I think this is a really bad idea. You're not fixing the problem that the card is "overperforming". And even if a card has a 1% draw chance, then it doesn't change the fact that in that 1% of games, basically nothing has changed.
And besides, a single card doesn't make the deck unless it's a combo deck or a build-around card like Baku the Mooneater. If you lose every game you don't draw the specific overpowered card in your deck, then it's a bad deck.
Also, shouldn't players be rewarded for playing the right cards in the right decks? Skull of the Man'ari and Voidlord are both awful cards on their own, but they become strong when played together in a deck like Cubelock. Isn't that the entire purpose of a deck-building game? It's the ideal example of really, really good card design: cards that are bad on their own, but when played in the right decks, the deck is much greater than the sum of its parts. Reducing the draw rate just disincentivises people from making good decks, because why play good cards if you never draw them?
TL;DR, it's a lazy solution that doesn't fix any problems, and probably introduces some as well. If a card is unbalanced, why not make the obvious choice and balance the card?
My point was just that I thought you didn't realise that you could attack face and still get the buffs. It's probably still a win-more card, but my thought process was that in an ideal world, in an Aggro/Enrage Warrior vs. Control matchup where the control player doesn't have the resources to fight for the board early on, they'll be relying on stalling until they can get a big board clear and swing the game. This card just makes stalling harder for the opponent, and it allows you to keep putting pressure while not committing more minions or spells (you improve your board state for "free" since it costs no resources). This way, after a big removal card, you can reconstruct the board with the cards in your hand. Again, this is the ideal scenario. Chances are it's just a win-more card.
Jokes aside, this card is actually pretty sick. It may even be worth running in Pure or Libroom Paladin just as another cheap buff to close out games or make trades.
An important point to consider with this card is that you can attack face and still get the buff from this card. With that in mind, this card seems pretty spicy. It can pull your board out of key damage break points and just make it more uncomfortable for your opponent to deal with. It's a way of mounting more threat on the opponent without actually committing any resources. In the ideal scenario, you use this card while you have a decent board to put enough pressure to bait out a big removal card, then crack back with the rest of your minions in hand. The fact that it has rush is also nice, since it allows you to ping off something without having to waste an attack of another minion.
I don't see why people are saying Watch posts are bad. They supplement a gameplan that revolves around constraining your opponent's options, because every time they do something, you get a benefit. To me, they're like less impactful secrets that your opponent can see. Ogremancer became the unsung hero of the meta in DMF, so I believe that people are underestimating cards that give you things when your opponent does things.
The Mor'shan Watch Post on its own seems very powerful. A lot of efficient spell removal will rotate, and it's just crushing against an aggro deck for coming out so early. Your opponent is either forced to commit damage to remove the Watch Post (thus killing off their board, or at least weakening it and making it susceptible to removal) or let it sit and allow you to stabilise through the tokens it generates.
Besides, we haven't yet seen all the cards. It's certain there are many more watch posts, and potentially more watch post synergy cards that are yet to be revealed. We may see a "Give all your watch posts Taunt" or "Your watch posts can attack this turn" card.
What I'm trying to get at is watch posts are not amazing, but I think it's incorrect to call them outright "bad". I believe, just like with all of the new mechanics that Blizzard introduces, it should be given a chance before making a preemptive decision.
The legendary is pretty bad though. Why not just play a corrupted Carnival Clown?
But unfortunately, this falls into the same pitfall that Paladin did in Rastakhan, which was that if you had nothing to heal, you'd get no benefit. Battle Rage has a similar requirement of needing damaged minions, but being damaged and having damaged minions as Warrior is much more likely than as Priest. Additionally, Priest needs a way to heal the damaged things, and the only reliable source is their 2 cost hero power.
It hasn't changed for years, which means it almost certainly will never change. It would require such a massive overhaul because it's changing one of the core fundamentals of the game.
You didn't seem to get the point: that's not how programming works. You can't just add 1 and have it work flawlessly. You can't just change "target 1" into "target 2" because there's no "target" function. The computer doesn't know what "target" means, they don't speak English. Try telling a computer to "target 2" and it will do nothing because you haven't told it what "target" or "2" means. It's a few thousand lines of code that tells the game what happens when the user clicks or taps on the screen when in the "targeting" game state, as well as referring to the effect of the card. The programmer has to tell the computer exactly what to do whenever any card is played, and what to do to the selected target. The card may read "target a minion. Freeze it", but the code is probably hundreds of lines.
