I have always felt that opening legendaries is one of the most fun aspects of HS (or the equivalent in any CCG really). Opening pack after pack to finally get a powerful deck lynchpin is a really entertaining. Blizzard has also expressed this opinion. When they introduced the no duplicate legendary rule, one of their biggest stated reasons was that they wanted it to be fun and not disappointing whenever a player opens a legendary card.
One thing that has always baffled me is when Blizzard prints a legendary with a cool, unique effect and poor stats. Often, the poor stats make the card unplayable and thus make opening the card disappointing - something they have said they don’t want to happen. Think the pre-buffed Lurker Below: legendary-level effect, but bad stats. I really don’t think legendaries need to have bad stats to compensate for a good effect. They are the rarest and “best” kind of card in the game. They should have their cake and eat it too. Again, I think Lurker is a great example. When they buffed it to have decent stats, it became a much more exciting card to open and still isn’t OP. (So, awesome job, Blizz! We appreciate your willingness to make adjustments both ways.) I really hope in the future they try to print legendaries that are more like current Lurker (or that are fun memes). Cards like Inkmaster Solia were always a bummer to me.
I think some legendaries need to have bad stats. Like some of them are just REALLY good like Kazakus for example is really powerful, yet a 4 mana 3/3 is super weak. Same with Flik, Barnes, Vancleef ETC as these cards have good effects which requires them to have lowered stats.
However, Alot of the current legenaries have SUPER good stats. Like all the primes from Ashes have really good stats for their mana costs.
Inkmaster Solia is a pretty mediocre card effect and stats, With a 6 mana rare does the thing now, I think even making it a 7 mana, 7/7 probs won't make it THAT good just as it has been power crept.
I think some legendaries need to have bad stats. Like some of them are just REALLY good like Kazakus for example is really powerful, yet a 4 mana 3/3 is super weak. Same with Flik, Barnes, Vancleef ETC as these cards have good effects which requires them to have lowered stats.
However, Alot of the current legenaries have SUPER good stats. Like all the primes from Ashes have really good stats for their mana costs.
Inkmaster Solia is a pretty mediocre card effect and stats, With a 6 mana rare does the thing now, I think even making it a 7 mana, 7/7 probs won't make it THAT good just as it has been power crept.
I agree that some should have lower stats. I guess what I'm saying is that effect and stats do need balance, but legendaries can push the limits a bit. So, for Flik, I totally agree. She has a 10/10 power level effect (totally worthy of legendary status) and doesn't need to be an amazing tempo play as well. However, legendaries with a "decent" legendary-level effect, like Solia or really even Swamp Queen Hagatha, should have good stats. There's no reason to under-stat a legendary with an effect that is "solid."
Also, totally agree with what you said about Solia.
The effect of a legendary is way more important than the stats attached. That isn't to say that this is always the case of course. If you look at a card like Archmage Arugal then his 2/2 stats stopped what could have been a very good effect from ever really breaking into the meta because it almost never survived on board. That's usually the exception rather than the rule though.
Stats didn't really matter that much. Costs do. Bloodmage Thalnos is a perfect example. 2 mana for 1/1 stats and the effect is so simple. Turns out it’s one of the most strongest card in the game . Existed for 5 years and it’s still good.
The effect of a legendary is way more important than the stats attached. That isn't to say that this is always the case of course. If you look at a card like Archmage Arugal then his 2/2 stats stopped what could have been a very good effect from ever really breaking into the meta because it almost never survived on board. That's usually the exception rather than the rule though.
That's fair. I opened Arugal in a pack and was somewhat disappointed. Why? Because he wasn't really good because of the stats. There are just some legendaries where you look at the effect and stats and say, "That totally makes sense. The effect is so darn good that those stats are logical." What i'm really talking about are the ones where you're like, "Hmm. That's a cool effect, but why in the world did they think it needed to so under-statted?" I would really just like to see this case become even rarer. (You are right that they're doing this less now.)
Oblivitron is another example. Cool and unique effect, but would totally be fine as a 5/5.
The main problem (in my opinion obviously) is the fact that Legendaries often don't feel "legendary", if you know what I mean. Blizzard often prints Legendaries that are on the same power level (or even worse) than some common/rare/epic cards, which doesn't make sense. Legendaries should be more powerful. That's just my opinion.
