This is my submission for the week. I love the art. Mages have plenty of freezes (2 minions and several spells). The card is absolutely terrible in arena lol but in a constructed deck could be amazing.
Here is another concept I came up with. VOLLEY! OMG :D Crazy with unleash. The idea is to deal 1 damage at a time, not all at once. So if you had 4 minions on the board, it would deal 1 damage to enemy minions 4 times. Could you imagine the animation? Would be epic!!
This is my submission for the week. I love the art. Mages have plenty of freezes (2 minions and several spells). The card is absolutely terrible in arena lol but in a constructed deck could be amazing.
Here is another concept I came up with. VOLLEY! OMG :D Crazy with unleash. The idea is to deal 1 damage at a time, not all at once. So if you had 4 minions on the board, it would deal 1 damage to enemy minions 4 times. Could you imagine the animation? Would be epic!!
Both very good cards but gnomish frost mage with frost nova would be insane!
This is my submission for the week. I love the art. Mages have plenty of freezes (2 minions and several spells). The card is absolutely terrible in arena lol but in a constructed deck could be amazing.
Loved this idea! An army of infinite GNOMES!!!
----------------------------------------------
I have since discarded the idea for Lor'themar, and have come with two new ideas - both priest legendaries. Which is better? (or less worse >.>)
This is my submission for the week. I love the art. Mages have plenty of freezes (2 minions and several spells). The card is absolutely terrible in arena lol but in a constructed deck could be amazing.
Loved this idea! An army of infinite GNOMES!!!
----------------------------------------------
I have since discarded the idea for Lor'themar, and have come with two new ideas - both priest legendaries. Which is better? (or less worse >.>)
Our good friend Reshad:
And O'ros, the Naaru of the Exodar:
Although I like Reshad's ability, I thin he's way too strong. At turn 5, you could easily draw 3 or more cards, and still get a body with only a tiny little bit of attack reduced. I think he has to at the very least be 3/5, as even 2 minions on the board with that would be very good value. Also, I believe you should write it as " for each other minion you control", unless you want him to be included in the tally. In which case, he is a lot stronger as you're always gaurenteed a card.
The basic idea behind this is like Unleash the Hounds - the more enemy minions the enemy has on board, the higher the outcome. In this case, I want to punish my opponent for too many allies, allowing to play expensive spells earlier/cheaper with the sacrifice of having used a spot in the deck for Manaflow. I want to see Pyroblast with Manaflow :)
I like this weeks challange alot and I came up with a quite simple idea. See above. I thought alot about the cost of Manaflow and I'm still not sure - is the cost appropiate to its effect? Do you like the idea in general? My idea was to cast expensive spells like Flamestrike or Pyroblast earlier/cheaper with the sacrifice of using a spot in the deck for it.
One example: If the opponent has 4 minions on the board, a Flamestrike gets reduced to (3) with Manaflow (1), which equals a total cost of (4).
You could wipe the board earlier, preventing damage - but don't forget cards like Pyroblast or other spells in the future. It could be quite a funny tempo swing throwing out a Pyroblast for 6 mana. Unfortunately, you would need 5 enemy minions for that, which is alot. Things may be different for spells like Fireball, if you combine it with Manaflow, you could throw out Fireballs for 1 mana, and still having mana available for other things. A nice tempo swing. Is it strong or weak? Would you like it as (0) mana more? Really would like to listen to opinions of you guys.
It's always hard to balance cards that reduce the cost of other cards, especially since even adding one more mana drastically reduces the effectiveness of the card. I personally like the idea, I think it fits great with tempo mage. I'm not so sure about the flavour though, maybe change it to something where the mage is taking the essence of nearby enemies or something? Maybe something like this? I realize it's a bit more of a warlock concept, but hey, the flavour fits.
But let's talk pricing. If we compare it to Preparation, I'd say you've over costed it. You need your opponent to have minions, and them having three is about what you'd expect, there for putting it on par with the rogue card.
There is no way you could possibly balance this card. You need a new concept.
He could make it mirror ability, but that would screw him, since the opponent could attack with em right away :) As it is now that is so broken i cant even ;-)
There is no way you could possibly balance this card. You need a new concept.
wait, just a sec *let me play this 5 cost minion and gain legendaries untill my side of the board is full k.
This is so broken, excelent body for its stats and a broken effect, sorry, but i can't imagine this being playable, very op and it's for ALL other minions on the board.
What do you think? Maybe I should make it 3 or 4 Mana and let it say "Deal 1 damage for each enemy minion, then shuffle a random Dragon into your deck for each damage dealt." I am also thinking it should be another Dragon class card.
I just posted this to the submission page, but every time I read it I trip over the wording and for the life of me I don't know if it's actually awkward sounding or I'm just overthinking it. I'm considering "For each other friendly minion on the battleifled, put a Coin in your hand." or "Put a Coin in your hand for each other friendly minion.", or even simply "For every other friendly minion, put a Coin in your hand." I also don't know if I need the comma or if it should be "add" rather than "put" a Coin to/in your hand.
I think it's okay balance-wise, but methinks it should be a Rogue card.
Wanted to give Demons a tool to survive against boardfloods, much like Twilight Guardian helped Dragons. Made her a 5-drop since Warlocks already have stuff to play on 4.
My first idea was this: http://i.imgur.com/aN8SCOx.png, but I didn't like the Battlecry because Voidcaller is out there. Worked with the stats a bit and ended up with her:
Gotta love the Flavour text:She's so lazy she doesn't start seducing untill 2 victims are around. :D
What do you guys think about the stats/necessity of such card?
