XarkkalServant of Illidan 9101321 PostsJoined 03/29/2019
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago
Here's another round of feedback. I'm sorry if I missed you!
Show Spoiler
@DestroyerR - None of these do it for me honestly. Millhouse there are already 2 versions submitted of, one of which is a mage, so I would suggest against that. The drawing card effect on him feels very random too. Hogger is interesting, but honestly pretty useless. It's an interesting take on Hogger flavor wise, but I just don't see this getting any play. Hakkar is way too dangerous. With Plague of Flames existing, and Warlock having so many ways to generate tokens, this would hit the board before most classes have any way to be able to answer it.
@KANSAS - I like it, my only complaint is I couldn't use it in Recruit hunter. I dream for this effect on a deathrattle, but the Battlecry makes sense for the flavor. The +1/+1 feels a little tacked on and underwhelming. Make sure you have a period at the end of your text.
@Swizard - This is a tricky one to balance… but I really like the flavor! One thing really fast, make sure you capitalize and bold the words "Legendary". See Dragon's Hoard as an example. Also, add a dash after "non" so it's "non-Legendary", see Corrupted Seer. Anyway, back to balance… I honestly think this might be fine at Prince Malchezaar's original mana cost of 5. It's a Psychic Scream, but you're shuffling cards into both decks, and adding Legendary minions to each deck, and since you're only removing non-Legendary minions from the board, there's a chance it's not even a full board clear. You might want to weigh other people's opinion on balancing, but my personal belief is you'd be good keeping it as a 5/5/6.
@DescentOfDragonsOp - The Battlecry on Alexstraza is very underwhelming, it's basically casting Overflow without the card draw and getting 5 armor instead, all for 1 more mana. You have a lot of room to work with to make that Battlecry more interesting. The HP is fine. None of it is very exciting honestly, I understand the flavor but it's too basic for a Hero card. Also, watch your spaces and your capitals, and your spelling on "characters".
@MenacingBagel - gave me a chuckle, but this wouldn't make it into Hearthstone. I'd probably give this 2 stars because the flavor is good and it made me laugh, but it's not realistic to ever be in the game.
@bigcums - I'm not sure about the flavor on this, but I see some potential with some tweeking. Adding Rush doesn't make any sense. Captain Greenskin gives your weapon +1/+1. If you don't want to go with weapon flavor, I suggest you keep the +1/+1 flavor by having this give the pirates you discover +1/+1 and ditching the Rush. This card played with Captain Hooktusk could then summon you 3 buffed pirates, and Hooktusk takes care of the Rush. Greenskin giving minions Rush does not fit flavor wise at all. I'm not going to point out every single one, but watch you typing, you have spaces in incorrect locations. I don't know about others, but I dock a star for each grammatical mistake I find, which can quickly take a 5 star card down to a 1 star card. That might be more harsh than most people judge it, but grammatical errors in my opinion completely ruin a card, because it sticks out like a sore thumb.
@Zeratia - I think flavor wise, you should have it be 3 random enemy minions. I'd suggest spelling out "Three". It looks weird to me starting a sentence with a digit, and the original Magtheridon has three spelled out.
@Xarkkal: I feel like you should have gone halfway and instead of making the secrets cost 0 mana, make them cost 1.
I was actually debating that already :) With the no duplicate requirement, the reward of just 5 random secrets feels underwhelming. Making them cost 1 mana feels better, but not too swingy. This way, at 10-mana, you can play Subject 9, the Callow and all 5 secrets (assuming you don't get any duplicates) Which is basically playing 5 random hunter secrets with a 4/4 stick for 10 mana. Which sounds fair to me for a legendary.
