PDA

View Full Version : Prime Orb of Brutality is a Bucket of un-Fun Waiting to Happen



HyenaNipples
12-10-2013, 08:23 AM
Prime Orb of Brutality is a gem that would allow Xentoth Inquistors (A card which cannot die) to continuously return to the table and grant its controller the -choice- of a card to discard from an opponent's hand. Thankfully, this gem does not yet work, and frankly, I have serious doubts whether it should ever hit a table in Hex TCG.

I am quite confident that this gem needs to be aborted or otherwise changed to NOT do what it says it's going to do. The sheer potential for unfun situations is staggering, and aught to be reconsidered. Especially since its impossible to counter the effect without Countermagic. Combined with other discard effects like Goblin Cooking Pot and Giant Corpse Fly, and to a lesser extent, Misfortune, this gem will make it quite easy and possible to entirely shut down an opponents game without any chance for them to prevent that from happening.

I believe this would be a more acceptable gem which maintains the spirit of the mechanic without ruining the opposing player's ability to actually play Hex TCG.

When this troop enters play, reveal a number of cards from your opponent's hand equal to this troops ATTK. Pick a non-Resource card, and then void all copies of that card still in the opponent's library.

ossuary
12-10-2013, 08:40 AM
Wouldn't voiding multiple copies of a card every time Xentoth is replayed be even worse, after a few recasts? Sure, the player keeps his current hand, but do that 3 or 4 times, and the rest of his deck is hosed. Combine that with discard to trash his hand as well, and you ruin both his early game AND his late game.

Maybe the real problem is an easily recastable major socketed troop? At least with graveyard manipulation decks, you have to work to get your combo up and running... Xentoth's Inquisitor is a combo all by himself. Maybe his ability should be a one-shot instead of infinitely repeatable? That would make it much less abusable.

HyenaNipples
12-10-2013, 09:03 AM
It's still strong, but it is definitely not worse. Getting rid of cards in the deck does not directly hinder the opponent's ability to play the game. It's a future worry and a strategic loss, but losing cards in the hand forces a player into just sitting there, doing nothing, and hitting the space bar. That's bad because it makes the play experience bad.

You could drop it down to just voiding one or two other copies, but I think that takes the oomph out of the effect, and Prime gems are supposed to have oomph.

SomeoneRandom
12-10-2013, 09:14 AM
double post =[

SomeoneRandom
12-10-2013, 09:17 AM
I think the gem you suggested is way off course for what it should be, effects like that usually garner a much higher cost than what a major gem should provide and honestly lose a lot of playability due to being a niche effect. Discard in general isn't that huge a deal unless it is multiple cards or super under-costed. Control has a lot of ways to deal with this guy and aggro won't have cards to let you get multiple casts off. I don't really see it being a big issue, I think it is a good answer to combat control a bit and force some solid removal or countermagic on him.

Really the only time we have seen discard become too strong is at 3 or less cost and 2 cards or more, especially random cards. Coercion effects have never seemed too strong, despite having a 3/1 body attached.

Eierdotter
12-10-2013, 09:39 AM
The gem is perfectly fine.

The Inquisitor is the problem here, due to beeing strong with every gem.

making his bounce a One-Shot would limit him to a usual 4 for 1 card. instead of X for 1.

DackFayden
12-10-2013, 10:05 AM
On paper I'd say prime orb of brutality is the strongest. Getting a guaranteed card on resolution is hard to beat.

The inquisitor does make brutality worse, however I feel the +2 cost will limit his play to more stally controlly decks. Realistically casting him a third time for 7-mana in an actual game will require some ramp and should be rewarded.

So I'd say keep the cards as is now. Then once people can actually test them see if either the orb or inquisitor need a nerf. Personally I'd say the orb needs a mechanic change (could be a life-siphon or something)

Lawlschool
12-10-2013, 03:44 PM
On paper I'd say prime orb of brutality is the strongest. Getting a guaranteed card on resolution is hard to beat.

The inquisitor does make brutality worse, however I feel the +2 cost will limit his play to more stally controlly decks. Realistically casting him a third time for 7-mana in an actual game will require some ramp and should be rewarded.

