High Priest Thekal-Molten Giant exploit in wild

Play Mode Discussion
I believe this is not intentional after seeing the naga sea witch nerf.

There are currently 3 decks using this exploit: Prince thekal on turn 3 usually leaves players with 1 health and 29 armor, and then they could play molten giants for 0 mana.

There are murloc decks, pirate decks that don't even use this as a main weapon, but it's that OP it would be added to ANY aggro deck from now on.

I've had a few matches with a turn 4-5 where players summoned 2 giants, combined with the already strong 3/4 body of thekal.

Molten Giants should read "costs 1 less for each(combined): health OR armor lost".

No other class can cheat out an 8/8 so quickly aside from a warlock that takes a lot of damage in the process and gives up turns 1-3.
Unlike Naga sea witch back then it's just too inconsistent to call it OP.
Just yet another cheat out of minions for hearthstone
Differences with Naga:
  • Legendary card means you have a single activator
  • You can only do this with two giants, a opposed to filling a board (barring minion duplication effects, but I can't think of any)
  • Only applies to Paladin, as opposed to having N classes all using the same combo
  • And if they don’t draw Thekal, those two giants are totally useless cards. In an aggro deck.

    It’s a highroll opportunity, but not a very good one. I’d be amazed if it actually made the deck better, despite the strength it can sometimes pull off. I’d bet you’d be better off with Sea Giant.
    What exactly is the difference between this and even lock having Mountain Giants turn 3?
    02/01/2019 04:51 AMPosted by Mand
    And if they don’t draw Thekal, those two giants are totally useless cards. In an aggro deck.

    It’s a highroll opportunity, but not a very good one. I’d be amazed if it actually made the deck better, despite the strength it can sometimes pull off. I’d bet you’d be better off with Sea Giant.


    So far it's great for me. With 2 Call to Arms and Divine Favor you're quite likely to find Thekal in a reasonable time, and he's just fire and forget type of synergy - whenever you get him, you drop him and voila, Giants are free from on now. Also whenever I play Wild, I find most opponents being Priests/Warlocks, and they tend to keep big hand, making Divine Favor obscenely powerful. I think the combo's doing great job there, and might be a mainstay in any Wild Paladin deck that's not Odd or Even.

    It's a highroll opportunity that reminds me a bit of Patches package. 3 card package for insane tempo play.

    02/01/2019 05:28 AMPosted by Underman
    What exactly is the difference between this and even lock having Mountain Giants turn 3?


    You sacrifice no tempo for it, ideally. You can still curve out with 1, 2 and drop Thekal + 2 Giants on turn 3. And Divine Favor later for reload. When it highrolls, it can highroll really hard.
    I understand the inconsistency debate of not drawing Thekal.

    It is a fact that a slower, weaker deck existed 2 months ago and everyone were laughing about it, but it has since been fine tuned to draw quickly.
    It already makes up the majority of paladins in the meta.

    Let's stress the deck mechanics:
    1. There are two call to arms in the deck.
    2. Most small minions are taunt with divine shield/drawing/murlocs that would re-appear late game (stall anyone?)
    3. Divine favor exists in paladin, it usually draws 3-6 cards by turn 4-5 (depending on the matchup).

    This deck could outdraw ANY other deck aside from Mechathun Druid (maybe, if it survives).
    The drawing mechanics means it's very unlikely to not face a Giant by turn 5 without paying any "sacrifice" like warlocks do when they summon their mountain giants.

    I've probably had 30-40 matchups against the deck, there wasn't ANY game where I didn't face a giant by turn 5, majority of times was turn 3-4 (had a few turn 2's as well).
    02/01/2019 05:40 AMPosted by Rozenkranc
    You sacrifice no tempo for it, ideally. You can still curve out with 1, 2 and drop Thekal + 2 Giants on turn 3. And Divine Favor later for reload. When it highrolls, it can highroll really hard.

    Yeah, ok I can see it.

    So basically it's stronger but also way less consistent since you need a legendary and the giant(s) with less card draw opportunity vs just the giant(s) with the possibility of drawing an extra card every turn.
    02/01/2019 02:02 AMPosted by TheGreatGoku
    I believe this is not intentional


    When an interaction can be spotted by an average player in thirty seconds or less, it's a safe bet that the developers and playtesters were also able to spot it.

    Also, Naga Sea Witch was intentional as well. The devs liked that deck. They only nerfed it in the end because the playerbase disagreed vehemently.
    02/01/2019 07:20 AMPosted by Slickriptide
    02/01/2019 02:02 AMPosted by TheGreatGoku
    I believe this is not intentional


    When an interaction can be spotted by an average player in thirty seconds or less, it's a safe bet that the developers and playtesters were also able to spot it.


