Curse Item

[silverclawgrizzly]

All right I want to talk about my favorite card that's been seen in Academy: Warlock, Curse Item. I feel like this card is really going to change up some play styles and am curious as to others thoughts. For those not aware the card is:

Level 2 dark
2/4 Mana
0-2 Range
Target: Equipment
Curse

"During the Upkeep Phase destroy this equipment, unless it's controller chooses to receive 2 direct damage. This equipment can not be replaced.

Ok that's a lot right there. Lets take it piece by piece and look at the main points shall we?

-It targets the Equipment itself, thus it ignores Nullifies. You're either gonna start casting protective spells on your gear or risk losing it. Also Purge Magic won't save you here. You either destroy your gear or Dispel this spell one at a time. Unless you got Destroy Magic....in which case good for you.
-The opposing mage can't just replace the equipment. That means if they choose to destroy it then it won't go back into a spell book. For people who bring multiples of certain slots like belts or chest pieces this can throw off their swap game.
-It's a curse and thus our friendly Imp Familiar can cast it. This greatly increases his value as he's handed what is essentially a 2 range Dissolve.
-It's a Level 2 so at most you're gonna have 4 in a book. This is a good thing as it's quite strong. The stacking possibilities it presents with not only itself but other direct damage spells is staggering.

Dark School is already strong and this is just another reason it's going to get insane in the coming months.

[Boocheck]

Warlocks definetly gained very nice tool.

I would add that you can use Enchanters ring and Ring of Curses with this spell too.

But if you targeted an equipment with less significance, you just toss it away. Also, you know that you will loose that equipment, so you can prepare yourself during planning phase.

Different thing is, if you target something like Libro Murtos :)

[bigfatchef]

Enchanters Ring works only while targeting a friendly creature. With enchantment transfusion it would work.

This course on libro would be a bummer for necro especially without graveyard.

I wonder how curse item will work at galvitar. Is cantrip still working when destroying?

[Boocheck]

You are right, i shift enchant way too much latly :)

Yup, Cantrip would work here. But i can imagine that teleport wands or hellfire lash will be an auto target for this spell. Especially if you compare mana spend on that equipm vs mana spend on casting the enchantement.

Here i cannot wait casting Cursed Item mixed with Decoy :)

[jacksmack]

*This equipment cannot be replaced* refers to casting another equipment card from spellbook that goes into same item slot.
This method is mostly used to get rid of corrodes.
It has nothing to do with cantrip - cantrip still works.


How do Armor Ward interact with Curse Item?

My guess is this:
Wizard has Curse Item on his Magic Wand but also a revealed Armor Ward.
During upkeep wizard chooses not to prevent destruction by taking damage.
Then warlock must pay 4 additional mana or the destruction is ignored.

[DaveW]

This sounds like a good reason to take an Arcane Ward for your most important piece of equipment... like the Libro... but then it only staves off the timing by a round. During the next turn though, you probably end up prepping a Seeking Dispel or Dispel in case it comes out again.

This probably won't impact a Wizard as much as he should have plenty of Dispels and Seeking Dispels. If the Wizard book (whatever it's called) ever comes out, then he can even prep one of them each round as his third spell.

It seems horrible to think that an expensive piece of equipment could end up being destroyed by a six mana cost spell. However, I can understand the costing.

I don't think it's so bad. It's like Ghoul Rot (without Magebind cost) with the option to destroy the spell if you feel the loss of the piece of equipment is better than taking damage. It hurts the Neco more than anyone, I think, since it's not a poison spell like Ghoul Rot, and his book is an obvious target.

Note that it can be used by anyone. This one spell might make me want to pack an extra Dispel or two in my books though, just in case.

[DaveW]

How do Armor Ward interact with Curse Item?

My guess is this:
Wizard has Curse Item on his Magic Wand but also a revealed Armor Ward.
During upkeep wizard chooses not to prevent destruction by taking damage.
Then warlock must pay 4 additional mana or the destruction is ignored.

Well, the item isn't being destroyed if the Wizard chooses to take damage... so the additional mana would not be spent in that case. If he chooses to have the equipment be destroyed, then (before the actual destruction) there would be the mana cost added to destroy it. If paid, then it is destroyed... if not, then the wand isn't destroyed, but the curse doesn't go away either. Note that the destruction is during upkeep, so the extra mana to be spent could come from next turn's supply.

[iNano78]

It's a cool spell, but the "can't be replaced" clause doesn't add much. Consider if this gets revealed on your chest piece: you let it get destroyed during upkeep, then put out a new chest piece during your quickcast (or deployed from Battle Forge). If your opponent has initiative, then there's a brief opportunity during opening quickcast for her to get a cheap shot I before you get a new chest piece - or to put a Nullify on you to cancel the new chest piece - but other than that, it isn't much different than being able to replace it by casting over it.

[Kaarin]

It's 0-2 enchantment so if it's cast on equipment that costs at least 6 it will costs the same as dissolve or less and You can stay obscured. What I don't like about it is that it's another Academy spell that bypasses Harshforge Plate.

Enchanters Ring works only while targeting a friendly creature. With enchantment transfusion it would work.

It will not work with Enchantment Transfusion, because ET can only move enchantments between creatures.

It's a cool spell, but the "can't be replaced" clause doesn't add much. Consider if this gets revealed on your chest piece: you let it get destroyed during upkeep, then put out a new chest piece during your quickcast (or deployed from Battle Forge). If your opponent has initiative, then there's a brief opportunity during opening quickcast for her to get a cheap shot I before you get a new chest piece - or to put a Nullify on you to cancel the new chest piece - but other than that, it isn't much different than being able to replace it by casting over it.

