MArcomage

Free multiplayer on-line fantasy card game

Please log in

dindon on 04:13, 3. Feb, 2010
The banish keyword seems functionally redundant here (though obviously it makes a difference to cards like Rainbow Dragon or Samurai).

I'm not sure I would be tempted by this card even if it were zero-cost. I think generally the scariest durables are bank and eternal guardian (with, I guess trebuchet and tower of babylon trailing behind?) and they'd be better dealt with by the much more versatile mediator. I don't know, would anyone put this in their deck?
DPsycho on 15:14, 3. Feb, 2010
Whereas a card to selectively discard from your opponent's hand might be more useful in some cases, this would be more useful in Hidden match decks. Having a card in hand with which you choose which card to remove from the other player's hand generally isn't worth the cost in Hidden matches, and even if the opponent has a Durable card being put to great use, its location can be effectively masked by quickly playing Quick and Swift cards in the same turn, causing your opponent to have to keep close watch or guess.

It would also be useful in clearing Durable cards from your own hand if it comes to it, though admittedly not as useful as existing self mass-discard options.

Mostly, I wanted a stronger Banish since the keyword is still terribly useless against the fourteen Rare Durables, the three expensive Banish A's notwithstanding. I suppose I could lower the cost since the self-discard would possibly be a detriment more often than a benefit. Oh, and yes, the Banish keyword is intentionally redundant.
dindon on 16:31, 3. Feb, 2010
To be fair, Alastor is really on the common side when it comes to Rares. I agree about the other two though.