I like your concept of runes, but I don't like the way you distributed their synergy between the sets. In Basic and Classic, you created an additional way to get each rune, but you didn't create any rune synergy here. It seems to all be in later expansions. I think this should be the primary theme of the class, considering how you made the runes Basic spells. Stuff like Deathrattle and summoning token already has synergy from neutral cards. You need to have some synergy for your runes anchored in the Classic set where it will never get rotated out of Standard. I think some of the token generation or synergy cards, like Ghoul, Soulblade, Army of the Dead, Plague Eruptor, March of the Damned, or Froustmourne, should be swapped with the Rune synergy cards from another expansion. You have way too much of this in the Classic set, and absolutely no Rune synergy. If this were a real class, it would be like the developers only came up with the idea of rune synergy a year after the class was created. I also think you don't need so much Freeze and Freeze synergy in the Classic set. Iceborn Knight in particular seems unnecessary, since it only even interacts with two Classic cards.
The fact that Potions should be representative of core class themes, and not just be new (and useless) effects that are tossed in randomly is a completely fair criticism. I will 100% rework Scourge Potion for the exact reason you suggested. I'm somewhat open to reducing the disease mechanic to only 1-2 cards instead of having it be the main theme of the entire MSoG set, and maybe expanding it beyond MSoG, but I really wanted to explore the concept of a micromechanic. I got some positive feedback specifically on that, where someone said it was interesting how DK actually got a new theme in MSoG instead of just regurgitating old stuff. As for its placement in the Kabal, I probably won't change that, unless I can find a good enough legendary effect to take Selendre's place, and even then it would be quite the undertaking. But it's not *completely* out of the picture.
Thanks again and I'll be reviewing your class shortly :)
First and foremost I wanted to tell that you death knight is an amazing work. I like the theme and the mechanic, everything seems interesting and playable which is nice.
I was surprised to by the fact that the deathknight would be Kabal but I accepted it quickly as it leaves the most design space available. Handbuff is weak and un-interesting, and jade do not fit with the feel of the class.
I really like the disease idea but I would think blizzard would implement more than 3 diseases to make sure that you don't have a reliable way to get exactly the disease you need, maybe 5 or 6. With at least one disease with both detrimental and beneficial effect (ex: give +1/+1 can only attack the target in front of him)
Patient zero and outbreak I don't like. I would prefer the [undead] to be immune to disease so outbreak would read : infect every minion on board with a (either random or discovered) disease. Patient zero could be more controlish without the undead tag, with the text: 3 mana 3/7 Taunt, diseased infect every minion it trade with. And it would work nicely with scourge potion which you can use to protect a minion from disease or heal the disease form patient zero
Blighted blade feels a little too weak. Any target which you would want to hit with this weapon is bound to be the dangerous kind meaning that you probably would have to hero power to use the blade to avoid taking too much damage, making the blade a 7 mana 3/3 with an slow effect. I would prefer to infect a random enemy minion. Clear the token infect the threat
I would remove completely necrofire. I feels too powerful and outbreak is already a soft board clear, you could add the potion name to outbreak and add something in relation with the disease theme. As it infect every minion getting it from kabal chemist would be less powerful for another class
Disease mechanic should not be easily controllable, once you release the disease on the board you should have a hard time removing and having the risk that it contaminate your own minion. The only work around being to play undead which are immune.
Alright I talked with a friend for about 45 minutes regarding your post and in general all of the criticisms of the MSoG set. I'm sorry to say that in the end, we are only changing two things:
- Frost Fever now reads "Freeze a minion. Reduce its Attack by 3, but not to less than 1." - Patient Zero no longer has taunt.
Let me explain how we came to this conclusion and respond to some of your suggestions. I may be wrong, but it seems like these were the main things you wanted to see change about the disease mechanic:
Have more than 3 diseases, and introduce some randomness into Disease-giving.
Make Undead minions Immune to disease.
Make Patient Zero a 3 mana 3/7 with Taunt that infects itself with a random disease and then gives that disease to whatever it attacks.
Make Outbreak affect all minions.
The disease mechanic should not be easily controllable.
Implied by the previous one, that whenever an infected minion attacks it spreads its infection?
Remove Necrofire Potion.
