Dhunters true identity is actually hero attacks. A lot of its best cards synergizes with hero attacks, it has a 1 mana hp that allows for a hero attack, a lot of its cards buffs its attack (not weapon), and its minions does things with a hero attack. Its so important to the class that getting your face frozen is more devastating to dhunters than to any other class, almost near levels of having to skip the entire turn because of it.
You made some good points on the subject of hero attacks, but what is given to both warrior and rogue are weapons, and things that work with weapons. Your argument that rogue has been 'silently begging' for cards that work with hero attacks is kinda hard to justify, given that rogue cards has often revolved around its weapon rather than the actual attack, like Deadly Poison, Cutting Class, stuff that will do other stuff regardless of whether the rogue actually performs the attack.
But this discussion is fairly academic. The real reason why anyone would want to play a dhunter deck is because they are the only tempo class that can heal and burn, and are the only class that needs* to draw cards to play their turn and they do it better than any other class (mage bs not withstanding). Playing a midrange dhunter is vastly different than playing any other midrange deck, with a good combination of weapons, burn, sustain and card draw that other classes simply do not have.
I think to argue whether a class should exist on the theory of uniqueness alone is often going to end up nowhere because I remember during AoO it was largely accepted that dhunters were simply doing the same things both hunter and rogue were doing, but better. That doesn't mean that hunters and rogues were necessarily obsolete. Metas change, and so does class playstyle, part of the reason why most of us really love the first expansion after rotation.
There are more than nuances, a lot of that stuff other classes can do and overlap with others. Which is a good thing.
At the moment, DH just lacks a spark in this sense. It just fails to give me a compelling reason why I would choose over another class, except that the specific card I'm interested in happens to be in DH.
I can understand this point however I don't think saying things like it doesn't justify it's existence as a class. It has positives like strong draw, discounts (with skull), copying effects (Zai). As well as powerful disruption with Star Student Stelina and Glide. It can also be very fast out the gate with it's hero power and many attack buffs. None of this is completely unique sure but it's not inconsequential.
It's also okay that the class doesn't appeal to everybody. I know people who dislike Warlock or only play Mage. It doesn't mean Demon Hunter doesn't have it's place in the game.
As for sigils, I like the idea. It's a secret that the opponent knows and reacts too. Very neat idea.
I remember reading somewhere that DH was developed with the same amount of time and resources as an expansion, which is probably why it doesn't feel like something that was intended to be added to the game since the start (I think Ben Brode even stated at one point that they weren't going to add any more classes). In the videos that they showed about DH's development, the design team said that they initially wanted to have a "Fury" resource that was unique to DH, but later in development they decided it was too complicated and changed the HP to first "Gain 1 Attack. You can use this one more time this turn" and eventually just the 1 Mana Hero Power we know today. From that history, it seems like they initially had some ideas for how to make DH feel unique and necessary, but they ultimately scaled back the complexity and made it more similar to the existing classes. Honestly I think it's kind of sad that they went in the direction of making it simple and somewhat redundant, but I can understand the choice as fitting HS's design philosophy of simplicity and being new-player friendly. As for what they've done with DH since its release, I think the most promising aspect is Token DH, but they haven't really supported it and the cards that they've made to synergize with it are all currently unplayable, so this unique identity isn't really expressed in actual games.
Yeah, I was conscious of the mechanic they scrapped during development when writing. Didn't they say they scrapped it partly because not all decks would use it, so it would be wasted in some metas? I would argue that's a non-issue to begin with because there will always be casual players that used it even when the surrounding deck was weak.
I agree Token DH had some potential because it was set up such that you wanted to trade your minions away. With Wrathscale Naga now in Wild they're going to have to work quite hard to bring that back.
I agree on the first part with Arthas possibly returning this year, but I don't think they would do something like Wrath of the Lich King again. Your stretch with Classic-> TBC >WotLK just makes no sense. With your logic WotLK would be skipped like TBC because of Demon Hunters.
They could put the Lich King in the Game another Way.
You can apply your logic to any class because there is overlap regardless of how you look at it. Let's take Warrior as an example:
Weapon/aggro: Rogue with more armour.
Control via hard removal: Mage & Warlock.
