Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => Mages => Topic started by: bigfatchef on October 14, 2016, 04:39:59 AM
-
Errata always is a big thing so I won't try to go into that direction.
Playing mages with big disadvantages is no fun, but by not using them I feel sorry for those mages. It's a waste. There are interesting game mechanics and tactics to play with.
So I am searching for a houseruling on mage abilities that would level them out as good as possible. Changes should be simple and easy to remember.
My changes would be:
Priest
Holy Avenger comes into play active
Holy Avenger gets his bonus also if no damage got dealt
Additonal burn is for free
(Nice possible wording in reply 17)
Johktari
quick summoning instead of fast
Beastmaster
Fast instead of quick summoning
(See detailed Description for swap of beastmasters abilities here: http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=17103.0)
Anvil Throne warlord
Battle orders as free additional action (once per round...)
Bloodwave warlord
Battle orders as free additional action (once per round...)
For 2 mana Soldiers start with 1 vet token
Vet tokens get also ranged+1
(Discussion about warlord abilities can be found here: http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=17288.0)
What do you think about this list? Is it complete?
I know that it would not make them all top tier, but at least close.
EDIT: changed ideas to best ideas till now.
Remaining question:
1 Priest gets damage barrier?
2 price for vet tokens ok?
3 maximum amount of vet tokens needed?
-
Better to just switch the warlords' battle orders just like you switched beastmasters' fast and quick summoning.
As for the priest I don't think giving him extra channeling is the right way to do it. 9 channeling does not make a Mage weak. Arraxian crown Warlock is perfect example. I think it's important to keep in mind what the priest actually wants to do. His burn-dealing ability means he wants to be attacking. And his holy avenger either means he wants enemies to attack him, or he wants to force enemies to choose between attacking him or his things or his holy avenger, or he wants to force enemies to choose between attacking him or his things and incurring some other cost. Like if they attack the priest or one of his friendly creatures he'll spend some mana to heal himself and he'll get a boost for his holy avenger.
But if they don't attack the priest or any of his creatures, then the priest will have more mana to spend on something else because he won't need to cast healing spells.
With this in mind, what might be changed to open up the priest's pool of viable strategies and make it more clear to players how they can best make use of him?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
About Veterans : I think giving each Soldier a vet token when summoned is probably strong enough.
Playing a soldier swarm they could really add up.
+1 attack / +1 armor is actually a great bonus, certainly if every soldier gets it.
-
I partially agree with Sailor about switching battle orders between those two. But Priest with 10 is the change i would really welcome :)
For Vet tokens - When summoning soldier, pay 3 (or 2) more mana and put a Vet token on him. Vet can be also obtained as normal, but thats it.
We trided Johktary/Straywood switch and it worked greatly :)
If only there was something like MAGE BOX expansion, giving this all changes, errated cards, some alternate mages to existing one and transition for Academy mages while introducing "padawan" mode :)
-
Whilst I think a lot of these changes are needed, I wouldn't agree with some of your detail...
Johktari
quick summoning instead of fast
Beastmaster
Fast instead of quick summoning
(See detailed Description for swap of beastmasters abilities here: http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=17103.0)
I think Quick Summoning should swap with Wounded prey (losing Fast defeats the point).
I would also tend to swap the Melee and Archery abilities, but feel much less strongly on those.
Bloodwave warlord
Battle orders as free additional action (once per round...)
Soldiers start with 1 vet token
vet tokens can stack.
(Discussion about warlord abilities can be found here: http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=17288.0)
I think starting with a Vet token is enough, no more gained in play.
I agree with all the other changes.
-
As for the priest I don't think giving him extra channeling is the right way to do it. 9 channeling does not make a Mage weak.
Yes it does. No 9 Channelling mage comes close to a 10 channeller (assuming count Druid as 10, which it really is).
Priest needs 10 Channelling more than anything else. He might want something else on top, but that is the start.
Arraxian crown Warlock is perfect example.
Agreed - it's a mediocre mage that will never be top tier.
-
Vulcan: the difference with the priest and the other 9 channeling mages is pretty big, so I really disagree there.
1) He is a holy mage, which is an expensive school to use right.
2) Unlike the paladin, his abilities do cost a lot of mana.
3) He has the priestess doing a lot better than him only because of that mana difference. Even with both having 10 channeling, the priestess has those awesome restore powers to support her big guys.
About Veterans : I think giving each Soldier a vet token when summoned is probably strong enough.
Playing a soldier swarm they could really add up.
+1 attack / +1 armor is actually a great bonus, certainly if every soldier gets it.
I agree. I think this would be too strong. Goblin grunt would have 4 dice, 4 life and 1 armor for 4 mana. Pretty crazy.
Still, I think killing an opponent is too weak. So I suggest:
"If a soldier creature deals damage equal to his level +2, the soldier gains a veteran marker. Each soldier can only have 1 veteran marker."
Veteran: "The soldier gains Ranged +1, melee +1 and armor +1.
While we are doing so much changes already. Give the necromancer poison training! Not for balance but for theme and gameplay.
-
Vulcan: the difference with the priest and the other 9 channeling mages is pretty big, so I really disagree there.
1) He is a holy mage, which is an expensive school to use right.
2) Unlike the paladin, his abilities do cost a lot of mana.
3) He has the priestess doing a lot better than him only because of that mana difference. Even with both having 10 channeling, the priestess has those awesome restore powers to support her big guys.
Completely agreed.
Still, I think killing an opponent is too weak. So I suggest:
"If a soldier creature deals damage equal to his level +2, the soldier gains a veteran marker. Each soldier can only have 1 veteran marker."
Veteran: "The soldier gains Ranged +1, melee +1 and armor +1.
I agree with the Ranged +1, but definitely prefer the simpler and better coming into play with Vet token. I don't remotely fear BW dominating or even being top tier with it.
While we are doing so much changes already. Give the necromancer poison training! Not for balance but for theme and gameplay.
I agree, but since the Necromancer does fine, I wouldn't push to errata it. If you are Houseruling a bunch, then yes I agree.
-
Vulcan: the difference with the priest and the other 9 channeling mages is pretty big, so I really disagree there.
1) He is a holy mage, which is an expensive school to use right.
2) Unlike the paladin, his abilities do cost a lot of mana.
3) He has the priestess doing a lot better than him only because of that mana difference. Even with both having 10 channeling, the priestess has those awesome restore powers to support her big guys.
About Veterans : I think giving each Soldier a vet token when summoned is probably strong enough.
Playing a soldier swarm they could really add up.
+1 attack / +1 armor is actually a great bonus, certainly if every soldier gets it.
I agree. I think this would be too strong. Goblin grunt would have 4 dice, 4 life and 1 armor for 4 mana. Pretty crazy.
Still, I think killing an opponent is too weak. So I suggest:
"If a soldier creature deals damage equal to his level +2, the soldier gains a veteran marker. Each soldier can only have 1 veteran marker."
Veteran: "The soldier gains Ranged +1, melee +1 and armor +1.
While we are doing so much changes already. Give the necromancer poison training! Not for balance but for theme and gameplay.
Another way to look at it: Arraxian Crown Warlock might only channel 9, but his abilities don't cost mana, and in fact he comes with extra life (38) to accommodate for his Blood Reaper cost. Similarly, Adramelech Warlock's abilities are free, and Fireweaving doesn't even cost an action. Meanwhile, Priest's Avenger has an added mana cost (similar to Beastmaster's Pet) AND his Malakai's Fire ability also costs mana. Combine this with the fact that his melee attack is too weak on its own (e.g. needs a Light damage weapon or at least Bear Strength in order to bring it on par with Straywood Beastmaster's or Arraxian Crown Warlock's basic melee with Battle Skill, which is free each round), and you quickly see how he's at a disadvantage even as a melee/buddy mage. Straywood Beastmaster, with Pet and Battle Skill, is already a better "buddy" mage than Malakai Priest, with Avenger and Malakai Fire ability, assuming the only card they cast is a creature (to make Pet/Avenger). And that's before factoring in how comparatively good/necessary all the Nature enchantments are to buff your self/buddy.
-
Thank you all four your feedback so far! As soon as I get the feeling we all agree more or less I will update the opening post for better overview.
Priest:
I agree with all reasons here and stay with channeling 10. Another idea could have been to burn for free instead of one mana.
Johktari and straywood:
has ranged +1. Fast just doesn't cooperate with that. Swapping wounded prey instead is no help here. I'll stay with swapping qucksummon and fast. Straywood as fast melee fighter needs his higher life (that was mentioned in that linked thread. So no swapping on that needed)
Warlords:
I totally agree on adding vet marker on soldiers when they are summoned. Also I agree on not stacking them up. That could be overdose. But I propose that those vet markers cost 1 mana. So they are comparable to anvils runes and fit in line.
I am not sure about swapping battle orders yet. Also if they should be a free additional action. More feedback needed. I have to admit I never really used them, so I can't tell out of my head who has which orders. There are always better things to do than using a battle order.
Necro
Yes, for thematic reasons that training would fit perfect, bin on the other hand he is already very strong and needs no further help. For simplicity I would also not change him.
-
Copying a post I just made in another thread regarding the Priest/Holy Avenger and the biggest change needed the ability beyond even the Channeling.
The problem with Holy Avenger is unlike Pet there's qualifications to the Melee bonus. The Pet ALWAYS has +1 melee and if you follow it around as the Beastmaster, it's +2. The Holy Avenger NEEDS the opponent to attack something else, NEEDS to delay it's action long enough for that happen, and NEEDS to be in a position to do that. All the opponent has to do is have more creatures, have 1 thing guarding in the same zone and the Holy Avenger will never be able to use it's bonus. It should be an inherent ability; not one with caveats.
-
Copying a post I just made in another thread regarding the Priest/Holy Avenger and the biggest change needed the ability beyond even the Channeling.
