Did this item jump from 1 power token to two? I presume it did because my level 7 Wizard was unable to equip it anymore. If so, did a series of items get a cost upgrade?
Yes. Also it went from level 8 to level 9. If you have questions like that, you can go to the item wiki and check the revision history. http://wiki.cardhuntria.com/index.php?title=Items/Opal_Battlestaff&action=history Compare the version today to the version from the 12th of August and you're gold. -Frank
The last revision was August 29th, so I assume it was indeed valid yesterday and no longer is. It could very well have been changed very late in the day on August 29th, but my guess is that it happened during the giant server rollover that happened yesterday. Personally, I don't understand the change. It seems like a deeply underwhelming item for two power tokens. It's not a whole lot better than the zero-token Jade Battlestaff, and it's noticeably inferior to the Sapphire Warstaff that costs 2. Seems like a weird change. But it definitely did happen. You aren't mistaken. -Frank
The item actually changed slightly (Penetrating Bolt got swapped in) which pushed the talent cost up.
The reason it wasn't in the update notes is that the item changed a while back but we didn't adjust the talent cost until this build. It was an oversight - sorry.
om.....Jayce just did the wiki update. Heck...he's been doing it since FEBRUARY 2013 !!! http://forums.cardhunter.com/threads/card-hunter-wiki-cardhuntria.282/page-13#post-33367
I know there's a formula involved, but it seems badly skewed in favor of making weapons take two power tokens. The Opal Battlestaff is particularly egregious on this point. The Jade Battlestaff is 3 levels lower and takes zero power tokens. You get: Sorcerous Bolt Spark Long Spark Bash Bash Simple Bash The Opal Battlestaff is obviously very similar, but it takes two power tokens. You get: Powerful Spark Powerful Spark Long Spark Penetrating Bolt Bash Bash Three of the cards are literally exactly the same. You trade a Spark up to a Powerful Spark (+1 Damage), you trade a Sorcerous Bolt to a Powerful Spark (-1 Damage, but -2 to Blocks), and you trade a Simple Bash to a Penetrating Bolt (same damage, but penetrating and long range instead of pushing enemies and getting boosted by the other Bashes that you have). Now maybe you're doing an electricity build and the fact that Powerful Spark is an electrical card is a good thing, but even if that was the case you's still be getting a boost to block penetration out of those traits on your Sorcerous Bolt. For most purposes, the Sorcerous Bolt to Powerful Spark trade is something of a downgrade. Spark to Powerful Spark is definitely an upgrade, but it's only 1 point of damage, so it's not really that big of a deal one way or the other. The big question mark of course is Simple Bash to Penetrating Bolt. Normally, I would say that Penetrating Bolt is a much better card. But Bashes get better the more of them you have, and if you're taking any Battlestaff (or Warstaff) into a mission, you presumably want to have bashes in your hand to keep enemies from closing. And it's not like any of the rest of the cards on the staff are of any particular use against heavily armored enemies, so the Penetrating Bolt is less useful than it is on say, a Crimson Staff. Bottom line is that the Opal Battlestaff is a very marginal, even questionable real upgrade to the Jade Battlestaff, and seeing it cost two power tokens instead of zero is a head scratcher. A single power token, or even zero power tokens (it is 3 levels higher, after all) would make a lot more sense. It has the same net damage on its attacks, only the rider effects have been shuffled around on two of the six cards. And it's not at all obvious to me that the Opal configuration is necessarily superior to the Jade. -Frank
Range damage wise, they are 11 vs 8. Its a far better indicator of usefulness. Plus you get far more more synergy and anti-block. Also, lets be honest here. lv 6 and 9 commons are not items people even use. So balance isn't really that important. there is little gain form BM going through all the low level commons and balancing them as stringently if people only use those weapons for 1-2 fights in low level campaigns (which are already a cakewalk).