What do you think? Maybe I should make it 3 or 4 Mana and let it say "Deal 1 damage for each enemy minion, then shuffle a random Dragon into your deck for each damage dealt." I am also thinking it should be another Dragon class card.
I just posted this to the submission page, but every time I read it I trip over the wording and for the life of me I don't know if it's actually awkward sounding or I'm just overthinking it. I'm considering "For each other friendly minion on the battleifled, put a Coin in your hand." or "Put a Coin in your hand for each other friendly minion.", or even simply "For every other friendly minion, put a Coin in your hand." I also don't know if I need the comma or if it should be "add" rather than "put" a Coin to/in your hand.
I think it's okay balance-wise, but methinks it should be a Rogue card.
Wanted to give Demons a tool to survive against boardfloods, much like Twilight Guardian helped Dragons. Made her a 5-drop since Warlocks already have stuff to play on 4.
My first idea was this: http://i.imgur.com/aN8SCOx.png, but I didn't like the Battlecry because Voidcaller is out there. Worked with the stats a bit and ended up with her:
Gotta love the Flavour text:She's so lazy she doesn't start seducing untill 2 victims are around. :D
What do you guys think about the stats/necessity of such card?
Flavor : "Nothing looks more demonic that one big, hot, monstrous BBQ..."
Summon : "FLAME ON !"
Attack : "BURN !"
Death : "Back to ashes..."
=> My contribution to this week's contest ;)
Thoughts ?
Seems too similar to a card I've seen earlier. That said, balance is cool, though.
If it just shuffles into deck, that is pretty slow. It might work in a fatigue deck, though, since it increases your deck size. Priest is pretty good at that. The cost is probably good, since it has no immediate effect. Instead of "At least one is put at the top of your deck", you could say "Put one on top of your deck".
What do you think? Maybe I should make it 3 or 4 Mana and let it say "Deal 1 damage for each enemy minion, then shuffle a random Dragon into your deck for each damage dealt." I am also thinking it should be another Dragon class card.
I just posted this to the submission page, but every time I read it I trip over the wording and for the life of me I don't know if it's actually awkward sounding or I'm just overthinking it. I'm considering "For each other friendly minion on the battleifled, put a Coin in your hand." or "Put a Coin in your hand for each other friendly minion.", or even simply "For every other friendly minion, put a Coin in your hand." I also don't know if I need the comma or if it should be "add" rather than "put" a Coin to/in your hand.
I think it's okay balance-wise, but methinks it should be a Rogue card.
Wanted to give Demons a tool to survive against boardfloods, much like Twilight Guardian helped Dragons. Made her a 5-drop since Warlocks already have stuff to play on 4.
My first idea was this: http://i.imgur.com/aN8SCOx.png, but I didn't like the Battlecry because Voidcaller is out there. Worked with the stats a bit and ended up with her:
Gotta love the Flavour text:She's so lazy she doesn't start seducing untill 2 victims are around. :D
What do you guys think about the stats/necessity of such card?
Flavor : "Nothing looks more demonic that one big, hot, monstrous BBQ..."
Summon : "FLAME ON !"
Attack : "BURN !"
Death : "Back to ashes..."
=> My contribution to this week's contest ;)
Thoughts ?
Seems too similar to a card I've seen earlier. That said, balance is cool, though.
If it just shuffles into deck, that is pretty slow. It might work in a fatigue deck, though, since it increases your deck size. Priest is pretty good at that. The cost is probably good, since it has no immediate effect. Instead of "At least one is put at the top of your deck", you could say "Put one on top of your deck".
Sort of like a priest Gang Up, except a little stronger due to the top deck. looks good.
Thoughts? I originally planned unstable portals but it wasn't quite the right flavour. The animation would be, a book covered in symbols would open over the top left hand side of the battlefield and your minions would be sucked into the book. Afterwards, spells would be spat out of the book and into your hand then the book would vanish. I wanted to reduce the cost of the spells so that you can still have something to play afterwards. Might consider reducing the cost to 5 or 6.
Here goes my 'My-Own-Page-Only' reviews for this week, this time for Page 4. Sad card-week for me already, but hopefully I'll find some joy in other, better entries by the time it's over.
Fleshing out my thoughts a little more this time on each aspect of the card, rather than just rating each aspect and giving my overall thoughts on it. That way people can understand where I'm coming from better. Also quoting people directly, so that they know their card received feedback (or didn't, and why).
[GUIDE]
[REVIEW KEYWORDS] AGGRO: This card seems to cater to aggro decks, which is generally not the kind of thing I want to see. BANISHED: This card does not meet the requirements for card creation, or "breaks the mold". INANIMATE: This minion is an inanimate object, which I typically do not like. LEMON: This card was unnecessarily submitted as a gold version, most likely to draw undue attention. MEH: Although there's nothing necessarily wrong with this card, it doesn't enthuse me very much. OMNI-RNG: This card's random effect has a very broad scope in some way, which I don't like. REVIEWED: This review is copied from my previous review of the card. STEALER: This card takes control of an enemy minion, which I do not like. TL;DR: This card has too much text, which I do not like. Note: This is not to be taken literally; I do read it. UPVOTE!: I upvoted this submission. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[SCORE SYSTEM] AUTHENTICITY: How realistic and believable I think the card feels (as a hypothetical REAL Hearthstone card). ARTWORK: How good I think the artwork is (art style, fidelity, cropping/positioning, etc.). NAME: How good I think the name is, particularly in relation to the theme. Established lore references generally get a pass. EFFECT: How creative and/or interesting the effect is, as well as how simple and concise it is. THEME: How coherent and intuitive I think the theme is, regardless of creativity or scope.
