Is it just me, or do you find the wording on Fiendish Servant a lil odd. I feel it should read "ADD", not "give" in the wording. The reason being, is that, I understood it as giving a friendly minion 2 attack, as in, what ever the minion's attack was, it will change to 2. I didn't read it as "ADD" 2 attack, which is what the card does. I don't know. Maybe it is just me. :P
completely agree, though the same thing but was pleasantly surprised when i saw the interaction, makes the card obviously much much stronger and might see play in zoo gala warlock
The confusion stems from the fact that this is the first card that gives a stat or effect that isn't pre-determined. All of the other "Give X" cards in the game say "1 health" or "+4/+4", for example. This card is worded in such a way that it can give another minion stats based on potential attack buffs. So vanilla, it's just "Give a random minion +2 Attack", but if you were to buff it, that number goes up.
The confusion stems from the fact that this is the first card that gives a stat or effect that isn't pre-determined. All of the other "Give X" cards in the game say "1 health" or "+4/+4", for example. This card is worded in such a way that it can give another minion stats based on potential attack buffs. So vanilla, it's just "Give a random minion +2 Attack", but if you were to buff it, that number goes up.
This is exactly what I thought the card meant. So I was wondering, what would make it a good card would be to buff it, since it's 2 attack was no good with the other minions I had on board. Had I known it ADDED it's attack, not changed, to another minion, I would have played it differently. Instead, I waited until I only had say 2 or 3 attack power minions on board, so that 'changing' their attack wouldn't matter. Once I found out it ADDED to the minions attack, I felt I could have played it much better.
Now it was just a one time thing, since playing the card I found out how it works. But little things like this are the one thing that gets under my skin about Hearthstone. A LOT of the cards don't clearly explain what they do, or how they work.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The world outside is so big, but it's safe in my domain Because to you I'm just a number and a clever screen name..."
I THINK FOR MYSELF, THEREFORE.... I'M AN ATHEIST !!!
Regarding the card text clarity... It's been discussed before and addressed by blizzard as well. It's not as simple as one might think. If you write 100% clear card texts then nobody will be able (or interested) to read them, and that will instantly become everyone's number one complaint. So they have to balance between people complaining about unclear (but not too long or complicated) texts OR too complicated and too long ones.
For example, if this game was only made for (and played by) programmers, then the card texts would look a little different than what they are now.
It's not poorly written. In fact it's written properly, and "Add" would be poor grammar. I don't Add you 2 more Oranges.
Strawman example.
You CAN say "Add this minion's attack to..."
Yes you CAN, but, in the context it's wrong and that is literary fact. You cannot just swap words out and ignore basic literary rules in English and Latin. Slang is great and all; however, this is a published game with professional writers. Professional writers>forum goers, Blizz is right on this and I very rarely say that.
I can add my oranges to yours, and we would have 4 oranges. Just as with the common phrase of "adding" to a pool of items. I can add my oranges, ideas, or abilities to another person's. If Brian adds his insight, we'll have more ideas. If we could add Angela's knowledge of computers to the team, we would be stronger.
To "give" implies you no longer possess it. If I give you 2 oranges, you have 4, and I have none. If I add my oranges to yours, WE have 4 oranges.
Yes, you can! However, the OPs point was that give implies that it replaces the other number. We agree that give and add or synonymous. The OP is implying give is misleading, and it's not. Give is also the correct term in the context of the card.
Give = Add - OP thinks GIVE is unlcear. It's not. Like I said before, it's just a reading comprehension issue.
I can add my oranges to yours, and we would have 4 oranges. Just as with the common phrase of "adding" to a pool of items. I can add my oranges, ideas, or abilities to another person's. If Brian adds his insight, we'll have more ideas. If we could add Angela's knowledge of computers to the team, we would be stronger.
To "give" implies you no longer possess it. If I give you 2 oranges, you have 4, and I have none. If I add my oranges to yours, WE have 4 oranges.
Isn't the current phrasing right then? (in the aforementioned card)
The minion that gives the attack no longer has the attack since it's dead.
