Duelyst Forums

S rank budget Faie (Jan 2019)

#9

Good choice, it would still be under 2k spirit :slight_smile:

Just for your information:

I added a short list of good rares to craft for L’Kian to the wiki:

Golem Metallurgist (for any Golem deck)
Manaforger (for Arcanyst decks)
Flameblood Warlock (for many Aggro or Burn decks)
Celebrant (for any Golem / Swarm deck)
Zyx (for Swarm decks)
Azure Horn Shaman (for Maehv decks)
Abjudicator (for spell heavy combo decks)
Cannon of Mechaz0r (for Mech decks)
Sword of Mechaz0r (for Mech decks)
Prismatic Illusionist (for Arcanyst decks)
Sojourner (solid card draw option if you don't have / like Spelljammer)
Lightbender (great dispel, sees play in many different decks)
Owlbeast Sage (essential to any Arcanyst deck)
Blue Conjurer (great in Arcanyst decks)
Grimes (good card, can be game winning, a lot of value for 6 mana)
EMP (often a great answer to many decks)
5 Likes
#10

Do berserker next

Make the Fenrir proud

Great deck, definitely looks like a fun mid-range/combo that would really catch players off guard from the standard burn package with some tech cards thrown in.

3 Likes
#11

this deck is a lot of fun, and competitive. feels really balanced and sharp. 10/10

2 Likes
#12

btw, if you put mark of solitude on a bloodsworn gambler, he can’t target your general with the first his. the following hits can target him.

2 Likes
#13

What? That’s insane :smiley:

2 Likes
#14

Now that sounds like a Gambler’s bug :open_mouth:

3 Likes
#15

AFAIK, it’s the same for ass protocol.

2 Likes
#16

Mark of Solitude does not work like Protocol. Protocol prevents you from directly attacking the enemy general and nullifies any damage you would deal to the enemy general indirectly (like splash damage from Thunderhorn/Flamewreath). Mark of solitude only prevents you from attacking the general but does not nullify any damage you would deal to them (you can still damage them with things like Frenzy or Thunderhorn).

4 Likes
#17

What you point out about the difference between AssProt and MoS is right, but just for the record Gambler should never be able to deal direct attack damage to the general if effected by MoS.
Since it’s ability states that he “has a 50% chance to attack again, attacking a random enemy”, the first and extra times he attacks targets should then always ignore the Enemy General, if he has MoS.

1 Like
#18

The problem here is that only Bloodsworn Gambler’s first attack actually counts as an attack, any attacks after that one aren’t technically attacks and don’t follow the rules of attacks (i.e. after the first attack nobody will counter Gambler even if they are in range, attacks ignoring provoke and pando’s ability, Gambler continuing to shoot down enemies even when he is already dead ect.).

2 Likes
#19

Wow! How one could archieve that?

1 Like
#20

I don’t think that’s correct as the text of Gambler says: “Every time this minion ATTACKS he has a 50% to ATTACK again, ATTACKING a random enemy”.
All the damage it deals with its ability after every first attack are also attacks.
Call it spaghetti code, call it a bug, but it’s definitely not working according to the rules.
Applying MoS should still prevent it from attacking the General, if we’d go by the rules.

@terrarius: The action of attacking should work according the rules (of attack), but surely BG plays by his own rules :grin:

1 Like
#21

BG playing by the rules ?:joy:

4 Likes
#22

How about: “Whenever this minion attacks, it has a 50% chance to FIGHT a random enemy.”

Perfect fix. :wink:

5 Likes
#23

I’ve always considered “fight” to be a symmetric process, so probably not the best word to be used in this case.

I got the joke, btw :wink:

5 Likes
#24

Drop an Ironcliffe next to Gambler, attack Ironcliffe with Gambler. If RNG is on your side the 0 health gambler will proceed to shoot every other enemy on the field (this is also a good example of Gambler’s consecutive attacks ignoring provoke).

This isn’t spaghetti code nor is it a bug, this is the result of CPG giving cards poor wording and using the same word to define different effects. Gambler isn’t the only example of this, Sirocco and Ebon Ox also share this quality.

Ideally Gambler’s text would be: “Whenever this deals damage during your turn, it has a 50% chance to deal damage equal to its attack to a random enemy”. This would help prevent confusion from most of the interactions with Gambler but would be much wordier than the current text.

5 Likes
#25

This solution is almost perfect. The only issue I find is when you summon Gambler when Ox is online. The 3 damage dealt to a random enemy due to the Destiny still counts as Gambler dealing the damage.

3 Likes
#26

Looks like I indeed missed the interaction with Ox :facepalm: That means the proper description of how Gambler works would be: “Whenever this minion attacks, it has a 50% chance to deal damage equal to its attack to a random enemy, every time it does so it has a 50% chance to do it again” that just sounds terrible.

Anybody have a better idea how to properly word Gambler’s effect?

2 Likes
#27

We don’t know if it’s indeed a wrong wording or if the wording is correct but those specific interactions (keeping on shooting after technical death, attacking generals while Mark of Solitude is on) are actual bugs.
Surely there’s something wrong with the card, and people complained about it since forever (and who knows when things will get fixed…).

1 Like
#28

@boronian was this interasction known/on the wiki?

1 Like