I rate the aforementioned aspects of a card as follows:
COMMENTARY: Figures, I end up top of the page this week and I'm not happy with my entry. So, this week's theme reminds me of the Joust week, in that the restriction limits what your card can do because it limits the amount of text you can comfortably fit on it without it looking bloated, unrealistic or fake. My original idea this week involved Ogres, and some kind of synergy with the 50% chance to attack the wrong enemy mechanic, which would have benefited an all Ogre deck of some kind, but it was just too much text to fit. Then I thought of an idea where you gained Elven Archers for each enemy minion, as a tool against aggro decks, but for some reason I scrapped that as well. Thought it might be too powerful, or even end up as an aggro card.
I'm sure I would have been much more satisfied with either of those, because at least they were interesting. Instead, I went with a Durotan concept, probably just because I really liked the art and I wanted to do something with it. It's also a Warrior card, and I'd like to see better Warrior representation in these competitions. Effect wise, the character's abilities in WoW seemed to revolve around frost, but I couldn't come up with a way to work that in that simultaneously made sense, was balanced, felt interesting, and fit on the card. So, I winged it. Wung it? Weva.
Initially I felt good with what I went with after I submitted it, but then I looked at it and thought it was OP (it was). I wrestled with the balance of it for a bit, and while I think it's in a much better state now, ultimately I'm just not enthused by my own creation, and that's a bad feeling. I think I need to make another account just in case this happens again; it'll have the same avatar, but with a mustache in the center, so no one will suspect it's me. It's foolproof!
AUTHENTICITY: 0*/5 - (Lacks a trigger (Battlecry). Also has several text/wording issues; lacks a space between 'Stealth.' and 'Summon', "with stealth" isn't necessary, and it should simply say 'for each enemy minion.'.) ARTWORK: 3/5 - (Seems like it could be cropped a bit better; the character should be the focal point.) NAME: 5/5 - (Accurate.) EFFECT: 3/5 - (Comparable to Onyxia, and arguably better.) THEME: 4/5 - (Genn Greymane isn't a rogue, but worgen do typically rely on ambushing their enemies, so I guess it makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: MEH THOUGHTS: I've seen almost this exact worgen concept several times in other weeks, and it's starting to get old for me. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 3/5 - (Mainly it's just the artwork that feels off with this one, and the inanimate token.) ARTWORK: 3/5 - (Though not bad, it feels 'zoomed out' and off-centered. Compare with Chillmaw. Ice Tomb seems fine.) NAME: 5/5 - (Accurate.) EFFECT: 4/5 - (Translates one of her abilities in WoW into a Hearthstone card well.) THEME: 5/5 - (Accurate.)
KEYWORDS: INANIMATE (Ice Tomb) THOUGHTS: Seems pretty strong, particularly when the board is even, or you're ahead, and your opponent has 2 or more minions. Ice Tomb should have 'Can't Attack' though, IMO. It makes some half-assed sense that eggs can move and attack, but not so much a block of ice, even if it is magical. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 2/5 - (Should say '1' instead of 'one', 'each other minion' to properly exclude itself, and 'battlefield' instead of 'board'.) ARTWORK: 4/5 - (Not bad.) NAME: 3/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, and arguably inaccurate since appears to be a Ramkahen, an offshoot of Tol'vir.) EFFECT: 1/5 - (Basically it's a better Blackwing Corruptor for the most part.) THEME: 0/5 - (There doesn't appear to be any thematic reason for this minion's effect.)
KEYWORDS: MEH THOUGHTS: This doing less than 3 damage is fine, but the times when it does 4 or more is what makes it a bit ridiculous. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 1/5 - (The H of 'health' is not properly capitalized, and it should be 'on the battlefield' instead of 'on board'.'.) ARTWORK: 3/5 - (Seems a bit too 'Gundam' to me. Robots in Hearthstone look much more cartoony and steampunk.) NAME: 5/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, but it seems fine.) EFFECT: 1/5 - (A bit wordy, and it has an unnecessarily wide power range due to it being based on ALL minions.) THEME: 4/5 - (About as Paladin related as Shielded Minibot or Cobalt Guardian, perhaps more so.)
KEYWORDS: TL;DR THOUGHTS: I would like this more if it had higher base stats and was only +1/+1 for each friendly Silver Hand Recruit. They generally form the bulk of a Paladin's board anyway, so having a dual effect seems redundant just for the extra flexibility.
