December 05, 2019, 06:14:31 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - Enti

Pages: [1]
1
General Discussion / Pillar of Righteous Flame - Discussion
« on: November 15, 2019, 09:45:21 PM »


Pillar of Righteous Flame. Arguably the most powerful legal MW card since the expansion Paladin vs. Siren. Or is it?


First of all, how do we even judge the strength of a card? We look at one card and experienced players can immediately assess if this card is strong or not. How do they do this? They compare it with similar, known cards!

For example:
We see a lvl 2 creature with 8 life, 2 armor and 3 dice attack. Nothing else. No effect. And it's an animal.
So how much mana would you estimate for this creature? Certainly not 9 mana, because for 9 mana you get 10 life, 2 armor, 4 dice.
And 8 mana? On that slot this unit would compete with the Silverclaw Ratel (8 mana, 8 life, 1 armor, 3dice piercing 1, when it is damaged, the Ratel has doublestrike)
No need to tell you, if that thing would cost 8 mana, noone would ever play this theoretical card.
So what if it cost 7 mana? Is it a good card now? "Good" as in, does it get played with a manacost of 7? Probably not because for one mana more you can get far more "dmg output" with the Ratel on the board.

Now imagine it is a knight. Suddenly all I wrote up there isn't relevant any more. Now your point of comparison immediately changes to the little Asyrian Defender. 8mana, 8 life, 2 armor, 3dice, def 9+ is now the point of reference. Again it is obvious that 9 or 8 mana is too much for my vanilla creature that I described. Considering that even the Asyrian Defender is very very seldom played, we can infer that the defender is too weak for its mana-cost.

Now ... imagine it is a demon. With what do you compare my vanilla 8life, 2armor, 3dice demon now? Either with Afflicted Demon or the Scourger I presume. Or you go with the Firebrand Imp..  And actually compared to the Firebrand Imp which is 5 mana, 6life, 2dice (fire) + flame immunity my vanilla demon suddenly doesn't look that bad. For 2 more mana you get +2 life, +2 armor and roughly the same attack.

And now imagine I say it is a shark. Again ...  I guess by now I have made my point clear. We use known, similar cards as reference if we judge how strong a card is.
If I ask you how good a creature is, you won't reference "Wall of Steel" in your reply and tell me that I only need 6 turns to get through that wall. You'll look for a similar creature to compare it with!


---



So let's face the question you have all been thinking about. If you have to judge how "good" Pillar is, with what do you compare it? I think there are 3/4 different card types you can compare it with.
First of all.. the most obvious one, we compare it with other conjurations that trigger an attack when someone enters the zone:
Apart from Manglers Caltrops and Bed of Urchins ... there are none to compare it with. I think it goes without saying that next to Pillar those two cards look... underwhelming. See for yourself:
Manglers: https://gyazo.com/07987c65d4121f0a8221a5918ba4387c
Urchins: https://gyazo.com/15e66df60ed823caab814d4379154b02
Pillar: https://i.gyazo.com/a91fa452eb00561b01e5d34ed3a1772e.png

We could also compare it with another card that is .. hmm.. apart from one effect very very similar:
Thunderstorm: https://gyazo.com/14108c1e6004008c2a70ecda5f611e35
Have you ever seen this card in a game? Probably not. Even though it's 3 mana cheaper and only has 1 attack-die less.
Well.. let's compare those two cards. Thunderstorm costs 3 mana less, as I said. But it doesn't attack when you cast it, only when a dissipate is removed. So that's a guaranteed 4 dice attack less than Pillar has. A simple 4 dice attack is worth 4 mana. That alone makes the Pillar superior. But the strongest feature of the pillar, the attack on entry and the +2 vs non-living is not even included yet in the manacost. Well, it feels wasted to compare those two cards, we all know that Pillar is way way better than Thunderstorm.

Now we could compare the Pillar with traps but let's come to the interesting comparison. In essence the Pillar is an attack spell, even though it's technically a conjuration. So let's compare it with attack spells. I guess it's best to compare it with Hurl Boulder. Finally a card that gets _frequently_ played in tournaments. A card that has many equal alternatives:
Fireball, Force Hammer, Lightning Bolt - they are all rather close together in terms of strength / mana efficiency.

