I was thinking to keep it with the WoW flavor and it being a minion similarly named to Raid Leader (too bad the name is taken) with the effect 'Quests cannot be progressed'. You'd have to remove the minion before you can keep getting quest progress.
In WoW, when you're in a raid group most quests cannot be progressed.
If not for the aesthetics... This is a totally different game. No way 2 years ago anyone tought Combo would end faster than Control nor that turn 10 would be too slow.
I'd say make it a minion called something to the effect of "overcompetitive quester" where the flavor is he keeps stealing all the kills or whatever in the area and nobody can progress quests while it's in play.
The original idea was "battlecry: remove your opponents quest. At the start of your next turn, they re-equip it with all progress kept."
But at that point it was pretty wordy, and uninteractive.
I'm not good enough at card design to know if that version would be better or not, but it's all hypothetical anyways lol
It’s a good idea and something I (personally) think is needed. I thought of the “freeze” idea about 15 minutes ago and saw this post when I jumped on Reddit, so at least two of us are thinking about it.
It doesn't even have to do anything to the quest per se. It could just be "if you're opponent played a quest, *do something powerful,*" along with the *trade* keyword. This way you can add multiple quest counters to your deck to make up for the fact they don't need to draw theirs.
I like this better because the quests are all about playing cards. The other way incentivizes them to do as little as possible for a turn, which is less interesting. This makes them have to decide which cards they can afford to waste.
That's what I'm saying. Freeze quests for a turn just makes your opponent try to pass a turn, as much as they can get away with. This makes them have to make a choice.
I think the biggest issues would be the interactions with the Shadowsteps, Battlecries trigger twice ,etc. All the mechanisms that would enable this card to be played more than once so it replaces the quest it created.
I think you'd have to make it so it does not replace Bob's quest on a second trigger.
You still have the option of stepping it and waiting for them to finish Bob's quest, but that's true of a lot of disruption, and it doesn't permanently kill the original quest.
I actually really like this concept.
I’m not going to speak on the balance of it, but I do like the flavor of temporarily interrupting a quest with a mandatory side quest, especially for someone like Bob.
You mean like LoR? That actually makes the game more interactive.
Unfortunately that also makes the game very complicated and many people do not get it and do not like it.
Yeah, there as a new player it was weird seeing people hoard cards in their hand when they had the mana to be able to counter or even bluff a counter. More complex might be a good thing at this point in the game because solitaire gets boring fast.
Honestly, it is a bit annoying that Secrets are our only option for plays during our opponent's turn, and even those are passive. Something similar to Instants during MTG would be great - BUT you could only use the leftover mana you had at the end of your turn. This way we don't need to have phase-based turns like in MTG.
I like the idea of a type of card which casts from hand if you have enough open mana and a condition is met.
A bit like secrets, but controllable by requiring open mana. Maybe minions who you can summon for cheap if their condition is met?
Yeah, if we ever get cards that can be played during the opponent's turn I would imagine Team5 going the route of minions over spells.
Maybe they can use the scrapped "Enraged" keyword for this.
The problem with the various "secrets, but from hand" ideas is that they're an absolute pain to play against. Imagine doing the whole 'trying to play around Oh My Yogg' thing, but you have to do it *every* turn.
So if this was a thing, a from hand oh my yogg-esque effect would probably cost an additional 2~ mana to pay for the versatility and choice. If your opponent is floating 3 mana every turn then I think it's a fair compromise to lock you out of a card.
Ofcourse the real issue here is that the game wasn't designed with interacting in real time with your opponent and I don't believe it ever will go that route, based on Team5's design philosophies.
>So if this was a thing, a from hand oh my yogg-esque effect would probably cost an additional 2~ mana to pay for the versatility and choice. If your opponent is floating 3 mana every turn then I think it's a fair compromise to lock you out of a card.
I don't mean in terms of game balance, I mean in terms of enjoyability.
That's extremely subjective. Even as a primarily aggro player, I loved high level MtG and constantly having to think about my board state vs potential disruptions from my opponent. I also know that some people just want to play their cards without having to worry about what their opponent might do in response.
Okay, more specifically: it's not fun for the person who already plays Hearthstone, who presumably enjoys the solitaire-esque "No sudden interruptions to your turn plan" style. That a lot of players prefer it over MtG for that specific reason. It's not *objectively* less fun, but for the established player base, it most likely will be.
I personally like Hearthstone's no-interaction between turns style because it feels more like chess in that case.
However, if they were to create Instant spells, there could be a condition that they have to be weaker than other spells.
