Hearthpwn

Druid's hero power is much, much better than Shaman's, outside of a few times when Totem Shaman was actually a thing.

I'm not sure a 1/3 with rush would see play these days. I'll go as far as to say I think it wouldn't, unless it was a tribe that a tier 1 deck would be based on.

Quote from Scarthcaroth >>

If this had a wider mechanic they'd showcase the card it's attached to first, like a specific legendary. Yes, sure, I guess there are ways of wording it more explicit however it's very much clear what's intended here. Pretending that it could mean "Oh, what if they actually mean this because there could be this mechanic somewhere in the set!" is just arguing for the sake of arguing.

These cards were showcased with the weapon that upgrades when you play spells and a minion that fires pings whenever you cast a spell. Obviously these are just spells that take up a single card slot but can cast multiple times to enable the weapon and the minion.

It's really not that complicated.

 Check the rest of the replies. There's literally someone who understood it the way I suggested, proving you're just wrong. Like I said.

That's just wrong. Cards in hearthstone either have a line explaining what they do, or they have a keyword. Twinspell or Echo are perfect examples of this. They exist in both forms, but they're always explicitly stated.

The only exception to this rule so far have been cards where the explanation would be too long to fit on the card. Zephrys for example. It's very hard to accurately describe what it does - probably impossible in the very limited amount of text space a card has. 

There's no reason for these cards to not be worded better. "(You can play this 3 more times)". Would be a very simple alternative, and I'm sure you could come up with something better. The way it's written now it could be a card that's part of a wider mechanic - let's say you have a legendary that revives when you play X monkeys, and then a number of cards that summon monkeys. It would make exactly as much sense to have the wording "3 monkeys left" on those cards. As in, you need to summon 3 more monkeys to revive the legendary. I can come up with 3 more ways this text could be interpreted by a player unfamiliar with it just off the top of my head. It's worded poorly, no way around it.

I think you're underrating the riffs. Think of it this way - only the first one you play is the weak vanilla version of it. Every other one you play after that is effectively playing two of them, as long as you can do it while spending all the mana for that turn, which is actually very easy to do, and Warrior does it easier than some other classes. Combine any two of them while only paying mana for one and it's obviously a good deal.

I don't think this is gonna make some incredible tier 1 deck - not on it's own at the very least - but I think it'll find a place in a decently viable deck.

The text is amazing, bothers me that the card isn't a tech card at all though. If it was an actual tech card with "Tech" in the name and this flavor text, that'd be perfect.

Bye.

Quote from EnTaroAdunEU >>

Ah yes, this Brawl is so much fun.

 Haven't you heard? It's a fan favourite, apparently.

Take it easy with the w(h)ine please.

If you wanna quote Trump at least say something he might possibly say. If you just put this into a deck with some 5+ mana taunts, this will draw one and give it 5-mana worth of buffs. You could think of this as "4 mana: Give a minion ~+4/+7 and draw a card" in that case. It's also a tutor effect, if there's ever a taunt minion in warrior that's really essential to draw, part of your win condition in other words, this will let you triple the chance of drawing it in time.

Is this a great card? No, not really. It's mediocre on its own, it's very reliant on actually having something you want to draw with it, and aggro decks have too many ways of removing single big minions these days for it to be a reliable anti-aggro tool. But it's definitely not "4 mana do nothing!". 

Go touch grass please.

If your tone was a bit less obnoxious you might not get downvoted quite as much. Just saying.

That's... a terrible idea. First, there's plenty of new players that have Wild Growth (a Core card) but don't have Wildheart Guff (an expansion legendary). Secondly, you see Excess Mana when you play Wild Growth while already at full mana crystals. If you haven't played Guff yet at 10 mana, the second part still applies, it's only inaccurate when you've both played Guff and ramped to 20 mana already. A line of text that explains why a card doesn't work as you might have expected makes a lot of sense.

If you want accuracy, instead of removing the second part it should be changed to something like "Draw a card. (You already have maximum mana crystals)". Could probably be worded better, but something to that effect.

What's a "tempo matchup" in your view?

Because 8 mana 8/8 with taunt is better than 8 mana "do nothing" as far as individual plays go?

The two cards are different, they have different strengths and weaknesses and fit into different decks. Sesselie of the Fae Court is less powerful as a buildaround card but it's also much less risky, with Celestial Alignment you often find yourself in a position against aggressive decks where you can't afford dedicating a whole turn to not removing any of your enemy's minions nor summoning any of your own, so it's just a dead card in your hand, whereas you could always play Sesselie in that spot.