All Comments

The Priest minion is just good.

The neutral taunt seems meh but the same was said about Rotten Applebaum and it sees play.

With all this Reborn taunt minions, Shieldbreaker seems way better.

Seems powerful but not enough for what it should do at 10 mana. 

It's good that it has bad stats for its cost ('cause Mage is a thing), since the other 10 mana legendary is quite broken if you get it from Conjurer's.

OP updated with all pieces.

I think this deck will own the next meta.

Deck ID Not Found

I like the reward but what else do you want to run to complete it other than blink fox and the 4 drop (spacing on name) ? Gotta be another good way to get it as tempo? The new 1 drop for rogue has a chance to get one i guess? pilfer seems like tempo loss in aggro but this payoff is good  

huh, interesting.  pretty solid.  most rogue lists already run two blink fox and two hench clan for vendetta enablers.  you probably run bazaar mugger and pharaoh cat from the new expansion and with your shark/bouces you can usually get this done at a decent pace.  the fastest you could do it by just curving would be pilfer/pharaoh cat > blink fox > hench clan > mugger and then have the quest for your turn 6.  idk if you run pilfer though, probably pharaoh cat is better even if it can whiff quest wise.  

the reward is good.  good synergy with weapon buffs, good for removal and it's a lot of late game chip damage.  it also lets you face tank minions in aggro races without killing yourself.

While the quest reward looks really enticing, it's hard to say how quickly and consistently rogue can complete it in time for the weapon to become more relevant than just two wagglepick swings. Current burgle rogue lists are still essentially tempo rogue decks that splash in 4 burgle minions to activate Vendetta, but you'd probably have to double that number to reliably complete the quest. What do you cut? Leeroy, eviscerate, Cleef? Spirit of the Shark and Shadowstep? Early tempo tools like SI and Backstab?

What interest me about this quest is the potential for a real late-game rogue deck that tries to control the board with Ancient Blades while working toward some crazy Togwaggle or Pogohopper finish, but I suspect that's too greedy to be viable.

I think the quest requirement for this card is very minor, Rogues have so many ways to generate cards from another class, with cards like Pilfer, Blink Fox, and Hench-Clan Burglar are already run in a Thief Rogue decklist. We also have the two new cards from this expansion that will help with it, Pharaoh Cat and Bazaar Mugger. I think the hero power is pretty decent overall, not crazy strong but just enough power. The problem currently is that it has anti-synergy with Spectral Cutlass. Yes a 3/2 weapon that makes you immune while attacking is nice to have but it doesn't offer any sustain which many Rogue lack. I'm going to make the prediction that it won't probably be as impactful

Only thing I don't like about this card is how much worse it makes Plague of Madness look.

Does this quest make Blade Flurry semi-playable again? Against aggro "4 Mana deal 3 damage" seems better than "3 Mana deal 1 damage and draw a card". Hmmmmmm...

this is insane one of the biggest weaknesses of rogue was always that you couldnt attack into minions to often because you had no way of healing and now you can be immune with an better weapon its also very easy to complete jesus christ

Spectral cutlass will be rotated out before this quest.  Could use 1 of cutlass stilll

mama-mia! now that's-a some spicy burgle rogue support 👌👌

the immume one cuz u can equipe it every turn

I will say this now, even before it's released. This card should have never been printed. It will tilt a lot of people and probably be nerfed after a month. Must craft for those 1600 dust.  I already made a deck for it. https://outof.cards/hearthstone/decks/3701-quest-pirate-rogue

Odd rogue back. Only more odder. 

This quest can be completed much faster than other quests giving insane Tempo advantage. 

This is good for SMOrcy thief rogue, if you struggle to survive on the other hand Spectral Cutlass is better

Hey it is pretty good, but question is does your deck wants this or Spectral Cutlass

It's not that I don't like it, I just wasn't expecting it to be so simple, especially since I saw at least one designer saying that the rogue quest was their favorite. Really? This is more interesting than the priest or druid quest?

Quote From BlueBanana

Big Priest has its own hate subreddit. Everything that is either high tier or annoying to play against receives hate, including Odd Paladin, but it doesn't come close to how much Big Priest is despised. I suppose the large amount of tech cards and other attempted solutions against it have at least partly been fueled by the players' reactions towards the deck, but it's impossible to know the motivations of Blizzard. Tech cards would be preferable with both odd/even decks and Big Priest, tbh as much as I hate Big Priest I wouldn't want anything in it to actually be nerfed. For Genn and Baku, some kind of reverse Inspire (triggers from opponent's hero power), temporary cost increase, temporary disable, and temporary replacement I could see working.

Don't forget that Mindbreaker was around when the DKs as well as Genn and Baku were in the meta and never saw play. Shutting off the HP for one turn or so has proven to be a poor answer to permanent upgraded hero powers, because their real strength lies in incremental value (well except for DK paladin I suppose).

Quote From AliRadicali

Quote From No Author Specified

Is the discussion about whether or not the cards should be nerfed or will be nerfed? You've conflated the two a couple of times, committing an appeal to authority.