Hurl Boulder, the classic attack spell. Frequently used to kill conjurations or to deal the last needed damage to finish the opponent: https://gyazo.com/0576b810f65381bd0e617e840c2cd6a7

8 mana, 7 dice, range 0-2

Finally a card we can really measure the Pillar against. But considering that the Pillar is ethereal maybe we should take the ethereal counterpart to the Boulder? That would be the Lightning Bolt. Also 8 mana but only 5 dice. So they subtracted 2 whole dice because its attack is ethereal? Well, and because it can roll a better effect. Let's say the ethereal was one dice and the better effect the other dice.
Here is the Lightning Bolt, maybe the closest attack spell we can compare the Pillar to:
https://gyazo.com/10e4c480e0adc1a8857bab1fbdc6c4da

You can draw your own conclusions, the post is getting to lengthy as it is.


---

I want to take a stance against three main arguments I have heard so far:
"Pillar is not too strong because ...  ['insert card' is better] dissolve and dispel are better"
First of all as you have seen in the beginning, I reject the whole premise of taking completely unrelated cards which have a fundamental different application as reference for a comparison.
But even IF I were to compare those cards with the Pillar I have to answer:
Dispel and Dissolve are zero-sum cards. You destroy something for exactly the same cost that your opponent paid for it. To destroy a 5 mana enchantment, you have to pay 5 mana. You win nothing in terms of mana.
Yes, it might be crucially important to dispel that enchantment and I'd rather not have a Pillar in my book than no Dispel or Dissolve, but that's not how the value of any card is determined, as we have discussed in the beginning.

Second argument goes like that:
"I have seen many games in which Pillar only gets 2 attacks out and then it's 9 mana for 2*4 dice ethereal with  daze/burn chance, that's not broken."

And I agree. In the worst case scenario the Pillar is not broken. In the utterly worst case scenario Pillar is like two a mixture of those two attack spells:
Arc Lightning: https://gyazo.com/2bc601d803d6342a6533360bac110f0f
Firestream: https://gyazo.com/8019d88a6a86096697383f3330a91691
And I admit, very few people would play those spells without hawkeye and other buffs. So you basically cast 2 spells with one action, but yeah... I agree that in the worst case scenario Pillar is not very impressive.
But highly situational cards are not judged by their worst case, but by their best case.
You don't look at Purify and say "well, if I neither have poison conditions nor poison enchantments, that card is utterly useless" when you build a deck. You think about prior games and on that basis you decide how likely it is that a situation arises in which Purify would be the best option in your entire book. And how dearly you'd miss it if you had to choose another option. Dispel for example. And most here would probably go for a Dispel instead of Purify even though in a best case scenario Purify is way way better. But how likely is said case to actually appear..


I have seen many many games in which Pillar was the sole pivotal card of the entire game.
Keejchen vs. markus at the German Championship this year. I've forgotten how many dice he has gotten out of the pillar.. The whole skeleton army forcewaved into that pillar.. Game over, in one move. From "he has no chance" to "he has won" in a single turn. Yes, he needed another card to pull that off, does that make force wave the second best card? Nope :p


The damage potential this card has is insane. Against every necro you have with minimal effort at least 4*6 dice, if you play against bloodthirsty zombies regularly 6*6 dice and more. And they don't even have armor! And the daze/burn chance is also increased against undeads.

Also, necro is one of the top mages. Having a card that obliterates undeads is very beneficial. Imagine two necro players, one has the pillar in his book, the other doesn't. The necro who has Pillar will probably win 10/10 games, that's how much impact this single card has.
And this is my problem with the card. You are practically forced to include it because it gives you such an insane advantage against every mage who uses non-living creatures. And accidentally, if you meet a Fire Elemental or a Whirling Spirit or an Invisible Stalker or a Gray Wraith ... You can trade very very favourably. 9 mana for 20/12/15/10 and you still have some attacks left for other targets.