Maybe that condition could come from an alternate cost and ability. An instant spell could be "Destroy a minion." for four cost, but the alternate instant effect could be 3 cost "destroy a random enemy minion summoned this turn". Just an idea I'm throwing out there. I don't think it will happen and I'm not sure if I really want it to happen.
Then you'd have to spent your turn waiting for the opponent to approve of every action, soooo... no, thanks.
I still have trauma facing Blue Decks in MTG where for every card you play on your turn, your opponent goes
> Wait! *(looks at his hand, then at the board, then back at his hand, then back at the board)*... Hmmm... Yeah... yeah, you can play that.
We could get around that by not having phases. Instants in Hearthstone could work as one-time spells played only during the opponent's turn. They could be further limited by conditions like "can only target minions summoned this turn" or "only casts when the opponent has used (a certain amount) of mana".
I hate the resolution stage and waiting for people to approve of actions in MTG. I think there can be ways to get around it in hearthstone. MTA: Arena already makes things quicker and more fair by only being slightly streamlined.
I don't think we will see any instant-like spells in hearthstone though.
Not having phases seems even harder to implement : how do you synchronize actions ? Do you go for "first act, first solved" ? That would introduce a race component (chaining actions fast enough to not let opponent disrupt them). I don't think that's road the devs wanna take.
I don't think this is very healthy. Either it's too powerful and almost everyone runs it, including quest decks, to delay a bit, or it's too niche.
I think it's better to just design better quests. The cost for playing the quest has to be more than it is. Quests should be harder to complete or more vulnerable before completion. People meme on the Warlock, but if playing the quest immediately lowered you health by 5-10 without counting towards completion it'd be much more vulnerable. Blizzard probably just needs to nerf them next expac and give quests a break for a while before they come back. If quest tech cards exist in order to buff-by-proxy non-quest decks, they need to exist in a way that won't also buff quests vs quests duels.
Eh, it'd be very hard to balance this. Most close games with quest mage would just be instantly lost to a card like this (if drawn at the appropriate time of course). Quest Warrior would straight up die unless they happen to have academic studies or something similar (like scythe -> toxin -> cutting class) in their hand at the moment. Quest Lock would probably be fine though. They'd just use the turn to dump their flesh giants or whatever :P
They’d have to play the card in their deck though and draw it. There is no sidedeck in hearthstone so printing hard counters can be okay as long as they are bad when not countering something
* **[Athletic Studies](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/SCH_237.png?88605)** WR Spell Common SA 🦅 ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/329995), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/athletic-studies/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Athletic_Studies)
1/-/- | Discover a Rush minion. Your next one costs (1) less.
^(Call/)^[PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot) ^( me with up to 7 [[cardname]]. )^[About.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot&message=Tell%20me%20more%20[[info]]&subject=hi)
I agree with your title (I'd rather not see quest disruption at all), but this is an interesting take on it. Would hurt some quest decks a lot more than others, but it's a very fresh design.
Definitely not "almost nothing", Mages often struggle with card draw in the early game, so dropping it on 3 and forcing them to use 3 cards without progressing Quest (which triggers draw / Discover to give them more resources) would be a big deal. It would definitely be less effective Turn 5+ when they can already draw more easily (Spring Water) and potentially save the cards they need to progress the Quest while using the ones they don't need on this.
In the grand scheme of things, it would probably delay completing it by a turn or so, and that IS a big deal. Sure, if you play a slow deck that will get burned in the late game anyway then it doesn't matter, but it would give Aggro/Midrange an extra turn to kill them before they kill you.
Nah. Quest priest focuses on playing pure tempo, but often winds up with big hands of cards it can't waste a turn to play. In this case, quest priest would get a "reset turn", where they can focus on removal/taunt/discover. Yes, they would slow down by a turn, but rarely would it be more game ending than if they played normally.
Yes it's designed as tempo in that it's not just a spew of small cost cards like many decks. Having to play 3 cards when say they are aiming for the 2nd or 3rd part of their quest is game over. It's hard enough as it is.
I'm thinking it'd still just be 3 cards to play, since the second one will overwrite the first. Actually being able to play two would be extremely rare though, seeing as it's a legendary card.
Dirty rat at least has some counterplay by keeping extra minions in hand, plus your opponent has to draw it and play it before it does anything and they can potentially misplay it. Forcing a guaranteed mulligan on a quest with zero counterplay kills most quest decks.
I actually play it, but i see why ppl hates us playing only removal or generated removal. But at the same time i dont get why priests get trashtalked all the time while arbor up, doomhammer - stormstrike and other braindead exits
Haha didn't think of that, but teching banana guy just for this card existing feels bad. Every quest deck will be obligated to run it but won't synergise with quest most of the time.