So I'd say keep the cards as is now. Then once people can actually test them see if either the orb or inquisitor need a nerf. Personally I'd say the orb needs a mechanic change (could be a life-siphon or something)

Exactly. It's powerful, but it costs a lot on subsequent casts. And he has to die first. Discard effects are not fun to play against, but they exist, and are a viable strategy. It's not like you'd never get to play cards, it only really punishes you if you hold back cards. Sure you'll be forced to top-deck, but at that point Inquis and other discard effects become pointless.

poizonous
12-10-2013, 05:40 PM
Guess what... The Strong combo of Inquisitor and Discard gem costs tons of mana, MUST die to reuse it, and maybe the 3rd time you cast Inquisitor opponents hand might be empty. This thing is never going to discard 4 cards. Plus now the fact that cards like Inner Conflict can simply cause it to never leave the field without opponent murdering his own card or casting extinction. Chaos Key resolves multiple discards as well, along with Curse of Oblivion the Inquisitor. Threads like these get my head hurting more than working with 3 broken ribs.

DackFayden
12-10-2013, 06:26 PM
Guess what... The Strong combo of Inquisitor and Discard gem costs tons of mana, MUST die to reuse it, and maybe the 3rd time you cast Inquisitor opponents hand might be empty. This thing is never going to discard 4 cards. Plus now the fact that cards like Inner Conflict can simply cause it to never leave the field without opponent murdering his own card or casting extinction. Chaos Key resolves multiple discards as well, along with Curse of Oblivion the Inquisitor. Threads like these get my head hurting more than working with 3 broken ribs.

Threads like this point out aspects of the game that might need a look-over.

I do believe you'll see how inherently strong and possibly unfun the inquisitor+brutality can be once the combination works

Edit*: I hope your ribs heal soon. Sounds painful

But here's a shot scenario: CA = card advantage

Play inquisitor get a card from opp +1CA. Have a 3/1 on turn3 capable of blocking most troops at that point and trading. So opp must use a card to disable/trade/remove it +2CA. Being reasonable here I'll say casting for 5 is fine, recast get one more card +3CA. At this point even if you chump block this card has netted a 3-for-1. It's an rather strong card for a control deck wishing to stall a game. strong, but balanced imho

And all this isn't taking into account that most opponents will reveal their currently uncastable bomb as 1 of the 3 cards. Meaning the threats you actually deal with will probably trade with a 3-1. I've tested this card with a sapphire-prime orb(card draw) and let me tell it makes your opponent just throw away cards.

poizonous
12-10-2013, 07:24 PM
I have playtested the Inquisitor/Discard gem already on Lackey, try using this combo against mono wild or Ruby Wild aggro. You will be lucky to even net a +1 out of this card against decks that drop their hands. The combo will not be too powerful and nor will it make the game un fun. People just seem to think that any combo that they will repteadly lose to because they dont know how to deal with it makes the combo too strong. When really teh truth of it all is the combo is only as strong as the opponents unknowing ability of how to deal with it. If your playing against a deck with Giant Corpse Flys and Inquisitors with the discard gem after turn 3 dont play your useless shards ( in other words if your deck has a majority of 4 drops and rarely needs more than 4 mana, dont play a 5th shard in those situation to keep it for discarding) and you wont have to lose your valuable cards.

VoidInsanity
12-11-2013, 06:55 AM
Its bad enough that Curse of Oblivion voids out entire cards from a deck for 3 cost, giving multiple cards that ability while also being a troop is just stupid. However the current Prime Orb of Brutality is also rather stupid for similar reasons, both should not exist. Corpse flies are strong enough as it is, turning anything into a corpse fly with the ability to pick what you want to discard seems rather nightmarish.

So I'll throw out my ideas for a replacement effect that fits the blood Theme

1. - "When this toop enters play it may pick a card with Equal or less attack than it from the opponents hand and force it to attack this turn as if it were in play".

2. - "When this troop enters play target another troop. That troop gets "This troop must attack if able" for X turns equal to your troops atttack".

jtatta
12-11-2013, 09:00 AM
I don't really see what the problem is. I personally feel like the gem is completely balanced. First off, you can only have four of them in your deck so it's not like you can load up all your Protectorate Defenders and Inquisitors with the discard gem. Second of all, they make you discard ONE card. Coming from a pretty extensive MTG background, I can assure you that losing one card from your hand isn't the end of the world.

Right now, control decks are simply too good. This gem gives aggressive and mid-range decks some pretty good cards to fight the end game of a control deck. It also gives control decks a very good card in the mirror match to gain an advantage. It's not very good against aggressive decks and that's the point.

