Voodoo Doll | Voodoo Doll

[Werdbooty]

Ya know, I hate this combo. The first time I got hit with it, it took me days to figure out what happened. I thought it was a glitch.

But such is life. I even went ahead and voted against the combo. Wasn't very surprised to see the difference in votes though. I'd say 50+ votes, with only six (including my own) against is a pretty sure thing. Obviously, the community has spoken.

I still think the combo is twisted and should burn in a place better left unmentioned. However, I think the same thing about Adrenaline with, well, just about anything. In fact, I'm sure there are more than a few combos that people abhor. My personal favorite right now is Antimatter plus Liquid Shadow. Deadly when it works.

My point is, have you tried playing with the Voodoo|TU combo? Heh. It's fun. I also enjoying using Fire Elixirs and Aflatoxin on my Voodoo Dolls. Hate it when Voodoo Doll is used that way against me tho. But again, such is life.

I still don't think the damage should carry over on a TU tho. Hrmph.

*wanders off to sulk*

[gavsword]

ok, now it sounds like the only reason you want a nerf is because its good against FGs.
yea the win rate is really bad, but it does win(and lose) fast. and flash, do something for all of us please.
1. Look at the poll
2. Think.
3. Lock this topic.
Im not a mod so i cant force you but for the love of overnotifications, please do that.

Seconded. Please end this conversation, most players agree it's fine as is.

Basically the arguments you are making Flashfire are about how broken this combo is alone, in a vacuum. Seriously look at the decks statistics, the averages and the win rate. ITS NOT BROKEN. LEAVE IT ALONE.

[OldTrees]

I would prefer if the thread were left open but the topic redirected to suggestions on how Voodoo Doll could be phrased clearer (if such phrasing exists)

[Werdbooty]

"Voodoo: if Voodoo Doll survives an attack damage and status are applied to your opponent. Damage is retroactive." (Retroactive meaning the damage is applied again if the creature is copied. The word "Echo" could be used as well, I suppose.)

Retroactive would stop all this nonsense. In fact, I think it could even be introduced as a game mechanic.


...I dunno if this has been mentioned yet (I haven't seen it) but couldn't you just TU your opponent's buffed up Voodoo Doll and kill him with it?

[OldTrees]

"Voodoo: if Voodoo Doll survives an attack damage and status are applied to your opponent. Damage is retroactive."

I like this wording but is just 1 word (retroactive) too long for the normal font.
"If Voodoo Doll survives an attack damage and status are applied to your opponent. Damage is retroactive."
would fit though.

[Werdbooty]

"Voodoo: if Voodoo Doll survives an attack damage and status are applied to your opponent. Damage is retroactive."

I like this wording but is just 1 word (retroactive) too long for the normal font.
"If Voodoo Doll survives an attack damage and status are applied to your opponent. Damage is retroactive."
would fit though.

Only if "Voodoo" is moved down to the passive table, along with Airborne.

Or better yet:


I think that clunky "survives an attack" can be done away with easily enough. Plug the card so that any damage and status going to the opponent from Voodoo Doll isn't resolved until the end of the turn. That way, if I annihilate the Doll with over 9000 damage, it isn't blasted directly back in my face right away. And I won't ever see that 9000+ damage because it can't very well be applied at the end of the turn if Voodoo Doll is no longer around to do so. Follow?

[Krahhl]

Then people will complain about going WTF? when they do hit a voodoo with 9000+ damage, the doll dies, and nothing happens. Many are arguing that the card has to specify exactly what it will do, so I think it should be mentioned that it has to survive.

"If this creature survives an attack, damage and status are inflicted to your opponent. Damage is retroactive." would be fine, and "Voodoo:" could simply be removed from the text and only listed under passive skills.

[gavsword]

I like the "if it survives the attack" clause, and it triggering at instant speed. I'll agree it could use the retroactive damage part, but that's it. Otherwise keep it as is.

[Werdbooty]

Then people will complain about going WTF? when they do hit a voodoo with 9000+ damage, the doll dies, and nothing happens. Many are arguing that the card has to specify exactly what it will do, so I think it should be mentioned that it has to survive.

"If this creature survives an attack, damage and status are inflicted to your opponent. Damage is retroactive." would be fine, and "Voodoo:" could simply be removed from the text and only listed under passive skills.

The only reason status and damage would be moved to the end of the turn would be to clean up the text.

It makes no difference that I can see if the damage done to a Voodoo Doll is applied at end of turn or instantly...other than to clean up the text.

Example:

"I do 9000+ damage to your Voodoo Doll! It dies because it can't take that much damage. Nothing happens because it died."

That's how it works now anyway, I think.

More concise: Power up your Voodoo Doll, he takes all that lovely damage, you TU for the kill and you...end your turn and the damage is applied. Still no difference, other than dropping the "survive" bit. The point is, the damage & status effects are only ever applied as long as Voodoo Doll lives. Unless I'm missing something.

The reason the wording is sticky is due to the retroactive, or rather, the lack of the word "copy." Technically, ALL damage and status effects done to Voodoo Doll are retroactively applied to the Opponent. I simply chose the word because retro=behind and active=active. I felt people would instinctively get the concept that damage comes back  again. Fine. But it still doesn't state specifically that the damage & status are retroactive when copied.