The entire code of the game would have to be revamped from the beginning because the core functionality of the game will have been changed. "Target" currently means choose exactly one target for the given card being played, but to change it to allow multiple targets, you would need to change the meaning to read "allow the user to choose as many targets until they have either selected as many targets as the number on the card dictates or there are no more valid targets that can be chosen and the maximum number of targets hasn't been fulfilled". Do you see what a massive fundamental change that is? This requires a complete overhaul of the basic targeting functions in the game's code, which probably sits at the very beginning of the code, meaning if you wanted to change it, you'd also have to change the rest of the code along with it.
Also, did you know that targeting isn't just when you draw the big red arrow to something? Almost every single card you play has a target. The Amazing Reno targets the player and the hero power to be replaced and then targets all minions on the board. Shardshatter Mystic targets a Soul Fragment in your deck and then targets all minions on the board. Loatheb targets all spells in your opponent's hand and deck. Tour Guide targets your hero power. Nightshade Matron targets your hand, then targets the most expensive card in your hand. Puzzle Box of Yogg-Saron targets a spell from a list of available spells, then applies targeting according to the spell that's cast. Every single one of these cards and over 3000 more need to be coded almost from scratch because of this "simple" change.
On top of that, there would need to be an entirely new UI element that allows the user to select multiple targets, which is another few thousand lines of code that need to be edited, tested and debugged.
If you're going to blame Blizzard for their code, learn how programming works before saying things like "if they can make it work for 1, they can make it work for 2".
EDIT: I'm not saying it will never happen, for all we know Blizzard could be working on multitargeting right now. But the point is that's not how programming works.
Unrelated, but I dislike having the ranks in the spell's name. It's annoying to have to type "(Rank 1)" or "(Rank 2)" to refer to the spell in particular. I don't know if this is a tall ask, but it would be cool if we could type "Living Seed" (with the card command) and it would automatically show Living Seed (Rank 1).
You know 1-drops are very powerful when one of the strongest cards from the expansion was a card that gave 2 random ones.
That said, I don't think I've ever gotten Frazzled Freshman from First Day of School a single time.
If only Archivist Elysiana stayed in standard.
*cough cough* No Minion Mage /s
I think this is a really bad idea. You're not fixing the problem that the card is "overperforming". And even if a card has a 1% draw chance, then it doesn't change the fact that in that 1% of games, basically nothing has changed.
And besides, a single card doesn't make the deck unless it's a combo deck or a build-around card like Baku the Mooneater. If you lose every game you don't draw the specific overpowered card in your deck, then it's a bad deck.
Also, shouldn't players be rewarded for playing the right cards in the right decks? Skull of the Man'ari and Voidlord are both awful cards on their own, but they become strong when played together in a deck like Cubelock. Isn't that the entire purpose of a deck-building game? It's the ideal example of really, really good card design: cards that are bad on their own, but when played in the right decks, the deck is much greater than the sum of its parts. Reducing the draw rate just disincentivises people from making good decks, because why play good cards if you never draw them?
TL;DR, it's a lazy solution that doesn't fix any problems, and probably introduces some as well. If a card is unbalanced, why not make the obvious choice and balance the card?
@MurlocBard, what's your favourite tribe in Hearthstone if you don't mind me asking?
It's hard to take someone seriously when they look like Kirby just got a Hammer copy ability.
Warrior looks like a lot of fun next expansion. Really regretting my choice of level 50 hero portrait now...
My point was just that I thought you didn't realise that you could attack face and still get the buffs. It's probably still a win-more card, but my thought process was that in an ideal world, in an Aggro/Enrage Warrior vs. Control matchup where the control player doesn't have the resources to fight for the board early on, they'll be relying on stalling until they can get a big board clear and swing the game. This card just makes stalling harder for the opponent, and it allows you to keep putting pressure while not committing more minions or spells (you improve your board state for "free" since it costs no resources). This way, after a big removal card, you can reconstruct the board with the cards in your hand. Again, this is the ideal scenario. Chances are it's just a win-more card.
I guess Blizzard wants Dude Paladin.
Jokes aside, this card is actually pretty sick. It may even be worth running in Pure or Libroom Paladin just as another cheap buff to close out games or make trades.
An important point to consider with this card is that you can attack face and still get the buff from this card. With that in mind, this card seems pretty spicy. It can pull your board out of key damage break points and just make it more uncomfortable for your opponent to deal with. It's a way of mounting more threat on the opponent without actually committing any resources. In the ideal scenario, you use this card while you have a decent board to put enough pressure to bait out a big removal card, then crack back with the rest of your minions in hand. The fact that it has rush is also nice, since it allows you to ping off something without having to waste an attack of another minion.
