An update from the Hearthstone team this afternoon has given us the first-ever banned card in the Wild format - Stealer of Souls.
This is quite unexpected news. Although players have been complaining about the card since its introduction in the Wailing Caverns set since it sees nasty combos with Mal'Ganis and Violet Illusionist, when bad interactions between cards occur, the first step Blizzard has taken in the past is to nerf the card. Seeing as how this card can't be nerfed without an overhaul to how the effect works, removing the flavor, Blizzard has gone the route of Wizards of the Coast and Magic the Gathering and simply removed the card from the format.
The card should be removed from Wild next week with a patch on Wednesday. Dust refunds will be available after the patch goes live and we'll get patch notes for the change on Tuesday, June 15. No other balance changes that will affect the Masters Tour Dalaran event are planned as per the Hearthstone Esports team.
Hearthstone's Alec has confirmed that the current plan for when the card rotates in 2023 is to make a change and remove the ban. If they decide to make adjustments to card before then, we can expect Blizzard to reconsider the ban.
Quote From @PlayHearthstone We’ll be banning Stealer of Souls in Wild in a small update next week. Stealer of Souls will still be playable in other formats, and will be eligible for a full dust refund for two weeks after this change goes live.
The patch note for this change will be shared on Tuesday, and the patch itself is expected to go live on Wednesday.
Current plan is to adjust the card at that point in time and remove the ban. If any adjustments happen to Stealer of Souls before that (ex/ a standard nerf) we'll also re-evaluate its inclusion in Wild. (Alec)
FYI - there will be no balance changes that affect Masters Tour Dalaran before the event, (HSEsports)
![All The Great Dark Beyond Card Reveals for October 23 - Day 13 [Finished]](the-great-dark-beyond-day-13.webp)
Comments
I personally haven’t been playing a ton lately, but I kind of felt like this card wasn’t too big of a deal. I mean, I have been playing every day, but not always for long periods of time. MI wasn’t really seeing it a ton when I found the time to jump on.
Was I running into the Mecha’thun decks playing this as part of their combo? Yes, but not often. Where they winning on turn 5 or 6? A few times, but around half (or more) times they either took longer and gave me time to win or whiffed on what they needed to draw off of Twist. That or the animations were taking too long and they roped out!
I tried playing it myself and was maybe successful in around half or less of the games I played, due to the same problems listed above. I’d say that maybe I was playing it wrong but… come on! It’s a fairly simple deck to pilot. You just need to get the right draw order and you win. But with bad draw order, you can lose!
Anyway, with that said I’m fine with their decision. I know they want it to be available in Standard for now and anerf would kill it in that format. They maybe even have more draw planned to pair well with this guy in the next couple sets. If that’s the case, more draw and no action on the card suddenly makes this even more dangerous in Wild. So a ban may seem heavy handed to some, I think it’s fine! I’ll probably dust the guy for now and recraft later if they do make some good standard options to go with him in the next set or two.
I’m a little upset by this, but only because I wanted to run a counter deck to the Stealers using Stealer, Twist, and then Brann, Mutanus, Brewmasters, Stingers (the Warlock murloc that makesyour next murloc cost HP), replay Mutanus! Would have been fun watching the diabolical fish man just CHOMP away a bunch of needed combo pieces
I honestly don't think bans are that big of a deal.
They already ban cards in arena, duels, and the occasional tavern brawl. And if they nerfed this to the point of unplayability then it would effectively work the same as a ban.
Some people are calling this lazy, but all physical card games resort to bans for balance purposes, and MTG is over 25 years old and still going strong. I don't think this is an insult to wild players, I don't think this is lazy, and I don't think this sets any unneeded precedents for the future.
Some people are also saying that they shouldn't ban cards because then players will start asking for bans for everything they don't like, but people could already ask for nerfs for whatever they want whenever they want. I don't see how asking for bans is any worse.
Banning cards is just another way to balance the game, same as nerfs. Blizzard has "nerfed" cards in the past by changing their text (Warsong Commander, for example), I don't see how a ban is really that different.
Freak out as much as you want, but in just a few months you may come to realize that even with the existence of bans, hearthstone is still hearthstone. It isn't that big of a deal and I don't think it will impact the game as much as some people in the comments are implying.
I think people are overreacting coz the wild format is meant to be the place where you play any collectible card in the game. With banning Stealer of Souls, this action breaks that "rule", but in the end like you said, banning has been around for ages and isn't a new thing. Blizzard just did something different this time instead of nerfing the card. It's not the end of Hearthstone guys 🙃
Don't know if anyone already said this or if this solution wouldn't be another temporary answer, but why don't just limit the health cost to spells, like this week's brawl?
If you read the article, it says "Hearthstone's Alec has confirmed that the current plan for when the card rotates in 2023 is to make a change and remove the ban", and there's a quoted tweet from Alec Dawson that says "Current plan is to adjust the card at that point in time and remove the ban". The reason they don't want to nerf it right now is because (presumably) they have plans in future expansions to build upon this card. Nerfing it would gimp the archetype -supporting cards that have probably been in production for about 8-10 months.
