There seems to be more activity in this comp than the last few. That's pretty good!
More feedback.
Fedrion
I know you've already submitted the card, but it's a VERY solid card and I could definitely see it making the finals.
Arkasaur
I think the card itself is fine. The synergy with Poisonous and the Battlecry is cute, but I feel like the card doesn't have much deliberacy. Everything on the card just feels like it just happened to be put together that way. As a card for the competition though, it'll likely get some good votes due to its interesting design.
BasilAnguis
I have already mentioned before about reducing the text size too much on the second version (in which, "Weapon" also should not be capitalized), which is why prompts like this are usually avoided in the first place.
That said, I do also have a problem with the first version which is that Discovering a card based on being Rare doesn't really narrow the pool in a meaningful way. While you may know what cards you'll be able to get and which ones you can't, there isn't really anything you can try to grab from the pool. I also don't like putting "from the past" on a Common or Rare card. Perhaps we might see it on an Epic one day, but as a Common or Rare, it very much takes away from the spectacle of Toki, Time Tinker.
And one last note, but that is definitely not a Kobold. It looks more like a humanoid raptor person.
KANSAS
I still stand by all the things I said about the card before, but I do think it's better as a 3/2.
The phrasing "Draw a Legendary from your deck" feels incomplete and could come off as deliberately skimping on the rules to fit the card into the competition. While I think it's kinda cool that it can draw non-minions now, there is the chronological problem in that Legendary non-minion cards did not exist during Blackrock Mountain. This aspect would only really become meaningful in The Boomsday Project (as Quests start in your hand anyway). Minion should also not be capitalized on the second version as the word is only capitalized when it's at the start of a sentence.
Wailor
I do agree with Link in that it should be a Warlock card. For basically the same reason. It would be weird for Time Rip and Roar of Time to exist in the same set (and at the same rarity no less).
Linkblade91
I'm going to go against the grain and say that I actually preferred the previous art over the current one, although this one does feel a lot more Hearthstone-y.
Nirast
I do kinda like Boastful Assassin. It's flavorful and it feels like a proper dual-class card. I do believe we will eventually see a Stealth + Taunt card in the game one day, although I will agree that the general weirdness of combining the two mechanics might rub people the wrong way.
Hibernating Rockbeast is pretty good.
DestroyerR
I did already mention this on Discord, but yeah, Showstopper exists and is also not very good.
Honestly, I think tinkering with the font size shouldn't be an immediate reason for a DQ as long as you don't go out of the window with it. I mean you have to compensate for a single letter, that should be done by going -1 or -2 and won't probably be noticed at all if people don't know it from the start. I've tried out alternate wording for KANSAS' card and it still looked okay at -4. We could also ask Shadows but I'm all for not asking questions in cases like this.
I do agree with this. The current wording actually already has text size reduced. It's currently at -2, but it works because it looks natural with the way the text on the game is usually presented. There is a problem with reducing the card text too much in that it can come off as natural and an attempt to force a card into the prompt where it wouldn't otherwise belong.
Alternatively, "can only" will make the text work while still appearing natural, but my hesitancy to use this wording stems from the fact that "can only" could psychologically make the effect sound like a downside even if the effect itself is still exactly the same.
@Demon: Thanks for the explanation. Regarding the text, why don't you simply phrase it in the present tense? "Your Hero Power always summons Stoneclaw Totem."
There is a technical problem with this text which is the fact that despite having less characters overall, this exact wording is harder to fit into 2 lines of text because of the specific line "summons Stoneclaw Totem" as opposed to "summon Stoneclaw Totem" which takes up more space on one line and forces it into another line. This is actually something I'm finding out after I already made the card with the wording it has now, which makes the process moving forward a bit more difficult to navigate around.
It's a case of a weird wording problem, which is one reason why prompts based on specific card texts are usually avoided.
