Proposal on Xavier Lemmens

+

ZerOwl

Forum veteran
The problem: Xavier Lemmens banishes the whole game mechanic. The Gwent gameplay consists of several parts including: hand, board (battlefield) and graveyard. It is impossible to imagine a card which would annihilate the whole board or opponent’s hand unconditionally. Yet there is a card which do exactly that for the graveyard. It might be hard to see the impact of the card with the current card pool but as the card pool grows it is inevitable that the graveyard will be used more and more.

And more & more will grow the value Xavier produces. It is perfectly fine to banish graveyard in dynamic games like MTG but for the “static” gameplays (such as in Gwent) this card has too much value. For example, let’s consider the following situation. A Loser plays 4 restoring cards in his deck, and a Winner plays Xavier. They play the first round and go to the final (will it be the 2nd or 3rd—doesn’t matter). The Loser has all or part of his restoring cards in the hand and the Winner has Xavier. If the Loser goes first he can rush up to spend one of his restoring card and lose all of the rest the next turn (because the first thing the Winner does is Xavier).

So on turn 2 the Loser has multiple dead cards in his hand. So the Winner essentially gained a card advantage out of nowhere. He effectively destroyed cards in the opponent hand! And did he pay for it? No! This is just insane. The game punishes players just because they are using one of the game mechanics. Since the Loser can expect Xavier from any player playing any faction, to become a Winner he can do just one thing: abandon graveyard mechanics for good. And I believe it is absolutely unhealthy for the game so the card should be either completely reworked or at least tuned down. My proposal is about tuning the card down.

Solution.

I suggest to change one of Xavier’s abilities which targets the opponent graveyard, leaving the ability to purge its own intact. So the new ability will be as follows: “Order: banish a card from the opponent’s graveyard and damage self by 1”. This way this card might be balanced around to find its optimal base power, amount of charges and provision.

For example, it might have infinite number of charges. Or some finite number but have Zeal. Or he might have Zeal with 1 charge per turn. Such design will allow an opposite player to react on the danger and will also prevent a user from banishing the whole opponent’s graveyard uncontrollably. The provision is also might be increased.

P.S. Please, before considering this post as a rant and starting defending the card ponder about the implications this card have on the whole Gwent gameplay.
 
Devil's advocate here.

Wouldn't it be better to have Xavier...
Order: banish a RANDOM card from the opponent’s graveyard”.
Would be more in line with the overall design of the game!

As King Bran once said: "Rrrandom! More random!"
 

4RM3D

Ex-moderator
Xavier is a card that keeps certain archetypes in check. It's not even about actually playing the card, but rather about the possibility the opponent has it and the fear it instills. This means that whenever a graveyard deck becomes too dominant, the meta will shift to using Xavier more. On the downside, Xavier's ability can just as easily be useless most of the time.

I'm not sure whether or not he should be changed. In the future, maybe, but now, he's too much of a gimmick. There are arguments for nerfing him. So yeah, giving him Zeal with a 1 turn cooldown could be a decent fix, at some point.
 
ponder about the implications this card have on the whole Gwent gameplay.
While I agree that this card is too binary at the moment, it is necessary for the whole Gwent gameplay. The bearmaster deck has currently a completly uncounterable carryover against most factions except for Xavier Lemmens. The beastmaster isn't the only culprint here, but the Savage Bear as well, which can thanks to opperator appear in round 3 as a 8 point card, which even has a strong removal. As long as those 2 cards aren't weakend, Lemmens has to be able to banish a huge part of the enemy graveyard.

plays 4 restoring cards in his deck, and a Winner plays Xavier. They play the first round and go to the final (will it be the 2nd or 3rd—doesn’t matter). The Loser has all or part of his restoring cards in the hand and the Winner has Xavier.
I honestly think that here the player is at fault as well. If he overcommites to restore in round 3, even though he does know that there is a direct counter, he has to expect to get no value from them. That is similar to a player alligning 6 point units on a row, even though everyone would be running Gigni.


Personally I'd like to change lemmens in a way that he only banishs 5 cards from the target graveyard on deploy.
Having as an order with a 1 turn cooldown, is too slow, because the enemy carryover will have unleashed by then. Giving him charges is a bad idea is well, because NR would massively benefit from him that way.
 

ZerOwl

Forum veteran
If he overcommites to restore in round 3, even though he does know that there is a direct counter
But that just means the restoring cards are basically useless. You just can't rely on them. 1 or 2 at most—no more. That severely harms deckbuilding and the whole gameplay as a consequence, in my opinion. And that makes the Skellige theme (as gravediggers) a joke.

Abusing graveyard to generate abnormal values isn't good either but that doesn't excuse such strong an ability Xavier as.
 
Xavier is a card that keeps certain archetypes in check. It's not even about actually playing the card, but rather about the possibility the opponent has it and the fear it instills. This means that whenever a graveyard deck becomes too dominant, the meta will shift to using Xavier more. On the downside, Xavier's ability can just as easily be useless most of the time.

I'm not sure whether or not he should be changed. In the future, maybe, but now, he's too much of a gimmick. There are arguments for nerfing him. So yeah, giving him Zeal with a 1 turn cooldown could be a decent fix, at some point.

