Elements the Game Forum - Free Online Fantasy Card Game

Elements the Game => Level 1 - Crucible => Card Ideas and Art => Crucible Archive => Topic started by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 01:02:44 am

Title: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 01:02:44 am

(http://vvzs7g.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p68vCZp1s4KAmVWY8nKNNk7AZk4O8dHbxthl1Ws-lI439e9fkiajlehiaZjOHV625w534G6snvehdKJdjypMZT8g-3v-xjwG9/Pinocchio%202.0.png?psid=1)	(http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pCYrMYDlNey3jcEIUB6Dv-EKAmfd98dMqXEFeE7WNUNaYTW--IvxqmHwkP0BER3gxsW09ZrHWzqC3lGJ7ZgkmbA/Pinocchio%20X.png?psid=1)
NAME: Pinocchio 2.0 ELEMENT: Aether COST: 3 :aether TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 1|3 TEXT: :life :life :life :life :life :Real Boy When Pinocchio 2.0 receives life energy, he turns into... ?	NAME: Pinocchio X ELEMENT: Aether COST: 2 :aether TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 1|3 TEXT: :life :life :life :life :Real Boy When Pinocchio X receives life energy, he turns into... ?

ART: Ignion IDEA: Ignion NOTES: This card was re-worked on 2/18/11. This is my answer to the aether/life - life/aether challenge posted by EmeraldTiger @ http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,21305.0.html Important Clarification: This is NOT PINOCCHIO. His name is "Pinocchio 2.0" who resides in the world of Elements. It seems some people have a problem with this, so just making sure to say it out loud. In addition, here is his story: There was once a doll loved by its owner dearly. The owner took great care of him and loved him just like a real son. But, one day, the owner was killed by an elemental creature. The doll thought, "Only if I was a real boy, I could have saved him. He cursed his powerlessness." The doll was burnt together with the owner's body. As the smoke ascended and reached aetherial domain, a miracle happened. The aetheric energy blended with the smoke began taking a shape of the doll. Pinocchio 2.0 was born. His wish still remains, "Only if I was a real boy...." He also joins the fight because he wants to find the creature that killed his owner. SERIES:

(http://8nctkq.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pWPL_D1cy6twKcX_yetEuIOF83DxqIilxJPha5JnJuN9QF5iBzLMz2fkHjovbARcbf8VjF7kwh-HeOnoKWcEx-SzwtWRFoeFg/Pinocchio%20R.png?psid=1)	(http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pAO_of1dVDDesCP9CnBfM6nXQC0eS1B4xesBTu4n1_cskWEWr65MnDpkrStiEu9BFFa3ep11EtO7L6kX74YFt0A/Pinocchio%20RX.png?psid=1)
NAME: Pinocchio R ELEMENT: Life COST: 10 :life TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 8|4 TEXT: Half-Immortal: This card cannot be targetted by your opponent's card effects.	NAME: Pinocchio RX ELEMENT: Life COST: 12 :life TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 10|6 TEXT: Half-Immortal: This card cannot be targetted by your opponent's card effects.

ART: Ignion IDEA: Ignion NOTES: These cards are NOT OBTAINABLE, just like Malignant Cell. SERIES:

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Wynden on February 18, 2011, 01:09:29 am

*facepalm*
You do realize that this card is broken with Rustler, right?

i.e. Rustler + 20 :light = +20 attack for Pinocchio & 40 :life

If you dropped this in a modded RoL Hope deck, you're almost guaranteed to win after you've set everything up - fractalling these, at the risk of a one turn delay due to fractal's ability, is a near instant win, with so much burst damage.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: EmeraldTiger on February 18, 2011, 01:24:38 am

Quote from: Wynden on February 18, 2011, 01:09:29 am

*facepalm*
You do realize that this card is broken with Rustler, right?

