TOPIC: 2023 Ultra Rare Beta Token Images

How to never discuss UR TEs again while most of those currently commenting are still alive.

Step 1: Set a treasure cap of something like 27 (assuming CoA2 gives 10. Adjust cap dependent on what CoA2 actually gives).

Step 2: print the necessary 2023, 2025, and 2027 UR TEs to make the CoA2. Allowing a cheaper recipe using 2023, 2025 and AoTF.

Step 3: for the next 48 years print a new slotless +1 Treasure UR every other year. Every X years offer transmutes to consolidate the past X years tokens to cut down on weight/storage

Benefit 1: This provides multiple ways for people to get to max treasure.
Benefit 2: Vets that want to have a reason to keep buying TEs (to free up slots).
Benefit 3: People that have held onto the AoTF get a benefit for doing so, while others are not shut out
Benefit 4: as vets hit max treasure and want to free up slots, things like the nuggets re-enter circulation at a higher rate, and even CoAs eventually are likely to regularly re-enter circulation as people shift to their slotless TEs.
Benefit 5: Treasure dilution should stabilize
Benefit 6: as I mentioned, we don't have to talk about TEs again for 50 years or so.

Picc wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Picc wrote: Making a case of a Charm of good fortune reprint again.

A reprint of Cogf would

Lets new people get in on existing synergy runs easier.

Stalls treasure gap creep for a few years.

If a COGF reprint were eligible for the COA recipie it would let people who have joined over VTD fully catch up now rather then having to wait 5 more years.

It would give beads a few more years to find their identity before 2 of 3 were on long term lockdown.

This would probably drive more sales. I can only speak for myself but I would buy a few to save (like I would with any new TE) and a few more to complete another COA.

Nothing says we couldn't either restrict a reprinted TE to count for less (or even no) points toward a COA since the COA recipie only mentioned the original. Even if a reprint charm counted for less points it might even free up a few more original charms for trade.

Nothing says it couldn't be a ROR reprint, that's even older and most of the above still applies.

In summary we are at a unique point in time after the end of the nugget cycle. If a TE reprint were ever to happen now would be the time. If there was ever a TE to reprint CoGF would be it.

We can all feel the treasure pool getting diluted more and more year after year. We all know it's not sustainable but that TEs drive sales. And after this TE we are basically back on the path towards the next COA. We cant solve that problem today but we can push that problem out by two more years and finally give people a chance to catch up without hurting anyones investment or sales.

There will always be time to print another new TE, this is quite probably the last chance we will ever have to step back for a moment, follow our better nature and let people catch up like we have been saying is important for years. Anyway that's all I got, probably wont donny good but worth saying none the less.

I think you are very optimistic to believe that reprinting the CoFG would increase sales, as opposed to the opposite when compared with a new +3 treasure URTE.



For the oft repeated claim that the "treasure pool getting diluted" - this is the kind of thing that would be easy for people to believe was happening even if it wasn't.

I had my best treasure pull ever after the last VTD. I don't presume this means there is a a trend towards better treasure.

I know there are some (incomplete) treasure stats kept somewhere.

Can someone with the relevant statistical expertise please start a new thread and explain:
* What they mean by dilution
* What the data sets we have imply about dilution
Under what assumptions, and with what confidence?

If not, I think people should just dismiss claims that the treasure is getting diluted as unsupported by evidence.

With respect I think your wrong and not arguing in good faith. I said my bit, it's up to people if they want to belive it or not.

If you would like to see if the pool is being deluted feel free to pour over the yearly treasure spreadsheets. I'm sure you'll find a way to interpret things to your favor. But in the interest of short hand how many non plat monster bits are in this year set vs last year or the year before again?

It’s not up to me to prove that treasure isn’t being diluted.

It’s up to the people who claim treasure is being diluted and use that as a basis for policy changes or token design decisions to define what dilution means and show why anyone else should agree with their policy changes or design decisions.

I know monster bit percentages fluctuate over time - that isn’t news - it’s been going on for over 10 years. Jeff explicitly said there were less monster bits in a recent treasure mix DUE TO UNFORSEEN SUPPLY AND DEMAND ISSUES, explicitly rebutting the idea that those monster bit reductions are some sort of designed dilution to the treasure mix in response to higher treasure caps.

Believing that people who ask you to back up your claims with evidence are therefore arguing in bad faith is a terrible way to arrive at the truth.

Jeff Martin wrote:

Rob F wrote: Bead really needs to be at +2 Chips max. All the Ioin Stones are at +2, why make the Bead +3??

For the Necklace should the classes be listed that can use it?

There are fewer available Bead slots.

For now. But the bead slot seems to be expanding pretty fast.

Flik wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote:

balthasar wrote:

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote: There are definitely 3 reprints.

