Card Suggestions

[s1eepy]

Card Suggestions

In short; these are aimed at balancing powerful Special Cards.

Witch Pyre [Bronze] - Neutral - Any Row/Loyal - Rare
1 Strength:
Remove a Card with strength 4 or greater from your side of the Battlefield when you play Witch Pyre; Otherwise remove Witch Pyre from the Battlefield.
Whenever a Special Card is played remove Witch Pyre and cancel its effects.
Keep Witch Pyre on the Battlefield at the end of this round.

Princess (the Pellar's goat) [Silver] - Neutral - Melee/Loyal - Epic
2 Strength:
Whenever you play a Special Card remove Princess from the Battlefield and cancel its effects
Every other turn Princess moves to the other side of the Battlefield.

Thaller (the fence) [Gold] - Neutral - Siege/Disloyal - Legendary
6 Strength:
Whenever you play a Special Card remove Thaller from the Battlefield and cancel its effects
Thaller gains +3 Strength for each Special card in your hand when he enters the Battlefield

Thaller would tell you how many Special Cards they were holding, but potentially give them a pretty big creature for the round. Which they then have the choice of what to do about it.

Note: all of them except Thaller are susceptible to damage sources coming from common creatures, which is a currently underutilized card type. How many Ballistas do you see being played? These aren't imba. If anything it addresses the elephant in the room about Commander's Horn being in nearly every deck. It also gives you a way to stop someone from doing a first turn Promote. Witch Pyre might need to have a higher strength requirement though.

 

[4RM3D]

Witch Pyre is the same as Ida Emean, except Ida doesn't persist next round.

What's the point of Princess?

Thaller would be too powerful with certain decks. Making him silver would be better.

 

[s1eepy]

Witch Pyre is the same as Ida Emean, except Ida doesn't persist next round.

That's almost exactly the point. It's also for stumping 1st turn spells on rounds 2 and 3.

What's the point of Princess?

I felt like having it nuke the first Special played by an opponent was too OP. This was sort of a compromise that draws heavily from game fluff.

Thaller would be too powerful with certain decks. Making him silver would be better.

Care to elaborate? He's either a big creature or a single special block for your opponent. I think he would be too easy to bring back into play if he were silver. He's coming in on your opponent's side and buffing off of their hand not yours.

 

[4RM3D]

Care to elaborate? He's either a big creature or a single special block for your opponent. I think he would be too easy to bring back into play if he were silver. He's coming in on your opponent's side and buffing off of their hand not yours.

Oh right, he's disloyal. Kinda missed that part the first time.

 

[Rawls]

Witch Pyre [Bronze] - Neutral - Any Row/Loyal - Rare 1 Strength: Remove a Card with strength 4 or greater from your side of the Battlefield when you play Witch Pyre; Otherwise remove Witch Pyre from the Battlefield. Whenever a Special Card is played remove Witch Pyre and cancel its effects. Keep Witch Pyre on the Battlefield at the end of this round.

Persisting at 4 it is too powerful for a bronze. As mentioned above, it's exactly like an already existing epic silver card, but more powerful because it persists. Ditch persisting and maybe 1 point value instead, or 2 at the most. I'd like it then. If your going to run with the special defensive cards, you risk not accumulating points.

Princess (the Pellar's goat) [Silver] - Neutral - Melee/Loyal - Epic 2 Strength: Whenever you play a Special Card remove Princess from the Battlefield and cancel its effects Every other turn Princess moves to the other side of the Battlefield.

Love it. I chuckled just reading it. +1. Maybe increase her strength to 4 honestly since she is silver.

Thaller (the fence) [Gold] - Neutral - Siege/Disloyal - Legendary 6 Strength: Whenever you play a Special Card remove Thaller from the Battlefield and cancel its effects Thaller gains +3 Strength for each Special card in your hand when he enters the Battlefield

Don't like it. If you're playing this Thaler card, you wont have many specials in theory. Also, his gaining power for special cards in you hand will be negated immediately when he is removed from the board as opponent plays a special if I'm understanding it correctly. No one would use him IMO.