i.e. Rustler + 20 :light = +20 attack for Pinocchio & 40 :life

If you dropped this in a modded RoL Hope deck, you're almost guaranteed to win after you've set everything up - fractalling these, at the risk of a one turn delay due to fractal's ability, is a near instant win, with so much burst damage.

good catch i didn't notice that.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 01:26:44 am

I did have Rustler in mind when I created this card. That's still a 3 card combo (card to generate light, Rustler, & Pinocchio, not to mention you'll need to generate life and aether to summon Rustler and Pinocchio). It's not as easy as you make it sound. Plus, it'll take time to accumulate 20 :light. I doubt it'd be rule breaking like you are saying. I mean, right now, if you use fire deck, you can put out lava golem and phoenix + a couple more in just one turn. That's at least 14 ATTK in the initial turn (I often reduce my opponent's life to 80 in the first turn only), and the next turn, it'll be 16 or even 20+, depending on your draw. Compared to that, Rustler/Pinocchio combo is not over the edge, IMO.

As far as RoL deck goes, I'm actually one of those people who are against RoL deck. IMO, RoL deck is the problem, not this card. Hope should not be immaterial IMO, but we all know that's a debate for the different section of this forum, so we don't need to discuss that here.

But, I appreciate your input, and I could always make adjustments like:

- make it gain +1 ATTK at the end of every turn :life was generated

To be honest, I wanted to make it gain +1 ATTK every time "you lied," but I couldn't think of any game mechanism that would resemble lying. LOL

This is not so much about what I want for this card anyway. I just wanted to tackle the aether/life challenge, so whatever makes it work will be good.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Wynden on February 18, 2011, 01:56:14 am

I'm not against the card's basis, but I think that something along the lines of a creature potentially gaining that much attack in one turn with only two cards - in reality, I know the quanta is an issue, but something with that kind of potential in a turn feels OP to me.

Well, with lying in mind, you could try something along the lines of a synergy with cards that will react to the opponent's cards, such as Mindgate. Maybe +1 attack every time a card owned by the opponent is stolen/mindgated/Precog'd/Cloaked/LS'd? It will open up a lot more potential combos, but it might do well to make this card either :darkness or :life if you do go with that. It'll take away the potential for high attack early in the game, but it, coupled with darkness' "Game Controlling" cards, it can be an interesting effect.

Side-note: I'm not one for RoL Hope decks either. After a month of playing them, I got really sick of them. What I'm trying to say is that just because Pinocchio isn't a rush card like :fire, late game it is really hard to balance. Just because the decks play two different styles - Rush & Stall - does not mean that it is not Broken. It just means that it isn't as useful if you're playing a Rush deck.

For example, take Chimera. Use it in early game, and it is near worthless. High cost, momentum, gravity pull, and a very low attack/HP, depending on the deck you're playing. Mid to Late game, it's a finisher. You get high damage and/or HP, so it acts as a meat shield or an EM creature with LS.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 02:02:43 am

Thanks for the suggestion, Wynden. But, the very reason I made this card was to try the aether/life challenge posted by EmeraldTiger, so if I change the elements, it kinda defeats the whole purpose lol.

I wonder if I should change it to:

Every time :life healing effect is triggered, Pinocchio gains +1 ATTK

This would include druid staff.

By the way, just so people know, another reason I picked Pinocchio for this is because "Pinocchio wants to become a human boy." He wants "real life," so it's even more appropriate semantically. Aether is not quite "life," so I really think that it makes sense for Pinocchio 2.0 to power up in relation to life related activity.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Wynden on February 18, 2011, 02:29:33 am

That works from every point of view I can think of, but I highly doubt a deck like andrenastaves would bother including this. It's sorta slow and clunky in a way if that's the case, because Life/Aether isn't a very common combo other than frogtal anyways.

I think either increase the attack gain, or make it a pump-creature - +1 attack/ 5 :life.