The problem with Holy Avenger is unlike Pet there's qualifications to the Melee bonus. The Pet ALWAYS has +1 melee and if you follow it around as the Beastmaster, it's +2. The Holy Avenger NEEDS the opponent to attack something else, NEEDS to delay it's action long enough for that happen, and NEEDS to be in a position to do that. All the opponent has to do is have more creatures, have 1 thing guarding in the same zone and the Holy Avenger will never be able to use it's bonus. It should be an inherent ability; not one with caveats.
^^ This is what I was getting at. I've had entire matches as Priest where the Avenger never got an attack bonus. Typically, it might trigger once or twice in a match. Compare that to Pet, which triggers on every attack for +1 melee and is easy to control whether or not it gets +2 melee.
On top of that, Battle Skill (e.g. +1 melee all the time for free, and 4 damage primary melee attack that cannot be removed (aside from Weak conditions)) is generally better than Priest's Fire (2 dice with Stun on 9+ and Burn token for 1 mana). If the Priest's basic attack rolled 3 dice + bonuses, it would be about on par, and then maybe the Staff of Asyra (or Resplendent Bow) might not be mandatory equipment. I guess it does roll 3 dice when you add Dawnbreaker's Ring, but again, Battle Skill is free for a Beastmaster (or Arraxian Crown Warlock or Bloodwave Warlord) and impossible to remove, whereas the Dawnbreaker's Ring is going to cost you a quick action and 3 mana, and is easily Dissolved/Crumbled.
-
About the Malakai Priest :
He's supposed to be the 9 channeling, more aggressive counterpart of the more defensive, 10 channeling Priestess, which makes sense to me and which I don't necessary feel should be changed
BUT ...
His abilities are too weak and should be upgraded to make him the melee terror he's supposed to be.
I'd suggest this :
Holy Avenger : 2 changes
- Make it so that the Holy Avenger comes into play active ( as if a Rouse the Beast was played on him )
This would allow the Priest to go straight on offense and not lose any steam while summoning a ( new ) Holy Avenger. This would be a real power boost.
- Currently the Melee +2 / Piercing +1 triggers only when another friendly creature or holy conjuration is attacked & damaged. The bad part here which has to be scrapped is the "damage" requirement.
Make it so that attacking any friendly creature ( the Avenger included ) triggers the +2/+1 bonus.
It completely doesn't make sense imo to have such great creatures with a Defense like the Knight of Westlock, Guardian Angel, Asyran Defender and when they guard and their Defense "succeeds" the Avenger ability does NOT trigger because they weren't damage. if their defense FAILS, the bonus triggers.
Not only does the opponent control this ability because he decides whether to attack or not and with which creature, you also have to take damage .... That's not a good ability.
So : +2/+1 should trigger when any friendly creature or holy conjuration was attacked.
Malakai's Fire :
Once per round is OK but should not have a cost.
Hand of purification :
I'm not kidding, I think his base light attack should have the "Damage Barrier" trait.
That does currently not exist, I know, but think about it.
This would mean that whenever the Priest is attacked, during the Damage Barrier Step, the attacker would suffer a 2 dice, possibly dazing, Light attack.
This would be like a built-in anti swarm ability and make him a very dangerous creature to attack.
Altogether :
- Keep Channeling at 9
- Holy Avenger comes into play active
- Damage requirement is scrapped to trigger +2/+1
- Malakai's Fire for free
- Hand of Purification gets Damage Barrier Trait
-
Hand of purification :
I'm not kidding, I think his base light attack should have the "Damage Barrier" trait.
That does currently not exist, I know, but think about it.
This would mean that whenever the Priest is attacked, during the Damage Barrier Step, the attacker would suffer a 2 dice, possibly dazing, Light attack.
This would be like a built-in anti swarm ability and make him a very dangerous creature to attack.
Altogether :
- Keep Channeling at 9
- Holy Avenger comes into play active
- Damage requirement is scrapped to trigger +2/+1
- Malakai's Fire for free
- Hand of Purification gets Damage Barrier Trait
... Or just give the Priest Channeling of 10 and let the player choose whether or not to cast a Circle of Light (which will hopefully be released in an upcoming set).
(https://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1918906.jpg)
-
... Or just give the Priest Channeling of 10 and let the player choose whether or not to cast a Circle of Light (which will hopefully be released in an upcoming set).
I use Circle of Light, but my Priestess builds mostly get far more out of it!
-
Hand of purification :
I'm not kidding, I think his base light attack should have the "Damage Barrier" trait.
That does currently not exist, I know, but think about it.
This would mean that whenever the Priest is attacked, during the Damage Barrier Step, the attacker would suffer a 2 dice, possibly dazing, Light attack.
This would be like a built-in anti swarm ability and make him a very dangerous creature to attack.
Altogether :
- Keep Channeling at 9
- Holy Avenger comes into play active
- Damage requirement is scrapped to trigger +2/+1
- Malakai's Fire for free
- Hand of Purification gets Damage Barrier Trait
... Or just give the Priest Channeling of 10 and let the player choose whether or not to cast a Circle of Light (which will hopefully be released in an upcoming set).
(https://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1918906.jpg)
Hey Borg, I like all of your ideas a lot. They seem thematically correct and filling the missing parts. BUT they are so detailed, that it feels like redesigning the priest. Do you think channeling 10 would level him also, so you could afford buffs and burns instead of reruling them? Or should adding a burn be a free action on top of channeling 10? Or are you hardliner for channeling 9 :)
I totally agree that HA should trigger a bit more often. After any friendly creature or conjuration is attacked seems fair. This is the one I would add on top of channeling 10.
What I see as a main problem between priest and priestess is their difference in channeling. 9 is so much worse, that the other abilities or his playstyle should even that out. But in reality also the abilities of priestess are very strong. Now there is completely NO WAY to repair this, because the two of them count as same magetype. Their can't ever be a priest only card, and that would be the totally easiest way to buff him without errata.
-
I don't think Borgs ideas are off, but at this point you have designed a new mage - call it a Justicar or something...
If you can't do it in 1-2 ability changes of a short sentence or less, then I think you are going too far.
-
If you can't do it in 1-2 ability changes of a short sentence or less, then I think you are going too far.
Well, I agree, but those changes wouldn't be more than the elimination and addition of just a few words, just as preferred.
I'll strikethrough the text that can simply be scrapped and put the suggested additions in bold
Holy Avenger : everything stays as printed, except
... Pay mana equal to its level+1, flip its action marker to the active side and place the Holy Avenger marker on it.
... if that creature attacked and damaged another a friendly creature ...
Malakai's Fire : everything stays as printed, except
... he may pay 1 mana to place a Burn condition on that creature.
Hand of Purification : attack line stays as printed, just add
Vigilant Trait
So there are only 7 words to scrap and 10 words to add
That's "minimal" right ? :)
.. and you'd have a hard hitting Mage. ;)
-
I agree with the avenger.
Making the burn free instead of 10 channeling is not bad, but you don't allow the priest to choose what to do with his mana. 10 channeling would give the priest oppurtunities to make new, fresh books and actually be some competition for the Priestess.
Technically, you wouldn't have an attack anymore. You cannot attack other creatures with a damage barrier. Also, I think a build in damage barrier is a bit over the top.
So maybe 10 channeling and the removal of the requirement of damage on the avenger?
-
About the Bloodwave Warlord :
Battle orders :
It seems quite obvious that making the battle orders a "Once per round, Free action" is the solution to seeing them played.
Veteran Tokens :
If I compare the vet tokens as we would like to see them ( Melee+1 / Ranged+1 / Armor+1 )
with enchantments like Bear Strength, Rhino Hide and Hawkeye
I can only come to the conclusion that each Vet Token is worth at least 6 mana, not to mention it cannot be removed like an enchantment.
It sure would be way overpowered if this token was awarded for free to every soldier Summoned.
So, what are the options ?
1- If you'd still like to have unlimited vet tokens in play I think they should be costed at least 2 mana apiece, more like 3 mana ( to be payed on top of the creature cost when summoned )
However, since the BW is just a 9-channeling mage, this extra cost might prove a real obstacle and thus not yield the desired result.
2- A better solution imo would be ( taking the Anvil Throne Warlord as an example ) to have a limit of 5 vet tokens per game which could allow us to drop the cost for them to just 1 mana. Any vet tokens lost are lost for the rest of the game. This would put a cap on the bonus and leave plenty of options to play with.
3- If you'd like an option where the vet tokens are free, I'd suggest a rule of no more than three vet tokens per game
Personally, I'd prefer the 5 Vet Tokens per game for just 1 mana.
-
Making the burn free instead of 10 channeling is not bad, but you don't allow the priest to choose what to do with his mana. 10 channeling would give the priest oppurtunities to make new, fresh books and actually be some competition for the Priestess.
Not going to jump into this full bore because I don't agree with the premise of the thread. However, I take minor issue with the above quote. If you really think the priest has been fully explored and that there are no new (or even effective, for that matter) priest builds then I would encourage you to try again. There isn't a single mage that has been "fully" explored. There are some that have been developed more than others, but the possibilities are still pretty wide open across the board for this game ;).
-
There isn't a single mage that has been "fully" explored. There are some that have been developed more than others, but the possibilities are still pretty wide open across the board for this game ;).
Now here is something I 100% agree with and which is basically the summary of my motivation to keep playing this game.
To try new approaches, new builds, "to boldly go where noone" ... enfin, you know that line ;)
-
What I see as a main problem between priest and priestess is their difference in channeling. 9 is so much worse, that the other abilities or his playstyle should even that out.
