June 03, 2020, 09:55:10 AM

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.

Messages - lettucemode

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19
Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: My lil' imp buddy and me
« on: July 24, 2014, 09:54:00 AM »
If I had Adramelech's Torment, the most Burns I can reliably apply per round is 1 ignoring attack spells. If the enemy mage has 2 or more creatures out, that is at least three rounds spent to get a burn on them all. Contrast that with the immediate damage from Moloch's, combined with the number of curses I am dishing out per round. I can cast three curses in a round and get three damage immediately after. The average damage from three Burns in a round is also 3, but with Adramelech's you pay twice as much mana to get that damage, and it took about twice as long.

Burns can be removed by Healing Wand or the Priestess's ability or Geyser again and again and again. Meanwhile the most Dispels the opponent can have is 6 and I have almost three times as many curses (though most books run 3-4 dispels). Given that people are expecting fire-heavy strategies with this new release, Moloch's is simply more reliable than Adramelech's. 

Also as I have stated before I have absolutely nothing in the book that synergizes with Burns. No Adramelech's Touch, no Wildfire Imps, no Combustion, and I'm using the old-school Warlock. There is very little reason to invest in something that will not interact with any other card or effect in my book, especially when Moloch's exists.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: My lil' imp buddy and me
« on: July 23, 2014, 12:53:31 PM »
With fire weaving and two targets together you can move a 2nd burn onto one creature and put another new burn on the other. And it's more efficient because you pay 2 mana for 3 average damage.

Like the OP says, I am using the Arraxxian Crown warlock for this build. Even if I was using the Adramelech Warlock, getting burns on 3+ enemy creatures is action intensive, especially since this book only has 1 creature and isn't running Ignite + Mage Wand. It's far easier to get bonus damage for something I'm already doing, which is cursing stuff.

But Enchanter's Ring only get discount when mage is casting. I think it does not allow discount when revealing, or when a familiar casts, does it?

You're right. I will be casting many enchantments targeting Sersiryx (Healing Charm, Bull Endurance, Brace Yourself, Nullify, etc.) since he cannot cast them himself, so Enchanter's Ring will offset the cost of all that.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: My lil' imp buddy and me
« on: July 22, 2014, 02:24:29 PM »
Using Fireballs instead of Force Hammer would free up some spellpoints, but with all the enchantments Sersiryx will be getting, I think I like the Enchanter's Ring more. I should try some games one way and some the other to see what I like.

I'm using Moloch's simply because I don't have anything in the book that synergizes with Burn tokens. No Firebrand Imps, for example. Also Moloch's is cheaper for more reliable damage, and can be used on several creatures at once.

Spellbook Design and Construction / My lil' imp buddy and me
« on: July 22, 2014, 12:29:58 PM »
A buddy book with the Arraxian Crown Warlock and Sersiryx.

My lil' imp buddy and meWarlock
Attack2 x  Fireball2 x  Flameblast2 x  Force Hammer1 x  Ring of FireConjuration1 x  Battle Forge1 x  Deathlock1 x  Mana Prism1 x  Poison Gas CloudCreature1 x  Sersiryx, Imp FamiliarEnchantment2 x  Agony1 x  Arcane Corruption2 x  Block2 x  Brace Yourself1 x  Bull Endurance2 x  Chains of Agony1 x  Circle of Fire1 x  Death Link2 x  Enchantment Transfusion2 x  Enfeeble2 x  Ghoul Rot1 x  Healing Charm2 x  Magebane2 x  Maim Wings1 x  Mongoose Agility2 x  Nullify2 x  Poisoned Blood1 x  Rhino Hide1 x  Reverse Magic1 x  Rise AgainEquipment1 x  Cloak of Shadows1 x  Demonhide Armor1 x  Dragonscale Hauberk1 x  Elemental Cloak1 x  Enchanter's Ring1 x  Helm of Fear1 x  Lash of Hellfire1 x  Leather Boots1 x  Leather Gloves1 x  Moloch's Torment1 x  Ring of Curses1 x  Sectarus, Dark Rune SwordIncantation3 x  Dispel3 x  Dissolve1 x  Seeking Dispel
Total cost: 120 pts

Now that FiF is out on OCTGN, you'll probably see me playing some variant of this book. I just threw it together over lunch, so there's definitely some room for improvement. Already I am thinking of pulling out the Deathlock, Rhino Hide, and maybe the gas cloud, too.

Turn 1, 19 mana: sprint to NC, Battle Forge
Turn 2, 20 mana: deploy Enchanter's Ring, summon Sersiryx, cast Brace Yourself on Sersiryx
Turn 3, 15 mana: start adapting. It'd be good to deploy Ring of Curses at this point if possible

With 14 mana to work with and two discount rings on in Round 3, this build has a lot of flexibility. You can go offensive or defense with your equipment and enchantments. Some interesting synergies I see:
  • Sersiryx can cast Curses on your mage, which can then be transferred to the enemy Mage with a single Enchantment Transfusion. Stack 'em twice as fast!
  • With an additional curse action each turn, Moloch's Torment gets a lot more value, especially if the opponent has several creatures out.
  • Sersiryx is resistant to the most popular Unavoidable attack: Flameblast.
  • Worried about Harshforge Monolith with all those enchantments out? Drop a Mana Prism and lighten the load, then take it out with Force Hammers.

