Sticking the OP, the only time I played a Gorilla was with the Jokhtaro
I chose it because it was thematic of Kumanjaro

The strategy was

Gorrilla (guards Lair) + Rhino Hide + Divine Protection

Because I was also playing Deathlock (for plentiful Bleed), the lack of healing was not an issue

It was however too big a defensive investment for a Beastmaster (even a Mid Range that planted Flowers)

And there lies the issue: it doesn't really gel with its school's strategies

Just for you Deck and from your side of the pond! Touch!

Thank you for that memory lane trip, sIKE! I think you meant to link Sam Fox's "Touch me"? Good cheesy song.
I did not realise she was known across the pond... Obviously known by you for her musical talent...
You proto-feminist, you...

I'm surprised there isn't a well-known song with both "Touch" and "Fire" in its title
I guess you just get your fingers burnt...

Oh, this is going to be agony, sitting through these previews instead of joining in.
Playtesters have to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement so sadly I can't say anything.
However, I can quote...

This card isn't very impressive in a vacuum, but it appears as though there will be other cards that only have an effect if there are burns/curses on the target, or increase in effect the more burns/curses there are. Adramelech's Touch will have great value when played with those cards.

It's niche, a pricey 2 SPs for a Warlock who you would think has better alternatives.
It's very cheap to reveal and just as cheap to Dispel. However, quoting the review...

By itself Adramelech’s Touch does nothing.

Who will waste a precious Dispel on this Curse that does nothing? When there are so many worse ones?
So there it is: 2 levels of curses on you and 1 burn that sometimes does no damage but it never goes out.
Nothing to worry about...

I'm shocked he opened with this spell to puzzle everyone. He's such a tease...
I read someone elsewhere mentioned foreplay and building up to a crescendo...

I think this is a great thread, Boomfrog, to capture all the great ideas that are out there.
Not just ideas to nerf the Wizard but, following Zuberi's Go Slow plan, to raise the others to his level.
For example a quick ranged weapon for Jokthari has been mentioned but AW were already on the case.

You would be surprised how many of these ideas are already back burners.
The problem is there is no "fixing mages" expansion as it is not thematic.
Instead you get insertions in thematic sets that stick out.
But it can't go on forever. How many promos this year so far? So how many promos per expansion? Do the maths.

I urge fans to post their creative ideas for weaker mages (but not Warlord, hopefully fixed, or Warlock vs Nonliving).
Don't let ACG have a monopoly!
As well as ideas that weaken the Wizard. So everybody, let's show some positively by showing off your creativity?
And let's all give them ideas to improve this game we love together?

Cards that help Jokthari, Priest, Straywood Swarm, Forcemaster non-Grizzly builds.
Cards that hurt Wizard too.
Ideas please?

Don't bother, Webcatcher
I think the paradigm shift of a "new rule", defacing the Tablets of Stone (gasp!), is too much for some
That's why I've given up on this thread

It doesn't even need to be a new rule per se.
When Magic first started, it didn't have the 4 copies rule
4 copies was the "tournament rules" that then became standard

The same would apply with "Pro Rules" added to the Living FAQ
Though I personally feel they should grab opportunity for a rewrite rules as a download
So traits could to be adjusted to be more relevant to the game (like Rage or Mana Drain)

Magic has changed its rules so many times
Game of Thrones and Netrunner both had worse absolutely broken rules when they were CCGs

I recall how difficult it was getting a Living FAQ to be the norm here (still no version control)
But it happened, we got a Living FAQ, something which is normal in Customised Card Games
So maybe rules changes may happen too - but I won't hold my breath

Options for Wizard (in order proposed)

1. Errata Wizard Training (various options)
2. Novice spells + other essential copies in Utility Pack
3. All Arcane Level 1 trained
4. "Pro Rules" auto-includes (details still TBC, just concept)
5. Wait for expansions to improve other mages but not Wizard (maybe a new "Non-Wizards Only" criteria? )

EDIT: 6. Errata Wizard's Tower - this is surely a given but alone won't solve it

I really like the elegance of option 3 but the only options which
(a) Get changes FAST and
(b) Cover Dispel, Dissolve and Teleport
are sadly either Options 1, 2 or 4
And people seem undecided on whether Option 1 would really hurt and remove Wizard's concept as a generalist