The main problem (in my opinion obviously) is the fact that Legendaries often don't feel "legendary", if you know what I mean. Blizzard often prints Legendaries that are on the same power level (or even worse) than some common/rare/epic cards, which doesn't make sense. Legendaries should be more powerful. That's just my opinion.
Agree and that’s kind of what I’m ultimately trying to get at. A good effect and bad stats doesn’t feel legendary
Bad-statted legendaries with powerful effects are mostly played in combo/midrange decks and since that archetype is favoured against Control you usually have the time to play them. Vs. aggro though they are too slow. Look at Dr. Morrigan. While stat-wise its terrible, the effect is pretty strong if you have multiple big minions in your deck (you could cheat her out with Silver Vanguard back in the day or discount her with Summoning Portals) -> Control Opponents will run out of resources and can't really remove the board with board clears since it's so sticky - vs. aggro it's a dead draw though.
Gruul is another one. It only works in decks that can cheat out big minions early and therefore doesn't make sense in most classes. But in Ramp Druid in Classic you could Nourish turn 5, then Ironbark Protector turn 8 - another Ironbark Protector if you wanted to further thin out removals and then slam that Gruul on the board to kill off Control. Or play Gruul right after Nourish (plz note Nourish costed 5 Mana back then) and skip turn 6 and 7 if you were 100% sure your opponent didn't have removal. And suddenly an 8/8 on turn 4 or 5 that grows every turn is not that bad anymore. So the NourishGruul Combo is actually pretty good. (or was back then)
Unfortunately a lot of 1 and 2 drops were way too strong in the beginning of Hearthstone so combo decks didn't really exist.
As a side note, Gruul Ramp is actually also a deck in Magic the Gathering...I guess Blizzard took some flavor from there. :)
And if we look at another good midrange card Cairne Bloodhoof we see the same thing. Super sticky and in combination (Combo) with Ancestral Spirit you can create 8/12 of stats for only 2 Mana provided you don't play vs. Aggro, because these guys will just ignore Cairne.
Followed up with a Faceless Manipulator on that Cairne and you just created a 16/24 minion for 5 Mana.
Bad-statted legendaries with powerful effects are mostly played in combo/midrange decks and since that archetype is favoured against Control you usually have the time to play them. Vs. aggro though they are too slow. Look at Dr. Morrigan. While stat-wise its terrible, the effect is pretty strong if you have multiple big minions in your deck (you could cheat her out with Silver Vanguard back in the day or discount her with Summoning Portals) -> Control Opponents will run out of resources and can't really remove the board with board clears since it's so sticky - vs. aggro it's a dead draw though.
Gruul is another one. It only works in decks that can cheat out big minions early and therefore doesn't make sense in most classes. But in Ramp Druid in Classic you could Nourish turn 5, then Ironbark Protector turn 8 - another Ironbark Protector if you wanted to further thin out removals and then slam that Gruul on the board to kill off Control. Or play Gruul right after Nourish (plz note Nourish costed 5 Mana back then) and skip turn 6 and 7 if you were 100% sure your opponent didn't have removal. And suddenly an 8/8 on turn 4 or 5 that grows every turn is not that bad anymore. So the NourishGruul Combo is actually pretty good. (or was back then)
Unfortunately a lot of 1 and 2 drops were way too strong in the beginning of Hearthstone so combo decks didn't really exist.
As a side note, Gruul Ramp is actually also a deck in Magic the Gathering...I guess Blizzard took some flavor from there. :)
And if we look at another good midrange card Cairne Bloodhoof we see the same thing. Super sticky and in combination (Combo) with Ancestral Spirit you can create 8/12 of stats for only 2 Mana provided you don't play vs. Aggro, because these guys will just ignore Cairne.
Followed up with a Faceless Manipulator on that Cairne and you just created a 16/24 minion for 5 Mana.
You undermined your own point by saying “Gruul only works in decks that...”
Gruul is always bad. He doesn’t work in “big” decks or combo decks. He works by staying safely in your collection manager.
Stating insanely specific combos that could present a fringe scenario where a horrible legendary is playable doesn’t really have anything to do with the topic of this thread, imo.
Bad-statted legendaries with powerful effects are mostly played in combo/midrange decks and since that archetype is favoured against Control you usually have the time to play them. Vs. aggro though they are too slow. Look at Dr. Morrigan. While stat-wise its terrible, the effect is pretty strong if you have multiple big minions in your deck (you could cheat her out with Silver Vanguard back in the day or discount her with Summoning Portals) -> Control Opponents will run out of resources and can't really remove the board with board clears since it's so sticky - vs. aggro it's a dead draw though.
