Blizzard finally realized vanish makes 0 sense for Rogue. What about Sap? Same stupid stuff just for single target.
I believe the key to this is the single target specification rather than effecting the whole board. (as others have mentioned) I also think that Vanish in terms of flavour for a Rogue, is simply weird - in truth, Valeera the Hollow is what Vanish probably should have been trying to achieve. Rogues don't normally make other characters go invisible.... at least they didn't the last time I played WoW anyway. :-P
If you have ever played WoW then sap fits perfectly with rogues skill set. To make it more equal with the effect it had in WoW then it would be more of a freeze for a turn than removing it from the board but definitely a rogue skill. Vanish was not.
If you have ever played WoW then sap fits perfectly with rogues skill set. To make it more equal with the effect it had in WoW then it would be more of a freeze for a turn than removing it from the board but definitely a rogue skill. Vanish was not.
Paralyze and removal are totally different. A freeze-like spell wouldnt let you go face when theres a giant taunt on the board.
Maybe instead of the freeze suggestion, it could give an enemy minion stealth for a turn. That way it could bypass taunts without total removal of the enemy's minion.
I personally wouldn't change the card at all though!
Blizzard finally realized vanish makes 0 sense for Rogue. What about Sap? Same stupid stuff just for single target.
I believe the key to this is the single target specification rather than effecting the whole board. (as others have mentioned) I also think that Vanish in terms of flavour for a Rogue, is simply weird - in truth, Valeera the Hollow is what Vanish probably should have been trying to achieve. Rogues don't normally make other characters go invisible.... at least they didn't the last time I played WoW anyway. :-P
IMO Vanish totally makes sense for Rogue, it's even the key of their identity, as they are defined in WoW, abusing control to stun lock their opponent then vanish to do the same again until their opponent go out of CD's and ressources.
It's likely the Hearthstone use of Vanish which makes your opponent board disappear which is totally unlogical. To me, they recently printed what should have been Vanish since beginning, and it's Daring Escape, this should have been the former Vanish. As it allows to get back your minions (with powerful battlecries for examples) and launch them again against your opponent.
And to Scorpyon, you got the Dissimulation cloak in WoW which makes you and raid members dissappear if they are within 30 ft of your position. Well you cannot use it in fight tho so it's not totally a vanish.
And to answer OP Sap is really fine to me, a powerful but well designed tempo card for a tempo class, i'm good with it.
Blizzard finally realized vanish makes 0 sense for Rogue. What about Sap? Same stupid stuff just for single target.
I believe the key to this is the single target specification rather than effecting the whole board. (as others have mentioned) I also think that Vanish in terms of flavour for a Rogue, is simply weird - in truth, Valeera the Hollow is what Vanish probably should have been trying to achieve. Rogues don't normally make other characters go invisible.... at least they didn't the last time I played WoW anyway. :-P
IMO Vanish totally makes sense for Rogue, it's even the key of their identity, as they are defined in WoW, abusing control to stun lock their opponent then vanish to do the same again until their opponent go out of CD's and ressources.
It's likely the Hearthstone use of Vanish which makes your opponent board disappear which is totally unlogical. To me, they recently printed what should have been Vanish since beginning, and it's Daring Escape, this should have been the former Vanish. As it allows to get back your minions (with powerful battlecries for examples) and launch them again against your opponent.
And to Scorpyon, you got the Dissimulation cloak in WoW which makes you and raid members dissappear if they are within 30 ft of your position. Well you cannot use it in fight tho so it's not totally a vanish.
And to answer OP Sap is really fine to me, a powerful but well designed tempo card for a tempo class, i'm good with it.
A class's identity may be partially based on how it plays in WoW, but that's not a deciding factor in whether to keep it in Hearthstone. Like, at all.
Also, the names of things are not nearly as important as what they do. A good name helps you remember a card, but it doesn't really affect the gameplay.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
A rogue is supposed to be strong at single target removal, stop suggesting things that make no sense and only continue to harm the game. Nerfing Sap would be like nerfing Blessing of Kings, or Power Word: Shield, or Flame Imp, it would be completely asanine and destructive.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you thought you knew what you think I know, then you'd know I knew you knew I know.
Blizzard finally realized vanish makes 0 sense for Rogue. What about Sap? Same stupid stuff just for single target.
I believe the key to this is the single target specification rather than effecting the whole board. (as others have mentioned) I also think that Vanish in terms of flavour for a Rogue, is simply weird - in truth, Valeera the Hollow is what Vanish probably should have been trying to achieve. Rogues don't normally make other characters go invisible.... at least they didn't the last time I played WoW anyway. :-P
IMO Vanish totally makes sense for Rogue, it's even the key of their identity, as they are defined in WoW, abusing control to stun lock their opponent then vanish to do the same again until their opponent go out of CD's and ressources.
It's likely the Hearthstone use of Vanish which makes your opponent board disappear which is totally unlogical. To me, they recently printed what should have been Vanish since beginning, and it's Daring Escape, this should have been the former Vanish. As it allows to get back your minions (with powerful battlecries for examples) and launch them again against your opponent.