Control via health gain: Priest and maybe Warlock.
Control via board sweeps: Mage, Priest & Warlock.
Midrange board-based buffing: Paladin. Granted, Paladin does this with spells while the minions are on board and Warrior does this without spells.
Handbuffs: Hunter & Paladin (from MSoG).
Recruit: Paladin & Priest.
Forcing uniqueness is only going to limit design space. Why should anyone care if two mechanics in two classes are vaguely similar? Mage is supposed to be the spell damage class, but nobody cared when they started branching that off into Shaman (they did the same thing with freeze too). Your issue is not an issue as long as the decks feel fundamentally different to play. The word "archetype" literally dictates that the decks have the same goal and gameplan, but the process used to achieve it is different. Rogue, Hunter, Warrior, Warlock and DH all have aggressive decks, but you're lying if you say they're the "same thing", in the same way that you can't say Control Mage, Warlock, Priest and Warrior are the same. If all the decks start to become homogenous, then that is a problem, but as long as the cards are different, each deck has its own unique feel to it, and therefore they cannot be classified as the same.
At a mechanical level, warrior absolutely has one thing the other classes don't: it cares about damaged minions. That is particularly apt right now because of the frenzy keyword, which makes so much more sense in warrior than any other class because of it. (The fact frenzy warrior isn't a meta deck is a separate matter.)
Of course most mechanics will be shared with other classes in some sense. I am not faulting DH for that. The point is more that it should find something that makes people choose to play DH over another class because its something only DH allows, not just because DH happens to do it a bit better than the other classes do. Until then it doesn't feel like DH is really adding any meaningfully different options.
Maybe the sigils will be the answer, and I'm looking forward to more of those being announced.
I understand the idea of wanting a class to be a unique shining star. To have something no one else has. But that's not the direction Blizzard went with any of the classes. Why should Demon Hunter be different? Mechanics being similar allow for neutral and dual class cards to be better targeted. Different archetypes in a class allow for diversity in builds. Sure maybe most DH are OTK right now but the next set dropping a good deathrattle or two could push the Barrens cards into the spot light. Even if it doesn't overtake the meta build letting these exist is still healthy. Heck I've been enjoying deathrattle DH in wild a lot. It's silly sure but it still wins and it's fun to play and refine that deck.
To me the game would be boring if every class was predetermined by some magical unique thing they needed to do. Fighting that one Recruit paladin in the sea of Secrets is refreshing and fun in my daily climb. Don't you agree?
The thing is, the other classes DO have at least something unique from other classes, and they had many of them since Classic so we cannot even argue that it took a long time to find them. As an incomplete list based solely on what they had in Classic:
Druid: mana ramp
Hunter: err... (Admittedly hunter struggles in this regard nowadays because it was originally the only class that was structured around a tribe, which is no longer central enough nor unique enough to count.)
Mage: mass freezing
Paladin: debuffs instead of true removal
Priest: steal cards/minions
Rogue: minion bouncing
Shaman: totems (0-attack utility minions)
Warlock: self-sacrifice/discard
Warrior: cares about damaged minions (on both sides of the board)
There's a certain amount on nuance in there, since a few cards do exist for many effects scattered across the other classes and neutral. But it is never enough that you would choose a class other than rogue to, say, bounce a minion a few times.
I fully get that not everyone cares if each class has their own unique aspect, but I still think it is good for the game design for them to have something. I guess it's most important from a (casual) deck-builder's point of view. When a new card is released these mechanics set the scene for how I think of the possibilities. Will bouncing it in rogue make it bonkers? Maybe druid could play it early enough for it to actually stick?
At the moment, DH just lacks a spark in this sense. It just fails to give me a compelling reason why I would choose over another class, except that the specific card I'm interested in happens to be in DH.
There is definitely hope, however. If sigils become a common thing they could definitely provide DH with its own approach to things: set it up over two turns.
For somebody who doesn't know the lore. Which are the regions for each one? Irelia is from Ionia but not able to find about the other ones. Zilean from Demacia? Malphite from Noxus?
Same here! I'm really interested to see what these new champions do.