AUTHENTICITY: 0/5 - (I can't consider class-specific weapons for non-weapon classes to be authentic until Blizzard adds one.) ARTWORK: 3/5 - (Seems grainy and slightly 'zoomed in'.) NAME: 4/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, but it seems fine.) EFFECT: 3/5 - (Probably a 3/3 on average, sometimes better. Seems reasonable, considering how generally weak those minions are.) THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: - THOUGHTS: It's a 'Mage Weapon', which makes about as much sense as a 'Warrior Secret'. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 0/5 - (Uses a screenshot for art, and is just overpowered.) ARTWORK: 0/5 - (Screenshot from what appears to be a model viewer.) NAME: 5/5 - (Accurate.) EFFECT: 3/5 - (The effect itself is fine, it's just overpowered for the cost. It might be reasonable at 2 or 3 Mana.) THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: - THOUGHTS: Because it's 0 Mana, it can be played immediately with any number of Taunt minions, which means it's always going to be at least a 1/4 with Taunt. That alone is above the power curve (Shieldbearer, Target Dummy, Voidwalker, Wisp), never mind how crazy it can actually get. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 4/5 - (Seems fairly legit for the most part.) ARTWORK: 4/5 - (Looks good as a Hearthstone card, though I'm not sure it looks like something out of Warcraft.) NAME: 4/5 - (Not an existing lore reference (granted there are many different kinds of bodyguards in WoW), but it seems fine.) EFFECT: 5/5 - (A perfect tool against aggro, kinda like Druid of the Flame... er, hrm.) THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: UPVOTE! THOUGHTS: So, the problem with this card is that it seems like a bit of power creep on Druid of the Flame. Whether or not Druid of the Flame is good enough for what it does, making a better version of it would still be power creep, even if the classes are different. I still upvoted it, mainly because it's minor enough that maybe it's not important enough to bitch about, and because Blizzard themselves did quite a lot of power creep in TGT. That doesn't make it okay, but at least I can say that it's not something they wouldn't do. Still, I really think this would be better balanced as a 2/4, or at 4 Mana. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 2/5 - (See Effect, really.) ARTWORK: 5/5 - (Very vibrant, looks nice.) NAME: 4/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, but it seems fine.) EFFECT: 2/5 - (I don't think Mage needs more AoE, and this is nothing more than a flexible, discounted Flamestrike.) THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense, assuming that the Mage would tailor the size of the Wall per each unique situation it was invoked.)
KEYWORDS: - THOUGHTS: Seems like this would replace Flamestrike in most decks. It's only worse than it when used against 1 or 2 minions, roughly on par against 3, and exponentially better against 4 or more. So, you lose a tiny bit of niche flexibility for raw power. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 2/5 - (Does not seem to be particularly well polished, and Owl Spirit's art is a screenshot.) ARTWORK: 3/5 | 0/5 - (Looks blurry, like JPEG quality. Seems a bit "cramped" as well. Owl Spirit's art is a screenshot.) NAME: 2/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, and a little weird sounding IMO.) EFFECT: 4/5 - (Good synergy for Beast druid. I would reword it as 'At the start of your next turn', and just give the Owl Spirit Charge.) THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: SCREENSHOT (Owl Spirit) THOUGHTS: While it does have rather crazy synergy with the Savage Roar + Force of Nature combo, I think it would be used primarily in a Beast druid deck to get more consistent value out of Druid of the Fang and Knight of the Wild early on, rather than being held on to it as a finisher. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 0/5 - (Rounding up isn't a thing in Hearthstone.) ARTWORK: 3/5 - (Seems a bit faded, like the colors are washed out.) NAME: 2/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, and it's more likely that this would be named after the former Hunter ability, Volley.) EFFECT: 0/5 - (It was fine up until it has to round up the damage. It's simply not intuitive enough for the average person.) THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
AUTHENTICITY: 1/5 - (Druids already have several spells that give them Treants in some way.) ARTWORK: 2/5 - (Doesn't seem to match Hearthstone's art style to me, certainly not of any of its Treants.) NAME: 1/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, and doesn't feel like it fits the Warcraft Druid-theme. Also, just kinda silly.) EFFECT: 3/5 - (Pretty good to Innverate out against aggro or as a last line of defense.) THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: MEH THOUGHTS: Reasonably solid for what it is, but not very interesting compared with the various spells Druid has to summon Treants.
AUTHENTICITY: 2/5 - (The 'L' in 'Less' is capitalized, and there's no period at the end.) ARTWORK: 5/5 - (Looks fine and gets extra credit as it is a direct port from the TCG.) NAME: 5/5 - (References Stonebranch, Ancient of War from the TCG.) EFFECT: 2/5 - (Too strong at a base Mana cost of 8, especially in Druid which can ramp it out even faster.) THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: MEH THOUGHTS: Seems somewhat underwhelming for a Legendary, it's basically just a stronger Ancient of War without the option for attack mode. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 4/5 - (I want to say it looks legit, but I'm a little iffy about the art and the effect.) ARTWORK: 3/5 - (I'm of two minds of this, as the art is distinct from Hearthstone's, but it still looks lighthearted and colorful.) NAME: 5/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, but it seems fine. Actually, I kinda like it.) EFFECT: 3/5 - (A really creative effect for this week's theme, though perhaps a bit too strong when you have total control of the board.) THEME: 5/5 - (Well expressed, I think.)
KEYWORDS: AGGRO, UPVOTE! THOUGHTS: Although this is an aggro/zoo card, there's something about it I just can't put down. That smile infects your soul. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 0/5 - (The name is actually ponderously unrealistic here, and there is no period at the end of the text.). ARTWORK: 4/5 - (Looks good.) NAME: 0/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, and it sounds like a Shaman card.) EFFECT: 3/5 - (Basically super Hellfire, but with no cap. There is something appealing to the danger of that.) THEME: 4/5 - (Makes sense, though I'm not sure why the number of minions would realistically affect the damage.)
