Arcane Wonders Forum

Mage Wars => Spellbook Design and Construction => Topic started by: SirJasonCrage on July 02, 2018, 01:56:30 pm

Title: THE Book.
Post by: SirJasonCrage on July 02, 2018, 01:56:30 pm
Big Edit: If you're making one of these, just add a mage and a mage stats card. If you save the book with an empty "mage" slot, it's gonna move the pot down, which causes all sorts of trouble.

Hi guys.

I just made a book and saved it. It's the book I'm gonna load from now on, to make new Mages. It has everything a mage might want and maybe some stuff that some won't want. Still gonna be less of a hassle to remove some of that stuff, instead of adding all of it.

Neat little number: If I use it as it is, so far, with a Forcemaster as an example mage, I'm at 85 SBP. A Warlord would be at a whopping 100.



Mage

Attack
2x Acid Ball

Conjuration
2x Mana Flower
1x Pillar of Righteous Flame
2x Tanglevine

Creature

Enchantment
1x Galvanize
1x Ballad of Courage
1x Chant of Rage
1x Bear Strength
1x Hawkeye
1x Nullify
1x Jinx
2x Poisoned Blood
1x Magebane
2x Regrowth
2x Brace Yourself
1x Rhino Hide

Equipment
1x Leather Chausses
1x Leather Boots
1x Leather Gloves
1x Mage Wand
1x Mage Staff

Incantation
3x Dissolve
2x Teleport
1x Purify
1x Force Push
3x Seeking Dispel
1x Remove Curse
3x Dispel



So I ain't really sure if there's a lot to discuss here, but if something strikes you as odd or something's in there that you'd do vastly different, hit me with it :)
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Reddicediaries on July 02, 2018, 05:25:01 pm
Honestly I make every mage the way I see that mage should be built. Obviously I have cards I almost always include in x quantity but I prefer building without set staples so that I better suit that mages style.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: bigfatchef on July 02, 2018, 06:03:49 pm
Usefull list. I would add a hurl boulder as finisher and against conjurations (fm uses uses in forcehammer instead).
I personally would not see jynx here and less regrowth, no mana flower, no ballad of courage. Hawkeye is only for rangers. I miss a lesser teleport and would maybe reduce a standart teleport. Also I miss crumble for one dissolve.

Well you already said it's easier to remove Things from the list so I see only few things I use most of the times.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: DaveW on July 02, 2018, 06:17:09 pm
You might want to put together a kind of standard swap list by mage... maybe a quicksand instead of a tanglevine for the warlord, lash of hellfire instead of magestaff for warlock, etc.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: SirJasonCrage on July 03, 2018, 10:31:02 am
Yo Dave,

a standard swap list would defeat the purpose of lessening my workload. I know I'm not gonna use three teleports and three dispels+seekings in a warlord, same as I know I'll be using quicks instead of tangles with him. Your thought is correct, there will be swaps whenever I actually build a book with this, but I don't think that kinda swaplist's gonna be useful.


Yo Bigfat,

I see you understand the purpose of this thread :) I actually debated using boulder and/or hammer, but I mostly don't use finisher spells (might be a mistake, but that's my style).
With Hawkeye and Bear strenght, honestly, you're always gonna find a use. I don't always like crumble, because as a solo mage player, I usually don't want to waste a full action when it could also be a strong attack.
As for the amounts of some spells, I just chose to go with this for now. I might change it around if I find it's too oppressive for the rest of bookbuilding.


Yo there, Red.

So you're saying it would be smart to use something similar for you, just with less/other cards? That's smart of you.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: bigfatchef on July 03, 2018, 12:37:25 pm
The thing with crumble is that it doesn't trigger nullify as it targets equipment.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Borg on July 04, 2018, 04:09:45 am
This OP is a perfect illustration of one of my main criticisms of MW currently.
Every book just looks the same.
There is not enough variety in spellbookbuilding and every expansion just added more staples and makes books more similar.

