Hey guys, I’ve been thinking about this new keyword for a little bit now and i’m interested to know how the community might react to it. I don’t have a name for it yet, but what would you guys think of a keyword that basically says,“Your next spell (if possible) must target this minion.” I’m basically thinking of a keyword like Taunt, but only affect damaging spells or spells that destroy. I don’t believe that this would be an toxic keyword or easily exploitable one, at least, no more than the other keywords are exploited currently. But yeah, please just try to be constructive and lmk what you think!
1 Like
As a Mage main, I initially hate it.
Objectively, it sounds fine, but it would need to operate like taunt, but for spells. Call it something like Spellward. “Targetable direct damage spells your opponent plays must target this minion.”
Even a description like that gets messy. How does it interact with destroy effects or AoE or spells that just hit specific criteria like lowest health? I understand where you’re going with the idea, but there’s no succinct way to sum it up without writing a paragraph and paragraphs are bad for card games.
Rules lawyering out of the way, the effect is weak. It theoretically gets put on minions as it’s supposed to be a keyword, but then your opponent will just hit that minion with their minions before casting.
There is a very thin slice of the pie where this effect would be worth playing, but at that point you might as well just ask them to create more Loatheb-like cards that give temporary spell cost increases.
Maybe it could be as simple as Spellward - Increase the cost of spells your opponent plays by 1. This could theoretically go all the way up to 7 more mana per spell by having a board filled with Spellward units, but I think we can all see just how broken a keyword like that would be.
Yeah, working out the gorey detail of this keyword has been a bit difficult but fun to play around with. The (if possible) gets around cards like devouring plague that will just hit random minions but might be able to kill the minion the keyword is on. Then I think this keyword might just operate like a non-secret spellbender type effect.
I was thinking the effect could just operate like a battlecry instead of a constant keyword like taunt or stealth. I appreciate you actually taking the time critique it especially given that your a mage main instead of just saying “bad idea lol”.
I don’t initally like the idea of increase cost effect because often time they just completely lock your opponent out for a turn or are somewhat of a miss when they have a decent minion curve. I just think it makes for an unfun gaming experience for both players, because if players dont feel the need to they wont run cards that increase spell costs.
Reflecting on it now I can see why they haven’t created a keyword like that. My idea would be that it would interact with destroy type cards that only target specific minions. Let’s say to protect another minions on your board. But yeah the finer details of this keyword remain to be seen, it is a fun thought-project though!
I would go on different scales for such keyword :
Does it have a place in the game ?
It could. We’ve had multiple exemples of cards doing something similare in the game. But they never had a big impact on the game. Some have never been played.
Is it a good retroactive keyword ?
No, there’s almost no card in the current game that could classify for it. Some cards got added the lifesteal effect to replace their “deal X heal X” because they were a good number of them and it was basically the same effect for most
It is a good expansion keyword ?
As it is no, the keyword does nothing on its own and will way too often blank out. It would need to offer some benefit to justify dedicating an expansion around it, but then it will be extremely similar to spellburst
Is it a good core set keyword ?
Maybe. Core set would be the best way imo to introduce a low-effect tech keyword on low powerlevel cards.
The effect on its own has its place but not worth a keyword. There won’t be enough minions to justify it. Enrage and joust got removed from the game and replaced by text because of that.
plus putting that effect on a keyword limits the freedom of design, you’d be limited to exactly what the keyword does, which is not much. For interesting cards with that effect you’d need some text just like with current cards anyway
1 Like
Hear me out:
We’ve had that secret that redirects a targeted spell to a new target on the board that’s generated instead. (steals a buff spell or diverts a damage or destroy spell).
Revisiting that old concept, and just giving something that same effect, isnt doing a whole lot and can be easily circumvented as it already is now when that secret is in play. Nor would just making spells cost more the following turn be all that effective either as we already have plenty of that and they dont need a keyword.
Perhaps something like a boardwide divine shield type such as how the one card that makes all your minions nontargetable by spells and hero powers, but the inverse option. “Divinest Shield” Cannot be a victim of AOE or Random Target Spells. Im sure there’s a better verbiage than this. But it essentially stops a mage from using blizzard, or from using the spells that hit a random minion(s). They can still use a targeted spell like frostbolt but no board clear spells can affect the other player’s board until the the ones given the divinest shield are eliminated any other means. (targeted spells, hero powers, minions attacking them, minion battlecries, but not Hero card battlecries) Reno bettlecry can;t affect them, lol.
1 Like
I would rather have a card that redirects the next two or three damage spells back in the mage’s face, but that will never happen.
1 Like
I don’t think there should be a keyword for it but it could be a neutral tech option. Back then I think we used to have one similar but it never saw play due to having bad stats. Maybe as a 4-mana 1/8 or something it could see some play.
1 Like