I see what you are saying red and I'm still trying to learn too (like I said I'm still pretty new to the game) so maybe I don't fully understand some of the mechanics.

The question I have for you when you say "quality of action" I am confused.  Let's set aside the debate if a spawnpoint is worth the mana investment or not and get to the action (or quality of actions).  A spawnpoint summons the same creatures that your mage does so the quality is the same.  A creature is a creature.

If you are saying it is more efficient/higher quality action to summon a big creature vs a spawn point, that might be true but after the spawn point is out you can summon TWO creatures instead of ONE.  That is where I am trying to say the power (and extra action phase) is valuable (at least to me) regardless of the mana investment.

If I am going creature heavy I use my mage to summon medium to big creatures (since they will have better position depending where I am on the board) and the spawnpoint summons the little swarmlings (practically free).  A lair with harmony is regenning 3 extra mana per round, a lvl 1 creature costs 5, so for a mean 2 mana investment I get an EXTRA creature out each turn.  Sure it is a baby and no that won't win me anything but an extra creature for 2 mana that doesn't cost my mage an action phase is worth it to me.

No it isn't the fastest opening strategy but (over time) the extra mana + extra creatures do add up, to help the end game.  A strong beginning and opening position is awesome but it's how the game ends not how it starts that matters most to me.  Which is why I like to save the "big creatures" for the end because the opponent has less resources available to deal with it.  So the baby level 1's are fodder/nuisance, get a few dice in, do some guards as needed but then end it with the big guys after the opponent is overwhelmed a bit.

If I do summon anything kind of big early it would have to be ranged or maybe a flyer to deal with flyers.  Like one of my favorite creatures in the game is the Gorgon Archer, making your oppnent weak and roll less dice is so attractive, plus her regen is awesome.

The opponent is dealing with small/cheap threats sent while I do the above.  I make them defend early (usually in their corner) so I have time to do my thing.  If they are too busy responding they don't have time/mana to set up themselves.  By the time you get to a point where you are regenning 6 more mana EACH turn than your opponent that mana adds up.

Spawnpoints and familiars never fall out of favor with me, would I rather cast 4 spells a turn or 2?  Casting 4 things per turn you can overrun your opponent.  If you don't have a spawn point or familiar you area giving up on Action Phases...I think having more action phases wins games.

Cbalian wrote...


I play pretty defensively for the most part so I shy away from taking damage. 

That is a strong series of defensive tiers. I am interested in how it plays out. Do you generally turtle and set up all that stuff? I have never played anyone who tried that. Is the flow of the match a passive defensive build up by you followed by your counterpunch?

I don't really "turtle" or take time to set up...I like to keep the flow going and pressure on opponent mage.  So it is kind of a mix of send baby creatures for them to deal with really EARLY (kind of a mini rush/aggro) THEN while they are dealing with that I can set up...while summoning equipment/defensives etc.

To do this in a decent amount of time (or it would take forever to set up and I would get overrun) I use EVERY action possible.  The more things cast PER TURN the better to get set up faster than my opponent can handle it.  If they are too busy defending and staying alive they spend their resources on that and they can't really even mount an attack on me.  So honestly even all the defenses listed are the back up but I don't generally rely on them (but they are nice to have).

I am a HUGE fan of familiars and spawn points.  Like the last Beastmaster game I won I never summoned a single creature with my mage and still won.  I let the familiar cast the enchantments.  That gives me 4 actions per turn.  I'd love to run battle forge but it is spell book cost prohibitive in that deck, but I do run it in others. 

Mana regen is key to make use of those familiars and extra actions.  I get the mana flowers/mana crystals/ pendants / harmonize out early.  Getting 14+ mana per turn adds up to a lot of power over 10 mana per turn since it all adds up.  When I play the Wizard I deprive them of mana and toss upkeeps on them right away.  If your opponent is getting 6 mana a turn and you are getting 14 what are they really going to do to you with 6 mana?  At that point they can only get overwhelmed.

Since this is a pretty mana heavy set up I don't run attack spells (since they cost mana).  Well I run a couple, like Force Hammer to squash a temple or stuff like that, but I hate Temple of Light so that is dead usually within 1-2 turn of it hitting the board.  Other than that I mainly like to do damage with weapons, it's SO mana efficient.  So after the defenses are set up I pull out a bow and shoot them while they come at me, then a sword or something when they get closer.

It kind of all depends on the mage.

I guess for the Wizard I do "turtle" a little bit, but for the Forcemaster especially I like to get in on the action (battle fury with her sword doing 10+ dice of damage per round is deadly to the enemy).

For the Wizard my favorite combo is Gorgon Archer + Basilisk.  You can turtle all day long with those.  If they get close to you Basilisk to hold them in place the Gorgon pinging away with decent damage but esp with Weak, by the time they actually get to you they are doing 1 dice of damage and aren't a threat.  They also spend so much time killing the Archer because they see that as a threat, and with it regening that gives me so much time and mana on the Wizard to keep tossing other stuff at them...hence they never really attack my Mage if they are too busy dealing with creature threats.

So it isn't all defense, sometimes keeping pressure on them so they aren't attacking me is a "defense" too.

Unavoidable wouldn't work on tier 1 or 3 of the defense only tier 2.

I actually run Unavoidable + Elusive for my Force Master and it is very nice.

But yes unavoidable would throw a wrench into a good chunk of my defense, I might even use up a dispell on that one.