Solution : reduce the number of starting SBP's to 100. ( or less ) to make those out-of-training staple spells too costly to maintain and thus force Mages to look for alternatives in-school.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Beldin on July 04, 2018, 05:38:30 am
I do not see this as a bad thing. Every book boils down to a toolbox of winning. The main goal is to win or you might as well play something else. So this boils down into offensive, defensive, and solutions to specific problems. The problem with a lack of variety is because the entire 6 years of card development fits inside a single block of mtg. So either we have constant releases and get lots of variety or we have slow burn development and everything feels the same at a basic level.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: SirJasonCrage on July 04, 2018, 10:00:05 am
Funny enough, Borg just expressed one of the reasons I made this book and the Post.

I basically have 35 sbp for "individual" Deckbuilding, if I use this staple.

Beldin makes a fair counterpoint though, there's always bound to be staples in games. Some things just work out better than others and some specific counters cannot be overlooked.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Reddicediaries on July 04, 2018, 10:09:13 am
I think you can allocate so many points because you don't run many creatures in most of your books correct?
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Beldin on July 04, 2018, 11:02:54 am
Who are you talking to red?
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Reddicediaries on July 04, 2018, 11:07:01 am
Who are you talking to red?
Sir Jason.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Beldin on July 04, 2018, 01:06:39 pm
ah yes sorry. My phone, for some reason, had not shown me all posts so it was ambiguous at the time. Hence the post.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Beldin on July 04, 2018, 03:21:35 pm
Incantation
3x Dissolve
2x Teleport
1x Purify
1x Force Push
3x Seeking Dispel
1x Remove Curse
3x Dispel

This is missing Heal. I tend to put atleast a single heal in all my books. Even at triple points cost. A heal at the right moment can turn the tide of a battle; coupled with Regeneration, and clever positional tactics you can tread water long enough to stabilise and then go onto win.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Borg on July 05, 2018, 04:08:39 am
there's always bound to be staples in games.

Yes, but do you find it a good thing that EVERY book can afford ALL the staples ?
I don't.

I have no problem with expecting a Pillar of Righteous Flame in EVERY Holy mage's spellbook but when it starts showing up in just every book, no matter what school, tbere is a problem imo.

The reason for this overpresentation of staples is : too many sbp's to build a book.

Think of it, the game is (theoretically) trying to restrict your spellbookbuilding options by charging double sbp's for out-of-school spells and even triple cost in some instances.

Do you honestly have the impression that these extra costs are effectively preve ting you from building your book optimally ? I don't.
120 sbp's is far too much. It takes the effectiveness out of the double/triple cost.

Lower the starting sbp's and force each mage to find in-school answers to situations and you'll get far more diverse books.

Every book boils down to a toolbox of winning. The main goal is to win or you might as well play something else. So this boils down into offensive, defensive, and solutions to specific problems.
I agree, but does every toolbox have to be nearly identical to your opponent's ?
You might as well play chess then.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Borg on July 05, 2018, 04:11:56 am
Quote from: Beldin link=topic=18742.msg91749#msg91749
I tend to put atleast a single heal in all my books. Even at triple points cost.
A perfect illustration of my point that 120 starting sbp's is way too much.

An added negative effect is shown here : players start playing every mage the same way.
The abundance of sbp's reduces player's inventiveness in trying to find in-school solutions and alternative ways of playing.

Too many sbp's stimulates lazy bookbuilding.

This is not a criticism of you Beldin. It's a general observation.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: keejchen on July 05, 2018, 01:37:56 pm
That title is total clickbait Jason ::)

For real though, this is a good idea and I should get around to making my own. Having a skeleton to work from, rather than building from memory every time, would spare me the "where's my teleport"-moments when running a new book.
 
@Borg: As Jason says this is a list of his staples that are tailored to his own preferred solo playstyle, another players list will look very different, mine will probably be shorter. Jason's list is good, but more than half of the cards are not strictly necessary to make a good book.

I fail to see how releasing more expansions with good cards are a problem. In the days of the base game, books had more staples because we didn't have a choice. Now we have greater variety in every spelltype, more choices to make (easy examples are in the removal category: Crumble/Dissolve, Dispel/Disperse), and for the most part Mage Wars remains a fairly balanced game (though we agree that Pillar is a fluke, but at least it's epic).