Obviously keeping Sersiryx alive for as long as possible is important, so there's a fair investment in keeping him alive and happy, but I think the additional Curse every round makes up for it.

Mages / Re: Wizard
« on: July 18, 2014, 08:31:54 AM »
Heart was always the most useless element. They'd be standing in front of a forest fire, like the entire forest is on fire directly in front of them, spanning the horizon, and he would use the power of Heart and say something like "I sense great pain in this forest"

Spellbook Builder / Re: SBB being updated tonight
« on: July 17, 2014, 02:16:52 PM »
Just wanted to say, the new theme looks pretty cool! Thanks for adding that

Custom Cards / Re: Prophet Mini-Expansion (printable)
« on: July 16, 2014, 10:11:02 AM »
The way the ability is worded, all spells cast by the opposing mage cost 1 extra mana unless they target a zone (or something in a zone) that has a Premonition marker. So if you don't place any markers, all your stuff costs 1 extra mana.

I like the idea because it introduces some cool mindgames, but I think the Prophet could gain a crushing mana advantage very quickly. Maybe remove the clause about him gaining extra mana for each unused marker? I haven't playtested him at all so maybe it's not actually a problem, but that's how it feels to me.

Got this Pocket-ed for later. Thanks for continuing to put out great content!

any idea when forged in fire cards will be on OCTGN?

We have had FiF done for at least a month now (kudos to sIKE for all his work). But we decided not to release it until the images have been added to the card database on this site out of respect for Arcane Wonders. You can expect to see FiF on OCTGN a day or two after that happens.

General Discussion / Re: Mage Wars Academy Expansion
« on: July 09, 2014, 07:47:26 AM »
I would imagine that balance and comparability with the current card set are not included in the design goals for this set. It is something people will play once or twice and then move on.

Rules Discussion / Re: Decoy and Seeking Dispel interaction
« on: July 08, 2014, 04:32:28 PM »
@Shadow you are just making my head spin. If it is face up in the Discard pile it is out of play how does it trigger?

because Decoy.

Rules Discussion / Re: Decoy and Seeking Dispel interaction
« on: July 08, 2014, 03:23:01 PM »
They would not trigger. Their text says when Revealed, not when Destroyed.

but as part of the destroy effect it is then turned face up allowing the Decoy destruction trigger to happen.

Rules Discussion / Re: Decoy and Seeking Dispel interaction
« on: July 08, 2014, 03:05:32 PM »
I should make it clear that I don't intend to invalidate the work of all the playtesters and designers with my comments. This is a truly tricky rules situation in a game with a metric crap ton of interactions. Even with such fringe cases, I still think MW is one of the greatest games I've ever played, and I really appreciate all the hard work that went into making it what it is today!

Has an errata to Seeking Dispel been considered? What if "Controller of enchantment cannot reveal the enchantment once Seeking Dispel has been cast" was replaced with "If the target enchantment is revealed before Seeking Dispel's Resolve Spell step, destroy it anyway"?

EDIT: ahh, that still wouldn't work because you could reveal an enchantment like Healing Charm to get its effect before it was destroyed. Hmm, how about "Treat Seeking Dispel's three casting steps as if they were all one step"?

EDIT #2: But then Decoy dies without giving mana. Okay, I give up. :P

I liked kich's explanation, actually - "Destroyed" triggers still happen even if an enchantment is facedown when it's destroyed. That allows stuff like Cantrip to work too.

Rules Discussion / Re: Decoy and Seeking Dispel interaction
« on: July 08, 2014, 02:56:12 PM »
The reason I bring these 2 sections up is that when a hidden enchantment is destroyed it is turned face up by the rules of the game before entering the discard pile. We know this because all cards in the discard pile are public knowledge. "Any player may freely examine the contents of any discard pile at any time." Seeking Dispel prevents the controller of the target enchantment form revealing the enchantment but as part of the destroy effect it is then turned face up allowing the Decoy destruction trigger to happen.

So how does this rule interact with Brace Yourself! or Healing Charm? Because from what you've said in the quoted paragraph, it seems like the effects on those cards would trigger if they were Seeking Dispel'd.

Cards turning face up just so they can be looked through once they are in the discard pile seems like flimsy reasoning to me. Discard piles are public knowledge, as you've said, so someone could easily pick up their opponent's discard pile, flip the cards face-up, thumb through it, then put it back in place face-down if they wanted to without any additional justification.

League / Tournament Play / Re: Players in Pittsburgh, PA?
« on: July 07, 2014, 11:48:52 PM »
Sorry it took me a while to respond. I am already involved in a weekly gaming group (where MW does not get played, though one other guy has a core set) so combined with my other life stuff I would not be able to make a weekly thing. I could come out every 3 weeks or so, though. I've got a car so I would be down to play wherever. Definitely interested in participating in a more active scene.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19