Dragonfire | Dragonfire (Upgraded)

[PhantomFox]

NAME: Dragonfire ELEMENT: Fire COST: 6 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: ABILITY: Give target dragon Dragonfire Dragonfire: Deal damage to all of your opponent's creatures.  More creatures affected reduces the damage done to each one.  Cooldown: 2	NAME: Dragonfire ELEMENT: Fire COST: 5 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: ABILITY: Give target dragon Dragonfire Dragonfire: Deal damage to all of your opponent's creatures.  More creatures affected reduces the damage done to each one.  Cooldown: 2

ART: Found on Dragon Publishing http://dragonpublishing.net/fire%20breathing%20dragon.jpg IDEA: PhantomFox NOTES: The damage done to each creature is equal to the dragon's attack divided by the number of creatures affected, with a maximum of 6 damage done to each, and a minimum of 1.  The ability is an active ability.  Cooldown puts the dragon into stasis for the number of turns specified.  SERIES:

[eh pewwwp]

i see a badass  deck coming on with this (adrenaline + emerald dragon, gets rid of stasis in 1 turn)

also, make a list of what you would consider dragons (ie: would leaf dragon be affected? if so would rustler be affected?)

i personally would like it on leaf dragon, just because that (adrenalined) and fire buckler would mean 2 direct damage to the opponent, -2 hp of all monsters, and "no stasis" between turns

very nice and balanced card

[Lordpants]

I think having it be able to target Leaf Dragon would make it a tad overpowered however, I do like the card concept that actually gives the dragons something to do.

[eh pewwwp]

I think having it be able to target Leaf Dragon would make it a tad overpowered however, I do like the card concept that actually gives the dragons something to do.

how so? it can only do 2 damage, just like a brimstone eater, and itself would only take off 1 health, the only FG that would be hurt MIGHT be paradox, and because of it's low health can easily be killed with pretty much any deck with cc, it's fine

but if others have a problem a solution could be giving the ability a cost, maybe 2 or 3 


EDIT: and if the stasis counter is like phase shield, it could only do 1 damage a turn, it just depends if they go into stasis at the end of the turn or right after activation

[PhantomFox]

Any other suggestions before I submit this to the crucible?

[Kuroaitou]

CURATOR COMMENT
To get this card Crucible-approved:
-Cite the artist's name in the table and in the bottom left of the card art picture (the artist's name is jessicawolf2002, found here: http://media.photobucket.com/image/dragon%20breathing%20fire/jessicawolf2002/Dragon%20Pics/dragons_lair.jpg)
-Make sure you get permission from the artist saying it's okay to use the art
-Fix the discrepancies between the card text and the Ability description in your table ("opponent's" is spelled wrong on the cards)



Oh boy. As if Fire needed ANYMORE crowd controlling abilities - you may want to distinguish what creatures are considered 'dragons' in your Notes section, if not explain the potential of having a 'Dragon' passive for this card to combine with correctly. Another thing is that the wording seems a little bit superfluous - perhaps you can shorten it to something like this:

"Bestows a dragon-creature with Dragonfire.
  Dragonfire:
Deals damage inversely proportional to the
number of creatures on the field."

This way, you not only see what type of 'creature' can be used with the spell, Dragonfire, but you also figure out how much the ability costs, and how the mechanic works within a certain amount of lines. ^^ Just a suggestion, of course. Also, the 'cool down' is unnecessary - placing a high cost on the ability itself can be a good limiting factor, even with Shard of Readiness (it's an expensive combo to use all three I'm assuming: Dragon + Dragonfire + Shard of Readiness).

Even though I think Fire has enough spells in its arsenal to kill off the enemies creatures either directly or passively (Rain of Fire, Fire Lance, Fire Buckler, Rage Potion), I suppose that this would be a nice card to make Dragons more 'lively' in the game as a whole.

[PhantomFox]

Card is updated.

And while the text is more concise, the way the text you suggest is read, the damage would be done to the player instead of the creatures, and does not take untargetable creatures into consideration.  The cooldown is necessary, because quanta is rather easy to come by in most cases, and I want a spammable AOE to not be used every turn.  Especially when multiple Dragonfire capable dragons are in play.