Of course, it also means that I can enjoy the LoR champs for who they are (or hate them - looking at you, Lee and Fiora), regardless of how truly they capture the LoL counterpart. Prime example - I love playing LeBlanc, and I couldn't care less that her design isn't like LoL. I've never played LoL, so why would I care? I think she's awesome as she is, here in LoR.
@linkblade: That's a trend that has been going on for a while. I think one part of the reason for it is that the finalists aren't allowed to vote. More often than not, those consist of very active participants. The less people vote, the easier it is to change the results of the first round.
You can apply your logic to any class because there is overlap regardless of how you look at it. Let's take Warrior as an example:
Weapon/aggro: Rogue with more armour.
Control via hard removal: Mage & Warlock.
Control via health gain: Priest and maybe Warlock.
Control via board sweeps: Mage, Priest & Warlock.
Midrange board-based buffing: Paladin. Granted, Paladin does this with spells while the minions are on board and Warrior does this without spells.
Handbuffs: Hunter & Paladin (from MSoG).
Recruit: Paladin & Priest.
Forcing uniqueness is only going to limit design space. Why should anyone care if two mechanics in two classes are vaguely similar? Mage is supposed to be the spell damage class, but nobody cared when they started branching that off into Shaman (they did the same thing with freeze too). Your issue is not an issue as long as the decks feel fundamentally different to play. The word "archetype" literally dictates that the decks have the same goal and gameplan, but the process used to achieve it is different. Rogue, Hunter, Warrior, Warlock and DH all have aggressive decks, but you're lying if you say they're the "same thing", in the same way that you can't say Control Mage, Warlock, Priest and Warrior are the same. If all the decks start to become homogenous, then that is a problem, but as long as the cards are different, each deck has its own unique feel to it, and therefore they cannot be classified as the same.
I remember reading somewhere that DH was developed with the same amount of time and resources as an expansion, which is probably why it doesn't feel like something that was intended to be added to the game since the start (I think Ben Brode even stated at one point that they weren't going to add any more classes). In the videos that they showed about DH's development, the design team said that they initially wanted to have a "Fury" resource that was unique to DH, but later in development they decided it was too complicated and changed the HP to first "Gain 1 Attack. You can use this one more time this turn" and eventually just the 1 Mana Hero Power we know today. From that history, it seems like they initially had some ideas for how to make DH feel unique and necessary, but they ultimately scaled back the complexity and made it more similar to the existing classes. Honestly I think it's kind of sad that they went in the direction of making it simple and somewhat redundant, but I can understand the choice as fitting HS's design philosophy of simplicity and being new-player friendly. As for what they've done with DH since its release, I think the most promising aspect is Token DH, but they haven't really supported it and the cards that they've made to synergize with it are all currently unplayable, so this unique identity isn't really expressed in actual games.
I understand wanting each class to be truly unique I don't think that is healthy for the game. If Warriors were THE weapon class and mages where THE spell class that takes away from other classes not enhances them. If you look at all the classes they overlap with another in every aspect. That's actually a good thing. It helps the design of neutral (and dual) class cards. If a card is so specific it only works in one class then why do we have neutrals?
Hero Attacks:
A lot of classes use their hero to fight. Druid attacks with it's claws, using animal forms to attack. Rogue takes a weapon and enhances it with poisons to take down their foes. Demon Hunter is somewhere in the middle it has weapons but it's spells enhance the hero even without weapons. Demon Hunter even has an "ignore taunt" mechanic in Kayn Sunfury.
Big Demons:
If we focus on the Demon aspect that alligns with Warlock. Demon Hunter's haven't had this pushed but cards like Fel Summoner or Pit Commander pulling demons from your hand or deck are very similar to WarlocksVoidcaller or Possessed Lackey. So far what we've seen these are very alike. If we go beyond Demons we have Paladin and Warrior with things like Commencement. Cards like this encourage deck building challenges. Decks shouldn't always be auto complete. Even if the cards don't make an impact, as the DH ones have so far, the variety being there is useful for the game.
Tokens:
Druid has the board buffs while Demon Hunter and Hunter do not. Druids want their tokens to live and continue the attack. Demon Hunter's throw away their tokens. They throw them into a board, clearing it out and benefiting from the death's with Nethrandamus or Feast of Souls. Hunters are in the middle here. Doing both board building and rushing tokens to clear.