 

[GrizzledLone]

Witch Pyre [Bronze] - Neutral - Any Row/Loyal - Rare

What about making it

Pyre [Silver] - Neutral - Legendary - Event​

Banish a random Sorceress from the battlefield. (I have Fleeting in mind, dunno if my wording makes that clear)
-> Introduce new category, Sorceress​

Not only a NR counter - Yen and Triss are neutral - but also working in favour for NR decks: Phillipa, Sabrina.
Dunno if the "random Sorceress" justifies it to remove gold cards from the game tho. Thought also about: "Remove 6 strength from all Sorceresses on the battlefield".

On Thaler I have to agree with Rawls and in my opinion the card is either too powerful or just a waste.
You play the card it tells you how many specials your opponent has in his hand. No matter how high it is buffed, your opponent has no benefit, 'cause you remove Thaler with your next special card anyways: too powerful.
You play the card it would tell you about your opponents cards after his turn but your opponent plays a special card, so Thaler is removed: complete waste.

 

[s1eepy]

Persisting at 4 it is too powerful for a bronze. As mentioned above, it's exactly like an already existing epic silver card, but more powerful because it persists. Ditch persisting and maybe 1 point value instead, or 2 at the most. I'd like it then. If your going to run with the special defensive cards, you risk not accumulating points.

Persisting at 4? The idea is you have to sacrifice a 4 strength unit from your side of the battlefield in order to have Witch Pyre hit play.

Don't like it. If you're playing this Thaler card, you wont have many specials in theory. Also, his gaining power for special cards in you hand will be negated immediately when he is removed from the board as opponent plays a special if I'm understanding it correctly. No one would use him IMO.

I think you also missed that I wrote him down as Disloyal. He's coming in on your opponent's side and gaining strength for specials in their hand, and counters the first special your opponent plays. At worst he's a 1 to 1 trade on cards, or you give them a free 6 strength unit if they're holding nothing. Where I'm seeing this as useful is towards the end of clutch rounds.

 

[GrizzledLone]

He's coming in on your opponent's side and gaining strength for specials in their hand

Thaller gains +3 Strength for each Special card in your hand when he enters the Battlefield

At no point did you write that. That's his point.

And it gets even worse than what Rawls thought 'cause not your opponent but you yourself have the control over killing Thaler or not.

Whenever you play a Special Card remove Thaller from the Battlefield and cancel its effects

Maybe you had "them" in mind but what you gave us is the exact opposite.

 

[s1eepy]

At no point did you write that. That's his point.

And it gets even worse than what Rawls thought 'cause not your opponent but you yourself have the control over killing Thaler or not.
Maybe you had "them" in mind but what you gave us is the exact opposite.

No. I wrote it that way deliberately because that's how it would be properly worded. "Your" pertains to the owner of the side of the Battlefield the card is on. The confusing nature of this is why I wrote a sentence explaining this in every post. If it were "Their" while the card is on your opponent's side: the logic would be that it would counter the first special you played not your opponent. For this reason both terms are "You/Your" and not "Your Opponent". But people seem to be missing the bit about cards being on the opposite side of the Battlefield effecting the way the wording works.

If anyone here has played MTG: you'll know what I'm talking about 110%. Verbage on persistent effects pertain to the controller not necessarily the one who played the card. If someone assumes control of a card you played: all instance of "you" refer to your opponent after control has been switched. I can evidence that this is 100% the way Gwent treats it's wording by reading Spectral Whale, which contains identical usage of "Your" and Disloyalty.

EDIT: Source: http://www.gosunoob.com/gwent/cards-...hale-15240300/
The Whale moves at the start of their turn, not at the start of yours.

 

[Treamayne]

Very familiar with MtG templating, which unfortunately does not apply here (though I wish they would formalize some templates and standardize some terms).

True, Whale uses "your" but also check Sabrina Glevissig.

Probably a more correct template in this case would be something like:

Thaler, the Fence
[Gold] - Neutral - Siege/Disloyal - Legendary
6 Strength:
Relentless Fleeting
Thaler gains +3 Strength for each Special card in its owners hand when he enters the Battlefield
When its owner plays an event, destroy Thaler.

I'm guessing the point is they have to decide to keep a buff spy, or lose him to play the Commanders Horn (or what-have-you).

