December Community Update

I see what you did there! :+1:

1 Like

@WarlockPrime Can we assume that Update 1.5 will drop before January 4th since 1.5.5 is mid-late January?

1 Like

We will be releasing the Kingdom Update blog in advance of the 1.5 update @Sibelios


This is excellent news… HOWEVER, please do not forget about the fallen rings. While it’s not as common, they can also be used to achieve turn 0. I point this out now because if you think the torches and pitchforks were crazy with the current situation, it is going to be 1000 times worse when people go from being stuck with 100 gems to being stuck with 50.

Fallen Rings are something that has been raised with the team in the past as well and they are aware of.

Brought it up again just now to be sure! :sparkles:


@WarlockPrime The logic is fundamentally wrong here. The DLC items don’t provide additional power bonuses - they provide DIFFERENT bonuses. If anything, they provide LESS since they don’t currently contribute to a set bonus. Furthermore, you say that all content in the game should be available for all our players. Are you serious about this? There’s no way F2P players have a serious chance at getting all the Dragon King items. I’ve purchased every season and spent thousands upon thousands of seasonal currency, and I still can’t get the items. So yeah, the logic for this decision is as meaty as a feather.

I purchased the DLC expecting the functionality included in the item description. However, you can’t sell me a laptop and expect me to be happy when you deliver a TV. Yeah, TVs are great… But I bought a laptop. In the case of the DLC, you only delivered half the functionality. I actually really like the items (Flame Ring), but I still expect the rest of the functionality. If you won’t deliver what was advertised, then I expect compensation for the functionality you did not deliver.

So, how will you compensate us for the advertised functionality you have chosen to not deliver?


Yeah, I didn’t buy these items - but it would seem that they would not provide extra bonuses but rather allow alternative set builds (which may allow extra bonuses I guess)
I would have liked the idea of extra gear pieces for each set to allow for some flexibility in building set bonuses (not extra bonuses, but different combinations to get the existing Set I II & III bonuses)

Based on the naming, the descriptions and the MONTHS long timeframe for any sort of indication about which way this was going to end, I can understand if those who paid money for these items feel this decision is not a fair one (in addition to the explanation of the decision not making much sense)


The problem I see with Aeon’s argument is that as far as I can recall, the devs have never advertised that the paid DLC items would be part of existing sets. On the other hand, the naming scheme used for 2 of the 4 DLC items would suggest to a reasonable player that these items could and would be part of a set bonus, as the prefixes on those two pieces pointed to existing sets in-game (which is Aeon’s actual argument).

Very unfortunate situation, yes. But, likely from the devs’ perspective, players are getting exactly what was explicitly advertised for these pieces, regardless of whatever these pieces are being called in the future. Therefore, the devs are unlikely to view this as a refundable event. Perhaps some goodwill compensation gems to everyone who has purchased the DLC for the confusion surrounding the matter, but that’s likely as far as the devs will go on this matter.

On the other side of the situation, 505’s argument on power levels of DLC items is confusing to read.

Ok… let’s take a look at the 4 DLC items currently in game.

Eveline’s Locket: The only source of Mana Mastery boosting from a Gear effect in-game.
Jeweled Golden Grasp: The only Gear piece in game that enables boosted damage against opponents that are Stunned.
Serpentine Flame Ring: The best and most reliable source of Haste in-game.
Mirror Shield: The best and most reliable source of Reflect in the game. The farmable Dreamhold Shield is vastly inferior, in comparison, as the only other Gear piece that has a chance to produce the Reflect status effect.

Right now, the DLC items are in a power level tier all of their own, even with being excluded from sets. After 4 Seasons, nothing that has been released comes even close in matching their power levels. It’s borderline arguable that these pieces individually are strong enough to be their actual own set bonuses all by themselves.

So, how would this content be made available to all players who didn’t want to pay DLC cash bundle prices? 5k gems per piece in the Shop? And if so, why sell DLC pieces at all then?

1 Like

Dragonguard Tome boosts a specific color mastery (same color as the equipped tome) by a % of Power. Although Eveline’s Locket boosts all, most players run mono builds so the benefit is similar. Runic Amulet also boosts a random Mastery but this randomness makes it inferior as a choice.

Just clarifying that it is not the only source of Mana Mastery boost from gear.

You could make the argument that this piece is actually inferior to the regular Jeweled Gauntlets even if you provided it with the Set bonus with the gearset that it shares its name since Jeweled-III actually blinds the enemy.

Ultimately the point is this is an arbitrary decision by the developers. They could easily include the two pieces with naming characteristics that are shared and provide those that paid money for the DLC content some satisfaction in their use without really changing any fundamental power dynamics amongst players in the game.

Eveline’s Locket and Mirror Shield do not share any naming characteristics so these pieces were never at issue so their abilities vis-a-vis other gear is pointless. Much like comparing Lucky Clover Ring to something else. It also does not share a naming convention nor gear set bonus.

1 Like

Sorry @lyrian, I strongly disagree with you on this point. The Serpentine Flame Ring has “Serpentine” in the name, and the item description shows it as part of the Serpentine set

However, we should clarify that when we talk about the paid DLC items being a part of a set, we’re only talking about the Serpentine Flame Ring and Jeweled Golden Grasp. Both of those items have a set name, and their item descriptions show they are part of a set. However, this doesn’t apply to Eveline’s Locket or the Mirror Shield, neither of which have set names or have set indicators in their descriptions.


Thanks for posting the screenshot., Aeon.