Look, I get it, losing cards in your hand when you crafted the perfect combo really sucks but it's a part of TCGs.

DackFayden
12-11-2013, 10:21 AM
I don't really see what the problem is. I personally feel like the gem is completely balanced. First off, you can only have four of them in your deck so it's not like you can load up all your Protectorate Defenders and Inquisitors with the discard gem. Second of all, they make you discard ONE card. Coming from a pretty extensive MTG background, I can assure you that losing one card from your hand isn't the end of the world.

Right now, control decks are simply too good. This gem gives aggressive and mid-range decks some pretty good cards to fight the end game of a control deck. It also gives control decks a very good card in the mirror match to gain an advantage. It's not very good against aggressive decks and that's the point.

Look, I get it, losing cards in your hand when you crafted the perfect combo really sucks but it's a part of TCGs.

If that mtg background is that extensive don't most games between = skill level come down to who drew more cards/spells?

The inquisitor benefits most decks by providing built-in card advantage. The benefit it has in a control deck is far more valuable, because those decks are built to get to high resource counts and slow down games.

Losing a card does suck, but is fair. The only possible issue is the prime orb gives the caster a choice of card. From mtg giving the opp the choice of what you discard, provides them with a) hand information b) Bomb removal.

Overall though I also see no inherent problem with the inquisitor+Brutality synergy because #ThisIsntMagic. I do however see a synergy that needs to be play-tested in alpha to ensure it doesn't become a dominant strat.

jtatta
12-11-2013, 11:28 AM
If that mtg background is that extensive don't most games between = skill level come down to who drew more cards/spells?

The inquisitor benefits most decks by providing built-in card advantage. The benefit it has in a control deck is far more valuable, because those decks are built to get to high resource counts and slow down games.

Losing a card does suck, but is fair. The only possible issue is the prime orb gives the caster a choice of card. From mtg giving the opp the choice of what you discard, provides them with a) hand information b) Bomb removal.

Overall though I also see no inherent problem with the inquisitor+Brutality synergy because #ThisIsntMagic. I do however see a synergy that needs to be play-tested in alpha to ensure it doesn't become a dominant strat.

While card advantage is something you always want to strive for, the winner of a match when both players are approximate skill level doesn't always come down to who draws more cards, etc. In that case, match ups matter, sideboarding matters, there are several things that factor in to that. That said, someone is always "better" than someone else anyway as you won't find two people that are exactly the same skill level/knowledge.

But anyway, I digress. I was making the point that the gem isn't the greatest thing since sliced bread and is reasonably balanced in a vacuum. Just because there's a recurring three-drop troop that can be socketed with it doesn't mean that it's broken or will create negative play experiences. Even in magic the card would be perfectly fine.

HyenaNipples
12-11-2013, 08:42 PM
Just because there's a recurring three-drop troop that can be socketed with it doesn't mean that it's broken or will create negative play experiences.

I feel I'm in danger of restarting this entire thread, but since this opinion is almost exactly the opposite of mine, I feel the need to offer a final counter-argument:

The fact that there is a recurring three-drop troop that can be socketed with a "discard an opponent's card of your choice" gem does mean that the gem is broken because it will create negative play experiences.

Let's sit and imagine a situation where a deck designed to exploit this interaction goes against anybody at all. They play the Inquisitor on turn 3. This allows that player to see 3 of the opponent's cards. That will likely be at least half the opponent's hand, and more than that if they smoothly moved up their deck's ramp. That gives the control deck player a huge amount of selection over his/her opponent's capability to play Hex TCG.

Then in all likelihood, the 3 ATTK on the Inquisitor will eventually force the opponent to kill that troop as most decks rely on destruction to remove threats. So the control player gets to do it again at 5 resources and pick over an even larger percentage of their opponent's ability to play the game. Of course, that is assuming that the control player doesn't have another Inquisitor copy to just play for 3.

Try to imagine how awesome it would be to see what your opponent has and pick out their best thing and toss it aside. Then try to imagine being on the other side, holding onto that Stoneskin as the only means by which your deck has any hope of stopping your opponent, and having your opponent pick it out and toss it away. And there is nothing at all you could have done to stop it. Your deck building is irrelevant. In some degree, your grasp of tactics and the metagame are irrelevant, because you never had a chance to use the card you needed effectively. And there is nothing you could have done to stop it.