It's a simple but very solid effect on that iconic 1/1/3 statline. I like it. That said, two minor issues: I'm no native speaker, but "Earthwarder" got me irritated for a moment. Shouldn't it be "waren"? Then I'm not sure why you're using future tense in the effect ("will always summon"). Don't aura cards usually use present tense ("always summons")? I've run a quick check and there's not a single card in the database that has the word "will" on it.
"Warder" is actually correct here. A "warder" is another word for a guard of some type, and to "ward" something can be used as a way of saying to protect or guard something. This is enforced on the card as summoning Stoneclaw Totem, which protects things and is also the representative of earth out of the original 4 Hero Power Totems.
You actually aren't the first person to point out that "will always" is not proper wording here. Truth be told, I'm not quite sure what the best wording to use here is. I haven't really been able to find anything better.
Now this is a card that will definitely do well. I also really like it just as a card. I like how it uses a game mechanic in a new way that feels very realistic as well as the fact that it manages to feel Legendary while still abiding to the two-line limit.
Wailor
I've always been a sucker for time-based aesthetics on cards, so you've definitely got my flavor vote. If we were still in 2016 or 2017 Hearthstone, I'd say that 4-Cost is appropriate, but nowadays though, when Assassinate costs 4 mana without a downside, I think it can probably be 3 mana.
Anchorm4n
I have mentioned before that I quite like this card. I was originally concerned that the flavor wouldn't be very obvious without voicelines, but Grumpymonk seemed to catch onto it quite fine, so it seems that won't be an issue. For the sake of consistency, I do agree that it could be just "Spellburst: Draw a weapon." and it would even fit naturally on only one line of text.
I have personally always wished that Team 5 made some type of weapon support for Paladin, so I like it for that as well.
KANSAS
Draining Imp seems OP to me. It is a 1 mana 3/3 and the downside seems inconsequential to me as it's delayed, very slow to grow, and can easily be stopped.
High Justice Grimstone is indeed very flavorful and he's very faithful to how he appears in Hearthstone as is, but I am slightly concerned about the card's tutoring power since it's able to very easily draw several powerful win-condition effects without needing to change your deckbuilding very much, if at all. Some people might also be put off by the card's inherent P2W aspect of the card, which was definitely more-so the case during the days of Blackrock Mountain.
BasilAnguis
Indeed a very simple card, which I do agree may be the card's downfall. But I think the card itself is fine.
Hello, my idea I'll submit within hour or two, maybe nerfed to 4 Mana
My first instinct is to say that it might be fine at 3 mana given that your opponent can easily ignore them for one turn and you don't develop a threatening presence until they can attack which gives your opponent plenty of time to do something about it. Three 3/3s for 3 mana is still strong though, so I wouldn't be opposed to putting it at 4 mana.
What I'm not a huge fan of is summoning a 1/1 minion and immediately giving it +2/+2 as opposed to just summoning a 3/3 minion. I get that this is for SHR synergy, but it feels like a weird workaround that tries to force a synergy. It would be like if Libram of Hope summoned a 1/1 SHR, then gave it +7/+7, Taunt and Divine Shield instead of what it does right now.
Off of feedback that the flavor of Shield of Souls was not perfect, I decided to make a new card. I've seen a few "Paladin turn evil" cards, but what if I flipped that idea of its head like Renounce Darkness.
Now, a heel-face turn like this doesn't happen instantly. It takes a little bit of time and dedication before you are fully redeemed, hence why Illidan will still keep his demonic minions and interestingly-designed weapons. Illidan is also redeeming himself after all and not anyone else.
The cost reduction might seem strong at first, but Demon Hunter as a whole is not a class that can build decks to take advantage of this lasting effect in the same way that Mage can reliably build an all-spell deck for Deck of Lunacy.
Purging Flame seems pretty nice, and I could definitely see this card being printed.
Hibernate is fine on balance, though the flavor feels a bit off since it's a bit weird for the Beast to die and THEN sleep.