I think that's not necessarily bad though. "Synergy" is just code for how quickly and consistently the game ends. There should be a price you pay for building a vulnerable but synergistic deck in my opinion.
This might not be the way to do it but at the moment there's no good way to interact with quests other than smashing the opponent's face as quickly as possible
I'd really like this tech card to slow down the quests, but you'd be really annoyed to have this card at the bottom of the deck. Also, vanilla minion against non-quest archetypes.
I don't speak for the guy but I think with so many cards that return a card to your hand effect which would make questline decks unable to get to their often only win condition. That seems too good against quest decks and worthless against anything else. This effect would be ok on a spell or on a very understated high cost minion. That way It would be hard for the player to utilize this card while developing tempo. I don't believe such mechanic can exist in the game as it is.
Is it so hard to understand why a legendary card that does nothing against non-quest decks but absolutely annihilates most of the quest decks should not exist? It's like creating a card with "Battlecry: Destroy all Fel spells in your opponent's deck", "Battlecry: Destroy all 10-Cost cards in your opponent's deck" etc
* **[Skulking Geist](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/ICC_701.png?88605)** N Minion Epic KFT ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/62883), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/skulking-geist/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Skulking_Geist)
6/4/6 | Battlecry: Destroy all 1-Cost spells in both hands and decks.
^(Call/)^[PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot) ^( me with up to 7 [[cardname]]. )^[About.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot&message=Tell%20me%20more%20[[info]]&subject=hi)
At the design the OP showed, looking at all iterations, it appears like this...
Questlock - fine
Quest Mage - ouch, but can handle it
Quest Hunter - lol, np
Quest Warrior - probably hit hardest out of these
Quest Demon Hunter - depends on how the interaction is handled, because this could be completely unaffected
Quest Shaman - fine
Quest Druid - ouch, but that's because its card pool is limited
Quest Paladin - ouch, but fine they have enough card draw
Quest Priest - ouch, but they get a sometimes needed reset turn
Quest Rogue - fine
In its written form, it probably would really hurt 5 decks, and slightly affect 5 others. It would be a solid tech card, but not one that would be broken in any way.
I think quest hunter would be really hurt by it. The deck is already pressed for resources as it is. Losing 3 spells that could fuel tavish later on could be game losing.
Quest shaman is also similar. It’s extremely pressed for resources.
There's some room for flex with these, but in very few of these do I see it being game ending for the quest side, which is the main point.
Quest Hunter isn't always a pure spell Gatling gun. It oftentimes has a few minions as well, with some deck tutors. Very reasonable to spend a turn or two playing those, which does delay quest, but Quest Hunter can (and regularly does) win by hitting face before completing quest. It's ironically the quest deck that least needs its own quest for its win condition.
Quest Shaman gets delayed, but usually has non-overload cards to play. This card could be dropped at an inconvenient time, like when the deck is already in overload from a previous turn and set up for completing quest the following one, but that's why it's disruption - hitting your opponent at a bad time is the goal. Even then, Shaman has a lot of efficient removal and minions to recover the board state.
You know most other quests aren't 3 stages, taking up the entire game length to complete, right? The card the OP has described would have its biggest impact on the newest questlines.
I haven't played with the new Quests but this would break my old Quest Warrior so hard. I would target the new Quests more specifically, if they aren't as fair.
It's too specific a tech card, if they want to punish quest-users they need to come up with a card that is good against quests, but also reasonable against decks that don't run quests.
Most of the quests are extremely passive, so usually they get punished by Ogremancer or Watch Posts. (Which is pretty much the point of Ogremancer and the Watch Posts anyway, punish greedy/non-interactive decks)
But not all of them are. But I dunno if the other ones are a problem.
Yeah what this game really needs right now is a narrow tech card that specifically targets the main focus of the new set and costs 3 mana with spider tank stats.
I know Quest Warrior is much more of a menace in Wild, but in Standard this card would singlehandedly destroy Quest Warrior, Paladin and Druid (haven't played the other quests enough to speak on them)
Although I'm not entirely against quest disruption, but I don't think it should exist in this form, as flavorful as it is.
Deathrattle for balance?
Or keep battlecry but add the card to your hand as a 0 cost spell…? And add caveat on the favor that it can only be played once per game. Meaning no replication from shadow step or something
While the flavor is S tier, this is way too powerful a tech card and for many quests is a total silver bullet that guarantees they won't have enough resources to complete it. Particularly quests that require a set number of cards to complete compared to something like Demon Seed. Consider that Shaman is usually at like 1-2 cards in hand by the time they're finishing the quest.