That is a negative play experience because you had that card in your hand. You were ready to play it. You know how to play it. And there is nothing you could have done to prevent yourself from losing it. That means you have no input, no response, and for that moment, you were not even playing the game while your opponent was.

Admittedly, my suggested change still has lots of problems, but that was one given in haste and I have no particular attachment to it. That has caused a great deal of distraction away from the central issue: The gem now is dangerous because it will create negative play experiences for players, and it needs to change to a version that would not do that.

Kolokee
12-11-2013, 10:49 PM
I personally can't wait to play this gem because of its power and my favor towards control decks. Favoritism aside, I do feel like it's way too good and should be changed. I don't need to see it in action to understand how good it's going to be, I've played magic for 17 years and know that something like this is basically an unfair advantage. Not so much because of the discard, but because of the looking at multiple cards and then choosing a card to discard. That's way to much power in my opinion.

I think the gem should either simply be nerfed to when this troop enters play, target opposing champion discards a card, or when this troop enters play, target opposing champion reveals a number of cards from their hand equal to this troops ATK, and then discards one at random. The random factor adds both a bit of fun and balance.

Gem's def OP tho. As much as I'd love to play it, and it will be an auto-play in every blood deck I build, it pains me to admit it's just too good to exist in its current state.

DackFayden
12-12-2013, 01:44 AM
Glad people are seeing the strength of pure Card Advantage + Discard choice.

That being said, understand HEX is a different power level from magic, or even a different type power (If you guys saw that demented mill deck when alpha was released, its in the forums somewhere). Perhaps its okay that strong synergies like Brutal orb and inquisitor exist since other decks are capable of just as much power ( turn 3 fist of unlimited powah).

Now I'm not saying HEX is a haymaker game like magic is now (its just I drop a bomb you answer or lose). I am saying from the cards I've seen powerful synergies are present in most of the shards. I think once brutality works and more cards are out we'll see if what we see on paper translates to play.

escapeRoute
12-12-2013, 03:28 AM
Threads like this point out aspects of the game that might need a look-over.

I do believe you'll see how inherently strong and possibly unfun the inquisitor+brutality can be once the combination works

Edit*: I hope your ribs heal soon. Sounds painful

But here's a shot scenario: CA = card advantage

Play inquisitor get a card from opp +1CA. Have a 3/1 on turn3 capable of blocking most troops at that point and trading. So opp must use a card to disable/trade/remove it +2CA. Being reasonable here I'll say casting for 5 is fine, recast get one more card +3CA. At this point even if you chump block this card has netted a 3-for-1. It's an rather strong card for a control deck wishing to stall a game. strong, but balanced imho

And all this isn't taking into account that most opponents will reveal their currently uncastable bomb as 1 of the 3 cards. Meaning the threats you actually deal with will probably trade with a 3-1. I've tested this card with a sapphire-prime orb(card draw) and let me tell it makes your opponent just throw away cards.


once a combination works is not a good reason to nerf something.. u gotta be able to pull it off consistently and u gotta have a good advantage when u do it...

u can just ignore the 3/1 on the field and outrunn the opponent with ur damage if he attack.. u can void it... u can inner conflict it... he wont have any board advantage out of that gem

if u dont like it... good, but dont say its op cause its not

guess what, often is not fun to play against control decks, but that doesnt mean u can nerfbat them cause of ur feelings... u gotta have more on ur hand to do that

i was actually planning on doing the kind of deck u fear (actually, its allready built, im just waiting for the gem to work) but, sincerely, if a control deck manage to pull of its thing then it should work...

by the same reason we should nerfbat the fist cause its too good or urunaz or i dont know... everthing

there are things that work much, much more than this one... like rootdancer...

and by the way... this gem give u the opportunity to actually fight back against control decks and this creature is one of the best chances u have to fight back against a control deck if u have black in ur deck (doesnt really matter if u are playing aggro or control here.. its just great against control)...

i guess the returning ability could be made oneshot but then it shouldnt increase the mana cost of this creature... also, in the next months/years we will see a lot of this "unfun" threads against control decks/combos... its the same thing that... after almost 20 years, ruined magic... and i hope crypto wont hear the cryes of all those "its not fun to play against combo/control deck" aggro/boringstomp creature people :(

i mean, dont get me wrong.. i see the possiblility of that combo to get out of hand... the problem is i dont see it getting out of hand consistently

jtatta
12-12-2013, 08:14 AM
I feel I'm in danger of restarting this entire thread, but since this opinion is almost exactly the opposite of mine, I feel the need to offer a final counter-argument:

The fact that there is a recurring three-drop troop that can be socketed with a "discard an opponent's card of your choice" gem does mean that the gem is broken because it will create negative play experiences.

