TOPIC: Latest 2009 Token Images

Both uncommon and rare Shurikens have the same damage track.

<br />Both uncommon and rare Shurikens have the same damage track.<br />

<br /><br /><br />Yes, that seems intentional. A Masterwork Weapon is like a normal weapon but with +1 damage. A magical +1 weapon has *+1 to hit* as well as the +1 to damage. The main difference between a magic +1 weapon and a masterwork weapon is the +1 to hit (plus it counts as "magical" for things like DR which doesn't exist in TD).

<br />

<br />Heh, don't knock the Black Lotus... that card paid for a semester of college for me :-D<br />

<br /><br />Actually, that and two moxes + a time walk, time twister... did it for me too.<br /> <br />

<br /><br />I covered a good chunk of a car with a pair of moxes and a set of legends....

Heya. Here are the points of contention I saw:<br /><br />COMMONS<br /><br />-Obviously, that first gem is wrong. Shouldn't be a 75GP Amethyst caption :-P<br /><br />-The common Shuriken in the picture wouldn't stick in anything. Shuriken did their damage, such as it was, from pointy bits sticking in people, not from rounded blade edges that would bounce off. Gotta get some points sticking outward on that image!<br /><br /><br />UNCOMMONS<br /><br />- The uncommon Faerie-Iron Large Shield is currently better than the rare Large Shield. Unecessary power creep, there! Make the FILS +1 AC/+3 AC against Fey, and it will slot in nicely between the greens and reds currently in existence, creating a worthwhile choice, without trumping a "superior" item.<br /><br />- The FI club and FI warhammer both have 4.5 average damage, and are otherwise the same except for the warhammer having more class restriction. Tradionally, more class restriction means a better weapon. I suggest changing 2 of the myriad 5's on the FI warhammer to 6's, yieling an improved 4.75 average damage, making it better than the FI club, but not as good as the 4.9 Trident, which is more restrictive still.<br /><br /><br />RARES<br /><br />-I don't think getting rid of the +1 FI shield is necessary, especially not just to replace it with a differently-named clone of the tower shield. I say make the FI shield +2 AC/+4 AC against Fey, thus creating (just like my proposal for the green FILS) a worthwhile choice, that fits the area it is in, and doesn't trump other equipment. Screw this power creep stuff!<br /><br />-The Javelin of Lightning is cool, but I think needs to be renamed. "Javelin" has already been established in TD as a reusable weapon that is either melee or ranged. How about calling this the Pilum of Lightning instead. A Pilum is specifically a ranged weapon, fits in with the Roman theme of this year's weapons and armor, and would avoid that nasty confusion from precedent.<br /><br />-Having a Slingstone of Thunder that does +6 damage on any shot next to the Arrow of Doom that does +5 damage only on a natural 20 is grossly out of balance. That slingstone basically combines a Thunderstone with a Sling for a double attack, while the arrow is a niche weapon with minimal use (I'd be pissed to get it in my bag, anyway). The +1 to hit with the arrow doesn't even come close to making these even.<br /><br /><br /><br />There are several things I really loved seeing -<br /><br />-Goodberry. I don't know why, but for some reason, I have had a special place in my heart for "Goodberry" ever since I first saw the spell ages ago in a player manual. Thanks for including it!<br /><br />-The Spiked Buckler is a great Ranger item. It goes a little way towards resolving that frustration of rangers everywhere about not being able to use a shield, despite being a combat class. This is something I hope to see more of in the future, as a good florentine fighter would have the equivalent of an AC bonus from their ability to parry with their second weapon, just like traditional fighters do with their shield.<br /><br />-I like the theme that flows through this year's selection a great deal. It's well done, even when combining bizare things like ancient Rome and feudal Japan.