Gruul is another one. It only works in decks that can cheat out big minions early and therefore doesn't make sense in most classes. But in Ramp Druid in Classic you could Nourish turn 5, then Ironbark Protector turn 8 - another Ironbark Protector if you wanted to further thin out removals and then slam that Gruul on the board to kill off Control. Or play Gruul right after Nourish (plz note Nourish costed 5 Mana back then) and skip turn 6 and 7 if you were 100% sure your opponent didn't have removal. And suddenly an 8/8 on turn 4 or 5 that grows every turn is not that bad anymore. So the NourishGruul Combo is actually pretty good. (or was back then)
Unfortunately a lot of 1 and 2 drops were way too strong in the beginning of Hearthstone so combo decks didn't really exist.
As a side note, Gruul Ramp is actually also a deck in Magic the Gathering...I guess Blizzard took some flavor from there. :)
And if we look at another good midrange card Cairne Bloodhoof we see the same thing. Super sticky and in combination (Combo) with Ancestral Spirit you can create 8/12 of stats for only 2 Mana provided you don't play vs. Aggro, because these guys will just ignore Cairne.
Followed up with a Faceless Manipulator on that Cairne and you just created a 16/24 minion for 5 Mana.
You undermined your own point by saying “Gruul only works in decks that...”
Gruul is always bad. He doesn’t work in “big” decks or combo decks. He works by staying safely in your collection manager.
Stating insanely specific combos that could present a fringe scenario where a horrible legendary is playable doesn’t really have anything to do with the topic of this thread, imo.
I undermined which point exactly?
Gruul is always bad. Well thats your opinion. In the wrong deck he certainly is.
This thread is about bad-statted legendaries so whats your point? I explained how you can use them and the Gruul example happened more often than you think.
Just because you have no idea how to use him doesn‘t mean he‘s bad ;)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have always felt that opening legendaries is one of the most fun aspects of HS (or the equivalent in any CCG really). Opening pack after pack to finally get a powerful deck lynchpin is a really entertaining. Blizzard has also expressed this opinion. When they introduced the no duplicate legendary rule, one of their biggest stated reasons was that they wanted it to be fun and not disappointing whenever a player opens a legendary card.
One thing that has always baffled me is when Blizzard prints a legendary with a cool, unique effect and poor stats. Often, the poor stats make the card unplayable and thus make opening the card disappointing - something they have said they don’t want to happen. Think the pre-buffed Lurker Below: legendary-level effect, but bad stats. I really don’t think legendaries need to have bad stats to compensate for a good effect. They are the rarest and “best” kind of card in the game. They should have their cake and eat it too. Again, I think Lurker is a great example. When they buffed it to have decent stats, it became a much more exciting card to open and still isn’t OP. (So, awesome job, Blizz! We appreciate your willingness to make adjustments both ways.) I really hope in the future they try to print legendaries that are more like current Lurker (or that are fun memes). Cards like Inkmaster Solia were always a bummer to me.
Has anyone else thought this?
I think some legendaries need to have bad stats. Like some of them are just REALLY good like Kazakus for example is really powerful, yet a 4 mana 3/3 is super weak. Same with Flik, Barnes, Vancleef ETC as these cards have good effects which requires them to have lowered stats.
However, Alot of the current legenaries have SUPER good stats. Like all the primes from Ashes have really good stats for their mana costs.
Inkmaster Solia is a pretty mediocre card effect and stats, With a 6 mana rare does the thing now, I think even making it a 7 mana, 7/7 probs won't make it THAT good just as it has been power crept.
I agree that some should have lower stats. I guess what I'm saying is that effect and stats do need balance, but legendaries can push the limits a bit. So, for Flik, I totally agree. She has a 10/10 power level effect (totally worthy of legendary status) and doesn't need to be an amazing tempo play as well. However, legendaries with a "decent" legendary-level effect, like Solia or really even Swamp Queen Hagatha, should have good stats. There's no reason to under-stat a legendary with an effect that is "solid."
Also, totally agree with what you said about Solia.
Having a legendary with a specific effect come down earlier or be able to be combo'd with other cards is often vital to the effect.
