MArcomage

That's a bit strong effect for such a cheap common don't u think??

If you see this in an opponent's hand, there's no way you'd discard a card to satisfy the condition. The effect is mostly to discourage the opponent from discarding.

Obviously, it would be much better in hidden games, but once you see it played by opponent, you'd certainly not discard ever again.

true, but still it's too powerful for an uncommon. not only it can deal a great amount of damage, it can completely destroy ur opponent's strategy (when he tries to save up resources to play a specific card)

Even without the halving effect, dealing 5 points of damage (assuming 4 wall is present) is a lot for a 1/1/1 Common. The wall halving makes this ridiculously powerful for its rarity and price.

true. not to mention that when someone combines it with the other card u created below this one in the concept section, that activates the Holy keyword on every card, regardless if it's Undead or not, they can basically destroy someone's wall and a third of their hand.

Old version was WAY too powerful. Modified to be far more realistic.

Old version:
If opponent's last card was discarded
Enemy wall is halved
else
Enemy wall: -4
always
Enemy tower: -1

New version:
If opponent's last card was discarded:
Enemy wall: -15
always:
Enemy tower: -1

Please keep in mind that the condition is only fulfilled if opponent clicks the "discard" button. This does not go off if cards are discarded as part of a played card's effect.

I'm still not sold on this one. For other similar conditions, such as opponent raising his wall or playing a certain kind of card on his last turn, the opponent can choose to avoid playing such cards or do so despite the backlash. When it comes to discarding, however, the opponent may actually not have a choice in the matter. If your resources are too low to play the cards on hand, you must discard to advance the turn.

Decks that focus on resource reduction are already rather powerful at present. Adding this inexpensive Common to the mix would make said decks devastating as building a tall wall with cheap cards is often the best response to this method.

I agree with DPsycho, this is too powerful. If you make it a rare, I'd consider it a very good idea. As it is now, with this card you win every game you play

If you really want to be able to force your opponent to a discard, your deck must be build for it, and you probably are already dominating the game if it happens anyway.
(Or your opponent already has 0 wall anyway.)

Not so, Progressor. Decks that are built to reduce stock generally don't have many cards with very high attack values. The last game I played against such a deck, I was able to hold my wall at around 50 for a long time by playing cheap wall building cards and discarding things Id never have the resources to play.

My original intent was to punish discarding in the same way Goblin saboteur punished large wall gains. I obviously failed at this, since the resulting card was instead just too good for brigand decks.

I've modified the card accordingly:

If opponent's last card was discarded:
Enemy wall: -15
Random enemy resource: +5
always:
Enemy tower: -1

Unless I've misjudged some of your comments, I believe this should fix the issues you have all been concerned with (except Progressor's).

I don't know, -15 wall is already too much for a common card with an easily applied condition. Goblin saboteur punishes wall raising over 8, but that essentially deals only 8 damage extra prior to the wall raise. (+8 wall - 12 wall + 4 damage = -8 wall), and dont' forget it costs more than just 1 of each resource. With this card you deal too much damage, without giving the chance to the opponent to raise his wall beforehand like goblin saboteur does. My suggestion is:
either make this a rare
either increase the cost slightly and make it uncommon
either increase the cost and make it common
either reduce the wall penalty from 15 to 10 (i would say 5, but the random +5 resource is a good counter)
or restrict the damage to tower (-5 tower sounds good, given that you will still provide the random resource gift)