Oscuda

[Halewijn]

Did anyone ever try [mwcard=MWBG1C02]Oscuda[/mwcard]? He became one of the cards I totally forgot existed. If so, how did you use him and did he fulfill his expectations?

Edit: The reason I never used him is because he feels a little overpriced and he damages your own living creatures. A [mwcard=MW1C38]Timber Wolf[/mwcard] is a much cheaper, very similar creature. This means that the piercing +1 and the stink attack should be worth 4 mana?

[ClockWork]

he seems underwhelming. Same stats as timberwolf. Would be good against swarm with defense, like snakes.

Use with necro?

[Hardcordo]

he seems underwhelming. Same stats as timberwolf. Would be good against swarm with defense, like snakes.

Use with necro?

for less SBP and 3 more mana I personally would prefer to use [mwcard=MW1C23]Malacoda[/mwcard] with my necro.

[Zuberi]

Attacks that deal guaranteed critical damage are rare and definitely make him worth the 4 extra mana. Unfortunately, the other aspects of that attack counteract this positive. Being a Full Action, low dice, zone attack makes its use situational. Best for countering swarms but even then you have to be careful with the situation that it doesn't hurt yourself too greatly. Then, it's Poison Damage, which means that the best use for that critical damage attack, countering Resilient creatures, isn't possibly at all; and in fact the attack becomes useless against all Non-Living which still represent a significant portion of the meta.

All this adds up to where he's just too situational. Whenever you have a situation that's good for him, he's well worth the investment, but he's still not AMAZING, and those times are so rare that he's not really even worth putting in your book. In my opinion.

[Halewijn]

He's probably best against beastmasters, but then again.. He is a beastmaster unit which is terrible synergy. I think Zuberi sums it up pretty well. He's not horrible by itself but simply never worth it. That actually explains why I simply forgot he existed. The really bad cards I remember because they are often the topic "how it should be boosted".

[Werekingdom]

I like to use him in Domination (I think he was released in Domination).
I also use him against Druids to destroy there vine tokens. (Great against swarms (becuase daze), Flyers,)
He does work ok as a guard, if your mage is not attacking then Oscuda can give out daze of guard.

[ClockWork]

All this adds up to where he's just too situational. Whenever you have a situation that's good for him, he's well worth the investment, but he's still not AMAZING, and those times are so rare that he's not really even worth putting in your book. In my opinion.

You hit the nail right on the head. %100 percent right.

And Rool, I would also use Malacoda, your dead on

[Moonglow]

Attacks that deal guaranteed critical damage are rare and definitely make him worth the 4 extra mana. Unfortunately, the other aspects of that attack counteract this positive. Being a Full Action, low dice, zone attack makes its use situational. Best for countering swarms but even then you have to be careful with the situation that it doesn't hurt yourself too greatly. Then, it's Poison Damage, which means that the best use for that critical damage attack, countering Resilient creatures, isn't possibly at all; and in fact the attack becomes useless against all Non-Living which still represent a significant portion of the meta.

All this adds up to where he's just too situational. Whenever you have a situation that's good for him, he's well worth the investment, but he's still not AMAZING, and those times are so rare that he's not really even worth putting in your book. In my opinion.

Umm if this is the view of a play tester how'd Oscuda make it into production?

[iNano78]

Umm if this is the view of a play tester how'd Oscuda make it into production?

Try him in (multiplayer) Domination, where swarms of minor creatures are common and tend to congregate in zones with orbs. Sure, he doesn't do anything vs Skeletons, but he can cripple a zone full of Goblin Grunts or Thunderrift Falcons or Deptonnes or whatever. It's not a coincidence that's the expansion Oscuda was put in. Domination requires spells that have a big impact on zones that are likely filled with several creatures. See also Altar of the Iron Guard (all your creatures enter guarding), Cascading Force Wave (move lots of creatures), Dragon's Breath (burn things in 2 zones, at a cost too high for Arena matches), Gravikor (nothing nearby flies),  Raincloud (heal everything in the zone, while removing conditions/reducing flame/acid damage), Sandstorm (zone attack with chance to push), Slaknir (makes a Goblin swarm Elusive, plus can move them around), Windstorm (sweeping with chance to Push), etc. They're all about having effects on many creatures at once.

If you're concerned about a promo being overpriced for what it does and/or how conditional it is, see Ankh of Asyra. Unless you're being swarmed by zombies, it's pretty terrible. So... kind of the opposite of Oscuda.

[Zuberi]

Umm if this is the view of a play tester how'd Oscuda make it into production?

I have a few responses to this. Hopefully you'll find one to be satisfactory.

1. Very few play testers have tested every single set. I didn't become a play tester till after Forged in Fire, for example. Not to mention sometimes life happens and people aren't able to test for awhile. Yes, the company has gotten feedback on all of the cards, but you can't assume that every play tester has had a hand in every card.

2. Even if you test the card and have criticism of it, that doesn't mean the other testers or the company will agree with you. There's lots of different views, and just because one play tester thinks something isn't worthwhile doesn't mean there's not someone else who likes it.

3. Being underwhelming is a lot less of an issue than being overpowered and won't necessarily cause something to be cut from a set. Of course the aim is for every card to be perfect and enjoyable and balanced, but a perfect world isn't realistic and generally it's better to err on the side of underwhelming instead of letting something out that breaks the game.

4. Just because a card is currently underwhelming doesn't mean that's a permanent thing. Things can easily change in power as more cards are released and the meta changes. Could be the card worked well in the past or it may work better when paired with future unreleased cards. A statement regarding the current status of a card is not necessarily a permanent condemnation of it.

5. Kind of the same as #4, but like iNano78 pointed out, just because a card is underwhelming in one style of play, doesn't mean it's not good in other situations. This card is definitely a lot better in Domination games, which I actually forgot is the set it was released in.

[Beldin]

Umm if this is the view of a play tester how'd Oscuda make it into production?

This article also should also help to answer this question:

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/timmy-johnny-and-spike-revisited-2006-03-20

[Moonglow]

All great answers thanks folks - the 'try it in Domination' one probably was the best prompt to recheck assumptions.

PS definately not a criticism of the playtesters either, I think that mage wars pumps out amazing set after amazing set.  Was just curious about how a card might come through when the play testers find it really weak.

Picking up on the 'just cause its weak now doesn't mean it will always be' theme, It would be awesome to see some way of picking up the super cool but seldom played cards (like invisible stalker) and see if there is a companion card that could be introduced to make them more viable than they have been.

Just a hater of unused cards

Thanks for the considered replies.