I think the description for "Greed" should be changed.

[noe]

The current description for this card is "Deal 20 damage to all units." which it literally means as all units including the player's own units; which is unnecessarily vague considering how dangerous it is.

In my experience this kind of extreme self-damaging effect is not a particularly common game mechanic, nor do I recall any cards in the first game that did something like this; and the perspective of the description itself is up for interpretation.

So when I saw the phrase "all units" in a default early game card I encountered on my first run I concluded it must be referring to "all enemy units" since damaging cards are typically directed at enemies; and there's no particular reason to assume a strategy game would just toss an ultra-dangerous self-destructive wipe out card into the player's lap on their first run with such minimal wording.

Well it did, because that's what it is, and that's what happened; it wiped my team and completely ruined my very first run. Such a miserable first experience to have with a game. Like I've not even settled into the system or had time to notice its wording conventions and I've already had an attempt destroyed because I read a first-run default card differently than the developers intended.

I think the card description should be changed to actually say "all friendly and enemy units" so there's no risk of confusion that this very specific highly dangerous damaging card will be affecting their own allies too. I don't see any good reason for why what happened to me should be possible.

Oh and apparently there's an undo button, but the game only saw fit to tutorialize it AFTER the run where that card wiped my team. That's even more annoying.

[Yippo the Clown]

I mean, it's a mistake you only make once, and tbh I figured it was all units when I looked at the card and decided it would be kinda broken if it was only enemies. I get where you're coming from, but there's a tradeoff to be had - precision vs concision in any given instance. Good UI design is full of choices like those.

[Draktok]

They just need to BOLD the ALL part of it and make it all caps :)

That said i agree with the above, 1 cost 20 dmg to enemies + 10 slay would e absurdly busted. That said I think? you might get the 10 gold killing your own units so there's something to be said about greed with some factions feeding you some gold

[jobes]

There are at least 3 other cards that damage or apply status effects to *all* units. Some of them are quite useful, like Inferno Room. Greed is not a bad card if you're not running all 3 floors and it's also helpful to clear out some of your floors for free gold if the boss won't make it to the upper floors.

I do agree though that the wording could be improved. I wiped out a floor accidentally with Greed my first time drawing it, but before my turn ended I thought "what happened to my champion?" and restarted the turn.

[noe]

Originally posted by Yippo the Clown:

I mean, it's a mistake you only make once, and tbh I figured it was all units when I looked at the card and decided it would be kinda broken if it was only enemies. I get where you're coming from, but there's a tradeoff to be had - precision vs concision in any given instance. Good UI design is full of choices like those.

Yeah it's a one-time experience that was completely unnecessary and frustrating; and is caused by a problem that can easily be fixed. I would consider it bad form if the developers refused to tweak a simple bit of text because "well it's only going to happen once".

And there's no reason for a new player to assume the effect being enemy-only would be unrealistically overpowered since a completely new player isn't going to know what the game balancing is actually like.

Some cards in this game have descriptions with five lines of text, where as the full description for Greed is barely three lines of text. Adding three words would not make the Greed description longer than any other description in the game. So bringing up the UI design as a reason for them to not add three words is contradictory to the game you're talking about.

It's a simple and unnecessary issue with a simple solution, add three words; or make the word "all" bold and caps like that other person above mentioned. I definitely don't feel this of all things is worth debating over.

[solthusx]

Re. Cards in MT1 that had this wording: There's Inferno,a Hellhorned that has piercing and does 100 damage to all units on the floor.

[tbloxham]

The underlegion has a card which does 20 damage to everyone, AND gives everyone decay. I just had an awesome go with it, cost reduced and consume removed, duplicated combined with the sap room, on the bottom floor. But you'd better believe noone from my side was standing there!

[n13e86]

When you're hovering the card over the floor, you see its targets highlighted.
Also, the Undo button is right there.

[HouseOfTheRat]

^This.

All cards that damage all units have this wording, so it is consistent. Same way a lot of buff cards can work on enemy units if you want.

[noe]

Originally posted by n13e86:

When you're hovering the card over the floor, you see its targets highlighted.
Also, the Undo button is right there.

You only see the targets it highlights if you're looking at them, I wasn't looking at my allies because I had no reason to be looking at my allies when using a card I thought only applied to enemies; that is the whole point.

As I mentioned in the original post you're literally commenting on, the undo button wasn't tutorialized to me until the run after I encountered Greed; so this point is irrelevant. People can encounter Greed and be screwed over by it right from the beginning before they know an undo button exists, which is what happened to me. That is the whole point.

Originally posted by HouseOfTheRat:

^This.

All cards that damage all units have this wording, so it is consistent. Same way a lot of buff cards can work on enemy units if you want.

Yeah it's only perceivably consistent if you've played the game long enough to encounter the wording repeatedly and see a pattern. As I mentioned in the original post you're commenting on, it was my first run - so obviously I couldn't know the terminology patterns in a new game I had just started playing. Like, again, that is the whole point.


My feedback is for the developers to add three words to an early game card description so that other new players won't have the same bad experience I did of misinterpreting an extremely dangerous effect and getting screwed over before even having an opportunity to settle into the game. Yet I'm still getting pushback - over adding THREE words to a card description for the sake of clarity in a strategy game. Actual proof people will argue over anything, I'm not checking this post again.

[n13e86]

Again, what's your point? You literally have the Undo button.
If you see that a spell does something you didn't like - just click that button. It's right there.

[.//slayer]

As I mentioned in the original post you're literally commenting on, the undo button wasn't tutorialized to me until the run after I encountered Greed; so this point is irrelevant. People can encounter Greed and be screwed over by it right from the beginning before they know an undo button exists, which is what happened to me. That is the whole point.

That's such a niche scenario that it's irrelevant. Like someone above said, it's a mistake that you only make once, and it's your mistake, not the game's.

The current wording is concise and accurate.

[Ellye]

Originally posted by n13e86:

Again, what's your point? You literally have the Undo button.
If you see that a spell does something you didn't like - just click that button. It's right there.

Undo can't undo picking up the spell from the spell selection, thinking it does one thing and only later learning that you were mistaken.

The normal way that most games deal with this would be to bold and captlize the ALL in the card text. Simple and clean.

[Draktok]

Originally posted by Ellye:

Originally posted by n13e86:

Again, what's your point? You literally have the Undo button.
If you see that a spell does something you didn't like - just click that button. It's right there.

Undo can't undo picking up the spell from the spell selection, thinking it does one thing and only later learning that you were mistaken.

The normal way that most games deal with this would be to bold and captlize the ALL in the card text. Simple and clean.

This is correct and everyone arguing it doesn't need to be changed just likes to argue on the internet.

[n13e86]

Originally posted by Draktok:

This is correct and everyone arguing it doesn't need to be changed just likes to argue on the internet.

No, we just don't see it as a problem.
We also pick spells that do what we didn't want sometimes. So what? You can remove the card later, you can just leave unplayed, and so on.
The wording is correct and precise. And it is not an "early game card", because no card is restricted to appearing specifically in early game.

[Conciliator]

Yeah I think a bold/coloring would be fine. I know NOW how it works but I also had to learn the hard way. But it's not that big of a deal b/c once you ♥♥♥♥ it a single time you'll always remember lol