I've tried this last season a Priest deck with Educated Elekk. Felt good (actually more fun than good), but I've always had problems drawing all the things I shuffled - Sphere of Sapience wasn't enough to fish for the shuffled stuff. Maybe this can help?
(Well... is there another class that I can succeed better than Priest with a deck themed around this? I did on Priest just because I'm F2P and have more priest cards)
Actually imho the card is well intentioned. But the road to hell is full of them.
A big problem (ok, not the only one) about quest rogue is the interaction with some specific cards, specially token generators and cheap cards that buffed go nuts. I always thought a good solution would be banning some cards from being together on a deck.
i.e. If rogue plays quest on deck, he/she can't play X card too. Kind of same way Even Shaman can't play Lightning Storm, or Even Warlock can't play Voidlord.
I think this could address the issue of some cards being ok alone, but becoming broken on a specific deck.
I don't care about meta,i play decks i like (Odd,Even,Aggro,Murloc,Mech,OTK,Quest,Devine Shield Paladin) .
That's the same thing I do, and I have fun with the game.
If the meta is too harsh with the decks I like to play, I try to tech my decks or build a new one to counter what is causing me trouble. If the result is a deck that I enjoy, I keep it.
I understand (and agree!). IMHO not only Doomguard, but every discard card should be "if you discard, benefit; else it's just normal stats for it's cost", or even something like "(...) else you discard anyway... even if it's summoned and not played from hand". I mean, if the card is "overpowered" for its cost because of discard, you should discard cards to have acess to that "power". If Blizzard try to make a mechanic that has ups and downs, they shouldn't let you bypass the downs. Or at least not to Cubelock extent.
But another point that came to me is "what they are gonna to (the idea of a) discard lock"? Discard is a warlock mechanic that they tried more than once to make viable since beta, and it is on basic and classic sets with Doomguard and Succubus. I can't remember any competitive discard-based lock, other than some fun-like or almost-good decks. But I can remember discard cards being playing on other warlock decks, like Doomguard itself being used as a finisher or with empty hand lategame. Summoning discard cards with Bloodreaver Gul'dan, Possessed Lackey or Carnivorous Cube seems more of a problem than old Doomguard. You are not only summoning two discard cards without the downside, you are also multiplying them - and you actually have different ways to do that.
So, are they going to nerf discard, a mechanic that - if the intention is to make it viable - actually need a buff not a nerf? Or are they going to nerf Doomguard, a classic card that could be ruined or made unplayable just because of one-or-two expansion sets?
But if they want to make disco lock more consistent and viable in the long run, even through different rotations, maybe Blizzard just need to redesign discard from scratch, or else it would be just discard cards fitting some non-discard based decks.
EDIT: Also, the same idea of "discard to profit, or else don't" could be applied to shaman's "overload to profit, or else don't". Seems like the difference is that Shaman, don't have "broken" mechanics to deal with. Unless you Lesser Sapphire Spellstone a Earth Elemental with Ancestral Spirit... but that is not a consistent deck. Warlock can made more than one variations of the deck that are very good ones.
Not only it's not a loss of cards, it actually helps some of your decisions by knowing that you will not draw those 2 cards this game, so you're not counting on them anymore.
0
I've tried this last season a Priest deck with Educated Elekk. Felt good (actually more fun than good), but I've always had problems drawing all the things I shuffled - Sphere of Sapience wasn't enough to fish for the shuffled stuff. Maybe this can help?
(Well... is there another class that I can succeed better than Priest with a deck themed around this? I did on Priest just because I'm F2P and have more priest cards)
1
That means that they are comparable to some extent.
0
Just saw on the theorycraft stream, it is confirmed: it can add ANY dragon to your hand. Saw it adding a Deathwing, Mad Aspect to the hand ;)
Guess i was wrong then, but I still think the wording is kinda not so consistent with the other cards. Anyway, that's how it is!