I can add my oranges to yours, and we would have 4 oranges. Just as with the common phrase of "adding" to a pool of items. I can add my oranges, ideas, or abilities to another person's. If Brian adds his insight, we'll have more ideas. If we could add Angela's knowledge of computers to the team, we would be stronger.
To "give" implies you no longer possess it. If I give you 2 oranges, you have 4, and I have none. If I add my oranges to yours, WE have 4 oranges.
Isn't the current phrasing right then? (in the aforementioned card)
The minion that gives the attack no longer has the attack since it's dead.
Yep.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Is it just me, or do you find the wording on Fiendish Servant a lil odd. I feel it should read "ADD", not "give" in the wording. The reason being, is that, I understood it as giving a friendly minion 2 attack, as in, what ever the minion's attack was, it will change to 2. I didn't read it as "ADD" 2 attack, which is what the card does.
I don't know. Maybe it is just me.
:P
"The world outside is so big, but it's safe in my domain
Because to you I'm just a number and a clever screen name..."
I THINK FOR MYSELF, THEREFORE.... I'M AN ATHEIST !!!
completely agree, though the same thing but was pleasantly surprised when i saw the interaction, makes the card obviously much much stronger and might see play in zoo gala warlock
The confusion stems from the fact that this is the first card that gives a stat or effect that isn't pre-determined. All of the other "Give X" cards in the game say "1 health" or "+4/+4", for example. This card is worded in such a way that it can give another minion stats based on potential attack buffs. So vanilla, it's just "Give a random minion +2 Attack", but if you were to buff it, that number goes up.
This is exactly what I thought the card meant. So I was wondering, what would make it a good card would be to buff it, since it's 2 attack was no good with the other minions I had on board. Had I known it ADDED it's attack, not changed, to another minion, I would have played it differently. Instead, I waited until I only had say 2 or 3 attack power minions on board, so that 'changing' their attack wouldn't matter. Once I found out it ADDED to the minions attack, I felt I could have played it much better.
Now it was just a one time thing, since playing the card I found out how it works. But little things like this are the one thing that gets under my skin about Hearthstone. A LOT of the cards don't clearly explain what they do, or how they work.
"The world outside is so big, but it's safe in my domain
Because to you I'm just a number and a clever screen name..."
I THINK FOR MYSELF, THEREFORE.... I'M AN ATHEIST !!!
Regarding the card text clarity... It's been discussed before and addressed by blizzard as well. It's not as simple as one might think. If you write 100% clear card texts then nobody will be able (or interested) to read them, and that will instantly become everyone's number one complaint. So they have to balance between people complaining about unclear (but not too long or complicated) texts OR too complicated and too long ones.
For example, if this game was only made for (and played by) programmers, then the card texts would look a little different than what they are now.
Completely agree with the OP. I thought the exact same thing and was thinking of the exact same solution.
I'm going to simplify for OP.
You have 2 Oranges.
I GIVE you 2 more Oranges.
How many Oranges do you now have?
It's not poorly written. In fact it's written properly, and "Add" would be poor grammar. I don't Add you 2 more Oranges.
Strawman example.
You CAN say "Add this minion's attack to..."
Yes you CAN, but, in the context it's wrong and that is literary fact. You cannot just swap words out and ignore basic literary rules in English and Latin. Slang is great and all; however, this is a published game with professional writers. Professional writers>forum goers, Blizz is right on this and I very rarely say that.
It's a reading comprehension issue.
I can add my oranges to yours, and we would have 4 oranges. Just as with the common phrase of "adding" to a pool of items. I can add my oranges, ideas, or abilities to another person's. If Brian adds his insight, we'll have more ideas. If we could add Angela's knowledge of computers to the team, we would be stronger.
To "give" implies you no longer possess it. If I give you 2 oranges, you have 4, and I have none. If I add my oranges to yours, WE have 4 oranges.
Yes, you can! However, the OPs point was that give implies that it replaces the other number. We agree that give and add or synonymous. The OP is implying give is misleading, and it's not. Give is also the correct term in the context of the card.
Give = Add - OP thinks GIVE is unlcear. It's not. Like I said before, it's just a reading comprehension issue.
Isn't the current phrasing right then? (in the aforementioned card)
The minion that gives the attack no longer has the attack since it's dead.
Yep.