XarkkalServant of Illidan 9101321 PostsJoined 03/29/2019
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago
"Im so cool, I play DH and I curved out perfectly. My victory was totally all because of my skill and not because I played the most broken cards in the perfect order, top decking most of the perfect plays"
XarkkalServant of Illidan 9101321 PostsJoined 03/29/2019
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago
Thank you all for the feedback! Made some changes to Subject 9. Let me know your thoughts. I'll get some more feedback after this conference call that I'm on and totally paying attention to ;)
XarkkalServant of Illidan 9101321 PostsJoined 03/29/2019
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago
Thanks for the feedback everyone! Ok, here's my next idea:
The art is a problem. Currently that's the best I can find, but it doesn't fit the card shape very well. So I'm going to keep up the art search. The only art of Subject 9 on the internet is the art from the actual card... Found some better art that should work, I'm going to keep looking to see if I find something I like more, but this should be fine.
FEEDBACK:
@Feuerrabe - I love the flavor! Something just feels off still when it comes to Jenkins' Party. I think the holding a dragon doesn't do it for me.
@SDhn2a - Moroes I really have troubles seeing as a Shaman card. I'm not a fan of the C'Thun card. Getting a Scheme on turn 6 is pretty bad. Y'Shaarj I definitely like best.
XarkkalServant of Illidan 9101321 PostsJoined 03/29/2019
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago
Here's my next idea:
I have a few other ideas I'm mulling over and might throw up later, but wanted to feel this one out, and take a break from the drawing board and give people some feedback. I'll have some feedback here shortly.
FEEDBACK
Show Spoiler
@linkblade91 - This card is probably win #3 for you. :)
@Demonxz95 - I really like the Al'ar, this would have been so much better than the trash they gave us!
@anchorm4n - This works for Sylvanas. Maybe keep her 5/5 stat line?
@CursedParrot - I don't think this works in it's current form. I don't think it should be Legendary minions that died this game, stick with just 5 random Legendary minions. I just got the idea of "whenever you draw this" effect to trigger the 5 Legendary minion shuffle. Would fit more into the plot twist idea. Draw this multiple times in a game to load up on extra legendaries. Not sure how much better that would be, but just a thought.
@MenacingBagel - I'm definitely not sold on the idea of a 1/5 sheep. I get why, but flavor wise it's wrong. I don't really have any ideas here, sorry I know that's not very helpful.
@Inconspicuosaurus - I don't like it. Would never see any play as a class card.
@shaveyou - I like Special Agent Sally the most between the two. I might just be scared of the idea of Double Puzzle Box from Nexus-King :)
@Pokeniner - I like the idea, but this feels very dangerous. Freeze 10 minions + Evocation = game over. I suggest a different effect, but I'm not sure what.
@Conduit - I agree with the 2 4/4 Millhouse that you seem to have settled towards.
@TheHoax91 - The deathrattle is an interesting idea, but I don't think it works. I would suggest a battlecry that fits the character more.
@grumpymonk - Kael'thas I like, though I don't think it should give spell damage to your hero. Maiev's I don't like, the resummoning feels more like Rez Priest instead of a Rogue card.
XarkkalServant of Illidan 9101321 PostsJoined 03/29/2019
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago
Ok, seriously can we nerf Shadowjeweler Hanar yet? I'm at the point where when that card is played on 2 (or 1 with coin) and I don't have a way to remove it (which is 99% of the time) I just concede. This card should be 3 mana or have 4 health.
I don't want to nerf it into oblivion, but in it's current form, it's too easy for Rogue to just drop this on curve, and they don't have to worry about their opponent having a way to remove it.
I want to ask for more feedback for my card. What did you vote and why? What could I have done better? And what should I do better next time?
In the interest of honesty I gave the card a three, although it could have been a four I suppose. There's nothing inherently wrong with the card, I would say, but I didn't find it particularly novel or exciting. It's alright, in just about every aspect. Alright flavor, alright balance (maybe a little strong), and alright creativity. I imagine some would find it un-fun, though, as I said originally, so that might have hurt the vote.
Thinking back I noticed I've been pretty harsh in my votes lately. Something I need to think about/fix on my end.