Let's sit and imagine a situation where a deck designed to exploit this interaction goes against anybody at all. They play the Inquisitor on turn 3. This allows that player to see 3 of the opponent's cards. That will likely be at least half the opponent's hand, and more than that if they smoothly moved up their deck's ramp. That gives the control deck player a huge amount of selection over his/her opponent's capability to play Hex TCG.

Then in all likelihood, the 3 ATTK on the Inquisitor will eventually force the opponent to kill that troop as most decks rely on destruction to remove threats. So the control player gets to do it again at 5 resources and pick over an even larger percentage of their opponent's ability to play the game. Of course, that is assuming that the control player doesn't have another Inquisitor copy to just play for 3.

Try to imagine how awesome it would be to see what your opponent has and pick out their best thing and toss it aside. Then try to imagine being on the other side, holding onto that Stoneskin as the only means by which your deck has any hope of stopping your opponent, and having your opponent pick it out and toss it away. And there is nothing at all you could have done to stop it. Your deck building is irrelevant. In some degree, your grasp of tactics and the metagame are irrelevant, because you never had a chance to use the card you needed effectively. And there is nothing you could have done to stop it.

That is a negative play experience because you had that card in your hand. You were ready to play it. You know how to play it. And there is nothing you could have done to prevent yourself from losing it. That means you have no input, no response, and for that moment, you were not even playing the game while your opponent was.

Admittedly, my suggested change still has lots of problems, but that was one given in haste and I have no particular attachment to it. That has caused a great deal of distraction away from the central issue: The gem now is dangerous because it will create negative play experiences for players, and it needs to change to a version that would not do that.

This is extremely exaggerated and I don't think you really thought it through. There are -many- ways to fight an Inquisitor with discard gem. You gem not block if he attacks, you can attack with your evasion troops, you can keep more than three cards in your hand, you can play out your hand before it actually matters, you can Void, you can Inner Conflict, etc, etc. Just because it "seems" un-fun to you doesn't mean it is for everyone. I personally can't for for this gem to work properly as I already have decks brewed that try to use it most effectively.

Discard effects are an integral part of TCGs. It's not like their Mind Twist'ing you on turn three. This effect is needed against control decks to keep them honest. It's needed against combo decks to make sure they can't just do what they want. As it's been pointed out, this isn't all that effective against aggro (the Inquisitor himself is a different story). Just don't jump to cinclusions. It's a fair and honest discard "spell."

HyenaNipples
12-12-2013, 09:26 AM
Again, the choice is the problem. And you can't stop that choice from happening. That's un-fun.

This isn't a blanket issue with discard effects. I don't see any problem with Goblin Cooking Pot, Giant Corpse Fly, and Misfortune.

I don't think I'm exaggerating at all. This is going to happen, and every Spike or Semi-Spike is grilling up a deck to use this capability because they recognize how awesome it is to choose a card from the opponent's hand and discard it. You think I'm exaggerating this potential problem, and I think you are drastically underselling it and not looking at the gem from outside a mechanical perspective. Discard is discard, yes, but the choice is the problem, and the potential to cast it multiple times, either over multiple copies of a troop or from a respawning troop compounds this problem.

Though upon reviewing the Socketed Cards (http://hextcg.com/socketed-cards/) section on the main website, the gem as it appears in the Alpha is not listed. So perhaps this entire thread is moot anyway. Assuming its not moot in general ;p

Norious
12-12-2013, 09:32 AM
Isn't the gem a major one? so u would need 2 rubys and 2 blood to get it to work, yes?

jtatta
12-12-2013, 09:35 AM
Why does it matter that you get your choice of three cards? Why is that so "un-fun?" Again, what is un-fun to you might not be un-fun for someone else (ie: me). Do you want every single discard effect to just be "discard a card"?

What's un-fun is random discard. What is fair and completely balanced is "choose a card out of X." Cards like Duress, Thoughtseize, Distress, on and on and on have existed in MTG for twenty years now and there aren't any "un-fun" threads.

In before the "ThisIsntMagic" police come blazing in but it's the same concept.