First, let me respond to #1. It would be hard for me to accomplish this because there are actually only two diseases in DK in WoW - Blood Plague and Frost Fever. Crypt Virus is a spin on the ability "Crypt Fever" which I believe is a talent for Frost Fever - it's not even an actual standalone ability, and it doesn't have anything to do with summoning a Crypt Fiend. So, already I feel like I've gone pretty deep into BS territory. To take diseases, one of the most iconic mechanics of DK, and create new ones that don't exist in the source material, I feel like this would rub DK mains that are excited to see their class ported to hearthstone the wrong way.
Next I'll take on #2 and #6 at the same time. This is also hard to implement, but for a different reason. Without explicitly stating in every Disease-generating card that Undead minions are immune to the effects and that whenever an infected minion attacks it spreads the disease, it's hard to communicate that this is how diseases work. The only solution would be to create a keyword - but this ruins the idea of a micromechanic, since a keyword would require me to build much more of the class around diseases and spread them outside of the MSoG set, which I'm definitely against doing. Overall either one of these two interactions, let alone both of them, make the disease mechanic much more convoluted than it already is as a micromechanic, and so I don't think its feasible to implement them.
Now for #3. It seems like a lot of the interesting interactions with this version of Patient Zero come from the fact that you can make it Undead to remove the diseases from it. Since we've established that those things can't happen, and that I've been wanting to remove Scourge Potion, it weakens the motivation to make this change. We thought about this idea with the current disease system, and the card just didn't seem to come together. Unless it has Taunt, it's an extremely slow card, to the point that it was unbearably weak. Even then, the way that the Diseases cause this minion to take such a beating before you can even use it make it feel really weak. And if the Diseases are random, then this card would probably only be playable in arena, where all you need is a disease and the specifics don't matter. Overall the current design of Patient Zero was much simpler, and more balanced with the upcoming change to Frost Fever.
With #4, the same reasoning applies as in #3 - the novelty of this effect comes from Undead minions being immune to diseases. This was probably the most compelling part of the argument, as I think it'd be really cool to tie diseases more strongly into controlling Undead minions. Again though, being unable to make Undead minions immune to a certain type of effect without introducing an entirely new keyword makes this effect hard to implement.
#5 and the randomness part of #1 is probably one of the few things that I actually really disagree on. My intentions with the Disease mechanic were for you to be able to respond to situations by choosing precisely the disease you needed. This is why the Diseases had very specific purposes - not general things that have approximately the same effect in any situation. Totems and Animal Companions are random because they do approximately the same things - despite their differences in abilities, totems put a token on your board and Animal Companion puts a 3.5-4 mana cost beast on your board. The three diseases share almost nothing in common, by design, other than the fact that they do something bad to enemy minions. Furthermore, I see the DK as the manipulative master of diseases - not someone who haphazardly mixes up their effects, implying randomness and effecting their own minions. Patient Zero is sort of the exception to this, since Patient Zero isn't a DK, it's someone who has presumably been effected by one. If Outbreak affected your own minions or was random, it would seem like you as a DK are inexperienced or bad, which isn't the design I'm going for.
Finally, #7. I've gotten a lot of feedback on Necrofire - some people say it's weak, some people say it's balanced, and you're the first one to say it's strong. We actually really like this card and are definitely not going to get rid of it. Furthermore, I think it's the type of card where, even if it were overpowered, it could be fixed by increasing the mana cost as opposed to removing it entirely. AoE is also one of DK's strengths and I don't feel bad about giving them two AoE options in the same set.
I think that in an alternate DK concept diseases could work quite nicely as you described them. However, that system has a completely different feel than the one that I was going for as an MSoG micromechanic, so I don't think it really fits into this class.
I like your concept of runes, but I don't like the way you distributed their synergy between the sets. In Basic and Classic, you created an additional way to get each rune, but you didn't create any rune synergy here. It seems to all be in later expansions. I think this should be the primary theme of the class, considering how you made the runes Basic spells. Stuff like Deathrattle and summoning token already has synergy from neutral cards. You need to have some synergy for your runes anchored in the Classic set where it will never get rotated out of Standard. I think some of the token generation or synergy cards, like Ghoul, Soulblade, Army of the Dead, Plague Eruptor, March of the Damned, or Froustmourne, should be swapped with the Rune synergy cards from another expansion. You have way too much of this in the Classic set, and absolutely no Rune synergy. If this were a real class, it would be like the developers only came up with the idea of rune synergy a year after the class was created. I also think you don't need so much Freeze and Freeze synergy in the Classic set. Iceborn Knight in particular seems unnecessary, since it only even interacts with two Classic cards.
