Strict Standards: Declaration of KunenaLayoutBase::debug() should be compatible with JLayoutBase::debug($data = Array) in /home/newtd/public_html/libraries/kunena/layout/base.php on line 38
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: New Newsletter

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 8 months ago #133

  • Druegar
  • Druegar's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +2
  • Enjoy Your Burrito
  • Posts: 5242
Why am I being dragged into this?
Have you looked it up in the TDb?
Please post TDb corrections/suggestions in this thread.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 8 months ago #134

bpsymington wrote:
Harlax wrote:
MasterED wrote:
If only there were new tokens to open... :P

Nah, we just need recipes to argue about.

Yeah, I'm worried about the Boots of the Four Winds recipe, the tokens needed besides the 4 pairs of boots.

That should be the easiest of the recipes, it should be one of each non-Golden Fleece Trade Item Token.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 8 months ago #135

  • bpsymington
  • bpsymington's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +3
  • Thanks for the War Banana, Druegar!
  • Posts: 12062
Mike Steele wrote:
bpsymington wrote:
Harlax wrote:
MasterED wrote:
If only there were new tokens to open... :P

Nah, we just need recipes to argue about.

Yeah, I'm worried about the Boots of the Four Winds recipe, the tokens needed besides the 4 pairs of boots.

That should be the easiest of the recipes, it should be one of each non-Golden Fleece Trade Item Token.

Let me go see if that is what it was for the RoSEC: tokendb.com/token/supreme-ring-of-elemental-command/

You are correct! That should be doable. Has there been word about whether or not we will be able to transmute the boots before GC next year?
My posts are back! Yay!

Check out the new Druegar token! Usable by all!
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 8 months ago #136

  • Druegar
  • Druegar's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +2
  • Enjoy Your Burrito
  • Posts: 5242
bpsymington wrote:
Let me go see if that is what it was for the RoSEC: tokendb.com/token/supreme-ring-of-elemental-command/
Bpsymington gets a cookie!
[img size=200,200]www.dantasyland.com/td/Cookie_of_Gratitude.png[/img]
Have you looked it up in the TDb?
Please post TDb corrections/suggestions in this thread.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 8 months ago #137

  • Picc
  • Picc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +1
  • Posts: 2962
Incognito wrote:
Picc wrote:
Look we know you hate the lenses & eldritched healing but honestly man just let it go. There are other fights far more worth having. Besides which it smacks a little hypocritical when your condemning people for bringing up the same idea over and over to try and sneak through power creep in one thread and your bringing this up again here.
???

My point is that maybe people should give more credence to the idea that the "three treasure stamps" messes with those who were motivated by the Troubadour, just like how the proposed Eldritch set change messed with those motivated by the healing.

No argument here, I agree that the change to treasure chips de-gamifies things and removes some of the onus to do well. If it were up to me I might have done things differently, but water under the bridge at this point.
Incognito wrote:
I am NOT advocating that we change the Eldritch set. I wouldn't mind if it did happen, but I don't think it's going to happen, given the post WYC thread. Not to mention, I wasn't even the one that had initiated that proposed change (it was Druegar).

So no, I am not bringing up the same idea. Because I am not advocating a change to the Eldritch set. I am drawing parallels between the treasure stamps rule change and the Eldritch set rule change.

If I'm mischaracterizing you here then I apologize but you dont have to be the one bringing up an issue if you keep mentioning how wrong/OP it is in other posts. That was more my point, we know their are powerful items in the game. If thats good or bad is subject to debate, reminding people of issues that may be sore spots but are unlikely to change (at least to me) looks a little like inciting them to start up old arguments again.

Incognito wrote:
And in fact, the only reason I even looked up that old thread was because of Arcanist's post about proposing to change Mad Evoker's Charm to make it more similar to the Lenses.

And for reference, I'm not the only one who does think the combo is overpowered:
Dennis Burdick wrote:
I agree with Incognito, that the Divine Lense & Eldrich set combo is too powerful. If "cast as a scroll" is good for the arcane, it should "equally" apply to the divine, too.
Im glad you have support in your position. I disagree with the good for the goose good for the gander argument Dennis is presenting, but to be honest I don't want to be drawn into that specific conversation. IMO its not the right time to discuss past tokens until the new set is locked in as keeping those under under control is less of a can of worms before the genie is out of the bottle so to speak.

