All Comments

I still stand by this. I don't understand Blizzard's insistence on having some brawls two or three times a year while other fine brawls disappear forever.

What a great deck! I've been looking for something that's random, yet weirdly competitive and unpredictable as well. Thanks!

Can you cancel the free trial after taking the rewards? to stretch the 7 days long enough to cover until September? I wouldn't think that's possible, but if it is that's basically giving everything away for free.

Subscription to prime is 6 bucks per month. Just curious, is there anyone here who would spend 6 bucks just to get these things?

which you had to pay in advance. while your opponent is just ignoring it.

Sunscale raptor was bad because frenzy sucks and Druids have better synergy with small minions than hunter, not because the effect was bad. Also, I don't think 1 mana 3/5s are bad, especially if you can multiples of it play it before turn 6. Trust me, I've reached legend with Beast Druid in wild and even there I know that discovering upgraded Bottomfeeders with Moonlit Guidance will feel awesome. I can imagine turn 4 summoning two 3/5s with just that one card. And also Aquatic Form is a really good card that incentivizes you to play Bottomfeeders.

At the very least, it's a 1 mana 1/3 beast for druid. You don't really need to go all in on the combo. 

Nice card. Hope it wont be too god, questline shaman is still in rotation

if you play questline warrior in wild i genuinely hope your computer dies and takes every component with it so you're forced to stop ruining every single game you play against someone with your low-skill overpowered dogshit that blizzard refuses to nerf in an actually meaningful way. i said the pirate warrior nerfs wouldnt do shit in wild when they happened and people doubted me, i said the questline hunter nerfs wouldnt do shit in wild and everyone doubted me. LOOK WHOS RIGHT NOW BITCHES
edit: shoutouts to the one dumbfuck that downvoted this as if im not 100 percent right and posting in the fucking salt thread, literally just play wild and you will see the shitshow that blizzard has cultivated in my favorite format. reno shaman ruining games and spamming okani so you literally cant play, pirate warriors and questline hunters that can breeze through games off pure rng, unbeatable combo priest games where they drop a nerubian on 2 and win the game by 5-6, blizzard is literally doing everything in their power to kill this format.

"At the start of your turn, take 0 damage. Each Curse is worse than the last." Is a 2 mana card btw

As I recall, it was for the "Call of the Void" and "Call of the Light" cardbacks. You could only get them by spending bits specifically through the Windows version of the Twitch desktop application; you couldn't use the web or a mobile app, and the application was wonky if you tried to run it on an emulator. The only option for Mac users was to install it with Boot Camp, but that seemed a whole lot of bother for just a single cardback.

On the contrary, I never care about the "lowest" version of Capture Coldtooth Mine when I split it with Jerry Rig Carpenter, and I welcome the opportunity to draw something halfway interesting with it. If you are adding Colossals to the deck, using Carpenter to find the Mine does seem like a good idea.

So that's the part that I was missing. I missunderstood it believing that they were like Curse of Agony added directly to the deck. Thanks for the explanation! :)

There must  be at least one other card that puts more than 1 curse into your opponent's hand for this card to even be remotely worth it.

The problem with this style of play is interaction. Curse of Agony can work because under normal circumstances your opponent cannot practically prevent getting hit by the curse as they draw them. This one however, can be dispelled (seemingly anyway) by simply paying 2 mana, so its highly unlikely it'll ever do enough damage to kill, since the warlock deck playing it is unlikely to put up enough tempo to force awkward turns.

So how much damage are we expecting? I'd say 6 damage is realistic. Is it good enough? I doubt it. Unless the abyssal curses cannot be removed, it'll never make an entire deck on its own.

As for this card, its entire viability is determined by the performance of these abyssal curses. If there are more support for it, it could work. But until then its likely never living up to its potential.

That's a near-sighted evaluation :-/

It literally :

Put a 5/6 body onboard. (which is average for a 5-mana card.)

Deals n damage to your opponent.

Give you back at least n life point.

(admittedly, n could be 0, which kinda suck)

It also potentially have the following side-effect :

Adding a card to your opponent hand may cause him to overdraw his next cards. (and some warlock list already make use of that kind of effect in their battleplan)

Taxing 2 manas or  dealing n damage again. (Admittedly, you should not count on getting heal out of these damage)

Increasing damage of future curse by one. (which may give more value to other card if you play the whole synergy. And unless you happen to have randomly generated that card, you should be.)

Where is the description for the curse, please?

The curses are added directly to your opponents hand, so ideally you already gave him a bunch of curses before (since each deals more damage than the last), then play this card and deal and heal a bunch of damage at the start of your opponents turn. Or your opponent (for whatever reasons) already had one or more curses in his hand.

