Talk:Spell

From Hearthstone Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Missing[edit source]

The list is missing Imp-losion — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.149.90.176 (talkcontribs) 10:44, 10 December 2014‎

Thanks, I've fixed the issue. -- Taohinton (talk) 01:55, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello! I think this list is missing some spell-related cards such as: Counterspell, Spellbender and Preparation. If you are agree, tell me so I'll add them. Thanks! FeliasSnape (talk) 01:48, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Those all sound like eligible candidates to me :) Others may be missing as well.
The tag can be added through the {{Card infobox}} template at the top of the page (you have to edit to see it). Just make sure |tags= includes Spell-related - you can add |tags if it's missing. Check out Millhouse Manastorm for an example. -- Taohinton (talk) 20:38, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Succesfully added! And I had to edit the Spell page with no changes just to see the changes, but all went perfectly. Thank you so much for letting me make the changes! ^^ FeliasSnape (talk) 20:51, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Loatheb seems to be missing as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.145.28.238 (talkcontribs) 20:25, 1 September 2016‎
Loatheb is a wild-format card, not a standard-format card, so it's not included in these lists by default (otherwise the lists would just grow and grow forever when they keep adding new cards). If you scroll past the standard cards and click to expand the Wild list, you'll see Loatheb there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerodast (talkcontribs) 02:56, 2 September 2016‎

Layout of effects with two steps[edit source]

I'm trying to explicit on individual card pages if the two (or more) effects of that spell or effect are carried one after the other, where after means that the first part of the effect is carried out, queuing and resolving triggers (which can therefoe create new sub-Phases etc), before the effect moves to its following step(s). Thus, I have nothing in contrary with using numbers instead of dots to itemize/enumerate the steps of an effect, but I think we should keep something (like the words "first" and "then" I used so far) that explicitly statets that the two steps happen one after the other. Elekim (talk) 09:09, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

It would be more professional-looking if the words "first" and "then" are capitalized, in my opinion. That was my ultimate intention. Aegonostic (talk) 01:53, 17 February 2017 (UTC)