"Ooh, it will hurt enchantments too much"
No it won't, they have 6 Dispels and 6 Seeking Dispels maximum
Builds will have to decide on 12 Persistent Enchantments or 12 Triggered Enchantments or both!
Jeez, every book we see has so many more enchantments, it's why Wizards play with Dispel Wands!
And the very nature of you being able to QC cast reveal attack with benefit means you are always up.
Yes, level 2+ enchantments become SP disadvantage, but you only bring them out later or to attract Dispels
Essence Drain, Vampirism, Ghoul Rot, Eagleclaw Wings, Force Hold, they are all great as 1 use forcing a Dispel
They become even better if opponent runs out of Dispels or for attracting them so as to protect Mongoose Agility!
I don't buy the argument that more Dispels and Seeking Dispels will be bad for the game
I think it will be good as we will then spend more on CREATURES which we avoid purely because of Obelisk/Orb!

"Ooh it will hurt equipment too much"
I should hope so too, turn 1 Forge (which should have range 1, not 10 out of 12 zones) is so dull
Mages carry so much equipment that it's a wonder they don't qualify for the Lightning +2 Bad Science penalty!


The design flaw is a lack of a Universal school (Neutral in Game of Thrones, No Faction in Netrunner)
Magic went down the let's give 2-3 colours out of 5 their own flavour spells with the same function
Destroying Enchantments: Green, White (Blue can bounce/counter)
Destroying Artifacts: Red, Green, White (Blue can bounce/counter)
Destroying Creatures: Black, Red, White (Blue can bounce/counter)
Mage Wars could go down the same path of similar function spells in different schools
But the problem is this would take a long time to implement
In the meantime, there are a lot of Disenchanted (pun intended) players like Aylin and my meta out there
Gamers are fickle, they have plenty of disposable and they rarely go back
All my ex-Mage Wars friends (hence me) are playing Serpent's Tongue (spells from spellbooks), their latest fad
The woods are burning, gentlemen, while we stick with the most conservative "rules are sacrosanct" approach?


Dammit, I've posted again on this thread after promising myself I will never bother again...
I don't need my blood pressure rising everytime I bang my head against the same wall of resistance in every thread

+1 on Indy's list - except Balance, which means a lot to me as a competitor

I would also add these extra traits to Indy's list

* Fun (it's Inner Child fantasy, immersive role-playing a mage/general)
* Intuitive (most of the time, grrr)
* Rewards Skill (except for a few bits of cheese, grr)

It's a good thread by Silverclaw to remind ourselves why we love the game

Hi ACG, long time no speak about your cards. We used to chat alot early in this thread (I encouraged you) then life got a bit busy.

As you know, I think you have incredible creativity and you come up with awesome off-the-wall ideas.
The only issue I have sometimes is balance in your great ideas.
Among playtesters, I'm the one who comes up with "too risky" or overpowered ideas that need curbing.
So when I find some of your ideas a bit extreme, imagine how it's taken in a more conservative setting!

Nevertheless, I'm a firm believer that the IDEA is what's priceless, the details can always be fine-tuned.
And you are full of innovative new mechanics that never ceases to amaze.

That said, some of these ideas are not as polished as some of prior work (a high standard to emulate).
You post these to collect feedback and there is nothing worse than nobody commenting so here's mine.
You know that I don't pull my punches so please don't take anything too personal (nothing harsh really).

(Caveat: I'm visiting family, no rulebook, bored hence feedback on your thread as the most interesting new one, so may be rules errors.)

Orb of Obsession
I love the idea, having to block LOS before moving etc. I would make it "non-mage enemy creature" else you are design restricting the Siren creature base. It's as wordy as one of my posts so I'd delete the last line of text. It's Psychic so most Nonliving (not Elementals) and Insects will be immune to it according the subtextual science behind Mage Wars (when they keep consistency). I would also make it Incorporeal as we need greater relevance for Ethereal (we have 3 creatures + 5 conjurations that are Incorporeal, we have at least 23 spells with Ethereal).

Reflection
Light is already the weakest damage type so it doesn't need this. It is also too situational, like Mind Shield, to be ever useful. This also does not add new mechanic, just an optional Reverse Attack for Light. If it was an optional redirect any attack to a friendly creature in your zone (Dark 1) which is funny ("what else are minions for?") then it would be more worthy of your usual creativity. Sorry but a miss in my books.