DDD, EoO, FoP Phoenix.

My bad, I was missing the FoP. I still believe we can try to make a better UR than the Gloves. If we must have them, maybe add a To Hit bonus?

The gloves seem to have advocates on both sides (too weak, too strong).

When that happens, we might be pretty close honestly.

I'm not sure it should be ranged instead of missiles

Personally if did 3x damage on a crit then it’s a really good pairing with any crit expander, Thor’s hammer, amulet of aiming, rogue legendary and relic.

As is with only bonus on a nat 20 it’s just bad the vast amount of the time.

I say just make it say 3x damage on crits, and then players need to use another token to expand the crit range to make it good.

I can support making them just x3 all crits. Trading off +4 str gloves makes for some diversity.

I made what I believe to be a strong case earlier in the thread that if the token only provides 3X damage on a Nat 20 crit that it doesn't measure up to other options in the glove slot on a damage EV basis (we can argue corner cases and team dexterity strategy shenanigans for PTD separately).

Using the same model, if the 3X damage gets applied to all crits no matter the range, the token damage EV flips by an equal or greater amount to the "too strong" side at 18 or lower, IE the token would be twice as good as GoGA for Rangers and potentially even more broken for other classes that can crit on a larger range. I think it's reasonable to state that the toke as is could use a little something extra, but indefinite expanded crit range is not it.

Not for this thread, as it's likely a new thread for new versions is coming soon, but it would be preferable if the next UR thread doesn't become mostly arguing about TEs. I can understand the need to look out for the new player and to protect TA from terrible decisions that will collapse sales, but it's easy to argue in a separate thread the invisible mage hand that guides the TD economy while we can miss how many hand symbols go on a token or how the shadow of the art isn't right or whatever with the other URs.

Ian Lee wrote: Not for this thread, as it's likely a new thread for new versions is coming soon, but it would be preferable if the next UR thread doesn't become mostly arguing about TEs. I can understand the need to look out for the new player and to protect TA from terrible decisions that will collapse sales, but it's easy to argue in a separate thread the invisible mage hand that guides the TD economy while we can miss how many hand symbols go on a token or how the shadow of the art isn't right or whatever with the other URs.

In the past creating a thread for such purposes and requesting people take the discussion there has worked.

Lead and I will follow.

Flik wrote: I can support making them just x3 all crits. Trading off +4 str gloves makes for some diversity.

Currently I believe it would be possible for a benrows Throw Monk to double 3x crits for a hair under 400 damage in one round. Need to double check

Edit: I was wrong. Highest possible without using consumables is 354 on a double 3x crit using this build:
tdcharactercreator.com/#/character/edit/716ec3b3-4660-43fc-993f-0910f86bbe58

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote:

balthasar wrote:

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote: There are definitely 3 reprints.

DDD, EoO, FoP Phoenix.

My bad, I was missing the FoP. I still believe we can try to make a better UR than the Gloves. If we must have them, maybe add a To Hit bonus?

The gloves seem to have advocates on both sides (too weak, too strong).

When that happens, we might be pretty close honestly.

I'm not sure it should be ranged instead of missiles

I like the idea of giving a good slider a chance to really shine.

Once per game book of slightly, oh, it doesn’t use a spell, and it is uncommon or lower, from a UR, and it is a free action not standard or instantaneous.

Thinking, could we get a boat on the cover, maybe a Gnomish boat?

So I think rare or lower at once per game would be reasonable, or once per room? Are there any “big” uncommon or common scrolls that would break if usable once per room? Seems okay, not good, better than before, will keep thinking.

Fob on the cutlass of the sun, I like it.

The gloves are probably more inline, doesn’t make everyone a dwarf, and doesn’t help a dwarf (4x dwarf on 20?). I’d have to maths say death knight vs these and reasonable crits on my builds, I think the death knight is better by gut feel.

I love the reprints!

I am content with the bead.

Is it possible to reorganize the Book of Useful Scrolls text to not have hyphen?

Maybe
"Use common
or uncommon
scroll as a FA
w/o turning in
token."

On a complete tangent, the PHB might want to be explicit that rogues can SA without one round delay on Helpless targets to align tokendb paralyzed explanation with PHB paralyzed.

Ian Lee wrote: Is it possible to reorganize the Book of Useful Scrolls text to not have hyphen?

Maybe
"Use common
or uncommon
scroll as a FA
w/o turning in
token."

On a complete tangent, the PHB might want to be explicit that rogues can SA without one round delay on Helpless targets to align tokendb paralyzed explanation with PHB paralyzed.

Fixed the token. Thanks.

Much better than last round! I like the changes hopefully it's done.

Wishful thinking requests:
Round 2 Death Die art was better
Phoenix, open up to all classes