I have recently played several games with the Forcemaster (my new favorite). One thing that was crucial to all of these games was getting the opponent mage into my zone... and keeping them there! Here are my thoughts on this.

In most cases the opponent mage will be either 2 zones away, 1 zone away, or in the same zone as your FM.

Case 1:

When they are 2 zones away, the best option is to use Teleport to move them to your zone. Then you can get a doublestrike in with Galvitar. If you are out of Teleport, the next best spell to use is Force Bash. This won't move them all the way into your zone, but it will move them 1 zone closer and incapacitate them, preventing them from moving further away. If you are out of Teleport and Force Bash, then just use Force Pull to move them 1 zone towards you.

Case 2:

When they are 1 zone away, the go-to spell should be Force Bash. Otherwise, use Force Pull. Force Bash is the go-to instead of Force Pull because it incapacitates the opponent mage, preventing them from moving away.

Case 3:

When they are in the same zone as your FM, you might feel like you don't have a job to do. However, you should do all you can to KEEP them there. The go-to spell for this situation is simply Knockdown. If you are out of Knockdown, use Force Hold instead.

So anyways, this is how I think when it comes to reeling the enemy mage in for punishment. Consequently, Teleport, Force Bash, and Force Pull are some of my most-used spells.

Warning: if you aren't mildly familiar with Magic The Gathering, this probably won't make any sense!

In my opinion, one of the most influential things created by MTG was the color pie. It was an interesting and thoughtful way to describe the game mechanics, value system, and "flavor" behind each type of magic. Having switched (permanently) from MTG to MW, I found myself wondering if MW has its own implicit version of the color pie. Since each color in MTG had its own value system, each color in MTG had two ally colors and two enemy colors based on this system of values. 

So I want to pose a question and then give my answer. Do you think MW has an implicit color pie in any shape or form? If so, which MW schools of magic would you associate with the MTG colors of magic?

My answer is Yes. I do think MW has a sort of color pie. (This is obvious; otherwise, what point would I have in writing this post?)

White = Holy
Blue = Arcane, Mind
Black = Dark
Red = Fire, Earth
Green = Natural, Water, Air

In MTG, White and Blue are very controlling areas of magic; in MW, the Holy, Arcane, and Mind schools are the most controlling schools of magic.

In MTG, White and Green have life gain and "growth" cards; In MW, the Holy and Nature schools have spells with life gain/regenerate effects, like Heal, Regrowth Belt.

In MTG, White is enemies with Red (since Red values aggression over defense) and Black (since Black is immoral). Likewise, in MW the Holy school is filled with protective/defensive spells whereas Fire and Earth spells are rarely defensive and emphasize total offense. Obviously, Holy spells are seen as moral whereas Dark spells are immoral.

Blue in MTG is friends with White but also with Black. Blue and Black share the desire for secrecy, power, and control and aren't above manipulation and trickery. I can't help but think of Arcane, Mind, and Dark spells the same way.

Blue in MTG doesn't like Red (because Red emphasizes spontaneity over strategy) or Green (because Green emphasizes nature over the unnatural). In MW, Arcane and Mind magic is very strategic and doesn't focus on brute force; Fire and Earth magic is very direct and all about dealing damage quickly. Admittedly, I think the Blue vs Green case doesn't apply as cleanly as it does to MW (i.e. Arcane, Mind VS Nature). Or maybe we have yet to see anti-unnatural cards from the Nature school and anti-nature cards from the Arcane and Mind schools.

Black and Red are friends in MTG. Dark and Fire are friends in MW. Just look at the Warlock! Black hates White, as mentioned earlier, and it hates Green too. Black is about decay and death. Green is about life and growth. You see this Black vs Green distinction in MW all the time. What do curses from the Dark school do? They weaken, they kill, they drain things, they cripple things. What is magic from the Natural school capable of? Regenerating life, boosting creatures, and turning things that are weak into things that are strong.

Finally, Red hates Blue and White (as mentioned already) but is friends with Black and Green. At first thought, Red and Green might not seem to have much in common in either MTG or MW. (Afterall, isn't the Beastmaster, a master of nature, very WEAK against FIRE spells?) But in MTG, Red and Green share a tie to nature. You will notice I have outlined the "MW color pie" such that all the elemental schools (earth, fire, air water) are in the Red and Green categories.

You may have noticed I left the War school out of the picture. This is open for discussion, but I don't think the War school of magic really fits into this argument. (Not dissing on the War school. I think it is awesome personally.)

In conclusion, I hope this post was informative or at least a little interesting. I also hope I may have convinced you that MW does indeed have its own version of the color pie as seen in MTG, albeit an implicit one.

As a final note, I am in NO shape or form accusing MW of "ripping off" MTG. I just wanted to show how MTG could have possibly influenced MW, as I am sure it did.

List your mages from most favorite to least favorite. Here is my list:

1) Warlord
2) Wizard
3) Priestess
4) Beastmaster
5) Warlock
6) Forcemaster

I absolutely hate the Forcemaster. I have been successful with every mage except for her. In my opinion, she is the weakest of all the mages. She has almost no attacking options, and if she is playing against a Beastmaster or Warlord (who knows anything about what they are doing) she will lose every time.

I like the Warlock, but I find that his spawnpoint leaves much to be desired. He has a couple of solid creatures, and though his fire spells are cool, I would take lightning over fire anyday; daze and stun are far more annoying than burn conditions.

I like the Beastmaster because there is nothing very complicated about him. You just summon a lot of creatures and keep them buffed up. Fun and simple.

The Priestess is VERY powerful. Her defenses are hard to crack, she has tons of healing options, and a few of her creatures are very powerful. I like her a lot.

The Wizard was my favorite before the Warlord came out. He feels very dynamic. He has great offensive capabilities, such as his powerful lightning spells (thunderbolt especially), but decent defensive capabilities too. He also has a lot of "trickery" cards, as I like to call them.

The Warlord is my favorite just because I like almost all of his cards. His creatures are dynamic and useful, he can catch his opponents off guard very easily, and there a lot of cool combos he has between his Horn of Gothos and his Helm of Command.

So... what is your list? No offense to any Forcemaster aficionados, but I absolutely despise the Forcemaster in almost every single way.

I have played 4-5 games as the Warlord, and every single time, regardless of who I am playing, I rarely find a use for any of the earth attack spells (Hurl Boulder, Hail of Stones). I am always focusing so much attention on my creatures that I don't really have time to worry about attack spells I guess. My fellow Warlords (wow... that sounds nerdy), do you find yourself playing the same way? No attack spells and just creatures?

Goblin Builders. I don't understand the point of them.

Removing 1 damage from a conjuration is pretty much useless; by the time my Akiro's Hammer takes any damage, removing 1 damage isn't going to help much. I understand that they can also build stuff without it taking away an action from the Warlord, but this never seems to help me, and it doesn't help that they don't channel their own mana!

What am I missing about these guys? Are they terrible? Or am I just not using him correctly?
How do you guys use Goblin Builders? Building walls? Building outposts in enemy territory? Please explain.