I'm not a 9-mana hardliner but I do have the feeling that giving the Priest 10 channelling is too simplistic as a solution and may in the end not make any meaningful difference as his abilities are still subpar.
imo AW's reasoning that the more aggressive mages channel 9 mana and the less aggressive channel 10 makes sense, and the Priest is supposed to be in the aggressive category.
That's why I think we don't need to change his channelling but to give a serious boost to his abilities.
Looking at his abilities it's not too hard to see where they are flawed ( requiring damage - thereby making a Defense a "handicap" - and not triggering when the HA is attacked himself ) or where it can be improved ( make the Burn free )
However, that would still not be enough, I think. He would still need more "bang".
So, what if the Holy Avenger came into play active ?
That would mean no tempo loss for the Priest, as he can summon and attack with the HA the same round.
It would allow him to walk straight into battle and summon the best possible HA there right on the spot and still have an attack that round.
If you think about it, it would be the Priest's alternate to Reanimate.
If the Necromancer loses his Servant all he has to do is pay up and the creature is ready to activate again next round. No round wasted on casting it again.
If the HA were active right away it wouldn't be such a loss of tempo each time he has to summon a new one and it actually would make sense to summon more low level Avengers.
Under the current rules you want to summon as few as possible HA's since you'll have to waste a full cast on it every time and both are not attacking that round.
Under my suggestion the full casts would hurt a lot less and it would actually let you gain more life out of the Ha ability. Summon 4 HA's and you've gained 20 life from it ...
At the same time the Priest should be a mage who's not afraid to be in the eye of a storm as he has Holy protection. That's why I suggested to give his basic attack also the Damage Barrier trait. Whoever melee attacks him should feel his wrath.
EDITED
Rather than a damage barrier, I think giving him the Vigilant trait would be an even better way to illustrate and effectuate this.
A Guard marker at the end of each activation to allow him a possible extra melee attack could be a great deterrent.
This may all take a lot of words to explain here but on the ability card it really wouldn't take that much space and words to implement at all ( see reply nr 17 above ).
-
Borg you got me with your explanation! I thought channeling up on 10 is simple and helpful, but I completely agree now. To boost his abilities is the better way to go. The HA that comes into play activated definitely puts some pressure in the game.
The only thing I don't agree is that damage barrier. I'd say a counterstrike trait is better.
Vet tokens:
I also agree that they are worth some mana. I would not put a cap on it, but let them cost 2. But maybe 1 is enough? As a cap you could say that ranged+1 is not added. It would then stay a boost for a melee army. Still not sure about this.
Battle orders:
Free action seems great.
Thanks for the ideas so far!
-
The only thing I don't agree is that damage barrier. I'd say a counterstrike trait is better.
I thought "Counterstrike" at first too, until I realised that Counterstrike counts all melee +1 abilities.
That would be mad :)
Which makes me just realize ..... there is another ability which is easier to implement and which may serve the same purpose : Instead of the Damage barrier, give the priest the Vigilant trait.
An automatic Guard marker at the end of his turn, allows him to summon/attack and still deal some extra damage in case he's melee attacked... food for thought
-
There isn't a single mage that has been "fully" explored. There are some that have been developed more than others, but the possibilities are still pretty wide open across the board for this game ;).
Every "special" priest I've seen is worse than if he would be a priestess. So yes, I think the priest is quite limited in spellbookbuilding. Of course you have infinite variations of the same strategy but I don't think there are currently many different good variations out there. Feel free to surprise me and share a spellbook. ;)
I like some idea's of Borg, but he's currently designing a new mage instead of tweaking an existing mage. :P
-
I like some idea's of Borg, but he's currently designing a new mage instead of tweaking an existing mage. :P
I thought so, too. But right now he is really tweaking a bit at 3 abilities without touching 9 mana. As he said scrape 7 words and add 10.
I guess with those changes he would still feel like the priest. Just with a chance to hurt someone.
@borg vigilant is a nice little buff. But as always guarding, you can't be guarded. The good thing would be it works only once a round, so it's not too crazy. But also without that, just burn for free, HA active summoning and HA trigger easier the priest could be doing well.
-
tbh i think a lot of this is speculation and unreasoned guesses, darts thrown into the darkness so to speak. The beastmasters should most likely switch fast and quick summoning. The warlords should probbaly trade battle orders, but I dont remember what the reasoning that convinced me of that was and I can't find it on the forums anymore for some reason.
The Arraxian Crown warlock is NOT lower tier, he's a very strong mage and you would be wise not to underestimate him.
As for the priest, I think it's hard to say what will help him because it's hard for people to see how his abilities should be used. Holy avenger wants to punish enemies for attacking the priest or his other creatures/holy conjurations. Malakai's fire wants to make the priest's light attacks do more damage. (since a burn is effectively like an extra attack die except bypassing armor, and the chance to roll again for free next round if it does any damage.) Dazes/stuns want to make it harder for enemies to hurt the priest or his creature(s)/conjuration(s). Healing spells allow him to increase the staying power of himself and his creatures.
So most likely the priest wants to:
1. punish enemies for attacking his stuff. if they dont' attack his stuff his stuff lasts longer anyways.
2. Do extra damage with his light attacks.
3. Increase his creatures' or his own staying power with healing spells.
the priestess's abilities are more focused on healing. She increases her life and removes condition markers. The priest is more focused on attacking. Specifically, if he and his threats stay in game longer due to healing and dazes/stuns, they'll be able to attack more times. Therefore he's not quite as reliant on expensive melee buffs. Give the priest some piercing instead of melee buffs, and keep attacking with him and his creature(s). Heal him if he takes too much damage. Make sure you're using daze/stuns to make enemy attacks less likely to hit him. Anything that gets a successful 7+ daze roll you can attack back with your holy avenger.
Of course this is all just theorizing on my part, ive yet to see anyone actually play the priest like this. The closest i saw was someone who used a priest with mana denial rather than merely dazes/stuns+healing.
-
The Arraxian Crown warlock is NOT lower tier, he's a very strong mage and you would be wise not to underestimate him.
I said mediocre - he's middling tier. I've never lost a tournament match against him (actually, I'm not sure I've lost a match against him).
He's not at the bottom, he's not at the top. If you ant to use the standard MtG tiers he's Tier 2 - honourable mention, but not what you'd ever consider taking into a tournament with £5000 on the line.
-
So most likely the priest wants to:
1. punish enemies for attacking his stuff. if they dont' attack his stuff his stuff lasts longer anyways.
2. Do extra damage with his light attacks.
3. Increase his creatures' or his own staying power with healing spells.
4. He wants to have a buddy as HA.
Whilst you are totally right that all ideas here are not tested, those proposed changes would keep your list the same.
1. You actually write „attacked“ on your list. Right now the HA only gets furios if damage has been taken.
2. The additional Burn would be 1 mana cheaper. As priest I often felt mana starved so that extra burn is not working all times. Change would help.
3. That's what holy school is good in :D
4. HA is pretty important for pressure. The idea to put him in play active is neat!
But yeah, it's all not tested. And nobody really knows why the priest is as he is.
@sharkbait: no mage is fully explored. I agree and that's why I love this game. But I really think that it is a waste of cards if some mages just feel like a bad choice to play with. I mean they are still fun to play, but always with that feeling of lower chances to win.
My plan is (locally) to have all mages being played in fair matches. The premise is to add even more fun and variety to this game and to let our gaming group grow. I can't imagine you are against that.
Official rules stay as AW tells us for those who are willing to play outside. (All under the purpose they agree to these changes)
-
Updated my list in opening post.
-
So most likely the priest wants to:
1. punish enemies for attacking his stuff. if they dont' attack his stuff his stuff lasts longer anyways.
2. Do extra damage with his light attacks.
3. Increase his creatures' or his own staying power with healing spells.
4. He wants to have a buddy as HA.
Whilst you are totally right that all ideas here are not tested, those proposed changes would keep your list the same.
1. You actually write „attacked“ on your list. Right now the HA only gets furios if damage has been taken.
2. The additional Burn would be 1 mana cheaper. As priest I often felt mana starved so that extra burn is not working all times. Change would help.
3. That's what holy school is good in :D
4. HA is pretty important for pressure. The idea to put him in play active is neat!
But yeah, it's all not tested. And nobody really knows why the priest is as he is.
@sharkbait: no mage is fully explored. I agree and that's why I love this game. But I really think that it is a waste of cards if some mages just feel like a bad choice to play with. I mean they are still fun to play, but always with that feeling of lower chances to win.
My plan is (locally) to have all mages being played in fair matches. The premise is to add even more fun and variety to this game and to let our gaming group grow. I can't imagine you are against that.
Official rules stay as AW tells us for those who are willing to play outside. (All under the purpose they agree to these changes)
All I'm saying is that i think you are wrong about two things. 1: i think there are tournament viable priest builds that exist. 2: i think he isn't a bad choice, nor is it a waste to try things with him until something works.
Side note for kelanen: i would take an AC warlock to a tournament over 3/4 of the existing mages. You guys put way too much of a match's result on the mage instead of on the player, in my opinion.
Not meaning to shoot anyone down here, but i don't think you guys are giving players enough credit
-
I do agree that the Priest, Johktari Beastmaster, and Bloodwave Warlord seem to be in a pretty bad place right now. I think some of the problems are fixable without direct erratas / houseruling, but most of them are not.
Priest:
Yeah, he should definitely either have 10 channeling or not pay 1 mana to place burns (potentially even both). There's just no reason to pick him over the Priestess (for defensive play) or Paladin (for aggressive play) at the moment. Of all the mages, he is consistently the most mana-starved in my experience. If Arcane Wonders ever wants him to be competitive, I don't think there is any way to get around directly altering his abilities (even if only slightly).