And to Scorpyon, you got the Dissimulation cloak in WoW which makes you and raid members dissappear if they are within 30 ft of your position. Well you cannot use it in fight tho so it's not totally a vanish.
And to answer OP Sap is really fine to me, a powerful but well designed tempo card for a tempo class, i'm good with it.
A class's identity may be partially based on how it plays in WoW, but that's not a deciding factor in whether to keep it in Hearthstone. Like, at all.
Also, the names of things are not nearly as important as what they do. A good name helps you remember a card, but it doesn't really affect the gameplay.
Are you a hearthstone developer that can say that this is their protocol when designing cards? Please share how you KNOW that it isn't a deciding factor.
So now we have problem with Sap? Cause its its unfair, bouncing back your big taunts and go face..You know what else is unfair for big taunts and let you go face(if your problem is only the taunt attribute)? Silences, Destructions and Polymorphs..So why all these crying with Sap? At least it leaves your minions shiny and new in your hand..And from all the classes that can harrass you with all above, your problem is rogue's Sap?Or do you want to remove all the removals?
Blizzard finally realized vanish makes 0 sense for Rogue. What about Sap? Same stupid stuff just for single target.
Fun > Meta
Vanish serves as an AoE. AoE is supposed to be rogues weakness.
Sap is a single target removal and a tempo card which fits rogues identity.
Stop whining about every single rogue card.
I believe the key to this is the single target specification rather than effecting the whole board. (as others have mentioned)
I also think that Vanish in terms of flavour for a Rogue, is simply weird - in truth, Valeera the Hollow is what Vanish probably should have been trying to achieve.
Rogues don't normally make other characters go invisible.... at least they didn't the last time I played WoW anyway. :-P
If you have ever played WoW then sap fits perfectly with rogues skill set. To make it more equal with the effect it had in WoW then it would be more of a freeze for a turn than removing it from the board but definitely a rogue skill.
Vanish was not.
Learn How to Play a Deck other than Big Priest!
Paralyze and removal are totally different. A freeze-like spell wouldnt let you go face when theres a giant taunt on the board.
Fun > Meta
Of course, nobody cries when sap is a dead card in your hand.
“Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt.”
Nevermind I recant my previous statement and apologize due to the complexities and high skill cap plays of drawing Barnes on curve.
Maybe instead of the freeze suggestion, it could give an enemy minion stealth for a turn. That way it could bypass taunts without total removal of the enemy's minion.
I personally wouldn't change the card at all though!
8-10 mana taunt? Grave horror from calling? Then yes, sap is needed. But in any case, sap is still needed
IMO Vanish totally makes sense for Rogue, it's even the key of their identity, as they are defined in WoW, abusing control to stun lock their opponent then vanish to do the same again until their opponent go out of CD's and ressources.
It's likely the Hearthstone use of Vanish which makes your opponent board disappear which is totally unlogical. To me, they recently printed what should have been Vanish since beginning, and it's Daring Escape, this should have been the former Vanish. As it allows to get back your minions (with powerful battlecries for examples) and launch them again against your opponent.
And to Scorpyon, you got the Dissimulation cloak in WoW which makes you and raid members dissappear if they are within 30 ft of your position. Well you cannot use it in fight tho so it's not totally a vanish.
And to answer OP Sap is really fine to me, a powerful but well designed tempo card for a tempo class, i'm good with it.
This.
A class's identity may be partially based on how it plays in WoW, but that's not a deciding factor in whether to keep it in Hearthstone. Like, at all.
Also, the names of things are not nearly as important as what they do. A good name helps you remember a card, but it doesn't really affect the gameplay.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
A rogue is supposed to be strong at single target removal, stop suggesting things that make no sense and only continue to harm the game. Nerfing Sap would be like nerfing Blessing of Kings, or Power Word: Shield, or Flame Imp, it would be completely asanine and destructive.
If you thought you knew what you think I know, then you'd know I knew you knew I know.
Are you a hearthstone developer that can say that this is their protocol when designing cards? Please share how you KNOW that it isn't a deciding factor.
Stay on topic and respond without being basal children.
Fun > Meta
So now we have problem with Sap? Cause its its unfair, bouncing back your big taunts and go face..You know what else is unfair for big taunts and let you go face(if your problem is only the taunt attribute)? Silences, Destructions and Polymorphs..So why all these crying with Sap? At least it leaves your minions shiny and new in your hand..And from all the classes that can harrass you with all above, your problem is rogue's Sap?Or do you want to remove all the removals?
How many of those are 2 mana and avoid deathrattle activation?
1. Silence which doesnt remove body from field
2.Shield Slam, arguably another stupid card. (doesnt dodge deathrattle
and requires sufficient armor)
0 points.
Fun > Meta
1. Lose to a specific card in a game that caused you to rage.
2. Request removal of said card from the game.
LMAO