Deathrattle:
Yes these could of gone in any class certainly. However I like the swarm nature of these in DH. The kill me and another will take my place feels Demon Hunter. Where Hunters you know it will summon a beast when it dies DH it's a deck building thing. You have to have the cards in your hand/deck to get pulled. Being prepared for the fight before hand. Rogues deathrattles tend to have value, buffing weapons or adding things to the deck.
OTK:
what I'm saying here is that we didn't need DH for another OTK archetype to exist
No we didn't need it to be DH. But is that bad that they have an OTK? As I said before different deck types in a class is a good thing. Not every Mage you face should be No Minion, even if that is the best type. Having other avenues lets players expirement to find new and dare I say fun ways to win.
Soulfragment:
Yes you do need to mention something. Why is it such a shock that in a dual class set another class has the mechanic? Warlocks use the healing better but DH turn those shards into a much stronger way to attack. Similar but different.
Outcast:
Yes it's stronger in a low cost aggro style. That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. I think making people look at their hand different because of a mechanic is a plus. Combo also is better with low cost cards, should it be limited to aggro as well?
Conclusion:
I understand the idea of wanting a class to be a unique shining star. To have something no one else has. But that's not the direction Blizzard went with any of the classes. Why should Demon Hunter be different? Mechanics being similar allow for neutral and dual class cards to be better targeted. Different archetypes in a class allow for diversity in builds. Sure maybe most DH are OTK right now but the next set dropping a good deathrattle or two could push the Barrens cards into the spot light. Even if it doesn't overtake the meta build letting these exist is still healthy. Heck I've been enjoying deathrattle DH in wild a lot. It's silly sure but it still wins and it's fun to play and refine that deck.
To me the game would be boring if every class was predetermined by some magical unique thing they needed to do. Fighting that one Recruit paladin in the sea of Secrets is refreshing and fun in my daily climb. Don't you agree?
I kinda wish we had the mini-set watermark, as that what's I'm imaging these cards to be in. Also, frenzy seems narrower than spellburst, as I'm finding it more difficult to come up with compelling designs.
The numbers might need some adjusting, but I'm happy with the effect at least. Which art do you think is better?
Early feedback:
KANSAS
I think the word "this" is missing in the frenzy effect. Anyways, I like it. If your opponent has a bunch of small minions, they can get through for a turn, but then this can come right back. Nice flavor!
Could this work? He might be big for a 1/4.
cydonianknight
I like this. Seems like a solid card. I don't mave much to add.
linkblade91
Most frenzy minions aren't big, so I don't know how much being able to potentially trigger frenzy twice on a minion is worth getting a smaller one. That being said, I like the flavor of both cards. The hero power works well with frenzy and gives warrior access to Inner Rage effects now that it has rotated out of standard.
Wailor
I actually think this design is clever, even if it doesn't seem all that exciting at first glance, kind of like of a Lotus Assassin type of effect.
Demonxz95
Definitely innovative. The only concern I have is that the word "cards" don't refer to minions or weapons already on the battlefield, as far as I know. But then again, team 5 likes to play fast and loose with their wording “¯\_ (ツ)_/¯“
Does DH have a good reason to exist yet?
Dhunters true identity is actually hero attacks. A lot of its best cards synergizes with hero attacks, it has a 1 mana hp that allows for a hero attack, a lot of its cards buffs its attack (not weapon), and its minions does things with a hero attack. Its so important to the class that getting your face frozen is more devastating to dhunters than to any other class, almost near levels of having to skip the entire turn because of it.
You made some good points on the subject of hero attacks, but what is given to both warrior and rogue are weapons, and things that work with weapons. Your argument that rogue has been 'silently begging' for cards that work with hero attacks is kinda hard to justify, given that rogue cards has often revolved around its weapon rather than the actual attack, like Deadly Poison, Cutting Class, stuff that will do other stuff regardless of whether the rogue actually performs the attack.
But this discussion is fairly academic. The real reason why anyone would want to play a dhunter deck is because they are the only tempo class that can heal and burn, and are the only class that needs* to draw cards to play their turn and they do it better than any other class (mage bs not withstanding). Playing a midrange dhunter is vastly different than playing any other midrange deck, with a good combination of weapons, burn, sustain and card draw that other classes simply do not have.