Beastmasters:
While your solution does work, I don't think it's actually necessary in the long run. The Straywood Beastmaster is fine as is, and introducing new cards could solve the awkwardness of the combined Sprint and Archery traits. Maybe a card which gives the skirmish trait while attacking with a ranged weapon, or perhaps an enchantment that grants +1 range to attacks. Another option is changing the Sprint ability to allow the Johktari Beastmaster to use a full-action ranged attack after moving twice by deducting 1 damage from the attack for each move action. I kind of feel like a more comprehensive action is needed though. Bows in general just seem really underpowered with every mage due to how restrictive they are. There is an abundance of people running positioning cards like Teleport and Force Push, which probably makes the extra range much less safe than the developers intended.
The other problem with the Johktari Beastmaster, which you didn't address, is her Wounded Prey ability. It sucks. In addition to the +1 damage the creature receives, I would also like it to apply the Lumbering trait, and halve all healing received by the creature (rounded down?). This would make the ability really useful (at least against living targets), let the Beastmaster more easily kite with ranged weapons, and turn her into a mage which specializes in focusing down one creature at a time.
Warlords:
Lastly there are the Warlords. I agree with your suggestion that Battle Orders should be free to cast (once per round). I kind of wish the 2 Warlords' Battle Orders were more differentiated from each other (Bloodwave should be way more offensive than Anvil Throne), but that is hard to fix at this point without completely redoing them. Unfortunately, there is almost no way to make the Bloodwave Warlord equivalent to the Anvil Throne Warlord without some sort of errata or houseruling. The Runesmithing ability is just so good, while the Veterans ability is terrible. I suggest keeping the limitation that veteran tokens cannot stack (to dissuade the Warlord from buddy build strategies), but instead change the ability to read as thus: "Whenever an enemy creature is destroyed, you may choose up to 3 friendly soldier creatures within 1 zone of that creature and give them a Veteran token (maximum of one token per creature). Creatures with a Veteran token gain melee +1, ranged +1, and armor +1." This would make the Warlord's goblin and orc armies a lot more viable (arena-wide buffs to goblins would also help; [mwcard=MWBG1C04]Slaknir, Goblin Chieftain[/mwcard] was a good start but more is needed. The change would also mean players are no longer punished for killing creatures with their mage or playing ranged units (who beforehand gained little benefit from becoming veterans).
Some of these changes might need a bit of tweaking, but I think they are a step in the right direction. In general:
1. the priest needs more mana efficiency (as well as access to more spells which the Paladin cannot as easily use)
2. the Johktari Beastmaster needs better incentives to stay at range, needs to be able to kite creatures effectively, and needs to just generally be less awkward to play
3. the Bloodwave Warlord needs a better primary ability
-
Side note for kelanen: i would take an AC warlock to a tournament over 3/4 of the existing mages. You guys put way too much of a match's result on the mage instead of on the player, in my opinion.
Not meaning to shoot anyone down here, but i don't think you guys are giving players enough credit
Not at all - I completely agree that a good player with a bad mage will beat a bad player with a good mage. But with two equal players the better mage will win - why handicap yourself? I go into a tournament taking the best I possibly can, so even the 2nd best is not good enough, let alone the 25th percentile, even if I agreed with that.
-
Side note for kelanen: i would take an AC warlock to a tournament over 3/4 of the existing mages. You guys put way too much of a match's result on the mage instead of on the player, in my opinion.
Not meaning to shoot anyone down here, but i don't think you guys are giving players enough credit
Not at all - I completely agree that a good player with a bad mage will beat a bad player with a good mage. But with two equal players the better mage will win - why handicap yourself? I go into a tournament taking the best I possibly can, so even the 2nd best is not good enough, let alone the 25th percentile, even if I agreed with that.
But there is no such thing as "equal" players, just as there is no such mage that is better than every other mage in each situation that can arise. Taking the best you can just means taking the mage that you personally play best with, not that it's better across the board. Inherently, that comes down to the player, not the mage.
-
Agreed with shark, and I actually think all mages are pretty close to each other. Even the bloodwave warlord is not that much worse than a necro or druid.
I really think some mages could really use an ability card upgrade, but I don't think it's problematic at this moment. An ability card is still only a little piece of the mage. Things like school training, cardpool, mage specific cards make up for a bigger portion.
Best example is the wizard, he was strong, but balanced when he came out of the core set, but due to the expansions of the minor schools and the addicition of the tower he became OP.
-
Agreed with shark, and I actually think all mages are pretty close to each other. Even the bloodwave warlord is not that much worse than a necro or druid.
I really think some mages could really use an ability card upgrade, but I don't think it's problematic at this moment. An ability card is still only a little piece of the mage. Things like school training, cardpool, mage specific cards make up for a bigger portion.
Best example is the wizard, he was strong, but balanced when he came out of the core set, but due to the expansions of the minor schools and the addicition of the tower he became OP.
I think the main problem here isn't an inherent weakness in the priest, warlords and beastmasters. Even if they're not weak in theory, they're weak in practice because they're so hard to figure out how to play, even for highly skilled players. There are very very few beastmaster builds that take full advantage of their ability card. (The only ones I know of are falcon swarm and beastslinger.)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I've seen tons of great, very different warlords and beastmasters. ??? The problem is really not figuring things out.
Veterans and battle orders are weak, no matter what your deck is, and no matter what you try, just as quicksummoning and a pet is strong in almost every single beastmaster build.
-
Yeah, I don't think there's a problem figuring things out, it's really not that obscure. Some mages are just weaker than others.
-
When you really get down to the heart of the problem, you notice that there are two types of mage Abilities.
1- Abilities that work independent of who the opponent is or what he does.
Pet, Voltaric Shield, Force pull etc are examples of this. These are the abilities that are generally considered to be "good".
2- Abilities that work dependent of who the opponent is or what he does.
This is where you find abilities like Holy Avenger, Wounded Prey, Veterans. All abilities which require your opponent to somehow play into your abilities before you can use them. These are the abilities that are generally considered "weak".
It should be quite obvious that whenever you have an ability where you need some "cooperation" from your opponent to actually make your ability work that you are at a disadvantage.
-
When you really get down to the heart of the problem, you notice that there are two types of mage Abilities.
1- Abilities that work independent of who the opponent is or what he does.
Pet, Voltaric Shield, Force pull etc are examples of this. These are the abilities that are generally considered to be "good".
2- Abilities that work dependent of who the opponent is or what he does.
This is where you find abilities like Holy Avenger, Wounded Prey, Veterans. All abilities which require your opponent to somehow play into your abilities before you can use them. These are the abilities that are generally considered "weak".
It should be quite obvious that whenever you have an ability where you need some "cooperation" from your opponent to actually make your ability work that you are at a disadvantage.
There is an alternative explanation that doesn't assume Arcane Wonders to have had a moment of uncharacteristic stupidity while designing multiple mages. If they had made this mistake only once or twice then that would be different. But this particular aspect of Mage abilities has happened enough times to make me think it's intentional. Aaron is not an idiot, and IMO the only design mistake he made which was blindingly obvious in retrospect was giving straywood quicksummoning and johktari fast. Therefore there is a reason for certain abilities to only work for certain matchups.
If wounded prey only works against living creatures and not nonliving creatures, then that probably means johktari bm is only supposed to need wounded prey against living creatures. Most zombies have lower life and and most skeletons have little to no armor. Nonliving creatures can't be healed. Only skeletons can be reconstructed to remove damage.
If veteran tokens only works when your opponent uses non-Mage creatures, that means you probably don't need vet tokens against solo mages. When your soldiers fight enemy nonmage creatures they are likely to take some damage. If they get +1 armor and +1 melee after destroying an enemy non-Mage creature they're more likely to survive long enough to attack the Mage too afterwards.
As for Holy Avenger, I'm not entirely certain how it's meant to be used, but it seems to me that as a holy Mage the priest would like it when his creatures and comjurations aren't attacked because then they last longer. Let's say priest attacks enemy knight of westlock with his staff for 5 dice and dazes it, and used Malakai's fire to burn it. Knight of westlock know has between 0 and 10 damage out of 10 life. If the knight survives and attacks the priest next, he only has a 50% chance of hitting. If the knight does hit, a guardian angel holy avenger can strike back at the knight for the same amount of dice. If the attack makes it through the defense that's another 0-6 damage. The knight is probably either dead or close to dead at this point. During final quickcast priest can cast another light attack on the knight, which will likely either daze/stun it or do enough damage for the burn to finish it off. Or if the knight is almost dead already he can cast a healing spell on himself, removing the damage that was just dealt to him. The problem if there is any with the priest isn't that his ability depends on opponent. More likely it's that he might be almost a one-trick pony, but I'm not entirely certain whether he is or not.
-
I haven't read all. I get good use out of either BM, I get also good use out of the Dwarf Warlord.
orc is a bit tricky but dont think battleorders should be a free action. the dwarf doesnt need it.
Lastly to the Priest, for me he should have 10 channel if it anyway change, one could then change the ability to place a burn to 2 mana if it is felt too good, but thatway he isnt force to place those 1mana cheeper burns always . The Priestess or Paladin are just always the better choice. I know that one can build working priest books, even more good players. But honest question to Shark, Coshade, and whoever plays the priest. Why wouldn't be the Priestess the better choice? As i had feared on playtest Paladin is just better choice still.
I am not breaking down the abilities now, but he doesnt do anything really better than the others, its not that bad anymore with bow and dazzle and blast but still rather play one of the others for better training or other ability and more channel
If the priest at least had battleskill with 9 channel that would also work.
-
Aaron is not an idiot, and IMO the only design mistake he made which was blindingly obvious in retrospect was giving straywood quicksummoning and johktari fast.
Just a quick note, I was only a playtester when the Core Set released.
Carry On.
-
Lot of wise people here stated something so i have Trump my way into this duscussion too :)
There are 12+2 Mages. There were not fully probed and they will not be as they card and play options change with each new expansion. But not all mages are equal. Good player will beat a bad player with any kind of mage but Best player with Priest will have disadvantage against Best player with Druid. Thats a Fact, that can only a luck during dice rolling can change.
