1156
Rules Discussion / Re: Tainted
« on: May 20, 2013, 05:53:32 PM »
Cool, thanks!
May 12, 2024, 08:36:28 PM
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
1157
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 20, 2013, 05:40:45 PM »
Re: Boots
I guess this improves Teleport as compared to Force Push. And weakens Stone Wall. I love it, but I'm not the guy who plays Earth Wizard, I'm the nonstandard Beastmaster with 3 teleports.
Re: Dwarf
I'm not sure what to make of these strong, efficient, cheep defensive creatures. Iron Golem is still very (very) good, but Panzergarde is probably better than Knight of Westlock for Warlord. Warlord seems like he's getting some love this set, but will it ever be enough to overcome 3x spellbook cost for Arcane?
1. (19) Walk, Barracks, Harmonize (yes, I know, it's expensive)
2. (12+2) Deploy Panzerguarde
3. (12+2) Deploy Panzerguarde
4. (12+2) Deploy Panzerguarde
5. (12+2) Deploy Panzerguarde
Sure, go ahead, rush that. It's got 4 mana left to cast On Guard as often as required, or maybe even the new boots.
The Barracks lets the Warlord make his basic attack, too, instead of spending his action on a summon.
Your (my) agro deck is going to need a low gear.
Lightning will help, of course, but the Panzergarde looks like one of many powerful defensive creatures coming down the pipe.
But like I said, 3x arcane. So conflicted.
I guess this improves Teleport as compared to Force Push. And weakens Stone Wall. I love it, but I'm not the guy who plays Earth Wizard, I'm the nonstandard Beastmaster with 3 teleports.
Re: Dwarf
I'm not sure what to make of these strong, efficient, cheep defensive creatures. Iron Golem is still very (very) good, but Panzergarde is probably better than Knight of Westlock for Warlord. Warlord seems like he's getting some love this set, but will it ever be enough to overcome 3x spellbook cost for Arcane?
1. (19) Walk, Barracks, Harmonize (yes, I know, it's expensive)
2. (12+2) Deploy Panzerguarde
3. (12+2) Deploy Panzerguarde
4. (12+2) Deploy Panzerguarde
5. (12+2) Deploy Panzerguarde
Sure, go ahead, rush that. It's got 4 mana left to cast On Guard as often as required, or maybe even the new boots.
The Barracks lets the Warlord make his basic attack, too, instead of spending his action on a summon.
Your (my) agro deck is going to need a low gear.
Lightning will help, of course, but the Panzergarde looks like one of many powerful defensive creatures coming down the pipe.
But like I said, 3x arcane. So conflicted.
)
1159
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 20, 2013, 04:12:21 PM »For the 12 point life swing in needs to cost 16.
Drain Life has an (expected value) 10 point swing for 12 mana. At that rate, you'd expect 12 a point swing to cost 14.4. The other point and a half for Drain Soul is probably for the lack of die rolling (it's a certainty tax) and healing resistance. Seems about right to me.
Is there any reason to make a deck that plays 4 Drain life and 4 Drain soul, or would that kind of deck just play wands and a way to protect them?
1160
Rules Discussion / Re: Tainted
« on: May 19, 2013, 04:58:12 PM »
Two issues that I have
1) It makes Tainted and Finite Life a really nasty combo. Perhaps too nasty
2) I think it is actually simpler if Tainted had no interaction with Finite Life and that the removal of the condition was not affected by Finite Life.
In regards to it then not being as effective against creatures with Finite Life, that would, at least to me, be consistent with what the condition is meant to be. Its difficult to taint something that can't be effected by healing.
I'll have to defer to you on the power level issue; I haven't played as Damage over Time Warlock or played against Necro at all, so I have no real way to judge. You're right that it's a potential combo, but it's not that good with the two tainted cards I've seen so far.
Drain Soul is terrible with Deathlock, because you don't get any of the life gain. The combo with the Spider is okay? The spider doesn't seem like it fits any current Nature book archatypes that would want to give up healing, but maybe a Dark book that currently plays Basilisk might want it.
The situation I'm imagining is a Necro with a creature that taints and does damage, and also a Deathlock. Against an opposing Wizard, neither the taints or the damage are likely to be healable. If the wizard packs a wand of healing, though, the damage won't be healable, and the taints ... might be? Priestess, of course, is a special case.
