TOPIC: Super Final Token Artwork...PLEASE PROOF

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />I just posted the RARES. <br /><br />Feedback please.<br /><br />Regarding the Mace...it does less damage because it has a chance to instantly kill an undead monster.<br /><br />Thanks.<br />

<br /><br />We understand that Jeff, I think we're just making the counter-argument that:<br /><br />A: an anti-undead mace was already released in 2006, so to create yet another such mace that just tackles the killing undead thing from a different angle is a bit meh...it's redundant, a token without a niche. I realize we do need an undead killing mace for 2008 but why not reproduce Gearons? Now, if new cleric weapons are to be released, IMO they really need to have different powers. Why is there such resistance to a Gearons reproduction since the MOD bring nothing significantly new to the table? Was Gearons considered to be overpowered for some reason?<br /><br />B: I've said it many times before, but the MOD is just too situation specific to be chased by anyone other than the guy who has a collection of four score UR tokens.<br /><br />We have been suggesting a different damage structure for the MOD, but in honest this is really just an awkward work around to give usefulness to an item that I can't help but feel should be outright axed and replaced.<br /><br />I guess I'm just asking that these arguments be given serious consideration before the MOD's implementation. I don't mean to take the weapon out of the hands of any clerics out there who are salivating over getting their hands on the thing, and if there are any please speak up and be heard (Gary?) <br /><br />Also, I hope this doesn't in any way offend. I like alot of what was done in 2008, but I call things like I see em, and I think that's better for TD than someone who will always give all 10/10 on everything. Constructive criticism only improves the game, and it is an excellent game with which you have done some truly amazing things Jeff!<br /><br />Anyway, I had previously said I would speak no more of it, but having received agreement on the matter, it's stoked the flames once more so I fear I have regrettably fallen off the wagon!<br />

<br /><br />Many people don't have Gearon's. Maybe this is a more balanced replacement? I happen to like the idea of balancing things. Power creep may eventually kill the game, so why argue for power creep? <br />

<br /><br />Like the Broadsword of Life-Stealing.  When it was +2 it was clearly superior to the +2 Longsword, now that it is +1 it is more of a choice of which to use.  I can understand if Jeff doesn't want to reprint Gearon's since it was clearly superior to the +2 Longsword.  <br />

<br /><br />I don't know that the long sword +2 is really a comparison. Most UR magical weapons have a +2 bonus coupled with a special power. The long sword was just that, a +2 weapon. Though it was a purp, power-wise it wasn't a true UR IMO. Nightshades, the flaming longbow, the keen scimitar...these were purps that one could be proud to own! Again, to me, a worthy purp weapon has 2 aspects:<br /><br />1- its +2 and overall does more damage than a rare counterpart<br /><br />2- has some sort of special additional power<br /><br />(These aren't hard and fast of course, I even suggested the "maul of the titans" earlier that gave no bonus to hit or damage but just had a much bigger damage wheel)<br /><br />Anyway, Gearons mace met both these requirements, and was not at all overpowered. It's just give and take. The MOD has a chance to destroy undead outright, whereas gearons gives +3 damage vs undead. On the average, the MOD has the edge versus undead, but Gearons is more flexible in any fight due to its higher base damage. As far as a balanced replacement, its the MOD that's all lopsided in its abilities. Gearons is far more balanced a weapon IMO.<br />

<br /><br />I guess I don't see the Mace of Disruption's ability as all that good.  For it to have an effect, you have to (1) be fighting an undead, (2) slide a natural 20, and (3) have the "8" be facing the damage dot (a 1 in 8 chance or 12.5% chance).  It seems like a longshot that you'll ever actually destroy an undead creature.  Gearon's Mace on the other hand did extra damage every time you used it against undead, so that seems much more effective (to me at least).  If you reprinted Gearon's +3 Mace, and had it do an extra +3 against undead only if you were a Cleric (and maybe Paladin), that seems completely in line with the Holy Greatsword and this year's Club.  I hope it does get reprinted eventually, and I hope the other combat-oriented classes (non-Wizard) get their "+3" variant of their weapon eventually. 