I think you're wrong on the sbp. With 160 points we could make some even crazier books, it would allow us to dive deeper into the schools for cards that are not currently viable (i.e. competitive). There's two sides to every argument though, more sbp would also mean a longer game, fewer sbp would make it shorter (which I am aware that some players would prefer). All in all I think 120 is a good middle ground.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: bigfatchef on July 06, 2018, 11:46:23 am
I know this is a bit derailing the topic, but in my opinion 160 sbp would favor even more similarity in between all schools. So I think it would more bypass all school decisions instead of forcing players to five deeper into them. I really wonder how a 100 or even 80 sbp competition would look like. Books would be bed different by this forced shortage. Every spellbook would be short at some point. Players were forced to decide very hard. An Allrounder with answers to everything would have no space for an actual thread to bring on the board. Also game would get shorter - what I would absolutely love to see.

I really want to try this and I have the feeling that would improve the game a lot in several aspects.

To the original post: minor heal is absolutely missing.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: SirJasonCrage on July 06, 2018, 02:44:19 pm
Yo, Keej.

Sorry. That clickbait absolutely accidentally somehow slipped in there without me noticing  :-\  8)

You get my drift though. Just trying to make Bookbuilding less of a hassle.


As for the sbp: Bigfat actually convinced me here, 100sbp would probably be a better change than 120. Then again, I'm just personally against change anywhere. I like Mage Wars the way it is, even if this thread is kinda lampshading one of my perceived flaws.


Concerning Heal or Minor Heal:
I rarely ever play heals. Just ain't my style. Even my Paladin has two Vampirisms instead of using those 12 sbp on heals :D
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: bigfatchef on July 06, 2018, 02:48:56 pm
Even my Paladin has two Vampirisms instead of using those 12 sbp on heals :D
You crazy  :o
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: SirJasonCrage on July 06, 2018, 02:58:34 pm
Just tried to build a Johktari out of this and found a huge flaw in the way I build the book.

Added a warning to the OP.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Beldin on July 06, 2018, 04:18:33 pm
Quote from: Beldin link=topic=18742.msg91749#msg91749
I tend to put atleast a single heal in all my books. Even at triple points cost.
A perfect illustration of my point that 120 starting sbp's is way too much.


I would still find room for it at 80 points in every book, a single heal can turn the tide of the match from a loss and make it into a win. Lower SBP would not solve this problem, it would change the game. If anything it would make these types of plays/choices more significant. Heal is a perfect example as it lengthens the game, as long as you roll average and above. If anything I would still create my books the way I do now however I would more strongly to the Novice cards like Disarm, or even lower level cards which fill a more niche role, like Drop Weapon, instead. The standard toolbox would never go away. It is not lazy book building, it is covering key areas that are common problems with every book.

I want a teleport and a force push for positional control (Eg. removing the base builder from his favourable zone). I want heal and regrowth for the times in the match I am not the beatdown. Dispel and other removal have obvious places. This is not justification to include my favourite cards, these are staples for every book as they all face common problems. I am sorry but I will continue preaching this as gospel because it is fact. I will include these at 120/100/80 points.

If anything at double figures we run the risk of having auto-building books, as a single strategy will emerge as optimal for each mage, with a toolbox.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: zot on July 06, 2018, 07:26:20 pm
I know this is a bit derailing the topic, but in my opinion 160 sbp would favor even more similarity in between all schools. So I think it would more bypass all school decisions instead of forcing players to five deeper into them. I really wonder how a 100 or even 80 sbp competition would look like. Books would be bed different by this forced shortage. Every spellbook would be short at some point. Players were forced to decide very hard. An Allrounder with answers to everything would have no space for an actual thread to bring on the board. Also game would get shorter - what I would absolutely love to see.

I really want to try this and I have the feeling that would improve the game a lot in several aspects.

To the original post: minor heal is absolutely missing.

this will easilly lead to more matches where folks can more often end up with a deck loss

Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Borg on July 07, 2018, 03:20:23 am
With 160 points we could make some even crazier books

The problem with 160 sbp's is that now each spellpoint represents only 0.625% of your total spellpoints.
In other words : sbp's are seriously reduced in value and as a consequence you have seriously reduced the impact of single, double and triple cost of a spell which in turn leads to different schools having even less impact in spell choices than they already have.

