Ben Brode Explains the Reasoning for the Naga Sea Witch Rule Change
Ben Brode was on reddit today responding to an inquiry on Naga Sea Witch and her recent undocumented change.
- It was a mistake that the change wasn't in the patch notes for 9.0.
- If Naga Sea Witch is too powerful, she will probably be nerfed.
- The initial conversation began with the interaction between Bright-Eyed Scout and Second-Rate Bruiser.
- Due to not thinking that combo was correct, they reevaluated how cost-setting and cost-adjusting auras worked.
- Changing it made the rules overall easier to understand.
- They were initially concerned with the power level of the card, but it isn't a high win-rate right now.
Check out the full text below. There's a lot of great insight into the change that is better read in full.
Quote from Ben BrodeIf you're talking about Naga Sea Witch, it was definitely intentional, and definitely a mistake that it missed the patch notes.
The thing that got us talking about the issue was the interaction between Bright-Eyed Scout and Second-Rate Bruiser.
Generally when things "set" a value (think Aldor Peacekeeper), it becomes the new baseline. Any "auras" that affect that value apply after the effect that is applying the new baseline. Think about a minion next to a Dire Wolf Alpha. If you Aldor Peacekeeper that minion, his new Attack will be 2, not 1. It's because the Aura applies after the "set" power. This hasn't always worked correctly in the past, but if you Aldor a Small-Time Buccaneer who is being buffed by his power - his power is an Aura, and so the resulting minion would have 3 Attack.
We think the Bright-Eyed Scout + Second-Rate Bruiser interaction wasn't correct, and it caused us to re-evaluate Cost-Setting and how it interacted with Cost-Adjusting Auras.
Here's the discussion the engineers and designers had regarding Sea Witch:
The Naga Sea Witch interaction can work out in one of two ways:
If you draw a Second-Rate Bruiser while Naga Sea Witch is already in play, Second-Rate Bruiser’s cost will be reduced by 2 if your opponent has 3 or more minions.
If you have a Second-Rate Bruiser already in hand and play a Naga Sea Witch, that Bruiser will always cost 5, no matter how many minions your opponent has. If it gets a Thaurissan tick, it goes down to 4. If the Naga Sea Witch leaves play, Second-Rate Bruiser’s cost will be reduced by 2 if your opponent has 3 or more minions, while keeping the Thaurissan tick making it cost 1 less – leaving it with a cost of either 4 or 2.
This distinction happens because in the first case, Naga Sea Witch’s timestamp will be earlier than SRB’s, so SRB applies last. In the second case, SRB’s modifier has an earlier timestamp, so Naga Sea Witch applies last.
Why this feels wrong: We have a very clear precedent that card text modifiers apply last, after any external stat-setting effect occurs.
Tar Creeper, Tar Lurker, Tar Lord, Lightspawn, Cogmaster, Old Murk-Eye, Goblin Sapper - All of these cards give themselves a modifier that alters one of their own stats. If you play a stat-setting effect on one of them, their text still applies. The Tar minions will always get their attack bonus, even after being affected by Crystal Core, Aldor Peacekeeper, Sunkeeper Tarim, Dinosize or any other effect.
The proposal is this: Cards that modify their own cost should work in this exact same way. Second-Rate Bruiser’s ability is in the same category as Tar Creeper’s ability – it modifies one of its stats when a condition is met. This would standardize their behavior, making them on the whole feel more intuitive and consistent, as well as making our lives easier by making the rules more predictable.
If Naga Sea Witch is in play: Cards in hand cost 5, then their text is applied.
If Aviana is in play: Cards in hand cost 1, then their text is applied.
If Aviana, Naga Sea Witch, Pint-Sized Summoner, Summoning Portal and Mana Wraith are in play: Cards in play apply their effects in the order that they came into play, then each card in hand applies its own text last.
If I draw a Molten Giant with Bright-Eyed Scout: Molten Giant’s cost is 5, minus the damage I’ve taken. If I’m at 25 health, it costs 0.
If I draw a Molten Giant with Bright-Eyed Scout while Aviana is in play: Aviana applies, making Molten Giant cost 1. Bright-Eyed Scout’s enchantment then applies, making Molten Giant cost 5. Finally, Molten Giant’s text applies, making it cost 5 minus HealthLost.
We made the change because we think these rules are easier to understand because they're more consistent with other parts of the game, not because we wanted to buff Naga Sea Witch. We were worried about it's power level and have been watching the play/win reports in Wild. Right now it's not one of the best decks, but it could grow in winrate as players get more practice. If it does become a big problem, we'd probably nerf Naga Sea Witch, rather than reverting the rules change.