I think I generally agree with what you're saying here and I am indeed planning to move some of the spell synergy into the classic set. I'm not sure about Rune synergy specifically though, mostly because there aren't that many cards that are supposed to synergize exclusively with Runes.
Interesting how you said "If this were a real class, it would be like the developers only came up with the idea of rune synergy a year after the class was created" since this was actually my intention with moving all the spell synergy out of the basic set. Created classes and their mechanics have been slowly evolving over time, since as you said the designers wouldn't think years and years into the future. I think I was mistaken on this one though, since spell synergy is so important to DK as a whole. I'm happy to move some into the classic set, any suggestions? Right now I'm looking at moving a nerfed version of Soulguard Bonecaster, along with Gathering Storm and maybe Horn of Winter into the classic set, in exchange for some of the redundant token cards as you said.
I disagree with you on Iceborn Knight though. It's not really supposed to have any particularly large synergy with Death Knight in particular - it's just supposed to be a simple, flavorful, maybe interesting minion that players who are super new to the game run. I don't expect it to see play in any decks even when there is more synergy for it, and I'm fine with that - I think one generally shouldn't try to make every single card in their class viable. Furthermore this card is one of the last remnants of my initiative to make an incredibly simple basic set.
Implied by the previous one, that whenever an infected minion attacks it spreads its infection?
Actually no, I know that would be to impossible to implement and would necessitate convoluted mechanics. In wow undead are often carrier of the disease but don't suffer from them, the idea that was simply for undead to be immune to disease and have the disease spread by randomness and battlecry/deathrattle.
#5 and the randomness part of #1 is probably one of the few things that I actually really disagree on. My intentions with the Disease mechanic were for you to be able to respond to situations by choosing precisely the disease you needed. This is why the Diseases had very specific purposes - not general things that have approximately the same effect in any situation. Totems and Animal Companions are random because they do approximately the same things - despite their differences in abilities, totems put a token on your board and Animal Companion puts a 3.5-4 mana cost beast on your board. The three diseases share almost nothing in common, by design, other than the fact that they do something bad to enemy minions. Furthermore, I see the DK as the manipulative master of diseases - not someone who haphazardly mixes up their effects, implying randomness and effecting their own minions. Patient Zero is sort of the exception to this, since Patient Zero isn't a DK, it's someone who has presumably been effected by one. If Outbreak affected your own minions or was random, it would seem like you as a DK are inexperienced or bad, which isn't the design I'm going for.
I understand your point, If you see the DK as a master of diseases effectively your way to implement diseases is more logical, I was more thinking about how disease felt when playing a WOW boss or the way we see it in Warcraft 3: A plague is introduced which contaminate everyone without discrimination and the undead ravaging inside the mess.
Next I'll take on #2 and #6 at the same time. This is also hard to implement, but for a different reason. Without explicitly stating in every Disease-generating card that Undead minions are immune to the effects and that whenever an infected minion attacks it spreads the disease, it's hard to communicate that this is how diseases work.
I thought about that when writing yesterday post and saw that it was the weakest point of that mechanic.
I like your concept of runes, but I don't like the way you distributed their synergy between the sets. In Basic and Classic, you created an additional way to get each rune, but you didn't create any rune synergy here. It seems to all be in later expansions. I think this should be the primary theme of the class, considering how you made the runes Basic spells. Stuff like Deathrattle and summoning token already has synergy from neutral cards. You need to have some synergy for your runes anchored in the Classic set where it will never get rotated out of Standard. I think some of the token generation or synergy cards, like Ghoul, Soulblade, Army of the Dead, Plague Eruptor, March of the Damned, or Froustmourne, should be swapped with the Rune synergy cards from another expansion. You have way too much of this in the Classic set, and absolutely no Rune synergy. If this were a real class, it would be like the developers only came up with the idea of rune synergy a year after the class was created. I also think you don't need so much Freeze and Freeze synergy in the Classic set. Iceborn Knight in particular seems unnecessary, since it only even interacts with two Classic cards.
I think I generally agree with what you're saying here and I am indeed planning to move some of the spell synergy into the classic set. I'm not sure about Rune synergy specifically though, mostly because there aren't that many cards that are supposed to synergize exclusively with Runes.