Honestly, a lot of people vote way, WAY too harshly in here. It came to a point where I’m hesitant to rate cards at all, because my ratings just plummet relative to the ratings I give other cards.
That being said, a pleasant surprise to be in the finals, GL to everyone!
Congrats to the winner! Not my favorite of the bunch, but definitely a worthy victor! Great job everyone!
On the subject of people voting way too harshly... How in the hell are Incendiary Chicken and Grand Apothecary Putress worthy of 13 1 star ratings?!?! I'm curious to know how any of the cards in the final were worthy of a 1 star rating? Are people not voting on a 5 star basis in the finals, but marking them by "favorite to least favorite"? If so, we should change the voting of the finalist cards to rating from 1-8 instead of a 5 star system.
I'd suggest crafting Shadowjeweler Hanar ASAP so you can play with it before it ends up getting nerfed. That card will win you so many games when it just snowballs the early game.
Nerfed? I don't think so. The card is powerful, but the deck's winrate is not so high as to deserve a nerf.
A 2 mana 1/5 that can snowball the entire game isn't nerf worthy? Too many classes have no way to remove a 5 health minion on turn 2. Winrate of the deck has nothing to do with it. It's not fun to lose a game on turn 2 just because you have no answer to a 1/5 minion.
XarkkalServant of Illidan 9101321 PostsJoined 03/29/2019
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago
I'd suggest crafting Shadowjeweler Hanar ASAP so you can play with it before it ends up getting nerfed. That card will win you so many games when it just snowballs the early game.
XarkkalServant of Illidan 9101321 PostsJoined 03/29/2019
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago
Any mage playing Ice Block, Reno Mage in particular has always really really gotten under my skin. Any and all of it's forms over the years. There are so many mage fans, and I just have just always had a special hatred of the class. There might be some bias because of my hatred for Jaina as well... FOR TEH HORDE!
I've been playing quest mage today to learn the deck and see for myself just how broken it is. I've never been a fan of it myself, and have rarely played the archetype. But the current form of it is just ridiculously easy to pull off. The biggest problem is the mana cheat. You end up casting so many spells for 0 mana, which can alone end up completing your quest. I was thinking about it today on what could be done to slow down the quest completion, but also not just completely kill the OTK potential. It is healthy to have OTK decks in the meta, but the random spell generation and low cost spells have been pushed in Mage to the max for too long, and has made this Quest just way too easy to complete. I think the best option would be to make it so spells that cost 0 do not count towards quest progression. That way, only spells you spend mana on would count towards your quest. This would also eliminate The Coin being such a huge benefit.
(I have debated making it for spells that cost 2 or more just because of the amount of 1-cost spells that mage has, but I think starting with just removing the 0-cost spells should be enough to slow it down to an acceptable power level.)
This also leaves Sorcerer's Apprentice untouched. As much as I hate this card, it is actually perfectly fine. If this card was touched, it would break way too many Mage decks. Any nerfs need to be directed towards the Quest itself, and the Giants. My proposed nerf makes Sorcerer's Apprentice less powerful in the deck, since it would make all your 1-cost spells not count towards your quest.
Show Spoiler
I also agree with Lyra that the cost of Mana Giant needs to be increased. I agree that it should start at 12-mana just like Arcane Giant.
Show Spoiler
These two nerfs should slow down the speed of the OTK, while not completely destroying the archetype. This will allow for a less polarized meta that Quest Mage could still be a part of, without being a Tier-S deck.
The change you suggested for Open the Waygate feels weird and frankly, not very realistic. But I do like the idea. I think a better change would be to make it say "spend 15 (or so) mana on spells that didn't start in your deck" instead.
That's a really good idea. It would force the archetype into a slower OTK that is focused on spending mana on the spells it generates, instead of just playing the cheapest spells possible.
