TOPIC: "Ghosting" a run for Treasure - Changed at GenCon?

I don't "want the future Legendary so badly". I expect there will likely be one due to past statements and precedent, but I'm fine if there isn't one.

I think there are plenty of CoA and ingredients such as CoGF and AoTF in circulation to meet demand. No other Legendary has its recipe updated every couple of years, I don't think this one should either. If at some point in the future it is necessary, the RoR, CoGF, or AoTF can be reprinted.

jedibcg wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Kirk Bauer wrote: I'm strongly against modifying the CoA recipe to use future URs. Unless one of the URs already in it is reprinted.

Kirk, I agree 100%

Do either of you have a reason?

@Mike just because they could be used in the CoA doesn't mean they also couldn't be used in this future Legendary you want so badly.

I was on mobile previously so I wasn't inclined to elaborate, but I think it is a very bad precedent to set that we can go back and modify the recipe for a Legendary. Players make decisions and purchases based on that Legendary with the knowledge that they could make it at some point in the future. I wouldn't want to change that recipe at a later time.

For example, let's say that somebody PYPs a bunch of AoTFs in order to make a Charm of Avarice one day. They chose these tokens instead of other tokens they might want. Then in 2017 let's say the nugget was added to the recipe and it counts the same as the AoTF. Well now that person will regret their PYP choices. Perhaps next time they won't bother to plan ahead for a Legendary they want.

The recipe for the CoA has changed though. It went from relic to legendary using the relic version. This is minor but it still has changed. CoA is unlike any other legendary so I am fine with it breaking the rules.

@Kirk regrets about any token purchases can happen since we never know what future tokens there will be.

That said as long is there is always a way for new people to make the CoA I don't care if it is through reprints or through new tokens. If there isn't a way to make it then it just becomes the same issue HoP was and that CoA was created to stop. Allowing anyone to be able to have the pulls (as long as they want to fork out the money).

@Mike there may or may not be enough pieces to make the CoA now, but we will either need reprints or a revised recipe at some point in the future. I am fine with either option and/or both.

jedibcg wrote: The recipe for the CoA has changed though. It went from relic to legendary using the relic version. This is minor but it still has changed. CoA is unlike any other legendary so I am fine with it breaking the rules.

I don't think that counts. It was a special timeless Relic and now it is a Legendary. In both cases it was the same recipe, the same effect, and the same timeframe to create it.

jedibcg wrote: @Kirk regrets about any token purchases can happen since we never know what future tokens there will be.

Agreed, except so far there has never been disappointment due to the recipe of a Legendary being changed. We all know that there will always be new tokens and reprints in the future.

jedibcg wrote: That said as long is there is always a way for new people to make the CoA I don't care if it is through reprints or through new tokens. If there isn't a way to make it then it just becomes the same issue HoP was and that CoA was created to stop. Allowing anyone to be able to have the pulls (as long as they want to fork out the money).

I don't recall this being the design goal originally. Jeff never indicated that the CoA would be perpetually available. He did indicate that there would likely be a new and different Legendary treasure-enhancer in the future.

Kirk Bauer wrote:
I don't recall this being the design goal originally. Jeff never indicated that the CoA would be perpetually available. He did indicate that there would likely be a new and different Legendary treasure-enhancer in the future.

It was one of the original design ideas. It has to do with the idea of the haves and the have nots and giving everyone that opportunity to be a have (though it is costly). That is why using only AoTF you could get the affects of a HoP, CoGF, and RoR.

The recipe did change though because a 3 part was added, again I said it was minor but it was technically a change. Also there were changes done to the first legendaries (or relics) recipes from when they were first made available to now (or were then).

jedibcg wrote: The recipe for the CoA has changed though. It went from relic to legendary using the relic version. This is minor but it still has changed. CoA is unlike any other legendary so I am fine with it breaking the rules.

That said as long is there is always a way for new people to make the CoA I don't care if it is through reprints or through new tokens. If there isn't a way to make it then it just becomes the same issue HoP was and that CoA was created to stop. Allowing anyone to be able to have the pulls (as long as they want to fork out the money).

@Mike there may or may not be enough pieces to make the CoA now, but we will either need reprints or a revised recipe at some point in the future. I am fine with either option and/or both.

Agreed, I'll also go with Kirk/Mike and vote indeed for reprints instead of new treasure enhancers. Thought kirk brought up a way to keep recipe viable without messing up older players (keep the point value on original year and the reprint year becomes worth 1 pt). Doable as you consider we really only need to print AoTF or CoGF ever other year so it'll be hypothetically 3/4 years before you see both again. IE print CoGF in 17, its viaable 17/18. AoTF comes in 19/20. Way pyp works only need a ur treasure enhancer every other year.

The idea of making a reprint 1 point as been around for awhile. I don't know that Kirk first purposed it, but a few (including myself and) have purposed the same idea.

I am not against the reprints idea. I am just pro having some way to make CoA. If the RoR, CoGF and AoTF will not be reprinted then I would want new TE as part of the recipe.

And reprint idea would involve editing the recipe as well....just saying.

jedibcg wrote: The idea of making a reprint 1 point as been around for awhile. I don't know that Kirk first purposed it, but a few (including myself and) have purposed the same idea.

I am not against the reprints idea. I am just pro having some way to make CoA. If the RoR, CoGF and AoTF will not be reprinted then I would want new TE as part of the recipe.

And reprint idea would involve editing the recipe as well....just saying.

I don't think there needs to be a UR in print at all times to make the CoA. If the RoR is reprinted at some point, it could be a few years down the road. I agree with the new printing just counting one point.

Hey Jedi / Mike / Kirk and everyone else who wants to discuss reprints/ recipes/ etc:

Go Start Your Own Thread.

(This terse message brought to you by years of moderating a different forum, and Not Enough Caffeine yet this morning.)

Raven wrote: Hey Jedi / Mike / Kirk and everyone else who wants to discuss reprints/ recipes/ etc:

Go Start Your Own Thread.

(This terse message brought to you by years of moderating a different forum, and Not Enough Caffeine yet this morning.)

Okay Mom.

jedibcg wrote:

Raven wrote: Hey Jedi / Mike / Kirk and everyone else who wants to discuss reprints/ recipes/ etc:

Go Start Your Own Thread.

(This terse message brought to you by years of moderating a different forum, and Not Enough Caffeine yet this morning.)

Okay Mom.

And go clean your room, too!



Thanks, Jedi

Brad Mortensen wrote: It kinda doesn't matter if it is profitable.

What matters is whether and how many people THINK it is, and what they do based on that belief, and how those actions affect other players.

Given that more than one person has said they plan to buy runs for loot.

That's an excellent point, Brad.

I want to take a moment to publicly applaud those folks who've said, out loud, what their plans are regarding loot/Treasure Farming. I know there's the risk of public censure when you come forward and say, "This is what farming I plan to do." or "I ran a Solo run partly for the Treasure" or "I want to be able to buy out empty slots and flip them for treasure."

But for every person who is brave enough to say it, there's many more who are thinking about, or who are doing it and not saying anything, or who haven't admitted to themselves that they take the value of the treasure into account when deciding just how many runs to do.