My suspicion is that "compatable" Deathlock would make Tainted as good as Deathlock makes damage. If Tainted is priced more cheaply than damage, I can see how that might be a problem.
To put it another way, Deathlock already makes normal damage better than vanilla Tainted (mostly. Tainted ignores armor, but is a poison effect.). If it Deathlock also brings Tainted "up to par," is that too good?
Of course, it's possible that Deathlock is the problem card, not the tainted mechanic, but we've never had the tools to make it matter, before. I mention this because it seems like Deathlock makes Bleed as good as Deathlock makes Rot, and that's a clear power upgrade that's more likely to be a balance problem. (Not saying it is, just that it seems more powerful.)
As for your second point... man, I don't know. I would expect that a card that prevents me from gaining life would, in all cases, prevent my life from going up. Maybe I just have that expectation from playing too much MtG?
1161
Rules Discussion / Re: Tainted
« on: May 18, 2013, 12:17:52 PM »
Is it too late to hope that Tainted comes with a rule that prevents the tokens from being removed from a creature with Finite Life?
It'd be weird for a tainted token -- which represents damage that is harder to heal than normal -- to ever be removable in situations where healing is otherwise forbidden. That would make Tainted strictly worse than standard damage in a book that is using Deathlock or Poisoned Blood. That's some bad anti-synergy for what should be thematically aligned cards.
But it all works great if there is a rule that prevents removing Tainted tokens from creatures with Finite Life.
Also, there should probably be a rule that says "removing a decrease is the same as an increase", just for simplicity's sake. Why have a carefully and elaborately worded faq when you can make a straightforward rule? This would be the same as the rule that Fast and Slow cancel each other, or the way MtG's +1/+1 tokens cancel -1/-1 tokens.
It'd be weird for a tainted token -- which represents damage that is harder to heal than normal -- to ever be removable in situations where healing is otherwise forbidden. That would make Tainted strictly worse than standard damage in a book that is using Deathlock or Poisoned Blood. That's some bad anti-synergy for what should be thematically aligned cards.
But it all works great if there is a rule that prevents removing Tainted tokens from creatures with Finite Life.
Also, there should probably be a rule that says "removing a decrease is the same as an increase", just for simplicity's sake. Why have a carefully and elaborately worded faq when you can make a straightforward rule? This would be the same as the rule that Fast and Slow cancel each other, or the way MtG's +1/+1 tokens cancel -1/-1 tokens.
1162
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 16, 2013, 09:54:44 PM »
Do we know how this interacts with the life track if you cast it on your opponent?
It'd weird to have tainted markers on your mage and also have a life track. Does having a tainted marker reduce your life by 3 instead?
It'd weird to have tainted markers on your mage and also have a life track. Does having a tainted marker reduce your life by 3 instead?
1163
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 16, 2013, 05:11:45 PM »
If there was a beefy incorporeal agro creature, that'd really make an enchantment like this necessary. Is there anyone playing Bear Strength on Whirling Spirit? That could be mean. And the reason no one is doing it, is Bear Strength only goes on living creatures. Duh.
Incorporeal turns the expected value of a die (1d3-1) from 1 to 1/3. Now that I think about it, does that mean that without Ethereal attacks, Whirling Spirit is as durable as an Earth Elemental?
Incorporeal turns the expected value of a die (1d3-1) from 1 to 1/3. Now that I think about it, does that mean that without Ethereal attacks, Whirling Spirit is as durable as an Earth Elemental?
1164
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 16, 2013, 10:51:12 AM »
I suddenly understand why you want promos to be tournament legal.
1165
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 16, 2013, 09:39:54 AM »Who plays mage staff in an aggro build?
I do in Beastmaster, but I guess that might be nonstandard?
It's cheaper to play than Staff of Beasts, and for the same spellbook cost. It hits flying familiars (Huginn, and Fellella obviously, but Thoughtspore, too), Poison Gas Clouds, and Whirling Spirit, all of which are good in control decks or midrange decks pushed into the control role.
Forcemaster and Warlock have better options, but I can see how I'd give it a try for Warlord too, maybe.
1166
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 15, 2013, 10:06:31 PM »
Not that exciting, but it's probably not supposed to be. This continues the "every ability has an enchantment" theme. It's only a matter of time before the equal and opposite, "This creature gains incorporeal" enchantment is printed.
3 mana for the reveal seems kinda high, but the spell level is right to include it as a silver bullet in most control decks. Agro decks will probably continue to play Mage Staff or curses.
