Artifact Idear

[Minister Polarius]

Asa's Good Reign: Ok, yeah. Still, it's just not that good, rather than almost useless.
Axe: Addressed. Not fluff at all.
Joseph of Arimathea: I thought that was a promo for some reason. Would be good, but dwarfed by Salome.
Pretension: I always thought it was a pretty good card. Given that Pharisees have almost nothing, that may be skewing my opinion.
Judah: Situational, but idk about fluff. He's the only card in the game that can permanently steal a Hero.
Well Reopened: O_o totally not fluff. Only useful in a sitelock deck, but VERY useful in a sitelock deck.
Consuming Fire: Yep.
Martha: Not fluff at all. D2 with Gifts, search for the Luke fort and put in play, and useful for Abom. Just not as good as some.

My fluff list:
Asa's Good Reign
Joseph of Arimathea
Consuming Fire
Zadook Anoints Solomon

1:15 fluff ratio isn't bad. Especially considering how fluffy Kings, AW, Priests, Patriarchs, RoA, FoOF, Warriors, WotB, and Prophets were. Wait...that's every other expansion. TxP is by far the least fluffy, and even on it's own, 4 fluff cards in 60 is an amazing ratio.

[TechnoEthicist]

Asa has saved me against Assyrians more times than I can count in Type 2...Axe has tore up multiple fortresses with my wife's Babylonians. Consuming Fire..I still don't think I quite understand how that card works...its seems stronger than it is...

[BubbleBoy]

I have actually used Consuming Fire in a deck. It was a FBTN Warrior-class banding deck. I wanted to have a way to negate WC characters in an emergency. I don't think I ever actually used that deck, but there's one use I can think of for that card, just so we don't think it's totally worthless.

[crustpope]

I have actually used Consuming Fire in a deck. It was a FBTN Warrior-class banding deck. I wanted to have a way to negate WC characters in an emergency. I don't think I ever actually used that deck, but there's one use I can think of for that card, just so we don't think it's totally worthless.

Exactly.  You have a big angel, like gabe, they have a wc with horsies.  You play consuming fire and they cannot play their horsies because you prevent them  This could enable you to have a chance to play an enhancement, especially with Angels sword.

Same thing with Asa's good reign, a little bit of CBN immunity never hurt anyone...except your opponent.

Jospeh of Aramithea searches for TGT or Burial shroud.  If you want to ignore go and get TGT, if you want to hold off Your Opponent, then get BS.  Either way, he searches, thins your deck and has great #'s for initiative.  I am not seeing the problem here...

Zadok annoints solomo works really well in my prophets and priest deck..especially since I have two priests who can play green (three if z temple is up)

Sure there are cards better than other cards but I honeslty dont see any "fluff" in the set.

[Professoralstad]

Consuming Fire is actually rather useful IMO. I used it twice in a T2 Multi game to get around my opponent's Uzzah (which he had in hand and I saw with Urim and Thummim). Also, like Crustpope said, it's a nice way to get around Horses. I would never use it in a T1 deck, but it's T2 potential makes it rather un-fluffy IMO.

[Minister Polarius]

Humn, I wasn't really considering T2. That cuts the fluff down to 1 or 2 cards (I will fight you on Zadook no matter what type, it's not a good card).

[crustpope]

it loves speed decks.  I get to seach for a good card with a brigade other than teal...and all those set asides have a brigade other than teal...so I can territory class search for them and then play them.

fight away!

I will admit it has limited uses, but it is not useless. I consider fluff to be anything useless (0/2 buckler comes to mind)

nothing is useless in tep

[ChristianSoldier]

I think the key to a successfully designed set is to give the players the cards they want, I can't stand buying Apostles when the commons are useless and much of the time my rare is 4 Squads of 4 or Casting Lots.  So I say cut down on the fluff in expansions, even though TexP was a good set, I wasn't fond of only getting 2 new cards (However I will say some of the rares I got were good).

As for TexP Fluff, I can't see myself ever using consuming fire, but the other cards I think all have their use.  I would much rather had consuming fire do something like "Discard all evil enhancements in play" or something somewhat useful, But my Strong Angels do a much better job or negating characters and weapons.

