Face Adversity
Generic Equipment - Head
This may only defend an attack if the attack's controller has drawn a card this turn.
Blade Break (When the combat chain closes, if this defended, destroy it.)
Average Card Type Distribution
Average Attack Value:Β
3.113.105523581
Average Defense Value: Β
2.442.440258685
Hero
Oscilio
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Oscilio that play both.
Kayo
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Kayo that play both.
Dorinthea
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Dorinthea that play both.
Dorinthea Ironsong
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Dorinthea Ironsong that play both.
Zen, Tamer of Purpose
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Zen, Tamer of Purpose that play both.
Olympia
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Olympia that play both.
Rhinar
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Rhinar that play both.
Equipment
Flight Path
40% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Flight Path that play both.
Sharp Shooters
40% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Sharp Shooters that play both.
Flash of Brilliance
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Flash of Brilliance that play both.
Hold Focus
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hold Focus that play both.
Ink-lined Cloak
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Ink-lined Cloak that play both.
Twinkle Toes
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Twinkle Toes that play both.
Hood of Second Thoughts
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hood of Second Thoughts that play both.
Flat Trackers
26% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Flat Trackers that play both.
Gauntlet of Might
26% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Gauntlet of Might that play both.
Hidden Agenda
20% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hidden Agenda that play both.
Target Totalizer
20% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Target Totalizer that play both.
Vigor Girth
19% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Vigor Girth that play both.
Nullrune Gloves
19% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Nullrune Gloves that play both.
Nullrune Hood
19% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Nullrune Hood that play both.
Embrace Adversity
17% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Embrace Adversity that play both.
Stonewall Gauntlet
17% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Stonewall Gauntlet that play both.
Goliath Gauntlet
16% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Goliath Gauntlet that play both.
Refraction Bolters
15% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Refraction Bolters that play both.
Nullrune Boots
14% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Nullrune Boots that play both.
Gallantry Gold
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Gallantry Gold that play both.
Nullrune Robe
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Nullrune Robe that play both.
Overcome Adversity
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Overcome Adversity that play both.
Confront Adversity
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Confront Adversity that play both.
Snapdragon Scalers
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Snapdragon Scalers that play both.
Headliner Helm
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Headliner Helm that play both.
Raw Meat
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Raw Meat that play both.
Bloodied Oval
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Bloodied Oval that play both.
Grandstand Legplates
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Grandstand Legplates that play both.
Ironrot Helm
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Ironrot Helm that play both.
Glory Seeker
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Glory Seeker that play both.
Achilles Accelerator
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Achilles Accelerator that play both.
Beckon Applause
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Beckon Applause that play both.
Blossom of Spring
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Blossom of Spring that play both.
Braveforge Bracers
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Braveforge Bracers that play both.
Stonewall Impasse
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Stonewall Impasse that play both.
banned - Blitz
Heartened Cross Strap
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Heartened Cross Strap that play both.
Stadium Centerpiece
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Stadium Centerpiece that play both.
Deep Blue
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Deep Blue that play both.
Sheltered Cove
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Sheltered Cove that play both.
Longdraw Half-Glove
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Longdraw Half-Glove that play both.
Arousing Wave
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Arousing Wave that play both.
Undertow Stilettos
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Undertow Stilettos that play both.
Aqua Seeing Shell
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Aqua Seeing Shell that play both.
Mask of Wizened Whiskers
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Mask of Wizened Whiskers that play both.
Skyhold Keikoi
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Skyhold Keikoi that play both.
Stride of Reprisal
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Stride of Reprisal that play both.
Twelve Petal KΔαΉ£Δya
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Twelve Petal KΔαΉ£Δya that play both.
Waves of Aqua Marine
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Waves of Aqua Marine that play both.
Hope Merchant's Hood
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hope Merchant's Hood that play both.
Crown of Dichotomy
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Crown of Dichotomy that play both.
Aether Ironweave
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Aether Ironweave that play both.
Ticket Puncher
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Ticket Puncher that play both.
Hide Tanner
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hide Tanner that play both.
Savage Sash
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Savage Sash that play both.
Weapon
Volzar, the Lightning Rod
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Volzar, the Lightning Rod that play both.
Mandible Claw
12% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Mandible Claw that play both.
Dawnblade
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Dawnblade that play both.
Cintari Saber
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Cintari Saber that play both.
Beckoning Mistblade
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Beckoning Mistblade that play both.
Tiger Taming Khakkara
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Tiger Taming Khakkara that play both.
Hot Streak
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hot Streak that play both.
Action
Arcane Twining (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
67% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Arcane Twining (Red) that play both.
Line It Up
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
40% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Line It Up that play both.
Chorus of the Amphitheater (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Chorus of the Amphitheater (Blue) that play both.
Comet Storm - Shock
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Comet Storm - Shock that play both.
Etchings of Arcana (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Etchings of Arcana (Blue) that play both.
Etchings of Arcana (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Etchings of Arcana (Red) that play both.
Etchings of Arcana (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Etchings of Arcana (Yellow) that play both.
