Hearthstone realm banner
Hearthstone realm avatar Hearthstone realm home

Hearthstone

142 Characters Joined
Create Thread
Hearthstone | Posted by | 5 years, 6 months ago
Fan Creations

Fury warrior in hearthstone.

I have been having this idea for a while now, and i finally sat down and put it on paper, so-to-speak.

 

Fury warrior! 

 

Basically it would look like this(ignore my lazy edit on the weapon background and yes i know they're in class colors now), Basically what would happen is on this card:

Or something similar, it would turn your hero power into an extra weapon slot. The first weapon you equip would be normal, but the second weapon, would not override the first weapon like it normally would, instead it would rest on your hero power, making it unusable but giving you the power of two weapons at once(you would still get one attack a turn like normal), just like in WoW, if you want to dual wield you have to throw away a shield. For instance.

 

Let's say you have a 3/1 Fiery War Axe equipped, and you attacked with it last turn, this turn you drew your second Fiery War Axe, you would attack for six, and after attacking the fiery war axe in the left spot would break like normal, and it would shift the newly equipped axe into your main hand. Same would happen if your opponent used an ooze against you, it would only break the weapon in the "main hand"

8 Share

// join_the_conversation

Sign in to share your thoughts, vote on comments, and connect with the community.

Sign in Create account

Comments

Sort by:
Oldest Newest Top

  • I have been having this idea for a while now, and i finally sat down and put it on paper, so-to-speak.

     

    Fury warrior! 

     

    Basically it would look like this(ignore my lazy edit on the weapon background and yes i know they're in class colors now), Basically what would happen is on this card:

    Or something similar, it would turn your hero power into an extra weapon slot. The first weapon you equip would be normal, but the second weapon, would not override the first weapon like it normally would, instead it would rest on your hero power, making it unusable but giving you the power of two weapons at once(you would still get one attack a turn like normal), just like in WoW, if you want to dual wield you have to throw away a shield. For instance.

     

    Let's say you have a 3/1 Fiery War Axe equipped, and you attacked with it last turn, this turn you drew your second Fiery War Axe, you would attack for six, and after attacking the fiery war axe in the left spot would break like normal, and it would shift the newly equipped axe into your main hand. Same would happen if your opponent used an ooze against you, it would only break the weapon in the "main hand"

  • Interesting idea, it certainly adds flavor to the warrior class. Just a few comments.

    • Rewording of the text, it's too long.
    • I think it should be 2 consecutive attacks instead of 1 combined attack. For example if you dual wielded Wrenchcalibur, when attacking the warrior attacks twice-- attacking first with the main hand proc'ing the bomb, then second with the off hand proc'ing another bomb.
    • Thematically, offhand weapons are weaker than main hand weapons. So I think it should have an off hand penalty. I was thinking in the lines of -50% damage rounded up. For example, an offhand Fiery War Axe would deal 2 damage instead of 3. Once the offhand weapon returns to the main hand, damage returns to normal.

  • I'm just going to point out that Blizz have tried to make dual-wielding weapons work in warrior and/or rogue for years (I think the early designs for what eventually became Kingsbane was such an attempt). Clearly getting something that feels good and fair is tricky.

    With that in mind, the biggest issue I have with your own approach is that you combine attacks (which makes perfect sense since in HS weapons really feed into an overarching hero attack value), but only the durability of 1 weapon goes down. In essence the second weapon is both a weapon buff and a weapon in its own right. That might seem fine as compensation for losing your hero power, but I think upon actual testing it would be brutal to play against, especially as weapon removal would only get rid of 1 of the weapons.

    I guess we have to look at pirate warrior, which already ignores its hero power anyway, and is often only looking for a small amount of extra damage to close out games. Not only is that deck having one of its weaknesses largely mitigated - namely that weapons often have to wait in your hand until the current one is used up - but it would also be giving them a higher total damage output. If both weapons lost durability then you focus on the first improvement only, allowing you to deal damage faster without increasing the total.

    Frankly though, pirate warrior is dangerous largely because of how fast it kills opponents already. There's really not that much healing you can do before turn 5, so them being able to speed it up even more sounds more dangerous than it is worth allowing. If it wasn't a start of game effect, and was instead a battlecry so you couldn't use it before turn 4, then maybe that problem goes away.

    As I said at the start, this is known to be a tricky thing to get right, and I suspect there is actually no good way to do it within HS.

  • AngryShuckie is right, both weapons should lose durability, since they are both being used. I wouldn't mind the attack stacking, that would be more intuitive than being able to attack twice imho. Intuitive gameplay would also be a major argument against JackJimson's idea of an off hand penalty. One thing we should keep in mind is the existence of Kayn Sunfury and the massive attack Illidan can gain with a combination of Weapons and spells. This mechanic could be broken in DH.