At 160 sbp's a Pillar of Righteous Flame at triple cost would still only take up 3.75% ( 6 of 160 ) of your sbp total.
If the absolute best cards, at the costliest rate cost you no more than that to include in your book it should be glaring obvious that there is a problem with the single/double/triple cost implementation element in this game because it's reduced to a non-factor.

Think of it like this : if a kid has 1 dollar and he wants a candy he has to make choices.
Does he take a Mars, or a Snicker. A pack of Lays chips or something else ?
If you give that kid 100 dollars. He simply takes the Mars AND the Snickers AND the pack of Lays chips AND a whole lot more. There are no choices to make anymore. Just take all the goodies.


I fail to see how releasing more expansions with good cards are a problem.

The point of releasing new expansions is, among other things:
- fleshing out certain schools
- balancing out schools
- providing new strategies for different mages.
- other goals ...

HOWEVER, if the starting sbp's total is so high that EVERY mage can simply afford to include every power card, no matter what school it comes from and how much the cost then these expansions increase a certain problem : the new cards then don't simply strengthen a certain school type but rather strengthen EVERY mage from ANY SCHOOL.
Thus the number of staples for every mage simply increases with every expansion which is a bad effect imo.

This is a clear indication imo that there is a balance issue between individual card sbp cost and total sbp's available.
The school cost ( single/double/triple) is not impactful enough and does not work as restricting as it should imo.
The result is : every spellbook looks mostly the same and there's actually only 1 type of book successful : the "toolbox" book. There should be more viable archetypes than that ( cfr aggro vs control vs combo in MtG ).
Every healthy game needs a competitive "aggro" variant. MW does not have that.

Therefore, solution : reduce the number of starting sbp's to like 100, let players really make choices about what to put in their book instead of just putting in every power card.


I would still find room for it at 80 points in every book, a single heal can turn the tide of the match from a loss and make it into a win. Lower SBP would not solve this problem, it would change the game.

I understand your argument but it is a personal preference / playing style of yours as other players ( myself included ) find this much less of a "must have" card.
In a fitting book, I may go for a Heal as well but in general I'd rather play a damage spell on the opponent for the same mana.


If anything at double figures we run the risk of having auto-building books, as a single strategy will emerge as optimal for each mage, with a toolbox. 

I think it's much too soon to draw that conclusion. It might be just the other way around as far as I'm concerned. I would rather expect to see much more variety than we have now because people would have to build more "focused" books.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: keejchen on July 07, 2018, 04:20:06 am
Ok, but the thing you are describing is not happening in the meta. I see plenty of variety even in books of the same schools.

Yea, be it at 100/120/160 sbp, you could make 14 (almost) identical books, one for each mage, and they would be playable, sure, this is the beauty and freedom in Mage Wars. But I wager my hat you would loose 90% of your games with such books. Just because you can do it, doesn't mean it's viable, the choices and struggles are there, even if you choose to ignore them. If you disagree, please do come around to OCTGN and prove it, I'll believe it when I see it. ;)

Your point about % is two-fold as well. If we agree that one 6 sbp card is a must, then at 160 it takes 3.75% as you say, leaving me with 96,25% to build with afterwards, more choice for me. At 100 sbp it accounts for 6%, leaving 94% of choice for me. Looking at it this way, less sbp is less choice. The notion that every book can afford every "power card" is just ridiculous, if only I could afford 4 mage wands and 4 elemental wands in every book!
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Arkdeniz on July 07, 2018, 05:46:33 am
I see another possibility:

Leave the total SBP at 120, but have a limit on the number of points that can be used for out of school spells.

If you say “no more than (eg 40/50/60) points can be out of school” then you serve both purposes of encouraging finding innovative in-school solutions to common situations, and encouraging the deeper use of traditionally ‘unviable’ spells that are rarely used, because you will have extra spellbook space for them.

Finally, the casual inclusion of triple-cost spells will stop. Using these will have to be very considered indeed, and serve very specific strategies and tactics.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Borg on July 07, 2018, 06:03:30 am
The notion that every book can afford every "power card" is just ridiculous, if only I could afford 4 mage wands and 4 elemental wands in every book!

