This isn't in the game though so it doesn't matter, does it. :D
Nah man, with that logic then you can just make whatever random card you want. "Hey guys here's a 0-mana 30/30 with Charge. It's fine because it isn't real".
On one hand, I like the simplicity of Batmech. At 5 mana, you're essentially getting a 3-mana card and two 1 mana cards, although it might be a little bit on the strong side.
Release the Draken! Is also pretty cool. I like the flavour of the pirates 'summoning' a dragon to fight for them. Why is it a 'Draken', not a 'Dragon'? I feel like it'd make more sense that way.
My cards:
I'd honestly really like to know about the wording "draken" instead of "dragon". I've done it to make it sound more like Kraken - and Draken is an actually synonym for Dragon (as far as my "looking-up"-skills go), but I'm not sure if Dragon is better?
It's a tough competition this week, but one that I really enjoy! Don't wanna dissapoint yebaba ;)
Mo'arg Enginner is a tool for handlock and would make possible the mechlock Blizzard wanted to push with Fel Cannon. Cards like Junkbot would become pretty insane with this but avoid playing it with a Fel Reaver in your hand!
Dragonmaw Sailor to make pirate/dragon warrior great again.
Daelin Proudmoore [both cards have the same effect but formulated differently] is a tool to make murloc and pirate decks viable (Anyfin Paladin is a combo deck and isn't really a murloc deck since any other murloc would screw the combo). Murloc and Pirate decks tend to be aggro/tempo decks and those tend to run out of steam quickly. Jaina's daddy would help refuel your hand provided you're lucky with your draws. [Also yes, I know there's a dedicated artwork for Daelin, but IMO it doesn't represent him and does not feel warcraft-y].
Which is best ?
Bump from page 2, which is best ? LarryMoments answered me but I would like several opinions. :)
I think Daelin Proudmoore is the coolest. It's an unique and very awesome draw engine for Murloc/Pirate decks, and while I don't know who this Daelin guy is, I think the art you're currently using fits the card. IMO the second wording is better, but IDK either way.
Some cards I want feedback on:
For the Doctor, I just want to ask whether I should change the 'Mech' to 'Dragon'. It's something that has been suggested, and something I'm considering, although I'm somewhat reluctant to change it because I feel 'Mech' fits better from a flavour perspective.
As for the Southsea Maneater, what do you think about it?
So I just checked and I think my last entry wouldn't be accepted because it didn't name a minion type. So I'm thinking of entering this card, but I would like to ask if you think the wording is OK. I believe this is how it would be worded, but I just want to run it through this discussion:
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Entry for this week's Card Design Competition - Season 8.16:
Mechanical Dragon is a bit odd. You can silence it to not be considered as dragon and I wonder if there would be that many situations where opponent would do that (or a player that would play it.)
There's a lot of people posting in both here, and the submissions thread but the highest number of votes on a card is 11. Vote more everyone! It doesn't matter who's card you vote for, but this is the smallest turnout I've seen for one of these weekly competitions.
@Fortify: Thanks for feedback. I thought the same thing for Mo'arg Engineer, voters who started playing after standard was introduced won't see the point but I think most people here have known the GvG era. Still undecided between it and Daelin though. As for your Mechanical Dragon, I think it's pretty weak and no deck would use both Mech and Dragon synergy, also "counts as" cards are overdone. I don't know what you can replace this with.
@Mewdrops: Thanks for feedback. Daelin was an admiral in WC2 and WC3 (hence the pirate/murloc synergy) and he is also Jaina Proudmoore's father. I still feel like there's something missing from it though. As for your cards: I don't like the first one, too hard to set up and it's better to have three small minions than a single big one in most circumstances. The second one is much better, why not making it work on both murlocs AND pirates like mine instead ? You would keep the "sea" theme as it is and it would be more polyvalent.
@Redneckbuddha: That's because the competition has not been advertised on the front page.
I am pretty happy with the effect unless someone can come up with a better wording, I am curious what you guys think this should have in the way of Cost and Stats.
Mechanical Dragon is a bit odd. You can silence it to not be considered as dragon and I wonder if there would be that many situations where opponent would do that (or a player that would play it.)