I consider Drain Life & Drain Soul in a totally different category than a heal spell.  Anytime you can reduce the opponents life and increase yours at the same time is hugely valuable, and because it does damage it really can't be considered a "heal only" spell.

So yes definitely run Drain Life/Soul, but that isn't running a heal spell.

Although I do kind of like the enchantment that heals 4 dice of damage and you can reveal it whenever (meaning your creature can be on the other end of the arena and still get a heal since you don't need to be in range).  Since that one is so cheap both spell book wise and mana wise I've been considering that one.

I think my biggest thing for being "anti heal" if you want to call it that, is I've only ever cast a heal spell in one game ever.  90% of the games I've played I've never taken more than 2-3 points of damage the entire game so the heal spell sits in the book.

The question that raises is "Do you use a heal spell on a creature going to die OR summon another creature?"

My thought on that is I consider creatures expendable (sorry cuddly grizzly pooh bear) but for the same amount of spell book points you can summon a fully healed ready to go creature guaranteed.  Yes depending on the creature you are out a bit more mana BUT a heal is so random, you might heal a lot you might heal little or even nothing.

My dice rolling skills suck so I always try to rely on strategy over luck so any cards that are more "random" I generally shy away from.  It's the same reason I "generally" don't use big attack spells.  That big fireball is awesome when it hits and crits etc but I could also use an action and mana to do very little damage also.

how about something along this line, all decks should have a card that does a certain effect then list the cards. you should have at least one card in each category.

de-equipt: explosion, dissolve
 dispel: dispel, destroy magic
 armour: chest, ele cloak, book
mana efficient damage: creatures, weapons
burst damage: attack spells, battle fury
avoid guard: elusive, creatures, ranged attacks
life regen: regrowth/belt, vampire, heal, life drain.

 etc
you can see how this will better help new players as they can find a neccesary spell for each deck

That actually is kind of where I was going with it.  I probably meant to say what "types" of things are needed and maybe not specific cards because it does depend on the individual mage.  Having something in each "category" to handle something or perform X action is a good way to go about it.  Like I said I am a mageling and only played a dozen games or so. 

What I am finding is cards that I go to more often and some cards in my box I almost never use.

I've also been trying to build more "themed" decks to actually get use out of some of the cards that I don't use so I don't end up playing the same strategy over and over.  Just because you know you can win doesn't make it fun, I like the challenge.

So far my only sets of cards I really focus on (regardless of mage) is:
Action advantage:  I like to take more actions per turn than my opponent
** so I try to use spawnpoints/familiars/battleforges - the more I have familiars and spawnpoints summoning things the more actions I have to attack with my mage or cast other stuff

Mana advantage: I like to regen more many per turn than my opponent so I can take advantage of those extra action phases.  Wizard my favorite for this, with my opponent regening only 6 mana per turn and me regening 14+ mana per round I can cast a big creature or extra big spell every turn

Armor/Defense:  So far I haven't quite found the sweet spot here.  I generally try to have 3 points of armor and 3 things to deflect.  I don't normally get hit with more than 4 things in a turn anyways and if I do get hit 3 armor points seems sufficient?

Life management:  I'm actually thinking about taking healing spells out of all of my decks, as it is now I am down to 1-2 heal spells but in the last 6 games I have played I never cast a single heal spell, and in the last 3 games I have played I never took a single point of damage to my mage so heal spells seem a waste of spell points.  I kind of am nervous to take them out though because as soon as I do that is when I will need them lol.  It is like if you bring an umbrella it won't rain, but if you don't have one it will rain.  I like to be prepared.

I do run regrowth belt, regrowth enchantment, and vamparism in pretty much every deck so prefer that method of "passive" healing because I don't have to use an action or quick action to cast a spell, and can get an extra attack in.

Damage output:  Lately I have found myself removing almost all attack spells, and most every incantation.  They are situationally good (and necessary) but if I have the choice to spend mana to cast a spell or cast a creature I seem to like to cast a creature because it will have a longer effect on game than a spell.  The only spell I really like to run is Force Hammers (I kill annoying conjurations or spawn points as soon as my opponent casts them) and I do like Battle Fury for extra damage output as well.

Creatures of course for the bulk of damage (plus they can guard me too if needed).

I'm a big fan of "weapon" damage over "spell damage" since weapon damage is so much more mana efficient.  If I whack someone or shoot a bow it doesn't cost me mana, so I can build my mana up or use spawnpoints/familiars to cast stuff while I hit stuff.

Utility:  I definitely run dispels/dissolves, sometimes steal equipment

So do you think it would be a mistake to drop all heal spells from my deck?  If I'm running regrowth & vamparism?

I actually just got the Pro-Sleeves (clear) yesterday and they seem great.

Doesn't make the card feel "bulky" like there is extra stuff on there, I'm kind of tactile so didn't want it to feel all plasticky (is that a word?).

They fit perfect on the sides although there is a little extra plastic on the top.  I guess that is kind of good since I'd rather the sleeve have extra cover than not enough.

But the best part is even with the plastic cover and even with the extra on top the cards still fit great in the spell books (OR the Pro card books which I also love to use to organize my cards not in play).

I definitely could do without that shiny silver dot, which I am too lazy to remove, so I just put the card in FRONT of it so I can't actually see the dot when looking at the card, so I guess not too big of a deal.

I don't have all my cards sleeved but the main ones that get used the most.