[Kuroaitou]

Card is updated.

And while the text is more concise, the way the text you suggest is read, the damage would be done to the player instead of the creatures, and does not take untargetable creatures into consideration.  The cooldown is necessary, because quanta is rather easy to come by in most cases, and I want a spammable AOE to not be used every turn.  Especially when multiple Dragonfire capable dragons are in play.

Okay - I suppose that the cooldown is an important facet of the ability in question, rather than the quanta cost (hence why you remove the cost of 3 , correct?), so perhaps you can try this instead?

"Grants a Dragon Dragonfire
Dragonfire: Damages foe's creatures for X-N. N = # of foe's creatures. Cooldown: 2"


Note that 'Dragon' can be a new passive that's introduced into the game for all the Dragon creatures that can benefit from this card.

X = whatever value you choose it to be and you can substitute the X for any single-digit number. This actually fits on 'Planplan's Card maker, surprisingly enough!  Either way, your card text is just a little bit ridiculous - just try to shorten it so that the Card text isn't so ridiculously long. Do you know how much damage it should deal to a single target on the field unprotected, say, another Dragon perhaps?

[PhantomFox]

The formula I have currently is X = (A/N); 0< X< 8 where A = dragon's attack and N = number of enemy creatures.  If I used that, I'd confuse absolutely everyone.

[Kuroaitou]

The formula I have currently is X = (A/N); 0< X< 8 where A = dragon's attack and N = number of enemy creatures.  If I used that, I'd confuse absolutely everyone.

Simplify it then. Why not just change X to a somewhat decent value between 0 and 8, say maybe around 5 (I'll explain how I got this value in a second) and go from there, where N = the enemy creatures? If there's 5 or more creatures, then each creature takes only 1 damage, making decks with a decent amount of creatures hard to take down.

I got the value of '5' by taking the difference between the non-upped dragons' attack power, 12 (Crimson Dragon) - 7 (Colossal Dragon), and for the upgraded card, changing the value of X to 7: Ruby Dragon and Massive Dragon (15 - 8 = 7). The equation you used somewhat makes sense, but I feel that you're overly complicating the ability in question (say a Golden Dragon with 10 attack has to deal with 6 creatures - you'd deal 2 damage to them, rounding up, or 1 damage rounding down, but then you throw two blessings on him gaining 16 attack, which then guarantees the 2 damage to them, rounding down, etc.). I get that this card is significantly going to be more useful on say, hard hitters (Obsidian Dragon with Eclipse for example), but there has to be a way to make it more concise. ^^;

Here's a better question I suppose for the Dragonfire ability: against how many creatures do you want the ability to be predicted/expected against for it to be balanced? (In other words, when you have Dragonfire in your deck along side some dragons of any element, what's the average effectiveness you want it to come against? 1-3 creatures? 4-6? More?)

[PhantomFox]

I like the wording as is, as it is the same tone and wording as other variable spells like Adrenaline.  This is two sentences, each of them clear.  It damages all creatures, and it's weaker against more creatures.  It's precise, and it's easy to understand.  If they want the specifics, they can experiment, like Adrenaline. 

As for the balancing, I want it to be close to rain of fire on the average number of creatures on the field.  The way it is now, it does 2 damage on average to a field of 5.  Which is okay, given that this is reusable.

[Kuroaitou]

I like the wording as is, as it is the same tone and wording as other variable spells like Adrenaline.  This is two sentences, each of them clear.  It damages all creatures, and it's weaker against more creatures.  It's precise, and it's easy to understand.  If they want the specifics, they can experiment, like Adrenaline. 

As for the balancing, I want it to be close to rain of fire on the average number of creatures on the field.  The way it is now, it does 2 damage on average to a field of 5.  Which is okay, given that this is reusable.

Fair enough.

On that note though, I get the impression that if this were to be implemented, Leaf Dragons would be exempt from the spell effect (i.e. - can't be given Dragonfire), because otherwise, you have a fairly cheap reusable combo. ^^;