FIF: Combustion Preview

[silverclawgrizzly]

You know Zuberi Combustion COULD be a small bit of deliverance for the Priest against the new Warlock. Run in and smack her as hard as you can, put the burn token on, then use Combustion to get her again as a quick cast.

It's not perfect obviously, that's 5 mana for a 2 dice attack with no effects but still it's an option.

[jacksmack]

You know Zuberi Combustion COULD be a small bit of deliverance for the Priest against the new Warlock. Run in and smack her as hard as you can, put the burn token on, then use Combustion to get her again as a quick cast.

It's not perfect obviously, that's 5 mana for a 2 dice attack with no effects but still it's an option.

How can that ever be the choice over a regular attack spell?



This card seems a bit weak to me. I would have prefered if they listed the attack dice like they did with sleep cost for creatures with different levels in order to avoid a linear increase in the first levels.


Not regarding Flame +X on the target:
Its completely unacceptable to use this card when the target has 1 o 2 burns, simply because an attack spell does i better, provide an effect roll and leave the already stacked burns.

Imo its often a bad choice when the target has 3 burns, simply because 3 burns on a target is awesome. Why not spend 3 more mana and use a fireball for even more burns?
If the opponenet uses geyser all burns are gone, but he spend an action and 4 mana. If you remove them for him he saves mana and an action.
If your opponenent has initiative you can delay the fireball till he used his final quickcast on geyser to give the burns from fireball atleast 1 round of applying damage.
I believe most build planned around stacking burns will use the fire shaper ring, which means you get 1 more dice for the attackspells, where as this card does not benefit from said ring (like explode).
This will bring flameblast to 1 less dice when considering this spell if the target has 3 burns, but leave up to 4 burns on the target for the same cost.


With 4 burns stacked this spell start to have advantages flameblast and a fire shaped fireball.


I would have loved to see this card, perhaps even with a 1 to 1 ratio - burn to dice - instead as an enchantment. This would give the option to "counter" a geyser, renewing rain, priestess abilities and healing wand.

[Zuberi]

You know Zuberi Combustion COULD be a small bit of deliverance for the Priest against the new Warlock. Run in and smack her as hard as you can, put the burn token on, then use Combustion to get her again as a quick cast.

It's not perfect obviously, that's 5 mana for a 2 dice attack with no effects but still it's an option.

You forget that you have to pay 1 mana to apply the burn as well. So you have a cost of 6 mana for a 2 dice attack which is affected by armor and has no effect roll.

With Malakai's Fire, you normally are paying 1 mana to get an average of 3 direct damage. Your suggestion changes that 1:3 ratio into a 3:1 ratio and changes it from direct damage to indirect damage which is affected by armor. It might be better than paying 1 mana to apply a burn to yourself, since she'd just transfer it over to you, but the ability is still neutered either way.

The best scenario you could hope for is to attack her after she has already acted. You could then apply your burn and she would not be able to move it until next round. Assuming the burn actually provides benefit and deals damage, you could then use Surging Wave on her before she can move it. Surging Wave is better than Combust if you only have 1 Burn on her, since it provides damage and an effect chance (and is good to have when facing her anyways). Thus, for a total of 6 mana you've dealt 3 damage on average and possibly dazed her. That's not horrible, but you could have used the Surging Wave without burning her first. The burn is still acting more as a liability than a benefit, and with such a plan to remove it as soon as possible, you're still only getting 1 damage out of your 1 mana investment on average. Still a much worse return than you normally expect, and arguably not worth the cost much less the risk.

[silverclawgrizzly]

At no point did I say it was an awesome option But it is a possibility.

Also doesn't Geyser say that if you remove the Burn tokens cancel the attack?

[mwcard=MW1A08]Geyser[/mwcard]

[Kharhaz]

This card seems a bit weak to me.

Combustion is paying for the immediate average damage of a burn marker. In theory you don't lose or gain damage per burn.

In play it works wonderfully as a combo card that can swing games her way. For example during a playtest match I had two flaming hellions out. Beginning of the round I cast and revealed a marked for death on the enemy beastmaster, then moved a burn token I generated last turn from the circle of fire on my warlock . Each hellion then made their now 5 attack dice ranged attack (1 from marked and 1 from smoldering curse)  (I was greedy and wanted to get as many burns as possible. I should have melee with them in hindsight) and each generated 1 burn. Flipped my quickcast for combustion and dealt another 7 attack die that round for a grand total of 17 damage dice.

Combustion will not always be better than an attack spell in every situation, but it can spike damage like crazy at an excellent mana per effect rate and, with smoldering curse, the average damage goes up per burn which gives the Adramelech Warlock an unique edge when casting it.

[jacksmack]

This card seems a bit weak to me.

Combustion is paying for the immediate average damage of a burn marker. In theory you don't lose or gain damage per burn.

In play it works wonderfully as a combo card that can swing games her way. For example during a playtest match I had two flaming hellions out. Beginning of the round I cast and revealed a marked for death on the enemy beastmaster, then moved a burn token I generated last turn from the circle of fire on my warlock . Each hellion then made their now 5 attack dice ranged attack (1 from marked and 1 from smoldering curse)  (I was greedy and wanted to get as many burns as possible. I should have melee with them in hindsight) and each generated 1 burn. Flipped my quickcast for combustion and dealt another 7 attack die that round for a grand total of 17 damage dice.

Combustion will not always be better than an attack spell in every situation, but it can spike damage like crazy at an excellent mana per effect rate and, with smoldering curse, the average damage goes up per burn which gives the Adramelech Warlock an unique edge when casting it.