But Judah can recur your 1/1 Genesis enhancements can't be negated character, Joseph of Arimathea can search out the best stall card in the game. Asa's good reign makes it much more difficult for your opponent to get around Throne of David, because if they block with a character holding a weapon you will be immune.  Martha is good in combo with Abom, Gifts of the Magi, and its good if you can make sure your draw 1 is better than your opponents draw 1, and she generates lost souls.  Axe is ok.  And Well Reopened is good because it can recur a site, or it can replace itself (draw one without any cost associated with it, like having initiative or even being in battle)

[Professoralstad]

Humn, I wasn't really considering T2. That cuts the fluff down to 1 or 2 cards (I will fight you on Zadook no matter what type, it's not a good card).

There is a certain card in Disciples that I predict will make Zadok Anoints Solomon unbelievably useful. So while I may agree it has limited uses currently, because of the Tabernacle Priest requirement (the only one anyone currently uses in a multicolor offense is Phinehas), it will help to find the other half of one of what is sure to be one of the more popular combos in the near future.

As to Asa's Good Reign: My Fallen Warrior + Bringing Fear + Wrath of Satan combo says hi. Asa's Good Reign is like Miraculous Handkerchiefs/Josiah's Covenant, but doesn't take up an Art slot. But I agree that it is highly situational. Probably the fluffiest TxP that I can think of, but it's not complete fluff.

[TheKarazyvicePresidentRR]

Asa's reign is pretty good if you run it with 3 nails. That means no annoying horsies hurting you cept with wonders/forgotten his/end the battle cards. I really can't think of any fluff in TEXP, Zadok is the closest but thats just due to lack of tabby priests. I am SURE that will be rectified soon.

[Alex_Olijar]

Let's show Abiathar some love, Professor.

[jtay]

I've gotta voice my opinion here.  I absolutely LOVE fluff.  I personally enjoy making decks that use certain fluff cards in cornerstone positions.  What's great is that no one expects it, and you can surprise your opponent if you successfully use a "useless" fluff card.  Fluff has a kind of "diamond in the rough" thing going on for it.  Everyone is too focused on the obvious good cards in each set, that they don't ever get to think outside the box.  Plus, fluff is easy to come by.  I don't have to pay or trade an arm and a leg to get any of the fluff cards that I think are great.  I look forward to the next full-size expansion set we get with regular packs that have all of that fluffy goodness in them.

[BubbleBoy]

I've gotta voice my opinion here.  I absolutely LOVE fluff.  I personally enjoy making decks that use certain fluff cards in cornerstone positions.  What's great is that no one expects it, and you can surprise your opponent if you successfully use a "useless" fluff card.  Fluff has a kind of "diamond in the rough" thing going on for it.  Everyone is too focused on the obvious good cards in each set, that they don't ever get to think outside the box.  Plus, fluff is easy to come by.  I don't have to pay or trade an arm and a leg to get any of the fluff cards that I think are great.  I look forward to the next full-size expansion set we get with regular packs that have all of that fluffy goodness in them.

Interesting point. However, wouldn't you say it's better to have all cards in a set be equally powerful and equally popular than for some to purposely be made "fluff"? This makes for more variety in decks, and also lowers the costs and requirements for a competitive deck, making the game just all-around more fun. I mean, yeah, some "fluff" cards are actually kind of useful, just because no one uses them, and so no one is prepared for them, but they are still tough to use well.

And either way, you shouldn't worry about running out of fluff cards to use in decks for a while. The ones we already have are not going anywhere.

[jtay]

Interesting point. However, wouldn't you say it's better to have all cards in a set be equally powerful and equally popular than for some to purposely be made "fluff"? This makes for more variety in decks...

In my opinion, equally powerful/popular => 95% theme cards => no variety outside of cactus defined themes.

...making the game just all-around more fun.

"Fun" is a relative term.  If winning tournaments is your definition of "fun," then sure, root for the equally powerful card sets.  As for me, if I win only 1 out of 10 games, but in that one game I manage to leave my opponent utterly confused as to what happened, that is more fun to me than winning any tournament.  Therefore I root for fluff.

[BubbleBoy]

As for me, if I win only 1 out of 10 games, but in that one game I manage to leave my opponent utterly confused as to what happened, that is more fun to me than winning any tournament.

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but I think you are outvoted here.