KEYWORDS: - THOUGHTS: Given the art, I would've named this 'Cataclysm', which happens to also be a Warlock ability in WoW. That would have been much better, especially when you consider that this can potentially deal up to 14 damage. 'Tempest Storm' just doesn't quite sell it. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 0/5 - (Probably one of the most erroneous submissions I've ever seen, I mean come on, it's actually a good rogue epic.) ARTWORK: 0/5 - (Calling whatever that is a weapon is a bit of a stretch. And it isn't one, regardless.) NAME: 3/5 - (Not a lore reference, though I think I get how it makes sense with the art.) EFFECT: 3/5 - (Interesting, but it seems like it outclasses Assassin's Blade, and probably every other Rogue weapon.) THEME: 5/5 - (Though the text conveying it is a mess, the core concept makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: - THOUGHTS: It reminds me of the Carnictis from King Kong. Poor Lumpy.
Really not sure which flavor is THE FLAVOR this week. Here are three iterations on my design and I tried to keep them comparatively unique. If you don't mind, I'd really appreciate any feedback. I believe all three meet the requirements for this week's challenge but if not please let me know so I can make changes.
Okay, I've updated my card. I had it as a 3/5 before, and got feedback that it seemed underpowered. Here is the updated card:
Keep in mind that it buffs itself. It gives a better buff that Stormwind Champion, but it is easier to counter, since you lose the buff if Phalanx is no longer in the middle of your board. I envision this comboing with Taunt warrior, both to protect Phalanx, and to make it harder to get past your taunts. Is a 3/7 too much? Would 3/6 be better?
This is my submission for the week. I love the art. Mages have plenty of freezes (2 minions and several spells). The card is absolutely terrible in arena lol but in a constructed deck could be amazing.
Here is another concept I came up with. VOLLEY! OMG :D Crazy with unleash. The idea is to deal 1 damage at a time, not all at once. So if you had 4 minions on the board, it would deal 1 damage to enemy minions 4 times. Could you imagine the animation? Would be epic!!
This is my submission for the week. I love the art. Mages have plenty of freezes (2 minions and several spells). The card is absolutely terrible in arena lol but in a constructed deck could be amazing.
Loved this idea! An army of infinite GNOMES!!!
----------------------------------------------
I have since discarded the idea for Lor'themar, and have come with two new ideas - both priest legendaries. Which is better? (or less worse >.>)
Thoughts? I originally planned unstable portals but it wasn't quite the right flavour. The animation would be, a book covered in symbols would open over the top left hand side of the battlefield and your minions would be sucked into the book. Afterwards, spells would be spat out of the book and into your hand then the book would vanish. I wanted to reduce the cost of the spells so that you can still have something to play afterwards. Might consider reducing the cost to 5 or 6.
This is my submission for the week. I love the art. Mages have plenty of freezes (2 minions and several spells).
The card is absolutely terrible in arena lol but in a constructed deck could be amazing.
Here is another concept I came up with. VOLLEY! OMG :D Crazy with unleash.
The idea is to deal 1 damage at a time, not all at once. So if you had 4 minions on the board, it would deal 1 damage to enemy minions 4 times. Could you imagine the animation? Would be epic!!
Hi.
Both very good cards but gnomish frost mage with frost nova would be insane!
Maybe... nah nah nah nah
Loved this idea! An army of infinite GNOMES!!!
----------------------------------------------
I have since discarded the idea for Lor'themar, and have come with two new ideas - both priest legendaries. Which is better? (or less worse >.>)
Our good friend Reshad:
And O'ros, the Naaru of the Exodar:
"Not all those who wander are lost."
- Velen R. R. Tolkien
There is some ferocious competition on page one. I have never seen so many votes on so many cards that high so quickly.
Although I like Reshad's ability, I thin he's way too strong. At turn 5, you could easily draw 3 or more cards, and still get a body with only a tiny little bit of attack reduced. I think he has to at the very least be 3/5, as even 2 minions on the board with that would be very good value. Also, I believe you should write it as " for each other minion you control", unless you want him to be included in the tally. In which case, he is a lot stronger as you're always gaurenteed a card.
It's always hard to balance cards that reduce the cost of other cards, especially since even adding one more mana drastically reduces the effectiveness of the card. I personally like the idea, I think it fits great with tempo mage. I'm not so sure about the flavour though, maybe change it to something where the mage is taking the essence of nearby enemies or something? Maybe something like this? I realize it's a bit more of a warlock concept, but hey, the flavour fits.
But let's talk pricing. If we compare it to Preparation, I'd say you've over costed it. You need your opponent to have minions, and them having three is about what you'd expect, there for putting it on par with the rogue card.
Battlecry Activated:I've seen it all!
Attacking:Feel my Wrath!
Death:Nozdormu! You lied!
There's my suggestion - forgot to uhm do dis! :3
There is no way you could possibly balance this card. You need a new concept.
Come Play Make the Keyword!!!
Check out my Worgen Class in the Class Competition
He could make it mirror ability, but that would screw him, since the opponent could attack with em right away :) As it is now that is so broken i cant even ;-)
- Click Here To Join Us On Discord! -
wait, just a sec *let me play this 5 cost minion and gain legendaries untill my side of the board is full k.
This is so broken, excelent body for its stats and a broken effect, sorry, but i can't imagine this being playable, very op and it's for ALL other minions on the board.
Maybe... nah nah nah nah
I came up with a Priest card. Here be Dragons.
What do you think? Maybe I should make it 3 or 4 Mana and let it say "Deal 1 damage for each enemy minion, then shuffle a random Dragon into your deck for each damage dealt." I am also thinking it should be another Dragon class card.
