Hearthpwn

Bumping these cards to see if I can get any comments o.o

The idea is pretty straight-forward: a defensible minion that can produce more minions.

Can I just say how relieving it is that there's no real urgency this week. Normally for the competitions you want to get a card in sooner rather than later just in case someone else has the same idea and beats you to it, but now we can relax because we're only working with our own ideas.

Quote from nurgling13 >>

Quote from Ethenil >>

 

Bumping these cards to see if I can get any comments o.o

               

 

The idea is pretty straight-forward: a defensible minion that can produce more minions.

 

I would say it seems balanced. Scales up from Cult Master, just about, but with better defense. However, it seems a little complicated for a basic card. This feels like an expert card to me. The distinction about dying in combat is one that has never been made in Hearthstone before. Not that you can't do it, just seems a little heady for basic.

ASylum - have the wildcards been picked yet? Just so I know. The submission post isn't clear if they're up there yet.

Quote from Dembai >>

ASylum - have the wildcards been picked yet? Just so I know. The submission post isn't clear if they're up there yet.

@Dracossack Hmm, I thought a bit and The Civil War is really good. I really thought about making the Frost Atronach a 3/2, but I swapped it for a 4/2 for no goddamn reason, but 3/2 still be OP? I think a 4-mana 2/2 would be really weak, its effect also affect your board, a minion oriented class. I liked the Draugr concept a lot, and I used it on the submission, I really ain't thinking about changing it. But maybe, if more people say he is OP, I change my mind.

@NotaGazella Thanks for the good feedback on the Starving Troll! The Frost Atronach would work as every other card with "at the end of your turn", just as Emperor Thaurissan. I will probaly change the Frost Atronach though.

Highlighted cards:

After thinking about it, iv'e decided to add tribes to my cards. Since it was a world that I thought of when I was younger it was expressively seperated by good or evil. Here in hearthstone I want to represent it as Light and Shadow. Now every minion will either have the Light or Shadow as part of their tribe. if it doesn't than it's because they are considered as neutral beings that helps both sides. Anyways hopefully it works out. I've made changes from what I showed earlier. Please give me a review in the balancing of the cards and what you think and I'll do my best to do the same to y'all.

Class and Hero power under here:

 Basic Class cards here:

 Here are my explanation in spoiler with the card number.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

 7.

 8.

9.

 10.

 Hope you guys like what you saw! Thanks in advance for your comments.

Quote from Ethenil >>

 

Bumping these cards to see if I can get any comments o.o

The idea is pretty straight-forward: a defensible minion that can produce more minions.

 

@linkofthepast
I would only change Life of Avalon's text. It ain't clear. Your hero gain 10 health, shouldn't it restore health instead? Or can you target in on a minion and give it 10 health? That would be a bit OP. Just try to clarify the text :)
Unsummon is a bit better than Sap, but I guess it is just fine, we play in a world with Quick Shot vs. Dark Bomb.

Quote from DKPaladinMDL >>

Thanks to everyone who voted for me! Awesome to see that we're near the front of the pack! Long live Bard!

Alright, I'm going to try to put off my concerns about things from future sets to the future and just focus on the basic set for now.

I've got a pretty solid plan for 9 / 10 of the cards for the set and I'm just looking for answers to a few specific questions.

Minions

The idea for Spirit Dancer came when discussing a card (which has since been removed) that was a 2 mana give a minion +2/+2 but costed 1 less if you played a minion that turn. The joke of "Wisp in bard" was suggested because you could combo them on turn 1 for a 3/3. But I realized that Wisp actually had bard synergy beyond that single card. I really wanted Wisp in bard to become a thing, but unfortunately wisp is just a wasted card slot. We were designing 1 drops that weren't just 1 mana 1/3s and once I stumbled upon this I fell in love with it.

There are two things I don't like about this card. One, it's smacking you in the face with blatantly obvious tempo, but this is okay for the basic set. Two, because of the english word "cast" being both a present and past tense verb, the effect of this card is pretty ambiguous. Ideally, it should activate both if you've played a spell this turn and the next time you play a spell this turn, since that's how I designed the card and it makes sense for the ambiguity (if it could mean one or the other, why not just have it mean both). But I dunno, I just don't like having a card that isn't clear on what it does. Then again, Tunnel Trogg confused me for a similar reason for a while, so I guess it might be okay.

But for whatever reason, this art on a 3 mana 3/4 minion is just really attactive to me, and I feel it's a breath of fresh air to see tempo bard instead of token bard.

Spells - Getting the Tempo back

Something Bard has often been criticized for thus far is that it's a very snowbally class that is bad when behind. Thus, I present to you two (or at least one) cards that are designed at getting the tempo back.