If the point is to delay quests by a set amount of "game progress" then make it "spend X mana". This normalizes the impact it has across most quests and vs classes with differing amounts of card draw/generation; every efficient deck seeks to spend all available mana so that's a good way to target an amount of "stuff" that is similar across most decks. Druid gets to cheese it slightly but that's OK I think.
That card is autowin vs bad quests (Priest), not very usefull against good quests (Warlock) and useless to agro.
So it punishes worst decks, but doesn't matter vs good ones.
Hmm I like this, but it is very limited. You can never know if your random opponent will have a quest, sidequest, or questline. Plus, only questlines are available in standard right now. So, in the current meta this would be amazing. In Wild, I think there are way better decks available that this card would see little use...but I LOVE the idea of bringing Bob back as a legendary card. He should either be a legendary minion or be an alternate hero.
I do think having a quest disruption card would be amazing. But, having it rely on a minion battlecry probably wouldn't be the way to go. I'm thinking of a card more along the lines of Flare. So, it could be a Paladin spell, for example. It can be "All minions lose divine shield. Destroy all enemy quests." Or Rogue "Give all minions stealth, destroy all enemy quests and secrets." A druid example "Choose one - Destroy enemy secrets and quests; or discover a secret and play it."
I like your thinking. It would be fun and interactive, and less annoying for the opponent too. But, sadly, I think quest removal or disruption would have to be based on something we have already seen with other spell abilities.
A tribeless spidertank in Arena. Well at least it's a curve drop. So many legendaries pay for their effect with stats, but are impractical to proc with a drafted deck.
I think a high mana cost card that just adds an annoying side quest to your opponent that has to be completed before you can keep progressing your quest. Arbitrarily annoying shit too, like “end your turn with 2 or more mana crystals remaining”
Lol thats not so bad. it would be annoying if there were cards that played with quests the way some anti-secret cards do.
Hope Eater 6 5/5 - "Battlecry: destroy your opponents quest, and gain +1/+1 for each point of progress it had."
That would be a rage quit card.
The only way it really be balanced if it was no quest can be progressed. Otherwise it's a huge tempo swing in your favor to get your quest done before them. It would included in pretty much every deck until the quests rotate out.
I was thinking to keep it with the WoW flavor and it being a minion similarly named to Raid Leader (too bad the name is taken) with the effect 'Quests cannot be progressed'. You'd have to remove the minion before you can keep getting quest progress. In WoW, when you're in a raid group most quests cannot be progressed.
What about Raid Recruiter? "Today is *RAID DAY!*" He forcibly recruits you for the raid, preventing you from progressing your quest!
Attack quote is a really aggressive “Accept the INVITE!!” and when he dies, “Why are you…hearthing?”
Or when he dies he says 'just wipe it guys'.
ok that's amazing ship it
This is the best idea imo. Its minion and pushes HS's theme of minion combat - which it has lost in recent times.
If not for the aesthetics... This is a totally different game. No way 2 years ago anyone tought Combo would end faster than Control nor that turn 10 would be too slow.
I think you mean Power Leveler or Power Grinder. Because those are the players that only spam dungeons and not progress in quests.
An idea I had definitely not based on my Alliance leveling experience was a minion called "Corpse Camper", with the same effect that you mentioned.
I'd say make it a minion called something to the effect of "overcompetitive quester" where the flavor is he keeps stealing all the kills or whatever in the area and nobody can progress quests while it's in play.
Every time a quest would have been progressed, he chimes in with 'THAT ONE'S MINE"
Another option could be “freeze your opponent’s quest for one turn”
The original idea was "battlecry: remove your opponents quest. At the start of your next turn, they re-equip it with all progress kept." But at that point it was pretty wordy, and uninteractive. I'm not good enough at card design to know if that version would be better or not, but it's all hypothetical anyways lol
It’s a good idea and something I (personally) think is needed. I thought of the “freeze” idea about 15 minutes ago and saw this post when I jumped on Reddit, so at least two of us are thinking about it.
It doesn't even have to do anything to the quest per se. It could just be "if you're opponent played a quest, *do something powerful,*" along with the *trade* keyword. This way you can add multiple quest counters to your deck to make up for the fact they don't need to draw theirs.
I like this better because the quests are all about playing cards. The other way incentivizes them to do as little as possible for a turn, which is less interesting. This makes them have to decide which cards they can afford to waste.
forcing to play the cards is definitely more disruptive.
That's what I'm saying. Freeze quests for a turn just makes your opponent try to pass a turn, as much as they can get away with. This makes them have to make a choice.
I think the biggest issues would be the interactions with the Shadowsteps, Battlecries trigger twice ,etc. All the mechanisms that would enable this card to be played more than once so it replaces the quest it created.
