TOPIC: SUPER Final Ultra Rare Images

NightGod wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

James Bennett wrote: Here are my thoughts on a few specific things in the last round of the URs:

Death Knight Armor: This is an interesting addition. I like the suggestion to combine it with the boots and gloves to make a more offensive set option.

Mad Evoker's Charm: Waiting on a clarification post for this one.

Ring of Expertise: Seems very solid. Would still not mind seeing it opened to all casters but make it only function for non-healing spells.

Ring of Quick Blessing: I would still prefer seeing the "5/game" clause removed and put a "non-damage" restriction on it. If that happens I think opening it to all casters could be a good option. If that is undesirable I would suggest replacing "(5/game)" with "(Druid 1/rm)".

The free action spell economy between Ring of Quick Blessing and Mad Evoker's Charm feels off to me. The ring's ability to be used on multiple damage spells per round likely offsets any damage bonus from the MEC and does not come with channeling HP to do so. I am not asking for a "once per room" restriction to come back for Clerics though. Since Spiritual Hammer is a sliding spell the use of it would restrict the Cleric which I view to restrict its usefulness as a Free Action.

I think if Ring of Quick Blessing were changed to non-Damage that would make it a nearly worthless ring for Druids. Getting two 1st Level spells as a free action that you have to mark off (which is what "non-damage" would result in for all Druids not equipping a Charm of Spell Swapping since there are only two non-damage 1st level spells) is in no way worthy of a UR Ring. Compare that with the UR Ring of Spell Storing, it gives you any level of spell on your spell card, without marking it off, as a Free Action.

It already seems like more of a Ring of Quick Casting, not a Ring of Quick Blessing. Druids were added later in the development cycle to what was originally just meant to be the Cleric Epic starter. I was personally surprised damage spells were left on at all, given the name.

I don't think that's correct, I think Druids were on it from the very start. They were on it in the first version of the Ring on the Lords and Ladies forum that I saw. They certainly weren't added to it late in the development cycle. From what I saw Jeff always intended this as a Ring for the Druid and Cleric.

Mike Steele wrote:

NightGod wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

James Bennett wrote: Here are my thoughts on a few specific things in the last round of the URs:

Death Knight Armor: This is an interesting addition. I like the suggestion to combine it with the boots and gloves to make a more offensive set option.

Mad Evoker's Charm: Waiting on a clarification post for this one.

Ring of Expertise: Seems very solid. Would still not mind seeing it opened to all casters but make it only function for non-healing spells.

Ring of Quick Blessing: I would still prefer seeing the "5/game" clause removed and put a "non-damage" restriction on it. If that happens I think opening it to all casters could be a good option. If that is undesirable I would suggest replacing "(5/game)" with "(Druid 1/rm)".

The free action spell economy between Ring of Quick Blessing and Mad Evoker's Charm feels off to me. The ring's ability to be used on multiple damage spells per round likely offsets any damage bonus from the MEC and does not come with channeling HP to do so. I am not asking for a "once per room" restriction to come back for Clerics though. Since Spiritual Hammer is a sliding spell the use of it would restrict the Cleric which I view to restrict its usefulness as a Free Action.

I think if Ring of Quick Blessing were changed to non-Damage that would make it a nearly worthless ring for Druids. Getting two 1st Level spells as a free action that you have to mark off (which is what "non-damage" would result in for all Druids not equipping a Charm of Spell Swapping since there are only two non-damage 1st level spells) is in no way worthy of a UR Ring. Compare that with the UR Ring of Spell Storing, it gives you any level of spell on your spell card, without marking it off, as a Free Action.

It already seems like more of a Ring of Quick Casting, not a Ring of Quick Blessing. Druids were added later in the development cycle to what was originally just meant to be the Cleric Epic starter. I was personally surprised damage spells were left on at all, given the name.

I don't think that's correct, I think Druids were on it from the very start. They were on it in the first version of the Ring on the Lords and Ladies forum that I saw. They certainly weren't added to it late in the development cycle. From what I saw Jeff always intended this as a Ring for the Druid and Cleric.

False.

Round 1 L&L - Holy Symbol. Cleric only
Round 2 L&L - Holy Symbol. Cleric only
Round 1 public - Neck. Cleric only
Round 2 public - Charm. Cleric only

Fiddy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

NightGod wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

James Bennett wrote: Here are my thoughts on a few specific things in the last round of the URs:

Death Knight Armor: This is an interesting addition. I like the suggestion to combine it with the boots and gloves to make a more offensive set option.

Mad Evoker's Charm: Waiting on a clarification post for this one.

Ring of Expertise: Seems very solid. Would still not mind seeing it opened to all casters but make it only function for non-healing spells.