The third aspect that makes this card so strong, apart from its undead and incorporeal kill mechanism, is whenever both sides play with creature spawnpoints. Imagine it's the turn in which you engage, both sides have 5 lvl 2 creatures. Your opponent attacks your field with 2 creatures, after that you play the Pillar in your zone. Now either he takes 4 dice for every additional creature he sends into this zone or he "surrenders" his investment and will lose the 2 creatures he has send into your zone. Also, next turn you play chant of rage and take is best remaining creature into your killing zone. Or you forcepush a creature that already moved. Or or or or.
This card has so many applications, you can even use it for dealing dmg to the enemy mage, if you prepare accordingly. I sometimes see the enemy mage keep standing in the same zone with the Pillar, because they expect me to forcepush/teleport them back into the zone anyway and then they used mana and actions to get away but because I am prepared they are in a worse position than before.



This card is well above the powerlevel of any comparable card. What are my suggestions to fix it? I don't mind that this card is insanely powerful in the right circumstances. I mind that it comes so cheaply to have such a powerful tool with you.
- First of all: Make it more expensive, so that you really have to sacrifice other tools if you want to include the Pillar into your book. I suggest lvl 4 holy.
- Secondly, remove the ethereal. Incorporeal creatures already don't see any arenas from the inside.
- Bump it up to 13 mana, that way you have at least to plan ahead if you want to use that card and cannot decide at the beginning of every turn if you want to use it now.
- Remove "non epic" from "Siphon Energy" target bar.




How do you judge how strong a card is?
What are your craziest Pillar-moments?
Do you think the card needs to be re-balanced? Why, why not?

I hope we see a civilized, fruitful discussion here and feel free to rip my text apart :)

2
General Discussion / The biggest problem MW has: rule-uncertainty
« on: May 24, 2018, 10:26:16 PM »
Most people I know, maybe every one (now that I think about it) who are considering stopping to play MW or already stopped playing it did so because the rules get more convoluted with every further expansion.

Even I have sometimes problems figuring out what the rules are. And I play pretty frequently, I read the forum, watch games on yt and octgn and I am still uncertain in some situations.

So I can understand the complains because I have similar albeit not as serious problems figuring out the rules.



There is a long list of "problems" that are not self-explanatory. For example until recently I presume 95% of the MW players weren't aware that cloak of shadows hinders the vine tree to tanglevine you if you are more than 1 field away from the tree.

But this kind of uncertainty is not easily eliminated because the root of this particular problem is the complexity of MW itself and the interaction between all the keywords there are.

What really drives people mad is the upkeep dilemma. What happens first. Do you get dmg first, or do you regenerate.
Most people know the rule "if your object is affected you decide".
Sounds simple at first glance. But what happens if your Pillar of Righteous Flame removes a Dissipate token and you want to attack the enemy creature, BEFORE it regenerates.
Some people even know the second rule, I think it's: "if there is a relative timing-issue initiative decides"

Well... again, the rule sounds easy but it's sooo hard to actually apply it. Especially if you don't play 5 times a month...

---

I was thinking of naming all the different problems but I presume you already encountered them yourself often enough. But if you want a convoluted scenario, check that out:
http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=18071.msg84446#msg84446

---

I rather save the space for my solution-proposal:

We should fix the order in which the effects happen. It might not be as "fair" or "logical" (although that is open for debate) but it would simplify the upkeep-drama significantly. Seriously. Please do give that proposal genuine consideration.


For example (no exhaustive list):

1. Regenerate
2. Heal (Healing Madrigal, Meridias Blessing, Theft of Life, Life Link, Death Link, ...)
3. Conditions & Effects (burn, rot, Drown, ...)
4. Damage-effects (Ghoul Rot, Plagued, Curse Item, Curse of Decay, Force Crush, Life Link, Death Link, Arcane Corruption, Malacoda, Colossal Crab, Consecrated Ground, Stranglevine, Poison Gas Cloud...)
5. Attacks (Goblin Bomber, ...)
6. Dissipate Token removal
7. Regenerate
8. Heal
9. Conditions (Lullaby, ...)
10. Damage-effects
11. Attacks (Telekinetic Bomb, PoRF, Whirlpool, ...)



As I said before, it's open to debate if that system is "fairer" but it is at least comprehensible for everyone.

And that way you always get 3 attacks with the Whirlpool and 2 chances of dazing/stunning with Lullaby because that's another thing that irks people. And they don't believe me even if I explain to them that initiative matters when you remove the second Dissipate token from Lullaby.. hehe, seriously, that regularly causes a dispute and normally we propose house rules in the beginning to avoid arguments about Whirlpool and Lullaby. Game is complicated enough as it is. And one single (important) rules-dispute can kill the mood for the entire evening, having someone going on about the "illogicality" of the game for hours... 