@Fortify: Thanks for feedback. I thought the same thing for Mo'arg Engineer, voters who started playing after standard was introduced won't see the point but I think most people here have known the GvG era. Still undecided between it and Daelin though. As for your Mechanical Dragon, I think it's pretty weak and no deck would use both Mech and Dragon synergy, also "counts as" cards are overdone. I don't know what you can replace this with.
Thanks for your comments. I will re-think another idea. The problem which I'm having is trying to create a card which is used for both classes without trying to make it OP. But you raise some good points for the card and for that thanks for review.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Entry for this week's Card Design Competition - Season 8.16:
I am pretty happy with the effect unless someone can come up with a better wording, I am curious what you guys thing this should have in the way of Cost and Stats.
Sorry to tell you this but I think the term which is used is 'minion type'. But it also adds in the rules you have to reference or more existing minions, which means you have to name the 'minion type'.
I made that mistake with the first card...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Entry for this week's Card Design Competition - Season 8.16:
F***ing read the requirements of the competition people -.-'
Thanks for the quality reply.
Your card must produce, interact with, or in some way reference two or more different existing minion types (Beast, Mech, Murloc, Pirate, Totem, Demon, Dragon) by name.
It is actually very easy to miss the "BY NAME" part of the rules which you very generously reference in your shtpost. I was already prepared to argue that my entry interacts with ALL creature types. I am glad you pointed out my error which is why I post my drafts in this forum in the first place.
F***ing read the requirements of the competition people -.-'
Thanks for the quality reply.
Your card must produce, interact with, or in some way reference two or more different existing minion types (Beast, Mech, Murloc, Pirate, Totem, Demon, Dragon) by name.
It is actually very easy to miss the "BY NAME" part of the rules which you very generously reference in your shtpost. I was already prepared to argue that my entry interacts with ALL creature types. I am glad you pointed out my error which is why I post my drafts in this forum in the first place.
Thank you.
Actually, I wasn't salty about your card in particular, it's just A LOT of people are clearly not reading the requirements (every week) - and no, I'd say it's not that easy to miss it - if you take a minute to read it at all (I'd get it if it were something vague or whatever, but here it's pretty simple).
I do concede my post didn't benefit the discussion at all, but I still think people need to read these things more carefully (because of examples like a few competitions ago; the prompt was to make a Spell, and someone made a minion and got like 5-10 votes in the submission thread -.-')
I am pretty happy with the effect unless someone can come up with a better wording, I am curious what you guys thing this should have in the way of Cost and Stats.
Sorry to tell you this but I think the term which is used is 'minion type'. But it also adds in the rules you have to reference or more existing minions, which means you have to name the 'minion type'.
I made that mistake with the first card...
This format should alleviate that 'by name' requirement. Still not sure about the vanilla stats.
Since the Gadgetzan reveal, I had a new idea for this week for a multi-class card:
The left one is a multi-class Druid, Rogue, Shaman card, if you haven't been keeping up with Gadgetzan. Each one of those has a minion typ it has synergy with. So, this card has synergy for each of these. Warrior decks work with both Pirates and Dragons. Faceless Warrior is designed so that it could fit into either a Pirate or a Dragon warrior deck. Mortal Disguise works off the fact that a number of Dragons and Demons in Warcraft have disguised themselves as mortals. Using that idea, this card 'reveals' the true form of the affected minion by taking away its disguise.
Since the Gadgetzan reveal, I had a new idea for this week for a multi-class card:
The left one is a multi-class Druid, Rogue, Shaman card, if you haven't been keeping up with Gadgetzan. Each one of those has a minion typ it has synergy with. So, this card has synergy for each of these. Warrior decks work with both Pirates and Dragons. Faceless Warrior is designed so that it could fit into either a Pirate or a Dragon warrior deck. Mortal Disguise works off the fact that a number of Dragons and Demons in Warcraft have disguised themselves as mortals. Using that idea, this card 'reveals' the true form of the affected minion by taking away its disguise.