If you think about it, the following are the 'healing' cards:
Feral Bond
Heal
Staves
*Luci
*:light Nymph
*Holy Light
*Drain Life
*Miracle
*SoG

With only ~3 cards to work with, it doesn't look promising for that ability - that said, andrenastaffs = +4 attack, and feral bond before its nerf would make this card pretty strong.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 04:32:49 am

Good point, Wynden, but let's not forget that we can have 6 of each in a deck.
If you have multiple ferals on your field, and druid staff, you can gain like 3~4 ATTK per turn. I'd say that's pretty strong?

If not, I could also think of another mechanism like this:

Give 2 :life to Pinocchio to increase its status by +3 ATTK

 

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: vrt on February 18, 2011, 07:21:02 am

This art isn't yours as you claim. Not only is the character by Walt Disney, the actual artwork is a licensed, commercial print.


http://www.freebirdsigns.com/shopexd.asp?id=40

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 09:45:22 am

Actually, Pinocchio is not a character by Disney. It was created by Carlo Collodi. Disney merely used it to make a movie. And, this is "Pinocchio 2.0," not Pinocchio anyway.

But, thanks for pointing out that website. I wasn't planning on putting much effort into this (I wasn't even going to make an image) because I just wanted to try the challenge by EmeraldTiger, but I've changed my mind. I'll be re-doing everything. Stay tuned :)

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: SnoWeb on February 18, 2011, 10:04:16 am

Do you really use Pinocchio as a fighting creature! Your opponent plays Vampires, Golems and dragons and you play Pinocchio!
You can't be serious! You expect that Pinocchio is able to deal more damage than a dragon?
I don't talk about the card itself. I just say a Pinocchio creature inside element is just moronic ...

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 10:09:41 am

lol again and again, this is NOT PINOCCHIO. "It's Pinocchio 2.0" It's a magical creature born of aether power with special tie to life.
Besides, with your logic, there shouldn't be frogs or scorpions in this game either. How do they really fight against dragons?  :P

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: SnoWeb on February 18, 2011, 10:15:26 am

Sure play your little poney, I'll fractal Heidi (or Pinocchio) as a counter.
At least a giant frog or a scorpion makes a bit of sense in a fight (and don't have a ridiculously high attack).
Pinnocchio (even 2.0) is a wooden doll with a small boy IQ and who has as unique power the fact that his nose grows!
At one point he turns into a real boy and you made it a 10|6 immortal creature! Did we read the same story?

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 10:36:33 am

Duh, how many times do I have to tell you. He is NOT Pinocchio. He is NOT A WOODEN DOLL. He is a magical creature. He DOES NOT HAVE A SMALL BOY IQ.

It's one thing to provide helpful feedback, but it's another to give attitude, and I don't appreciate it.

If you lack imagination, that's your problem, not mine. Does Mac OSX Leopard mean it's a Leopard? Should it start scratching you? Does Giants mean those athletes are giants? What about Android? Are these phones actually robots just because they use the name Android?

Pinocchio 2.0 is a magical creature, and yes just like those above examples, there are "characteristics" that are incorporated into the theme. That's not anything new or absurd in long history of human civilization.

And, please read carefully before you throw stuff at me. I did not turn him into a real boy. Real Boy is a name of the effect (which reflects his wish). He does not become a real boy (Unless the doll looks like a real boy to you, then you need glasses). I also did not turn him into immortal. He is half-immortal, which makes sense for a creature that has made a half-transition from aetheric energy-based being into life-based being.

Again, work your imagination a little more before you trash someone's idea.