2- Abilities that work dependent of who the opponent is or what he does.
This is where you find abilities like Holy Avenger, Wounded Prey, Veterans. All abilities which require your opponent to somehow play into your abilities before you can use them. These are the abilities that are generally considered "weak".
- AGREED
I feel that Orc Warlord and Priest need a little help. Johktari need less help because one or two new spells could help her greatly.
I really think some mages could really use an ability card upgrade, but I don't think it's problematic at this moment. An ability card is still only a little piece of the mage. Things like school training, cardpool, mage specific cards make up for a bigger portion.
- AGREED
I arcanly wonder, how much possible is to find this Trio officialy Errated :)
There is an alternative explanation ...
I assume that for those abilities to be carefully *disabled* against some mages or creatures due to the balance reasons as you describe it would be way too much grandmasterish. :) Blizzard and his products have balance issues (even the small ones counts... i am looking at you Genji from OverWatch!) , NASA isnt 100% mistake proof either, even if they should be and the examples could go one and one.
If i play as warlord with goblin swarm, i would really welcome to have those other Battle Orders from Dwarf with a better way to distribute Vet tokens. Thats probably my selfish reasons not a need of balance :)
-
Lastly to the Priest, for me he should have 10 channel if it anyway change, one could then change the ability to place a burn to 2 mana if it is felt too good, but thatway he isnt force to place those 1mana cheeper burns always . The Priestess or Paladin are just always the better choice. I know that one can build working priest books, even more good players. But honest question to Shark, Coshade, and whoever plays the priest. Why wouldn't be the Priestess the better choice? As i had feared on playtest Paladin is just better choice still.
I am not breaking down the abilities now, but he doesnt do anything really better than the others, its not that bad anymore with bow and dazzle and blast but still rather play one of the others for better training or other ability and more channel
If the priest at least had battleskill with 9 channel that would also work.
Of note: I've played using the priest significantly more than the paladin, and am nowhere close to the skill level with the priest as Coshade. That being said:
Everyone seems to be assuming that the HA is only affecting the game when the HA gains the Melee+2/Piercing+1. I find this premise to be false. The HA can be used to force your opponent into making bad decisions for which you can plan and counter. An example (and this is only one example, of which there are many that I've found) - You have a HA Crusader Griffin with White Cloak Knight and Knight of Westlock as buddies. Your opponent has to choose a threat to deal with. The threat of the Griffin rolling 7 dice + Piercing 1 is high enough to make one consider attacking the Griffin. However, the Griffin's both extra tough (life +5) and flying so it's really easy to be put in a bad position trying to kill it.
These are the choices that the opponent has to make, and good priest players punish based on what choice is made. I call the priest Aggressively reactive in my head.
The priestess is more defensive reactive, but I can expand on that in other places. I think they play differently enough that one doesn't overshadow the other in every situation and that it again comes back to player skill with the mage.
In regards to the paladin, I've been more often the opponent than the Pally driver. From my observations, th epaladin tends to be almost TOO flexible. The pally can do a lot of things decently, but doesn't focus well without giving up some of that flexibility (or things on their ability card). It's still a bit early to tell because there's a LOT of pally exploration left to do, but calling him strictly better than the priest is going against the data I'm seeing.
Good player will beat a bad player with any kind of mage but Best player with Priest will have disadvantage against Best player with Druid. Thats a Fact, that can only a luck during dice rolling can change.
It should be quite obvious that whenever you have an ability where you need some "cooperation" from your opponent to actually make your ability work that you are at a disadvantage.
I have a fundamental disagreement with these being facts due to a lot of what I've stated above. The starting conditions of "Best player with druid/priest" are unquantifiable, thus you can't test this thoery. However, it sounds like we're going to have to agree to disagree on these. 8). I do not mean to make anyone feel bad with the disagreements either. I do find civil discussions like this to be really entertaining because I have to really explore why I feel what I do. Carry on the good works, gents :D
-
There is an alternative explanation that doesn't assume Arcane Wonders to have had a moment of uncharacteristic stupidity while designing multiple mages. If they had made this mistake only once or twice then that would be different. But this particular aspect of Mage abilities has happened enough times to make me think it's intentional. Aaron is not an idiot, and IMO the only design mistake he made which was blindingly obvious in retrospect was giving straywood quicksummoning and johktari fast. Therefore there is a reason for certain abilities to only work for certain matchups.
I think Aaron is a very talented designer, but still, I think most people agree that the warlord abilities could have been a lot better. Forcemaster vs Warlord was the first expansion of Mage Wars and it had multiple flaws apart from the ability card. Guess when Johktari and the Priest (and wizard tower) were released? In the second expansion. I think it's pretty clear the expansions have been getting better each time. And personally I currently find Conquest of Kumanjaro the worst expansion. (Apart from those very awesome intercepters and a few other cards. ::) )
The best examples are academy from this year. While they seem pretty useless for Arena at first sight, it contains many hidden gems in those expansions and I was quite suprised by it. Druid vs Necro was a LOT better than the previous two expansions and Forged in Fire fixed most of the errors in Forcemaster vs Warlord. Paladin vs Siren also seems to be incredible and fresh at first sight.
My point is: Maybe due to better playtesters, maybe due to more experience or another reason altogether, but the quality has been rising every single time. The fact that some of us criticise some mages does not mean we think Aaron, AW or other designers are idiots.
-
Lastly to the Priest, for me he should have 10 channel if it anyway change, one could then change the ability to place a burn to 2 mana if it is felt too good, but thatway he isnt force to place those 1mana cheeper burns always . The Priestess or Paladin are just always the better choice. I know that one can build working priest books, even more good players. But honest question to Shark, Coshade, and whoever plays the priest. Why wouldn't be the Priestess the better choice? As i had feared on playtest Paladin is just better choice still.
I am not breaking down the abilities now, but he doesnt do anything really better than the others, its not that bad anymore with bow and dazzle and blast but still rather play one of the others for better training or other ability and more channel
If the priest at least had battleskill with 9 channel that would also work.
Of note: I've played using the priest significantly more than the paladin, and am nowhere close to the skill level with the priest as Coshade. That being said:
Everyone seems to be assuming that the HA is only affecting the game when the HA gains the Melee+2/Piercing+1. I find this premise to be false. The HA can be used to force your opponent into making bad decisions for which you can plan and counter. An example (and this is only one example, of which there are many that I've found) - You have a HA Crusader Griffin with White Cloak Knight and Knight of Westlock as buddies. Your opponent has to choose a threat to deal with. The threat of the Griffin rolling 7 dice + Piercing 1 is high enough to make one consider attacking the Griffin. However, the Griffin's both extra tough (life +5) and flying so it's really easy to be put in a bad position trying to kill it.
Haven't yet Tried crusade griffin, which is finally a flyer worth an avenger but all other HA the priestess could for the same mana just cast the next bigger (asyran defender HA vs a KOW). Priestess just has 3 mana more to use in investment in the first three turns (where it is extremly unlikely to use the burn ability already). Whenever you don't use your Burn you lose more vs a Priestess.
Even the griffin costs 17 mana for Optional (twice with charge and HA pierce 1) flying and 2/14. For 16 mana i can have as priestess a KoW with an optional Knights courage for the same potential dice (but granted 5 vs maybe 3/5/7) [flying vs defense, life vs armor]. And during all that time the priestess did channel more. HA is quite nice on the Griffin, but Mana and power effective the priestess is still better. And I do not consider her abilities here really.
In your example you have a KoW a white cloak kingth and a HA griffin vs a priestess with White cloak KoW KoW with knights courage and during those minimum of 4 turns (total cost) the priestess has a 5mana advantage and 1 action less (due to enchanting). Which for example is already an agony just removing the HA attack bonus already, or she can also just have a griffin with bearstrength and bulls endurance instead (more actions needed) but only 1 mana short till the minimum time you can have all those and non optional buff like HA. So every turn from now on still play more to priestess as she just channels more. As stated I am not saying the priest in general is bad, but Priestess is just the better option.
-
I enjoy this clash of cultures or rather "schools" or "paths" of the mage wars 😀
There i So much behind this discussion while everything is in civil borders of discussion that if we were OSN, wars and Hunger will be in history books and some really stupid and bad people on their way to colonize sun.
Halewjin point out a very important thing and thats how quality with each expansion is rising. From good trough very good to Pure awesomness :) lets také a moment and appreciate all those great minds of designéra and playtesters (except me, i just argue with everyone about wording :) )
This remainds mě a little bít pre-wizard nerf discussion. Je is not OP, je is beatable but now in reverse. He is not bad, He is playable. I love all mages but while building anything for Priest, i ended up with priestess instead :)
-
I enjoy this clash of cultures or rather "schools" or "paths" of the mage wars 😀
There i So much behind this discussion while everything is in civil borders of discussion that if we were OSN, wars and Hunger will be in history books and some really stupid and bad people on their way to colonize sun.
Halewjin point out a very important thing and thats how quality with each expansion is rising. From good trough very good to Pure awesomness :) lets také a moment and appreciate all those great minds of designéra and playtesters (except me, i just argue with everyone about wording :) )
This remainds mě a little bít pre-wizard nerf discussion. Je is not OP, je is beatable but now in reverse. He is not bad, He is playable. I love all mages but while building anything for Priest, i ended up with priestess instead :)
just for the priest not sure if I am allowed to say it but I do it: There were cards in discussion for PvS nice for the Priest only or mainly which may give him more flavor. Those were just not very thematically for the Paladin but they will pop up at some other stage. So yes the game changes with every expansion and becomes more. What I had pointed out is still as long as you only use Holy Avanger Priestess is just better, so what is necessary is a good use of those burns (some interaction) if the priest itself is not changed. It will come within time, of course I'd love a channel 10 change, but if creatures and spells directly interacting with his abilities it can work too. Just creating cards only usable for a single mage (again on a competetive level) is probably not good either as hard as all the card selecetion for the sets are anyway. But honestly for how complex the game it is quite good balanced in general.
