Scorch and Morkvarg ['Destroy' or 'Banish']

+
RickMelethron;n7924840 said:
no it doesn't...

Yes, it does: https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=definition+destroy&*. The joy of Google. Not sure what the Dark Souls quote is about as I've never played it.

Back to the topic...I agree with the posters above especially ArianeGrosmont's suggestion of some kind of card that reduces base strength to 1 (maybe alter Dimerterium Shackles rather than a new card?). Perhaps the change really needs to be made to Morkvarg rather than Scorch, though; having it resurrect immediately is the problem for me, if it were resurrected in the next round (or by using a Freya) then I wouldn't mind so much.
 
265feral;n7928630 said:

ah yes... online dictionaries... it's not like people have been making fun of "the dictionary definition of feminism" for the past ~3 years...

265feral;n7928630 said:
Not sure what the Dark Souls quote is about as I've never played it.

(that's quite ironic...) dark souls is a game that doesn't hold players hands; it teaches you the very basics and you're left to figure out the rest by yourself

the point of the quote was to say that more people should play dark souls to get over the idea of "this game has to tell me exactly everything about how it works in the most minor details", which happens every once in a while on these forums..
 
Last edited:
RickMelethron;n7929590 said:
(that's quite ironic...) dark souls is a game that doesn't hold players hands; it teaches you the very basics and you're left to figure out the rest by yourself

the point of the quote was to say that more people should play dark souls to get over the idea of "this game has to tell me exactly everything about how it works in the most minor details", which happens every once in a while on these forums..

If Dark Souls does it, doesn't mean Gwent has to do it also. Regardless, the basics should at least be explained. After that, it's up to the player to find the right combos or synergies. Players need to know the mechanics like Fleeting, Relentless, Permadeath (which is a weird one), Banish, etc. Of course you can still learn it the hard way by experiencing it through a (casual) match.
 
When a unit is banished, it's no longer in your graveyard. A permadeth unit goes to your graveyard but cannot be resurrected... except by very specific cards (for example: SK's restore says:'' resurrect... can be permadeth'')
 
Can we leave Morkvarg out of this? One of the unique cards in the game, along with Johnny (the best made card)...
 
HenryGrosmont;n7932720 said:
Can we leave Morkvarg out of this? One of the unique cards in the game, along with Johnny (the best made card)...

It has nothing to do with the cards :p Its about the descriptions and function/game mechanics
 
Debating the specifics of words using a dictionary or something similar is futile IMO
there are countless words in Gwent that can be debated all day long in that case. And a dictionary isn't a rule book for Gwent.

All these words are simply key-words that represent a function or mechanic in-game. And so cards use these key-words to describe what their ability is.

For all intents and purposes you can replace these key-words with 'effect 1' or 'effect 2' and 'tag 1' or 'tag 2' and you would not change the mechanics of the game in any way.
But in order to make the mechanics memorable the words used are picked appropriately to best describe the flavour of the effect.




 
265feral;n7928630 said:
Perhaps the change really needs to be made to Morkvarg rather than Scorch, though

I understand what you mean, but I think that cards should still reflect the character from the Witcher world. In that respect Morkvarg's ability is perfect
 
LadyAly;n7932920 said:
It has nothing to do with the cards :p Its about the descriptions and function/game mechanics
Oh, really? :p
265feral;n7928630 said:
Perhaps the change really needs to be made to Morkvarg rather than Scorch, though; having it resurrect immediately is the problem for me, if it were resurrected in the next round (or by using a Freya) then I wouldn't mind so much.
 
265feral;n7920950 said:
I'm with the OP; for a native English speaker (which I am) 'destroy' has a general definition of "end the existence of, obliterate, defeat utterly" or (according to the Cambridge Dictionary) "to damage something so badly that it cannot be used".

I don't know. I'ma DESTROY a burrito at lunch time, but I don't think that will be the end of the conversation.

Also, it would be nice if Morkvarg worked like Olgierd and went to the graveyard til the next round, or on a timer. Then there would be more defenses against it. Caretaker, Griffin, that one NG lady who puts him back in the deck, etc etc.

I don't think Scorch should banish anything, unless it only targets one creature randomly (at highest strength). You shouldn't be able to banish three Light Warships with one card.
 
frbfree;n7934880 said:
Also, it would be nice if Morkvarg worked like Olgierd and went to the graveyard til the next round, or on a timer.