What the right amount of mana to be as the quest requirement is an interesting debate. I think 15 mana might be too little. But since you are dependent on what random spells you generate, you could easily get screwed over by a hand of low cost spells. I think at 15 mana, this could still end up getting completed by turn 6-7. Maybe 20-25?
I've been playing quest mage today to learn the deck and see for myself just how broken it is. I've never been a fan of it myself, and have rarely played the archetype. But the current form of it is just ridiculously easy to pull off. The biggest problem is the mana cheat. You end up casting so many spells for 0 mana, which can alone end up completing your quest. I was thinking about it today on what could be done to slow down the quest completion, but also not just completely kill the OTK potential. It is healthy to have OTK decks in the meta, but the random spell generation and low cost spells have been pushed in Mage to the max for too long, and has made this Quest just way too easy to complete. I think the best option would be to make it so spells that cost 0 do not count towards quest progression. That way, only spells you spend mana on would count towards your quest. This would also eliminate The Coin being such a huge benefit.
(I have debated making it for spells that cost 2 or more just because of the amount of 1-cost spells that mage has, but I think starting with just removing the 0-cost spells should be enough to slow it down to an acceptable power level.)
This also leaves Sorcerer's Apprentice untouched. As much as I hate this card, it is actually perfectly fine. If this card was touched, it would break way too many Mage decks. Any nerfs need to be directed towards the Quest itself, and the Giants. My proposed nerf makes Sorcerer's Apprentice less powerful in the deck, since it would make all your 1-cost spells not count towards your quest.
I also agree with Lyra that the cost of Mana Giant needs to be increased. I agree that it should start at 12-mana just like Arcane Giant.
These two nerfs should slow down the speed of the OTK, while not completely destroying the archetype. This will allow for a less polarized meta that Quest Mage could still be a part of, without being a Tier-S deck.
I'm not sure that's enough, actually. I played the deck a lot in March to grind my Mage to 1.000 wins and my impression is that most spells initially cost more than 0. Like OP said, it's the cheap spells for 1 or 2 mana that get cheaper with apprentice or glyph that make up most of the cycling. Or do I get the mechanic wrong and they wouldn't count towards the quest in your iteration if they get discounted? I always assumed such cards check for the initial state of the card, not an altered form it gained by buffs or the like.
In this iteration, 1-2 mana spells that are discounted down to 0 mana would NOT count towards the Quest. A minimum of 1 mana must be spent on the spell in order for it to count towards Quest progression.
This change wouldn't nerf the Quest into oblivion, but it would prevent a huge swing turn with Sorcerer's Apprentice and Mana Cyclone or Evocation where the mage can complete their Quest by just dumping all the 0-cost spells they have in their hand.
XarkkalServant of Illidan 9101321 PostsJoined 03/29/2019
Posted 4 years, 7 months ago
I've been playing quest mage today to learn the deck and see for myself just how broken it is. I've never been a fan of it myself, and have rarely played the archetype. But the current form of it is just ridiculously easy to pull off. The biggest problem is the mana cheat. You end up casting so many spells for 0 mana, which can alone end up completing your quest. I was thinking about it today on what could be done to slow down the quest completion, but also not just completely kill the OTK potential. It is healthy to have OTK decks in the meta, but the random spell generation and low cost spells have been pushed in Mage to the max for too long, and has made this Quest just way too easy to complete. I think the best option would be to make it so spells that cost 0 do not count towards quest progression. That way, only spells you spend mana on would count towards your quest. This would also eliminate The Coin being such a huge benefit.
(I have debated making it for spells that cost 2 or more just because of the amount of 1-cost spells that mage has, but I think starting with just removing the 0-cost spells should be enough to slow it down to an acceptable power level.)
This also leaves Sorcerer's Apprentice untouched. As much as I hate this card, it is actually perfectly fine. If this card was touched, it would break way too many Mage decks. Any nerfs need to be directed towards the Quest itself, and the Giants. My proposed nerf makes Sorcerer's Apprentice less powerful in the deck, since it would make all your 1-cost spells not count towards your quest.