List of Dragons:
Collectible:
Non-Collectible:
(from Dragon Egg)
(from Leeroy Jenkins)
(from Onyxia)
(from Ysera)
FEEDBACK (Pages 5-6):
Can be weak compared to Dragon's Breath. Or not. I dunno.
I think it's okay balance-wise, but methinks it should be a Rogue card.
More or less a funsies card other than a troll card.
Maybe make it "Whenever you play a minion this turn, add a Coin to your hand." Otherwise, okay.
A pretty neat Legendary if you ask me.
Why the Epic rarity? Otherwise, it's okay.
Seems too similar to a card I've seen earlier. That said, balance is cool, though.
Vote for Stormwind Strategist in this weeks' Card Design Competition. Click the image or HERE for full view.
If it just shuffles into deck, that is pretty slow. It might work in a fatigue deck, though, since it increases your deck size. Priest is pretty good at that. The cost is probably good, since it has no immediate effect. Instead of "At least one is put at the top of your deck", you could say "Put one on top of your deck".
Come Play Make the Keyword!!!
Check out my Worgen Class in the Class Competition
Sort of like a priest Gang Up, except a little stronger due to the top deck. looks good.
Another variant I cooked up.
And the original concept for reference:
Which variant is best?
List of Dragons (for reference):
Collectible:
Non-Collectible:
(from Dragon Egg)
(from Leeroy Jenkins)
(from Onyxia)
(from Ysera)
FEEDBACK (Page 7-8) coming soon.
Vote for Stormwind Strategist in this weeks' Card Design Competition. Click the image or HERE for full view.
I like the one that doesn't do damage better. It's simpler.
Come Play Make the Keyword!!!
Check out my Worgen Class in the Class Competition
I guess you're right: I mean, shuffle X Dragons to your deck is easier to balance than including a damage output.
BTW, reworded each.
Vote for Stormwind Strategist in this weeks' Card Design Competition. Click the image or HERE for full view.
Thoughts? I originally planned unstable portals but it wasn't quite the right flavour. The animation would be, a book covered in symbols would open over the top left hand side of the battlefield and your minions would be sucked into the book. Afterwards, spells would be spat out of the book and into your hand then the book would vanish. I wanted to reduce the cost of the spells so that you can still have something to play afterwards. Might consider reducing the cost to 5 or 6.
Here goes my 'My-Own-Page-Only' reviews for this week, this time for Page 4. Sad card-week for me already, but hopefully I'll find some joy in other, better entries by the time it's over.
Fleshing out my thoughts a little more this time on each aspect of the card, rather than just rating each aspect and giving my overall thoughts on it. That way people can understand where I'm coming from better. Also quoting people directly, so that they know their card received feedback (or didn't, and why).
[GUIDE]
[REVIEW KEYWORDS]
AGGRO: This card seems to cater to aggro decks, which is generally not the kind of thing I want to see.
BANISHED: This card does not meet the requirements for card creation, or "breaks the mold".
INANIMATE: This minion is an inanimate object, which I typically do not like.
LEMON: This card was unnecessarily submitted as a gold version, most likely to draw undue attention.
MEH: Although there's nothing necessarily wrong with this card, it doesn't enthuse me very much.
OMNI-RNG: This card's random effect has a very broad scope in some way, which I don't like.
REVIEWED: This review is copied from my previous review of the card.
STEALER: This card takes control of an enemy minion, which I do not like.
TL;DR: This card has too much text, which I do not like. Note: This is not to be taken literally; I do read it.
UPVOTE!: I upvoted this submission.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[SCORE SYSTEM]
AUTHENTICITY: How realistic and believable I think the card feels (as a hypothetical REAL Hearthstone card).
ARTWORK: How good I think the artwork is (art style, fidelity, cropping/positioning, etc.).
NAME: How good I think the name is, particularly in relation to the theme. Established lore references generally get a pass.
EFFECT: How creative and/or interesting the effect is, as well as how simple and concise it is.
THEME: How coherent and intuitive I think the theme is, regardless of creativity or scope.
I rate the aforementioned aspects of a card as follows:
5/5 - Fantastic
4/5 - Great
3/5 - Good
2/5 - Okay
1/5 - Poor
0/5 - Terrible
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
COMMENTARY: Figures, I end up top of the page this week and I'm not happy with my entry. So, this week's theme reminds me of the Joust week, in that the restriction limits what your card can do because it limits the amount of text you can comfortably fit on it without it looking bloated, unrealistic or fake. My original idea this week involved Ogres, and some kind of synergy with the 50% chance to attack the wrong enemy mechanic, which would have benefited an all Ogre deck of some kind, but it was just too much text to fit. Then I thought of an idea where you gained Elven Archers for each enemy minion, as a tool against aggro decks, but for some reason I scrapped that as well. Thought it might be too powerful, or even end up as an aggro card.
I'm sure I would have been much more satisfied with either of those, because at least they were interesting. Instead, I went with a Durotan concept, probably just because I really liked the art and I wanted to do something with it. It's also a Warrior card, and I'd like to see better Warrior representation in these competitions. Effect wise, the character's abilities in WoW seemed to revolve around frost, but I couldn't come up with a way to work that in that simultaneously made sense, was balanced, felt interesting, and fit on the card. So, I winged it. Wung it? Weva.