The FILS is the same AC as the regular LS of 2008 +2, only the same classes that can use the regular LS can uses the  FILS. So the boost is only against fey where the AC is +3, so no real creep there. <br />I also see this as a great method to introduce items that while in the same power level as the original Large Shield, but will be desirable amongst players.  Next year Jeff could introduce the Hardened Steel Large Shield AC+2, +3 vs. Constructs, and the year after that he could introduce the Blessed Large Shield AC +2, +3 vs Undead, and so on.  It creates an item that can be easily changed year after year, that probably only matters in one or perhaps 2 combats per year, that only impacts the hit roll by 5%.  So not really too much power creep that still keeps the players coming back for next years version of the item.

<br />Yes, that seems intentional. A Masterwork Weapon is like a normal weapon but with +1 damage. A magical +1 weapon has *+1 to hit* as well as the +1 to damage. The main difference between a magic +1 weapon and a masterwork weapon is the +1 to hit (plus it counts as "magical" for things like DR which doesn't exist in TD).<br />

<br /><br />Not true... there have been TD monsters out there with DR.. but other than that.. the math is correct.

<br />The FILS is the same AC as the regular LS of 2008 +2, only the same classes that can use the regular LS can uses the  FILS. So the boost is only against fey where the AC is +3, so no real creep there. <br />I also see this as a great method to introduce items that while in the same power level as the original Large Shield, but will be desirable amongst players.  Next year Jeff could introduce the Hardened Steel Large Shield AC+2, +3 vs. Constructs, and the year after that he could introduce the Blessed Large Shield AC +2, +3 vs Undead, and so on.  It creates an item that can be easily changed year after year, that probably only matters in one or perhaps 2 combats per year, that only impacts the hit roll by 5%.  So not really too much power creep that still keeps the players coming back for next years version of the item.<br />

<br /><br />Ridiculous. No matter what, it's still better than  the plain +2 LS, which is the entire point. I'm sure everyone would agree that bonus variety is a good way to produce desirable tokens without creep, but only if it were on the same level to begin with.

<br />It creates an item that can be easily changed year after year, that probably only matters in one or perhaps 2 combats per year, that only impacts the hit roll by 5%.  So not really too much power creep that still keeps the players coming back for next years version of the item.<br />

<br /><br />I agree... specialized bonuses (such as the 'slaying' line of weapons I was pushing for this year) are a way to make something a little more unique and interesting without pushing the envelope too much. With all the iron gear in this year's release, one can't help but wonder if 2009 will give rise to the "room of lonely dryads" which will undoubtably spell doom for many of us.  =)<br />

The Large Shield is an Uncommon -- not a Rare.  <br /><br />The Tower Shield is a Rare -- or +3 to AC.<br /><br />The 2009 Rare will be a Large shield that is +2 AC and +4 vs. Fey.<br /><br />Seems good to me.  Feedback?

Sounds fantastic and exactly the way it should be. Either a lower general bonus or a higher specific bonus. It's the best way to keep things in balance and keep people interested.

<br />The Large Shield is an Uncommon -- not a Rare.  <br /><br />The Tower Shield is a Rare -- or +3 to AC.<br /><br />The 2009 Rare will be a Large shield that is +2 AC and +4 vs. Fey.<br /><br />Seems good to me.  Feedback?<br />

<br /><br />That seems more reasonable.  It is good to offset the bonus abilities by making the basic abilities a bit lower, so that the new tokens aren't clearly better than the old ones, it's more of a case of choosing which version you prefer.  It seemed like in a lot of cases, the new tokens took an existing token and then added to it - making the old token clearly inferior and obsolete.  <br /><br />Will the new 2009 Rare Shield have the class usability of the 2008 large Shield or the 2009 Tower Shield?  Based on the stats, it might be best to let it have the wider Large Shield usability.  

I think it's fine but it brings up the issue of which item is in use in a situation. If the party walks into a room, how do we decide which shield they are using and what are the requirements and stipulations of switching. If I walk into a room full of fey, but I had the tower shield ready, is it just a round to switch to the Fey shield?