DackFayden
12-12-2013, 10:52 AM
Why does it matter that you get your choice of three cards? Why is that so "un-fun?" Again, what is un-fun to you might not be un-fun for someone else (ie: me). Do you want every single discard effect to just be "discard a card"?

What's un-fun is random discard. What is fair and completely balanced is "choose a card out of X." Cards like Duress, Thoughtseize, Distress, on and on and on have existed in MTG for twenty years now and there aren't any "un-fun" threads.

In before the "ThisIsntMagic" police come blazing in but it's the same concept.

Oh men, just wait till the gem works. My vote is it will seem super unfun and be a pain to play against/around and people will rage more on forums. But because this is HEX I feel this power-level, while a 1 card combo is actually fair. Since other decks are capable of just as much power.

And to those saying: "u can just ignore the 3/1 on the field and outrunn the opponent with ur damage if he attack.. u can void it... u can inner conflict it... he wont have any board advantage out of that gem" Just realize that if a control deck played a 3 drop and you have to hold back troops until you void/ inner conflict(if you're lucky) / dingle it then you're giving them time to hit resource drops, which is their goal. Again inquisitor is such a powerful enabler for control, but I feel it's fair given the power levels of HEX

#ThisIsntMagic

ossuary
12-12-2013, 10:58 AM
Will you please stop responding to everything with "this isn't magic?"

We KNOW it's not Magic. That is obvious, and not an argument. However, it was built on the core rules and functionality of Magic. It is an extension of Magic... a child of Magic. As such, discussions RELATING to Magic are relevant. Especially since we have no other concrete rules to go on for now, until CZE gives us a complete handbook.

Just saying This Isn't Magic over and over again is tiresome, and unhelpful.

jtatta
12-12-2013, 11:15 AM
Listen, if you guys are really upset that this gem exists then you're REALLY going to hate Inquisition when it's added into the game. From the card files, it's a discard spell that lets you see the opponents ENTIRE hand, not just X cards, and make them discard one. Just goes to show you that you can't please everyone. Prepare to be "un-funed" to death.

DackFayden
12-12-2013, 11:23 AM
Will you please stop responding to everything with "this isn't magic?"

We KNOW it's not Magic. That is obvious, and not an argument. However, it was built on the core rules and functionality of Magic. It is an extension of Magic... a child of Magic. As such, discussions RELATING to Magic are relevant. Especially since we have no other concrete rules to go on for now, until CZE gives us a complete handbook.

Just saying This Isn't Magic over and over again is tiresome, and unhelpful.

cool cool did you see the rest of my post? There was some content in there

Lawlschool
12-12-2013, 12:05 PM
Listen, if you guys are really upset that this gem exists then you're REALLY going to hate Inquisition when it's added into the game. From the card files, it's a discard spell that lets you see the opponents ENTIRE hand, not just X cards, and make them discard one. Just goes to show you that you can't please everyone. Prepare to be "un-funed" to death.

I think the problem is with what people think is or is not "fun" for this game. It's a pretty hard-core strategy game underneath it's colorful exterior. It requires a lot of thinking and planning and moves and countermoves, not just "play out your awesome combo and win!" And having cards that actively set you back and disrupt your plans in the way that Inquis or Inquisition (didn't know that card existed, I'm stoked) isn't "fun" for the other guy. But that's their entire purpose. They are cards that are intentionally disruptive and unfun. I love strategy games, and IMO, the "fun" is in the challenge, not in the execution. If your criteria for "fun" in Hex is being able to execute your strategy consistently, then yeah, there's a lot of stuff that makes Hex "unfun."

It's not "fun" in one sense to not be able to play your cards, but it's "fun" in an entirely different sense to find ways around the disadvantages the game and your opponent throw at you.

jtatta
12-12-2013, 12:13 PM
The problem is that what's fun or unfun is -completely- subjective. I understand that Hyena, and maybe others, think that discard effects are unfun but to me I think they're quite fun and necessary. In any case, I think that we can argue if the effect is balanced or not rather than how fun it is. I personally feel that it's very balanced and a welcome addition to the game.

DackFayden
12-12-2013, 12:19 PM
The problem is that what's fun or unfun is -completely- subjective. I understand that Hyena, and maybe others, think that discard effects are unfun but to me I think they're quite fun and necessary. In any case, I think that we can argue if the effect is balanced or not rather than how fun it is. I personally feel that it's very balanced and a welcome addition to the game.