    One part of me wants to agree, but the other part wants to remind you of the interaction between Jan'alai and Brann. I mean, that was obvious and they didn't even test it.
    02/01/2019 04:51 AMPosted by Mand
    And if they don’t draw Thekal, those two giants are totally useless cards. In an aggro deck.

    It’s a highroll opportunity, but not a very good one. I’d be amazed if it actually made the deck better, despite the strength it can sometimes pull off. I’d bet you’d be better off with Sea Giant.
    but highroll isnt fun to face when you just auto lose, look at barnes, you could argue hes inconsistent also.

    How many highroll situations is too much? Do we just allow every deck to do this in the future?
    02/01/2019 07:55 AMPosted by Pißwasser

    One part of me wants to agree, but the other part wants to remind you of the interaction between Jan'alai and Brann.


    In a world where Anduin can generate a full board of Ragnaros on a good day, what makes you think that the devs missed a double-Ragnaros by Jaina? I'd have to imagine that EVERY battlecry ever invented gets viewed through the "What does Brann do to this?" lens at least once.
    02/01/2019 08:02 AMPosted by Slickriptide
    In a world where Anduin can generate a full board of Ragnaros on a good day, what makes you think that the devs missed a double-Ragnaros by Jaina?

    The fact that on day 1, litteraly everyone that played a Jan'Alai on a board that had a Brann crashed the game?
    02/01/2019 08:09 AMPosted by Underman
    02/01/2019 08:02 AMPosted by Slickriptide
    In a world where Anduin can generate a full board of Ragnaros on a good day, what makes you think that the devs missed a double-Ragnaros by Jaina?

    The fact that on day 1, litteraly everyone that played a Jan'Alai on a board that had a Brann crashed the game?


    This.

    Looks like Slickriptide forgot about that bug that caused the game to crash.
    02/01/2019 08:15 AMPosted by Pißwasser
    02/01/2019 08:09 AMPosted by Underman
    ...
    The fact that on day 1, litteraly everyone that played a Jan'Alai on a board that had a Brann crashed the game?


    This.

    Looks like Slickriptide forgot about that bug that caused the game to crash.


    I don't know coding, at all, so genuine question - how would this lead to the conclusion that they missed the interaction? Does not testing it mean they weren't aware of it?
    02/01/2019 04:00 PMPosted by Jezq
    02/01/2019 08:15 AMPosted by Pißwasser
    ...

    This.

    Looks like Slickriptide forgot about that bug that caused the game to crash.


    I don't know coding, at all, so genuine question - how would this lead to the conclusion that they missed the interaction? Does not testing it mean they weren't aware of it?


    that would be worse than not testing it at all. assuming it will work 'coz reasons is (almost) acceptable, launching the game with a known bug that crashes the game isnt. it doesnt take a rocket scientist to know that janalai would be tried with brann by wild players so knowingly going live with a game breaking bug is negligence.
    I actually HAD forgotten about that, but I was questioning it because that bug is a non-sequitur in a discussion about whether a gameplay interaction is obvious or not.

    At some point, they tested Jan'alai and at some point the script broke, and there was a disconnect the testing of the game infrastructure. That's a different thing entirely from having all the devs forget that Brann existed in the context of Jan'alai, and never envisioning a Mage with two copies of Ragnaros on the board, which is what @TheGreatGoku is suggesting about Thekal and Molten Giant when he labels it an "exploit".

    Even if literally nobody at Blizzard actually put Jan'alai and Brann together onto the board at the same time, ever, before Rastakhan's Rumble was release, I'm certain that several people at least thought about the implications of Jan'alai + Brann from a gameplay perspective. Likewise, with Thekal and Molten Giant. It's so glaringly obvious a combo that it's virtually impossible for it to be an unintended "exploit".
    Common you are calling this combo mana cheating?

    you need to have the Legendary Thekal in hand and a mountain giant.
    Sometimes the mountain giants stay in hand for the entire game, it is a high risk high reward.

    If you want to compare:
    Even Warlock - 3/4 mana mountain giant.
    Even Shaman - 0 mana 5/5 taunt, 4 mana 7/7, Very easy to use with Sea Giants.
    Big Priest - Barnes + resurrect spells - big cheat.
    Cubelock - Voidlord and Cube strategies, OP.

    So, comparing to that, the Molten Giant + Thekal Combo is nothing and inconsistent.

    Join the Conversation

    Return to Forum