There is a reason Morkvarg is LEGENDARY. The card itself is fine. It only gets strong when it's buffed by other cards (or played via discard for an one time bonus).

 
Only one thing to say, SUCCUBUS ! it's so much satisfaction to see your opponent checking this card with his mouse for like 30 seconds when you play her after he invested so many ressources buffing Morkvarg. <3
 
Esclive;n7937240 said:
Only one thing to say, SUCCUBUS ! it's so much satisfaction to see your opponent checking this card with his mouse for like 30 seconds when you play her after he invested so many ressources buffing Morkvarg. <3

Exactly, you can't build a deck that will counter every possible decks out there. You try to build a deck (or decks) that will respond well to certain factions and strategies (buffing, control, etc.). I find that the game is pretty well balanced since the last patch. I play at different levels on both XBOX (from start of Beta) and PC (since NG patch) and win and lose my fair share of games/rounds
 
So again - I can't understand *destroy* - Gerald *Igni is destroy like scorch. But why can he destroy cards with Quen on it ? Then it should be possible to destroy with Scorch Morkvarg, too. ( or I am to dumb to get this mechanic behind... )
 
LadyAly;n7960110 said:
Then it should be possible to destroy with Scorch Morkvarg, too. ( or I am to dumb to get this mechanic behind... )

When you Scorch a target it goes into the graveyard. Scorch does also destroy Morkvarg. Only because of Morkvarg's ability, he immediately comes back again (with 2 less strength).

 
LadyAly;n7960110 said:
So again - I can't understand *destroy* - Gerald *Igni is destroy like scorch. But why can he destroy cards with Quen on it ? Then it should be possible to destroy with Scorch Morkvarg, too. ( or I am to dumb to get this mechanic behind... )
Quen protects from damaging cards/effect like weather and Alzur's Thunder (you can have a 10 strong card and the Thunder won't be able to remove it - theoretical explanation). Which isn't the case with Igni, Scorch or Epidemic. Those completely remove the card form the board.
 
LadyAly;n7960110 said:
So again - I can't understand *destroy* - Gerald *Igni is destroy like scorch. But why can he destroy cards with Quen on it ? Then it should be possible to destroy with Scorch Morkvarg, too. ( or I am to dumb to get this mechanic behind... )

One of the problem you seem to have is you are trying to understand the rules of Gwent, by assuming/interpreting what an effect is by the dictionary definition of the word itself.
Which is exactly what you don't won't to do. You need to consider it in terms of a gameplay mechanic or design.
and the problem is only made greater by a language barrier.


The word 'destroy', in Gwent simply means to remove a unit from the board and send it to the corresponding graveyard. Now to be even more specific when a unit is set/damaged down to 0 total strength, whilst it's base strength remains above 0.
this is what 'destroy' means in Gwent, of course destroy in the context of the English language is quite different and is more subjective. The word was simply chosen to reflect the flavour of the card. A dictionary definition does not dictate an ability or an effect.

A unit that has quen is protected from a "damaging instance". A "damaging instance" refers to when it's strength is reduced by a card or an ability that says "remove 'X' strength, in other words a card such as Iorveth, ballista or a trebuchet. These cards state to remove a set value. That is the interaction in Gwent, which is what you need to consider, above other definitions. Quen does not protect from scorch, because scorch does not counts as a "damaging instance".

Im struggling to see what problem you have with morkvarg . He is susceptible to all the usual effects, 'scorch' or a 'damaging instance', along with all the others. Morkvargs special ability however is that when he is destroyed, I,e sent to the graveyard (because an effect damaged/set his strength down to 0, whilst his base strength was above 0) he will immediately resurrect himself. That isn't the same as protecting a unit with quen.

----

also you said you didn't know the deference between "permadeath" and "fleeting"

Fleeting means the card is ALWAYS 'banished', when destroyed. And a banished unit does not appear in the graveyard. It is removed from he game completely.
This is a game design choice so cards such as operator cannot be used again. (Specifically by resurrecting him)

Permadeath is just another tag that refers to a different mechanic. It's a tag to add greater control over how cards are resurrected.
Most medics cannot resurrect permadeath units. Except when the card specifically states it can. Such as restore.
the word 'permadeath' is not the best word to use I admit, but it's just a tag that represents a mechanic in game.

hopefully this helps.


 
Last edited:
Thanks a lot for all the patience ! Will try to keep the stuff in my mind and get lesser buffled :cheers:
 
Top Bottom