Anyone try using Teleport Trap in the Gorgon's square?

You can not cast Teleport Trap in a zone where there already are opponent's creatures.

I thought that I would try to build a Johktari Beastmaster book, but I am finding it incredibly difficult. I have settled on many of her spells, but I need help finishing it up... especially regarding creature selection, and some enchantments.

First, I determined that I would try to make a mixed control and turtle book, and that Hunting Bow and Lair would be the focus of the book. I have so far spent a little over 80 spellbook points. I'm thinking of adding about 25-30 points in Creatures and about 6-10 more points in Enchantments for use with them:

EQUIPMENT [10+13?]

2 Hunting Bow
2 Bearskin
2 Eagleclaw Boots

Possible:

Sunfire Amulet
Regrowth Belt
Mage Wand
Elemental Cloak
Deflection Bracers
Enchanter's Ring (unless I bring in Fellela)

CONJURATIONS [19-21]

Lair
Etherian Lifetree
Renewing Spring
1-2(?) Mana Flower
4 Tanglevine
4 Bloodspine Wall
1-2(?) Wall of Thorns

INCANTATIONS [31]

Heal
Purify
Teleport
Shift Enchantment
Rouse the Beast
Call of the Wild
2 Dispel
Seeking Dispel
2 Dissolve
2 Force Wave
2 Force Push

ENCHANTMENTS [9+???]

For Mage:
2 Hawkeye
2 Rhino Hide

Other Misc:
Teleport Trap
Decoy
Nullify

Others (for Creatures):
??

CREATURES []
??

ATTACK [0?]
None(?)

For creatures, I decided that Spiders were out (Mage isn't summoning, and Lair only brings in Animals), and 2-4 Raptors are required. Galador might also be good, and I'm thinking about Bobcats (for low cost options). I'm torn on creatures beyond those... maybe Timber or Dire Wolves? I also do not know the proper number / types of enchantments to take for the creatures. Lastly, I'm wondering whether Fellela would help, and if so, then whether I need Tarok to help protect her and go after enemy fliers that I can't hit with Galador's stun or kill outright with the Raptors.

Any and all thoughts on the build so far are welcome.

The small creatures blocking is great. I love the bobcats: cheap, the charge means people don't want to move away from them, and the dodge means they can't rely on a strong creature swatting them with a single hit. Foxes being fast is obviously helpful too.

I've recently decided that I had to have a Lair for her to work. After all, she takes a full action to shoot her bow, so she would not be able to summon creatures in the same round she attacks.

The creature mix that I thought about was drastically different, however, as was the style of game that I envisioned. I thought about a defensive / positional type game. Cast Lair near starting corner, and make prolific use of Bloodspine Walls to shoot through.

My thoughts on creatures included [edit: removed Spiders... didn't know that they weren't animals], Raptors, and maybe a Thornlasher or two, with some mix of Dire and Timber Wolves... maybe with Galador, but he wasn't in my original mix. Basically, I was focusing on ranged attacks. I didn't give the smaller creatures a thought until now. Thanks for the input there. They make sense since the Beastmistress isn't going to have a lot of extra mana to play with, and she seems to need her creatures out fairly quickly.

So... maybe I put in some Bobcats and Foxes... make sure that I have one or two of the Walls of Thorns in place of the Bloodspine Walls (to let the little guys come and go as needed, without being attacked by the wall). I also thought of taking the Etherian Lifetree to buff the walls and creatures a little.

I like Decoy as well, but I do not usually use them to pop Nullifies since I generally play Wizard. I tend to use the Decoys as fake Teleport Traps or fake Nullifies (or better) of my own. I pack a couple of Jinx's for use as Nullify bait instead of the Decoys.

If the Jinx hits a Nullify, fine... he spend one action and four mana, and I only spend one action and two mana. A Decoy hitting the Nullified Mage does no better... either it costs two mana for my opponent's four (if he chooses to Nullify the Decoy), or no mana for my opponent's two (if he doesn't).

Both spells are one spellbook point as well for the Wizard.

If the Jinx sticks, my opponent's next quick spell is cancelled, which might disrupt his plans. The cost to me if it sticks is one action and two mana (counting Arcane Ring discount when it eventually is revealed)... but in this case, it is a loss of two mana compared with my opponent since he gets his mana back when his spell is cancelled... so the trade-off is the two mana plus Jinx spellbook point spent for me against slightly modifying my opponent's actions (change in spells cast, or possibly preventing my opponent from doing what he is hoping to do).

What might my opponent be planning to do? One example might be that he might have his own Decoy and a Curse / Poison enchantment that he wants to stick to my Mage. He generally won't be able to get his Decoy spell off, leaving the Nullify on my Wizard to counter the enchantment spell if he still chooses to cast it.

And if that "Nullify" that he saw me enchant may Mage with just after he popped another of my Nullifies was a Decoy instead... maybe he casts it on another target instead, which probably hurts me less. And... maybe I switch things up and *do* use a Decoy instead of a Jinx, just to keep my opponent guessing.

Note: This isn't as good if the opponent had Huginn in range to see what it was that was stuck on his Mage.

But as Aylin says, you need at least one creature for each unknown properties you what to have in your evaluation (as long as all of them have a linear behavior).

I doubt that Armor will be a linear function. Two armor is a little less valuable than twice the value of one armor, as both will stop a single point of non-critical damage if only one is rolled. Four armor is less valuable than four times the value of one armor, or two times the value of two armor. Ultimately, there will come a point (somewhere around 20 armor, perhaps?) where additional armor is no more valuable than the next lower number of armor as all possible non-critical damage is absorbed by either amount of armor.

After all this I'm about ready to make a Wizard spell book that is 120 points no matter which element is trained....

I play a Wizard quite a bit, and have argued in the past that my Wizard's training should be kept from my opponent, just because I have a rather competitive spirit. I would say that I was trained in Arcane plus one of the elements, and leave it at that; that's what the card says, so that's what the opponent knows.

While I'll have a Lightning Ring or an Iron Golem or an Armor that probably indicates my training out soon enough, I can understand the point that it perhaps would be more reasonable to have to disclose training at the start of the game for reasons mentioned earlier (knowledge of which spells the opponent needs to preserve, avoid casting, etc.) After all, isn't that what we all do when we know we're going up against any other type of Mage? When I go up against a Dark-trained Mage, I try to avoid playing small, living creatures until I see my opponent's opening moves. He should have the same kind of foreknowledge.

Does informing my opponent of my training tell him how I'm going to play? No... not really. I might have a Gate of Voltari and be passive in the opening to build up my forces, or I can play the same Wizard aggressively with a big creature or two and teleports. (Many times how I play will depend on which other Mage I am going up against.) In truth, the Wizard feels to me more flexible to play than most (any?) other Mage(s) even if training is disclosed. You know that a Warlock is probably coming to get you, that a Forcemaster won't be going all swarmy on you, and so on.

It doesn't matter to me which way becomes the standard, but I would like this to become an official rule one way or the other... and sometime soon. Please

Is it a good tactic now that corrode is out there, and is it even legal to do the following:

Cast an armor on your mage one turn, wait until you get corroded by an enemy attack, then replace armor with another armor (even the same type since the original goes back in the book?) so that the original corrode penalty goes away.

Is that how it works? You effectively have to drop your armor before putting on the new armor, so the corrode does go away, yes?

Can someone confirm that replacing one armor with another of the same kind is legal? My thinking is that the mage isn't wearing both at the same time, so....

Thanks!