Keejchen, come on. Read again what you're saying here.
So because you cannot afford 4 mage wands and 4 elemental wands in every book my point is ridiculous ?

Honestly, I don't think this game is designed or meant to be played withh 4 of these in every book.

When I say every book can afford every power card I obviously mean 1 ( or 2 ) copies, not 4 of each ...
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: keejchen on July 07, 2018, 07:27:27 am
We are arriving at the point: It is a choice.

I really love wands, so do I get 1 or 2? Jason has 1 in this standard book. Some of my mages do not even get 1, unless it is necessary/helpful for a specific combo. Wizards usually get more than 2, because they are in school. I am pretty sure I have at least 1 elemental wand in every book trained in an elemental school.

Wizards get 4-6 nullifies, Siren and Druid carry a good amount of dissolve/crumble. Would love to re-introduce fireballs in my Druid (for countering Druids), however, I have found that it is just not worth the 6 sbp, and I can find some solutions that are in school or at least not triple cost. I am still on the fence on whether Pillar is actually worth it in Necromancer (probably is though, since he has a lot of trouble in mirror matches).

You also cannot have 1 of every card in the game, there are ~700 cards in MW. Most books have 50-60ish cards, including copies.

So I say, sbp is tight if used right. 8)

Anyways. You could play with 100 sbp and you might like it more, but you are not fixing a problem that everyone has. I have always been a fan of trying house rules, when I find flaws or shortcomings in games. I have a book I made with Karadox's archmage rules at 360 sbp, and I tell you, I could not afford all the stuff I wanted..

You should post your list of power cards, that you think should be in every book (100 sbp or whatever). Would love to see it, and it would be relevant for Jason's thread that we have otherwise horribly derailed.  :D
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: DaveW on July 07, 2018, 08:39:51 am
I see another possibility:

Leave the total SBP at 120, but have a limit on the number of points that can be used for out of school spells.

If you say “no more than (eg 40/50/60) points can be out of school” then you serve both purposes of encouraging finding innovative in-school solutions to common situations, and encouraging the deeper use of traditionally ‘unviable’ spells that are rarely used, because you will have extra spellbook space for them.

Finally, the casual inclusion of triple-cost spells will stop. Using these will have to be very considered indeed, and serve very specific strategies and tactics.

The in school vs. normal cost for spells at least helps with the limit on out of school points.

What we might try also is to limit spell level out of school... instead of completely banning spells from opposed schools.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: wtcannonjr on July 07, 2018, 10:53:44 am
We are arriving at the point: It is a choice.

I really love wands, so do I get 1 or 2? Jason has 1 in this standard book. Some of my mages do not even get 1, unless it is necessary/helpful for a specific combo. Wizards usually get more than 2, because they are in school. I am pretty sure I have at least 1 elemental wand in every book trained in an elemental school.

Wizards get 4-6 nullifies, Siren and Druid carry a good amount of dissolve/crumble. Would love to re-introduce fireballs in my Druid (for countering Druids), however, I have found that it is just not worth the 6 sbp, and I can find some solutions that are in school or at least not triple cost. I am still on the fence on whether Pillar is actually worth it in Necromancer (probably is though, since he has a lot of trouble in mirror matches).

You also cannot have 1 of every card in the game, there are ~700 cards in MW. Most books have 50-60ish cards, including copies.

So I say, sbp is tight if used right. 8)
This is the school of thought that I use in designing my spellbooks. There is a choice to be made around the number of copies of each spell that can be put into a book in addition to the first copy of each spell. So, the game does provide many choices across the spell types for each mage to use, but the depth of spells selected out of school will vary based on their training.

I would look to define a 'base book' for each of the Primary Schools rather than a single book across the entire spell pool. This allows you to include the idea of 'spell depth' into your design choices and play style which can be important when you consider counters to your opponents counter play lines of thinking. It also should be more useful to adapt as new expansions are added that focus on expanding various schools and/or lines of play.

