Hearthpwn

Quote from Hozuki1988 >>

Quote from JibbaNerbs >>

Quote from Hozuki1988 >>

 

 I'd offer two pieces of advice here.  1.  Make it a battlecry, since, presumably, it is.  And 2.  Somewhere in your description put some kind of reminder about what Hellfire is, because it took me a bit to remember it myself, and it's possible that other people could also be confused.  (I.E. Using the card button on the far right of the bar.)  It might be illegal to add that now, since you've already posted it, but you'll probably be okay, since it's no change to the mechanics and doesn't affect the flavor.  (Speaking as a non-admin, of course).

 

Quote from JibbaNerbs >>

Quote from Hozuki1988 >>

 

 I'd offer two pieces of advice here.  1.  Make it a battlecry, since, presumably, it is.  And 2.  Somewhere in your description put some kind of reminder about what Hellfire is, because it took me a bit to remember it myself, and it's possible that other people could also be confused.  (I.E. Using the card button on the far right of the bar.)  It might be illegal to add that now, since you've already posted it, but you'll probably be okay, since it's no change to the mechanics and doesn't affect the flavor.  (Speaking as a non-admin, of course).

 THXS XD i forgot about the keyword. About the effect, the text wouldn't  be huge?

 

Quote from Hozuki1988 >>

Doesn't this guy destroy worlds or something?

Seems Balanced.

Sometimes Executus tells jokes with really dark roots.

STILL TOO SOON, EXECUTUS!

Probably Vanilla stats (In the same line as Malch, actually), since you still wanted  this card.

If I have one oddity with my emotes, it's that when a priest plays his first shadowform, or the mage starts playing pirates, I Greet them.  I guess it's a bit like waiting to be introduced before shaking hands, or something like that.  I usually only do that with decks I find interesting, though, as sort of a thanks for playing something new and interesting rather than a deck I've seen a thousand times before.

As far as the original questions, about saying WP and such, I'd say context is extremely important;  Well played only works if it could have gone either way, and thanks is usually a snarky way to respond to whatever they said.  What I miss is the set of emotes you can use in TF2 (Which I also play).  It would be kind of nice to make it clear what you were talking about.

Quote from andcurley >>

Could I get some feedback on an idea I'm kicking around?

 

It's sort of a mashup of the Prince Malchezaar mechanic and the alternate legendaries from Whispers of the Old Gods like Nat, the Darkfisher, Ragnaros, Lightlord, etc. I made him a Grimy Goons card for flavor reasons (too bad he already appeared in GvG!), but I'm not sure about the power level/value here.

In my initial design he gave both players 10 Coins at the start of the game, but that seemed way too broken.

 

'Fun fact, these guys will do anything if you offer to pay them in red capes.'

The Crusade comes from a time of great conflict, and at that time, rises up without being called.  In this way, we've got them tied in.  Then there's their Paladin connection.  And of course, they fit the theme of the challenge.  From a mechanical standpoint, this card acts a bit like a much more difficult Noble Sacrifice, crossed with Tirion Fordring.  Worst case, it's junk, but not utterly unplayable.  Best case, the OTK doesn't work as planned, and you live to fight another day.  

It is, in short, a card that won't always go off, but if it does, you'll be glad you put it in your deck.

Well, it's a comparatively tough condition to meet, and pretty bad stats if you can't.  Effectively, if you aren't playing the right kind of deck, it's an overcosted, understatted, objectively worse Tirion.  Not useless, but still pretty awful.  Meanwhile, if you can pull it off, it really pays off, stopping certain OTKs dead in their tracks, and giving you potentially the tempo-swing you need to get back in the game.  I think it's a card that people might actually play, but also one that isn't completely OP.  It goes well with the paladin aesthetic, too, right in with noble sacrifice and Tirion.

What I'm wondering about is about the value of a free effect, even one with a difficult activator.  Several of the dragons just need a dragon in hand to work, for massive effect, while this summons, straight from hand, with no warning to the opponent.  On the other hand, 15 damage is half of your health, which is a solid cost, and in fact, if this minion gave you the option 'you can summon this minion for 15 HP', I'm not sure if it would be good.   This is especially tricky considering that if your opponent is playing the slow game, this is effectively a dead card in your hand.  So, all that said, do you guys reckon it's OP, or about right?

(Sorry if I flooded with posts, this is the last one of the night.)

Galakrond bothers me as a card.  The concept is excellent, making the player think about the board as a whole, while also functioning as board clear, and face damage, but it strikes me as an almost dangerous amount of math for a single card, since you have to determine how much health is on the board (with Galakrond), and then almost iterate it out, seeing how many times he'll proc, and only then being able to determine whether you should play him. as an addend, I'd not that even with both players at full health, he'll only proc twice, which is about enough to kill any minions, taking them out of the picture.

To remedy this, you could potentially try it the other way around?  Maybe make it so that he deals 4 damage to all characters until he's done 20 damage?  That way, his board clear remains intact, and in similar quantities, but the math is much simpler, which could be nice for newer players.  You could even say 'Battlecry: deal 20 damage split evenly among all characters", unless you're attached to the 4 at a time, which is your right.  Hopefully that was helpful.

Well, it's effectively junk in any combo-deck; too much chance to mill your best cards.