I like your wording, it's close, but not quite. The idea here is to be clear and concise. I know "Damage is retroactive" is like, murky-clear, and "Retroactive when copied" is a little closer. Ideally, I'd like to see "If Voodoo Doll is the target of a spell or ability, any damage and status effects are applied to your Opponent at the end of the turn. If Voodoo Doll is copied, any damage previously dealt to Voodoo Doll is retroactive."

Now there's a mouthful. Ugh. I don't know, I don't play the card often enough. What do you guys think? That's what the forum's for, right?


PS - This is eerily reminiscent of Empathic|Feral Bond.

[TheCrazyMango]

If all that this thread is about now is how voodoo doll works, could you guys move this to the voodoo doll thread? these notifications are annoying.

[gavsword]

Then people will complain about going WTF? when they do hit a voodoo with 9000+ damage, the doll dies, and nothing happens. Many are arguing that the card has to specify exactly what it will do, so I think it should be mentioned that it has to survive.

"If this creature survives an attack, damage and status are inflicted to your opponent. Damage is retroactive." would be fine, and "Voodoo:" could simply be removed from the text and only listed under passive skills.

The only reason status and damage would be moved to the end of the turn would be to clean up the text.

It makes no difference that I can see if the damage done to a Voodoo Doll is applied at end of turn or instantly...other than to clean up the text.

Example:

"I do 9000+ damage to your Voodoo Doll! It dies because it can't take that much damage. Nothing happens because it died."

That's how it works now anyway, I think.

More concise: Power up your Voodoo Doll, he takes all that lovely damage, you TU for the kill and you...end your turn and the damage is applied. Still no difference, other than dropping the "survive" bit. The point is, the damage & status effects are only ever applied as long as Voodoo Doll lives. Unless I'm missing something.

The reason the wording is sticky is due to the retroactive, or rather, the lack of the word "copy." Technically, ALL damage and status effects done to Voodoo Doll are retroactively applied to the Opponent. I simply chose the word because retro=behind and active=active. I felt people would instinctively get the concept that damage comes back  again. Fine. But it still doesn't state specifically that the damage & status are retroactive when copied.

I like your wording, it's close, but not quite. The idea here is to be clear and concise. I know "Damage is retroactive" is like, murky-clear, and "Retroactive when copied" is a little closer. Ideally, I'd like to see "If Voodoo Doll is the target of a spell or ability, any damage and status effects are applied to your Opponent at the end of the turn. If Voodoo Doll is copied, any damage previously dealt to Voodoo Doll is retroactive."

Now there's a mouthful. Ugh. I don't know, that's what the forum's for, right?


This is eerily reminiscent of Empathic|Feral Bond.

Feels unneeded, doesn't change the text that much. Also increase rate of EM due to the fact that they would trigger after bond (though they aren't in Voodoo decks) and SoG. And yeah we should probably move this thread.

[Krahhl]

The only reason status and damage would be moved to the end of the turn would be to clean up the text.

It makes no difference that I can see if the damage done to a Voodoo Doll is applied at end of turn or instantly...other than to clean up the text.

Example:

"I do 9000+ damage to your Voodoo Doll! It dies because it can't take that much damage. Nothing happens because it died."

That's how it works now anyway, I think.

That's not really how it works. With what you are saying, you could lightning a voodoo 4 times, causing it to die, and not take any damage since it's gone by the end of the turn. However, you should actually take 15 damage because the voodoo does survive the first three lightnings.

Also, in decks that do use gravity pull + voodoo, what happens when your gravity pulled voodoo has 20 health, your opponent has 40 damage in creatures, and both you and your opponent have 10 health? Assuming your opponent's creatures don't do 20 damage each or anything massive, your opponent would die after 10 damage worth of creatures have attacked. If you don't calculate this until the end of the turn, your voodoo would die and then you would die before your opponent.

The idea here is to be clear and concise. I know "Damage is retroactive" is like, murky-clear, and "Retroactive when copied" is a little closer. Ideally, I'd like to see "If Voodoo Doll is the target of a spell or ability, any damage and status effects are applied to your Opponent at the end of the turn. If Voodoo Doll is copied, any damage previously dealt to Voodoo Doll is retroactive."

I agree that "damage is retroactive" isn't very clear, but "retroactive when copied" doesn't do it either. It would imply that statuses are also copied. They actually are, but only to the new voodoo, not to your opponent, while damage is. "Damage is retroactive when copied" seems to hit, but it's too long.

The problem with your wording, aside from not fitting on the card and above-mentioned "end of the turn", is that it may spark up more problems with people who argue that healing is simply negative damage, and BB'ing or healing a voodoo doesn't increase your opponent's health.

If people really enjoy arguing, they could even say that only some status effects are applied to your opponent. Immortality and adrenaline are not. But that's an entirely different part of the card from the TU effect we're discussing.


No complaints about moving the thread. Most of it didn't even have anything to do with nerfing anyway; people did not argue that it was overpowered with TU, but simply unpredictable from the card text alone.