Initially I felt good with what I went with after I submitted it, but then I looked at it and thought it was OP (it was). I wrestled with the balance of it for a bit, and while I think it's in a much better state now, ultimately I'm just not enthused by my own creation, and that's a bad feeling. I think I need to make another account just in case this happens again; it'll have the same avatar, but with a mustache in the center, so no one will suspect it's me. It's foolproof!
Okay, enough prattling from me, on to the others.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 0*/5 - (Lacks a trigger (Battlecry). Also has several text/wording issues; lacks a space between 'Stealth.' and 'Summon', "with stealth" isn't necessary, and it should simply say 'for each enemy minion.'.)
ARTWORK: 3/5 - (Seems like it could be cropped a bit better; the character should be the focal point.)
NAME: 5/5 - (Accurate.)
EFFECT: 3/5 - (Comparable to Onyxia, and arguably better.)
THEME: 4/5 - (Genn Greymane isn't a rogue, but worgen do typically rely on ambushing their enemies, so I guess it makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: MEH
THOUGHTS: I've seen almost this exact worgen concept several times in other weeks, and it's starting to get old for me.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 3/5 - (Mainly it's just the artwork that feels off with this one, and the inanimate token.)
ARTWORK: 3/5 - (Though not bad, it feels 'zoomed out' and off-centered. Compare with Chillmaw. Ice Tomb seems fine.)
NAME: 5/5 - (Accurate.)
EFFECT: 4/5 - (Translates one of her abilities in WoW into a Hearthstone card well.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Accurate.)
KEYWORDS: INANIMATE (Ice Tomb)
THOUGHTS: Seems pretty strong, particularly when the board is even, or you're ahead, and your opponent has 2 or more minions. Ice Tomb should have 'Can't Attack' though, IMO. It makes some half-assed sense that eggs can move and attack, but not so much a block of ice, even if it is magical.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 2/5 - (Should say '1' instead of 'one', 'each other minion' to properly exclude itself, and 'battlefield' instead of 'board'.)
ARTWORK: 4/5 - (Not bad.)
NAME: 3/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, and arguably inaccurate since appears to be a Ramkahen, an offshoot of Tol'vir.)
EFFECT: 1/5 - (Basically it's a better Blackwing Corruptor for the most part.)
THEME: 0/5 - (There doesn't appear to be any thematic reason for this minion's effect.)
KEYWORDS: MEH
THOUGHTS: This doing less than 3 damage is fine, but the times when it does 4 or more is what makes it a bit ridiculous.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 1/5 - (The H of 'health' is not properly capitalized, and it should be 'on the battlefield' instead of 'on board'.'.)
ARTWORK: 3/5 - (Seems a bit too 'Gundam' to me. Robots in Hearthstone look much more cartoony and steampunk.)
NAME: 5/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, but it seems fine.)
EFFECT: 1/5 - (A bit wordy, and it has an unnecessarily wide power range due to it being based on ALL minions.)
THEME: 4/5 - (About as Paladin related as Shielded Minibot or Cobalt Guardian, perhaps more so.)
KEYWORDS: TL;DR
THOUGHTS: I would like this more if it had higher base stats and was only +1/+1 for each friendly Silver Hand Recruit. They generally form the bulk of a Paladin's board anyway, so having a dual effect seems redundant just for the extra flexibility.
Also, please don't use custom watermarks, there's no reason to do so.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 0/5 - (I can't consider class-specific weapons for non-weapon classes to be authentic until Blizzard adds one.)
ARTWORK: 3/5 - (Seems grainy and slightly 'zoomed in'.)
NAME: 4/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, but it seems fine.)
EFFECT: 3/5 - (Probably a 3/3 on average, sometimes better. Seems reasonable, considering how generally weak those minions are.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: -
THOUGHTS: It's a 'Mage Weapon', which makes about as much sense as a 'Warrior Secret'.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
KEYWORDS: BANISHED (Not properly stored.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
KEYWORDS: BANISHED (Not properly stored.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 0/5 - (Uses a screenshot for art, and is just overpowered.)
ARTWORK: 0/5 - (Screenshot from what appears to be a model viewer.)
NAME: 5/5 - (Accurate.)
EFFECT: 3/5 - (The effect itself is fine, it's just overpowered for the cost. It might be reasonable at 2 or 3 Mana.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: -
THOUGHTS: Because it's 0 Mana, it can be played immediately with any number of Taunt minions, which means it's always going to be at least a 1/4 with Taunt. That alone is above the power curve (Shieldbearer, Target Dummy, Voidwalker, Wisp), never mind how crazy it can actually get.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 4/5 - (Seems fairly legit for the most part.)
ARTWORK: 4/5 - (Looks good as a Hearthstone card, though I'm not sure it looks like something out of Warcraft.)
NAME: 4/5 - (Not an existing lore reference (granted there are many different kinds of bodyguards in WoW), but it seems fine.)
EFFECT: 5/5 - (A perfect tool against aggro, kinda like Druid of the Flame... er, hrm.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: UPVOTE!
THOUGHTS: So, the problem with this card is that it seems like a bit of power creep on Druid of the Flame. Whether or not Druid of the Flame is good enough for what it does, making a better version of it would still be power creep, even if the classes are different. I still upvoted it, mainly because it's minor enough that maybe it's not important enough to bitch about, and because Blizzard themselves did quite a lot of power creep in TGT. That doesn't make it okay, but at least I can say that it's not something they wouldn't do. Still, I really think this would be better balanced as a 2/4, or at 4 Mana.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 2/5 - (See Effect, really.)