  • The idea is workable, but consistent cards like these often get cancerous quickly.

    Best thing to do is to simply reduce the number of weapons needed to 4, and make it a battlecry. If that makes it too weak, then perhaps it should also have 'draw this at the start of the game', but with reduced stats. So to fit this juggernaut of a card, that deck would need to play a weakened card on curve, and still need to draw those weapons to be effective. In this way, its not an auto include into hyper aggro decks, but remains a viable card for tempo aggro, or even midrange.

    Also, I agree with the other commenters that what a duo weapon should be doing is allowing double swing. I would also add that cards like Upgrade! should upgrade both weapons at once. The swing would happen first on the main, then on the secondary weapon, so its matters which weapon you equip first.

    Friendly

  • All good points! And yes i meant to say when you attack with both weapons both lose durability, in my example above, you would lose one 3/1 axe, and the other one would becom a 3/1, but it would shift to your main hand to free up use of the hero power again.

     

    When it comes to attacking i really do favor one attack a turn still, even though i know it would make more sense for it to be double attack, because a lot of warrior weapons are flavored to have multiple attacks(Sul'thraze Fool's Bane), or are balanced around the one attack a turn mechanic(Livewire Lance Brass Knuckles Wrenchcalibur Woecleaver) with wording that says "Whener your hero attacks" or "after your hero attacks" I figured it would be easier to not have to change the wording on those cards to fit the mechanic.

    In regards to pirate warrior, granted it was an oversight on my part, but isn't the synergy related to anchar? and pirate synergy not just weapons? Sure the deck has weapons in it, i won't deny, but i don't think it would be a major problem, When you're being hit with an [Hearthstone Card (archanite reaper) Not Found], i don't think it would matter, if it was on that turn or the turn after.

     

    Also i think [Hearthstone Card (upgrade) Not Found] should benefit both weapons as well, when i was thinking about it i was worried about something like Doctor Krastinov could see a bit of an issue, but i don't think it would live past a 1/1 buff. The card i am REALLY worried about for this would be Hoard Pillager, i threw out pirate warrior before, but i think with hoard pillager being a pirate, and it EQUIPPING a destroyed weapon, it would be an issue going forward.

    • Quote From clawz161

      In regards to pirate warrior, granted it was an oversight on my part, but isn't the synergy related to anchar? and pirate synergy not just weapons? Sure the deck has weapons in it, i won't deny, but i don't think it would be a major problem, When you're being hit with an [Hearthstone Card (archanite reaper) Not Found], i don't think it would matter, if it was on that turn or the turn after.

      If your hand has no taunts or healing to use, or you haven't seized board control then no, having an extra turn won't matter. But if you do have any of those an extra turn can make all the difference, especially to overall win rates where it can easily make an OP deck merely strong. It is that turn which made a huge difference to Patches era Pirate Warrior, which in the end got slowed down much more by the nerf to Fiery War Axe than Patches himself.

      Since then the lack of strong 2 mana weapons has driven the archetype to slower plays, such as using Ancharrr. Perhaps Blizz is keen to never given them one again, in which case maybe a start of game dual wield effect would be OK, but that is a pretty major design limitation to commit to.

      Regarding pirate synergy versus weapon synergy: there's a lot of overlap there. Along with cannons, weapons are what makes the pirate tribe distinct from the others. Sure there's plenty of pirates that have nothing to do with weapons, but there is definite two-way synergy between weapons and pirates, such that decks focusing on one almost always end up as a pirate/weapon decks with something else to cement the game plan (e.g. charge minions for smorc-ing in Pirate Warrior or something like Cannon Barrage if you want some style points in rogue). 

      ----------------------------------------------------------------------

      Anyway, I'm heading a bit off-topic. In the end I acknowledge both of the following:

      • Allowing dual-wielding would be cool if it can be made to work.
        • I was even quietly hoping it would happen with the rogue/warrior pairing in Scholomance.
      • If it did happen and warrior had access to it, pirate warrior would inevitably consider it.
        • So I would always have reservations about it unless it turns up on turn 6+ (which is too late for it to be worthwhile).

      So I guess, the tl;dr is: I still have pirate warrior PTSD but would still like to see how any attempt at dual-wielding weapons would work out.

  • Also for the "offhand weapon penalty" if we're doing two attacks a turn, i would consider the ogre mechanic of 50% chance of a miss, rather than decreasing damage. It is held in your less dominant hand afterall.