Quote From edennnnnn

are you just using un-interactive to mean "i don't like it" because how could a play pattern be MORE interactive than putting a card in hand and giving your opponent a choice to make???

 

Okay looking back at it, maybe un-interactive was poorly worded, "Disrupting your opponents turn by making them pay 2 mana to remove 1 curse, or make them spend most of their mana to get rid of curses, depending on the support this archetype will get" is a better way of wording it i suppose.

The main reason i used "Un-interactive" is because i imagined the worst case scenario (I like imagining the "best" and "worst" case scenarios for a lot of cards when they get revealed.) where "curselock" is a meta warping archetype/deck, and it's curselock mirrors most of your games. Both locks just playing curses and removing their opponents. Both ignoring board cuz they want they 1. Dont have the mana to spend on minions cuz they spent it on removing curses. 2. Want to play their own curse cards so they can curse their opponent. Of course this is just speculation, and such things are really dependand on the support this archetype will get. But i really hope they make it a fun archetype, and not one that feels both bad to play as and play against. We have had enough bad experiences with warlock in the last year. (And btw this comes from someone who likes playing warlock. I'm just concerned about one of my favorite classes going into another bad direction.)

What's the purpose of that?? As my understand the curses only heals you when this is in board, right? So just healing 2 points when you are lucky enough when your opponent draw that specific card at that specific time?? I'm missing something because I'm not getting it, I think...

are you just using un-interactive to mean "i don't like it" because how could a play pattern be MORE interactive than putting a card in hand and giving your opponent a choice to make???

Hmm this seems hard to judge. We need to see more cards in order to judge this legendary better. However i personally hope this "curselock" DOES NOT become good/competative because it seems like solitairstone 2.0 if its a meta deck. These curses seem so un-interactive and not fun to play against. Also turning the curses into healing just makes it harder to deal with that deck, which i hope this archetype will fail and i hope it doesn't get good support.

Edit: "Un-interactive" might not have been the best word choise, but i was imagine the scenario where it's "Curselock" mirrors every game, and the support it got was/is insanely strong. I probably should have used "toxic" or something in this direction. I just want to express that i really hope this is a overreaction, because i just wish to see warlock not go into another "feelsbad" direction again. Especially after Tickatus and The Demon Seed made warlock often the class that gets bashed at a lot because of unfun archetypes.

I was discussing it from a gameplay point of view more than how effective it will be, since we don't have nearly enough information to comment on that at the moment. I'd be surprised if playing against it didn't feel like playing against bomb warrior. Both encourage passive, defensive gameplay along with healing (the legendary pay-off effect is literally that), that ends up very boring to outright frustrating to play against. How good warlock is at doing that (both initially and within it's 2 year lifespan in Standard) doesn't change much in that regard.

I'm not completely hating on the design though. I do like that there is the option to spend 2 mana to halve the damage taken from each curse.  And even without that it is a genuine improvement over bomb warrior because you won't get blind-sided out of nowhere by randomly drawing several bombs and losing a game you were just about to win.

So at least it is a positive refinement on an old, contentious deck. That's a serious step up from them printing the hunter questline when people were fed up of Raza priest in Wild!

I think the Bomb Warrior comparison isn't quite fair. Bomb Warrior was a deck that had to do very little to basically shuffle lethal damage into your deck and there was practically 0 counterplay to said bombs.

Curse Warlock, assuming it works, will always at least give you the ability to slow down the burn by just removing the curses. Warlock is also not nearly as good at turtling as Warrior is and they lose the ability to just run cheap removal and healthgain like they can with Mo'Arg and Grimoir of Sacrifice right now..

The way I see it is that it's probably gonna be a ramping damage threat similar to Questlock, except without the absurd midrange power spikes or the extreme damage ramp once your deck is empty and you still have Backfire in hand. It's gonna do what Warlock always does: Punish decks that rely on just hiding behind boardclears and armor while having to fight for their life against proactive decks. As long as they don't print some really insane other cards that somehow go with the curse package and make it an allrounder like Questlock I doubt it's gonna be more than a funny tier 3 - tier 2 control deck that falls in and out of meta depending on what's currently played. At best it'S gonna be a slow burn deck with predictable damage margins and if the non-curse control shell is good enough it'll probably not even outclass OwlTK

I get why it could work, because the position always at the bottom. But you also can't get infinite dredge to keep pulling this.

Maybe with a class that draws deck quickly.

This won't see play unless T5 decides Warlock gets no more healing, and even then it might not see play. It literally does nothing but tax your opponent for 2 mana.

Sightless Watcher was always on the precipice of maybe being playable. So, even if you whiff, it's still an okay card. The potential upside of a 3/2 tutor - not just draw, but tutor - puts this into the A tier. The only way this is bad is if Mechs are bad.