Note - Arena currently (thru Lost Grimoire I expansion) has 482 different spells which includes Mage specific spells that not all books can include. I don't use the Academy spells since they tend to lower the SBP cost for mages to gain similar effects than a comparable Arena spell. e.g. An Arena spell at level 2 would require 4 SBP for an out of school mage, while a similar spell in Academy provides part of the same effect (e.g. +1 Melee rather than +2 Melee) as a level 1 spell.

I am not sure of the definition of "power card" that is being discussed here. This sounds different than the idea of a 'staple spell' that should be included in all spellbooks. The idea of allowing all mages to have access to a Pillar of Light card is fine with me since the cost varies by mage training. Powerful spells come in different flavors - Mage Specific, School Specific, Epic, Unique, and Legendary are variations that come to mind. Therefore, I don't see a reason to use house rules to further limit spells unless you want to further differentiate each mage's style of play through a more restricted set of spells in their books. Each restriction removes options for styles of play from different mages so it does come down to the level of choice that the game system provides to each mage.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: wtcannonjr on July 07, 2018, 10:58:38 am
How does the book in the OP deal with Terrain spells? I don't see any counter spells that can be used against a book that features this type of strategy. I suppose you could focus all your Creatures on those with the Flying trait which may help some. Still … ??
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Beldin on July 07, 2018, 02:13:49 pm
Guys you realise at this point we have completely derailed the OP and are now discussing a game point that is set in stone? The SBP of mages is not going to change at this point. At best we are considering oiling the hinges of a rusted open door where the horse has bolted, died of old age, and been made into glue.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: bigfatchef on July 07, 2018, 08:29:07 pm
Guys you realise at this point we have completely derailed the OP and are now discussing a game point that is set in stone? The SBP of mages is not going to change at this point. At best we are considering oiling the hinges of a rusted open door where the horse has bolted, died of old age, and been made into glue.
The mage wars ship is sunken. Everybody here in this forum is part of those few stranded on a lonely island. Only rumors appear that somebody has information that the captain is alive and on his way to get a bigger ship for us. The stone with rules set on it lies deep on the ground of the ocean. This is anarchy!  8)

Honestly everything that improves the game is a good thing. Everything that motivates people to play the game is good. There are threads about exactly this. Let it be needed errata, suplement or ADMW Housrules that are out and so on. I think a thread or even section about 160 or 80 sbp books is absolutely worth a try.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Enti on July 08, 2018, 05:28:03 am
Solution : reduce the number of starting SBP's to 100. ( or less ) to make those out-of-training staple spells too costly to maintain and thus force Mages to look for alternatives in-school.

Beautiful idea, if the cards would be available.

OP's book has 2x Poisoned Blood
Show me any non-dark-school that can do that. With ANY card.

1x Jinx
Show me another non-arcane card that can do what jinx does.

1x Galvanize
Show me another non-holy card that can remove corrodes.

1x Magebane
Show me another non-dark card with this effect.

1x Chant of Rage
... same text


Why is it such a big problem that, if you play a "ranged attack solo mage" no matter which mage it is you need very similar cards? No matter if you play Jokthari or Adramalech or Wizard, you'll need stuff that boosts your ranged attacks to the maximum and let's you re-roll. And you'll need battleforge, thus many equipments. It's natural that they all need the same "skills/equipments" since they follow a very similar playstyle.

Same with dot-mages. If you play a dot-mage no matter if you use a druid, a warlock, a necro or a FM you'll need the same basics. Cutting the available points will only lead to making those mages even less distinguishable because you cannot and will not refrain from including ghoul rot, poisoned blood, mage bane and all the other spells that are fundamental for dot-builds. Obviously -.-
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Arkdeniz on July 08, 2018, 07:37:10 am
OP's book has 2x Poisoned Blood
Show me any non-dark-school that can do that. With ANY card.

1x Jinx
Show me another non-arcane card that can do what jinx does.

1x Galvanize
Show me another non-holy card that can remove corrodes.

1x Magebane
Show me another non-dark card with this effect.

1x Chant of Rage
... same text


I don't think 'no other card can do what Poisoned Blood' can do is the point. It would be bad game design if another card did. 