-
Because you asked here is a response. I usually don’t like to respond to these types of threads because they start on a premises that there is an imbalance, rather than exploring why there is a difference between similar mages. Just to note I don’t agree that the BMs, Warlords need to be changed or the holy mages. If I were to change the Priest I could see channeling 10 for a 2 mana burn ability. Honestly I don’t think that change would actually do anything to buff him in any significant way though.
Priest vs Priestess - Both of these mages IMO are meant to played for the long game. In general I consider the Priest to be a dual-action mage. While the Priestess mainly focuses on defense and survival. What I define as dual action here is the ability to make a move that is both defensive and offensive in it’s nature of the action.
--------------------------------------------------Side Tangent-------------------------------------------------------
The most common mistake I see players make for the Priest is going Battle Forge, a KOW HA and maybe another creature, and I also see those players bang their head against a wall to try and make it work.
Ironically I actually think the Priestess is better with a few buddies and Battle Forge. This is probably why most people assume the Priestess is better. The ability to support creatures within a timing window is perfect for her condition removal ability.
---------------------------------------------------Side Tangent Over ------------------------------------------------
If we assume both mages are supposed to go for the long game here are my observations.
Typically late game my board is channeling 13 mana (14 if Priestess), and my goal is to have my mage survive with low armor and mass healing while my creatures do the damage. Just a note my maximum mana to use is up to 14 on my Priest, I don't rely that on happening though so I make my assumptions on lowering it. This is because of Meditating Monk
The Priest
Holy Punch - This is the most overlooked ability for the Priest. I’m not talking about the burn. It’s the chance to daze without any more investment than a quick action! If you get rushed, having an innate daze ability is amazing for shuting them down. Something I appreciate about the Priest is the dual nature of his melee attack. It’s a theme I hope to discuss in a number of ways. In this example you don’t have to spend spellbook points and mana to gain that daze chance you want. Granted Akiro’s Favor is usually what I use to guarantee that daze, but arguably I find it more useful than equipping the Staff of Asyra specifically because of the mana required. The Priestess spending mana on temporary spells like Luminous Blast vs the Priest’s fist is a justification of how she may have more channeling, but may not have more mana on the board.
Holy Avenger -To replicate HA you would have to spend a ton of extra actions and spellbook points. Bear Strength and Bulls Endurance are great to replicate the ability, but 1 action vs 3 and an extra 4 spellbook points is super costly. If we say that an action is worth roughly 2 mana (dissolve and dispel vs crumble and disperse) it would cost the Priestess 4 extra mana to replicate the effect and that is before spending the mana to cast the spell. Suddenly that extra channeling is being wasted (granted the effects are different, bulls is not as good and bear is contingently better). That is on top of the fact that I prefer HA for level 1 and rarely level 2 creatures which means it’s wrapped up in a nice mana saving present. My conclusion here is that the Priestess has more mana in total, but the Priest can come out ahead with total value on the field. Also you can see the buff theme here as consistent of the dual-action archetype. It is both offensive and defensive as opposed to the Pirestess purely defensive nature in her abilities.
Burning Heretics - Once you get to late game, the Priest’s burn/daze punch is one of my favorite tools. You can eliminate their way of dealing damage to you, while slowly cripping their strategy. I would say the Priest has the best melee or ranged attack potential because of the dual action effect (again a theme here like HA). It is actually correct in a lot of ways as Priest to get offensive to attempt to shut down their offensive capabilities. This is something no other mage can replicate and is purely unique to the Priest.
The Priestess has an innate mana advantage and can therefore afford to take some higher level pieces of equipment. Mainly I would take the Staff of Asyra since I would want that daze melee, or use attack spells to replicate the daze. I would like to note that in my experience you shouldn’t take different creatures necessarily based on channeling alone.
Tl:dr - Priest is better at getting to the long game, while Priestess is better for supporting her creatures at that point. They are not similar as the Priest is a dual-action type mage, while Priestess’s abilities are defensive.
-
Here here!!! Well said Coshade! Agreed in all fronts. Personally i think the priest is awesome and many folks have issues with him based on the assumption that the priestess can do it better, usualy because of the channeling difference. They claim that the priest is weak because his HA is weaker than using a bigger creature that cost more mana in the forest place then buffing it with spells. The thing about the HA is that you cannot remove those buffs. Enchantments can be dispelled, but an HA marker, much like a pet marker, can't be removed and if nothing else it's the biggest life buff in the whole game (that's permanent. Restore has dissipate).
Yeah you have to pay for the out of school stuff and that adds up quicker in holy than it does in dark or nature. That's being tempered by current releases. I still think the priest rocks, and ill play a priest against any other mage and not feel bad about my ability to win. It's all in how you get there.
-
Side note for kelanen: i would take an AC warlock to a tournament over 3/4 of the existing mages. You guys put way too much of a match's result on the mage instead of on the player, in my opinion.
Not meaning to shoot anyone down here, but i don't think you guys are giving players enough credit
Not at all - I completely agree that a good player with a bad mage will beat a bad player with a good mage. But with two equal players the better mage will win - why handicap yourself? I go into a tournament taking the best I possibly can, so even the 2nd best is not good enough, let alone the 25th percentile, even if I agreed with that.
But there is no such thing as "equal" players, just as there is no such mage that is better than every other mage in each situation that can arise. Taking the best you can just means taking the mage that you personally play best with, not that it's better across the board. Inherently, that comes down to the player, not the mage.
Lets not get carried away here.
You and I both have been at fault, a couple times at least, for making some mage either stronger or weaker. There have definetly been mages that have allowed me to beat much stronger players.
I think you're maybe looking at this from the perspective of a very strong tactical player, with excellent predictive judgement and attention to detail.
I'm a B level player at best (occasional small tournament wins, etc), so I know that if I'm stomping a top tier opponent it's not my play skill that's carrying the day. It was probably my spellbook and mage choice.
There have, in the past, been mages that were just plain better than the alternative. There's a reason Forcemaster and Wizard got errata.
----
Having said that, I have a message for anyone who thinks they've solved the current metagame. Buckle up, buttercup.
-
My biggest problem with the HA is the fact that it's so dependent on the opponent doing very specific things and you having enough actions to make sure your HA is in position to utilize its bonus. Otherwise it's just a generic creature that you've paid extra mana for extra life for and if that was the case, it's just better to get a better creature out.
-
Okay then. Make attacking the avenger a bad idea...and then you get your use out of it.
-
Because you asked here is a response. I usually don’t like to respond to these types of threads because they start on a premises that there is an imbalance, rather than exploring why there is a difference between similar mages. Just to note I don’t agree that the BMs, Warlords need to be changed or the holy mages. If I were to change the Priest I could see channeling 10 for a 2 mana burn ability. Honestly I don’t think that change would actually do anything to buff him in any significant way though.
Priest vs Priestess - Both of these mages IMO are meant to played for the long game. In general I consider the Priest to be a dual-action mage. While the Priestess mainly focuses on defense and survival. What I define as dual action here is the ability to make a move that is both defensive and offensive in it’s nature of the action.
--------------------------------------------------Side Tangent-------------------------------------------------------
The most common mistake I see players make for the Priest is going Battle Forge, a KOW HA and maybe another creature, and I also see those players bang their head against a wall to try and make it work.
Ironically I actually think the Priestess is better with a few buddies and Battle Forge. This is probably why most people assume the Priestess is better. The ability to support creatures within a timing window is perfect for her condition removal ability.
---------------------------------------------------Side Tangent Over ------------------------------------------------
If we assume both mages are supposed to go for the long game here are my observations.
Typically late game my board is channeling 13 mana (14 if Priestess), and my goal is to have my mage survive with low armor and mass healing while my creatures do the damage. Just a note my maximum mana to use is up to 14 on my Priest, I don't rely that on happening though so I make my assumptions on lowering it. This is because of Meditating Monk
The Priest
Holy Punch - This is the most overlooked ability for the Priest. I’m not talking about the burn. It’s the chance to daze without any more investment than a quick action! If you get rushed, having an innate daze ability is amazing for shuting them down. Something I appreciate about the Priest is the dual nature of his melee attack. It’s a theme I hope to discuss in a number of ways. In this example you don’t have to spend spellbook points and mana to gain that daze chance you want. Granted Akiro’s Favor is usually what I use to guarantee that daze, but arguably I find it more useful than equipping the Staff of Asyra specifically because of the mana required. The Priestess spending mana on temporary spells like Luminous Blast vs the Priest’s fist is a justification of how she may have more channeling, but may not have more mana on the board.
Holy Avenger -To replicate HA you would have to spend a ton of extra actions and spellbook points. Bear Strength and Bulls Endurance are great to replicate the ability, but 1 action vs 3 and an extra 4 spellbook points is super costly. If we say that an action is worth roughly 2 mana (dissolve and dispel vs crumble and disperse) it would cost the Priestess 4 extra mana to replicate the effect and that is before spending the mana to cast the spell. Suddenly that extra channeling is being wasted (granted the effects are different, bulls is not as good and bear is contingently better). That is on top of the fact that I prefer HA for level 1 and rarely level 2 creatures which means it’s wrapped up in a nice mana saving present. My conclusion here is that the Priestess has more mana in total, but the Priest can come out ahead with total value on the field. Also you can see the buff theme here as consistent of the dual-action archetype. It is both offensive and defensive as opposed to the Pirestess purely defensive nature in her abilities.