I think to argue whether a class should exist on the theory of uniqueness alone is often going to end up nowhere because I remember during AoO it was largely accepted that dhunters were simply doing the same things both hunter and rogue were doing, but better. That doesn't mean that hunters and rogues were necessarily obsolete. Metas change, and so does class playstyle, part of the reason why most of us really love the first expansion after rotation.
Tragedy Miracle Rogue Deck List and Guide - Memes and Dreams #15
Nice! And the name of the deck is the best one I have seen in a long time!
Does DH have a good reason to exist yet?
There are more than nuances, a lot of that stuff other classes can do and overlap with others. Which is a good thing.
I can understand this point however I don't think saying things like it doesn't justify it's existence as a class. It has positives like strong draw, discounts (with skull), copying effects (Zai). As well as powerful disruption with Star Student Stelina and Glide. It can also be very fast out the gate with it's hero power and many attack buffs. None of this is completely unique sure but it's not inconsequential.
It's also okay that the class doesn't appeal to everybody. I know people who dislike Warlock or only play Mage. It doesn't mean Demon Hunter doesn't have it's place in the game.
As for sigils, I like the idea. It's a secret that the opponent knows and reacts too. Very neat idea.
Quest Trading - Play A Friend!
Battletag: Szafirmag#2937
Region: EU
Trade Only?: Yes
Achievement Hunting: Forged in the Barrens edition
Yep, it was confirmed by Celestalon a few weeks ago (can't find the exact tweet but you can trust me on this one)
Does DH have a good reason to exist yet?
Yeah, I was conscious of the mechanic they scrapped during development when writing. Didn't they say they scrapped it partly because not all decks would use it, so it would be wasted in some metas? I would argue that's a non-issue to begin with because there will always be casual players that used it even when the surrounding deck was weak.
I agree Token DH had some potential because it was set up such that you wanted to trade your minions away. With Wrathscale Naga now in Wild they're going to have to work quite hard to bring that back.
Dean Ayala's Dream Land & Community Q&A #15 - Future Game Goals, Hero Cards, Blizzard Turnover, Progression
I agree on the first part with Arthas possibly returning this year, but I don't think they would do something like Wrath of the Lich King again. Your stretch with Classic-> TBC >WotLK just makes no sense. With your logic WotLK would be skipped like TBC because of Demon Hunters.
They could put the Lich King in the Game another Way.
Does DH have a good reason to exist yet?
At a mechanical level, warrior absolutely has one thing the other classes don't: it cares about damaged minions. That is particularly apt right now because of the frenzy keyword, which makes so much more sense in warrior than any other class because of it. (The fact frenzy warrior isn't a meta deck is a separate matter.)
Of course most mechanics will be shared with other classes in some sense. I am not faulting DH for that. The point is more that it should find something that makes people choose to play DH over another class because its something only DH allows, not just because DH happens to do it a bit better than the other classes do. Until then it doesn't feel like DH is really adding any meaningfully different options.
Maybe the sigils will be the answer, and I'm looking forward to more of those being announced.
Does DH have a good reason to exist yet?
The thing is, the other classes DO have at least something unique from other classes, and they had many of them since Classic so we cannot even argue that it took a long time to find them. As an incomplete list based solely on what they had in Classic:
There's a certain amount on nuance in there, since a few cards do exist for many effects scattered across the other classes and neutral. But it is never enough that you would choose a class other than rogue to, say, bounce a minion a few times.
I fully get that not everyone cares if each class has their own unique aspect, but I still think it is good for the game design for them to have something. I guess it's most important from a (casual) deck-builder's point of view. When a new card is released these mechanics set the scene for how I think of the possibilities. Will bouncing it in rogue make it bonkers? Maybe druid could play it early enough for it to actually stick?
At the moment, DH just lacks a spark in this sense. It just fails to give me a compelling reason why I would choose over another class, except that the specific card I'm interested in happens to be in DH.
There is definitely hope, however. If sigils become a common thing they could definitely provide DH with its own approach to things: set it up over two turns.