Glyph Overlay (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Glyph Overlay (Red) that play both.
Perennial Aetherbloom (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Perennial Aetherbloom (Blue) that play both.
Perennial Aetherbloom (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Perennial Aetherbloom (Yellow) that play both.
Pop the Bubble (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Pop the Bubble (Yellow) that play both.
Exploding Aether (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Exploding Aether (Red) that play both.
Overflow the Aetherwell (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Overflow the Aetherwell (Red) that play both.
Photon Splicing (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Photon Splicing (Red) that play both.
Trailblazing Aether (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Trailblazing Aether (Red) that play both.
Sigil of Cycles
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Sigil of Cycles that play both.
Battlefront Bastion (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
17% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Battlefront Bastion (Red) that play both.
Lead with Speed (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
16% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Lead with Speed (Red) that play both.
Goblet of Bloodrun Wine
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
13% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Goblet of Bloodrun Wine that play both.
Lead with Heart (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Lead with Heart (Red) that play both.
Smashback Alehorn
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Smashback Alehorn that play both.
Engaged Swiftblade (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Engaged Swiftblade (Red) that play both.
Engaged Swiftblade (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Engaged Swiftblade (Blue) that play both.
Hit and Run (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.452.454545455
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hit and Run (Blue) that play both.
Sharpen Steel (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Sharpen Steel (Red) that play both.
Bonebreaker Bellow (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Bonebreaker Bellow (Blue) that play both.
Bonebreaker Bellow (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Bonebreaker Bellow (Red) that play both.
Money Where Ya Mouth Is (Red)
Avg. played: Β
1.471.470588235
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Money Where Ya Mouth Is (Red) that play both.
Money Where Ya Mouth Is (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Money Where Ya Mouth Is (Blue) that play both.
Draw Swords (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Draw Swords (Blue) that play both.
Driving Blade (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Driving Blade (Blue) that play both.
Supercell
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Supercell that play both.
Battlefront Bastion (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Battlefront Bastion (Yellow) that play both.
Murky Water
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Murky Water that play both.
Prismatic Leyline
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Prismatic Leyline that play both.
Visit the Golden Anvil
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Visit the Golden Anvil that play both.
Blanch (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Blanch (Red) that play both.
Biting Breeze (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Biting Breeze (Blue) that play both.
Biting Breeze (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Biting Breeze (Red) that play both.
Breed Anger (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Breed Anger (Red) that play both.
Emissary of Moon
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Emissary of Moon that play both.
First Tenet of Chi: Moon
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and First Tenet of Chi: Moon that play both.
First Tenet of Chi: Wind
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and First Tenet of Chi: Wind that play both.
Tiger Form Incantation (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Tiger Form Incantation (Red) that play both.
Untamed (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Untamed (Blue) that play both.
Wind Chakra (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wind Chakra (Blue) that play both.
Engaged Swiftblade (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Engaged Swiftblade (Yellow) that play both.
Hold 'em (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hold 'em (Red) that play both.
Lead with Speed (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Lead with Speed (Yellow) that play both.
Hit and Run (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hit and Run (Yellow) that play both.
Nimblism (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Nimblism (Red) that play both.
Lead with Power (Red)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Lead with Power (Red) that play both.
Attack Action
Stone Rain
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
40% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Stone Rain that play both.
Blast to Oblivion (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Blast to Oblivion (Red) that play both.
Flittering Charge (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Flittering Charge (Red) that play both.
Fry (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Fry (Red) that play both.
Second Strike (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Second Strike (Red) that play both.
Smash Up
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Smash Up that play both.
Bonds of Memory (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
17% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Bonds of Memory (Red) that play both.
Desires of Flesh (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
17% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Desires of Flesh (Red) that play both.
Agile Windup (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
16% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Agile Windup (Blue) that play both.
Bonds of Memory (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Bonds of Memory (Blue) that play both.
Desires of Flesh (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Desires of Flesh (Blue) that play both.
Desires of Flesh (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Desires of Flesh (Yellow) that play both.
Mind's Desire (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Mind's Desire (Blue) that play both.
Mind's Desire (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Mind's Desire (Red) that play both.
Rally the Rearguard (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Rally the Rearguard (Red) that play both.
Scar for a Scar (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Scar for a Scar (Red) that play both.
Agile Windup (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Agile Windup (Yellow) that play both.
Wage Might (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wage Might (Blue) that play both.
Ravenous Rabble (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Ravenous Rabble (Red) that play both.
Agile Windup (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Agile Windup (Red) that play both.
Assault and Battery (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Assault and Battery (Red) that play both.
Bare Fangs (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Bare Fangs (Red) that play both.
Wild Ride (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wild Ride (Red) that play both.
Mighty Windup (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Mighty Windup (Blue) that play both.
Pack Hunt (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Pack Hunt (Red) that play both.
Wage Agility (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wage Agility (Yellow) that play both.
Mighty Windup (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Mighty Windup (Red) that play both.
Wild Ride (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wild Ride (Yellow) that play both.
Assault and Battery (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Assault and Battery (Blue) that play both.
