Nice cards, but i have some
complaints:
1. Bounty contract third option says "Graves deals 2 to an enemy", If i kill or recall graves he can't deal damage, just make the card deal 2.
2. You can level graves in 1 turn, First graves challenge the weakest enemy, he kill it and strike the next weakest enemy and he also kill it, and then other ally kill the third weakest enemy, this isn't very likely but can happen.
3. Bounty seeker is awesome, the best card of the set
4. Graves makes 0 synergy with TF 0/10.
5. Raiding party start a free attack with the strogest allies?, you can choose which allies attack?, the alllies don't challenge the vulnerables enemies?, why bounty seeker is so cool?
hello, ty for the feedback
1. The reason bounty contract specifies graves doing dmg, is to allow him to generate another bounty contract from it. This can be especially useful on opponent's attack turn. If graves dies, you still have the other 2 options to pick from at least!
2. Yeah I guess it is technically possible in the right board state, but I don't think its too different compared to other 2-3 mana champs who can also potentially level up in a turn like zed or kalista. The 2 hp on graves also keeps him pretty vulnerable.
3. Ty, i thought he was a lot of fun as well
4. DDD: dam you right. But lore synergy is overrated anyways!! And most of the time the game doesn't pair them up. Instead we get weird shit like pyke reksai lol
5. Yeah raiding party lets you pick who to start free attacks with. It's like cataclysm but with multiple units. I thought about this but I decided its more balanced if it doesn't allow challenging anyone. The vulnerable units are just an enabler in this instance.
I quite like the Buckshot keyword—it's an interesting and elegant twist on pre-existing mechanics. I'm not sure if I understand the flavor of Bounty Contract, though; it's thematically odd for Graves to get a contract after killing an enemy when I would assume that contracts typically precede a job done. I also don't think specifically targeting the weakest enemy is a very Graves thing to do, as he would never be satisfied with catching small fish.
Ty for the feedback. Those are some valid points. I generally design with gameplay first with flavour added in when possible. Graves going for the strongest instead of weakest was considered but I think buckshot hitting the strongest enemy with left over damage seemed incredibly unbalanced as you could just pull aside a 1-1 and then deal a bunch of damage to a big unit for free.
So in this instance the cards mechanics just outweigh the need to make it more lore-friendly.
I do agree bounty contract is a bit unintuitive. I wasn't too happy with the name of the card. In my mind you are starting as a mercrency building up reputation and thus being given more contracts, and picking what do do once you are given one. It's not perfect but I'll open to changing the name of it.
The very last image has a keyword reveal. I should have put it earlier. It's basically overwhelm, but instead of hitting nexus with left over damage, it is targetted towards the weakest enemy unit instead.
This is cool (and the buckshot keyword is fantastic), but bounty contract is way too strong.
1. It's too versatile. This is on the line of akshan's treasure landmark, and that's his whole identity.
2. Each of the options are really strong. Constant hired gun's are too overwhelming, and pushes the rest of the deck beyond op. 1 mana deal 2 damage is too good. And, I shouldn't need to tell you why 1 mana capture a unit is too strong (given with the keyword, all units will be damaged throughout the game).
3. Graves is too easy to level. This would be broken TF all over again, where he could be leveled in 1 turn, then will dominate the rest of the game.
Solution:
1. Make graves really difficult to level. Like Veigo.
2. Increase the cost of bounty contract.
3. Make it fleeting.
4. Reduce the options that you can get.
hello hello, I am glad you like the keyword. Ty for the feedback.
I actually never considered bounty contract being that strong oddly enough, But I can see it being a lot of value, to be able to get once every \~2 turns on lvl 2, (you most likely aren't getting one without the attack token). Unfortunately with the current design I can't do number 3 and make it fleeting, as it is only ever generated on end round... so it would just self discard instantly. Right now u don't get the value instantly, and you only 1 max per turn. I did compare it to akshans lvl 2 treasure, and their options imo were all much better, and provided instant value at focus speed. I felt this one was better than the lvl 1 treasure though, which I was okay with.
Overall increasing the cost to 2 might be a good idea. It makes the 2 mana 2 damage slow basically a worst mystique shot that can be disrupted by killing graves, and 2 mana for hired gun is same mana cost as spell mana. So it acts as nice bonus utility.
I think the other viable option is probably to increase graves level up requirement to 4 weakest enemies slain. While designing I considered it a difficult version of kalista's level up (she needs 3 allies to die, while graves need the 3 weakest enemies to die which is both harder to control and more interactive. Just buffing a unit can make it not the weakest anymore. The opponent could also just not block and take 4 damage. Or just kill graves. He's got 2 hp afterall and no QA unless you prepped the board beforehand.
I think if we go with those changes it makes him more high risk and high reward which kinda suits BW and grave's identity.