How many chest pieces do You have in your spellbook? 4?

[iNano78]

It's a cool spell, but the "can't be replaced" clause doesn't add much. Consider if this gets revealed on your chest piece: you let it get destroyed during upkeep, then put out a new chest piece during your quickcast (or deployed from Battle Forge). If your opponent has initiative, then there's a brief opportunity during opening quickcast for her to get a cheap shot I before you get a new chest piece - or to put a Nullify on you to cancel the new chest piece - but other than that, it isn't much different than being able to replace it by casting over it.

How many chest pieces do You have in your spellbook? 4?

None of your business.   :o

What I meant was, if you have 1 chest piece equipped and at least 1 more in your spell book (which isn't unusual, in my experience), then you could let your first get destroyed by Curse Item and cast the other during the quickcast phase following the upkeep during which it was destroyed... which isn't much different than replacing it during a quickcast phase.  Perhaps the only difference is you can't pay the 2 damage cost, then quickcast new armor during your opening quickcast, preventing your opponent from having an opportunity to blast you with an attack spell during their opening quickcast on a round when they have initiative when you're temporarily down a chest piece... but taking 2 direct damage to maintain +2 armor isn't generally better than not taking 2 direct damage and losing that 2 armor for 1 quickcast phase (although there are certainly cases where it is better, like losing your Dragonscale Hauberk and then taking a Fireball to the face, or losing your Chitin Armor and getting splattered with an Acid Ball/Blast). 

Another use of Cursed Item is if you have enough Corrode to bring your net Armor to 0, a Curse Item could be used to effectively block your planned armor-swap, messing up your turn (e.g. preventing you from using a planned spell).  That's pretty nasty, actually.

And in the case of slapping a Nullify on you when you have a Cursed Item, they could still do that during the opening quickcast with initiative regardless of whether or not you are allowed to replace the equipment, so that's a wash.  So... not being able to replace the equipment while cursed doesn't really change much from an in-game perspective.

However, it is highly thematic.  There are lots of RPG's where, if you equip an (unidentified) cursed equipment, you can't easily get rid of it (e.g. armor-swap).  Hopefully we'll see a piece of equipment itself that is cursed (e.g. has some negative stats or deals damage during upkeep) that can be cast on an opposing mage that can't be replaced and must be dealt with in some other way (e.g. Dissolve or Crumble or Explode).  I'd love to be able to  deploy such a cursed equipment on an opposing mage by a Battle Forge!

[silverclawgrizzly]

I think the inability to swap helps a fair bit, but that's a debatable I'll admit. It can always just be targeted with a Dispel, though I'm willing to bet I have more Curses in my Warlock book than a Wizard does Dispels(as in I have more than 6 anyway.) Now once neat thing, if an opponent is relying on that Battle Forge and is geared up, assuming you have your familiar you could in theory take out 3 pieces of equipment in a turn.

[Coshade]

*This equipment cannot be replaced* refers to casting another equipment card from spellbook that goes into same item slot.
This method is mostly used to get rid of corrodes.
It has nothing to do with cantrip - cantrip still works.


How do Armor Ward interact with Curse Item?

My guess is this:
Wizard has Curse Item on his Magic Wand but also a revealed Armor Ward.
During upkeep wizard chooses not to prevent destruction by taking damage.
Then warlock must pay 4 additional mana or the destruction is ignored.

Your example is exactly how it plays out. Curse item is a great card, but I wouldn't recommend taking it out of school. I would also consider using up all their dispels before placing it to get the real damage on. I love this card. Combo it with Explode to deal with the lower mana equipment and battle forge books are toast.

[zolikk]

It's a cool spell, but the "can't be replaced" clause doesn't add much. Consider if this gets revealed on your chest piece: you let it get destroyed during upkeep, then put out a new chest piece during your quickcast (or deployed from Battle Forge). If your opponent has initiative, then there's a brief opportunity during opening quickcast for her to get a cheap shot I before you get a new chest piece - or to put a Nullify on you to cancel the new chest piece - but other than that, it isn't much different than being able to replace it by casting over it.

When you replace an equipment with a new one of the same slot, the old equipment goes back into your spellbook, it isn't destroyed. That is what the clause adds to the card. You can choose to do as you described but you would be destroying the equipment.

Otherwise I might have a lesser back-up equipment for that slot, replace it to get rid of the Curse, and then recast the original stronger equipment again the next round.

[DaveW]

It can always just be targeted with a Dispel, though I'm willing to bet I have more Curses in my Warlock book than a Wizard does Dispels(as in I have more than 6 anyway.)

Six Dispels max, but also perhaps a couple can be gotten rid of with Seeking Dispels (if prepped on the turn that they are cast) and if the enchantment isn't revealed immediately. Also Jinx' will keep the spell from being cast to begin with... at least delaying the effect.

[wtcannonjr]

It can always just be targeted with a Dispel, though I'm willing to bet I have more Curses in my Warlock book than a Wizard does Dispels(as in I have more than 6 anyway.)

Six Dispels max, but also perhaps a couple can be gotten rid of with Seeking Dispels (if prepped on the turn that they are cast) and if the enchantment isn't revealed immediately. Also Jinx' will keep the spell from being cast to begin with... at least delaying the effect.

Okay, since we started down this path there are also 4 possible mage wands to take into account...