Bare Fangs (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Bare Fangs (Yellow) that play both.
Assault and Battery (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
1.561.562500000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Assault and Battery (Yellow) that play both.
Clash of Might (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Clash of Might (Blue) that play both.
Mighty Windup (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
1.531.529411765
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Mighty Windup (Yellow) that play both.
Pound Town (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Pound Town (Yellow) that play both.
Pack Hunt (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Pack Hunt (Yellow) that play both.
Concuss (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Concuss (Blue) that play both.
Wage Agility (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
1.531.533333333
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wage Agility (Blue) that play both.
Wage Vigor (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wage Vigor (Red) that play both.
Pound Town (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Pound Town (Red) that play both.
Persuasive Prognosis
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Persuasive Prognosis that play both.
Mind's Desire (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Mind's Desire (Yellow) that play both.
Impulsive Desire (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Impulsive Desire (Red) that play both.
Pick to Pieces (Red)
Avg. played: Β
1.501.500000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Pick to Pieces (Red) that play both.
Impulsive Desire (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Impulsive Desire (Blue) that play both.
Attune with Cosmic Vibrations
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Attune with Cosmic Vibrations that play both.
Companion of the Claw (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Companion of the Claw (Red) that play both.
Companion of the Claw (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Companion of the Claw (Yellow) that play both.
Harmony of the Hunt (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Harmony of the Hunt (Red) that play both.
Levels of Enlightenment
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Levels of Enlightenment that play both.
Second Tenet of Chi: Moon
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Second Tenet of Chi: Moon that play both.
Second Tenet of Chi: Tide
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Second Tenet of Chi: Tide that play both.
Second Tenet of Chi: Wind
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Second Tenet of Chi: Wind that play both.
Pound Town (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Pound Town (Blue) that play both.
Wallop (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wallop (Blue) that play both.
Rally the Rearguard (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Rally the Rearguard (Yellow) that play both.
T-Bone (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and T-Bone (Red) that play both.
Zero to Sixty (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Zero to Sixty (Red) that play both.
Wage Gold (Red)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wage Gold (Red) that play both.
Wage Agility (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wage Agility (Red) that play both.
Wage Vigor (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wage Vigor (Blue) that play both.
Wage Might (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Wage Might (Yellow) that play both.
Thunk (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Thunk (Blue) that play both.
Run Roughshod
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Run Roughshod that play both.
Attack Reaction
Agile Engagement (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Agile Engagement (Red) that play both.
Ironsong Response (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
9% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Ironsong Response (Blue) that play both.
Razor Reflex (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Razor Reflex (Red) that play both.
Ironsong Response (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.442.444444444
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Ironsong Response (Red) that play both.
Glint the Quicksilver
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Glint the Quicksilver that play both.
Hiss (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hiss (Blue) that play both.
Hiss (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Hiss (Red) that play both.
Intimate Inducement (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Intimate Inducement (Blue) that play both.
Intimate Inducement (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Intimate Inducement (Red) that play both.
Intimate Inducement (Yellow)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Intimate Inducement (Yellow) that play both.
Maul
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Maul that play both.
Vigorous Engagement (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Vigorous Engagement (Red) that play both.
Overpower (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Overpower (Blue) that play both.
Defense Reaction
Sink Below (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.302.302325581
23% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Sink Below (Red) that play both.
Fate Foreseen
Avg. played: Β
2.312.307692308
14% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Fate Foreseen that play both.
Unmovable (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
8% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Unmovable (Red) that play both.
Unmovable (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Unmovable (Blue) that play both.
Evasive Leap (Red)
Avg. played: Β
3.003.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Evasive Leap (Red) that play both.
Territorial Domain
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Territorial Domain that play both.
Block
Test of Strength
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
10% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Test of Strength that play both.
Test of Might
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
7% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Test of Might that play both.
Instant
Electrostatic Discharge (Blue)
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Electrostatic Discharge (Blue) that play both.
Electrostatic Discharge (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Electrostatic Discharge (Red) that play both.
Sigil of Conductivity
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Sigil of Conductivity that play both.
Sigil of Forethought
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Sigil of Forethought that play both.
Sigil of Lightning
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
33% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Sigil of Lightning that play both.
Pass Over
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Pass Over that play both.
Path Well Traveled
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Path Well Traveled that play both.
Stir the Pot
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Stir the Pot that play both.
The Grain that Tips the Scale
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and The Grain that Tips the Scale that play both.
Oasis Respite (Red)
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
11% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Oasis Respite (Red) that play both.
Take it on the Chin
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Take it on the Chin that play both.
Kindle
Avg. played: Β
2.002.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Kindle that play both.
A Drop in the Ocean
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and A Drop in the Ocean that play both.
Homage to Ancestors
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Homage to Ancestors that play both.
Preserve Tradition
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Preserve Tradition that play both.
Rising Sun, Setting Moon
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
6% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Rising Sun, Setting Moon that play both.
Slap-Happy
Avg. played: Β
1.001.000000000
5% of decksPercentage of decks that could play both Face Adversity and Slap-Happy that play both.