I think Zephrys doesn’t belong in a game like hearthstone where you can’t interact on your opponent’s turn. Always drawing either the perfect board clear, stall, or lethal cheapens the game and the player experience. It rewards the luck of the draw over anything else. Games shouldn’t turn on one card. For those that hate mechanics like yogg, I’d argue that Zephrys is worse. At least yogg has a chance to backfire. Zephrys is a sure win. That’s not right when the recipient has no ability to react.
Although I’m not asking for a nerf to Zephrys, I do believe that these “draw this card and win” type of mechanics aren’t suitable for hearthstone because of the lack of interrupts.
That’s my feeling on zyphyrs specially when played in decks that can replicate battecries like quest shaman, you don’t even need a singleton deck in shaman to play it and it feels broken in an already broken deck.
Agreed. Zephrys not only finds the perfect answer, it allows access to class specific cards that otherwise wouldn’t be available. This provides for abuse in situations where the answer can be repeated through copying spell effects or battle cries.
Game dispositive effects that require no setup shouldn’t exist in hearthstone.
For those are argue that Zephrys comes at a high cost, I’d say that the cost is only illusory. You don’t build a deck around Zephrys. Zephrys builds around the deck. In other words, it’s an auto include for any deck that can exploit him. There’s no sacrifice to the design of the deck, so long as you’ve constructed the deck properly either with sufficient draw or only uniques.
In terms of pure curiosity, it’s a very interesting card. But “2 mana draw lethal” is pretty annoying card text, tbh. It should at least be limited to cards from within your own class.
Exactly, its just highlander decks before Kazakus, they didn’t worked only with reno, they only wait for some powerful card to make them viable, and their main weakness is bypassed by card generation and multiple cards with the same purpose.
For sure, and I admit I underrated ALL of the (used) highlander cards (except Brann, that was always a good deal imo).
Its just Zephs effect that is probably a bit too good after playing as and against new highlander decks. I crafted him for my memes (no regrets, still a good card in my library), but I have cut him from them 'cos the “find the perfect answer” thing got old to me after a week of playing. I’d prefer to win or lose to Yogg (or his box) shenanigans than having the perfect answer given to me most of the time.
That said, I am a memer, so that has to be accounted for
I’d venture to say that with almost two full years’ worth of cards in standard, the highlander requirement is de minimus. Look no further than hunter, he has more than enough removal, minions, and damage. Arguably, the Highlander deck doesn’t compromise in power because what you lose in duplicates, you make up for in flexibility and situational answers. So, I think the argument that highlander decks are inferior to normal decks solely on the basis of a lack of duplicates is greatly exaggerated.
It is a mistake. Remember class identity that took away Vanish from Rogue because Rouge cannot have board clear. Now Blizzard decide to give Hunter mass dispell, brawl,… through Zephrys (which will be magnified by Zuljin). Before, match up with Hunter was easy, built some big taunt minions and he conceded after deadly shot failed, now it’s all about if he has Zephrys or not.
Blizzard keeps pushing for rng as win condition instead of skills (draw Luna’s pocket Galaxy early/ draw Zephrys on time…)
I get the need to add RNG into the mix so that games are less static. Things like discover or burgle give an element of surprise and amusement that traditional physical card games lack. I’m OK with the occasional to rare occurrence where something amazing is discovered or burgled. That’s just stupid luck.
Yet, with Zephrys there is no RNG component beyond the normal RNG that all players face—drawing the damn card. Once that happens, the RNG effect of Zephrys is negligible. It becomes more of a “how would you like to win” question.
The feeling I get when I play Zephrys or when I’m on the receiving end resonates with the same feeling as some of the ludicrous dungeon run mechanics. I either feel like I cheated my way to victory or cheated out of victory.
It is funny. People complain about RNG all the time but they print a card that actually reduces the RNG in the game and people complain about it. People always complain about powerful Tutor cards in card games yet all Tutor cards really do is reduce the RNG of card draw.
No idea about Standard, but in Wild Zephrys is almost broken. Way, way too strong.
The fact that you can have multiple copies of this broken 3/2 for 2 (which are surprisingly crazy stats for such a battlecry minion) makes it unpleasant to play against.
I always know my chance to win lowers dramatically the more I see Zephrys.
But not only winning, knowing your prior play will get countered the next turn isn’t fun.
It’s not only about winning, it’s about having fun first and foremost (unless you have inferiority complex and must compensate through winning).
I am beginning to agree with Zephrys being an awesome card from a design and execution perspective but an ‘unfun’ (annoying card) when playing against the it. The fact that it answers anything is just so powerful of an impact.
That would be a decent restriction
I disagree with the others above, I think Highlander is a good restriction and does remove from the power of the deck. The issue I have is that a lot of Highlander decks are using Zephrys still as an additional ‘answer’ in board control or, in Paladin’s case, lethal. The deck needs to check if Highlander at start = True/False imho.
It is a delicate balance so I do see the irony here. Tutoring in HS is just so powerful. Magic has learned it’s lesson, finally, and tutoring tends to be limited to a very high cost (Mastermind’s) or in a limited number of cards (or just lands) in Standard right now. Being able to tutor an EXACT answer to your situation whether as an aggressor or defense is more power than most cards ever have. Shadow Visions is another tutor card that is quite strong (I think most powerful card). I can’t think of any other tutor card which I felt was crazy strong.
I disagree. Zephrys doesn’t reduce the RNG aspect of the game because it provides answers that the opponent would otherwise not have either due to the class limitations or deck construction.
Zephrys, like LPG at five mana, exacerbates the RNG nature of card draw because of his impact. Whoever draws zephyrs wins.
Also, tutor cards are fine when they are used in conjunction with other cards to produce a powerful effect. Zephrys is different in at least two regards. First, he can find things that aren’t in your deck. Second, he can find things that aren’t in your class. Moreover, Zephrys doesn’t need a certain board state to work. Of course you get better results or you can tweak the results by manipulating the board state. For all of these reasons, Zephrys is incredibly frustrating to face.
Not gonna lie Zephrys is quite strong. One of those “Fun to play with, but unfun to play against” cards that usually end up frustrating the community.
Technologically it is a marvellous card, but in practice it can be VEEERY frustrating, knowing it basically gives your opponent a direct answer to your setup.
A case of… and I am giving my best Jeff Goldblum impersonation here:
“Your designers were so preoccupied with the fact that they could that they forgot to ask themselves if they should.”
Again, DRAW rng needs to be excluded from the equation. If you cannot handle losing to card draw then, to put it bluntly, you shouldnt be playing card games. Period. Its simply the nature of the beast, regardless of which card game!
Zeph is bad (imo) for the consistency - AKA the lack of RNG - that he introduces. It feels worse losing to him than it ever did to Yogg for me because its all but guaranteed that, once hes played, its GG. Its a LOW risk, HIGH reward card, and thats what I hate about him the most.
The two principles aren’t mutually exclusive. Because of how impactful Zephyrs is, he exacerbated the draw RNG. He is impactful because his results exclude RNG’s negative effects—he always gives you an answer.
Excluding draw RNG hamstrings the explanation for why Zephyrs is a mistake. I understand your argument that draw RNG is a necessary element of card games. That fact doesn’t contradict the argument of Zephyrs making it worse.