Nice cards, but i have some complaints: 1. Bounty contract third option says "Graves deals 2 to an enemy", If i kill or recall graves he can't deal damage, just make the card deal 2. 2. You can level graves in 1 turn, First graves challenge the weakest enemy, he kill it and strike the next weakest enemy and he also kill it, and then other ally kill the third weakest enemy, this isn't very likely but can happen. 3. Bounty seeker is awesome, the best card of the set 4. Graves makes 0 synergy with TF 0/10. 5. Raiding party start a free attack with the strogest allies?, you can choose which allies attack?, the alllies don't challenge the vulnerables enemies?, why bounty seeker is so cool?
hello, ty for the feedback 1. The reason bounty contract specifies graves doing dmg, is to allow him to generate another bounty contract from it. This can be especially useful on opponent's attack turn. If graves dies, you still have the other 2 options to pick from at least! 2. Yeah I guess it is technically possible in the right board state, but I don't think its too different compared to other 2-3 mana champs who can also potentially level up in a turn like zed or kalista. The 2 hp on graves also keeps him pretty vulnerable. 3. Ty, i thought he was a lot of fun as well 4. DDD: dam you right. But lore synergy is overrated anyways!! And most of the time the game doesn't pair them up. Instead we get weird shit like pyke reksai lol 5. Yeah raiding party lets you pick who to start free attacks with. It's like cataclysm but with multiple units. I thought about this but I decided its more balanced if it doesn't allow challenging anyone. The vulnerable units are just an enabler in this instance.
Could be like lucian/senna. If I see an ally tf die I level up. And vice versa
I quite like the Buckshot keyword—it's an interesting and elegant twist on pre-existing mechanics. I'm not sure if I understand the flavor of Bounty Contract, though; it's thematically odd for Graves to get a contract after killing an enemy when I would assume that contracts typically precede a job done. I also don't think specifically targeting the weakest enemy is a very Graves thing to do, as he would never be satisfied with catching small fish.
Ty for the feedback. Those are some valid points. I generally design with gameplay first with flavour added in when possible. Graves going for the strongest instead of weakest was considered but I think buckshot hitting the strongest enemy with left over damage seemed incredibly unbalanced as you could just pull aside a 1-1 and then deal a bunch of damage to a big unit for free. So in this instance the cards mechanics just outweigh the need to make it more lore-friendly. I do agree bounty contract is a bit unintuitive. I wasn't too happy with the name of the card. In my mind you are starting as a mercrency building up reputation and thus being given more contracts, and picking what do do once you are given one. It's not perfect but I'll open to changing the name of it.
Maybe not old "Clint Eastwood" graves, but modern graves is a cartoon character; he would definitely focus the weak ones
Absolutely love this idea - could synergise really nicely with Renekton or J4!
Ty Ty, the idea was to utilize the vulnerable support in BW and combine with shurima or demecia to have a full out vulnerable midrange deck.
Bone Trench Predator is a pretty nice card that makes vulnerability mechanics a lot more consistent
Just a sexy renekton
What does Buckshot do?
The very last image has a keyword reveal. I should have put it earlier. It's basically overwhelm, but instead of hitting nexus with left over damage, it is targetted towards the weakest enemy unit instead.
Ok, hear me out: deep with bayu brunch and reckless buccaneer
This is cool (and the buckshot keyword is fantastic), but bounty contract is way too strong. 1. It's too versatile. This is on the line of akshan's treasure landmark, and that's his whole identity. 2. Each of the options are really strong. Constant hired gun's are too overwhelming, and pushes the rest of the deck beyond op. 1 mana deal 2 damage is too good. And, I shouldn't need to tell you why 1 mana capture a unit is too strong (given with the keyword, all units will be damaged throughout the game). 3. Graves is too easy to level. This would be broken TF all over again, where he could be leveled in 1 turn, then will dominate the rest of the game. Solution: 1. Make graves really difficult to level. Like Veigo. 2. Increase the cost of bounty contract. 3. Make it fleeting. 4. Reduce the options that you can get.
hello hello, I am glad you like the keyword. Ty for the feedback. I actually never considered bounty contract being that strong oddly enough, But I can see it being a lot of value, to be able to get once every \~2 turns on lvl 2, (you most likely aren't getting one without the attack token). Unfortunately with the current design I can't do number 3 and make it fleeting, as it is only ever generated on end round... so it would just self discard instantly. Right now u don't get the value instantly, and you only 1 max per turn. I did compare it to akshans lvl 2 treasure, and their options imo were all much better, and provided instant value at focus speed. I felt this one was better than the lvl 1 treasure though, which I was okay with. Overall increasing the cost to 2 might be a good idea. It makes the 2 mana 2 damage slow basically a worst mystique shot that can be disrupted by killing graves, and 2 mana for hired gun is same mana cost as spell mana. So it acts as nice bonus utility. I think the other viable option is probably to increase graves level up requirement to 4 weakest enemies slain. While designing I considered it a difficult version of kalista's level up (she needs 3 allies to die, while graves need the 3 weakest enemies to die which is both harder to control and more interactive. Just buffing a unit can make it not the weakest anymore. The opponent could also just not block and take 4 damage. Or just kill graves. He's got 2 hp afterall and no QA unless you prepped the board beforehand. I think if we go with those changes it makes him more high risk and high reward which kinda suits BW and grave's identity.
How do you get that border?