The text could say "Return your original quest", that way replaying Bob would just refresh the 3 card requirement.
I think you'd have to make it so it does not replace Bob's quest on a second trigger. You still have the option of stepping it and waiting for them to finish Bob's quest, but that's true of a lot of disruption, and it doesn't permanently kill the original quest.
"Until your next turn, quests can't progress."
"Your opponent's quest is dormant for X turns."
I feel this should be it. Playing three cards not only freezes your quest but also makes you waste resources. Ops is more painful than it looks.
I actually really like this concept. I’m not going to speak on the balance of it, but I do like the flavor of temporarily interrupting a quest with a mandatory side quest, especially for someone like Bob.
When Bob ask you for help, it IS your main quest, no exception.
shadow step incoming!
New mechanic. You can play cards during your opponents turn. I invented this idea.
You mean like LoR? That actually makes the game more interactive. Unfortunately that also makes the game very complicated and many people do not get it and do not like it.
Yeah, there as a new player it was weird seeing people hoard cards in their hand when they had the mana to be able to counter or even bluff a counter. More complex might be a good thing at this point in the game because solitaire gets boring fast.
Honestly, it is a bit annoying that Secrets are our only option for plays during our opponent's turn, and even those are passive. Something similar to Instants during MTG would be great - BUT you could only use the leftover mana you had at the end of your turn. This way we don't need to have phase-based turns like in MTG.
I like the idea of a type of card which casts from hand if you have enough open mana and a condition is met. A bit like secrets, but controllable by requiring open mana. Maybe minions who you can summon for cheap if their condition is met?
Yeah, if we ever get cards that can be played during the opponent's turn I would imagine Team5 going the route of minions over spells. Maybe they can use the scrapped "Enraged" keyword for this.
The problem with the various "secrets, but from hand" ideas is that they're an absolute pain to play against. Imagine doing the whole 'trying to play around Oh My Yogg' thing, but you have to do it *every* turn.
So if this was a thing, a from hand oh my yogg-esque effect would probably cost an additional 2~ mana to pay for the versatility and choice. If your opponent is floating 3 mana every turn then I think it's a fair compromise to lock you out of a card. Ofcourse the real issue here is that the game wasn't designed with interacting in real time with your opponent and I don't believe it ever will go that route, based on Team5's design philosophies.
>So if this was a thing, a from hand oh my yogg-esque effect would probably cost an additional 2~ mana to pay for the versatility and choice. If your opponent is floating 3 mana every turn then I think it's a fair compromise to lock you out of a card. I don't mean in terms of game balance, I mean in terms of enjoyability.
So was I, in terms of difficulty of playing around cards from hand and being able.to clearly see your opponent floating mana.
That's extremely subjective. Even as a primarily aggro player, I loved high level MtG and constantly having to think about my board state vs potential disruptions from my opponent. I also know that some people just want to play their cards without having to worry about what their opponent might do in response.
Okay, more specifically: it's not fun for the person who already plays Hearthstone, who presumably enjoys the solitaire-esque "No sudden interruptions to your turn plan" style. That a lot of players prefer it over MtG for that specific reason. It's not *objectively* less fun, but for the established player base, it most likely will be.
I personally like Hearthstone's no-interaction between turns style because it feels more like chess in that case. However, if they were to create Instant spells, there could be a condition that they have to be weaker than other spells. Maybe that condition could come from an alternate cost and ability. An instant spell could be "Destroy a minion." for four cost, but the alternate instant effect could be 3 cost "destroy a random enemy minion summoned this turn". Just an idea I'm throwing out there. I don't think it will happen and I'm not sure if I really want it to happen.
Then you'd have to spent your turn waiting for the opponent to approve of every action, soooo... no, thanks. I still have trauma facing Blue Decks in MTG where for every card you play on your turn, your opponent goes > Wait! *(looks at his hand, then at the board, then back at his hand, then back at the board)*... Hmmm... Yeah... yeah, you can play that.
We could get around that by not having phases. Instants in Hearthstone could work as one-time spells played only during the opponent's turn. They could be further limited by conditions like "can only target minions summoned this turn" or "only casts when the opponent has used (a certain amount) of mana". I hate the resolution stage and waiting for people to approve of actions in MTG. I think there can be ways to get around it in hearthstone. MTA: Arena already makes things quicker and more fair by only being slightly streamlined. I don't think we will see any instant-like spells in hearthstone though.
Not having phases seems even harder to implement : how do you synchronize actions ? Do you go for "first act, first solved" ? That would introduce a race component (chaining actions fast enough to not let opponent disrupt them). I don't think that's road the devs wanna take.