=>

This card I really like, because of how well it accomplished all of the things I wanted it to. "I want a card called reverberate" "I want an AoE card that distinguishes itself from 6 mana deal 3 damage" "I want a card to get you back the tempo". The only thing I'm really looking for feedback on is the art choice. The art for reverb itself was very hard to find, and was the only one even close to the style I wanted it in, although the figure getting hit feels... out of place. As for echo, it was hard to find the "abstract ghost thing" that I was looking for, and that's what came the closest.

or 

I'm still undecided on how I want to word this card. I'm feeling a bit too lazy to put in all the tokens but they're just a 2/2 with charge, a 2/2 with taunt, etc etc... It doesn't really get you the tempo back, and it is probably a weak card, but I feel like it can function similarly to north sea kraken because of the 2/2 with charge. Just looking for feedback on the wording.

Spells - Token synergy

This song is the absolute defining characteristic of token Bard as opposed to other aggressive decks, no questions asked. It's the idea that you are buffing friendly minions health and allowing them to survive and use their melody effects rather than just going for damage, damage, damage. Playtesting with this card has been pretty successful, despite that it's rather strong and has a ridiculous combo. The only reason it didn't make it into the 3 showcase cards in place of Choir was that it was just a bit too bland, especially considering that there were so many simple cards displayed. No feedback needed, but it's welcome anyway.

Not much to say.

Spells - Misc

It's possibly a bit weak, but it's a nice and simple card that fits with bard flavor. If anyone has a strong opinion on whether this card is playable or not, I'd love to hear it.

My only real worry with this card is with Otto Tune's future being uncertain, I'm scared that there aren't enough powerful melodies to make this card usable. I feel like it'll never see play, which is sad considering how central it is to bard. It's pointless with angelcaller, you might as well just run a different card rather than get card draw, and it's not reliable with Otto Tune.

Bard's multi-card draw. It fits the flavor from the simplistic lore that I made up quite nicely. I think it's also a pretty good usage of this art, as well as a pretty solid card design. My only worry is that Bard has so much card draw from other cards that use card draw in a REALLY cool way (You will start to see some of this in the next set with my all-time favorite card) that it might have to disappear from the card that just use it in a normal way.

So that's the 9 cards. The last spot used to be:

But we felt that it was just too much blatantly obvious "play tempo bard god dammit!" in combination with Wandering Bard. So I removed it. I think that the last spot should probably be a weapon, since all weapon classes have at least 1 in the basic set. The problem is, the entire reason Bard has weapons is for interesting Melody interactions, but Melody can't be used in the basic set. Does this mean I should create a weapon that's untrue to bard's concept of Melody weapons only, or should I go against hearthstone's design standard of weapon variety and having one in the basic set? I'm not sure.

Anyway, regarding what I said about giving feedback of my own, I'll probably start after round 2. It's impossible for me to give any meaningful feedback to 70+ concepts, so I want to wait until there are fewer and talk about what people are missing and where they should be headed for the next phase.

Quote from SnorlaxBR >>

@linkofthepast
I would only change Life of Avalon's text. It ain't clear. Your hero gain 10 health, shouldn't it restore health instead? Or can you target in on a minion and give it 10 health? That would be a bit OP. Just try to clarify the text :)
Unsummon is a bit better than Sap, but I guess it is just fine, we play in a world with Quick Shot vs. Dark Bomb.

Quote from SnorlaxBR >>

@Dracossack Hmm, I thought a bit and The Civil War is really good. I really thought about making the Frost Atronach a 3/2, but I swapped it for a 4/2 for no goddamn reason, but 3/2 still be OP? I think a 4-mana 2/2 would be really weak, its effect also affect your board, a minion oriented class. I liked the Draugr concept a lot, and I used it on the submission, I really ain't thinking about changing it. But maybe, if more people say he is OP, I change my mind.

Quote from DKPaladinMDL >>

 

 I think that the last spot should probably be a weapon, since all weapon classes have at least 1 in the basic set. The problem is, the entire reason Bard has weapons is for interesting Melody interactions, but Melody can't be used in the basic set. Does this mean I should create a weapon that's untrue to bard's concept of Melody weapons only, or should I go against hearthstone's design standard of weapon variety and having one in the basic set? I'm not sure.

Quote from Dracossack >>

Quote from DKPaladinMDL >>

 

 I think that the last spot should probably be a weapon, since all weapon classes have at least 1 in the basic set. The problem is, the entire reason Bard has weapons is for interesting Melody interactions, but Melody can't be used in the basic set. Does this mean I should create a weapon that's untrue to bard's concept of Melody weapons only, or should I go against hearthstone's design standard of weapon variety and having one in the basic set? I'm not sure.

 I have exactly the same problem. I intend to include weapons in the Oracle class, however I intended for them all use a new keyword to heavily slim down text since they're more "equipment" with special effects. I wasn't intending to include any weapons that's primary use is attacking for damage. I did just check though and you're wrong, Shaman doesn't have any basic weapons. So it should be OK to not have any in the basic set if you can't design an appropriate one.

 

Just give something like a light justice, not everyfin need to be awesome.