I also agree with Lyra that the cost of Mana Giant needs to be increased. I agree that it should start at 12-mana just like Arcane Giant.
These two nerfs should slow down the speed of the OTK, while not completely destroying the archetype. This will allow for a less polarized meta that Quest Mage could still be a part of, without being a Tier-S deck.
Here's another round of feedback. I'm sorry if I missed you!
@DestroyerR - None of these do it for me honestly. Millhouse there are already 2 versions submitted of, one of which is a mage, so I would suggest against that. The drawing card effect on him feels very random too. Hogger is interesting, but honestly pretty useless. It's an interesting take on Hogger flavor wise, but I just don't see this getting any play. Hakkar is way too dangerous. With Plague of Flames existing, and Warlock having so many ways to generate tokens, this would hit the board before most classes have any way to be able to answer it.
@KANSAS - I like it, my only complaint is I couldn't use it in Recruit hunter. I dream for this effect on a deathrattle, but the Battlecry makes sense for the flavor. The +1/+1 feels a little tacked on and underwhelming. Make sure you have a period at the end of your text.
@Swizard - This is a tricky one to balance… but I really like the flavor! One thing really fast, make sure you capitalize and bold the words "Legendary". See Dragon's Hoard as an example. Also, add a dash after "non" so it's "non-Legendary", see Corrupted Seer. Anyway, back to balance… I honestly think this might be fine at Prince Malchezaar's original mana cost of 5. It's a Psychic Scream, but you're shuffling cards into both decks, and adding Legendary minions to each deck, and since you're only removing non-Legendary minions from the board, there's a chance it's not even a full board clear. You might want to weigh other people's opinion on balancing, but my personal belief is you'd be good keeping it as a 5/5/6.
@DescentOfDragonsOp - The Battlecry on Alexstraza is very underwhelming, it's basically casting Overflow without the card draw and getting 5 armor instead, all for 1 more mana. You have a lot of room to work with to make that Battlecry more interesting. The HP is fine. None of it is very exciting honestly, I understand the flavor but it's too basic for a Hero card. Also, watch your spaces and your capitals, and your spelling on "characters".
@MenacingBagel - gave me a chuckle, but this wouldn't make it into Hearthstone. I'd probably give this 2 stars because the flavor is good and it made me laugh, but it's not realistic to ever be in the game.
@bigcums - I'm not sure about the flavor on this, but I see some potential with some tweeking. Adding Rush doesn't make any sense. Captain Greenskin gives your weapon +1/+1. If you don't want to go with weapon flavor, I suggest you keep the +1/+1 flavor by having this give the pirates you discover +1/+1 and ditching the Rush. This card played with Captain Hooktusk could then summon you 3 buffed pirates, and Hooktusk takes care of the Rush. Greenskin giving minions Rush does not fit flavor wise at all. I'm not going to point out every single one, but watch you typing, you have spaces in incorrect locations. I don't know about others, but I dock a star for each grammatical mistake I find, which can quickly take a 5 star card down to a 1 star card. That might be more harsh than most people judge it, but grammatical errors in my opinion completely ruin a card, because it sticks out like a sore thumb.
@Zeratia - I think flavor wise, you should have it be 3 random enemy minions. I'd suggest spelling out "Three". It looks weird to me starting a sentence with a digit, and the original Magtheridon has three spelled out.
I was actually debating that already :) With the no duplicate requirement, the reward of just 5 random secrets feels underwhelming. Making them cost 1 mana feels better, but not too swingy. This way, at 10-mana, you can play Subject 9, the Callow and all 5 secrets (assuming you don't get any duplicates) Which is basically playing 5 random hunter secrets with a 4/4 stick for 10 mana. Which sounds fair to me for a legendary.
I really want this card for Yogg Hunter...