Interesting how you said "If this were a real class, it would be like the developers only came up with the idea of rune synergy a year after the class was created" since this was actually my intention with moving all the spell synergy out of the basic set. Created classes and their mechanics have been slowly evolving over time, since as you said the designers wouldn't think years and years into the future. I think I was mistaken on this one though, since spell synergy is so important to DK as a whole. I'm happy to move some into the classic set, any suggestions? Right now I'm looking at moving a nerfed version of Soulguard Bonecaster, along with Gathering Storm and maybe Horn of Winter into the classic set, in exchange for some of the redundant token cards as you said.
I disagree with you on Iceborn Knight though. It's not really supposed to have any particularly large synergy with Death Knight in particular - it's just supposed to be a simple, flavorful, maybe interesting minion that players who are super new to the game run. I don't expect it to see play in any decks even when there is more synergy for it, and I'm fine with that - I think one generally shouldn't try to make every single card in their class viable. Furthermore this card is one of the last remnants of my initiative to make an incredibly simple basic set.
When I said Rune synergy, I didn't mean necessarily the explicit Rune synergy like the weapon that gets durability when a rune is played. Generic spell synergy is rune synergy as you explained in your intro to the class. The "Next spell played" effect is something in particular I was expecting to see in Classic. I think Soulguard Bonecaster and Gathering Storm would be good Classic cards.
Feedback has seemed to calm down, so here are the patch notes for 1.2, in no particular order. If no one has any objections, then I'll get to work!
1.2 Ghoul wording "Charge. At the end of your turn, destroy this minion." Frozen Fanatic capitalize T Seer of Endless Ice reworded Vrykul Icebringer Health 5 -> 4 Unstable Abomination damage 5 -> 4 Ebon Queen attack 6 -> 4 Crater Cultist -> 2 mana 2/1 "Reduce the cost of spells in your hand by (1)." Frost Fever -> "Freeze a minion. Reduce its attack by 3, but not to less than 1." Patient Zero -> Loses taunt. Glacial Advance -> TGT Soulguard Bonecaster -> Classic Shatterstrike -> Basic Army of the Dead -> GvG Horn of Winter -> Classic Vrykul icebringer -> Wotog Encase in Ice -> TGT Ravenous Skelesaur -> Ice Elemental
- Lots of set changes to put spell synergy in classic as per feedback
- A few balance changes, some based on feedback others pushing new ground
- A few remove/replace and card reworks based on feedback
Swapping rarities and sets and moving the writeups appropriately was a ton of work and I wouldn't be surprised if I made any mistakes. Please, if you're looking through the sets and notice there are too many or too few cards, either in total or of a particular rarity, or a writeup is missing or it doesn't make sense, please comment so that I can fix it, like you guys have been doing so well so far :)
The card writeups seem to be fine, but in the part above the cards that explains the Frost archetype, Shatterstrike is still shown as Common despite now being moved to Basic.
The card writeups seem to be fine, but in the part above the cards that explains the Frost archetype, Shatterstrike is still shown as Common despite now being moved to Basic.
Thank you so much for taking a look, the rarity should be fixed.
I've also added a section about review trades if anyone's interested.
While trying to see how I would go making a quest DK is stumbled on the card Shadowmourne
Text is : "whenever this kills a minion, restore health to your Hero equal to its attack"
I think the "its" is a little confusing because it could mean :
The minion attack (anything from 0 to 30
The hero (2 or 3 depending of the hero power or more if there is a weapon buff card) The most probable meaning
The weapon (meaning 2 unless in can be buffed with a card)
"Its" has probably been used to keep the description short but I think the description could be clearer:
1) "whenever this kills a minion, restore health equal to its attack to your hero"
2) "whenever this kills a minion, restore health equal to your hero attack to it " (following Truesliver Champion text instead of Ivory Knigth)
3) "whenever this kills a minion restore health equal to your weapon attack to your hero"
I was definitely worried that this wording would lead to some confusion and I'm not surprised that it did. I was actually referring to the attack of the minion you killed. My main concern wasn't really spacing, as you can see this full text fits on the card:
I just don't like having to repeat the word "Minion" twice in the same sentence, it feels like the kind of thing you really shouldn't have to do (but you do). What do you think, should I change it?