Is a 6 mana 6/6 Zola the Gorgon preferable over the 3 mana 2/2 version we got? Clearly not. The 3 mana 2/2 version is WAY better.
Stats, in that case, are in a distant third of importance compared to the actual effect and cost of the card.
What is the better legendary? Bloodmage Thalnos with its paltry 1/1 stats or Majordomo Executus with its beefy body and effect?
Bloodmage is a far better card.
The effect of a legendary is way more important than the stats attached. That isn't to say that this is always the case of course. If you look at a card like Archmage Arugal then his 2/2 stats stopped what could have been a very good effect from ever really breaking into the meta because it almost never survived on board. That's usually the exception rather than the rule though.
Stats didn't really matter that much. Costs do. Bloodmage Thalnos is a perfect example. 2 mana for 1/1 stats and the effect is so simple. Turns out it’s one of the most strongest card in the game . Existed for 5 years and it’s still good.
That's fair. I opened Arugal in a pack and was somewhat disappointed. Why? Because he wasn't really good because of the stats. There are just some legendaries where you look at the effect and stats and say, "That totally makes sense. The effect is so darn good that those stats are logical." What i'm really talking about are the ones where you're like, "Hmm. That's a cool effect, but why in the world did they think it needed to so under-statted?" I would really just like to see this case become even rarer. (You are right that they're doing this less now.)
Oblivitron is another example. Cool and unique effect, but would totally be fine as a 5/5.
The main problem (in my opinion obviously) is the fact that Legendaries often don't feel "legendary", if you know what I mean. Blizzard often prints Legendaries that are on the same power level (or even worse) than some common/rare/epic cards, which doesn't make sense. Legendaries should be more powerful. That's just my opinion.
Agree and that’s kind of what I’m ultimately trying to get at. A good effect and bad stats doesn’t feel legendary
Bad-statted legendaries with powerful effects are mostly played in combo/midrange decks and since that archetype is favoured against Control you usually have the time to play them. Vs. aggro though they are too slow. Look at Dr. Morrigan. While stat-wise its terrible, the effect is pretty strong if you have multiple big minions in your deck (you could cheat her out with Silver Vanguard back in the day or discount her with Summoning Portals) -> Control Opponents will run out of resources and can't really remove the board with board clears since it's so sticky - vs. aggro it's a dead draw though.
Gruul is another one. It only works in decks that can cheat out big minions early and therefore doesn't make sense in most classes. But in Ramp Druid in Classic you could Nourish turn 5, then Ironbark Protector turn 8 - another Ironbark Protector if you wanted to further thin out removals and then slam that Gruul on the board to kill off Control. Or play Gruul right after Nourish (plz note Nourish costed 5 Mana back then) and skip turn 6 and 7 if you were 100% sure your opponent didn't have removal. And suddenly an 8/8 on turn 4 or 5 that grows every turn is not that bad anymore. So the Nourish Gruul Combo is actually pretty good. (or was back then)
Unfortunately a lot of 1 and 2 drops were way too strong in the beginning of Hearthstone so combo decks didn't really exist.
As a side note, Gruul Ramp is actually also a deck in Magic the Gathering...I guess Blizzard took some flavor from there. :)
And if we look at another good midrange card Cairne Bloodhoof we see the same thing. Super sticky and in combination (Combo) with Ancestral Spirit you can create 8/12 of stats for only 2 Mana provided you don't play vs. Aggro, because these guys will just ignore Cairne.
Followed up with a Faceless Manipulator on that Cairne and you just created a 16/24 minion for 5 Mana.
I don't think this is a fair comparison. The reason majordomo is so bad is because he sets your hero's hp to 8.
I feel like Akama Prime has really bad stats, it is a control card but trading with it does not work, I would increase its HP
You undermined your own point by saying “Gruul only works in decks that...”
Gruul is always bad. He doesn’t work in “big” decks or combo decks. He works by staying safely in your collection manager.
Stating insanely specific combos that could present a fringe scenario where a horrible legendary is playable doesn’t really have anything to do with the topic of this thread, imo.
I undermined which point exactly?
Gruul is always bad. Well thats your opinion. In the wrong deck he certainly is.
This thread is about bad-statted legendaries so whats your point? I explained how you can use them and the Gruul example happened more often than you think.
Just because you have no idea how to use him doesn‘t mean he‘s bad ;)