This is an excellent explanation that should settle the "intentional or not" issue completely. It also makes a lot of sense, so thank you for sharing and clarifying!
It looks like Dragon's Breath doesn't follow these new rules though. Here's a video documenting that with Naga Sea Witch in play, Dragon's Breath in hand does not reduce its cost by one every time a minion dies, even though Volcanic Drake does: https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/6yj2o9/new_bug_with_naga_sea_witch_and_dragons_breath/
Is this something that should happen, or a case that was missed in the last update?
It's a bug. Should be fixed in an upcoming patch (though the fix will miss 9.1.) (Source)
The problem with the giant decks isn't their winrate. It's that they're complete matchup lottery decks. If you play against a deck/class with big enough board clears for giants, you lose. If you play against anyone else, you win. The decks are completely uninteractive and completely un-fun. It feels so bad when you play a class like rogue and lose because you have absolutely no way to clear away 3+ 8/8s on turn 5. It's just not healthy for the meta in any way.
Non-interactive tactics in HS? No way... ;)
I see what you referenced there, and I support the reference.
Wow, so maybe every level-headed person who said the deck isn't that hard to beat were RIGHT???? What a surprise. /s
They should rly fire the person who writes patch notes at this point, every single patch notes release is incomplete ... i mean its not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things, but that person is doing a very shitty job ...
My team does not have a single person who manages all of the documentation and it wouldn't surprise me if their team is set up the same way. On my team each developer is responsible for documenting their own changes, and we're not exactly stellar about keeping the documentation up to date either. With so many screw ups they really should be cracking down on it more though.
How hard is it for each person to take notes on the changes they make and then have a meeting before writing the patch notes to talk about what has been changed? It's not that hard man, I have a job similar to theirs but in construction, and I still manage all the details and information correctly. JUST TAKE FUCKING NOTES AND TALK TO EACH OTHER!!!
A terrible behavior of the developer, who so openly looks and speaks out against societies of players, who are tired of enduring obvious mistakes! Delete new druid card for 10 and new imba Priest card just right now and meta will go on with other deck types. which made it possible to play unique and necessary assemblies. You will only appreciate how ridiculous it is to try to discuss a Witch card where mechanics works incorrect! Wild format is ruine!
I dont like quest or control decks, i dont like freeze mage - Return flamewaker for tempomage! Just 1 card and game works! Return Rogues steal Burgle card for 3 mana and big list of cards will be playable!
Hartstone has never been so full of errors and omissions: quest, deathknight, second legendary architypes does not work at all. Hunter needs spells to clean the table - get DK ability for stitching of creatures! This is superfluous and useless skill! Hello, What are you working on? What we get from developers (nothing)?
Simple question here. Why spend so much energy, resources, and time on one particular card? A card that is currently in wild, and through self-admission, is not being played much. A buff given to card that Team 5 is already eying for a nerf! Here is my HUGE problem with team 5 right here. It speaks to a complete out of touch mentality which values answering to reddit than dealing with legitimate in-game issues. God forbid the reddit community is baffled meanwhile the MAJORITY of the community is ignored. Sorry, but reddit represent a minority of players who spend most of their time on spreadsheets and calculators, not a true representation of the majority of players. This elitist mentality is whats ruining the game. Point the fire hose at the dog house while the house burns.
It's not about a single card, nor is it about any set of cards. It's about clarifying the game rules surrounding auras, cost-setting, and order of play. This change will likely impact future sets since they develop about 2 expansions ahead of the current set.
As for your complaint about Team 5 being out of touch: reddit is one of the primary sources of communication for the devs to get feedback. Sure, reddit users may represent a tiny fraction of Hearthstone players as a whole, but it represents a huge percentage of players who communicate at all. The vast majority of players don't bother giving feedback for one reason or another.
Halfway through the text, I got really confused.
So Auras affect after set buffs, hand reductions are Board then text. If there are more than one board hand reductions, then it enters board-enter order.
Still confused but I think I got it.
⌃Confirmation that hs players are dumb
Vice versa. First the Aura effect (e.g. Naga setting to 5 mana), then any other buffs applied. IMO that looks and sounds correctly, as a mechanic.
Is incompetence his answer for the change? Because that's the actual reason.
"If it does become a big problem, we'd probably nerf Naga Sea Witch, rather than reverting the rules change."
These people are utterly clueless. People like this in charge of the game is why it's in its current state.