What do you think: Is my proposed solution easier to grasp than the current rules and do you agree that the convolution of the rules is the biggest problem for MW right now?

3
Rules Discussion / Mistakes during ADMW2
« on: April 17, 2018, 06:55:46 PM »
Hey guys,

I had the idea to write down the mistakes I witness during the ADMW2 tournament. It's probably the tournament in the whole game with the highest density of skill. I doubt any national tournament has as many high skilled player as this OCTGN tournament. So you'd think that there will be no mistakes since everyone attending really knows his (or her?) way around this game.
But MW is complex enough that even the best players do make mistakes and if THEY make those mistakes it is reasonable to assume that many players who are not as experienced as they are make the same mistakes. So it does make sense to write those mistakes down for other people to learn from it.

I start with the only one I remember from yesterdays game Keejchen vs. Farkas:

Sersiryx casting Death Link.

If you see other mistakes, please feel free to mention them and I edit this post to make a list.

4
Rules Discussion / 2 Questions
« on: July 29, 2017, 03:07:23 PM »
Hello Mage Wars community (and especially Zuberi :p)

2 questions came up in my recent games:


My falcon wanted to attack Fellella. I had initiative (not sure if that's even important).

Now. I have a hidden Falcon Precision. Fellella has an innate 6+ defense and has a hidden block.

The Falcon attacks the familiar.
My opponent - probably prematurely [because OCTGN asked him to] reveals his block. After that I reveal my Falcon Precision. He already paid 2 mana.


My problem is the following:

In a tournament - if I am the attacker - I'd politely ask him in the "Declare Attack step" if he wants to reveal anything. And at that point the would very probably reveal his block. Paying the mana.
And then, I would reveal my Falcon Precision in the fourth step, "Avoid Attack". In magic you would just say it was a misplay to reveal the block too early. I guess.
But I am not sure, what is the correct way of doing it?

I understand, that I probably have priority at the beginning of each step. So strictly speaking if I ask him in the fourth step, if he wants to reveal anything, I have passed my initiative and I am not allowed to reveal FP anymore. But if I ask in the first step, so when I "declare" the attack, it's hit "fault" for revealing it too early?

Not that I'd ever be so nitpicky, just curious how to handle this situation. :p
We just played it like this, he revealed Block, I then revealed FP and he got his 2 mana back. That's probably how you'd do it in most cases. But my question remains, how would you handle it in a highly competitive environment?


---

Second question, about block/dodge as well:

He has a hidden block/dodge. My Falcon has a daze/fumble.
Falcon attacks the creature with a block/dodge.
What happens?

My guess: With fumble, neither block nor dodge is triggered. Because you did non end the declare attack step.
But according to the supplement, once the declare step is successfully passed, it is considered an "attack". Thus it should trigger block/dodge even if he never even has to use the defense?
It's probably not intended to work like this, but the wording on block is pretty clear, isn't it?
"When this creature is attacked, you must reveal Block [...]"
And the supplement says: "Once the Declare Attack Step is completed, the melee attack is in progress"

Looking forward to reading your opinions.

5
Spellbook Design and Construction / Alfiya, lazy Enforcer
« on: March 09, 2017, 01:27:31 AM »
Hey guys,

since I first "accidentally" played with Alfiya, I am fascinated by that card and tried to build a deck around her.
First I tried to play her in a regular "temple-priestess"-deck but soon realized that this is not the optimal way to utilize her.
The next attempt was with the temple and 4 Light of Dawns..  But that again was too slow, not efficient enough.
Then I tried again, this time without the temple and with the battle forge + manually summon the dragon + the Light of Dawns. Again.. not very competitive - not even close.
The deck evolved, I started to summon Alfiya before the Light of Dawns and before I realized it, the deck changed again. No spawnpoint whatsoever.
Turn 1: Cleric + Basilica
Turn 2: double move + Enchanters Ring
Turn 3: Alfiya, lazy Enforcer and an enchantment.
Turn 4: Killing everything and everyone

Take a look at the (current) book:

Alfiya, lazy EnforcerA Priest Spellbookbuilt by the OCTGN SBB
Attack1 x Acid Ball2 x Luminous Blast2 x Sunfire Burst1 x Pillar of LightConjuration2 x Tanglevine1 x Pillar of Righteous Flame1 x Temple of Light1 x Malakai's Basilica1 x Wall of Earth1 x Hand of Bim-ShallaCreature3 x Asyran Cleric1 x Alfiya, Noble Enforcer1 x Cassiel, Shield of Bim-ShallaEnchantment2 x Akiro's Favor1 x Lion Savagery1 x Cheetah Speed1 x Rust1 x Rhino Hide1 x Bear Strength2 x Regrowth2 x Dodge3 x Divine Reversal2 x Divine Protection2 x Song of Love2 x Eye for an Eye1 x Blur1 x Circle of LightEquipment1 x Enchanter's Ring1 x Dawnbreaker RingIncantation2 x Whirling Strike2 x Rouse the Beast4 x Battle Fury1 x Force Push1 x Teleport1 x Cure2 x Remove Curse2 x Purify1 x Minor Heal1 x Heal2 x Lesser Teleport1 x Seeking Dispel2 x Dissolve5 x Dispel
Total cost: 120 pts


If you are intrigued by this awesome dragon and if you are wondering if this really is viable, take a look at my (new!) yt-channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCafM9Dne-M4tM0Es9N6jZgA/videos

I uploaded 5 different games with her already and I still have 3 more that are being uploaded at this moment.

Feel free to voice your opinion! :)

At the moment I am thinking about playing her with the Paladin. The obvious advantage would be that I'd have 10! more spellbookpoints to spent and that I could use a ballista... But on the other hand no holy avenger (I rarely use this ability anyway) and no Malakai's fire.. (well.. maybe used once or twice a game)

And if you are interested in some training games, especially if you want to play a gate wizard or a druid, I'm all yours. I think these 2 matchups are the hardest ones.

6
Events / ADMW Winter Special - Betting game
« on: March 06, 2017, 07:25:07 PM »
The first 3 games are already scheduled:



Keejchen vs. aridigas:  9.3 at 16 pm CET  (judge: schwenkgott)
jacksmack vs. powlich: 10.3 at 20:00 CET
Parkdeck vs. theasaris: between 13.3 - 17.3
My game with sharkbait isn't planned yet but I am available all the time :p

Now to the betting-game. I'm not sure if you are familiar with these Panini-booklets that are everywhere during a football world cup. Especially our American friends are probably not familiar with it... But basically before the first match in each round you "bet" who is going to win. And after the first round you count how many you've had right. And then you do it for the next round again. And  the one with the most right "bets" is the winner.
Since we don't have any prices (at least I don't have any :p) it's just for the fun. Buuut...  it is fun! :p
Obviously it is a bit awkward if I compete myself because I am a participant.. but oh well.. I'll survive it and that way I encourage the other participants to participate as well :)
And just to make it clear: Everyone is invited to participate!


Round 1:                       
keejchen vs. aridigas:      keejchen
parkdeck vs. theasaris:    parkdeck
schneeente vs. sharkbait: schneeente
jacksmack vs. powlich:     jacksmack

Loser bracket:
aridigas vs. theasaris:  theasaris
sharkbait vs. powlich:  powlich


And dear god, I hope nobody is offended because I assumed they'll lose. If anyone can't take this game how it is intended (as fun, let's see who will have the most points in the end) then please let me know. Post in this thread or via personal message and I'll ask a mod to delete this thread.


6 points as possible to get in the first round. And in total there are only 14 points to get. So this first round is pretty important for this betting-game at least :p

7
Hey guys!

As you may have noticed there is a big German MW community out there (playing regularly on OCTGN) and therefore we have German commentary on some ADMW Winter Special matches.

While Schwenkgott has uploaded 7 videos from the latest tournament, Arcane Wonders has nearly twice as many with their 12 videos.

But coincidentally? until now there was not a single overlap. But now there is and I took the chance to analyse the difference in their commentary. Why? Because I always had the feeling that there are distinct differences and now we have the chance to discuss them. Cool!