You appear to have missed that you can attack face and get the buff. This doesn't specify attacking into minions.
I don't see why people are saying Watch posts are bad. They supplement a gameplan that revolves around constraining your opponent's options, because every time they do something, you get a benefit. To me, they're like less impactful secrets that your opponent can see. Ogremancer became the unsung hero of the meta in DMF, so I believe that people are underestimating cards that give you things when your opponent does things.
The Mor'shan Watch Post on its own seems very powerful. A lot of efficient spell removal will rotate, and it's just crushing against an aggro deck for coming out so early. Your opponent is either forced to commit damage to remove the Watch Post (thus killing off their board, or at least weakening it and making it susceptible to removal) or let it sit and allow you to stabilise through the tokens it generates.
Besides, we haven't yet seen all the cards. It's certain there are many more watch posts, and potentially more watch post synergy cards that are yet to be revealed. We may see a "Give all your watch posts Taunt" or "Your watch posts can attack this turn" card.
What I'm trying to get at is watch posts are not amazing, but I think it's incorrect to call them outright "bad". I believe, just like with all of the new mechanics that Blizzard introduces, it should be given a chance before making a preemptive decision.
The legendary is pretty bad though. Why not just play a corrupted Carnival Clown?
Both Inner Rage and Awaken are rotating next expansion.
Finally, Magicfin makes sense.
Out with 4 mana 7/7s, in with the 5 mana 8/8s!
But unfortunately, this falls into the same pitfall that Paladin did in Rastakhan, which was that if you had nothing to heal, you'd get no benefit. Battle Rage has a similar requirement of needing damaged minions, but being damaged and having damaged minions as Warrior is much more likely than as Priest. Additionally, Priest needs a way to heal the damaged things, and the only reliable source is their 2 cost hero power.
Desperate Prayer costs 0...
What did Lucentbark ever do to you?
It hasn't changed for years, which means it almost certainly will never change. It would require such a massive overhaul because it's changing one of the core fundamentals of the game.
You didn't seem to get the point: that's not how programming works. You can't just add 1 and have it work flawlessly. You can't just change "target 1" into "target 2" because there's no "target" function. The computer doesn't know what "target" means, they don't speak English. Try telling a computer to "target 2" and it will do nothing because you haven't told it what "target" or "2" means. It's a few thousand lines of code that tells the game what happens when the user clicks or taps on the screen when in the "targeting" game state, as well as referring to the effect of the card. The programmer has to tell the computer exactly what to do whenever any card is played, and what to do to the selected target. The card may read "target a minion. Freeze it", but the code is probably hundreds of lines.
The entire code of the game would have to be revamped from the beginning because the core functionality of the game will have been changed. "Target" currently means choose exactly one target for the given card being played, but to change it to allow multiple targets, you would need to change the meaning to read "allow the user to choose as many targets until they have either selected as many targets as the number on the card dictates or there are no more valid targets that can be chosen and the maximum number of targets hasn't been fulfilled". Do you see what a massive fundamental change that is? This requires a complete overhaul of the basic targeting functions in the game's code, which probably sits at the very beginning of the code, meaning if you wanted to change it, you'd also have to change the rest of the code along with it.
Also, did you know that targeting isn't just when you draw the big red arrow to something? Almost every single card you play has a target. The Amazing Reno targets the player and the hero power to be replaced and then targets all minions on the board. Shardshatter Mystic targets a Soul Fragment in your deck and then targets all minions on the board. Loatheb targets all spells in your opponent's hand and deck. Tour Guide targets your hero power. Nightshade Matron targets your hand, then targets the most expensive card in your hand. Puzzle Box of Yogg-Saron targets a spell from a list of available spells, then applies targeting according to the spell that's cast. Every single one of these cards and over 3000 more need to be coded almost from scratch because of this "simple" change.
On top of that, there would need to be an entirely new UI element that allows the user to select multiple targets, which is another few thousand lines of code that need to be edited, tested and debugged.
If you're going to blame Blizzard for their code, learn how programming works before saying things like "if they can make it work for 1, they can make it work for 2".
EDIT: I'm not saying it will never happen, for all we know Blizzard could be working on multitargeting right now. But the point is that's not how programming works.
Unrelated, but I dislike having the ranks in the spell's name. It's annoying to have to type "(Rank 1)" or "(Rank 2)" to refer to the spell in particular. I don't know if this is a tall ask, but it would be cool if we could type "Living Seed" (with the card command) and it would automatically show Living Seed (Rank 1).
EDIT: typo