Also, if "While trying to see how I would go making a quest DK" means what I think it means and you're theorycrafting decks, that's AWESOME. It turns out I actually will be updating my playtesting software for DK since some other people wanted to use it - what made me hesitate is the fact that I don't usually get much value out of playtesting as a result of my poor deckbuilding skills - but if you're making decklists then that's great and I'd be super interested to see and try out what you come up with.
I was definitely worried that this wording would lead to some confusion and I'm not surprised that it did. I was actually referring to the attack of the minion you killed. My main concern wasn't really spacing, as you can see this full text fits on the card:
I just don't like having to repeat the word "Minion" twice in the same sentence, it feels like the kind of thing you really shouldn't have to do (but you do). What do you think, should I change it?
What do you think about my initial proposal :
whenever this kills a minion, restore health equal to its attack to your hero
Moving the "to your hero" after "its" removes the ambiguity between the hero and the minion. The only possible misunderstanding left is the one between the weapon attack and minion attack which not that likely. It seems to me that it would be acceptable compromise between concision and clarity. If not I would go with the full text for clarity because as you saw I misunderstood
Text apart, the fact that the card heals the value of the minion attack makes that card really strong, maybe even too strong. Maybe making the weapon a 2/2 would be a more balanced
Also, if "While trying to see how I would go making a quest DK" means what I think it means and you're theorycrafting decks, that's AWESOME. It turns out I actually will be updating my playtesting software for DK since some other people wanted to use it - what made me hesitate is the fact that I don't usually get much value out of playtesting as a result of my poor deckbuilding skills - but if you're making decklists then that's great and I'd be super interested to see and try out what you come up with.
I am looking for the quest because it feels to me that the quest deck my suffer from same problem as paladin quest.
The quest is focused on a control deck: meaning we need stall, value, burst damage and/or win by fatigue. But having to fill the deck with low value rune, however powerful the 1 mana effect? topdecking the card late game will be a drag. Even after completing the quest, you would still need to have cheap spell to activate the effect while in the same time trying to close the game. And most of the spell remaining in you hands will probably be removal and stall which would probably be redundant with the final effect of the deck. It means a lot of spell even with the rune generation cards especially that I don't see that myself playing more than one deathspeaker zealot if even.
I maybe wrong and that is why I am trying to theorycraft a deck and try to guess how it could win against current aggro deck (which should be our bread and butter) and control deck (quest warrior, paladin control and priest control)
Edit: I am not sure but does the Omega rune count toward the quest ?
I will probably make Shadowmourne a 2/2 since it is really strong right now.
With this quest, there are plenty of cards that generate runes, so you don't need to run only the 1 mana runes (In fact, I'd expect you to only run two Unholy Runes and two Blood Runes). The Omega Rune itself doesn't count towards the quest, however, Death Runes will count as two runes since you play them and the rune that they generate.
I was not able to theory craft a quest deck I liked enough to post. If I have time tomorrow I will post an explanation. Still I found a deck which may work correctly i the current meta.
I was planning to finalize the deck and add as much cycle as possible but for an unknow reason I can't see the cards pictures at my home connection. There is 5 remaining spot to try to get as much cycle as possible in the deck.
The idea is to abuse the Blood rune generation, the hero power and the Crater Cultist to create an OTK deck. Ideally around turn 10 you do a huge Auctionner turn with coin and discounted spell then drop Darion for the weapon and the extra healing in case you won't able to hero-power with Malygos then drop either Evolved kobold+hero power + as much blood Rune as possible or Malygos + coin + Heropower+BloodRune
Synergie
Doomsayer and blood Elemental make a great combo as you get : one extra turn delay and a free blood rune
Runic Waraxe and Blood Elemental : trade the minion with the face + get free rune
freeze effect + Doomsayer
freeze effect and Shatterstrike
Darion weapon, blood rune and Malygos, the weapon protects you and allows you to play two additionnal blood rune (the one which should have killed you and one more) Malygos + 4 blood rune is 32 damage and you can generate a maximum of 6, to activate the combo you either need one coin or Darion
Darion + Evolved kobold + 4 blood rune is 30 damages in two turns and don't need discount
Maybe funny to add one fencing master instead of the two burgly bully to get the free hero power during the malygos turn but you lose the coin generation for cycling.
I will see later if I can see the cards and add the missing cycle in the deck
You forgot to make a card writeup for Horn of Winter.