Ring of Quick Blessing: I would still prefer seeing the "5/game" clause removed and put a "non-damage" restriction on it. If that happens I think opening it to all casters could be a good option. If that is undesirable I would suggest replacing "(5/game)" with "(Druid 1/rm)".

The free action spell economy between Ring of Quick Blessing and Mad Evoker's Charm feels off to me. The ring's ability to be used on multiple damage spells per round likely offsets any damage bonus from the MEC and does not come with channeling HP to do so. I am not asking for a "once per room" restriction to come back for Clerics though. Since Spiritual Hammer is a sliding spell the use of it would restrict the Cleric which I view to restrict its usefulness as a Free Action.

I think if Ring of Quick Blessing were changed to non-Damage that would make it a nearly worthless ring for Druids. Getting two 1st Level spells as a free action that you have to mark off (which is what "non-damage" would result in for all Druids not equipping a Charm of Spell Swapping since there are only two non-damage 1st level spells) is in no way worthy of a UR Ring. Compare that with the UR Ring of Spell Storing, it gives you any level of spell on your spell card, without marking it off, as a Free Action.

It already seems like more of a Ring of Quick Casting, not a Ring of Quick Blessing. Druids were added later in the development cycle to what was originally just meant to be the Cleric Epic starter. I was personally surprised damage spells were left on at all, given the name.

I don't think that's correct, I think Druids were on it from the very start. They were on it in the first version of the Ring on the Lords and Ladies forum that I saw. They certainly weren't added to it late in the development cycle. From what I saw Jeff always intended this as a Ring for the Druid and Cleric.

False.

Round 1 L&L - Holy Symbol. Cleric only
Round 2 L&L - Holy Symbol. Cleric only
Round 1 public - Neck. Cleric only
Round 2 public - Charm. Cleric only

But they were on the first of the Ring though, right?

kurtreznor wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

kurtreznor wrote:

kurtreznor wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

kurtreznor wrote: Mad evoker charm went back to the not-clear version: does 1/room apply only to the mage power/free action effect? Can you pay life multiple times to boost spell damage?

On tokens when two effects have different duration or frequencies the effects are normally separated by an ampersand.

For example Cleric Relic Sacred Necklace says:

"May cast 2nd-lvl Spells or Resore Spell as Free Actions & may heal a target ally to full hp-even if that character is dead (1/game)"

Which we all understand to restrict the resurrection ability to 1/game but not the 2nd level spells as free actions ability.

It seems to me that the entire MeC power, whether or not it triggers the Mage Power threshold, may be used only 1/room.

I've been wrong before though about how to interpret a token....

Ok, taken in that context, it makes sense. But it would be nice to make it more clear that life payment is 1/room THEN check if 15+ life was spent for bonus.

As an UR, this is fine, as it allows one big burst each combat. BUT if the relic/legendary only allows boosting spell damage 1/room, those are very weak.

Maybe add a keyword 'channel'
Channel: for every 1hp you channel into a spell, gain 1pt damage to that spell. If you spend 15+, also use a Mage power.

Then the MEC could read:
Gain channel 1/room
Gain mage power: cast spell as free action. 1/room.

Then the relic and legendary can add more uses of channel and gain other mage powers.

Except Channel isn't always 1 HP for 1 damage, it's 1 HP for 2 damage at Relic/Legendary. I get the classic MTG reference, but it might be too confusing as a keyword for TD since it is variable.

Aw man, too bad tokens can't change rules...oh wait, that exactly what they do.

Add '2dmg added instead of 1 per 1hp channeled.' to the relic.

I'm very in favor of going with a keyword on this. Mechanics that must be looked up in the tokendb are probably preferable to mechanics that are confusing and need to be heavily clarified in the tokendb anyway.

BrainScan wrote:

kurtreznor wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

kurtreznor wrote:

kurtreznor wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

kurtreznor wrote: Mad evoker charm went back to the not-clear version: does 1/room apply only to the mage power/free action effect? Can you pay life multiple times to boost spell damage?

On tokens when two effects have different duration or frequencies the effects are normally separated by an ampersand.

For example Cleric Relic Sacred Necklace says:

"May cast 2nd-lvl Spells or Resore Spell as Free Actions & may heal a target ally to full hp-even if that character is dead (1/game)"

Which we all understand to restrict the resurrection ability to 1/game but not the 2nd level spells as free actions ability.

It seems to me that the entire MeC power, whether or not it triggers the Mage Power threshold, may be used only 1/room.

I've been wrong before though about how to interpret a token....

Ok, taken in that context, it makes sense. But it would be nice to make it more clear that life payment is 1/room THEN check if 15+ life was spent for bonus.