Incognito wrote:
So Picc, I think you are misreading the situation here! :)

If that is the case, or I missed some sarcasm or nuance, again I apologize. I do respect your opinion and voice in the design process. And I've never had any doubt you were putting forth a well thought out argument for the good of the game as you saw it. The main point of my original comments was that I don't like seeing you argue in, well I guess a more sensationalist way then you usually do.
Incognito wrote:

But if you want to blame someone for bringing up the Eldritch / Lenses combo, you can blame ARCANIST. NOT ME! :angry:

Not looking to assign blame to anyone (though for the record I disagree with errata and retroactive changes in all but the most critically game breaking of circumstances as IMO they undermine consumer confidence). In the end though it doesn't matter who brought it up (or why), only that were taking the opportunity to argue about it again.

End of the day, if I spoke out of turn I'm sorry. Beyond that I suggest we take any discussion of specific token interactions back to the 2016 dev form to avoid splitting up the conversation.
Semper Gumby, Always flexible.
Last Edit: 4 years 8 months ago by Picc.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 8 months ago #138

  • Picc
  • Picc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +1
  • Posts: 2962
Druegar wrote:
Why am I being dragged into this?

Probably something to do with all the cookies ;)
Semper Gumby, Always flexible.
Last Edit: 4 years 8 months ago by Picc.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 8 months ago #139

  • Incognito
  • Incognito's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +1
  • Posts: 4361
Druegar wrote:
Why am I being dragged into this?
Sorry! I am not trying to "drag" you into this. I was just providing context in the form of history.

Since there are so many discussions on the forum (over so many years), it is often easy to forget the details.

I was simply explaining the origins of a previous thread (without intending to ascribe good or bad judgment). :cheer:
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 8 months ago #140

  • Incognito
  • Incognito's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +1
  • Posts: 4361
Picc wrote:
Incognito wrote:
My point is that maybe people should give more credence to the idea that the "three treasure stamps" messes with those who were motivated by the Troubadour, just like how the proposed Eldritch set change messed with those motivated by the healing.

No argument here, I agree that the change to treasure chips de-gamifies things and removes some of the onus to do well. If it were up to me I might have done things differently, but water under the bridge at this point.
Looks like we are on the same page here.
Incognito wrote:
I am NOT advocating that we change the Eldritch set. I wouldn't mind if it did happen, but I don't think it's going to happen, given the post WYC thread. Not to mention, I wasn't even the one that had initiated that proposed change (it was Druegar).

So no, I am not bringing up the same idea. Because I am not advocating a change to the Eldritch set. I am drawing parallels between the treasure stamps rule change and the Eldritch set rule change.

If I'm mischaracterizing you here then I apologize but you dont have to be the one bringing up an issue if you keep mentioning how wrong/OP it is in other posts. That was more my point, we know their are powerful items in the game. If thats good or bad is subject to debate, reminding people of issues that may be sore spots but are unlikely to change (at least to me) looks a little like inciting them to start up old arguments again.
It is intended to be a historical reminder (not a call to action).

There is always so much going on that it is easy for people to forget what happened a few months ago on the forum, let alone a year ago or many years ago.

Plus with the revolving door of old players leaving and new players joining, the newer players often have no inkling of what happened in the past.

I often try to mention things so that people don't accidentally or conveniently forget things that have happened in the past.
Incognito wrote:
And in fact, the only reason I even looked up that old thread was because of Arcanist's post about proposing to change Mad Evoker's Charm to make it more similar to the Lenses.

And for reference, I'm not the only one who does think the combo is overpowered:
Dennis Burdick wrote:
I agree with Incognito, that the Divine Lense & Eldrich set combo is too powerful. If "cast as a scroll" is good for the arcane, it should "equally" apply to the divine, too.
Im glad you have support in your position. I disagree with the good for the goose good for the gander argument Dennis is presenting, but to be honest I don't want to be drawn into that specific conversation. IMO its not the right time to discuss past tokens until the new set is locked in as keeping those under under control is less of a can of worms before the genie is out of the bottle so to speak.
Except that new tokens may interact with old tokens (with proposed errata). So it can be relevant. But I will let you take up the particulars of the Mad Evoker's Charm issue with Arcanist! :P

And I guess I will invoke Mike Steel in questioning who (other than Jeff) should be deciding what topics should be discussed when.
Incognito wrote:
So Picc, I think you are misreading the situation here! :)

