Hearthpwn

While there are plenty of minions that have abilities that make them more than good enough at 1/1, that whole having to draw them thing is just the big ticket right there. Makes the card way too RNG dependent, and there just aren't enough ways to ensure that you'll not only draw minions, but that they'll be worthwhile.

It should also be noted that you'd be giving your opponent draw information whenever you create a 1/1. So say it's in arena and you draw a Spellbreaker - opponent is going to know you have a silence in hand, for example.

I really like this card. Almost-BoK with a restriction that, in hunter, isn't too restrictive at all, then throws some high tempo+value cards in your deck.

Hell, even this on turn 5 with Stonetusk Boar is reaaaally strong. Sure, the 4/4 charge for 5 may not be the greatest thing in the world - but when you're later topdecking 4/4 chargers for 1, that's pretty good.

Extra points if you put it on something with a great battlecry or deathrattle, thus giving you extra iterations of those abilities in your deck.

It's definitely a high value card, so that won't be what stops it from seeing play. If it doesn't see play, it'll just be due to an appropriate shell not being able to be built around it.

Statline is great for arena. Pretty decent for constructed, but without being overstatted it's not enough to see play. Despite synergy with some new cards (and very old cards - looking at you that 5 mana 4/4 that gets bigger when the lock takes damage), I don't think warlock needs to try *this* hard to take damage just to turn on those battlecries, Things like Kobold Librarian, Flame Imp and - y'know, hero power - should be enough.

So basically, a half decent pick in arena, doubtful it'll see constructed play.

While I like the flavour and the card in general, it doesn't seem that competitive. If we compare it to Eaglehorn Bow - another weapon that tries to get a couple extra charges of durability - you're paying 1 mana more for 1 less attack (yes, lifesteal is relevant), and have little control over what cards you're going to get from your opponent. If it's virtually or literally unplayable, tough cheese, no extra durability.

On the other hand, you can actively increase the charges yourself, whereas hunter has to wait for their secrets to get triggered. Furthermore, rogue is better equipped to buff its weapons (Deadly Poison being the obvious good synergy with this card and the main reason why a lifesteal weapon like this could be relevant), making better uses of the extra charges.

It's just... how often does a 4 mana weapon that requires further work to be at competitive level of goodness actually see play? In most cases you're giving up a lot of tempo on the turn you play this, and are you going to generate enough life and value off it in the long run to make up for that early game tempo loss?

While not anything to write home about, 4 damage for 4 mana isn't the wooorst thing ever in a worst case scenario.

4 damage for 1 mana though? Insane value, obviously.

It'll be interesting to see if there's a hunter deck that can control board well enough to consistently get the discount, but I could foresee this becoming a valuable tool in a midrange hunter deck.

In an aggro meta this is such a great card. Against control, not so much. Quite frankly, it's very well designed - it's a tech choice that's fantastic when chosen appropriately, and pretty darn underwhelming when not (think cards like The Black Knight and Harrison Jones - great when they hit their mark, below average otherwise).

Haven't looked at what beasts a typical druid deck would have die during a game.

In theory, it could be pretty decent - if you built a predominantly non-beast deck, and included a few mid to high cost beasts that are way undercosted at 3 mana.

In reality though, off the top of my head, I believe trying to do this would rule out at least a few really strong druid cards - for example, aren't DK Malf's spawns beasts? Those definitely aren't worth 3.

It's very similar to Starfire, but also quite different. Deals the same amount of damage without help, but both get helped in different ways (Southsea Captain vs spell damage). Starfire gets past taunts, Castaway gets past faerie shroud. Castaway searches for specific cards - allowing for synergy to be built into the deck - while Starfire straight up draws.

Ultimately though, Starfire doesn't see play. I'm pretty skeptical about Castaway on that point alone.

It's interesting - first few comments were about how amazing this card is.

It distinctly reminds me of Telepathy in Magic - but Telepathy is much better, as the hands of your opponents are revealed as soon as it hits the board.

In some sort of alternate universe where the metagame didn't exist and any deck you faced could be one of about a hundred different archetypes, a card like Telepathy could potentially see play - someone mentioned information is power. Hell, it's one of those cards that's more powerful at the kitchen table rather than a tournament simply because the metagame is likely to be much more varied in a casual setting.