As an UR, this is fine, as it allows one big burst each combat. BUT if the relic/legendary only allows boosting spell damage 1/room, those are very weak.

Maybe add a keyword 'channel'
Channel: for every 1hp you channel into a spell, gain 1pt damage to that spell. If you spend 15+, also use a Mage power.

Then the MEC could read:
Gain channel 1/room
Gain mage power: cast spell as free action. 1/room.

Then the relic and legendary can add more uses of channel and gain other mage powers.

Except Channel isn't always 1 HP for 1 damage, it's 1 HP for 2 damage at Relic/Legendary. I get the classic MTG reference, but it might be too confusing as a keyword for TD since it is variable.

Aw man, too bad tokens can't change rules...oh wait, that exactly what they do.

Add '2dmg added instead of 1 per 1hp channeled.' to the relic.

I'm very in favor of going with a keyword on this. Mechanics that must be looked up in the tokendb are probably preferable to mechanics that are confusing and need to be heavily clarified in the tokendb anyway.

For the UR, if we can fit all text on the token I think that's best. Why make people go to TokenDB.Com to read what it does if the token itself can say it? Most people playing True Dungeon have probably never gone to TokenDB.Com.

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote: Maybe we move the armor back until Lucky Plate isnt available, and reprint Ektdar's?

Probably too late but, yes.

Mike Steele wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

NightGod wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

James Bennett wrote: Here are my thoughts on a few specific things in the last round of the URs:

Death Knight Armor: This is an interesting addition. I like the suggestion to combine it with the boots and gloves to make a more offensive set option.

Mad Evoker's Charm: Waiting on a clarification post for this one.

Ring of Expertise: Seems very solid. Would still not mind seeing it opened to all casters but make it only function for non-healing spells.

Ring of Quick Blessing: I would still prefer seeing the "5/game" clause removed and put a "non-damage" restriction on it. If that happens I think opening it to all casters could be a good option. If that is undesirable I would suggest replacing "(5/game)" with "(Druid 1/rm)".

The free action spell economy between Ring of Quick Blessing and Mad Evoker's Charm feels off to me. The ring's ability to be used on multiple damage spells per round likely offsets any damage bonus from the MEC and does not come with channeling HP to do so. I am not asking for a "once per room" restriction to come back for Clerics though. Since Spiritual Hammer is a sliding spell the use of it would restrict the Cleric which I view to restrict its usefulness as a Free Action.

I think if Ring of Quick Blessing were changed to non-Damage that would make it a nearly worthless ring for Druids. Getting two 1st Level spells as a free action that you have to mark off (which is what "non-damage" would result in for all Druids not equipping a Charm of Spell Swapping since there are only two non-damage 1st level spells) is in no way worthy of a UR Ring. Compare that with the UR Ring of Spell Storing, it gives you any level of spell on your spell card, without marking it off, as a Free Action.

It already seems like more of a Ring of Quick Casting, not a Ring of Quick Blessing. Druids were added later in the development cycle to what was originally just meant to be the Cleric Epic starter. I was personally surprised damage spells were left on at all, given the name.

I don't think that's correct, I think Druids were on it from the very start. They were on it in the first version of the Ring on the Lords and Ladies forum that I saw. They certainly weren't added to it late in the development cycle. From what I saw Jeff always intended this as a Ring for the Druid and Cleric.

False.

Round 1 L&L - Holy Symbol. Cleric only
Round 2 L&L - Holy Symbol. Cleric only
Round 1 public - Neck. Cleric only
Round 2 public - Charm. Cleric only

But they were on the first of the Ring though, right?

You are both technically correct as well as being intentionally misleading. You've purposely worded it as if the UR at the start of the Cleric transmute was always a Ring intended for Clerics and Druids. It was not always a Ring. Nor was it always intended for both classes.

BrainScan wrote: I'm very in favor of going with a keyword on this. Mechanics that must be looked up in the tokendb are probably preferable to mechanics that are confusing and need to be heavily clarified in the tokendb anyway.

There are a large number of tokens now that have to have a lot of explaining on tokendb. We will need to make sure that site never crashes during in-person cons as us coaches will need to constantly look things up to help explain to players.

I like the tokens. The armor is pretty powerful not only with +9AC but also strength. As Dr. Uid said- so many strength boosts...

haasdt wrote: There are a large number of tokens now that have to have a lot of explaining on tokendb. We will need to make sure that site never crashes during in-person cons as us coaches will need to constantly look things up to help explain to players.

From a coaching standpoint, most players with that level of complexity will be using the app, or spreadsheet, or website. I'd hope all of them would, in fact.

I do have some sympathy for the DMs as complexity ratchets up.. And the players who may it find it even more challenging to get things done in 12 minutes.