[Game] Card Treasure Hunt (The Resurrection Attempt)
Not a lot to work with here, R. The only hint was followed by a disclaimer that it wasn't a hint.
Guardians of the Ancient
For somebody who doesn't know the lore. Which are the regions for each one? Irelia is from Ionia but not able to find about the other ones. Zilean from Demacia? Malphite from Noxus?
Runeterra's Guardians of the Ancient Expansion Releases on May 5! New Cards, Trailer, and Details
Same here! I'm really interested to see what these new champions do.
Of course, it also means that I can enjoy the LoR champs for who they are (or hate them - looking at you, Lee and Fiora), regardless of how truly they capture the LoL counterpart. Prime example - I love playing LeBlanc, and I couldn't care less that her design isn't like LoL. I've never played LoL, so why would I care? I think she's awesome as she is, here in LoR.
Legendaries Of Runeterra - Card Design Competition Discussion Thread
Congrats to FenrirWolf!
@linkblade: That's a trend that has been going on for a while. I think one part of the reason for it is that the finalists aren't allowed to vote. More often than not, those consist of very active participants. The less people vote, the easier it is to change the results of the first round.
'Tis But A Scratch - Card Design Competition Discussion Thread
Here's my idea, it's about a big mama bear protecting her cub when danger arises. I'll add feedback later today.
Does DH have a good reason to exist yet?
You can apply your logic to any class because there is overlap regardless of how you look at it. Let's take Warrior as an example:
Weapon/aggro: Rogue with more armour.
Control via hard removal: Mage & Warlock.
Control via health gain: Priest and maybe Warlock.
Control via board sweeps: Mage, Priest & Warlock.
Midrange board-based buffing: Paladin. Granted, Paladin does this with spells while the minions are on board and Warrior does this without spells.
Handbuffs: Hunter & Paladin (from MSoG).
Recruit: Paladin & Priest.
Forcing uniqueness is only going to limit design space. Why should anyone care if two mechanics in two classes are vaguely similar? Mage is supposed to be the spell damage class, but nobody cared when they started branching that off into Shaman (they did the same thing with freeze too). Your issue is not an issue as long as the decks feel fundamentally different to play. The word "archetype" literally dictates that the decks have the same goal and gameplan, but the process used to achieve it is different. Rogue, Hunter, Warrior, Warlock and DH all have aggressive decks, but you're lying if you say they're the "same thing", in the same way that you can't say Control Mage, Warlock, Priest and Warrior are the same. If all the decks start to become homogenous, then that is a problem, but as long as the cards are different, each deck has its own unique feel to it, and therefore they cannot be classified as the same.
[Game] Card Treasure Hunt (The Resurrection Attempt)
From anyting, for sure. Text of the riddle is not connected with the card's effect.
Does DH have a good reason to exist yet?
I remember reading somewhere that DH was developed with the same amount of time and resources as an expansion, which is probably why it doesn't feel like something that was intended to be added to the game since the start (I think Ben Brode even stated at one point that they weren't going to add any more classes). In the videos that they showed about DH's development, the design team said that they initially wanted to have a "Fury" resource that was unique to DH, but later in development they decided it was too complicated and changed the HP to first "Gain 1 Attack. You can use this one more time this turn" and eventually just the 1 Mana Hero Power we know today. From that history, it seems like they initially had some ideas for how to make DH feel unique and necessary, but they ultimately scaled back the complexity and made it more similar to the existing classes. Honestly I think it's kind of sad that they went in the direction of making it simple and somewhat redundant, but I can understand the choice as fitting HS's design philosophy of simplicity and being new-player friendly. As for what they've done with DH since its release, I think the most promising aspect is Token DH, but they haven't really supported it and the cards that they've made to synergize with it are all currently unplayable, so this unique identity isn't really expressed in actual games.
[Game] Card Treasure Hunt (The Resurrection Attempt)
Wrong direction from what?
Does DH have a good reason to exist yet?
I understand wanting each class to be truly unique I don't think that is healthy for the game. If Warriors were THE weapon class and mages where THE spell class that takes away from other classes not enhances them. If you look at all the classes they overlap with another in every aspect. That's actually a good thing. It helps the design of neutral (and dual) class cards. If a card is so specific it only works in one class then why do we have neutrals?