In constructed competitive Magic though, you'd never see Telepathy despite how important information is. Why? Because giving up a card slot in your deck - and in your hand - is far less important when, due to the metagame, you should know roughly what your opponents are running anyway. All you need them to do, generally, is drop a few cards, and you'll usually get an idea as to what archetype they're piloting - and in turn, what the other cards in their deck are. No need to give up a card for it.

So Chameleos, IMO, shouldn't be played for 'information' purposes - it's a waste of a card in your deck. If it were played for any reason, I'd imagine it'd fit into some sort of control priest shell, in a slower meta where you're not unlikely to see something like a Lich King out of the opponent - an extra Lich King in your deck never hurt.

I'm skeptical about it seeing play at all though; relying on a lot of RNG like that doesn't usually work too well.

Definitely seems 'playable'. Probably not 'very good' unless a lot of 3 attack minions exist in the meta. Basically, if you use it to kill a 3/2, 3/3 or 3/4 you've spent 5 mana getting creature removal *and* a 6/3 creature with potential upside (that's unlikely to get utilized).

It's almost surely better than Boogeymonster on account of having rush - but it needs such a perfect target to real be enough value to warrant inclusion, and even killing a 3/4 is like "deal 4 damage, get a 6/3" - so not too far from Blacking Corrupter which was faaaar less reliant on getting a perfect target.

Would have had a much higher chance at seeing play if it gained +1/+3 or even +4 health, as then it has a chance to snowball against aggro and get out of control - and conditional cards need the chance to be broken to break into the meta.

That said, there are some cute combos available - namely with cards that spawn minions for your opponent. Gravelsnout Knight comes to mind in standard - but then, is the combo even that good? In many/most cases you're looking at a 2/3 and 6/4 (with potential upside) for 6 mana. You'd probably do better with any random 2 drop + Chillwind Yeti.

It's interesting. When I started making this post, I was thinking the card might be decent - basically, a cheaper Argent Commander. I've swapped positions now - seems pretty meh. Even the best case scenarios for it aren't that great.

The only thing that makes this potentially inferior to Aldor Peacekeeper is the dragon-in-hand condition. The effect, specifically in priest, is much stronger thanks to the numerous priest effects that care about a minion having 2 or less attack.

Whether or not there's room in a dragon deck, or dragon-hybrid deck (if you're playing this, you probably want to be playing Cabal Shadow Priest too) is another story, but there's definitely potential in this card.

In arena, 2/4 with for 3 with potential large upside is very playable.

Are some of the non-battlecry reliant 4 drops playable in a competitive metagame if you staple on a 6 armor pseudo-battlecry onto them?

Well, Chillwind Yeti/Senjin Shieldmasta/Fandral Staghelm + 6 armor is almost surely better than Shieldmaiden, but the big difference in that case is that Shieldmaiden helped control warrior do what it was trying to do (survive until and into late game so it could take over), whereas no current druid archetypes would want to be running this (bad for token, Jade wants battlecries, big wants early ramp + this would disallow the 4 mana 3/3 + ramp card).

In a vacuum though, it has some potential - if you can ignore the fact you can't play true minions at 3 and below if you're trying to maximise its usefulness (there are a few ways to get around it, like Power of the Wild). It's just whether or not there would ever be an archetype that you're happy to run a 3/5, 4/4 or 4/5 + 6 armor for 4 in druid. It should also be mentioned that you might find getting a poisonous minion acceptable, given that the attack stat is much less relevant in that case (if you were to play the 3 mana stealth poisoner, you're looking at 6 armor + pseudo removal for 4, which isn't terrible).

In arena it's not the worst thing ever, but I imagine odds are you won't be getting a 4 drop, making it a bad tempo play (but having some potential if you have a slower deck and need the armor).

Basically, it's playable, and it has the potential to be put to work, but currently doesn't have a home and needs to be built around to a degree.

I fail to see how this would beat a freeze mage that's running Vaporize.

Just confirmed - two Fandrals still only plays Jade Idol (and thus, I'm assuming, all other choose effects) once. This makes perfect sense, IMO - because if you have two things instructing you to choose all/both options, you're still choosing all/both options, not choosing them twice.

A quick Google didn't show any posts about players currently having out two Fandrals and then casting Jade Idol. Have you actually tested this yourself? Fandrals ability alone doesn't make me think you'd get two iterations of the choices ("choose both options" + "choose both options" = "choose both options"). I'll run a quick test now to check.