Since the Gadgetzan reveal, I had a new idea for this week for a multi-class card:
The left one is a multi-class Druid, Rogue, Shaman card, if you haven't been keeping up with Gadgetzan. Each one of those has a minion typ it has synergy with. So, this card has synergy for each of these. Warrior decks work with both Pirates and Dragons. Faceless Warrior is designed so that it could fit into either a Pirate or a Dragon warrior deck. Mortal Disguise works off the fact that a number of Dragons and Demons in Warcraft have disguised themselves as mortals. Using that idea, this card 'reveals' the true form of the affected minion by taking away its disguise.
Out of these, I like Mortal Disguise the most, although I think a better art could be used (the current one is kinda awkward-looking). Maybe something shapeshifting into a dragon/demon? IDK. It's flavourfully awesome, and the effect is pretty cool as well. I think it's balanced, and overall it's pretty cool.
Question: How do you add the Lotus/Goons/Kabal faction thing on the cards? Hearthcards doesn't seem to have that function, at least for me. Anyways, Lotus Trainer is also cool, although the flavour isn't quite there. I don't really have a lot of feedback regarding it.
I don't like Faceless Warrior. I assume the effect is a 'Battlecry', but I don't see how the keyword can be fit on the card without going over the '4-line-limit' or the attack/health icons, and that's pretty much the only reason I don't like it.
Anyways, I've got these two cards:
The Shark is, of course, meant for pirate decks, but it can also be used as a sort of tech against them if they become prevalent enough. The flavour here is that it smells humans on the sea and it gets excited. Like, 'Ohh, pirates. I love pirates'. If anyone has any nicer shark art, please tell me.
The Doctor has gotten a lot of mixed feedback. I've had people say it's way too hard to trigger (which I kind of agree on), that the 'Mech' should be a 'dragon', and some have said it's cool, others say it's bad. I do like the flavour behind it, which is why I'm reluctant to mess around with it, but feedback would definitely be appreciated.
Since the Gadgetzan reveal, I had a new idea for this week for a multi-class card:
The left one is a multi-class Druid, Rogue, Shaman card, if you haven't been keeping up with Gadgetzan. Each one of those has a minion typ it has synergy with. So, this card has synergy for each of these. Warrior decks work with both Pirates and Dragons. Faceless Warrior is designed so that it could fit into either a Pirate or a Dragon warrior deck. Mortal Disguise works off the fact that a number of Dragons and Demons in Warcraft have disguised themselves as mortals. Using that idea, this card 'reveals' the true form of the affected minion by taking away its disguise.
Since the Gadgetzan reveal, I had a new idea for this week for a multi-class card:
The left one is a multi-class Druid, Rogue, Shaman card, if you haven't been keeping up with Gadgetzan. Each one of those has a minion typ it has synergy with. So, this card has synergy for each of these. Warrior decks work with both Pirates and Dragons. Faceless Warrior is designed so that it could fit into either a Pirate or a Dragon warrior deck. Mortal Disguise works off the fact that a number of Dragons and Demons in Warcraft have disguised themselves as mortals. Using that idea, this card 'reveals' the true form of the affected minion by taking away its disguise.
Out of these, I like Mortal Disguise the most, although I think a better art could be used (the current one is kinda awkward-looking). Maybe something shapeshifting into a dragon/demon? IDK. It's flavourfully awesome, and the effect is pretty cool as well. I think it's balanced, and overall it's pretty cool.
Question: How do you add the Lotus/Goons/Kabal faction thing on the cards? Hearthcards doesn't seem to have that function, at least for me. Anyways, Lotus Trainer is also cool, although the flavour isn't quite there. I don't really have a lot of feedback regarding it.
I don't like Faceless Warrior. I assume the effect is a 'Battlecry', but I don't see how the keyword can be fit on the card without going over the '4-line-limit' or the attack/health icons, and that's pretty much the only reason I don't like it.
Anyways, I've got these two cards:
The Shark is, of course, meant for pirate decks, but it can also be used as a sort of tech against them if they become prevalent enough. The flavour here is that it smells humans on the sea and it gets excited. Like, 'Ohh, pirates. I love pirates'. If anyone has any nicer shark art, please tell me.
The Doctor has gotten a lot of mixed feedback. I've had people say it's way too hard to trigger (which I kind of agree on), that the 'Mech' should be a 'dragon', and some have said it's cool, others say it's bad. I do like the flavour behind it, which is why I'm reluctant to mess around with it, but feedback would definitely be appreciated.