If that is the case, or I missed some sarcasm or nuance, again I apologize. I do respect your opinion and voice in the design process. And I've never had any doubt you were putting forth a well thought out argument for the good of the game as you saw it. The main point of my original comments was that I don't like seeing you argue in, well I guess a more sensationalist way then you usually do.
Apology accepted! It's all good! Water under the bridge (just watch out for that troll! Cause you know, trolls live under bridges!) :P
Last Edit: 4 years 8 months ago by Incognito.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 8 months ago #141

  • Druegar
  • Druegar's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +2
  • Enjoy Your Burrito
  • Posts: 5242
Incognito wrote:
I am not trying to "drag" you into this.
And yet, you did.
Incognito wrote:
Since there are so many discussions on the forum (over so many years), it is often easy to forget the details.
It's also easy to present assumptions as "facts". If you're going to accuse me of something, perhaps you could support your claim with conjecture-free evidence.
Have you looked it up in the TDb?
Please post TDb corrections/suggestions in this thread.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 7 months ago #142

Kirk Bauer wrote:
Incognito wrote:
The long-term impact I see is that this decision is significantly de-emphasizing the utility of tokens. :(

I don't love the auto-3-treasure-draws nor do I hate it. But Incognito has a valid point. I also fear it will devalue monster trophies as well, since this will further increase the number of treasure draws above and beyond what the CoA did.

Here is by BIG SUGGESTION:

The automatic three treasure draws should take place in the Epilogue room, no treasure tokens. Each player gets three draws. The epilogue room has something like 49% uncommon, 49% rare, 1% healing, 1% special. This is designed to be useful especially for new players. No monster trophies.

Then for anybody that has treasure-enhancers or level 6 or whatever, they get treasure tokens like normal and the draws are done outside of the dungeon like last year, and they have something like the mix that Jeff proposed (5% special of some sort), and of course monster trophies.
LIKE THIS IDEA
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 7 months ago #143

John Lilovich wrote:
Kirk Bauer wrote:
Incognito wrote:
The long-term impact I see is that this decision is significantly de-emphasizing the utility of tokens. :(

I don't love the auto-3-treasure-draws nor do I hate it. But Incognito has a valid point. I also fear it will devalue monster trophies as well, since this will further increase the number of treasure draws above and beyond what the CoA did.

Here is by BIG SUGGESTION:

The automatic three treasure draws should take place in the Epilogue room, no treasure tokens. Each player gets three draws. The epilogue room has something like 49% uncommon, 49% rare, 1% healing, 1% special. This is designed to be useful especially for new players. No monster trophies.

Then for anybody that has treasure-enhancers or level 6 or whatever, they get treasure tokens like normal and the draws are done outside of the dungeon like last year, and they have something like the mix that Jeff proposed (5% special of some sort), and of course monster trophies.
LIKE THIS IDEA

Wouldn't that just make it worse for players without treasure enhancing tokens, by not giving them the chance to get any monster ingredient tokens and an 80% less chance of getting a special token?
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: New Newsletter 4 years 7 months ago #144

  • Kirk Bauer
  • Kirk Bauer's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Hero Member +1
  • www.tdtavern.com
  • Posts: 2640
Mike Steele wrote:
John Lilovich wrote:
Kirk Bauer wrote:
Incognito wrote:
The long-term impact I see is that this decision is significantly de-emphasizing the utility of tokens. :(

I don't love the auto-3-treasure-draws nor do I hate it. But Incognito has a valid point. I also fear it will devalue monster trophies as well, since this will further increase the number of treasure draws above and beyond what the CoA did.

Here is by BIG SUGGESTION:

The automatic three treasure draws should take place in the Epilogue room, no treasure tokens. Each player gets three draws. The epilogue room has something like 49% uncommon, 49% rare, 1% healing, 1% special. This is designed to be useful especially for new players. No monster trophies.

Then for anybody that has treasure-enhancers or level 6 or whatever, they get treasure tokens like normal and the draws are done outside of the dungeon like last year, and they have something like the mix that Jeff proposed (5% special of some sort), and of course monster trophies.
LIKE THIS IDEA

Wouldn't that just make it worse for players without treasure enhancing tokens, by not giving them the chance to get any monster ingredient tokens and an 80% less chance of getting a special token?

My post was before the new proposed mix of 5% other. The point was to replace monster trophies with something newbies can actually use.
My online token shop: www.tdtavern.com (5% discount code: TDFORUM)

My builds: Ranger and Bard
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Time to create page: 0.251 seconds