If I were a game developer, I wouldn't change the concept of immunity (which is quite obvious and self-explanatory) not even this specific card, because that would be a mere band-aid that would only serve to hide the real problem.
Make no mistake, the problem with this card is the same as always: the cost cheating problem. We must avoid trivializing the cost of cards, either in mana or health, as in this case.
The concept of PAYING in health instead of mana is interesting, especially in the thematic philosophy of warlocks. But paying means paying, if you don't give what is asked of you, you get nothing.
If you are immune and CANNOT lose health, then it should be impossible to make any health payments, therefore it is as when you have no mana to pay and therefore cannot play any more cards. Remember that the game already prevents you from playing cards for life if you don't have enough life to pay the cost! There is already a precedent.
Taking damage would be a different thing, since an immunity would prevent it, but if in the upper left corner of a card where its mana cost is usually shown inside a blue gem, there is now a drop of blood, that means that you have to give health as payment for playing it...
Practical example: imagine that a card is published whose text reads: "Battlecry: During the next turn, your opponent cannot spend mana". Then, even if your opponent has 10 mana crystals, or even if he has ways to recharge them, he could only play cards whose mana cost is zero on that turn, because he could not consume mana no matter how much he had.
I hope that it has been clear. Honestly, it would be the most elegant solution, and also, it would not only solve the problem of this card but it would have corrected the underlying problem at its roots, that is, it would have fixed the problem forever, even for future cards, as it would not be a simple patch or temporary solution.
This is totally logical and fixes the underlying problem elegantly.
I hope they can integrate this kind of interaction to the game..
Agreed 100% percent, the problem was that "pay" equals "damage yourself". If they fixed that interaction it would be so nice.
But nevermind, not that hard of a ban I think. There were only 2 way outs with this one, either fixing the problem with inmunity, or banning it. Nerfing was not a choice. The card is OK in standard.
For anyone interested in the topic, Iksar was recently a guest on the "State of Wild" podcast. Here's a link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW-6CsjDiO8&t=79s
They address many of the issues that the community raises about the format.
FWIW - the Wild podcast "ecosystem" more-or-less unanimously regards the Stealer deck as being pretty bad (the bottom of Tier 3, falling to Tier 4 at more competitive ranks), since it tends to roll over against fast decks. The podcasters are also more-or-less agreed that it would be a good idea to nerf the card, since it's a high play-rate deck that's shitty to play against.
In the future they could also make something like a forbidden/limited list for wild, like in Yu-Gi-Oh duel links. That would basically allow you to put Stealer of Souls or Violet Illusionist in your deck, but never both at the same time. I'd much rather see that solution than if they nerfed/changed the card after it rotates.
Good start, well, if they will delete sorc. apprent. And fix unnerfed pala, and secret mage. I will return to their game.
I m really sad about it i m drop hs not coz of battle pass or other monetization things, but coz blizz doesn t care about my game format...
This is exactly why banning cards from wild is a mistake. People like you will march to get every single power card banned.
People like him are already marching to get every single power card nerfed. It's the same.
I like this. I'm assuming with this being a ban in one format that more support for self-damage Warlock is in the works for standard and they don't want to gimp that. While at the same time still having a fix for the problems in Wild. This also gives them time to evaluate and change the card in more thought over and tested fashion.
Blizzard does have some issues to look at though. Cards that cheat mana on a bigger scale are causing issues. These need to be toned down or limited in some form rather than keep getting released. I love mana cheating, don't get me wrong. However playing out your entire deck in a turn for free is a bit over the top. Especially when adding in combos that end up winning the game. Again, I don't mind these. But there is a difference from a Mecha-thun that does it on turn 10+ to one that does it on 3-4. You have to survive those turns, fight against your opponent and interact. The hyper fast version are too much of a single player experience in what is a multi player game. I get that sometimes people get the best draw and the game can feel uninteractive or that you had no chance. That will happen on occasion but that needs to be a rarity. An entire deck that just plays an "end the game" card hyper fast should not be allowed.
When the Wretched Tiller OTK happened I laughed. I even forgot that card existed. Mistakes happen. This card though with the ease of access to immunity shouldn't have passed as is. I only hope Blizzard will be more mindful of cheat and combo mechanics in the future, especially with how things interact in Wild. However I am thankful for the fairly quick and simple ban solution for now until a better adjustment can be made.
So, Wild is literally not... wild anymore? (referring to all cards can be played)
Turns out this option was available after all.
He probably doesn't know the literal wild is right outside city limits.
are you referring to what I said? or to Hearthstone? because I don't get it.
Hearthstone could clarify the rule for playing cards and using life as part of the payment cost. Such payments are not considered as damage and can not be prevented.
Magic the Gathering had a similar rule about using life points as payment to play cards, but I don't remember the details.
Precisely. If Immune didn't prevent life loss from paying life costs, the ban would have been completely unnecessary in the first place.
Glad issue is being resolved. Not played wild ladder in a week. Still have my win 5 quest to do.
Not sure about the idea of just banning the card. Totally get they don't want to weaken it in standard though - why impact standard players negatively due to a wild problem.
I think I liked the idea of immune not protecting against health cost cards or simply health cost cards aren't playable if you are immune.
But hey - at least problem will be fixed for now that's the main thing.