I like your concept of runes, but I don't like the way you distributed their synergy between the sets. In Basic and Classic, you created an additional way to get each rune, but you didn't create any rune synergy here. It seems to all be in later expansions. I think this should be the primary theme of the class, considering how you made the runes Basic spells. Stuff like Deathrattle and summoning token already has synergy from neutral cards. You need to have some synergy for your runes anchored in the Classic set where it will never get rotated out of Standard. I think some of the token generation or synergy cards, like Ghoul, Soulblade, Army of the Dead, Plague Eruptor, March of the Damned, or Froustmourne, should be swapped with the Rune synergy cards from another expansion. You have way too much of this in the Classic set, and absolutely no Rune synergy. If this were a real class, it would be like the developers only came up with the idea of rune synergy a year after the class was created. I also think you don't need so much Freeze and Freeze synergy in the Classic set. Iceborn Knight in particular seems unnecessary, since it only even interacts with two Classic cards.
Come Play Make the Keyword!!!
Check out my Worgen Class in the Class Competition
- Patient Zero no longer has taunt.
First, let me respond to #1. It would be hard for me to accomplish this because there are actually only two diseases in DK in WoW - Blood Plague and Frost Fever. Crypt Virus is a spin on the ability "Crypt Fever" which I believe is a talent for Frost Fever - it's not even an actual standalone ability, and it doesn't have anything to do with summoning a Crypt Fiend. So, already I feel like I've gone pretty deep into BS territory. To take diseases, one of the most iconic mechanics of DK, and create new ones that don't exist in the source material, I feel like this would rub DK mains that are excited to see their class ported to hearthstone the wrong way.
Next I'll take on #2 and #6 at the same time. This is also hard to implement, but for a different reason. Without explicitly stating in every Disease-generating card that Undead minions are immune to the effects and that whenever an infected minion attacks it spreads the disease, it's hard to communicate that this is how diseases work. The only solution would be to create a keyword - but this ruins the idea of a micromechanic, since a keyword would require me to build much more of the class around diseases and spread them outside of the MSoG set, which I'm definitely against doing. Overall either one of these two interactions, let alone both of them, make the disease mechanic much more convoluted than it already is as a micromechanic, and so I don't think its feasible to implement them.
Now for #3. It seems like a lot of the interesting interactions with this version of Patient Zero come from the fact that you can make it Undead to remove the diseases from it. Since we've established that those things can't happen, and that I've been wanting to remove Scourge Potion, it weakens the motivation to make this change. We thought about this idea with the current disease system, and the card just didn't seem to come together. Unless it has Taunt, it's an extremely slow card, to the point that it was unbearably weak. Even then, the way that the Diseases cause this minion to take such a beating before you can even use it make it feel really weak. And if the Diseases are random, then this card would probably only be playable in arena, where all you need is a disease and the specifics don't matter. Overall the current design of Patient Zero was much simpler, and more balanced with the upcoming change to Frost Fever.
With #4, the same reasoning applies as in #3 - the novelty of this effect comes from Undead minions being immune to diseases. This was probably the most compelling part of the argument, as I think it'd be really cool to tie diseases more strongly into controlling Undead minions. Again though, being unable to make Undead minions immune to a certain type of effect without introducing an entirely new keyword makes this effect hard to implement.
#5 and the randomness part of #1 is probably one of the few things that I actually really disagree on. My intentions with the Disease mechanic were for you to be able to respond to situations by choosing precisely the disease you needed. This is why the Diseases had very specific purposes - not general things that have approximately the same effect in any situation. Totems and Animal Companions are random because they do approximately the same things - despite their differences in abilities, totems put a token on your board and Animal Companion puts a 3.5-4 mana cost beast on your board. The three diseases share almost nothing in common, by design, other than the fact that they do something bad to enemy minions. Furthermore, I see the DK as the manipulative master of diseases - not someone who haphazardly mixes up their effects, implying randomness and effecting their own minions. Patient Zero is sort of the exception to this, since Patient Zero isn't a DK, it's someone who has presumably been effected by one. If Outbreak affected your own minions or was random, it would seem like you as a DK are inexperienced or bad, which isn't the design I'm going for.