"Im so cool, I play DH and I curved out perfectly. My victory was totally all because of my skill and not because I played the most broken cards in the perfect order, top decking most of the perfect plays"
-My last opponent, and pretty much every DH ever.
Thank you all for the feedback! Made some changes to Subject 9. Let me know your thoughts. I'll get some more feedback after this conference call that I'm on and totally paying attention to ;)
Thanks for the feedback everyone! Ok, here's my next idea:
The art is a problem. Currently that's the best I can find, but it doesn't fit the card shape very well. So I'm going to keep up the art search. The only art of Subject 9 on the internet is the art from the actual card... Found some better art that should work, I'm going to keep looking to see if I find something I like more, but this should be fine.
FEEDBACK:
@Feuerrabe - I love the flavor! Something just feels off still when it comes to Jenkins' Party. I think the holding a dragon doesn't do it for me.
@SDhn2a - Moroes I really have troubles seeing as a Shaman card. I'm not a fan of the C'Thun card. Getting a Scheme on turn 6 is pretty bad. Y'Shaarj I definitely like best.
Here's my next idea:
I have a few other ideas I'm mulling over and might throw up later, but wanted to feel this one out, and take a break from the drawing board and give people some feedback. I'll have some feedback here shortly.
FEEDBACK
@linkblade91 - This card is probably win #3 for you. :)
@Demonxz95 - I really like the Al'ar, this would have been so much better than the trash they gave us!
@anchorm4n - This works for Sylvanas. Maybe keep her 5/5 stat line?
@CursedParrot - I don't think this works in it's current form. I don't think it should be Legendary minions that died this game, stick with just 5 random Legendary minions. I just got the idea of "whenever you draw this" effect to trigger the 5 Legendary minion shuffle. Would fit more into the plot twist idea. Draw this multiple times in a game to load up on extra legendaries. Not sure how much better that would be, but just a thought.
@MenacingBagel - I'm definitely not sold on the idea of a 1/5 sheep. I get why, but flavor wise it's wrong. I don't really have any ideas here, sorry I know that's not very helpful.
@Inconspicuosaurus - I don't like it. Would never see any play as a class card.
@shaveyou - I like Special Agent Sally the most between the two. I might just be scared of the idea of Double Puzzle Box from Nexus-King :)
@Pokeniner - I like the idea, but this feels very dangerous. Freeze 10 minions + Evocation = game over. I suggest a different effect, but I'm not sure what.
@Conduit - I agree with the 2 4/4 Millhouse that you seem to have settled towards.
@TheHoax91 - The deathrattle is an interesting idea, but I don't think it works. I would suggest a battlecry that fits the character more.
@MrRhapsody - Medivh by far.
@grumpymonk - Kael'thas I like, though I don't think it should give spell damage to your hero. Maiev's I don't like, the resummoning feels more like Rez Priest instead of a Rogue card.
Ok, seriously can we nerf Shadowjeweler Hanar yet? I'm at the point where when that card is played on 2 (or 1 with coin) and I don't have a way to remove it (which is 99% of the time) I just concede. This card should be 3 mana or have 4 health.
I don't want to nerf it into oblivion, but in it's current form, it's too easy for Rogue to just drop this on curve, and they don't have to worry about their opponent having a way to remove it.
This should be interesting!
Here's my first idea:
Edit: Making a Sylvanas Hunter card seems too obvious. I redact this idea.
Congrats to the winner! Not my favorite of the bunch, but definitely a worthy victor! Great job everyone!
On the subject of people voting way too harshly... How in the hell are Incendiary Chicken and Grand Apothecary Putress worthy of 13 1 star ratings?!?! I'm curious to know how any of the cards in the final were worthy of a 1 star rating? Are people not voting on a 5 star basis in the finals, but marking them by "favorite to least favorite"? If so, we should change the voting of the finalist cards to rating from 1-8 instead of a 5 star system.