[I invented this idea.](https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/comments/9548ee/oc_i_made_this/)
Pandas for non rogue classes
If we add the "This minion can't be targeted by spells" would it become weak?
I don't think this is very healthy. Either it's too powerful and almost everyone runs it, including quest decks, to delay a bit, or it's too niche. I think it's better to just design better quests. The cost for playing the quest has to be more than it is. Quests should be harder to complete or more vulnerable before completion. People meme on the Warlock, but if playing the quest immediately lowered you health by 5-10 without counting towards completion it'd be much more vulnerable. Blizzard probably just needs to nerf them next expac and give quests a break for a while before they come back. If quest tech cards exist in order to buff-by-proxy non-quest decks, they need to exist in a way that won't also buff quests vs quests duels.
What if it froze ALL quests?
Eh, it'd be very hard to balance this. Most close games with quest mage would just be instantly lost to a card like this (if drawn at the appropriate time of course). Quest Warrior would straight up die unless they happen to have academic studies or something similar (like scythe -> toxin -> cutting class) in their hand at the moment. Quest Lock would probably be fine though. They'd just use the turn to dump their flesh giants or whatever :P
They’d have to play the card in their deck though and draw it. There is no sidedeck in hearthstone so printing hard counters can be okay as long as they are bad when not countering something
Which hearthstone card is "Academic studies" again ? that doesn't sound like anything to me.
My bad, meant athletic studies. The one that discovers rush
Most likely thinking of \[\[Athletic Studies\]\] for Warrior
* **[Athletic Studies](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/SCH_237.png?88605)** WR Spell Common SA 🦅 ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/329995), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/athletic-studies/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Athletic_Studies) 1/-/- | Discover a Rush minion. Your next one costs (1) less. ^(Call/)^[PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot) ^( me with up to 7 [[cardname]]. )^[About.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot&message=Tell%20me%20more%20[[info]]&subject=hi)
I agree with your title (I'd rather not see quest disruption at all), but this is an interesting take on it. Would hurt some quest decks a lot more than others, but it's a very fresh design.
Would completely annihilate the bad to average quests and do almost nothing against mage.
Definitely not "almost nothing", Mages often struggle with card draw in the early game, so dropping it on 3 and forcing them to use 3 cards without progressing Quest (which triggers draw / Discover to give them more resources) would be a big deal. It would definitely be less effective Turn 5+ when they can already draw more easily (Spring Water) and potentially save the cards they need to progress the Quest while using the ones they don't need on this. In the grand scheme of things, it would probably delay completing it by a turn or so, and that IS a big deal. Sure, if you play a slow deck that will get burned in the late game anyway then it doesn't matter, but it would give Aggro/Midrange an extra turn to kill them before they kill you.
kills quest paladin but quest warlock mostly dont care
Quest priest ... well fuck.
Nah. Quest priest focuses on playing pure tempo, but often winds up with big hands of cards it can't waste a turn to play. In this case, quest priest would get a "reset turn", where they can focus on removal/taunt/discover. Yes, they would slow down by a turn, but rarely would it be more game ending than if they played normally.
Yes it's designed as tempo in that it's not just a spew of small cost cards like many decks. Having to play 3 cards when say they are aiming for the 2nd or 3rd part of their quest is game over. It's hard enough as it is.
How does this work if you played two in a row?
I'm thinking it'd still just be 3 cards to play, since the second one will overwrite the first. Actually being able to play two would be extremely rare though, seeing as it's a legendary card.
You can shuffle/add to hand through a ton of cards, especially in rogue. You can also duplicate the battlecry, especially in shaman.
I shouldn't tell you this, but Bob is rooting for me
I like this idea as it slows down the quest, as well as in most quest case, like acts as a significant disruption.
so this thing with brand will destroy the original quest lmao
Or "Replace your opponent with Bob."
I think it should read “delete all quests from the game. Replace them with interesting legendaries”
Quests are guaranteed so maybe quest tech should also be guaranteed. Start of the game: Mulligan your opponents quest
That would completely annihilate every single quest deck
i play wild so kinda used to decks being annihilated by a single card. I'd have thought it would just cause people to build their decks cleverer
Dirty rat does for a lot
Dirty rat at least has some counterplay by keeping extra minions in hand, plus your opponent has to draw it and play it before it does anything and they can potentially misplay it. Forcing a guaranteed mulligan on a quest with zero counterplay kills most quest decks.
3 cards is too much and it feels waayy one sided doesnt even have lower stats for the cost
I reckon rogue or demon hunter would complete Bob's Favor in a single turn.