I absolutely love the idea of Druid having a Forest Fire card, so you get points for me on that front. Even though the setup required to make this card likely makes it balanced, Druids are not supposed to be good at AoE so giving them a cheap way to potentially clear the board even at a huge board sacrifice is slightly bizarre.
Linkblade91
I think you've got a pretty good card here. If it can make Righteousness actually playable, then all the better.
R
Felocity is a hilarious pun that I approve of, and I do like the card. Magifincent is another great pun, but the card feels weird given that Murloc decks aren't really focused on damaging with spells.
Anchorm4n
Shaking the Snowglobe has some pretty funny flavor, although it might be a bit difficult to utilize effectively. I suppose that adds to the deckbuilding challenge of the card though. I do personally prefer Brothers in Arms, which while a strict powercreep over Inner Demon, is not something I have a big problem with given that Inner Demon was never a good card to begin with and the power spike isn't that steep.
Hordaki
I like this. I've always enjoyed Paladins having some cards that sometimes lean into the darker side of Paladin, and I think we could use more of them.
Nirast
I think Forged in Frost is really flavorful, although I'm not sure if it's better than Upgrade! given that you need to Freeze your hero and it lacks the versatility all for +1 Attack. I think Frostbite is pretty good. If anything, I'm surprised the name hasn't already been taken by a real collectible card in the game.
Grumpymonk
I think you've got yourself a pretty solid idea here. Not really much more to say other than that.
Ilphelkiir
I don't really like this. It doesn't feel at all like a Druid card given that destroying Mana Crystals is entirely Warlock's domain, as well as the fact that Druid can ramp and very easily take advantage of this in a way that I don't like.
Allthehype
I think an opposite counterpart to Renounce Darkness for Paladin would be really great. KotFT does seem like the perfect place for the card flavorfully, but there's one very important and very glaring problem: Spell schools did not exist until Forged in the Barrens. Therefore the card should be either from there or a custom set.
I am a writer for the website, and I work with the team to bring good content to the site. My main specialty here in terms of content is writing the Fan Community Spotlight articles. I'm very involved with the FC side of the community as a whole.
Warrior is a very weird class for the prompt, and this is something that we actually spoke about while discussing the specifics of it. Warrior (and to a lesser extent, Hunter) is a class that unlike all the others, does not have a main spell school of choice. They have the least amount of tagged spells in the game at only 5. Fire and Nature were the two biggest ones in the class, both having 2, so we decided to go with that
Follow up question: why did warrior and hunter need 2 schools to begin with when paladin only has holy? Pally has 2 shadow spells but that wasn't forced onto the class.
I can easily see why warrior would have fire for thematic reasons (smelting metal for weapons and armour), even if it rarely makes its way onto cards. But as with paladin's shadow spells, the reasons for the nature tag in warrior are completely external to the class (either a poison from rogue or just because Un'Goro was all about nature) in a way that would be quite fitting for this competition.
In the case of Nature Warrior spells vs Shadow Paladin spells, there are two factors at play here: The flavor of the class as a whole, and the total number of spell cards in the class that have spell types.
2 out 5 Warrior spells with types are Fire spells, or in other words, they make up 40% of Warrior spells with types. Compare that to Paladin Shadow spells, which makes up 2 out of 45 Paladin spells with types, which is only 4.4% of Paladin spells with types.
And then there's class flavor. As you pointed out, fire is an occasional thematic element for Warrior even if it isn't the main focus of the card as it would be for a Mage or Shaman card for instance. While nature is not necessarily a thematic element for Warrior, there is not anti-thematic association either as there is for Shadow spells in Paladin which are supposed to be flavored around being warriors of the light and standing for everything that's right. Shadow spells seem very anti-thematic to the class in a huge way, compared to Fire and Nature to Warrior which are not.
Warrior is a very weird class for the prompt, and this is something that we actually spoke about while discussing the specifics of it. Warrior (and to a lesser extent, Hunter) is a class that unlike all the others, does not have a main spell school of choice. They have the least amount of tagged spells in the game at only 5. Fire and Nature were the two biggest ones in the class, both having 2, so we decided to go with that
There seems to be more activity in this comp than the last few. That's pretty good!