A 2 mana 1/5 that can snowball the entire game isn't nerf worthy? Too many classes have no way to remove a 5 health minion on turn 2.
Winrate of the deck has nothing to do with it. It's not fun to lose a game on turn 2 just because you have no answer to a 1/5 minion.
After the finals are completed, a Competition Transparency Report will be found on the Home page of the competition.
A blue button that says "View the Competition Transparency Report" will be available underneath the image of the winning card.
Here's a couple articles on the site by Shadow about the Report. There's some good info in there.
Card Design Conversation - The First Winner
Card Design Conversation - Learning By Numbers
Next:
A Witchwood Shaman card
I'd suggest crafting Shadowjeweler Hanar ASAP so you can play with it before it ends up getting nerfed. That card will win you so many games when it just snowballs the early game.
Any mage playing Ice Block, Reno Mage in particular has always really really gotten under my skin. Any and all of it's forms over the years. There are so many mage fans, and I just have just always had a special hatred of the class. There might be some bias because of my hatred for Jaina as well... FOR TEH HORDE!
Good luck to all the finalists! Really any of these deserve to win, all really solid cards!
That's a really good idea. It would force the archetype into a slower OTK that is focused on spending mana on the spells it generates, instead of just playing the cheapest spells possible.
What the right amount of mana to be as the quest requirement is an interesting debate. I think 15 mana might be too little. But since you are dependent on what random spells you generate, you could easily get screwed over by a hand of low cost spells. I think at 15 mana, this could still end up getting completed by turn 6-7. Maybe 20-25?
I'm not really salty about this, but still got a good kick out of my shit luck. One of the most hilariously terrible hands I have ever had.
In this iteration, 1-2 mana spells that are discounted down to 0 mana would NOT count towards the Quest. A minimum of 1 mana must be spent on the spell in order for it to count towards Quest progression.
The altered form is what is read. Look at the interaction with Aeroponics between Garden Gnome and Anubisath Defender. When Aeroponics costs less than (5), it does not trigger Garden Gnome. And if you play Aeroponics for less than (5), it does not give you a (0) mana Anubisath Defender.
This change wouldn't nerf the Quest into oblivion, but it would prevent a huge swing turn with Sorcerer's Apprentice and Mana Cyclone or Evocation where the mage can complete their Quest by just dumping all the 0-cost spells they have in their hand.
I've been playing quest mage today to learn the deck and see for myself just how broken it is. I've never been a fan of it myself, and have rarely played the archetype. But the current form of it is just ridiculously easy to pull off.
The biggest problem is the mana cheat. You end up casting so many spells for 0 mana, which can alone end up completing your quest.
I was thinking about it today on what could be done to slow down the quest completion, but also not just completely kill the OTK potential. It is healthy to have OTK decks in the meta, but the random spell generation and low cost spells have been pushed in Mage to the max for too long, and has made this Quest just way too easy to complete.
I think the best option would be to make it so spells that cost 0 do not count towards quest progression. That way, only spells you spend mana on would count towards your quest. This would also eliminate The Coin being such a huge benefit.
(I have debated making it for spells that cost 2 or more just because of the amount of 1-cost spells that mage has, but I think starting with just removing the 0-cost spells should be enough to slow it down to an acceptable power level.)
This also leaves Sorcerer's Apprentice untouched. As much as I hate this card, it is actually perfectly fine. If this card was touched, it would break way too many Mage decks. Any nerfs need to be directed towards the Quest itself, and the Giants. My proposed nerf makes Sorcerer's Apprentice less powerful in the deck, since it would make all your 1-cost spells not count towards your quest.
I also agree with Lyra that the cost of Mana Giant needs to be increased. I agree that it should start at 12-mana just like Arcane Giant.
These two nerfs should slow down the speed of the OTK, while not completely destroying the archetype. This will allow for a less polarized meta that Quest Mage could still be a part of, without being a Tier-S deck.
Next: A Priest minion with Shadowform synergy