If you reprinted Gearon's +3 Mace, and had it do an extra +3 against undead only if you were a Cleric (and maybe Paladin), that seems completely in line with the Holy Greatsword and this year's Club.  I hope it does get reprinted eventually, and I hope the other combat-oriented classes (non-Wizard) get their "+3" variant of their weapon eventually.  <br />

<br /><br />As a cleric, I was perfectly happy with Gearons being +2, but if excluding it to cleric and paladin is excuse enough to kick it up to +3 in the reprinting, you'll get no argument from me!  =D

A few comments - sorry been out of fourm-space.<br /><br />Amulet - I'll pass on using it, except on maybe a 4th time through...ingredients and dungeon only itmes are WAY more valuable at this point.<br /><br />Mace - um, I would not mind seeing Gearon's mace on a chippie, but at the same time it is nice only being a chippie and something for old-timers or great traders to have...  Also the Mace power and damage for an UR is just so so - but I'm glad to see Cleric and PAL only and specific bane weapons are a nice type of power creep if they are done right.  (one thing about the Mace - maybe it could do added damage VS a certain type of undead, like non-corporeal or vs dead-skin types.<br /><br />Troll armor is interesting, but have not checked it as being the best for any one class in the game - that said - it seems underpowered for an UR, but interesting as I like these combo save items!!!<br /><br />G

<br />A few comments - sorry been out of fourm-space.<br /><br />Amulet - I'll pass on using it, except on maybe a 4th time through...ingredients and dungeon only itmes are WAY more valuable at this point.<br /><br />Mace - um, I would not mind seeing Gearon's mace on a chippie, but at the same time it is nice only being a chippie and something for old-timers or great traders to have...  Also the Mace power and damage for an UR is just so so - but I'm glad to see Cleric and PAL only and specific bane weapons are a nice type of power creep if they are done right.  (one thing about the Mace - maybe it could do added damage VS a certain type of undead, like non-corporeal or vs dead-skin types.<br /><br />Troll armor is interesting, but have not checked it as being the best for any one class in the game - that said - it seems underpowered for an UR, but interesting as I like these combo save items!!!<br /><br />G<br />

<br /><br />I think the Troll Armor is the best armor for a Barbarian at this point. 

In that case - I think the Troll Armor is BROKEN - doesn't the Barbarian already have a GREAT FORT save?

<br />In that case - I think the Troll Armor is BROKEN - doesn't the Barbarian already have a GREAT FORT save?<br />

<br />That armor and the fort save ring = basically immune to poisen for the barbarian.

I had decided not to comment on individual tokens at all this time around and I'm still not going to. I just figured I'd toss in a little explaination why. I'm not exactly sure my group and I are going to be in for buying any more tokens during next or subsequent years. The feeling seems to be that there's no functional purpose anymore. I mean, with this batch, AC is up to 30 plus and no one needs a 30 AC. Their take is we should just keep at the low to mid 20's or whatever we have at the moment and put the resources elsewhere. Since I might not be in, I don't exactly feel right possibly poopoo'ing someone else's party with the token whozits. Considering creep, another year of purchases would get us to 30  and completely invulnerable(spiffy), but the consensus for them seems to be that nigh invulnerable is more than good enough.

Do we really know what "invulnerable" entails though? Personally I agree, I wouldn't want to be in a place where a 19 or 20 was never a hit. In fact 18+ should usually always connect IMO. It's just that, without knowing the attack bonuses of the monsters, it's hard too know what too much is.<br /><br />Obviously, if you go through hardcore a few times and each time you're virtually never hit, you can get a rough idea that, at least, your AC at the time was "too high" but not by how much. <br /><br />I'm interested to see what my AC of 23 does for me in the coming year.

Considering that on the low end, a run always has to be scaled so a 1 bag newbie can survive, it's very likely that 23 is already close. Without any more UR's, playing a paladin for me next year would be 27 or so. For HC, it's hard to scale but I'm already up in the tail of the curve even for token buyers I'd imagine. As a group we've spent well into the smakload territory. Though our lifetime spending probably equals his yearly spending. That's still likely well into outlier area.

<br />

<br />In that case - I think the Troll Armor is BROKEN - doesn't the Barbarian already have a GREAT FORT save?<br />

<br />That armor and the fort save ring = basically immune to poisen for the barbarian.<br />

<br />Plus things like death ray, and turn to stone, and a few others I think...

Team Token made it through HARDCORE 2007 without getting taking a hit...some of us had been through before, but we let those who had not done the dungeon solve things...<br /><br />oh and the battle with the beholder...let's just say that SAVE throws were HUGE of course!  (Hence the comment about the Troll armor)

ya, these ac's are getting really high. its a good thing they havent taken into consideration touch attacks.