Xavier is a meta checking card yes however i think it still has to be balanced a bit. I think it is important to give other player chance to response to him as currently you can potentially auto win by droping him in melee. Adding Order to the card would do the trick.
 
I honestrly don't know how Xavier Lemens could be a fair card but I agree its actual design has been a complete disappointment for me regarding Gwent and its future.
A card that basically reads like: "oh, so you like (some mechanic), sorry but your opponent included this card in his/her deck, forfeit and move on" should never exist. If a mechanic is overpowered or too popular, the solution never shoud be to include cards that destroy that mechanic to the ground.
 
nobody here is objective... you are all skellige players who hate to get your plans ruined. its the same with scorch, epidemic or the card that destroys all artifacts. Graveyard decks use resources that check a zone that is neither hand nor board thus sometimes can do stuff that are unbalanced. So you are telling me if i for example play northen realms i have to rely on my hand but ill know that you can have phoenix in your graveyard and bears/beasts and blast me late game for super value? if xavier would be nerfed or even deleted from the game so should be the graveyard based cards...
 
Devil's advocate here.

Wouldn't it be better to have Xavier...
Order: banish a RANDOM card from the opponent’s graveyard”.
Would be more in line with the overall design of the game!

As King Bran once said: "Rrrandom! More random!"

I would change the card to:

Ranged: Banish 6 random cards from your opponents graveyard

Melee: Banish 3 cards from your opponents graveyard

You would put it in the ranged row when the enemy has an abundance of "has to be removed from the graveyard" cards so just sniping 6 random ones will generally be more worth than deleting 3 specific ones (Beast Skellige)

You would put it in melee for when you need to remove a few but specific ones (Speartip / D'oa in consume decks)

As far as I have seen, nobody uses this card to banish his own graveyard (why would you even want that other than for this one ciri card)
 
Well, Xavier card with present ability would be described as: "If you play against Skellige, you win".

Basically destroys mayority of strategies and cards... Xavier cost 7 provisions. It destroys without any effort all efects and strategies of many cards like Phoenix (14), Renew (13), Caretaker (12), Sigfrida´s rite (10), Cerys (10), Derran (8) and also the priestes and bears ... all in one.

Until it will be weakened, Skellige strategy is based on hopes that there is not Xavier in opponent´s deck...

But also agree, that bearmaster power should be limited.
 
Xavier is a card that keeps certain archetypes in check.
"In check"? I can clearly see that you haven't had the joy of playing a Skellige deck against it. This one card for the low, low price of 2 (!) provisions completely devastates entire archetypes. I've seen official dev streams where CDPR employees specifically named graveyard interaction as a Skellige faction trait. And all at the same time the same people introduce a card, which makes Eist a dead leader? How? Franckly, it's mind-boggling. I understand, that Homecoming still needs balancing (almost two years of beta-testing have yielded zero result, after all), but what are we supposed to do until December patch? Change a faction? Play Shirru Eithne or Casino Reveal?
Well, Xavier card with present ability would be described as: "If you play against Skellige, you win".
This. And I fully agree: Lemmens should banish one card tops. A mere increase in requisition cost will not alleviate the issue. The card's design is bad, simple as that.
 
"In check"? I can clearly see that you haven't had the joy of playing a Skellige deck against it. This one card for the low, low price of 2 (!) provisions completely devastates entire archetypes.

Like I said, the fear of the card is enough. Though, that only applies to the top half of the ladder. I can see why players want to have the card changed. I am not opposed to the idea, either.
 
Like I said, the fear of the card is enough. Though, that only applies to the top half of the ladder. I can see why players want to have the card changed. I am not opposed to the idea, either.
Yes, the fear of the card is enough... to make the graveyard archetype unplayable. It is a White Frost^10 that leaves some points on board... and is much more powerful against graveyard cards.
If there is a single relatively easy to include practically uncounterable card that destroys a strategy to the point of unavoidable defeat then there is something wrong.
 
Exactly as Grenelef said, this card makes a Leader useless further more, you can't use any grave interaction cards, when you know that there could be a Lemmens card to your opponent's disposal. So in a way one card counters a whole mechanic of a Faction. In my opinion this is not balanced at all. Either make him banish a set number of cards ( 2-3) Or give him an order so players can respond in some way...
 
Like I said, the fear of the card is enough.
Enough for what? For people to not play certain archetypes? I've thought that playstyle diversity was a good thing. Well, this card hurts it. A lot. Is it fun to watch your opponent play like ass only to pull out Lemmens once and win the game? You could say that I lost the match in a deckbuilder, but it costs nothing to have him in your deck. And as far as my personal matchmaking goes, Lemmens seems like an auto-include for most people right now. For good reason. The card's broken. Sure, I can sound biased, but the fact of the matter is: Lemmens is simply not fun to play against. Although, I would imagine he's great to get cheap wins with.
In my opinion this is not balanced at all. Either make him banish a set number of cards ( 2-3) Or give him an order so players can respond in some way...
Both would be nice, actually.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom