Shatterpillar | Rorschach Fly

[SnoWeb]

NAME: Shatterpillar ELEMENT: Entropy COST: 1  TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 0|2 TEXT: Hallucinogen: absorbs 2 random quanta of its owner and distributes the remainings equally when discarded.	NAME: Rorschach Fly ELEMENT: Entropy COST: 1  TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 3|1 TEXT: Hallucinogen: Empties the bigest quanta pool of its owner when discarded.

ART: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1150081 IDEA: SnoWeb NOTES: "Hallucinogen" is a passive ability and cannot be lobotomised. SERIES: Invasive creature series (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,23363.0.html)

[Kaos.]

In my opinion the Rorschach Fly could be a little bit OP in a Nightmare deck. Nightmare + RF + Pest could annihilate opponent's quantum. :/

The only idea I've got to balance it it's raising its cost to 2 or 3 (and maybe decreasing its attack by 1), so it's dangerous even for you if you've got a bad draw with not many pillars.

[az4rel]

i think this card is a bit op with nightmare but useless as a standalone.
I like kaos idea, but it makes it less usable as a stand alone.... specially the fly.
dont know how to fix it yet but i'll be back posibly maybe 

[SnoWeb]

I see what you mean, guys. However, remember that this is not a spell. The effect is only triggered if the card is discarded. This means that the opponent cannot play any card and cannot discard any other card (before anything happens). This means that he probably has only few quanta. Also the effect is triggered at the discard time which means just before the pillars generate new quanta.
True, a deck comprising both this card, nightmare and devourer is probably a good denial deck. But this is the strength of the deck and not of the card alone. I don't think, for now, that said combination is better than other good denial combination (devourer/fractal, devourer/earthquake or discord/backhole).
I'll see what the others will say about the card and if everybody (or the majority) say like you guys, I'll change it.

[karis]

@az4rel
i'm don't think 3/1 with 1 cost is useless creature...   and shatterpillar is good for entropy creature to be a butterfly   

@SnoWeb
are you already think about nightmare+malignant cell case?   don't talk only about this card  but whole your invasive series. 

[SnoWeb]

Copied from the series thread:

Shatterpillar | Rorschach Fly - Don't like em. Can't see a positive use and even for nighmare bit meh.

Standalone useage: none|competes with micro abomination
Clog Hand use: The discard effect is negligible when the opponent is forced to discard without adding silence to the equation.
Clog Field use: Will not be played|Powerful, hard to block, creature that does not Infest.

Overall Mechanically:
Please forget this card.
Other critiques:
The name does not seem to fit thematically well.
A series is more credible if it does not try to force the idea into every element.

[/list]

@az4rel
i'm don't think 3/1 with 1 cost is useless creature...   and shatterpillar is good for entropy creature to be a butterfly   

That's the problem here. There are already creature costing 1 in entropy (Schrödinger's cat and Micro-abomination). This use (as BE holder) is therefore already covered.
As OldTrees said, the creatures are weak and as they do not have a multiplication mechanism (as most of the other card in the series) they are less interesting. I could add one for sure but who would like to fill his field with a 0|2 creature?

@SnoWeb
are you already think about nightmare+malignant cell case?   don't talk only about this card  but whole your invasive series.

I'm not totally sure what you meant here. I did three card using a infest-like mechanic (Flame | Flame (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,23276.msg317070#msg317070), Ivy | Ivy (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,23314.msg317099/topicseen#msg317099) and Caulerpa taxifolia | Caulerpa taxifolia (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,23319.msg317131#msg317131)). As I stated above, I don't think it could be a clever solution here.
Maybe you wanted to know if I tried to combine (or create decks combining) the use of nightmare on malignant cells? This could make your opponent play the malignant cell and clog his field faster. I tried indeed and found it was a bad idea (slower than a regular aflatoxin).
If I didn't answer your question, please explain ...

[karis]

my bad.  i'm bad in english and that make me don't wanna type so much word   

i'm talking about,  if you fill your opponent field with malignant field.  then use nightmare on this card (or this whole serie card).

i'm mean.  if in that case.  you can force your opponent to discard your own card that you give to your opponent by nightmare....

but come to think of it...  i'm don't think it's so OP anymore. 

[SnoWeb]

you can force your opponent to discard your own card that you give to your opponent by nightmare....

Yeah. That's the whole idea. However, I don't think that you need a field full of malignant cell to do that. I might work in the same direction ...
Question for those that know aflatoxin mechanism well: Can you still play creature when your field is full (destroying them for example) or do you have to discard?