Death Knight Armor

Not that I find it a problem, but one thing lost is that it has no tie to the uncommon squire armor. I realize it overcomplicates, but it would be more thematic if it were:

Death Knight Armor
Cleric, Fighters
+9 to AC
& -3 dmg from Undead
& +1 Melee dmg

Or, even:

Death Knight Armor
Cleric, Fighters
+9 to AC
& Regen 2pts after combat

Less mechanically linked.

Or:

Death Knight Armor
Cleric, Fighters
+9 to AC
& -5 dmg from Darkrift

Undead not quite same as Darkrift, but there's some connection.

Or, if want to be very metagamey:

Death Knight Armor
Cleric, Fighters
+9 to AC
& +3 Dex

Gee, wonder why Cleric, Fighters Dex.

Nigh infinite number of other ways to go, but that's part of the problem. +2 Str is easy and always useful, where Undead or Darkrift or whatever is not.

Fiddy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

NightGod wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

James Bennett wrote: Here are my thoughts on a few specific things in the last round of the URs:

Death Knight Armor: This is an interesting addition. I like the suggestion to combine it with the boots and gloves to make a more offensive set option.

Mad Evoker's Charm: Waiting on a clarification post for this one.

Ring of Expertise: Seems very solid. Would still not mind seeing it opened to all casters but make it only function for non-healing spells.

Ring of Quick Blessing: I would still prefer seeing the "5/game" clause removed and put a "non-damage" restriction on it. If that happens I think opening it to all casters could be a good option. If that is undesirable I would suggest replacing "(5/game)" with "(Druid 1/rm)".

The free action spell economy between Ring of Quick Blessing and Mad Evoker's Charm feels off to me. The ring's ability to be used on multiple damage spells per round likely offsets any damage bonus from the MEC and does not come with channeling HP to do so. I am not asking for a "once per room" restriction to come back for Clerics though. Since Spiritual Hammer is a sliding spell the use of it would restrict the Cleric which I view to restrict its usefulness as a Free Action.

I think if Ring of Quick Blessing were changed to non-Damage that would make it a nearly worthless ring for Druids. Getting two 1st Level spells as a free action that you have to mark off (which is what "non-damage" would result in for all Druids not equipping a Charm of Spell Swapping since there are only two non-damage 1st level spells) is in no way worthy of a UR Ring. Compare that with the UR Ring of Spell Storing, it gives you any level of spell on your spell card, without marking it off, as a Free Action.

It already seems like more of a Ring of Quick Casting, not a Ring of Quick Blessing. Druids were added later in the development cycle to what was originally just meant to be the Cleric Epic starter. I was personally surprised damage spells were left on at all, given the name.

I don't think that's correct, I think Druids were on it from the very start. They were on it in the first version of the Ring on the Lords and Ladies forum that I saw. They certainly weren't added to it late in the development cycle. From what I saw Jeff always intended this as a Ring for the Druid and Cleric.

False.

Round 1 L&L - Holy Symbol. Cleric only
Round 2 L&L - Holy Symbol. Cleric only
Round 1 public - Neck. Cleric only
Round 2 public - Charm. Cleric only

But they were on the first of the Ring though, right?

You are both technically correct as well as being intentionally misleading. You've purposely worded it as if the UR at the start of the Cleric transmute was always a Ring intended for Clerics and Druids. It was not always a Ring. Nor was it always intended for both classes.

I was not being intentionally misleading, I did not recall the journey the Cleric UR took. I'm not sure I paid that much attention to it before it became the Ring, I'm not sure what the powers were in the earlier versions, and I'm not sure what caused it to change. I do think that when Jeff created the Ring he had it in mind for both classes, regardless of previous iterations of the Cleric UR.

The one thing that is still puzzling to me is why the Ring of Expertise is just Wizard & Bard. It seems like based on Crown of Expertise precedence that it would have been all the spellcasting classes. Maybe change Ring of Expertise to a basic reprint of Crown of Expertise and make it all classes again?

Mike Steele wrote: I was not being intentionally misleading, I did not recall the journey the Cleric UR took. I'm not sure I paid that much attention to it before it became the Ring, I'm not sure what the powers were in the earlier versions, and I'm not sure what caused it to change. I do think that when Jeff created the Ring he had it in mind for both classes, regardless of previous iterations of the Cleric UR.

The one thing that is still puzzling to me is why the Ring of Expertise is just Wizard & Bard. It seems like based on Crown of Expertise precedence that it would have been all the spellcasting classes. Maybe change Ring of Expertise to a basic reprint of Crown of Expertise and make it all classes again?

I would assume it is the healing that keeps Clerics and Druids away.

Bards don't get a heal spell until 2nd level.