However, people have made the point that fel-reaver is just as likely to mill your worst as it is your best, and I think this is the same way, especially in something like a zoolock, for instance, where (unless I'm mistaken), you don't really have any major combos.  If you think of it as if all of your cards are effectively equal, you just have to end the game 10 turns sooner, which you might already be able to do, and which this helps you to do.

I guess what I'm saying is that I could see this making Cancer-lock a deck, and one that would be universally feared, since 3 draw with effectively no downside (In that scenario), is about as OP as OP gets.

That said, the downside is pretty major in any warlock deck that has combo-pieces (I.E. Renolock), so we'll call that a pass, and if you gave it a manacost, say, 3 mana, any cancer-deck worth its salt would have to give up one of its favorite turns (One in the early game), it might even be too slow.

I don't know how to keep it from terrorizing the meta, while not neutering it as far as value goes.  making it 2 mana might be just the thing, but I'd say that for now this is a bit of a game-breaker.

See, I take issue with Latent as a keyword.  I like the idea, sure enough, but here the thing.  If you have a passable deck the rest of the way up, which isn't hard to imagine, you've effectively created the ability to thin your deck by an unspecified number of cards, and then, once you've gone through all of those cards, you haven't run out of power, since you still have a supply of OP cards at the bottom of your deck.

What I would do to fix this is to

A.  Make the Overpowered (On their own) latent cards come from a separate card.  I.E. Crazed Geneticist:  3 mana, 3/3 deathrattle shuffle a latent Aberrant Monstrosity into your deck.  (Or on the bottom, you get the idea.)

B.  Or make the cards less powerful.  Being able to guarantee any kind of big draw late-game is pretty good, so you could make the argument that even being overpriced, they'd be worth it.

Further, I'd definitely suggest adding some buff cards to this, maybe some cards that specifically buff small minions, since that seems to be the playstyle, such as, for example: 2 mana:  Set the attack of all minions with less than 3 attack to 3, for the hero-power value.  Probably add something like a bigger mirror image (As in the mage card), if you were doing that.

That way, your hero-power synergizes with the buff-cards, and the buff cards synergize with certain class cards, which are, coincidentally, perfect targets for your hero-power.  

With that sort of 'flood' mechanic, you could add a card, maybe 2 mana, that does 1 damage for each friendly minion? It would be OP with 7, but playing against this hero, people would try very hard to avoid giving you any traction, so it might actually be underpowered?

And, while I'm talking about it, you could definitely make the legendary something like 5 Mana:  0/8, stealth,  at the start of your turn restore this minion to full health.

Maybe it's just my playstyle, but this hero seems to have a lot of potential to me.

Blizzard has been getting, let's say flak, for their treatment of Rogue, notably only giving Rogue 2 Jade Golem Cards, instead of the 3 granted to other classes.  That's a fair enough criticism, just looking at it.

And then I had a thought.  The Jade Golem 'scaling' mechanic occurs whenever you summon a jade golem.  It doesn't have to be the newest or the best golem, according to the text, just a golem.  So, theoretically, if you have the first golem you summon, the 1/1, and you shadowstep and replay it twice, you're now on 4/4 golems.  And this can, with perfect luck, mean that while the other classes, namely druid, have bigger golems in the long run, you can be 2 or 3 golem levels ahead of them in the early game.  Take, for instance, the dream.  You go second with a swarmer, 2 shadowsteps, and a prep.  First 2 draws, shuriken.  (Obviously, that's a ridiculous amount of RNG, and the results will probably be worse than that 90+% of the time.)

Your first turn, you coin out the swarmer, against whatever 1drop they played.  As it's in stealth, there's nothing they can really do about it.  Next turn, you trade, shadowstep the golem, play it, shadowstep it again, play, and shuriken, prep, shuriken.  Assuming I'm right, that leaves you with a 1/1 (Which you've been shadowstepping), a 4/4 and a 5/5.  On turn 2, in a deck that may or may not have even more jade synergy.

I'll repeat myself here, that's a ridiculously unlikely series of events.  But on the other hand, that's just the dream.

I think that's why rogue didn't get the golem synergy they wanted.  Shadowstep, and tiny golems that turn the deck into more of a C'thun where you're playing multiple, smaller, but still growing, C'thuns.

I don't know, that's the dream, so all you Rogue players out there, keep an eye out.  You might, and mind you I say might, be okay this expansion.

Don't give up on this card, I'd say.  Sure, it's easy to kill, but that's nothing new for ragers.  Compare it to jungle panther.  Only difference is one HP for 1 ATK, and no beast tag, which rogue didn't use anyway.  And if the enemy uses an AoE, it'll probably kill one just as easily as the other.  So you could make the argument that this is a step up from jungle panther.  Add to that the stealth synergy we've been seeing for Rogue, and maybe, just maybe, we have a good card.  I'm not going to say Rogue didn't get the short end of the stick this expansion, but they aren't necessarily a dead class yet.

As for the total lack of weapons.  Well, that just seems wrong, especially since that's part of Rogue's whole thing.  If I had to guess, I'd say it's coming.  They're probably just sitting there, laughing at the rage, waiting to show us something.  At least, they'd better be, or the rage won't end.