Finally, #7. I've gotten a lot of feedback on Necrofire - some people say it's weak, some people say it's balanced, and you're the first one to say it's strong. We actually really like this card and are definitely not going to get rid of it. Furthermore, I think it's the type of card where, even if it were overpowered, it could be fixed by increasing the mana cost as opposed to removing it entirely. AoE is also one of DK's strengths and I don't feel bad about giving them two AoE options in the same set.
I think that in an alternate DK concept diseases could work quite nicely as you described them. However, that system has a completely different feel than the one that I was going for as an MSoG micromechanic, so I don't think it really fits into this class.
Hope this clears things up.
Come Play Make the Keyword!!!
Check out my Worgen Class in the Class Competition
Feedback has seemed to calm down, so here are the patch notes for 1.2, in no particular order. If no one has any objections, then I'll get to work!
1.2
Ghoul wording "Charge. At the end of your turn, destroy this minion."
Frozen Fanatic capitalize T
Seer of Endless Ice reworded
Vrykul Icebringer Health 5 -> 4
Unstable Abomination damage 5 -> 4
Ebon Queen attack 6 -> 4
Crater Cultist -> 2 mana 2/1 "Reduce the cost of spells in your hand by (1)."
Frost Fever -> "Freeze a minion. Reduce its attack by 3, but not to less than 1."
Patient Zero -> Loses taunt.
Glacial Advance -> TGT
Soulguard Bonecaster -> Classic
Shatterstrike -> Basic
Army of the Dead -> GvG
Horn of Winter -> Classic
Vrykul icebringer -> Wotog
Encase in Ice -> TGT
Ravenous Skelesaur -> Ice Elemental
After about 2 hours of work, 1.2 is out!
- Writeups updated through ONiK
- Lots of set changes to put spell synergy in classic as per feedback
- A few balance changes, some based on feedback others pushing new ground
- A few remove/replace and card reworks based on feedback
Swapping rarities and sets and moving the writeups appropriately was a ton of work and I wouldn't be surprised if I made any mistakes. Please, if you're looking through the sets and notice there are too many or too few cards, either in total or of a particular rarity, or a writeup is missing or it doesn't make sense, please comment so that I can fix it, like you guys have been doing so well so far :)
The card writeups seem to be fine, but in the part above the cards that explains the Frost archetype, Shatterstrike is still shown as Common despite now being moved to Basic.
While trying to see how I would go making a quest DK is stumbled on the card Shadowmourne
Text is : "whenever this kills a minion, restore health to your Hero equal to its attack"
I think the "its" is a little confusing because it could mean :
"Its" has probably been used to keep the description short but I think the description could be clearer:
1) "whenever this kills a minion, restore health equal to its attack to your hero"
2) "whenever this kills a minion, restore health equal to your hero attack to it " (following Truesliver Champion text instead of Ivory Knigth)
3) "whenever this kills a minion restore health equal to your weapon attack to your hero"
I will probably make Shadowmourne a 2/2 since it is really strong right now.
With this quest, there are plenty of cards that generate runes, so you don't need to run only the 1 mana runes (In fact, I'd expect you to only run two Unholy Runes and two Blood Runes). The Omega Rune itself doesn't count towards the quest, however, Death Runes will count as two runes since you play them and the rune that they generate.
I was not able to theory craft a quest deck I liked enough to post. If I have time tomorrow I will post an explanation. Still I found a deck which may work correctly i the current meta.
I was planning to finalize the deck and add as much cycle as possible but for an unknow reason I can't see the cards pictures at my home connection. There is 5 remaining spot to try to get as much cycle as possible in the deck.
The idea is to abuse the Blood rune generation, the hero power and the Crater Cultist to create an OTK deck. Ideally around turn 10 you do a huge Auctionner turn with coin and discounted spell then drop Darion for the weapon and the extra healing in case you won't able to hero-power with Malygos then drop either Evolved kobold+hero power + as much blood Rune as possible or Malygos + coin + Heropower+BloodRune
Synergie
Maybe funny to add one fencing master instead of the two burgly bully to get the free hero power during the malygos turn but you lose the coin generation for cycling.
I will see later if I can see the cards and add the missing cycle in the deck
Bumping this as Assault on Icecrown was released over here, which makes this thread relevant again: http://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/fan-creations/196572-adventure-concept-assault-on-icecrown-v1-0
A lot of balance changes have happened since I last posted here, I'll update them when I get the time (I'm super busy right now).