That does change the situation a bit. The devs still have not explicitly stated that the inclusion of these items into sets was advertised. The naming of these items alone in-game does not constitute an explicit advertisement by them. That said, the game recognizing that these items are a part of a set is very strong implicit case that the intent was there to do so at some point.

What’s weird here is that the “sets” here for both of these pieces are called the same as the existing set in the game, yet they are coded to be in different sets. The tell is in the screenshot you posted.

For example, for the Jeweled Set:


For the Jeweled Grasp:


Same name, yet different sets as far as the game is concerned. Same situation for the Serpentine Flame Ring.

So, the question is why is this the case? Did the devs try to implement them into their respective sets at some point, change their mind (or find the implementation impractical, such as the game can’t recognize 2 rings in the same set without a serious recoding of the gear system), and we are observing sloppy or leftover coding that found its way to the production servers?

We may never know, and I suppose as of 1.5 it won’t matter anymore.

FWIW, I’d be on Team Compensation at this point. But, ultimately, Sibellos is right on this matter. The resolution on this matter is a purely arbitrary decision by the devs and our quibbling over the semantics of the situation is likely going to fall on deaf ears as the devs have announced their decision on the matter.

Thank you for the additional pics and thoughts! I think that fleshes out the scenario some more. The other thing is this: the info screens Eveline’s Locket and Mirror Shield do not show they are part of any set at all, whereas the info screens for the Serpentine Flame Ring and Jeweled Golden Grasp DO show them as part of their respective sets. This makes it look like the latter two items were meant to be part of a set, but were not implemented correctly or had a bug. In my opinion, this supports the idea they were designed to be part of a set.


@WarlockPrime So, the question remains: If the developers will remove this functionality, how will the developers compensate those of us who purchased the two DLC items that have this functionality? (Serpentine Flame Ring & Jeweled Golden Grasp)

Remember, this functionality IS ALREADY built in (see pictures below) - the items are ALREADY programmed as parts of sets… the problem is that a bug is preventing them from working correctly. If the developers remove this functionality instead of fixing it, we deserve compensation. I suggest enough crowns for two Premium Pass+ (the PLUS version), though I still prefer fixing the two items.



1 Like

Just an update with the Kingdom blog, it will be releasing a day later (5th of Jan) as some of the development team behind these changes are still on leave.
This means they will be available to answer questions that will likely arise once the Kingdom Blog is posted.

I’ll also update the original post to now mention the new date, should anyone notice it has been edited. :sparkles:


Thanks for the heads up. I will pass this on to my kingdom as we are eagerly awaiting this blog post.

@Jeto @WarlockPrime If the plan is to NOT fix the two DLC items (Flame Ring & Golden Grasp), we still need to hear how the people who purchased the items will be compensated. As a reminder, this is the plan that the team communicated to us a while back:

I still prefer that the two DLC items be included in their respective gear sets. However, if that can’t/won’t be implemented, then please update us on how we will be compensated for not getting that functionality. I suggest enough crowns to buy at least two or three Premium Pass+ Quest Passes (the “plus” version, not the regular version).

1 Like

Your persistence got me curious. I do not play on PC, so I hadn’t seen these DLCs until now.

Here is what is says:

  1. It says the contents of the dlc are not tradeable or refundable.
  2. I do not see a promise that the items will be part of the respective sets, but I agree it is a fair assumption given the names.

I don’t know if this page looked the same more than 6 months ago when you bought the dlc, but by the looks of it, I’m not optimistic anything will happen.

If you don’t get a compensation, I hope you will at least learn a lesson from the whole situation.

  1. I’m persistent because I know I’m right, and I have faith the developers will do right by their supporters.

  2. You’re correct - it’s too late for a Steam refund. However, it’s not too late for the developers to give some crowns / in-game currency as compensation.

  3. If someone sells you a car, you expect it to drive you from point A to point B for at least 5 years. If instead the “car” turns out to be nothing more than a paperweight after 2 hours of driving, you’d expect to be compensated, right? The fact that the items are called by Set Names and the fact that they are already coded to be part of their respective set names (see previous post) … This tells us they are/were supposed to be part of a set.

  1. :thinking::thinking::thinking::thinking: Why, yes, I’ve learned so many lessons that I’m halfway to a doctorate. As I’ve said before, I’d prefer functionality over compensation. Aside from that, maybe the lessons are as follows: “If you make a mistake, then make it right;” “Do right for your customers;” and “If you don’t deliver on half the functionality of an item you sold, what do you have to lose by giving some in-game currency as compensation?”

To me this is the critical issue and players like @AeonNhiyr should be provided some sort of relief. The developers chose to name them according to existing sets in the game. Maybe they did this because of theme. Perhaps they did this because the anticipated the possibility of adding additional items to sets along the way. Who knows why they did this but the choice at the outset should have been to name them just like the other two DLC items, making them completely independent and not subject to any confusion about association. It’s entirely reasonable that a customer would buy the Serpentine Flame Ring expecting it to be part of the Serpentine set. Why wouldn’t you think that? The developer made a mistake here for whatever reason and its not unreasonable to ask them to at least provide some offset since they ultimately decided that they were not going to make them part of the set despite an abundance of evidence that it would not imbalance the game in any way, but instead makes the buyer worse off because they are less able to make a set like other players!.

IP2 and 505Games should do the right thing and provide some form of recompense for players, especially ones that have been as patient in learning the resolution of this issue and continued to be paying customers like @AeonNhiyr