Burning Heretics - Once you get to late game, the Priest’s burn/daze punch is one of my favorite tools. You can eliminate their way of dealing damage to you, while slowly cripping their strategy. I would say the Priest has the best melee or ranged attack potential because of the dual action effect (again a theme here like HA). It is actually correct in a lot of ways as Priest to get offensive to attempt to shut down their offensive capabilities. This is something no other mage can replicate and is purely unique to the Priest.
The Priestess has an innate mana advantage and can therefore afford to take some higher level pieces of equipment. Mainly I would take the Staff of Asyra since I would want that daze melee, or use attack spells to replicate the daze. I would like to note that in my experience you shouldn’t take different creatures necessarily based on channeling alone.
Tl:dr - Priest is better at getting to the long game, while Priestess is better for supporting her creatures at that point. They are not similar as the Priest is a dual-action type mage, while Priestess’s abilities are defensive.
Totally dissagree, I tell you if you bring up the channel that high with priest you go for a ultra long game. As said if you go HA for lvl 1 and lvl 2 creatures you are no better of than just casting a lvl 3 non HA as the priestess (as i said, cleric-> defender/Whitelcoak, defender-Kow,...).
You are really talking about a 1/3 daze change for a 1/2 miss on the daze roll, So for 1/6 chance to daze you use your valid full action to do it? I rather have luminous blast then, its very likely to kill after all, else I will have to use this melee always. Of course I grant that a general thought the normal melees shouldnt be underestimated.
" Honestly I don’t think that change would actually do anything to buff him in any significant way though."
Of course it does cause any round you don't use your burn ability (so minimum the first three rounds you have an extra mana. This changes a lot.
On the extra Spellpoints of bear strength and so on you are right (assuming lvl 3 above HA else just go for the higher lvl creature as priestess). But you need wand(s) of healing as a priest
As stated I don't feel that any of the mages are really too weak to be competetive, but Priestess-> priest
Lastly by having 10/2 for burn it wouldn't be such a disavatnage vs the adramalech warlock were you can't really use your ability.
I know i think the game much more theoretical and mathematical, but from a competetive point of view I am totally pursuaded by my point. And it doesnt mean I can't build good Priest books, but the Priestess would be better of.
But I don't think it is a must change, in such big card pools there will be some cards that are just the weaker option than another on a competetive level. I see many play the game much more causual. What I feel is the best is to avoid such weakness in further sets (card, mage,... basis), that's one goal for me as playtester. That is why i often poke on a single life or 1mana cost to make subpar cards closer to be playable at a competetive level.... Very mathmatical but necessary, lately with all my playtesting in board game ratings I reached a level where I intentionally try to find flaws in the games, or imbalances, and if it is only turnorder (classic 4 player table you are 3 times ahead of the other player and 1 time behind or otherway round, or have double "initiative"
if turnorder and start player token go clock and counterclockwise,...) or other such effects determined turn order by a weaker player not competing for victory anymore but having indirect king making.....
-
Making Priest "War Mage" might give him a little extra, and make him more of a melee mage.
I guess you could improve his melee attack a bit also.
Theres no point in making him more like the Priestess. We still want him to be a "battle mage" ?
-
10 channeling would not change him into a priestess. Simply a priest that can pay for his abilities and is not constantly mana starved.
-
Malakais Supervision - each time you or creature under your control makes a holy attack that deal damage to target object, you may pay 1 mana and place Burn condition on the target of this spell. Every object in the Arena can be target of this ability once per round.
Just an idea. I promise i will not react more on Priest unless it would be clarifing, helpful or have another 10 new matches with Priest against anybody :)
-
The Arraxian Crown warlock is NOT lower tier, he's a very strong mage and you would be wise not to underestimate him.
I said mediocre - he's middling tier. I've never lost a tournament match against him (actually, I'm not sure I've lost a match against him).
He's not at the bottom, he's not at the top. If you ant to use the standard MtG tiers he's Tier 2 - honourable mention, but not what you'd ever consider taking into a tournament with £5000 on the line.
Arraxian Crown Warlock made second place in the German Nationals this year, and there were a lot of Priestesses and Druids and Necros there. And it was one of the biggest MageWars tournaments worldwide (with 32 Participants). So I don't think he's really weaker than the so called top tier mages. I feel he's constantly being underestimated.
-
Wow ths thread has gotten huge!
As mentioned in the opening post I am not trying force some errata. Actually in this discussion I learned a lot.
It was never that clear to me, that Aggro-Mages have only channeling 9 due to their free melee attack.
I do now also have a very clear picture about the different kinds of abilities. They got summoned up pretty good.
And I learned a lot about tactics.
All i all a usefull thread in my eyes.
Warlock:
I never had doubt he is strong.
Priest:
I always underestimated the tactical worth of that eventual HA-attack-bonus. (make it a bad idea to hit the Anvenger). And 5 life is a good deal for 3 (level2) mana, even without further bonus.
Anyway I feel that the priest is always mana starved for the things he wants/needs to do. And for a long game Priestess is definately always better.
I wonder if he would play different with channeling 10. I guess not. I would still burn for only 1.
BM:
Straywood needs no change!! He is strong and competitive.
The reason I would change him ist to change Johktari and not loose any ability. It would simply be easy to handle.
The main thing is Johktaris wounded prey and strange fast/range+1 combo. Last got a bit better with Kajarah. If wounded prey would work for mage as well it would be awsome (but maybe too strong).
The theme here seems to be "take one creature out after another".But it is useless against tank or nonliving.
-> I don't know. If wounded prey would be better their would be strategies findable to play fast/ranged+1.
Warlords:
Maybe battle orders have to be seen as nice sideeffect. Really to use only if both cards were wrong, or some surprise moment when one is actually helpful.
Anvil Throne is strong as is. No need to change anything in my eyes.
Bloodwave has vet-token problems. And as I read it we all kind of agree on that. (we do not agree if it needs to be changed, but that is not the point)
So coming back to the actual quastion:
for houseruling funplay: What smallest possible changes would level those 3 obviously weaker mages out?
Priest: buff HA and burn or channel 10?
Johktari: switch fast/quicksummoning with straywood (and have impact on him as well) or make wounded prey work on mage or better idea?
Bloodwave: vet tokens for 2 mana when soldier summoned? And vet get also ranged+1?
P.S.:
I absolutely agree on how well designed the whole game is. All in all the balance is very good since there are so different playstyles and possibilities. It is amazing how this works out!!
I am really not trying to offend someone here. This is why I just asked about tips for a fun houseruling. I love the priest and Johktari and would simply love to see them in a better position.
-
Bloodwave: vet tokens for 2 mana when soldier summoned? And vet get also ranged+1?
Two mana/token seems about right, but I would NOT add Range+1 to it simply because the BW can also give an order to give Range +1.
A Crossbowman with Vet and an order would as such be able to attack at range with 5 dice + Pierce +2 - seems a bit too strong imo ... ;) so melee & armor +1 for 2 mana seem fine to me.
Priest:
And 5 life is a good deal for 3 (level2) mana, even without further bonus.
Well, I don't agree there.
The purpose of the game is still to eliminate the opponent before he eliminates you and giving a creature +5 life is not really doing much to help you achieve that whereas +2 attack dice + Pierce +1 is much more effective in that regard, so I really think that all the built-in restrictions on the HA ability need to be removed ( Damage requirement and the HA himself being excluded - so this guy gets mad when you swing at his buddies but not when you swing at himself ? Come on ;)
-
Bloodwave: vet tokens for 2 mana when soldier summoned? And vet get also ranged+1?
Two mana/token seems about right, but I would NOT add Range+1 to it simply because the BW can also give an order to give Range +1.
A Crossbowman with Vet and an order would as such be able to attack at range with 5 dice + Pierce +2 - seems a bit too strong imo ... ;) so melee & armor +1 for 2 mana seem fine to me.
The ranged +1 would only count for the first roll. So, 5+3+3. Not Op.
So coming back to the actual quastion:
for houseruling funplay: What smallest possible changes would level those 3 obviously weaker mages out?
Priest is bottom tier, but not "obviously" weaker. His 2 siblings are simply better.
For the same reason I don't think the warlords are that much weaker than all the other mages. It would only become a real issue once a new war mage, with better (swarm) abilities than the bloodwave, would exist.
-
So coming back to the actual quastion:
for houseruling funplay: What smallest possible changes would level those 3 obviously weaker mages out?
Priest is bottom tier, but not "obviously" weaker. His 2 siblings are simply better.
For the same reason I don't think the warlords are that much weaker than all the other mages. It would only become a real issue once a new war mage, with better (swarm) abilities than the bloodwave, would exist.
Anyone can read my general thoughts, but for people that feel them lower tier I would change following:
Don't limit Vet tokens to one per creature (this can apply some pressure, likewise as Kralathor)
Make the Priest channel 10 and cost the burns 2
Jokthari I would change wounded prey to also give range +1 (for her)
I don't think those mages are weak, but those are small adjustments if you want to house rule them if you are personally of the opinion in your group they are too weak.
-
Bloodwave: vet tokens for 2 mana when soldier summoned? And vet get also ranged+1?
Two mana/token seems about right, but I would NOT add Range+1 to it simply because the BW can also give an order to give Range +1.
A Crossbowman with Vet and an order would as such be able to attack at range with 5 dice + Pierce +2 - seems a bit too strong imo ... ;) so melee & armor +1 for 2 mana seem fine to me.
The ranged +1 would only count for the first roll. So, 5+3+3. Not Op.
Hey Halewijn,
I've been reading and rereading your remark and I simply don't understand what you're referring to.
Are you saying that the (suggested) Range+1 for vet Tokens would apply on the first ranged attack made only and not after that for the rest of the game ?
What do you mean with "5+3+3" ? Where does the Crossbowman get three rolls from ???
