I don't care what anyone says, khopesh is meta defining. When people have to build their decks with khopesh in mind so they don't get blown out by it then I'd say its a pretty busted card. Now granted, my play group is rather small(only about 4-6),but it pretty much wrecks every other deck except for my Shub deck because it has support destruction in it.

Graham's point the whole time was that Khopesh actually isn't metagame defining. It's a card of average efficiency. Unless you have a guy with Toughness, it's 2 cards for 2 cards. You know what is AT LEAST that efficient usually. Feeding Frenzy! And it even works at Disrupt timing, in the middle of struggles! How freaking obnoxious would that be if you saw it more often from a Cthulhu player? You get chump blocked and then mauled. GG.

Khopesh also can be destroyed right after it's played. Burrowing Beneath before it kills anything? GG. Or let your opponent kill one thing, then destroy Khopesh or drive the creature insane, and you just destroyed 2 cards for 1. GG again!

There are plenty of things that are just as annoying as Khopesh. Master of the Myths is on the same level, though it's also an inefficient card. You limit yourself to 2 domains for deploying things just to have a guaranteed blocker… for most situations.

You know combo is just as annoying as Khopesh? Marcus Jamberg + Pawn Broker + Dimensional Rift/Cursed Skull/Ice Shaft. Being able to wipe the board always from turn 4 on is stupid good, even if it's using inefficient cards. Should we restrict Jamberg now? Or Pawn Broker?

You know what else would be "broken"? The Silver Key + Negotium Parambulens in Tenebris. I am actually planning on building a "for fun" deck around this combo just to be annoying.

My rambling aside, Khopesh is annoying but it can be easily dealt with. So are any of the things I just mentioned as well. Don't hamstring yourself by saying a card is broken and you have to build a deck to specifically combat ONE CARD.

AUCodeMonkey said:

Because it's so hard for casual/beginner players to find a card with Toughness? I don't think you will often see Khopesh used on characters without it, normally even a duffer will catch on to the idea that cheap tough characters or high-toughness characters are the way to go which I hope we can all agree raises the card's efficiency.

Personally I think it's a card you should be aware of and put on your checklist when making a tournament deck. Do I have anything to deal with Khopesh? OK, yes I do, on to the next item. There are things that can take it out, but it you don't have one you could be facing a surgical strike of several wounds being dealt in a targeted manner to your key characters.

Not many things can do that. Most effects only hit a single character. A lot of them are untargeted, allowing the opponent to pick who is affected. Feeding Frenzy requires that they all be at the same story with your character, again you don't get to cherry pick. It's the combination of cherry picking and possible high numbers of wounds being dealt that set the Khopesh apart from many other wounding effects into something it's worth your time to be aware of.

Just don't go overboard is all. If you stuff your deck with too many attachment/support destroying cards then you'll be vulnerable against all the other decks from the lost efficiency. Take some minor precautions if you need to (some deck archetypes may not need to do anything at all), and then get back to general tuning.

kamacausey said:

The Destruction deck type is meta defining. Khopesh is just another link in its near dominance.

Khopesh is strong, but I think ( and the following is heavily dependent on exactly what deck you are playing ) that you have to adjust your playstyle more than you have to adjust your deck build when keeping the Khopesh in mind.

Eric's Syndicate/Hastur deck was heavily geared to wards beating destruction, yet it still went unbeaten by every other deck it faced that day as well. So in a sense, even though his deck was geared to face destruction, you could say that his deck logically defines that local meta, with destruction being much less of a concern.

It all comes down to which deck type faces which other deck type. Some decks will have fits against destruction and have little hope in beating it, while other decks think of it as a nuisance and nothing more. A lot really does depend on matchups.

And matchup is also just one factor in numerous factors that say a deck is good or bad against another. You also have to consider bad or good card draws, how well cards are resourced and what cards follow in the draw, etc. etc.

AUCodeMonkey said:

I laughed hard at Feeding Frenzy! Great analogy! If there was a way to give reputation I would give it for this . Seriously, that was an amazing wrap up.

Carioz said:

His wife is a Cthulhu faction fangirl. So he likely has been stomped by that card making the scenario even more humorous. Then she might lay out a Mutant Spawn ( Soft and Cuddly ) at the end game to scare the piss out of him. GG indeed.

She is quite the Cthulhu fangirl. She hasn't used Mutant Spawn yet, but Shocking Transformation -> Cthuloid Spawn is a different story…

And yes, I hate Feeding Frenzy. I was a pretty heavy Agency fanboy, and then that card changes my attitude considerably. Not to mention Beneath the Mire. Rushers beware!