ARTWORK: 5/5 - (Very vibrant, looks nice.)
NAME: 4/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, but it seems fine.)
EFFECT: 2/5 - (I don't think Mage needs more AoE, and this is nothing more than a flexible, discounted Flamestrike.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense, assuming that the Mage would tailor the size of the Wall per each unique situation it was invoked.)
KEYWORDS: -
THOUGHTS: Seems like this would replace Flamestrike in most decks. It's only worse than it when used against 1 or 2 minions, roughly on par against 3, and exponentially better against 4 or more. So, you lose a tiny bit of niche flexibility for raw power.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 2/5 - (Does not seem to be particularly well polished, and Owl Spirit's art is a screenshot.)
ARTWORK: 3/5 | 0/5 - (Looks blurry, like JPEG quality. Seems a bit "cramped" as well. Owl Spirit's art is a screenshot.)
NAME: 2/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, and a little weird sounding IMO.)
EFFECT: 4/5 - (Good synergy for Beast druid. I would reword it as 'At the start of your next turn', and just give the Owl Spirit Charge.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: SCREENSHOT (Owl Spirit)
THOUGHTS: While it does have rather crazy synergy with the Savage Roar + Force of Nature combo, I think it would be used primarily in a Beast druid deck to get more consistent value out of Druid of the Fang and Knight of the Wild early on, rather than being held on to it as a finisher.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 0/5 - (Rounding up isn't a thing in Hearthstone.)
ARTWORK: 3/5 - (Seems a bit faded, like the colors are washed out.)
NAME: 2/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, and it's more likely that this would be named after the former Hunter ability, Volley.)
EFFECT: 0/5 - (It was fine up until it has to round up the damage. It's simply not intuitive enough for the average person.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: -
THOUGHTS: Common?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
KEYWORDS: BANISHED (Not properly stored.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 1/5 - (Druids already have several spells that give them Treants in some way.)
ARTWORK: 2/5 - (Doesn't seem to match Hearthstone's art style to me, certainly not of any of its Treants.)
NAME: 1/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, and doesn't feel like it fits the Warcraft Druid-theme. Also, just kinda silly.)
EFFECT: 3/5 - (Pretty good to Innverate out against aggro or as a last line of defense.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: MEH
THOUGHTS: Reasonably solid for what it is, but not very interesting compared with the various spells Druid has to summon Treants.
Also, please don't use custom watermarks, there's no reason to do so.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 2/5 - (The 'L' in 'Less' is capitalized, and there's no period at the end.)
ARTWORK: 5/5 - (Looks fine and gets extra credit as it is a direct port from the TCG.)
NAME: 5/5 - (References Stonebranch, Ancient of War from the TCG.)
EFFECT: 2/5 - (Too strong at a base Mana cost of 8, especially in Druid which can ramp it out even faster.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: MEH
THOUGHTS: Seems somewhat underwhelming for a Legendary, it's basically just a stronger Ancient of War without the option for attack mode.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 4/5 - (I want to say it looks legit, but I'm a little iffy about the art and the effect.)
ARTWORK: 3/5 - (I'm of two minds of this, as the art is distinct from Hearthstone's, but it still looks lighthearted and colorful.)
NAME: 5/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, but it seems fine. Actually, I kinda like it.)
EFFECT: 3/5 - (A really creative effect for this week's theme, though perhaps a bit too strong when you have total control of the board.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Well expressed, I think.)
KEYWORDS: AGGRO, UPVOTE!
THOUGHTS: Although this is an aggro/zoo card, there's something about it I just can't put down. That smile infects your soul.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 0/5 - (The name is actually ponderously unrealistic here, and there is no period at the end of the text.).
ARTWORK: 4/5 - (Looks good.)
NAME: 0/5 - (Not an existing lore reference, and it sounds like a Shaman card.)
EFFECT: 3/5 - (Basically super Hellfire, but with no cap. There is something appealing to the danger of that.)
THEME: 4/5 - (Makes sense, though I'm not sure why the number of minions would realistically affect the damage.)
KEYWORDS: -
THOUGHTS: Given the art, I would've named this 'Cataclysm', which happens to also be a Warlock ability in WoW. That would have been much better, especially when you consider that this can potentially deal up to 14 damage. 'Tempest Storm' just doesn't quite sell it.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AUTHENTICITY: 0/5 - (Probably one of the most erroneous submissions I've ever seen, I mean come on, it's actually a good rogue epic.)
ARTWORK: 0/5 - (Calling whatever that is a weapon is a bit of a stretch. And it isn't one, regardless.)
NAME: 3/5 - (Not a lore reference, though I think I get how it makes sense with the art.)
EFFECT: 3/5 - (Interesting, but it seems like it outclasses Assassin's Blade, and probably every other Rogue weapon.)
THEME: 5/5 - (Though the text conveying it is a mess, the core concept makes sense.)
KEYWORDS: -
THOUGHTS: It reminds me of the Carnictis from King Kong. Poor Lumpy.
FEEDBACK (Page 7-8):
I don't know what to make of this card. While interesting, I don't know how to balance it.
The middle is the flavor you're looking for.
That's a version fitting of a Legendary.
I like both, but I prefer Volley better.
Reshad, maybe make it cost (6).
Reduce the cost to 5 or 6.
Vote for Stormwind Strategist in this weeks' Card Design Competition. Click the image or HERE for full view.
3 mana or 4 mana? I'm not sure how I should value this.
THERE IS NO GAME.