A Crossbowman rolls 3 dice with Pierce+2 as his standard ranged attack.
If Vet token were to give Range+1 that would make it 4 dice + Pierce+2.
The Release Volley Order could up that to 5 dice + Pierce+2 once per round per Crossbowman with a Vet Token
What am I missing ?
-
Bloodwave: vet tokens for 2 mana when soldier summoned? And vet get also ranged+1?
Two mana/token seems about right, but I would NOT add Range+1 to it simply because the BW can also give an order to give Range +1.
A Crossbowman with Vet and an order would as such be able to attack at range with 5 dice + Pierce +2 - seems a bit too strong imo ... ;) so melee & armor +1 for 2 mana seem fine to me.
Priest:
And 5 life is a good deal for 3 (level2) mana, even without further bonus.
Well, I don't agree there.
The purpose of the game is still to eliminate the opponent before he eliminates you and giving a creature +5 life is not really doing much to help you achieve that whereas +2 attack dice + Pierce +1 is much more effective in that regard, so I really think that all the built-in restrictions on the HA ability need to be removed ( Damage requirement and the HA himself being excluded - so this guy gets mad when you swing at his buddies but not when you swing at himself ? Come on ;)
I would have thought that this myth that it's useless to attack enemy nonmage creatures would have been dispelled by now. Yes you have to kill the Mage to win, but defensive strategies still do work. Keeping your own creatures alive longer is a good tactic. Giving a creature five extra life for only 3 or 4 mana, and giving them an extra offensive boost on top of that should be powerful. The fact that the priest is not doing that well probably has little to do with his channeling stat.
The wizard is 10 channeling and his voltaric shield costs two mana every round that he uses it. And yet no one would say that the wizard is underpowered. And the forcemaster tends to pay a lot of upkeep.
-
Bloodwave: vet tokens for 2 mana when soldier summoned? And vet get also ranged+1?
Two mana/token seems about right, but I would NOT add Range+1 to it simply because the BW can also give an order to give Range +1.
A Crossbowman with Vet and an order would as such be able to attack at range with 5 dice + Pierce +2 - seems a bit too strong imo ... ;) so melee & armor +1 for 2 mana seem fine to me.
Priest:
And 5 life is a good deal for 3 (level2) mana, even without further bonus.
Well, I don't agree there.
The purpose of the game is still to eliminate the opponent before he eliminates you and giving a creature +5 life is not really doing much to help you achieve that whereas +2 attack dice + Pierce +1 is much more effective in that regard, so I really think that all the built-in restrictions on the HA ability need to be removed ( Damage requirement and the HA himself being excluded - so this guy gets mad when you swing at his buddies but not when you swing at himself ? Come on ;)
I would have thought that this myth that it's useless to attack enemy nonmage creatures would have been dispelled by now. Yes you have to kill the Mage to win, but defensive strategies still do work. Keeping your own creatures alive longer is a good tactic. Giving a creature five extra life for only 3 or 4 mana, and giving them an extra offensive boost on top of that should be powerful. The fact that the priest is not doing that well probably has little to do with his channeling stat.
The wizard is 10 channeling and his voltaric shield costs two mana every round that he uses it. And yet no one would say that the wizard is underpowered. And the forcemaster tends to pay a lot of upkeep.
the priest is not doing bad, he is just doing worse than the priestess in any case and that has to do with his channeling
-
Priest is bottom tier, but not "obviously" weaker. His 2 siblings are simply better.
If that's not 'weaker' and by quite a lot, I don't think we have a language in common here...
For the same reason I don't think the warlords are that much weaker than all the other mages. It would only become a real issue once a new war mage, with better (swarm) abilities than the bloodwave, would exist.
Just as well no-one gave Paladin the war school and a super-fast spawnpoint then!
-
I think if Veteran tokens were allowed to stack and isn't restricted to Melee strikes, it should be fine. Not only does it simplify the ability but you give a small buff to archer warlord as well. (ranged creatures getting a +1 melee + 1 armor isn't the end of the world).
Also swapping Fast & Quick Summon on the two Beastmasters I think is incredibly elegant. No reason why it isn't official.
-
I would never give up quick summoning on the original beastmaster. Fast is an trait you can get from an enchant, and has limited usage. Losing quick summon is a nerf to beast master. Nerf the wizard, swap fast and zap
But really, just allow wounded pray to target mages, its just a weaker Marked for Death.
Priest only really needs that 10 channeling he got cheated out of, maybe remove the once per turn restriction on his burn.
Interesting one here, what if the Warlords battle orders still were a quickspell, but you gained 1 mana when you used them rather then spending 1 mana. Cause you know, Warlords draw there strength from there armies, and cast better when riding high on that officer ego.
-
I would never give up quick summoning on the original beastmaster. Fast is an trait you can get from an enchant, and has limited usage. Losing quick summon is a nerf to beast master.
But really, just allow wounded pray to target mages, its just a weaker Marked for Death.
Priest only really needs that 10 channeling he got cheated out of, maybe remove the once per turn restriction on his burn.
Interesting one here, what if the Warlocks battle orders still were a quickspell, but you gained 1 mana when you used them rather then spending 1 mana. Cause you know, Warlords draw there strength from there armies, and cast better when riding high on that officer ego.
Warlock/lord typo aside, I'd agree with all of that.
-
I don't really get why you'd want to swap Zap/Fast on Wizard/J-Beast. That would be weird. (Thematically wizards aren't known for being speedy, and why would a Beastmaster have a built-in ethereal ranged spell?)
I get that taking Quicksummoning away from S-beast might seem like a nerf, but look at it another way. After the swap, you have one Beastmaster designed for summoning swarms of level 1 creatures while keeping her distance (Ranged +1, Quicksummoning, Wounded Prey; goes great with Lair and Hunting Bow/Spear and Marked for Death, maybe Wychwood Fairy, maybe Animal Kinship since she won't have the actions/mana for a lot of equipment), and one Beastmaster designed for buddy melee that the enemy can't easily run from (Melee +1, Fast, Pet; heavier on Enchantments and select equipment; maybe Fellella) .
-
I get that taking Quicksummoning away from S-beast might seem like a nerf, but look at it another way. After the swap, you have one Beastmaster designed for summoning swarms of level 1 creatures while keeping her distance (Ranged +1, Quicksummoning, Wounded Prey; goes great with Lair and Hunting Bow/Spear and Marked for Death, maybe Wychwood Fairy, maybe Animal Kinship since she won't have the actions/mana for a lot of equipment), and one Beastmaster designed for buddy melee that the enemy can't easily run from (Melee +1, Fast, Pet; heavier on Enchantments and select equipment; maybe Fellella) .
Instead of one good, one bad, you get two mediocre - I think that's worse than the current situation.
-
I have played with both beastmasters with this houserule and I actually prefer it.
Yes, quicksummoning is hands down better than fast but not all Straywood beastmasters use their quicksummoning during a game. IF you want a beastmaster with quicksummoning, you still have a Johktari with a free (bad) wounded prey and good at shooting. Although I have to say that I also boosted the wounded prey in those games. We allowed it targeting mages too.
Instead of one good, one bad, you get two mediocre - I think that's worse than the current situation.
So, instead of one good and one bad you gain 2 good beastmasters but both a little more specialized at a certain strategy.
-
Yes, quicksummoning is hands down better than fast but not all Straywood beastmasters use their quicksummoning during a game.
Show me a Beastmaster that doesn't use it., and I'll show you an improved version with a few L1 Creatures in it. I don't believe an optimal Straywood exists without making use of it, it's just too good.
-
I don't really get why you'd want to swap Zap/Fast on Wizard/J-Beast. That would be weird. (Thematically wizards aren't known for being speedy, and why would a Beastmaster have a built-in ethereal ranged spell?)
Thematically it would be dumb. I only suggested that to as an attempt to balance all the mages.
Leave Straywood alone, and siphon strength from the Wizard
-
Leave Straywood alone, and siphon strength from the Wizard
Wizard doesn't need Strength siphoning from it now. Post errata it's still good, but it's somewhere from the middle to bottom of the top tier. It's basically right where you want a mage to be.
-
Yes, quicksummoning is hands down better than fast but not all Straywood beastmasters use their quicksummoning during a game.
Show me a Beastmaster that doesn't use it., and I'll show you an improved version with a few L1 Creatures in it. I don't believe an optimal Straywood exists without making use of it, it's just too good.
Beastmasters with big buddies or in lesser extend with a lair. often too action starved to waste a (multiple) quickcasts on a level 1. With a lair, the need for quicksummoning is already a lot smaller.
By the way, the quicksummoning isn't gone.. If you want it, you would still have the Johtari that can make very good use out of it.
Think of it the other way around if it makes you feel better, your decks that make good use out of the quicksumming trade the "pet and melee +1" for "ranged +1 and (a boosted allowing mages) Wounded prey". Instead of paying extra mana to boost 1 creature you can give all your little guys a +1 die on something you need killed for free.
-
This is perhaps a little off topic, but as there was lots of commentary towards the start of this thread about the Bloodwave warlord and how he is 'weak' and the veteran tokens need to be made automatic or stackable etc etc.
I return serve with this two-part suggestion to make him (and indeed the Anvil Throne) perhaps a little better indirectly:
1) Make Goblin Grunts a quickcast deploy rather than a full action, but add 1 point of Dark school to their existing War school cost.
2) Make the Goblin Grunt a cantrip.
As well as helping the warlords along, this change would reflect two things:
a) Goblins are supposed to be the swarming minions serving dark powers. That is their fantasy canonical role. They just keep coming. Kill one, and another pops up.
b) playing this would just be plain fun! An endless horde of little goblins getting underfoot, slashing with their poorly made swords while falling in droves before the kitted-out hero mages.