Distribution of Cards

[YoungDave]

Morning guys,

I don't want this to sound like a moan (well - don't then!) as we're loving Mage Wars.  But does anyone else have an irk with the distribution of cards in CoK?

To elaborate; none of my group were playing MW at the turn of the year - I played my first game in mid-Jan and was immediately hooked.  So much so that I bought everything.  That's right, base set, all 3 expansions, both spell tombs, green and yellow action markers and enough spellbooks to cover every Mage.  Now, because I was one of the first in my club to get into the game, I was happily teaching others the pleasure of MW. 

But that meant I was jumping from apprentice decks one day to full decks the next - and bear in mind that we weren't using "tweaked" decks yet - just the suggested list in the various rule sets.  And you know what - there aren't enough cards to put either of the 2 CoK decks together without taking certain cards from other decks.  Well, I got tired of continually building / destroying the 4 initial Mage decks between apprentice mode and full mode, so I bought a second main copy which arrived last Thursday (along with the other 14 sets that the boys put in as a combined order - yes, I really have gotten that many bods into the game in just a couple of months).

And do you know what?  After making up 4 "permanent" apprentice decks I still don't have enough of the "outlined" cards to do a Priest or Female Beastmaster deck.  Short of Feral Bobcats, a Knight of Westlock and a couple of other cards that I can't remember of the top of my head.  Which is disappointing.  Don't get me wrong, I've made both those decks now, played them over the weekend - mentioning to my opponents that they were "tweaked".  But that's the way we're all going to go, as more of us gain more experience.

But I suppose the point of this long ramble (thanks for bearing with me!) is this:  Is FiF going to be a FULL expansion (ie have enough cards to cover the suggested builds without pinching any from the present Warlock or Warlord) or is it going to be "short" of cards like CoK?

So don't get me wrong guys - I'm loving the game (been playing EVERY day since last Wed - it's great being retired!!!) and I suppose this has only been an issue for me because I've done so much changing from apprentice to full books - and NOT  been able to put an initial deck together for CoK for such a while.

Cheers guys.

Dave I

[ringkichard]

Every duplicate card in FiF takes the spot of some other new card that had to be cut from the print sheet to make room for the duplicate. So there's two options:
1. Reduce the number of new cards
2. Use more print sheets

I don't think anyone wants option 1.

Option 2 costs money. If you're willing to spend more money so that you can collect all the preconstructed books, I'd recommend buying multiple sets. 

[wtcannonjr]

Forged in Fire is listed as a Spell Tome Expansion. This is different than a Full Expansion so the number of cards (and the cost) is less.

I believe the card count works out as follows:

Spell Tome Expansion - 2 decks of 55 cards each = 110 total cards
Full Expansion - 4 decks of 55 cards each = 220 total cards

This is just my observation from previous releases.

[aquestrion]

I personally like a wide plethora or cards and I personally love destroy build destroy.

[kailas]

I can easily create 4 books from Core set.
I will always be against more copies of the "same", with more diversity i can create better strategies, more interesting gameplay and combos.
I dont need 4 bridge trolls, i would rather pick troll, minotaur, lion and etc.

[Moonglow]

Its probably more of a problem when you first start in the game, as we're trying to use the setbooks etc more when we first start.  As you play more and end up customising books, you're unlikely to need the same spells you were at the start and probably appreciate the diversity more.   My approach whenever I've tried to make a book and cant has been to use that as a motivator to try and find a similar price card that adds value to the book/strategy.