But, of course, I don't know you personally, and it's probably not fair for me to expect everyone to possess same level of abilities. Some people are more intelligent, some are more creative, some are tougher, some are etc..... So, here's little something to help you understand my card/idea:

there was once a doll loved by its owner dearly. The owner took great care of him and loved him just like a real son. But, one day, the owner was killed by an elemental creature. The doll thought, "Only if I was a real boy, I could have protected him." The doll was burnt together with the owner's body. As the smoke ascended and reached aetherial domain, a miracle happened. The aetheric energy blended with the smoke began taking a shape of the doll. Pinocchio 2.0 was born. His wish still remains, "Only if I was a real boy...." He also joins the fight because he wants to find the creature that killed his owner.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: SnoWeb on February 18, 2011, 10:44:38 am

Quote from: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 10:36:33 am

Duh, how many times do I have to tell you. He is NOT Pinocchio.

Ho sorry! I misread the tittle. I thought it was Pinocchio. But you are right, if it's neither a wooden doll nor a little boy, it clearly has nothing to do with Pinocchio. The only thing I don't understand then is ... why it is called Pinocchio?

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 11:04:04 am

Why did google call their phone OS Android? Why did Giants name their team Giants? Why is the elemental creature, "Immortal," named immortal when it can actually die?

Taking on names has long existed as a way for people to tap into or adopt certain "characteristic" or "theme." I could have picked any other creature, artifact, items, legends, figures, etc. It's really not that important what I happened to pick. Plus, I don't always know reasons for everything I think up. I'm an artist. My mind is creative and comes up with stuff. I write songs, poetry, paint, draw, etc. If I must look back and ask myself why I picked Pinocchio as the base, my best guess is:

- Aether (not life) & Life (living creature) challnege = needed something to bridge the two. A doll (not life) that turned into a boy (life). Hmmm, maybe I can use this.
- I also like humor. I initially wanted to make an ability related to his nose or lies just for fun (though that turned out too hard, and I gave up).
-  Maybe I saw a doll or something recently. Without remembering, stuff like that prime our mind and influence what we think. Another example is someone walked by a bakery. She didn't remember it or think much about it, but later that day, she craved for cake and had one.

Just a guess, but you probably would have liked it better if I named it Chucky 2.0, wouldn't you  ;D

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: SnoWeb on February 18, 2011, 12:28:44 pm

You probably heard about something called "collective unconscious". The mass unconsciously associate an image or a charateristic to a term or feature". In advertisement or public relation, one could use this hidden image to enhance a characteristic of a product. Giants are generally strong. When you call your team Giant, it doesn't mean that the players are giants (I suppose I don't know anything about Ice Hockey or Baseball). It means that they are strong. Same for Android, it enhance the technical side of the object (I suppose too, I don't know anything about phones either). What I say is, Pinocchio doesn't carry any warrior-like characteristic IMO. On the contrary, I think in the collective unconscious, Pinocchio has a weak and shy image. To keep on your metaphor, you wouldn't call an ice hockey team "The Pinocchio" (unless the players are little boys that tell lies). However, you could call you team "The Actic Dragons" or "the Scorpions".

I was probably a bit to sarcastic here and I obviously upset you. I must apologize for that. However, I think your idea doesn't stand any change to become an element card just because it's called Pinocchio. You guessed right, I have less of a problem with Chucky (or even Buzz Lightyear). And the reason is that in the collective unconscious these two characters carry a less childish and a bit more warrior-like image.

Now if you wanna keep calling your creature Pinocchio, you are free to do it ...

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 06:58:16 pm

My questions were rhetorical questions. I was not asking you to explain those things to me. I was trying to explain those things to you. Your definition of collective unconsciousness is also inaccurate. I studied psychology, so I know.

Also, another thing you are still not getting. It is up to the person to choose "which characteristic" they are tapping into. What I tapped in with Pinocchio was the creative part of it, not strength. They are reflected on ability and card design. However, it also makes sense for a doll to become stronger as it transforms closer to a real flesh that has muscles. Not to mention, there are different kinds of strength. IMO, Pinocchio was NOT WEAK. He was strong. He overcame so many obstacles and eventually achieved an incredible dream. (try being swallowed by a whale and come back out if you think you are stronger than Pinocchio).  I'd never call that weak. I appreciate that kind of true strenth over a mere physical strength, and in the magic world, they get to manifest in enchanced ways.