More feedback.
I have already mentioned before about reducing the text size too much on the second version (in which, "Weapon" also should not be capitalized), which is why prompts like this are usually avoided in the first place.
That said, I do also have a problem with the first version which is that Discovering a card based on being Rare doesn't really narrow the pool in a meaningful way. While you may know what cards you'll be able to get and which ones you can't, there isn't really anything you can try to grab from the pool. I also don't like putting "from the past" on a Common or Rare card. Perhaps we might see it on an Epic one day, but as a Common or Rare, it very much takes away from the spectacle of Toki, Time Tinker.
And one last note, but that is definitely not a Kobold. It looks more like a humanoid raptor person.
I still stand by all the things I said about the card before, but I do think it's better as a 3/2.
The phrasing "Draw a Legendary from your deck" feels incomplete and could come off as deliberately skimping on the rules to fit the card into the competition. While I think it's kinda cool that it can draw non-minions now, there is the chronological problem in that Legendary non-minion cards did not exist during Blackrock Mountain. This aspect would only really become meaningful in The Boomsday Project (as Quests start in your hand anyway). Minion should also not be capitalized on the second version as the word is only capitalized when it's at the start of a sentence.
I do kinda like Boastful Assassin. It's flavorful and it feels like a proper dual-class card. I do believe we will eventually see a Stealth + Taunt card in the game one day, although I will agree that the general weirdness of combining the two mechanics might rub people the wrong way.
Hibernating Rockbeast is pretty good.
Can't be any worse than Freeze Shaman.
I do agree with this. The current wording actually already has text size reduced. It's currently at -2, but it works because it looks natural with the way the text on the game is usually presented. There is a problem with reducing the card text too much in that it can come off as natural and an attempt to force a card into the prompt where it wouldn't otherwise belong.
Alternatively, "can only" will make the text work while still appearing natural, but my hesitancy to use this wording stems from the fact that "can only" could psychologically make the effect sound like a downside even if the effect itself is still exactly the same.
There is a technical problem with this text which is the fact that despite having less characters overall, this exact wording is harder to fit into 2 lines of text because of the specific line "summons Stoneclaw Totem" as opposed to "summon Stoneclaw Totem" which takes up more space on one line and forces it into another line. This is actually something I'm finding out after I already made the card with the wording it has now, which makes the process moving forward a bit more difficult to navigate around.
It's a case of a weird wording problem, which is one reason why prompts based on specific card texts are usually avoided.
"Warder" is actually correct here. A "warder" is another word for a guard of some type, and to "ward" something can be used as a way of saying to protect or guard something. This is enforced on the card as summoning Stoneclaw Totem, which protects things and is also the representative of earth out of the original 4 Hero Power Totems.
You actually aren't the first person to point out that "will always" is not proper wording here. Truth be told, I'm not quite sure what the best wording to use here is. I haven't really been able to find anything better.
Feedback time.
I have mentioned before that I quite like this card. I was originally concerned that the flavor wouldn't be very obvious without voicelines, but Grumpymonk seemed to catch onto it quite fine, so it seems that won't be an issue. For the sake of consistency, I do agree that it could be just "Spellburst: Draw a weapon." and it would even fit naturally on only one line of text.
I have personally always wished that Team 5 made some type of weapon support for Paladin, so I like it for that as well.
Draining Imp seems OP to me. It is a 1 mana 3/3 and the downside seems inconsequential to me as it's delayed, very slow to grow, and can easily be stopped.
High Justice Grimstone is indeed very flavorful and he's very faithful to how he appears in Hearthstone as is, but I am slightly concerned about the card's tutoring power since it's able to very easily draw several powerful win-condition effects without needing to change your deckbuilding very much, if at all. Some people might also be put off by the card's inherent P2W aspect of the card, which was definitely more-so the case during the days of Blackrock Mountain.