Rather, I assume the complaint is that because some cards are the 'simple' and 'obvious' answers to some problems, they get chosen because they can be afforded, at the cost of variety and 'thinking outside the box'. Thus countering individual spells become more of a concern in book construction than countering various mages.

By this I mean that if everyone packs a couple of Poisoned Bloods, then players will inevitably start thinking along the lines of "how can I work around/remove my opponent's inevitable Poisoned Blood play?', rather than 'Hmm, he has brought a Wizard. How might this Wizard plan to prevent me healing or regenerating, and how can I fight that?'

So: Poisoned Blood is used to prevent healing and regeneration. A Wizard who could not afford a PB might use nullifies, reverse magics and such to stop the Healing spells, or use dispel to get rid of regen enchantments and so on. A Warlord with no PBs might instead simply plan on dealing more damage, to nullify the regen through sheer output ("I don't care if you regenerate 2 damage when I can deal 4 more!"). 

I like theme in my games, MW included. So anything that can enhance the theme of different mages approaching the same problem with different tools gets a tick from me. I have suggested limiting the proportion of the spellbook dedicated to out-of-school cards. Others have suggested just making the books bigger or smaller. The best solution is probably just playing more with different players. Encounter new tricks. They are out there.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Borg on July 08, 2018, 08:27:11 am

I don't think 'no other card can do what Poisoned Blood' can do is the point. It would be bad game design if another card did. 

Rather, I assume the complaint is that because some cards are the 'simple' and 'obvious' answers to some problems, they get chosen because they can be afforded, at the cost of variety and 'thinking outside the box'. Thus countering individual spells become more of a concern in book construction than countering various mages.

THAT is exactly the point I'm trying to get across.
Thank you for putting it in words so precisely, Arkdeniz.

It is EXACTLY because EVERY book can afford Poisoned Blood and Magebane and Chant of Rage and so much more ( the easy solutions ) that everybody uses them instead of trying to find alternative, outside-the-box in-school solutions.

Obviously those in-school alternatives may be less straight forward or effective as the out-of-school staples but may ultimately have the same end result.
That is also why I said that the current situation promotes "lazy deckbuilding".
Because every book has too many sbp's at the outset, the best and simplest approach to bookbuilding is to use all the most effective, proven cards. School-cost really has no impact currently. (Not enough anyway)
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Enti on July 08, 2018, 08:31:59 am
You are constructing a fantasy-world.

It's not such a nice feeling to be totally helpless as you imagine it to be, trust me :D

And those ominous "in school answers" that miraculously seem to appear once fewer spellbook points are available will not increase the fun but will increase the frustration.

Try it yourself, both of you, build mages with 80 sbp and fight each other and do that 100 times and after that you can see how great this idea is. Or if it makes the game much more predictable and boring.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Arkdeniz on July 08, 2018, 05:00:32 pm
I really have to try to get my head around octgn and play some of you guys. See if we can't change both our metas for the bettas. 
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: DaveW on August 30, 2018, 04:41:57 pm
Beautiful idea, if the cards would be available.

1x Galvanize
Show me another non-holy card that can remove corrodes.

Rust
Potentially also a second set of Armor
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Kelanen on November 23, 2018, 11:19:47 am
Beautiful idea, if the cards would be available.

1x Galvanize
Show me another non-holy card that can remove corrodes.

Rust
Potentially also a second set of Armor
Disarm

And I have 2 chest pieces and a Disarm in almost every book...
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: wtcannonjr on November 24, 2018, 08:43:00 am
Beautiful idea, if the cards would be available.

1x Galvanize
Show me another non-holy card that can remove corrodes.

Rust
Potentially also a second set of Armor
Disarm

And I have 2 chest pieces and a Disarm in almost every book...

Raincloud also removes Corrode or Burn markers.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: DaveW on November 24, 2018, 10:08:38 pm
Waterfall Cloak, I think... dont have my cards in front of me....
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: Arkdeniz on November 25, 2018, 01:38:20 am
Not Waterfall Cloak. It gives Acid -2, and can remove Burns.
Title: Re: THE Book.
Post by: DaveW on November 26, 2018, 02:20:55 pm
Not Waterfall Cloak. It gives Acid -2, and can remove Burns.

Ah... that was it... thanks for the quick correction.