Well, I think is too early to call a failure here, in Standard we have more 4 expansions to the cards find a way in the two classes, for example,, the spell damage pack, works way better in mage than shaman, if in the future expansion shaman gets a lot of spell damage support this can chance.
That said I really don't believe hunter ever will use Guadian Animals, much better a 2/4 + 8/8 charge than 2 mid minions with rush for 7 manas and hunter can't deal with many high cost cards like druid can.
There's a few cards that work in both classes the card was designed for, like Wand Thief but, OP has a point that the cards seem to often favour one class more than the other.
It was a good idea though, and there's certainly a chance that certain cards will find a place in the other class eventually.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you see a bad post on the forum use the report function under it, so I or someone else of the moderation team can take care of it!
They work fine. There's no rule that says they have to be used equally between the classes to be a successful design. A large part of the dual class cards is just in their identity in combining flavors from each class.
but here comes the problem. the cards become useless for the class that the cards don't work, which means less cards to play.
There are always class cards that don’t impact the meta (I.e. they aren’t good enough). Doesn’t mean there are fewer cards to play, just that only the best cards ever see play anyway.
Of course they did, and this really feels like a mistaken premise.
Dual-class have worked much better than the gangs did, because they actually belong to their classes. Lord Barov is very much Warrior in texture and feel, and also very much Paladin. Hunter currently doesn't use Guardian Animals. Maybe they could, there have been Hunter decks in the past that ran only a few bigger beasts and cheated them out. But it's a card that comes across as a real Hunter card, just one that doesn't have a home.
The gangs, however, were just new gimmick generics that not everyone could use. Kabal Chemist or Lotus Agents or whatever were wicked boring, with no real class identity. Jades were powerful in Druid and Shaman, and Kazakus helped out existing Reno decks, but they didn't capture the imagination, really. They're just cards.
To say "oh, well only one deck uses it, therefore it failed" is to call the idea of generic cards a failure. There's plently of generics that never show up outside one specific deck. Are generics a failure because Lake Thresher is only in one Druid deck? Are generics a failure because Shu'ma is pretty much only in Quest Hunter? No.
The Rogue/Warrior dual class cards have been quite successful as both classes make good use them, especially Cutting Class and Doctor Krastinov
Same with Soul Fragments and Warlock/DH
And many more dual class cards are used in at least one archetype of each class (although some of those archetypes are not so popular right now - example: Spell Damage Shaman).
Not all printed cards are supposed to appear in top tier deck lists and not all dual class cards are supposed to be good for both classes. They still can be used as discovered or differently acquired during game. The idea is good and I hope it will be supported in future as there are really cards which feel as belonging to more than one class.
I agree that cards such as Guardian Animals and Lord Barov see play in only one class. However, I think it's safe to say that this isn't true for a fair amount of cards.
Devolving Missles is great in both Mage and Shaman, High Abbess Alura is viable in both Priest and Paladin, Ace Hunter Kreen has seen some play in Hunter if more so Demon Hunter, Trick Totem is amazing in both Mage and Shaman, and I've seen all the Soul Shard cards see play in Warlock and Demon Hunter.
I do agree that some dual-class cards simply lean towards one class. However, perhaps time will tell if it will mostly be flops? Thanks for bringing this up! It was interesting to think this through.
it was a certainity that it would work better with one than with the other because of class identity, for example with High Abbess Alura we knew that we wouldn't run it in priest because priest is mainly a control class full of removal meaning that if you put alura in priest more often than not you either run an Alura that kills itself with a priest spell, or completely forsake removlal in your priest deck which is a really bad idea.
While Paladin doesnt really have hard removal, most of paladin's spells are utility based, secrets, buffs, token generation or things like Rebuke and First Day of School, so you are really not forsaking removal when running her because paladin simply doesnt have it but has many spells that have really high singergy with Allura's abilities
My answer is No.
Why? because most dual cards are either used by one of the classes only, mostly.
Like druid only uses Guardian Animals and hunter doesnt even touch it.
and warriors use Lord Barov while paladins live without it.
I dont think dual class is bad idea or failed completely but the dual class cards mostly are more useful to the one class rather then both.
I think the trio class cards worked better because bigger variety of cards to discover and use, basically back in gadezstan.
Well, I think is too early to call a failure here, in Standard we have more 4 expansions to the cards find a way in the two classes, for example,, the spell damage pack, works way better in mage than shaman, if in the future expansion shaman gets a lot of spell damage support this can chance.
That said I really don't believe hunter ever will use Guadian Animals, much better a 2/4 + 8/8 charge than 2 mid minions with rush for 7 manas and hunter can't deal with many high cost cards like druid can.
It worked as it should, the problem is that obviously it will work better for one class or the other as the game is built around build archetypes.
In magic the gathering you can build you decks around mana sources, in hearthstone you build around class archetypes.
While dual mana cards in magic are viable and fair, hearthstone cannot be as flexible.
