Under this line of thought Boiling Armor should also be reclassified. I still think Touch of Death should remain a magic attack, it is just different from every other melee attack. The closest is Devastating Blow which depends on revealed cards. I am surprised you didn't step Path of Knives up to Silver and not sure if Cone of Cold should be stepped up to Gold. Of course none of this matters as long as penetrating doesn't bypass Toughness.
I consider forced discards to be attacks. Actually, the closest card to Touch Of Death is Punishing Strike (+3 dam, -pene). But Penetrating does have synergy with punishing effects (someone holding a lot of cards likely has some armors), so I could make ToD a Silver+ card. Do you want Path Of Knives to be Silver? Thinking about it, it probably is worth that in SP. Cone Of Cold is the only range 6 Cone available to players, and is theoretically capable of encumbering 48 chars. And the damage is low enough that most people don't mind if they hit their own chars with it (assuming anyone using CoC also uses WoW and team moves).
Path of Knives is only good in SP because the AI is stupid. Cone of Cold is really not worth gold, let alone silver. It's another situational card, yes you can encumber multiple characters, but it is difficult to play without hitting your allies or even hitting more than 1 target. And the damage isn't what matters- it's the 2/2 Encumber. I am curious about the viability of several Arcane cards if they are no longer attacks. Could it lead to abuse with Fright? Possibly.
That would be the primary consequence (also unaffected by Cowardly), though they would still be stopped by Defensiveness and Stun. For comparison, the current Utility cards are the TKs, Whirls, Cleanses, and Purges. Oh, and the main reason I want Maze reclassified is because Utilities don't auto-target.
I had made a couple notes about armor and wanted to mention it on the forum, but after searching to see if anyone else had mentioned this in particular, oh wow, Kalin has gone above and beyond for organizing, etc., in this post and another. Also, others have created threads about general balancing acts. I'm still a little torn between being a necrosurfer or creating a whole new thread for this one little thought here, but .. it seems on-topic, and this thread is one of the more recent, etc. etc. etc. on with the show. Armor. Not the special ones. Not really caring about rarity, either. I'm just weirded out by this quality scale. I went ahead and included rarity for this reason: Maybe some cards were given lower costs when made rarer, at least way back in the day? I can't say I believe this consistently plays out, but I was just trying to throw a bone to the reason behind actual rarity vs. stated design wishes. Don't worry, I know BM has acknowledged the system got wonky somewhere. I'm not trying to rub anything in. Sorry. $:^ } Just seeing if any correlation could play out with these particular cards. It's a "maybe" at best. Code: Name Armor Quality Rarity 4+ Keep all Wr Pr Wz Mail 2 + D D D D Uncommon Solid Mail 3 B B C D Common Crafted Mail 4 + B B B C Uncommon Enchanted Mail 5 AA AA AA A Common Here's a much simplified version of that chart: Code: Name Quality Mail 1 Solid 6 Crafted 7 Enchanted 12 That's just some really crazy disparity there. Mail ... +5 ... Solid ... +1 ... Crafted ... +5 ... Enchanted Interestingly enough, if we wanted to say rarity originally had something to do with cost, then going from Common to Uncommon consistently (within this tiny set of cards) lowers the cost by two levels. Pretending this were true, and ignoring all the class differences for more simplicity's sake (not to mention time's sake), this is how everything would look at Common: Code: Name Quality Mail C 3 Bronze Solid Mail B 6 Silver Crafted Mail A 9 Gold Enchanted Mail AA 12 Green ...and this is how everything would look at Uncommon: Code: Name Quality Mail D+ 1 Paper+ Solid Mail C+ 4 Bronze+ Crafted Mail B+ 7 Silver+ Enchanted Mail A+ 10 Gold+ Interesting, hm? Exactly 3 between each one. Of course, once again, I'm not saying, "I know rarity affects quality cost." I could offer the same charts without claims of rarity. Still interesting, hm?