Holy fuck that score is high!
Always the Totem that everyone always wanted to summon anyway besides the occasional Wrath of Air Totem (which can no longer summon, RIP).
I'm interested to see how this comp goes since it's all about simplicity.
It's like... father and son.
And then Bandersmosh is the weird kid that they're embarrassed to talk about.
My first instinct is to say that it might be fine at 3 mana given that your opponent can easily ignore them for one turn and you don't develop a threatening presence until they can attack which gives your opponent plenty of time to do something about it. Three 3/3s for 3 mana is still strong though, so I wouldn't be opposed to putting it at 4 mana.
What I'm not a huge fan of is summoning a 1/1 minion and immediately giving it +2/+2 as opposed to just summoning a 3/3 minion. I get that this is for SHR synergy, but it feels like a weird workaround that tries to force a synergy. It would be like if Libram of Hope summoned a 1/1 SHR, then gave it +7/+7, Taunt and Divine Shield instead of what it does right now.
Off of feedback that the flavor of Shield of Souls was not perfect, I decided to make a new card. I've seen a few "Paladin turn evil" cards, but what if I flipped that idea of its head like Renounce Darkness.
Now, a heel-face turn like this doesn't happen instantly. It takes a little bit of time and dedication before you are fully redeemed, hence why Illidan will still keep his demonic minions and interestingly-designed weapons. Illidan is also redeeming himself after all and not anyone else.
Here is a list of Holy spells
The cost reduction might seem strong at first, but Demon Hunter as a whole is not a class that can build decks to take advantage of this lasting effect in the same way that Mage can reliably build an all-spell deck for Deck of Lunacy.
Alright, time for feedback.
Purging Flame seems pretty nice, and I could definitely see this card being printed.
Hibernate is fine on balance, though the flavor feels a bit off since it's a bit weird for the Beast to die and THEN sleep.
I absolutely love the idea of Druid having a Forest Fire card, so you get points for me on that front. Even though the setup required to make this card likely makes it balanced, Druids are not supposed to be good at AoE so giving them a cheap way to potentially clear the board even at a huge board sacrifice is slightly bizarre.
I am a writer for the website, and I work with the team to bring good content to the site. My main specialty here in terms of content is writing the Fan Community Spotlight articles. I'm very involved with the FC side of the community as a whole.
In the case of Nature Warrior spells vs Shadow Paladin spells, there are two factors at play here: The flavor of the class as a whole, and the total number of spell cards in the class that have spell types.
2 out 5 Warrior spells with types are Fire spells, or in other words, they make up 40% of Warrior spells with types. Compare that to Paladin Shadow spells, which makes up 2 out of 45 Paladin spells with types, which is only 4.4% of Paladin spells with types.
And then there's class flavor. As you pointed out, fire is an occasional thematic element for Warrior even if it isn't the main focus of the card as it would be for a Mage or Shaman card for instance. While nature is not necessarily a thematic element for Warrior, there is not anti-thematic association either as there is for Shadow spells in Paladin which are supposed to be flavored around being warriors of the light and standing for everything that's right. Shadow spells seem very anti-thematic to the class in a huge way, compared to Fire and Nature to Warrior which are not.
Warrior is a very weird class for the prompt, and this is something that we actually spoke about while discussing the specifics of it. Warrior (and to a lesser extent, Hunter) is a class that unlike all the others, does not have a main spell school of choice. They have the least amount of tagged spells in the game at only 5. Fire and Nature were the two biggest ones in the class, both having 2, so we decided to go with that
I'm not sure if the Shadow tag goes as well with the card as I thought it would, but I guess I should post it anyway.
Updated. Thank you.
According to Shadows, there was roughly a six-way tie for eighth place, hence the decision to only have 7 finalists.
Yeah, I'll gladly take a card to reveal too.
Yeah, I think this sounds pretty fun.