Sunflower
Ok, I know you like the Defensive Samara Tree Conjurations Druid build. But there is a reason why Flowers are all range 0-0 as they want to avoid Ballistas concentrating on 1 zone, giving you ready marker action firepower. This falls prey to the design flaw of Ballista (which is at least Zone Exclusive). If you made it Nature 3 range 0 then I think this may be more possible. However I really hate ready marker attacks, I think they made a huge error with Flowers because the issue of Temple of Light, Hand of Bim-Shalla and Wizard's Tower (not Sacrificial Altar as they nerfed recursion in Obliterate's wording) was down to having extra QC markers that are ready marker attacks. This was highlighted long before Flowers (even my Resources article highlighted ready marker attacks were incredibly valuable for flexibility and action burst). I was proposing solutions (like Winter Orb's 1 reset) to curb them so as to remove the ugly erratas (and hurt Wizard's Tower) then Flowers came out to legitimise this mechanic. So I am incredibly biased against these mechanics, as I was when I reviewed Ballista. So sorry again, ACG old chap, but this is plain broken as is and needs to be range 0-0 so at least you are limited to 3 Flower attacks max in each zone (due to the Highlander rule) - even then, that's potentially 6 Flowers attacking with a Snatch (non-futureproofed name for Siren's Pull) through Bloodspine all in 1 action burst. Just feel they opened Pandora's Box with Flowers (there are other ways to bypass Nullify to kill Teleport Wands) and this is Ballista-broken.

Blood Pact Robe
I like it. I would nerf it a bit but also make it more flexible. "The first time each round that this Mage takes damage from an enemy attack, place mana equal to that damage on Blood Pact Robe. Blood Pact Robe may summon a Demon whose level is less than the mana on it." Spawnpoints only summon in Deployment anyway, right? Also, I assume Spawnpoints must spend all mana on them? (I always do but is it compulsory?) If not, the Robes needs to stipulate this. The first time gives opponent tactical options and enemy ensures no cheesy self-attacks. Finally I think Enhancement is unnecessary, just give it the 3 Life cantrip effect of Libro Mortis. I'm starting to feel we should minimise new keywords unless they really add to the game and Enhance was added for Enchant Equipment to avoid 2-for-1 which I was never hugely taken with. It's personal prejudice. Overall though, a typical ACG nice idea.

Cursed
Too good. And you know what I think about fiddly mana on enchantments from your Spirit spawnpoint. So it will come as no surprise that I would remove the 1 Channeling, then it's definitely an interesting idea. Probably would be considered "too risky" though sadly. Another nice ACG idea, though its derivative of your Spirit spawnpoint.

Gate of Eternity
I love some of the mechanics (Suspend in Magic). My main issues is it doesn't get Passage Attacks trait so a Push cost 3 kills a mage! The game is totally against kill spells (Drain Soul closest) which I fully support. Also it should be Incorporeal (for reasons given above) and never gain Indestructible, another game principle (objects can be removed). So I'd rechrome it as (a) Incorporeal, (b) Blocks LOS, Passage Attacks and (c) "During each Upkeep, place a Time Token on Gate of Eternity. If a creature whose level is lower than the number of Time Tokens on it passes through it, move all Time Tokens to that creature and remove it from the arena, removing 1 Time Token each Upkeep until it has 0 Time Tokens when it reappears in a random zone (assign and roll a d12)." This is to prevent it being constantly pushed through if it always appeared in an adjoing zone. Because it's mandatory, this gives the opponent tactical plays to send sacrificial minions through allowing safe passage for others. Such a Wall need not be Epic Legendary, could be Extendable and unfortunately would need to be Arcane for Banish consistency. It still is your Time Token Wall idea, but applied to Banish. Clever cards like this would only work if Arcane 1 was the Universal school. Currently the version I've adapted would be an innovative but sadly meta-unbalanced idea. I like your thinking though.

Mycticore
I see no problem with Fungus growing on Golems. Just has to be "Corporeal Creature". I appreciate creature subtype is to provoke Wounded Prey but also create some other unwanted interactions like Rhino Hide and Bull's Endurance and Regrowth. You know how much I hated Plants being given Animal characteristics (as it moves an intuitive RPG skirmish simulation closer to Magic's ridiculous Loxodon Warhammer-wielding Birds of Paradise). So again this is personal taste. However, I like your idea of a Fungus that does damage to you if you fail to kill it in 1 round. It's a bit niche currently, just for Jokhtari Wounded Prey and even then not that good. I'd just change the wordy text to "During upkeep, remove all damage on Mycticore and place it on attached target.". I'd also add Cantrip or tone down level as it will be easy to overdo damage and kill it (aided by opponent) or to Teleport away, destroying it (don't clunkily nerf this as opponent used up a valuable Teleport). This version works well with Flame attacks too so not just for 1 function. It's a good idea but it feels extremely engineered, a bit more elegance is required in my books.