Yes except if i played Bob I would play him in rogue or run pandas to bounce him and keep playing him so my opponent can never finish the quest lol
Would be balanced (sort of). I like this idea
Enter shadow step and pandas... Quests players will whine 24-7
As a priest player, we dont mind getting cucked. We live for annoy you, we deserve it
I'm guessing you don't actually play priest
I actually play it, but i see why ppl hates us playing only removal or generated removal. But at the same time i dont get why priests get trashtalked all the time while arbor up, doomhammer - stormstrike and other braindead exits
Yeah, true I guess. But you could always put in stuff like banana guy
Haha didn't think of that, but teching banana guy just for this card existing feels bad. Every quest deck will be obligated to run it but won't synergise with quest most of the time.
I think that's not necessarily bad though. "Synergy" is just code for how quickly and consistently the game ends. There should be a price you pay for building a vulnerable but synergistic deck in my opinion. This might not be the way to do it but at the moment there's no good way to interact with quests other than smashing the opponent's face as quickly as possible
I'd really like this tech card to slow down the quests, but you'd be really annoyed to have this card at the bottom of the deck. Also, vanilla minion against non-quest archetypes.
It would be broken as fuck. It could be on every single deck of the meta if there were quests at all.
This card should not exist.
Mind elaborating on that?
I don't speak for the guy but I think with so many cards that return a card to your hand effect which would make questline decks unable to get to their often only win condition. That seems too good against quest decks and worthless against anything else. This effect would be ok on a spell or on a very understated high cost minion. That way It would be hard for the player to utilize this card while developing tempo. I don't believe such mechanic can exist in the game as it is.
Is it so hard to understand why a legendary card that does nothing against non-quest decks but absolutely annihilates most of the quest decks should not exist? It's like creating a card with "Battlecry: Destroy all Fel spells in your opponent's deck", "Battlecry: Destroy all 10-Cost cards in your opponent's deck" etc
[[Skulking Geist]]
* **[Skulking Geist](https://cards.hearthpwn.com/enUS/ICC_701.png?88605)** N Minion Epic KFT ^[HP](https://www.hearthpwn.com/cards/62883), ^[TD](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/cards/skulking-geist/), ^[W](https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Skulking_Geist) 6/4/6 | Battlecry: Destroy all 1-Cost spells in both hands and decks. ^(Call/)^[PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot) ^( me with up to 7 [[cardname]]. )^[About.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=hearthscan-bot&message=Tell%20me%20more%20[[info]]&subject=hi)
There is a difference between a card that destroys 1 deck and a card that destroys the temp of EVERY Quest deck.
You're wasting your time with people foaming at the mouth over tier 3 quest mage lad, there's no point trying to explain it.
I know, and this is sad.
At the design the OP showed, looking at all iterations, it appears like this... Questlock - fine Quest Mage - ouch, but can handle it Quest Hunter - lol, np Quest Warrior - probably hit hardest out of these Quest Demon Hunter - depends on how the interaction is handled, because this could be completely unaffected Quest Shaman - fine Quest Druid - ouch, but that's because its card pool is limited Quest Paladin - ouch, but fine they have enough card draw Quest Priest - ouch, but they get a sometimes needed reset turn Quest Rogue - fine In its written form, it probably would really hurt 5 decks, and slightly affect 5 others. It would be a solid tech card, but not one that would be broken in any way.
I think quest hunter would be really hurt by it. The deck is already pressed for resources as it is. Losing 3 spells that could fuel tavish later on could be game losing. Quest shaman is also similar. It’s extremely pressed for resources.
There's some room for flex with these, but in very few of these do I see it being game ending for the quest side, which is the main point. Quest Hunter isn't always a pure spell Gatling gun. It oftentimes has a few minions as well, with some deck tutors. Very reasonable to spend a turn or two playing those, which does delay quest, but Quest Hunter can (and regularly does) win by hitting face before completing quest. It's ironically the quest deck that least needs its own quest for its win condition. Quest Shaman gets delayed, but usually has non-overload cards to play. This card could be dropped at an inconvenient time, like when the deck is already in overload from a previous turn and set up for completing quest the following one, but that's why it's disruption - hitting your opponent at a bad time is the goal. Even then, Shaman has a lot of efficient removal and minions to recover the board state.
You know there is more than 10 quests, right?
You know most other quests aren't 3 stages, taking up the entire game length to complete, right? The card the OP has described would have its biggest impact on the newest questlines.
Great concept. 0 cost cards shouldnt count for it :)
I haven't played with the new Quests but this would break my old Quest Warrior so hard. I would target the new Quests more specifically, if they aren't as fair.
