So with Mad scientist leaving standard, i think many people will not play hunter secrets anymore, it just doesnt seem worth it. Unfurtunally there are alot of interesting Hunter Secrets that never see play because they arent viable enough.
So here is a control Hunter idea with secrets:
So youve thrown down a 2 mana Beast, then turn 3 Animal companion, then this and you sacrifice your 1-2 beasts for 2 secret draws. Hounds also work well with this.
I've also thought experimented with other effects like: "Whenever a friendly Deathrattle minion dies, add a random Hunter Secret to your hand"
or, "Whenever a friendly beast is summoned-" instead of 'dies'.
or complexer:"Battlecry: For every friendly Beast with Deathrattle, put a random Hunter Secret into the Battlefrield".(This would combo turn 10 with Ball of spiders, 6 mana 3 webspinners, into 3 random hunter secrets into play. Also works with the new "'Infest'-give your minions deathrattle add 1 random beast to your hand" card)
I wish I was with Blizzard and could just test this, but i think the card is best as it stands now. The most important thing is that i want to keep seeing secrets in standard and more hunter cards interacting with them, including those that arent commonly played.
Cool. With the new Hunter deathrattle minions coming out, i think the "Whenever a friendly Deathrattle minion dies, add a random Hunter Secret to your hand" might be more suitable. And buff his attack by 1 maybe to compensate.
So there is a statloss of 3 stats -> 1,5 mana. 1,5 mana is about the worth of a card draw. Since the synergies with this card are pretty good (UtH, Highmane, maybe even Call of the Wild) I'd say it might be too powerful? And random secret adds extra value: your opponent has zero clue as to what he should try to play around first. Concept is good, probably too strong.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm just another one of those. You know, those who do things. Things that need to be done by those that do these things in order to do those things that don't do these things themselves. Has the word 'things' lost meaning to you already?
Hey folks,
So with Mad scientist leaving standard, i think many people will not play hunter secrets anymore, it just doesnt seem worth it. Unfurtunally there are alot of interesting Hunter Secrets that never see play because they arent viable enough.
So here is a control Hunter idea with secrets:
So youve thrown down a 2 mana Beast, then turn 3 Animal companion, then this and you sacrifice your 1-2 beasts for 2 secret draws. Hounds also work well with this.
I've also thought experimented with other effects like: "Whenever a friendly Deathrattle minion dies, add a random Hunter Secret to your hand"
or, "Whenever a friendly beast is summoned-" instead of 'dies'.
or complexer:"Battlecry: For every friendly Beast with Deathrattle, put a random Hunter Secret into the Battlefrield".(This would combo turn 10 with Ball of spiders, 6 mana 3 webspinners, into 3 random hunter secrets into play. Also works with the new "'Infest'-give your minions deathrattle add 1 random beast to your hand" card)
I wish I was with Blizzard and could just test this, but i think the card is best as it stands now. The most important thing is that i want to keep seeing secrets in standard and more hunter cards interacting with them, including those that arent commonly played.
I would play it.
Sorry, but face is NOT place :P
Cool. With the new Hunter deathrattle minions coming out, i think the "Whenever a friendly Deathrattle minion dies, add a random Hunter Secret to your hand" might be more suitable. And buff his attack by 1 maybe to compensate.
So there is a statloss of 3 stats -> 1,5 mana. 1,5 mana is about the worth of a card draw. Since the synergies with this card are pretty good (UtH, Highmane, maybe even Call of the Wild) I'd say it might be too powerful? And random secret adds extra value: your opponent has zero clue as to what he should try to play around first. Concept is good, probably too strong.
I'm just another one of those. You know, those who do things. Things that need to be done by those that do these things in order to do those things that don't do these things themselves. Has the word 'things' lost meaning to you already?
[Game] Name another card that has the same...