But you could have flameblasted for 2 dice less and left 3-4 burns, or fireballed for 3 mana more and left 3-5 burns.

Wouldnt 3-5 burns be worth 3 mana?

[Zuberi]

Also doesn't Geyser say that if you remove the Burn tokens cancel the attack?

You are correct. I have changed it to Surging Wave instead.

Combustion is paying for the immediate average damage of a burn marker. In theory you don't lose or gain damage per burn.

I'm not sure where you are getting this information from, but it is not accurate. The average damage of a Burn marker depends upon how many rounds remain in the game, but quickly exceeds the average damage of a 2-die attack, approaching 3 damage at it's maximum. You thus are losing some damage potential unless the game will be over soon anyways. If the game is going to end in just a round or two, you may actually increase your average damage from the markers, but otherwise it is a loss. In addition, you are converting direct damage into a normal attack which can reduce the damage further via armor.

It is still a good spell for the burst potential and killing something quickly. However, unless the enemy mage is going to die soon, it would deal more damage to leave the burns alone (even with Smoldering Curses). This is entirely a finisher spell, similar to Hurl Boulder, for when you want something to die this round. In that regards, it is the cheapest finisher spell, in both level and mana, currently in the game and has the highest damage potential since there's no max on how many burns may be present. However it is more difficult to utilize since it requires the external application of Burn markers, which I agree it needs at least 3 to be present before it is worth using over Flameblast or similar attack spells.

[Wildhorn]

But lets not forget it is an unavoidable attack at range 2 (others are range 1).

[Boocheck]

Profesor Zuberi says it right. It is a great finisher, sometimes you dont have a luxury to wait for another upkeep phase, also, i can imagine situation when during planning phase, your opponent prepared an "extinguisher" but thanks to iniciative, you combust first thus lowering efectivity of his draw for that round.

Combustion is a great tool which provides a good amount of flexibility to Warlock or fire/burn oriented mages.

Also, i love artwork-bullying of Forcemaster

[Aylin]

You know Zuberi Combustion COULD be a small bit of deliverance for the Priest against the new Warlock. Run in and smack her as hard as you can, put the burn token on, then use Combustion to get her again as a quick cast.

It's not perfect obviously, that's 5 mana for a 2 dice attack with no effects but still it's an option.

That clearly subpar action isn't an "option" any more than me stabbing myself in the foot with a box cutter is an "option"; sure it's something I could do but it's so incredibly bad it isn't even worth considering.

Pillar of Light is also a 2-die attack (3 with ring), and has the possibility of dazing/stunning. On top of that it's in-school.

[baronzaltor]

An opponents armor is a big consideration with this card too.  Combustion cashes all of those burn tokens in for a regular, flame based, attack.

So, while burns are direct damage.. this isnt.

If an opponent has a Dragon Scale Hauberk or Elemental Cloak on, you have to climb over his armor rating AND the flame -2.

If an opponent has a flame resistance, a lot of armor, aegis or resilient or something like that, it takes so many burns that youd have been better off just leaving them in place and using Addys Touch to keep them all ticking.

[Myrddin]

This is entirely a finisher spell, similar to Hurl Boulder, for when you want something to die this round. In that regards, it is the cheapest finisher spell, in both level and mana, currently in the game and has the highest damage potential since there's no max on how many burns may be present. However it is more difficult to utilize since it requires the external application of Burn markers, which I agree it needs at least 3 to be present before it is worth using over Flameblast or similar attack spells.

I was going to come in and say that I could see its uses but actually: this says it all. It's clearly a specialist-use spell but no worse for that. Especially as it's clearly solidly aimed at the (Adramelechan) Warlock in particular and fire wizards in general: a single spellbook point for something that could quite plausibly deal 8-10 dice in a hurry shouldn't be sniffed at.

As far as armour goes, I can imagine a Warlock preparing an explode alongside this: strip their armour, lay down some burn and then turn that long-term investment into some instant death. 

[Arlemus]

I don't think it's fair to take this spell out of context.  People did the same thing with meditation amulet.

[Wildhorn]

I don't think it's fair to take this spell out of context.  People did the same thing with meditation amulet.

Exactly. This spell will be very useful when your opponent has 4 burst on him guarded by a creature with intercept and you need to finish him off.

[Myrddin]

This might be a bit wacky, but it has a secondary use for the Arraxian Warlock: to case on yourself! Against a Warlock or fire wizard, you could end up with a fair few burn tokens on you before you put on the obligatory dragonscale and elemental cloak. Say you have four burns on you by the time you're fully kitted out with that gear: you can either let them burn out, taking an average of 12 direct damage, or you can combust yourself to take a 4 dice attack (8 minus 2 for cloak, minus 2 for dragonscale) which is mitigated by 3 armour, so average of just over 2 damage, less than the burns would have done at the start of next turn if you left them. Against an Adramalech Warlock you'd be getting rid of her demons' bonus against you too (at least till she reignites you).

Sure, it's entirely worse than extinguishing yourself with a water spell, but they cost you triple anyway.

Obviously Adramalechan Warlock would just shift those burns away usually, so less likely to use this...

PS: what I can see Adramalechan Warlock doing occasionally is waking creatures up with this: use her inherent ability to shift a single burn onto a creature, blow it up for two dice of damage. 5 mana to wake a sleeping creature with minimal damage isn't so bad, especially if your alternative is to use your mage's full attack, missing an opportunity to hit the opponent and hurting the creature far more. The risk here would be that you have a 1/9 chance of doing no damage at all and failing to wake it up, and that chances rises sharply if the creature has armour.