1
It says "add a Dragon" and not "add a random Dragon"... does it mean that it is only Priest or neutral dragons then?
0
Don't you play Lab Recruiter or Togwaggle's Scheme?
Your opponent can also put cards like bombs (warrior) or corrupted bloods (Hakkar, the Soulflayer) in your deck
It may be a bug, but probably not. I did a lot of mistakes like those, and using a deck tracker helped me a lot!
0
Try this deck, and watch this game (it took 43 turns):
https://hsreplay.net/replay/ozfuXKc9XLbZbH9bDqbdEM
I'm playing with a very reactive Priest deck, trying to double Seance their Archivist Elysiana
Observation: I'm considering taking out both Holy Ripple for two Psychopomp. But that can make the deck weaker against other decks.
0
It won't because it is a battlecry effect.
Countess Ashmore draws a rush card, and Siamat is a battlecry card.
0
Am I crazy or... Is this a reference to Snidely Whiplash from Dudley Do-Right cartoons??!?
He is actually a recurring villain in the cartoon... And they look almost identical to me.
0
He said "by turn 4"
You can only attack with both in turn 5, and only if both survives opponent's turn.
0
Agree too...
Actually imho the card is well intentioned. But the road to hell is full of them.
A big problem (ok, not the only one) about quest rogue is the interaction with some specific cards, specially token generators and cheap cards that buffed go nuts. I always thought a good solution would be banning some cards from being together on a deck.
i.e. If rogue plays quest on deck, he/she can't play X card too. Kind of same way Even Shaman can't play Lightning Storm, or Even Warlock can't play Voidlord.
I think this could address the issue of some cards being ok alone, but becoming broken on a specific deck.
0
That's the same thing I do, and I have fun with the game.
If the meta is too harsh with the decks I like to play, I try to tech my decks or build a new one to counter what is causing me trouble. If the result is a deck that I enjoy, I keep it.
EDIT: forgot to quote
0
I understand (and agree!). IMHO not only Doomguard, but every discard card should be "if you discard, benefit; else it's just normal stats for it's cost", or even something like "(...) else you discard anyway... even if it's summoned and not played from hand". I mean, if the card is "overpowered" for its cost because of discard, you should discard cards to have acess to that "power". If Blizzard try to make a mechanic that has ups and downs, they shouldn't let you bypass the downs. Or at least not to Cubelock extent.
But another point that came to me is "what they are gonna to (the idea of a) discard lock"? Discard is a warlock mechanic that they tried more than once to make viable since beta, and it is on basic and classic sets with Doomguard and Succubus. I can't remember any competitive discard-based lock, other than some fun-like or almost-good decks. But I can remember discard cards being playing on other warlock decks, like Doomguard itself being used as a finisher or with empty hand lategame. Summoning discard cards with Bloodreaver Gul'dan, Possessed Lackey or Carnivorous Cube seems more of a problem than old Doomguard. You are not only summoning two discard cards without the downside, you are also multiplying them - and you actually have different ways to do that.
So, are they going to nerf discard, a mechanic that - if the intention is to make it viable - actually need a buff not a nerf? Or are they going to nerf Doomguard, a classic card that could be ruined or made unplayable just because of one-or-two expansion sets?
But if they want to make disco lock more consistent and viable in the long run, even through different rotations, maybe Blizzard just need to redesign discard from scratch, or else it would be just discard cards fitting some non-discard based decks.
EDIT: Also, the same idea of "discard to profit, or else don't" could be applied to shaman's "overload to profit, or else don't". Seems like the difference is that Shaman, don't have "broken" mechanics to deal with. Unless you Lesser Sapphire Spellstone a Earth Elemental with Ancestral Spirit... but that is not a consistent deck. Warlock can made more than one variations of the deck that are very good ones.
0
Not only it's not a loss of cards, it actually helps some of your decisions by knowing that you will not draw those 2 cards this game, so you're not counting on them anymore.
1
1