Hearthpwn

they should make it a 1 mana 4/4 with stealth, if you have a card in your deck draw 3 cards, hopefully that will make it more balanced.

Quote from Kaiyuni »

Quote from honj90 »

It would be playable (not OP) if it were neutral. However Priest is the class that cares the least about Zombie Chows drawback. Furthermore, you need to have a dragon in your starting hand for it to be as good as Chow and you don't want to keep a 5-9 drop just to enable the whelp. 

Maybe I could see a priest deck with both Chow, Whelp and Blackwing Technician being played to take advantage of Velen's Chosen, but I doubt it would be Tier 1.

Don't forget there are other dragons besides the 7+ mana ones. Azure Drake and Faerie Dragon are the first two that come to mind that a priest would use in a dragon themed deck. Azure Drake being good enough stand-alone in any priest deck, actually.

That's why I said 5-9 mana. Faerie Dragon can't be targeted with buffs or hero power, so it's especially bad in priest (another reason I would have liked the whelp to be neutral).

EDIT: Of course you can keep a 4-drop like Hungry Dragon or Twilight Drake (I don't think you'd want to run Twilight Drake, but you might be forced to if you wanted the Whelp to trigger consistently). My point was, you're going to have a lot of mulligans where you have Ysera and Twilight Whelp in your starting hand and you'll wish that Whelp was a Chow instead.

Quote from Kaiyuni »

Quote from honj90 »

It would be playable (not OP) if it were neutral. However Priest is the class that cares the least about Zombie Chows drawback. Furthermore, you need to have a dragon in your starting hand for it to be as good as Chow and you don't want to keep a 5-9 drop just to enable the whelp. 

Maybe I could see a priest deck with both Chow, Whelp and Blackwing Technician being played to take advantage of Velen's Chosen, but I doubt it would be Tier 1.

Don't forget there are other dragons besides the 7+ mana ones. Azure Drake and Faerie Dragon are the first two that come to mind that a priest would use in a dragon themed deck. Azure Drake being good enough stand-alone in any priest deck, actually.

It's highly unlikely that any dragon decks use Faerie Dragon.  The only 'dragon synergy' that exists is holding a dragon in your hand and a 2 drop isn't a card you want to have for this purpose, nor is it a good 2 drop to begin with.  It's very mediocre and mediocre doesn't cut it in constructed these days.

Azure Drake/Faerie Dragon are false answers. You aren't going to run Faerie Dragon as a priest ever. You can't buff it or heal it. Azure Drake is too costly and again if you are purposefully holding an Azure Drake in your opening hand as a priest you are way behind, a 2/3 ain't gonna help you.

PETITION TO NERF TWILIGHT WHELP!! MAKE IT A 1/1!!! grrr

I agree with most posters here that it's not that great, however it has another redeeming quality seldom mentioned : it's a very playable early game dragon, which means that it also enables other cards that care about holding dragons. Not that there are enough to make it worthwhile, I believe, but it's something.

Add to that that Hungry Dragon has very decent potential with Priest, the class who probably cares the least about giving one-drops to their opponent, what with all the healing back the damage they deal, not playing lame early game minions that they can trade with, and having access to Shadow Madness and Cabal Shadow Priest to turn theses minions against the oponent, and Priest seems a fine home to a Dragon deck, if it ever becomes a thing.

Oh I'm not saying this is a 'bad' card by any means; I've seen a ton of people trash it so far. 

I do see its potential when combo'd with the Blackwings, but to call it "OP" is absolutely ludicrous. 

"If it were in x other class" should tell you all you need to know. There's a reason it's NOT a Hunter card that says beast, it's much more balanced (and imo, very bad) in Priest with he word Dragon.

Quote from HS_CVH »

"If it were in x other class" should tell you all you need to know. There's a reason it's NOT a Hunter card that says beast, it's much more balanced (and imo, very bad) in Priest with he word Dragon.

are you a semi-famous HS player?

Quote from SauceBoss123 »

Quote from HS_CVH »

"If it were in x other class" should tell you all you need to know. There's a reason it's NOT a Hunter card that says beast, it's much more balanced (and imo, very bad) in Priest with he word Dragon.

are you a semi-famous HS player?

Nope, just been moderately successful on the ladder and I was famous in another game you probably never heard of, lol.

 I find this entire thread hilarious and even though I am resurrecing it I have to say since everyone except for the original poster was dead wrong, it bears revisiting. Dragon priest is a thing, and a quite successful one at that.  With the prevalence of all the dragon minions available, it is dead simple to drop a one cost 2/3 on the first turn which is of course

op and makes unerfed stb look crappy by comparison. As a gold rogue with thousands of games under his belt  I can attest that I have never seen anyone drop a whelp as a 2/1.  Thank God this broken little card is rotating out soon.

It's never been op. Dragon priest was always a thing just never T1-2 before. The card that saved them is the OPerative. I see people holding on to whelps more often than not especially if it's their  only dragon to activate wyrmrests and historians. 1 mana 2/3 doesn't compare to most pirates anyway even with buccaneers being nerfed so rogues can stop crying over dead threads

yes it is overpowered, if dragon tag was hard to require like for example back when all dragons was pretty much 9 drops it would be fine, but in these low curve bullshet decks it is dumb.. just op curve 1 mana 2/3 into op curve 2 mana 2/4 taunt into op curve 3 mana 3/5 into op curve 4 mana 3/6 taunt into op curve 5 mana 5/6 battlecry pick a late game card from your opponent and gain more value in your aggro curve priest deck than your opponent who has sacrificed his early game in order to have more late game

No.