Now that I agree with. The power-level of the effect is definitely balanced. But, we'll have to see if the 'unfun' feel it'll have is enough to cause a change.

From my experience most players find discard where opp has a choice unfun. Being in topdeck mode is rarely fun I guess.

jtatta
12-12-2013, 12:26 PM
Now that I agree with. The power-level of the effect is definitely balanced. But, we'll have to see if the 'unfun' feel it'll have is enough to cause a change.

From my experience most players find discard where opp has a choice unfun. Being in topdeck mode is rarely fun I guess.

Casual players, sure, I can see that. Tournament players love effects like this. It gives us knowledge of hands and allows us to plan several turns ahead. I'm concede that effects such as Mind Twist/Mind Shatter (Discard X cards, ie: all of them) are not very fun but effects that let us see information and choose a card that can be problematic is just excellent.

A_e-n
12-13-2013, 02:07 PM
Fun? Not fun? Fun? Not fun?

Subjective. It's annoying, I mean, not fun, to read about fun/not fun.

Balanced? Unbalanced?

Needs discussion.

I've really been looking forward to this gem, specifically to use inside Inquisitor. Is it fun for me to pick through three of the cards YOU chose for me to see, and have you discard one? YES! It's awesome. I want to do it, and I want to do it now.

Is it not fun to have it done to me? NO! Playing around people that use this card will be fun. Opponent casts Inquisitor, you show three cards. You get to choose what he chooses... the mind games will be a lot of fun. Will there be a time when I only have three cards in hand? Sure, but at that point it's on me -- knowing opponent is playing blood, it's a likely strategy.

I don't need to get into all the ways you can deal with the combo. Everyone here probably knows how, or is at least competent enough to learn how to play against it.

This seems like another, "I don't like to lose this particular way" thread.

DackFayden
12-13-2013, 03:29 PM
Fun? Not fun? Fun? Not fun?

Subjective. It's annoying, I mean, not fun, to read about fun/not fun.

Balanced? Unbalanced?

Needs discussion.

I've really been looking forward to this gem, specifically to use inside Inquisitor. Is it fun for me to pick through three of the cards YOU chose for me to see, and have you discard one? YES! It's awesome. I want to do it, and I want to do it now.

Is it not fun to have it done to me? NO! Playing around people that use this card will be fun. Opponent casts Inquisitor, you show three cards. You get to choose what he chooses... the mind games will be a lot of fun. Will there be a time when I only have three cards in hand? Sure, but at that point it's on me -- knowing opponent is playing blood, it's a likely strategy.

I don't need to get into all the ways you can deal with the combo. Everyone here probably knows how, or is at least competent enough to learn how to play against it.

This seems like another, "I don't like to lose this particular way" thread.

Yeah you right. I think you might be underestimating how quickly one can go down to 3 cards though. As for "dealing" with the combo, there are cards that shut it down, but I think the complaint is generally "This 1-card is always at least a 2-for-1"

Personally I like the combo and look forward to playing it. But I'm fully aware that this is the type of synergy that can get out of hand depending on the environment. So we will see when it's finally functional

TheGateKeeper
12-16-2013, 08:42 AM
They way I see it discard effects are entirely necessary in TCGs as are cards like counter-magic are too. Yes this Orb gives targeted discard but so what that isn't not a big deal and effects like this required to keep potential combo decks in check.

funktion
12-18-2013, 04:30 AM
Sure this lets you make them discard multiple cards over the course of the game, but to put it into some context. You're spending 8 resources total to make them discard the same amount as you would with a misfortune. Sure you get a body along with it as well, but you're gonna get a body along with the effect regardless of what gem you play. Inquisitor is just a strong card all around and semi-targetted hand disruption is healthy for the game.

If anything I think there might need to be a few more options with which to counter inquisitor. It's definitely quite the strong card, but having strong cards is a good thing.

DackFayden
12-19-2013, 08:26 PM
Awww well looks like Prime Orb of Brutality got the axe. It was fun dreaming

Leingod
12-19-2013, 10:33 PM
Well, they changed the come-into-play gem into the on-hit gem. Don't know if the gem itself is gone totally.

jtatta
12-20-2013, 09:01 AM
Awww well looks like Prime Orb of Brutality got the axe. It was fun dreaming

Actually, we can continue dreaming until the Blood "comes into play" major gem is released. Each shard has a comes into play Prime gem and an "on damage" Prime gem. The discard one is/was/still might be the comes into play one.