Relentless savagery is op

[FDL]

I prefer the bots that want to help me to make 87$/h working from home.

[The MiddleAgedNerd]

Card is good. Good with vess. Kinda made for vess and ele it seems. Not op at all. Thread should be closed. Pointless

[Gondorian]

Jacqui, if you're going to create these threads, give something to the discussion other than saying that it is op.

+1

[bobrossw]

I do think it's OP - but it's kind of pointless to say that now...it's less OP than some other stuff out there. People will see that this card is OP once some of that other stuff gets nerfed down a few pegs.

[Arcanes]

omg again?
Now any good card is OP if you lose a duel? xD
This card is good, just that.

[jacqui]

danae, if you're going to comment in these threads, give something to the discussion other than saying give something to the discussion.

Since it is not readily apparent, the reason the thread exists is because GDC asked for cards that are op but are overshadowed by cards that are simply more op and thus do not receive any attention. Since we already know those highly talked about cards will be nerfed, the focus in turn ought to shift on the lesser op but still op cards.
bobross hit the nail on the head.

[Gondorian]

danae, if you're going to comment in these threads, give something to the discussion other than saying give something to the discussion.

Since it is not readily apparent, the reason the thread exists is because GDC asked for cards that are op but are overshadowed by cards that are simply more op and thus do not receive any attention. Since we already know those highly talked about cards will be nerfed, the focus in turn ought to shift on the lesser op but still op cards.
bobross hit the nail on the head.

Thanks for trying to do what I asked for, but you should really give some clues as to why you think a card is OP if you're going to make a thread for it. That should then lead to more constructive discussion, right?

[bobrossw]

I'll give it a go - it's a +2 attack buff for 2, that's solid to begin with. It's on par with mindless ferocity - a card that was used in SF occasionally in Vess decks. But it doesn't have mindless ferocity's drawback, instead it has an extra benefit.

Now one might argue - oh no, it's on par with mindless ferocity because only claw allies can use it.

That argument is built on the assumption that there is something wrong with claw attack allies - therefore they deserve a card that is more powerful than other types of allies.
Possible things that could be wrong with a group of cards:
1 - they may have limited capabilities between them, leaving some important strategic hole that they are unable to fill well -i.e. a fatal flaw. - I don't know of any fatal flaws for claw attack allies. I know they're very common among shadow and that many great allies including wulven, many homuncs and many ravagers have claw attack.
2 - there might not be enough of them to field a competitive deck.
3 - they may lack tribal support that other groups of allies have. - This is a weird sort of argument and in itself represents a sort of power creep. If tribal support is necessary to make a card good, then a whole lot of other cards just got a lot worse.

So if someone can demonstrate to me that claw attack allies suck in some important way, then I might accept that giving them a card that is better than comparable, already playable cards is warranted.

Another way to look at this is to compare it to other class cards. The easiest one that comes to mind is For Unaxio. For Unaxio does something similar, and is probably on-par in terms of power level in comparison with its cost. On the plus side, for unaxio gets recast every turn, fueling cards like CoF. On the other hand, for unaxio needs to be cast every turn, which costs resources. In the end, I'd say they're roughly on-par in terms of power/cost.

The problem with this is that For Unaxo! is a class card for a class that specializes in attachments. Relentless savagery is a faction card. Therefore relentless savagery should not be on-par with that sort of class card, anymore than humans should get their own version of mind control.

Lastly you can look at it in terms of its effect on the game. I think it is making vess remarkably more consistent and it combos well with the wulven tribe, that also make vess very consistent. The combination has the potential to make Vess OP.

"But how can you say Vess is OP!? Look at twilight!!!" I know...hence my earlier statement. This card is OP on paper, it may cause some problems for the game, but those problems won't be felt until Garina and Twilight are nerfed...so we may as well wait and see.

[Umbra7]

I'll give it a go - it's a +2 attack buff for 2, that's solid to begin with. It's on par with mindless ferocity - a card that was used in SF occasionally in Vess decks. But it doesn't have mindless ferocity's drawback, instead it has an extra benefit.