*Note: Owner in Gwent (so far) means controller for units on the battlefield (e.g. Milva can return Yaevinn to your opponent's hand even though you played him there)

 

[s1eepy]

True, Whale uses "your" but also check Sabrina Glevissig.

Good point out; though the difference with her is that she only ever targets a row, never a player.
The Whale, and Thaler, are different because they do target a player.
The Whale bounces rows on a targeted owner's side, where as Sabrina doesn't care about which player's row it's nuking.
I think "you" is still correct.

Probably a more correct template in this case would be something like:

Thaler, the Fence
[Gold] - Neutral - Siege/Disloyal - Legendary
6 Strength:
Relentless Fleeting
Thaler gains +3 Strength for each Special card in its owners hand when he enters the Battlefield
When its owner plays an event, destroy Thaler.

I'm think of cards like Prince Stennis, where they just say to draw. There's a distinction between a card being played and a card being in play, and who that text pertains to.
I'm thinking it's better if all of it is worded like the whale for after it's in play.
So, this line: "for each Special card in its owners hand when he enters the Battlefield"
Might actually be better like this: "After 1 turn Thaler gains +3 Strength for each Special card in your hand"
Because the countdown happens at the start of their turn: it's no different unless you play him after they've already passed, which would be pointless.

Also: Fleeting is good. What does Relentless do? I wouldn't have him hang around in play for more than one round.

I'm guessing the point is they have to decide to keep a buff spy, or lose him to play the Commanders Horn (or what-have-you).

Almost. You have to feed Thaler a card before you could play the Commander's Horn. You're missing the counter-spell part of the card.

Let's say you only have the two Event cards, then he's 12 Strength. One is Commander's Horn, the other is First Light.
The choices are:
Waste First Light to remove Thaler from play for a successful Commander's Horn,
use some form of unit-bound board control to remove Thaler from play for a successful Commander's Horn, or
keep the buffed Thaler.

This choice becomes pretty tilted based on the number of cards you're holding:
If you have 5 Event cards in your hand he's now 21 strength and probably worth keeping seeing as you're probably low on units; especially if you're up a round.
If you have no Events he's a free 6 strength and tears from your opponent.
If you have one Event card: he's a hard slap in the face; this is the ideal time for him to hit play.

He's intended to not always play to the owner's favor on account of how strong counter-spell is.

I'd revise it to this as a final draft on wording:

Thaler, the Fence
[Gold] - Neutral - Siege/Disloyal - Legendary
6 strength:
Fleeting
After 1 turn add 3 strength to this unit for each Special Card in your hand
When you play a Special Card cancel its effects then remove this unit from the game

All of the wording I'm using comes from:
http://www.gosunoob.com/gwent/cards-...mean-14220200/
http://www.gosunoob.com/gwent/cards-...gift-14320100/
http://www.gosunoob.com/gwent/cards-...hale-15240300/
http://www.gosunoob.com/gwent/cards-...vist-11220600/
http://www.gosunoob.com/gwent/cards-...tion-11331000/

 

[Treamayne]

What does Relentless do?

Relentless is the category that cannot be bounced by Milva, Eithne and company.

At this point, the rest is semantics. Without a defined and standardized template it could go either way. Personally I would like to see the use of "your" wit disloyal cards go away. Not everybody playing Gwent has a CCG background and it is too confusing for new players (like MtG Barrier to entry (the reason Banding - the best Keyword ever IISSM - is gone). Owner is already defined in Gwent as the person on whose side a unit resides. Non-specific pronouns are not treated as clearly (so far). Note that spies that perform actions for the player playing them (Stennis) so not use pronouns at all. Just <action>.

Long story short: your new template works, my suggestion does too.

 

[Rawls]

Pulling these from another post I made in a different topic - They're all Scoia'tael cards

Sirssa (5 value ambush silver) - when opponent passes, she reveals and shoots one random unit on opponent's side for up to five damage

Water of Brokilon (gold special card) - allows player to see opponent's hand, and remove one bronze card ... maybe not the last part ... it's a reference to the vision the waters give Geralt in the short story "The Sword fo Destiney."

Dryad Archer (4 value bronze) - Removes 1 from random enemy every turn.