To get the faction, all you should have to do is select Gadgetzan for the watermark, and you should get an option to pick a faction.
I agree with the feedback for the Frank N Styne card. It just doesn't make sense to make a deck that requires all three types of minions in it. Southshore Maneater is a much better card. I like the flavor and it would work well in Pirate decks.
You should really make it much cuter to have a chance though. Preferably some image of WoW pet. And make sure to get artist's permission so you don't offend anyone! /sarcasm
Why Rogue is my favourite class:
My submission for this week's card design competition.
Is it just me or there's something going wrong with Hearthcards.net when they try to add the new tri-class signs to the editor?
THERE IS NO GAME.
So I just checked and I think my last entry wouldn't be accepted because it didn't name a minion type. So I'm thinking of entering this card, but I would like to ask if you think the wording is OK. I believe this is how it would be worded, but I just want to run it through this discussion:
My Entry for this week's Card Design Competition - Season 8.16:
Mechanical Dragon is a bit odd. You can silence it to not be considered as dragon and I wonder if there would be that many situations where opponent would do that (or a player that would play it.)
There's a lot of people posting in both here, and the submissions thread but the highest number of votes on a card is 11. Vote more everyone! It doesn't matter who's card you vote for, but this is the smallest turnout I've seen for one of these weekly competitions.
RedneckBudha
@Fortify: Thanks for feedback. I thought the same thing for Mo'arg Engineer, voters who started playing after standard was introduced won't see the point but I think most people here have known the GvG era. Still undecided between it and Daelin though. As for your Mechanical Dragon, I think it's pretty weak and no deck would use both Mech and Dragon synergy, also "counts as" cards are overdone. I don't know what you can replace this with.
@Mewdrops: Thanks for feedback. Daelin was an admiral in WC2 and WC3 (hence the pirate/murloc synergy) and he is also Jaina Proudmoore's father. I still feel like there's something missing from it though. As for your cards: I don't like the first one, too hard to set up and it's better to have three small minions than a single big one in most circumstances. The second one is much better, why not making it work on both murlocs AND pirates like mine instead ? You would keep the "sea" theme as it is and it would be more polyvalent.
@Redneckbuddha: That's because the competition has not been advertised on the front page.
Custom cards :
CLASSES : Alchemist (CCC#5 | Phase V) | Chef (CCC#4)
EXPANSIONS : Year of the Scorpion (Year Comp)
Here's where I'm headed this go around.
I am pretty happy with the effect unless someone can come up with a better wording, I am curious what you guys think this should have in the way of Cost and Stats.
My Entry for this week's Card Design Competition - Season 8.16:
My Entry for this week's Card Design Competition - Season 8.16:
F***ing read the requirements of the competition people -.-'
You can't stop the signal.
It is actually very easy to miss the "BY NAME" part of the rules which you very generously reference in your shtpost. I was already prepared to argue that my entry interacts with ALL creature types. I am glad you pointed out my error which is why I post my drafts in this forum in the first place.
Thank you.
You can't stop the signal.
Since the Gadgetzan reveal, I had a new idea for this week for a multi-class card:
The left one is a multi-class Druid, Rogue, Shaman card, if you haven't been keeping up with Gadgetzan. Each one of those has a minion typ it has synergy with. So, this card has synergy for each of these. Warrior decks work with both Pirates and Dragons. Faceless Warrior is designed so that it could fit into either a Pirate or a Dragon warrior deck. Mortal Disguise works off the fact that a number of Dragons and Demons in Warcraft have disguised themselves as mortals. Using that idea, this card 'reveals' the true form of the affected minion by taking away its disguise.
Come Play Make the Keyword!!!
Check out my Worgen Class in the Class Competition
Why Rogue is my favourite class:
My submission for this week's card design competition.
Come Play Make the Keyword!!!
Check out my Worgen Class in the Class Competition
I like the art on the first one more.
You should really make it much cuter to have a chance though. Preferably some image of WoW pet. And make sure to get artist's permission so you don't offend anyone! /sarcasm