Now one might argue - oh no, it's on par with mindless ferocity because only claw allies can use it.

That argument is built on the assumption that there is something wrong with claw attack allies - therefore they deserve a card that is more powerful than other types of allies.
Possible things that could be wrong with a group of cards:
1 - they may have limited capabilities between them, leaving some important strategic hole that they are unable to fill well -i.e. a fatal flaw. - I don't know of any fatal flaws for claw attack allies. I know they're very common among shadow and that many great allies including wulven, many homuncs and many ravagers have claw attack.
2 - there might not be enough of them to field a competitive deck.
3 - they may lack tribal support that other groups of allies have. - This is a weird sort of argument and in itself represents a sort of power creep. If tribal support is necessary to make a card good, then a whole lot of other cards just got a lot worse.

So if someone can demonstrate to me that claw attack allies suck in some important way, then I might accept that giving them a card that is better than comparable, already playable cards is warranted.

Another way to look at this is to compare it to other class cards. The easiest one that comes to mind is For Unaxio. For Unaxio does something similar, and is probably on-par in terms of power level in comparison with its cost. On the plus side, for unaxio gets recast every turn, fueling cards like CoF. On the other hand, for unaxio needs to be cast every turn, which costs resources. In the end, I'd say they're roughly on-par in terms of power/cost.

The problem with this is that For Unaxo! is a class card for a class that specializes in attachments. Relentless savagery is a faction card. Therefore relentless savagery should not be on-par with that sort of class card, anymore than humans should get their own version of mind control.

Lastly you can look at it in terms of its effect on the game. I think it is making vess remarkably more consistent and it combos well with the wulven tribe, that also make vess very consistent. The combination has the potential to make Vess OP.

"But how can you say Vess is OP!? Look at twilight!!!" I know...hence my earlier statement. This card is OP on paper, it may cause some problems for the game, but those problems won't be felt until Garina and Twilight are nerfed...so we may as well wait and see.

I define overpowered as a card/group of cards when used make it severely hard (next to impossible) for a large number of decks and playstyles to overcome. They give you an advantage over a majority of opponents with few counters to oppose you. Under this definition, relentless savagery is not overpowered. In this currently aggro dominant meta, yes that +2 attack constantly rolling around is going to do really well. However control decks wont have as much trouble with it. And there are a good number of common ways to bypass the return to hand effect
Retreat
Rest for the weary (admitadly not common yet.)
Attachment removal
(potentially) bad santa
Transmogrification curse

Relentless savagery has a lot of really nice combos of course. Place it on cobra demon, and he becomes a very viable threat. Eternal troll can get a quick 4 attack in in an enemy, without too much worry of tempo loss. Turns feasterling into a huge powerhouse. And then you have the haste wulves. But while these are great combos, it is hard to argue that its overpowered when you still have a large number of workarounds (the eternal troll combo i will accept as potentially overpowered. But thats more troll than savagery...). For starters, the opponent needs to have an ally alive long enough to gain effect from savagery, which in the current meta basically means you need to go first.

But were it to get nerfed anyways, it would likely kill the card no matter what they do to it. It is currently at what is likely going to be its most balanced state (in terms of cost/benefit, not necessarily gameplay wise.) it could be changed to a 1cc +1 attack to claw damage allies with the return to hand effect, and that might still retain some usage, however it would limit the amount of decks that can really benefit from by a lot, making it unworthy of fitting into a deck. Upping the cost to 3cc would definitely kill it, unless more effects were added. However adding additional effects might just make vess and wulven tribe decks overpowered
Id rather the card stay as it is for now. If it does turn out to be overpowered, its not going to be so easily determined until much later.

[Rajawali]

Bobross explain it very well (thumbs up!)

I'll say I like the loopability of this card, but if it must stay in the Shadow Faction Card withouth making it OP then how about change it like this :
"Attach to target friendly ally. That ally has +1 attack. While that ally has claw attack, Relentless Savagery is returned to its owner's hand when that ally is killed."