Riftmeister's Mantle
I've already suggested a similar cloak (not in Arcane, we can't give a school its own counters) and sadly, that did not fly. I appreciate competing with 2 great Cloaks has Opportunity Cost and as the first power is situational, you need to give a second power that will be always useful but feel giving a Mage Uncontainable and move action Climbing may be too much so I would add "Unless Restrained" to the second ability, else you are really hurting Nature and Mind which Restrain. You need re-chrome it to not be Arcane. Anyway, my similar idea didn't make it so this is a nice idea that's sadly ahead of its time. I suspect we may see something similar sometime in the future for whoever's still playing a cheesy-Teleport unbalanced game then.

Typing this, I really miss our chats. It's so refreshing to discuss ideas with someone where design, not theme, is the primary driver. You have a far more creative mind than me (I'm good at improving other people's spark of genius) but you need to address balance and meta as well, focus your creativity on what's needed in the game. I know that's hard when inspiration can't be channeled like mana. It's good to see you still crafting nice ideas. And some of your droll witty flavour text really appeals to me too ("the gift that keeps on giving"). I'm surprised there isn't a humorous (but subtle) STD reference for the fungus... Sadly none of my similarly droll flavour text gained favour so again it's a clash of styles I think, as I think they are aiming the game at parents playing with their children, or assume so from a lack of subtlety there.

And if I had a request, please can we have some more Murkh, the Anti-Mage? His flavour test had me in creases (he's my hero, can't wait for the Goblin Mage card) and more seriosuly, the anti-Arcane ideas are very relevant!

Keep up the good work, ACG. I may have been quiet (slightly on orders) but I do read and appreciate your posts here.

I did notice that, and I wasn't particularly surprised since you and I seem to agree a lot. I think the main objection to your standard-core-spells idea will be that it cuts down on choice for those who don't necessarily want those spells. I might suggest 2 or 3 core spellbooks that mages could choose from to add a little more variety in case someone doesn't want the blocks or they'd rather pay for decoys than seeking dispel or something.

We do think so similar! Because I thought the same as well. But then I ended up with what i came up with.
(Your "elegant interesting solution" that I said I would think about provoked my thought processes on this.)

My thought process developing this idea:

In custom card games, there are various models.
Some, like Game of Thrones, allow for a single "Restricted" card that you may have legal copies of.
Some, like Netrunner, encourage a certain size deck and limit you to c.15 influence (out of school).

Well, you can immediately see the 66 cards to fit 120 points comes from Netrunner.
Because Netrunner melds opportunity cost (takes up limited space) and points buy (our spell points).

I then translated Restricted as "what if every mage had 12 spell levels of Arcane for free?"
But I felt this gave too much flexibility in the end, too much unrestricted budget inflation.
In the end, the reality is 2 Dispel + 2 Dissolve + 2 Teleport is a compulsory minimum buy.
And it was this ability to buy essentials on the cheap which gives Wizard his power base.
So I felt give them to all. Wizards gains the least and is nerfed because 66 spell slots only.

Part of the fun of this "Pro" rule is you KNOW I have 2 Nullify, 2 Block and 2 Seeking Dispel.
Believe me because I love playing tricksy builds, this gives you amazing bluffing opportunity.
You don't need Decoy (that Retaliate could be first thought as Nullify then Block) to bluff.
If you do want Decoy (and you know how much a fan I am of its style), it's a Novice spell.

Then I thought about the expanding card pool collection, ever growing competition for inclusion.
The game is actually nerfing itself in its diversity so here was a chance to also expand diversity.
As well as weaken equipment (enchantments are great anyway, you always get a 1 use benefit).

I know MW has a lot of "y = mx + c" linear relationships hidden with it (all good games are maths).

spell's lifetime benefit = (average lifetime x per round benefit) - constants (spell points, action, mana)

Actually that's the simplest relationship model but we'll go with it
Everyone was talking about altering the multipliers but it's the spell point tax that hurts

Anyway, that's the reasoning why I decided against a flexible Arcane budget
I just felt that KNOWING these spells exist in the opponent's book adds so much awesome mind games.

And of course it stuffs the Wizard (because Wizard may think it's a Nullify and Fireball to find it's a Block).

Anyway, I'm not against the idea of more free flexibility.
But thematically, every Mage apprenticing with the same base spells also feels better.