3 mana for the reveal seems kinda high, but the spell level is right to include it as a silver bullet in most control decks. Agro decks will probably continue to play Mage Staff or curses.
1167
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 12, 2013, 10:05:10 PM »
Lets see...
1 (19) Move, Ring of Beasts, Enchanter's Ring
2 (24) Dire Wolf Pet, Cheetah Speed on self
3 (17) Red Claw, Cheetah speed on Red Claw
4 (10) Reveal Cheetah on self, Move, Move, Attack, Reveal Cheetah on Red Claw, Move, Move, Attack, cast and reveal Cheetah Speed on Dire, move, move, attack. (0)
5+ (9) Spam Foxes?
This opening is only range 3, so the furthest it can hit is Far Center, and on turn 4 so you're going to waste at least one of these attacks on a guard of some kind, but it does hit for 4 + 5 + 8 if you can deliver everyone to the target zone and bloody your living target. That'll kill a medium creature that wasn't expecting three fast attackers, especially if you have odd-turn initiative so you can Jinx for your Quick Cast Phase action and send in your Dire again at the top of turn 5.
Can anyone here figure a better opening using the new wolf? Maybe skip the pet and redclaw and just spam the things?
1 (19) Move, Ring of Beasts, Enchanter's Ring
2 (24) Dire Wolf Pet, Cheetah Speed on self
3 (17) Red Claw, Cheetah speed on Red Claw
4 (10) Reveal Cheetah on self, Move, Move, Attack, Reveal Cheetah on Red Claw, Move, Move, Attack, cast and reveal Cheetah Speed on Dire, move, move, attack. (0)
5+ (9) Spam Foxes?
This opening is only range 3, so the furthest it can hit is Far Center, and on turn 4 so you're going to waste at least one of these attacks on a guard of some kind, but it does hit for 4 + 5 + 8 if you can deliver everyone to the target zone and bloody your living target. That'll kill a medium creature that wasn't expecting three fast attackers, especially if you have odd-turn initiative so you can Jinx for your Quick Cast Phase action and send in your Dire again at the top of turn 5.
Can anyone here figure a better opening using the new wolf? Maybe skip the pet and redclaw and just spam the things?
1168
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 11, 2013, 11:26:04 PM »
I love this card, and I love that it's competing with belt of regrowth (which I think is an unsung power card). Not sure which I'd want against Bat & Hellion Warlock, which says to me that this is balanced just right. Finding room for this to help against Priestess is looking really tempting.
Also, the flavor text in this whole batch of spoilers is really good. My compliments to the author(s). I hope all future belts have questions for flavor text.
Also, the flavor text in this whole batch of spoilers is really good. My compliments to the author(s). I hope all future belts have questions for flavor text.
1169
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 11, 2013, 12:01:52 PM »
At 13 mana, the obvious comparisons are to Iron Golem and Knight of Westlock. He's got more health and Regenerate, but 0 armor is a major weakness. He's not an animal, so he doesn't seem like he's what the Beastmaster wants in a creature, but I can see him in a Warlord's book. But that's a crowded mana point, and Knight and Golem are some of the best defensive creatures in the game.
The real problem is his vulnerability to the Warlock's lash and demons. 7 dice + burn seems like it might kill in 2 turns, or even 1 with battle fury. Piusflea has said before that he thinks the Warlord is vulnerable to an early Warlock rush and this doesn't really help.
The real problem is his vulnerability to the Warlock's lash and demons. 7 dice + burn seems like it might kill in 2 turns, or even 1 with battle fury. Piusflea has said before that he thinks the Warlord is vulnerable to an early Warlock rush and this doesn't really help.
1170
General Discussion / Re: Conquest of Kumanjaro - SPOILERS
« on: May 10, 2013, 11:13:57 PM »One note, you don't get your mana back from Decoy if it gets countered by Nullify. Since the Decoy never resolves, you don't get to use the ability to get the mana back.
Also, I don't think my opponent never targeting my mage with an incantation or enchantment means I've wasted the Nullify. If they would have targeted me otherwise, I'm happy to discourage Ghoul Rot or Teleport or whatever.
Oops, yep! Got confused with the Seeking Dispel ruling.
And yes, if Armor Ward preserves my Mage Wand of Sleep and my Suppression Cloak and whatever else because my enemy decides not to dissolve them, I'm totally ok with that. Thats resources well spent.