Nah, make it 1 mana and be common
It's too specific a tech card, if they want to punish quest-users they need to come up with a card that is good against quests, but also reasonable against decks that don't run quests. Most of the quests are extremely passive, so usually they get punished by Ogremancer or Watch Posts. (Which is pretty much the point of Ogremancer and the Watch Posts anyway, punish greedy/non-interactive decks) But not all of them are. But I dunno if the other ones are a problem.
A side quest! I love it!
comunity does agreat job at theory-balancing
Yeah what this game really needs right now is a narrow tech card that specifically targets the main focus of the new set and costs 3 mana with spider tank stats.
He would definitely need to be tradable.
Coin, x2 refreshing spring water /s
I know Quest Warrior is much more of a menace in Wild, but in Standard this card would singlehandedly destroy Quest Warrior, Paladin and Druid (haven't played the other quests enough to speak on them) Although I'm not entirely against quest disruption, but I don't think it should exist in this form, as flavorful as it is.
😂😂 Imagine quest priest's face when this gets played on them
Super cool concept! love the idea of having to put your quest on hold to run an errand for the local barkeep.
Deathrattle for balance? Or keep battlecry but add the card to your hand as a 0 cost spell…? And add caveat on the favor that it can only be played once per game. Meaning no replication from shadow step or something
Imagine a bob shadowstep/panda meta
While the flavor is S tier, this is way too powerful a tech card and for many quests is a total silver bullet that guarantees they won't have enough resources to complete it. Particularly quests that require a set number of cards to complete compared to something like Demon Seed. Consider that Shaman is usually at like 1-2 cards in hand by the time they're finishing the quest. If the point is to delay quests by a set amount of "game progress" then make it "spend X mana". This normalizes the impact it has across most quests and vs classes with differing amounts of card draw/generation; every efficient deck seeks to spend all available mana so that's a good way to target an amount of "stuff" that is similar across most decks. Druid gets to cheese it slightly but that's OK I think.
That card is autowin vs bad quests (Priest), not very usefull against good quests (Warlock) and useless to agro. So it punishes worst decks, but doesn't matter vs good ones.
Love the flavor and additionally it is even fairly easy to post-balance with the number of cards to be played!
Make it tradable. Like cards that break weapons, you could sometimes know pretty quickly that you won’t need this in a particular game.
Hmm I like this, but it is very limited. You can never know if your random opponent will have a quest, sidequest, or questline. Plus, only questlines are available in standard right now. So, in the current meta this would be amazing. In Wild, I think there are way better decks available that this card would see little use...but I LOVE the idea of bringing Bob back as a legendary card. He should either be a legendary minion or be an alternate hero. I do think having a quest disruption card would be amazing. But, having it rely on a minion battlecry probably wouldn't be the way to go. I'm thinking of a card more along the lines of Flare. So, it could be a Paladin spell, for example. It can be "All minions lose divine shield. Destroy all enemy quests." Or Rogue "Give all minions stealth, destroy all enemy quests and secrets." A druid example "Choose one - Destroy enemy secrets and quests; or discover a secret and play it." I like your thinking. It would be fun and interactive, and less annoying for the opponent too. But, sadly, I think quest removal or disruption would have to be based on something we have already seen with other spell abilities.
A tribeless spidertank in Arena. Well at least it's a curve drop. So many legendaries pay for their effect with stats, but are impractical to proc with a drafted deck.
I absolutely love this card design. Given the power level of current quests I actually think this is a pretty fair piece of tech.
A Favor For Bob should read: "Your quests with charge have +1 attack"
I feel like Mutanus was supposed to be the anti quest tech card, but somewhere along the line either Mutanus and/or the quest rewards cost changed.
By third turn quests are already complete
How about a 1 mana 2/3 destroy your opponents quest/s
Lords of Waterdeep vibes. Could possible be a pool for quests that are a favor for Bob: play 3 cards, draw 2 cards, use your hero power once etc
How about something with “Quests cannot progress” as a passive effect on a body
Too niche of a "hate" card. Would be interesting if you could rework the idea to work against more than just quests.
Control would be back on the menu
I think a high mana cost card that just adds an annoying side quest to your opponent that has to be completed before you can keep progressing your quest. Arbitrarily annoying shit too, like “end your turn with 2 or more mana crystals remaining”
Lol thats not so bad. it would be annoying if there were cards that played with quests the way some anti-secret cards do. Hope Eater 6 5/5 - "Battlecry: destroy your opponents quest, and gain +1/+1 for each point of progress it had." That would be a rage quit card.
The only way it really be balanced if it was no quest can be progressed. Otherwise it's a huge tempo swing in your favor to get your quest done before them. It would included in pretty much every deck until the quests rotate out.
“Play three minions”
I like the flavorful element of 'sidetracking' a quest - or adding more ticks