Erosion | Rust

[ZephyrPhantom]

NAME: Erosion ELEMENT: Water COST: 2 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Target permanent is destroyed after 3 turns, or target immaterial permanent loses immaterial.	NAME: Rust ELEMENT: Water COST: 2 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Target permanent is destroyed after 3 turns, or target immaterial permanent loses immaterial.

ART: Thalas  (modified version of Zanz's Jade Shield artwork) IDEA: Zblader NOTES: This card works by giving the target permanent a lifespan similar to Phase Shield. Weak in comparison to Deflag, but it makes up by being able to destroy immaterial things. SERIES:

NAME: Erosion ELEMENT: Earth or Water COST: 2  or    TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Target permanent is destroyed after 3 turns, or target immaterial permanent loses immaterial.	NAME: Rust ELEMENT: Earth or Water COST: 2 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Target permanent is destroyed after 3 turns, or target immaterial permanent loses immaterial.

ART: Thalas  (modified version of Zanz's Jade Shield artwork) IDEA: Zblader NOTES: This card works by giving the target permanent a lifespan similar to Phase Shield. Weak in comparison to Deflag, but it makes up by being able to destroy immaterial things.  This card's effect can be negated by Protect Artifact being cast on the permanent. SERIES: Duality Series: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,19516.0.html

NAME: Erosion ELEMENT: Earth or Water COST: 2  or    TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Target permanent is desroyed after 3 turns. Ignores immaterial.	NAME: Rust ELEMENT: Earth or Water COST: 2 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Target permanent is desroyed after 3 turns. Ignores immaterial.

ART: Thalas  (modified version of Zanz's Jade Shield artwork) IDEA: Zblader NOTES: This card works by giving the target permanent a lifespan similar to Phase Shield. Weak in comparison to Deflag, but it makes up by being able to destroy immaterial things.  This card's effect can be negated by Protect Artifact being cast on the permanent. SERIES: Duality Series: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,19516.0.html

[Ajit]

People are about to harass you for adding the immaterial exception.  For multiple reasons too probably.

Its alright.

[Rutarete]

Interesting.. and nice effect on the art
The only change i suggest  at the moment is a cost raise- as immortals have augmented characteristics, so should this to have an 'equal and opposite counter'

[Time_lord_victorius]

the answer to kill morning glory!!! this a great day!

[Werdbooty]

I love this. Doesn't even need to be a dual card, but still - great! How did you arrive at the cost, if I may ask?

[ZephyrPhantom]

I love this. Doesn't even need to be a dual card, but still - great! How did you arrive at the cost, if I may ask?

Werdbooty, you'd be suprised to find that I design my cards by heart rather than rely on any rules. I usually balance after I make the card, and then look back at what cards the card could be similar too.

Well, in terms of cost, compare it to Deflag - Deflag does the same thing , but it does it more immediatly and can't hit immaterial. This card can, but at the cost of doing it three turns later.  The upgrade version costs the same due to it's increased splash-ness into decks (think animate weapon).  A great counter to PA and Morningstar (it also helps with Wings, lowering the turns defending by 2 ), but can also be used to get rid of something when you don't have any other options.

[Werdbooty]

Great explanation, and no, I'm not surprised. I prefer the intuitive route myself. The community can help me balance.

[rohlfo]

even if people get iffy about the immaterial bit, still cool to have something which destroys permanents without needing fire quanta.

[wizelsnarf]

Protect Artifact does not need a nerf. Most people aren't going to carry it because if you only take 1 of them, you often don't get it in time. If you take like 3 or 4, then they become dead cards in your deck.

Q: Would you rather carry 2 pulvies or a pulvy and a PA?

A: Almost everyone always chooses 2 pulvies as PA before the pulvy is a dead card.


I don't think any card should nerf PA as it stands. Destroying Jade Shield is pretty mean too. The reason that reflective shields are immaterial is that firebolt decks often carry explosion. Now they can carry this and freaking own making reflective shield pointless.




You need to get rid of the clause about immaterial permanents - it is just a slap in the face to too many cards.

[ZephyrPhantom]

 don't think any card should nerf PA as it stands. Destroying Jade Shield is pretty mean too. The reason that reflective shields are immaterial is that firebolt decks often carry explosion. Now they can carry this and freaking own making reflective shield pointless.


You need to get rid of the clause about immaterial permanents - it is just a slap in the face to too many cards.

That in turn is a slap in the face to the card's concept - it destroys immaterial cards, but it takes 3 whole turns. I would rather carry Deflagration for speed.  Also, I only see 5 cards being potentially nerfed with this - Jade/Mirror Shield, PA, Morning Star, and maybe Wings if you want to get technical.  Again, your opponent has 3 turns to play a duplicate (which does punish Jade and Morning Star a bit, but they're still effective seeing as a stalling opponent should be able to regain enough quanta), so you could just run a second copy of the card (which you yourself say is preferable, however that costs more quanta overall). PA is only 2  | 1  , so in comparison the user of Rust is now 0 | 1 quanta behind.

Taking away the anti-immaterial would make it your generic PC, as well as inferior to Deflag. I don't want this card to be that.

[wizelsnarf]

So your telling me you prefer PA to two pulvies?!

This card is too cheap to do what it does. You can't steal immaterial items and it costs more than explosion. I guess the cost is comparative but I think you need to change something about this card to balance it better.



And 50% of the time 3 turns is not that big a deal anyway. I just play defensively until the card I want destroyed is gone then go back to business. Explosion might be quicker but its less versatile.


Anyhow I don't think I am going to change your mind but I think that it isn't balanced.

[ZephyrPhantom]

So your telling me you prefer PA to two pulvies?!  No. When did I ever say that?

This card is too cheap to do what it does. You can't steal immaterial items and it costs more than explosion. Keep in mind that you get to use stolen items, and explosion does it immediatly for less quanta.



And 50% of the time 3 turns is not that big a deal anyway. I just play defensively until the card I want destroyed is gone then go back to business. Explosion might be quicker but its less versatile. There are games that can be determined by 1 turn. If you Deflagged, maybe your rush was able to deal enough damage too win. If you Rusted, your opponent could stall long enough to play a duplicate, or he could possibly deal enough damage to win.


Anyhow I don't think I am going to change your mind but I think that it isn't balanced. No, but you did give me an idea. The effect can be negated by Protect Artifact instead.