Next time, if you have opinions like that, make sure you express them as "your opinion." There is nothing wrong with you having your own opinion and disagreeing with things. But, it is not appropriate for you to attack someone else's point of view.

Also, I am not concerned about whether or not any of my cards make it into the game. I mean, we all know 99% of the cards don't. So, while I'm sure there must be people that are holding hope for it, it is also reality that most cards that are created here are pretty much for our enjoyment (which is still great). So, my focus is more on having fun with card ideas with creativity. So, let's loosen up a bit. I'm not making these cards to get into the game. I'm making these cards for "fun."

With that said, I always consider other people's wants and needs too. So, if there are people who want any of my cards to become more serious competition, I'm always willing to do that. For example, I once made a card called I.R.S. as a joke, but people liked the idea, so I re-created it as Elemental Shackle. If enough people like this card and want me to change its name, I wouldn't mind doing that.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: SeddyRocky on February 18, 2011, 07:05:33 pm

Note: You need to add a cost for the... real boy. Or it can be fractaled and played for free.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 18, 2011, 07:25:10 pm

Quote from: SeddyRocky on February 18, 2011, 07:05:33 pm

Note: You need to add a cost for the... real boy. Or it can be fractaled and played for free.

Good point. I didn't think of that. Because it was not obtainable, I left it blank lol.
Thanks for your help  :)

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Kuroaitou on February 22, 2011, 06:06:48 pm

CURATOR COMMENT
-Remove the extra hyphen or the '-' from the TEXT section of the main card's tables so that it matches the image (":life :life :life :life :life :Real Boy - When Pinocchio 2.0 receives life energy, he turns into... ?" (remove the red symbol))

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: QuantumT on February 22, 2011, 06:10:11 pm

The half immortal ability as an effect is too strong for how much these cost to get into play.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Celidion on February 24, 2011, 03:22:01 pm

Quote from: QuantumT on February 22, 2011, 06:10:11 pm

The half immortal ability as an effect is too strong for how much these cost to get into play.

Should make it immaterial to the owner's cards, but not the opponent's. I believe that would balance this card out nicely, and maybe nerfing the attack a bit.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: Ignion on February 24, 2011, 05:23:41 pm

Hi, Celidion.

I suppose you are talking about R & RX.

I'd agree with you if they were playable from hands. However, they cannot be played normally. That's what gives this card more boost in what you get.

For example, think about Phase Dragon. You can summon the card with just 13  :aether and it's immortal. That's pretty strong, and because it's a mono card, it can be summoned rather easily despite its high cost. Not to mention its HP is pretty high from the beginning, so it's extremely difficult to counter this card.

On the other hand, R & RX require much more time and effort. First, it's not a mono card. You cannot summon it normally. You need to summon Pinocchio 2.0 (1 turn), then you can transform him only if you have enough  :life. Not to mention, there is also a high risk that your opponent can easily kill it before you can transform him as he is very weak before transformation. Furthermore,  :aether or  :life don't have any cards to power up creatures except for adrenaline. If you wanted to power up R or RX, you'd need to bring in yet another element, which is yet more work. R or RX won't get much boost from adrenalin because they are not low attack creatures. So, with everything considered, I don't think what you get is OP.

That's my rationale, but if you still think it's OP, I can think of a few options:
1. Change R & RX to 6|1 & 8|1  (Half-immortal doesn't mean he is invincible. Cards like fire buckler can kill him instantly).
2. Increase the cost of  :life to transform him to make it harder to summon R & RX.

Title: Re: Pinocchio 2.0 | Pinocchio X
Post by: QuantumT on February 24, 2011, 07:48:40 pm

What I see the half-immortal ability leading to is repeated TUs. Since it's only targetable by you, it's a Phase Dragon as far as your opponent is concerned, but you have an easy way of duplicating it.