I didn’t mean a spell of another class. I meant a spell that isn’t Neutral and isn’t Rewind. “Class” means “non-Neutral.”
But I can see how that may have been extremely confusing so instead let’s word it as “Discover a copy of another non-Coin spell you’ve cast this game.”
I think the way you worded it the first time was better, but honestly I don’t think the coin pollutes the pool that much.
Lightshow at 2 might be okay, I dunno. It’s pretty mana efficient at 2 and might be too strong.
Okay, perhaps I misread your version then.
But it still makes the card more difficult to understand.
And I don’t really see how eliminating the Coin from the potential pool actually helps that much.
It would be a Fel Barrage but it can get stupid and go where you don’t want it. Fel Barrage was playable, but it wasn’t breaking the meta.
It’d be a fel barrage that scales significantly every time you play it and that can randomly go face even with minions on the board.
Like I said I’m not sure it’d be broken, but it’d potentially be too strong. I think it’s something they could certainly try, though. If they were willing to reverse it like they did with Edwin.
I think Lightshow is potentially a card they’ll support more in the future is the main thing, right now it’s kinda tricky to copy multiple times, but that could easily change.
Let’s say that we want every Rewind to hit Lightshow, and we want to cast Volume Up with Finale to copy Lightshow. If we don’t have Coin, then we can run 8 spells main deck: 2 Lightshow, 2 Rewind, 2 Volume Up and 2 other spells★. It’s good to have these extra spells because it means our Volume Ups are less likely to draw little or nothing. If we do that then Rewind has exactly 3 options: Lightshow, Volume Up and the flex spot (most likely Arcane Bolt, since we can functionally run a bunch without diluting the Rewind pool further).
However, if you add a Coin, the Lightshow percentage drops to a 75% chance from 100%. That’s a very large drawback for going second, in addition to the usual disadvantage.
★ edit: technically if Volume Up is the first and only spell you draw by the time you cast it, there’s a 1/35 chance of drawing flex flex Volume Up, but overall this a less than 0.2% risk so it’s not worth seriously worrying about.
Yeah tbh that’s pretty much how I feel too. Probably cut the fear you have in half and that’s me.
I honestly think that the Rewind change I mentioned is more important for the Lightshow archetype than decreasing the cost of Lightshow. Having Lightshow cost 3 isn’t actually as big of a problem as having your Rewinds have a 25% chance to fail because you used the Coin.
Still, I think it’s more likely than not that the archetype needs the help of a 2 Cost Lightshow.
Lightshow from 3 mana to 2.
Volume up from 4 mana to 3, only draws two spells now.
Mage is now viable. 
Mage is already viable. The Volume Up change wouldn’t work either. It’d be totally counter intuitive.
Every time I hear a “Mage” Buff thread. People be rabid towards Mage players.
I would be up for some mage buff with manathirst spells doing more dmg at targets above 15 HP.
It could be even manathirst (8) - double dmg from Fireball (and perhaps some other spells) when above 15 HP. Just buff the spells.
Create Firemage which totally incinerate opponents from a certain mana point.
I am more in favor of increasing the baseline number of beams to 3. Lightshow at 2 mana is a much bigger buff and allows it to ramp up considerably faster. Assuming perfect curve, a turn 2 lightshow followed by turn 3 Lightshow and then Rewind + Lightshow in turn 4 is 9 beams by turn 4 (18 damage). Can snowball fast from there. With the alternative approach, we would be looking at 7 beams by turn 4.
I honestly wouldn’t even touch mage for now. It is only contained by other top performing decks in the meta rather than being bad per se (when not trying to run Lightshow). Overbuffing Lightshow can be very problematic down the line. It is a potentially scary card that can become a monster in the right conditions. The 3 beams baseline is probably a more careful buff and we could see how it does from there.
I don’t think Lightshow needs a buff. This card works like relics and with two mana it could end up too good, especially because you can discover it from School Teacher and it also benefits highly from Aegwynn the Guardian.
False. The baseline is 2+c random damage where c is cost; for example, Arcane Missiles is c=1 and Cinderstorm is c=3. 3 beams is a bigger buff than 2 cost; 3 beams would need to cost 4.
Except we have this card made past year called fel barrage.
Unless you’re saying that knowing your target is somehow worse than random damage your premise is wrong.
Also cards you compared do 1 damage pings while lightshow does 2 damage pings that are clearly inferior by:
Doing excess damage
Wasting more on Divine shields
Being affected by damage reducing effects.
Basically if astalor did it’s damage in 2 damage pings it would not even be played anymore.
I think not knowing your target is a fair trade for upscaling with additional casts. A 2-beam Lightshow at least has a chance at having the same result as Fel Barrage.
The point is that 6 damage for 3 mana is right out.
Rogue concoctions are doing arguably much more than that. Granted, you need to discover 2 of the same type from a belt to get to this card, but you are casting 3 damage twice for 3 mana and choosing your target. I think the purpose of mana cost in a card like this is not to balance the damage output at baseline, but to set up what the curve of the card can look like. Increasing the baseline number of beams just means you start from your (current version) second cast. At 2 mana the entire curve can occur earlier which I think is more problematic than this other alternative.
Well…
Let’s split this in 2:
Because you gonna be able to pile all lightshow in a single turn creating a perfect clear turn.
In other words i believe people should stop being so dramatic about damage output itself instead and that lightshow would probably be more near the correct place dealing 6 damage.
Using cards like rewind is the own cost for lightshow escalation effect.
I not defending a buff at rewind in any way. That card is dangerous to even exist.
But it was smartly put at cost 2 were you have a decent tempo loss from discovering a card from that extremely premium pool.
Turning it’s excessive cost compared with other cards that discover a card already the own drawback for any mage deck who plan that recursive use of spells
(casting the same spell many times for who not understood).