Okay. Where do we start? At the beginning. I don't want to retell everything they said, so we stick with bullet points. These are the videos in question:
Arcane Wonders: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FzOirGq7t8&t=225s
Schwenkgott Thunderdome: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3VuV05dpPg

schwenkgott & aridigas
T1 + 2:
- asking why not using a spawnpoint?
- explaining the 2 different necro spawnpoints
- analyzing/commenting on red's strategy to apply pressure very early with these 2 deathfangs
- pointing out the inefficient mana usage
- pointing out the missing Eternal Servant
- comparing the mana channeling
- explaining the Banner


coshade
T1 + 2:
- As well saying that it is a highly unusual opening. (But telling us the advantages this opening might have [applying pressure so that the paladin might be forced to pop the Banner earlier])
- Telling us how great the Monk is in great detail
- comparing the mana channeling


Ah, well, it is too tedious to summarize it in such detail. Let me tell you my general observation:
The German commentary is much ... hmm...  harsher compared to coshade's observations. While coshade generally points out the positives aspects of a move the German commentary focuses far more on the negative side. Or "what the player could have made better".
For example Schwenkgott and aridigas both unanimously judged the fireblast to be a total waste of manapoints, actions and spellbookpoints while coshade's comment was "it's not bad" - probably referring to the actual roll (2 damage and burn) not to the strategy using the blast in the first place.
Another nice example is the discussion about the chant of rage (that red revealed it too early and asked if he can cover it again). While the German's even referred to it again, later, when parkdeck moved his Paladin and then decided to move his Sentry instead, the comment was "now red could also say 'moved is moved'".
Coshade reacted differently. When red made the mistake he talked about chant of rage being a new spell, player still figuring it out and getting used to it, not saying his opinion if parkdeck should allow red to cover it again.
 
And another very interesting example: When parkdeck played the Pillar of Righteous Flame.
Schwenkgott's and Aridigas reaction was clear. Huge mistake. Wasting precious dice and even questioning the move altogether (not only the target of the attack).
Coshade again, much more diplomatic: "Interesting move. I wonder why he attacked the necromancer [...]"
I think at that point coshade didn't realize that the cloak made the move even worse since attacking the necromancer with 2 dice instead of attacking the undead creature with 6 dice is such a huge difference. Additionally some damage (no matter if 2 or 5) on the Necromancer really doesn't matter at this point at the game so the only reasonable target was a ceature. Buuut as you can hear for yourself (minute 35) coshade is rather cautious not to voice direct criticism.

And we could go on like this, there are a lot more examples that are all pointing in the same direction.
While the English commentary is much more descriptive in nature (that applies to sharkbait and puddnhead as well) the Germans tend to assess/evaluate/judge the moves the players make.


The difference between red's marked of death play was also very telling. On the one hand "bringt doch gar nichts" and "unheimlich schlecht" (which translates to "it's useless" and "unbelievably bad") and in the other hand "he pays mana to reveal mfd, bad luck, unfortunate, bad rolls..".
Again, coshade being much more descriptive and less evaluating whether the move was good while from schwenkgott's and aridigas side the main concern seems to be if the move, the strategy, the plan was a good one.


I hope both sides feel accurately represented and I also hope that all three of you can agree with the observations.
Not sure if anyone here finds this interesting at all.. but since I wanted to compare the videos anyway (for myself because I am interested in the differences) I just wrote down my impressions.


And a quick reminder: I'm still waiting for something like this:
http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=17395.msg79966#msg79966

Have a nice day and I'm looking forward to many many more commented videos, both ways of commenting have their advantages, keep the good work up! :)

8
General Discussion / International Mage Wars Skype Channel
« on: July 20, 2016, 09:08:26 AM »
Hey mutual Mage Wars fanatics!

We really need a common Skype channel guys. An international one!

Main reason to join: If you open a game on OCTGN you can just drop a note and everyone immediately knows that you are looking for an opponent.

I hope that way we can promote Mage Wars a little bit more and having discussions there instead of struggling with the small chat-box on the left.

Come forth and add me, my Skype nick is “Schneeente”.
I'll then add you to the first international Mage Wars Skype channel! :p

9
Rules Discussion / 2 Guarding creatures in 1 zone
« on: October 22, 2014, 12:34:12 PM »
There is a mage guarding and a deathfang guarding in a zone.
A Gremlin wants to attack the mage, can he do it?
Or can the enemy mage decide, that the deathfang has to be targeted?

Pages: [1]