If you are a warrior and you see a healing light coming your way, you are not going to put up your ice shield to block it, especially when you have a priest on your team and know all the priestly moves. Please stop blocks from affecting enemy positive support spells like heal, inspiration, etc. So someone has a shield, and your warrior has an obliterating 17 dmg hit, and you are going to heal their shielded person to try to get rid of the shield, or cast inspiration on them, so you can attack them with the damage dealer? No, shouldn't work. Blocks should only work against damaging effects or something
This poll fails due to bias, no matter what opinion I might and might not have. (also, I'd vote I'd disagree if possible - but just because I know how the cards work. If I didn't, I might have felt differently)
Honestly it just a function of the game. The devs had choice to make it one way or another. If you want a roll playing anwser to the problem its this. Magic energy from the enemy is rushing at you. Do you block it or not. Most people are going to say I raise my shield. Since its a function of the game just play around it. I used this feature in MP and during SP all the time. Yay bungled heal! Its not hard to play around and depending on how the system was coded it could interfere with other mechanics if changed. Personally I like the current way it works.
Woah, there is a Pengwin AND an angry penguin? Frightening Let's remove realism. We're playing a game with cards, where was realism to begin with? And I think it creates an interesting tactical decision with some of the "heal everyone within 3" cards. Do I risk healing the enemy if the block fails? Does he/she have a block?
I've seen someone called theReal Penguin or similar in mp as well. Funny as heck - I thought I was original
No, what you see is a bolt of holy energy coming at you. You don't know it's a heal instead of damage. You block it. Blocks are damn strong. It's not really much different to the shield stopping 2 dmg instead of 20 - you wouldn't block a crappy blow with a one-use shield. It's just how the game works. Plan for it best you can.
You're still the #1 Pengw1n! Concerning the original thread, not all cards are clearly good or bad. I've killed more than a few enemies with Misguided Heal, Unholy Frenzy, and even Unholy Wellspring. And if I had any Savage Curses, I'd use them as armor destruction.
As Angry Penguin pointed out, the 'realism' of this comes from the fact that the character doesn't know what kind of spell it is until they've already blocked it. So there you go. That's exactly how blocking spells works in real life. From a gameplay point of view it adds some tactical depth. It's possible to deliberately fish for enemy blocks by casting weak spells on them. You may not have wanted to block the heal card, but the player who used the heal card on you probably did want you to block it! Furthermore, sometimes it's unclear whether a card is a 'good' card or a 'bad' card. For example Soothing Darkness could be very helpful or very harmful depending on the situation. So if blocks only worked on 'bad' cards, then should Soothing Darkness be blocked or not? There are heaps of other examples too. Unholy Energy, Savage Curse, and even generally helpful cards like Accelerated Thought. The current rule is that characters will always try to block enemy cards, and they'll never try to block ally's cards. That's a very simple and clear cut rule with no source of confusion about what cards should and shouldn't be blocked. I think the rule is great in that it adds significant tactical depth without adding any complexity to the rules. I think depth vs complexity is the key to designing good strategy games. It's generally a bad thing to add complexity to the game if it doesn't significant increase the depth of possible viable strategies . This particular rule change you're suggesting for Card Hunter would not only make the game more complex (in that block would work differently for different cards), but it would actually reduce the depth of strategy. Finally, I dislike that your poll says "fix this?" If you want to have a serious poll then you shouldn't use a loaded question like that. And not only is the question loaded, but the available responses are unbalanced as well.
For all the reasons stated in this thread and the dozens of other threads asking the same question, I disagree with the OP.