Hero Attacks:
A lot of classes use their hero to fight. Druid attacks with it's claws, using animal forms to attack. Rogue takes a weapon and enhances it with poisons to take down their foes. Demon Hunter is somewhere in the middle it has weapons but it's spells enhance the hero even without weapons. Demon Hunter even has an "ignore taunt" mechanic in Kayn Sunfury.
Big Demons:
If we focus on the Demon aspect that alligns with Warlock. Demon Hunter's haven't had this pushed but cards like Fel Summoner or Pit Commander pulling demons from your hand or deck are very similar to WarlocksVoidcaller or Possessed Lackey. So far what we've seen these are very alike. If we go beyond Demons we have Paladin and Warrior with things like Commencement. Cards like this encourage deck building challenges. Decks shouldn't always be auto complete. Even if the cards don't make an impact, as the DH ones have so far, the variety being there is useful for the game.
Tokens:
Druid has the board buffs while Demon Hunter and Hunter do not. Druids want their tokens to live and continue the attack. Demon Hunter's throw away their tokens. They throw them into a board, clearing it out and benefiting from the death's with Nethrandamus or Feast of Souls. Hunters are in the middle here. Doing both board building and rushing tokens to clear.
Deathrattle:
Yes these could of gone in any class certainly. However I like the swarm nature of these in DH. The kill me and another will take my place feels Demon Hunter. Where Hunters you know it will summon a beast when it dies DH it's a deck building thing. You have to have the cards in your hand/deck to get pulled. Being prepared for the fight before hand. Rogues deathrattles tend to have value, buffing weapons or adding things to the deck.
OTK:
No we didn't need it to be DH. But is that bad that they have an OTK? As I said before different deck types in a class is a good thing. Not every Mage you face should be No Minion, even if that is the best type. Having other avenues lets players expirement to find new and dare I say fun ways to win.
Soulfragment:
Yes you do need to mention something. Why is it such a shock that in a dual class set another class has the mechanic? Warlocks use the healing better but DH turn those shards into a much stronger way to attack. Similar but different.
Outcast:
Yes it's stronger in a low cost aggro style. That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. I think making people look at their hand different because of a mechanic is a plus. Combo also is better with low cost cards, should it be limited to aggro as well?
Conclusion:
I understand the idea of wanting a class to be a unique shining star. To have something no one else has. But that's not the direction Blizzard went with any of the classes. Why should Demon Hunter be different? Mechanics being similar allow for neutral and dual class cards to be better targeted. Different archetypes in a class allow for diversity in builds. Sure maybe most DH are OTK right now but the next set dropping a good deathrattle or two could push the Barrens cards into the spot light. Even if it doesn't overtake the meta build letting these exist is still healthy. Heck I've been enjoying deathrattle DH in wild a lot. It's silly sure but it still wins and it's fun to play and refine that deck.
To me the game would be boring if every class was predetermined by some magical unique thing they needed to do. Fighting that one Recruit paladin in the sea of Secrets is refreshing and fun in my daily climb. Don't you agree?
[Game] Card Treasure Hunt (The Resurrection Attempt)
Nope. Wrong direction
[Game] Card Treasure Hunt (The Resurrection Attempt)
[Hearthstone Card (
Rin, the First Disciple
) Not Found]?
Legendaries Of Runeterra - Card Design Competition Discussion Thread
Well crap, I didn't think I'd win that honestly. That was my first win :D
Best of luck to you guys for the next competition.
'Tis But A Scratch - Card Design Competition Discussion Thread
I kinda wish we had the mini-set watermark, as that what's I'm imaging these cards to be in. Also, frenzy seems narrower than spellburst, as I'm finding it more difficult to come up with compelling designs.
The numbers might need some adjusting, but I'm happy with the effect at least. Which art do you think is better?
Early feedback:
Could this work? He might be big for a 1/4.
Legendaries Of Runeterra - Card Design Competition Discussion Thread
Congrats to FenrirWulf :)
Achievement Hunting: Forged in the Barrens edition
I suppose, with mini-set Blizzard will introduce more 'sigils')