Simply blame the base structure of the game not the idea.
Its much better than the triclass cards from mean streets.
Dual class cards is something this game needed for years. Great idea hope it sticks
There's a few cards that work in both classes the card was designed for, like Wand Thief but, OP has a point that the cards seem to often favour one class more than the other.
It was a good idea though, and there's certainly a chance that certain cards will find a place in the other class eventually.
If you see a bad post on the forum use the report function under it, so I or someone else of the moderation team can take care of it!
i think it would be good idea if we can get more dual cards that would support the past onces.
I like the dual class idea and i dont hate it in any way but at the moment, its kinda too heavy in one side and light in the other.
They work fine. There's no rule that says they have to be used equally between the classes to be a successful design. A large part of the dual class cards is just in their identity in combining flavors from each class.
but here comes the problem. the cards become useless for the class that the cards don't work, which means less cards to play.
The Grimmy Goons Falacy
They did, they do, they will.
Dead but dreaming
There are always class cards that don’t impact the meta (I.e. they aren’t good enough). Doesn’t mean there are fewer cards to play, just that only the best cards ever see play anyway.
Of course they did, and this really feels like a mistaken premise.
Dual-class have worked much better than the gangs did, because they actually belong to their classes. Lord Barov is very much Warrior in texture and feel, and also very much Paladin. Hunter currently doesn't use Guardian Animals. Maybe they could, there have been Hunter decks in the past that ran only a few bigger beasts and cheated them out. But it's a card that comes across as a real Hunter card, just one that doesn't have a home.
The gangs, however, were just new gimmick generics that not everyone could use. Kabal Chemist or Lotus Agents or whatever were wicked boring, with no real class identity. Jades were powerful in Druid and Shaman, and Kazakus helped out existing Reno decks, but they didn't capture the imagination, really. They're just cards.
To say "oh, well only one deck uses it, therefore it failed" is to call the idea of generic cards a failure. There's plently of generics that never show up outside one specific deck. Are generics a failure because Lake Thresher is only in one Druid deck? Are generics a failure because Shu'ma is pretty much only in Quest Hunter? No.
The Rogue/Warrior dual class cards have been quite successful as both classes make good use them, especially Cutting Class and Doctor Krastinov
Same with Soul Fragments and Warlock/DH
And many more dual class cards are used in at least one archetype of each class (although some of those archetypes are not so popular right now - example: Spell Damage Shaman).
A few fails as dual class cards imo are: Disciplinarian Gandling and Flesh Giant (both useless in Priest), Wave of Apathy (useless in Paladin), High Abbess Alura (useless in Priest) and Shield of Honor (this really should have been a Warrior-only card)
I see Flesh Giant all the time...
High Abbess Alura is the nuts in Combo Priest.
just another trash design from an otherwise trash company
Not all printed cards are supposed to appear in top tier deck lists and not all dual class cards are supposed to be good for both classes. They still can be used as discovered or differently acquired during game. The idea is good and I hope it will be supported in future as there are really cards which feel as belonging to more than one class.
I agree that cards such as Guardian Animals and Lord Barov see play in only one class. However, I think it's safe to say that this isn't true for a fair amount of cards.
Devolving Missles is great in both Mage and Shaman, High Abbess Alura is viable in both Priest and Paladin, Ace Hunter Kreen has seen some play in Hunter if more so Demon Hunter, Trick Totem is amazing in both Mage and Shaman, and I've seen all the Soul Shard cards see play in Warlock and Demon Hunter.
I do agree that some dual-class cards simply lean towards one class. However, perhaps time will tell if it will mostly be flops? Thanks for bringing this up! It was interesting to think this through.
Check Out My KaC Review In Over 11,000 words!
Check Out My TWW Review in Over 14,000 words!
Check Out My TBP Review in Over 21,000 words!
Check Out My RR Review in Over 36,000 words!
it was a certainity that it would work better with one than with the other because of class identity, for example with High Abbess Alura we knew that we wouldn't run it in priest because priest is mainly a control class full of removal meaning that if you put alura in priest more often than not you either run an Alura that kills itself with a priest spell, or completely forsake removlal in your priest deck which is a really bad idea.
While Paladin doesnt really have hard removal, most of paladin's spells are utility based, secrets, buffs, token generation or things like Rebuke and First Day of School, so you are really not forsaking removal when running her because paladin simply doesnt have it but has many spells that have really high singergy with Allura's abilities
You can’t just give two examples of cards that are only played in one class and claim that they didn’t work.
Adorable Infestation, Ace Hunter Kreen, Demon Companion, Torie Aim Crescent, Soulciologist Malicia, Soul Shear, Spirit Jailer, Brittlebone Destroyer, Flesh Giant, Raise Dead, Gift of Luminance, High Abbess Alura, Steeldancer, Cutting Class, Coerce, Wand Thief, Brain Freeze, Janice Barov, Devolving Missiles, Lightning Bloom and Speaker Gidra have all seen play in both classes.