I would prefer it if the topic remained whether they should be nerfed, but when the counterargument being presented is "Wild/HS ought to be X way, so you're wrong", it's very unfair of you to call me out for citing the game designers' views on what Wild/HS ought to be. An appeal to authority isn't always a fallacy, especially with something as subjective as "what is this game about?"

It is especially in subjective topics a fallacy. At least in objective questions it can be argued that the authority itself is making an argument, and therefor to appeal to it is to say that since the authority makes the argument, the argument can be made and is a part of the argument in which appeal to authority is used.

Maybe I'm indeed a bit unfair in only targeting the fallacy of your side, but the reason I got involved here in the first place is that your argumentation was so much better than the other side's that I felt it was warping the direction of the debate - you were doing adequate job of disproving their arguments so I saw no need to do it. I don't feel strongly enough about not nerfing Baku or Genn to partake in this discussion just because I disagreed. Some people throw slurs like "dishonest argumentation" at me but I'm just saying, just because I argue for a side, don't assume that's my opinion - thus why I rebutted RavenSunHS' comment.

That's a very long way to say, it's not unfair, you're committing an appeal to authority and it totally is a fallacy.

So to actually try to reach a conclusion here, it's a fallacious argument indeed that HS should be any way, but even more so is to try and justify it, as if claiming it is an objective fact in the first place. In the end it's just a subjective opinion whether playing against odd/even decks is enjoyable and whether they should be nerfed or changed or not.

I appreciate you playing the devil's advocate but I think you're wrong WRT this appeal to authority being fallacious. "Fun" is subjective, but if the topic is a specific game, and you can cite the game's author saying "I'm doing X Y and Z to make the game more fun" then whether or not you agree with their definition of fun, the statement still stands as an authoritative claim about the direction of the game's development. It doesn't mean an endorsement of those design choices as the objective truth.

To be clear, I'm not claiming that HS objectively has to be a certain way, I'm claiming that, objectively, the devs have claimed their intent to make it a certain way.

Quote From LyraSilvertongue

Quote From AliRadicali

Quote From RavenSunHS

Still "repetitive" is not an argument.

You not agreeing with the argument doesn't make it not an argument. If you want to make *that* case you have to actually substantively address the argument and point out where it's fallacious. The devs have stated ad nauseam that their goal isn't just to keep the game balanced, but also "fresh" "fun" "not stale", etc. By most people's standards that excludes high levels of repetitiveness.

 

The degree to which T5 feels that the game needs to be fresh vs stale is not something we have inside knowledge of. If the goal was to make it so that wild never has major predictable or stale cards/plays you'd have to either be constantly nerfing past expansion class staples or introducing major power creep that makes the old powerful staples way less desirable compared to new cards. That is not realistic in the slightest.

Again I go back to my Bloodreaver Gul'Dan argument. Unless you're playing an extremely low curve zoolock build, heavily emphasizing low to midrange curved plays and not building for a late game back up plan then there is not a single warlock deck worth its weight that would ever not include the DK. Be it midrange, control, combo, or straight up OTK the DK will always be extremely good as it creates a pseudo-infinite removal system via the hero power, creates value out of thin air and empty boards, and completely strips the drawback of the warlock hero power/self-damaging theme away due to guaranteed healing each turn. And there are plenty more examples, although much less overblown than DKs, that emphasize that removing Genn/Baku for the sake of making the game fresh is laughable because there are already dozens of cards that are so good that they are not going away without being nerfed or deleted. 

I agree, we don't have inside knowledge of T5 decision making process. I'm not the one making the argument that wild is meant to be static or w/e, but when presented with such arguments, what little we can glean from dev interviews still counts for more than people presenting their own personal feefees as some immutable fact or rule.

I don't know why people keep going back to some generic concept of "stale" or "repetitive" when I've made it abundantly clear what my specific problems are with Genn and Baku's design and how they impact gameplay and decision-making. Gul'dan has to be drawn, has to be set up and has to be played for a whopping ten mana. If you want to argue that it leads to linear gameplay when you have single cards that win you the game, or that the card is OP, that's a fine argument to make but I don't see how it has any bearing here, it's just whataboutism. You can't compare a card that costs ten mana to play to do anything to a card that starts out activated without even being drawn, let alone played.

This card isn't showing up on the front page and you cannot click on the "Revealed" button on the side either. Took me a while to find this thread. Probably why no one has commented yet. 

It seems like a really easy quest to complete and you don't have to sacrifice a lot to do it. Very solid in my opinion. Doesn't even require you to build a deck around it fits into the Rogue identity already. You only really sacrifice your turn one to play the quest. 

Edit: Now it is showing up on the front page.

That is a very easy condition. I'm interested to see the Hero Power.

EDIT: Just poked around online. Apparently it equips a 3/2 weapon that makes your hero Immune while attacking.

Holy sweet mother of...

How many fucking board clears and heals does a man need to draw just to stomp out the sheer cancer that are murlocs?!

Reno, Kazakus, Flamestrike, DK Jaina, Dragon's Breath, Explosive Sheep, and I still only won by the skin of my teeth. What the fuck is wrong with these inbred frogs? Why is Blizzard still shitting them out every expac?