(Probably) a new kind of mechanics, but need more inputs

[waterzx]

Haven't made a card for about a week because I've been looking for something special, and this is what I've settled with

A new type of ability for creature which has its own pros and cons, just like Rage Potion. However, this ability will SELF-ACTIVATE whenever you have sufficient quanta, which means if you do not activate the ability yourself, it will activate itself at the end of your turn.

But this is different from "absorbing quanta every turn" because the creature won't die because of lack of quanta.

But I still can't find a suitable ability for this mechanics. The closest one I've got is an ability that damages both player but I think it's a common ability so I want to get something else. Any help ?

[Drake_XIV]

"When you have X , [effect here]" Kind of thing?

[furballdn]

Shouldn't be that hard to program.
If (quantaelementofwhateveryouchoose>=certain number):
{//eventgoeshere;}

[waterzx]

"When you have X , [effect here]" Kind of thing?

Something like that. You simply can't avoid using the skill unless you delay, lobotomize or freeze the creature.

The skill needs to be useful and harmful at the same time. This is why I need inputs. I can't find a suitable skill for this.

[Drake_XIV]

If it has to both be harmful and useful, it seems like .

Maybe something like:

When you have 12 , take 1 damage but deal twice the damage.

[waterzx]

If it has to both be harmful and useful, it seems like .

Maybe something like:

When you have 12 , take 1 damage but deal twice the damage.

This is not what I want. Let me give you an example :

   : Deal double damage to random player. Self-activate if you have enough

[Drake_XIV]

So, it's an optional active ability until you have a certain level of ?
E.g. : [Creature Name] deals double damage.  Must be used when you have X .

Or does it need the start up active to start a passive?
E.g. : [Creature Name] deals double damage when you have X .

[waterzx]

So, it's an optional active ability until you have a certain level of ?
E.g. : [Creature Name] deals double damage.  Must be used when you have X .

Or does it need the start up active to start a passive?
E.g. : [Creature Name] deals double damage when you have X .

Neither. Self activate when you can pay the activation cost of 

[Drake_XIV]

That's what I mean with the second one.  Maybe if I reworded it...

: [Creature Name] now deals more damage when you have at least X .

The ability in this case would be one-time use like Deja Vu, right?  But it has a lasting effect?

[Cheesy111]

That's what I mean with the second one.  Maybe if I reworded it...

: [Creature Name] now deals more damage when you have at least X .

The ability in this case would be one-time use like Deja Vu, right?  But it has a lasting effect?

It is an 'active' ability in the sense that it can be lobotomized, however it occurs at the end of your turn if you have 2+ fire quanta.  You do not choose whether or not to activate it.  It will probably not be a one-time use.

[furballdn]

If you have this ability you must be sure what it entails. This would mean that the owner has to carefully control quanta so there can't be too much lest something bad happens (too much energy, singularity, discharges in owner's face...etc). To counteract this, the creature must have something that is really good. Perhaps some low cost powerful hitter, but if you generate too much energy, it turns on you or something.

[OldTrees]

Probably not a creature.

What is your thoughts on this ?

http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,39347.msg489308.html#new

The mechanic is: Drain X quanta and [Effect].

It is in the same category as
X quanta: [Effect]
or
Absorb X quanta. [Effect]

Is it useful in a case where the current version are not? Or is it more useful in a case the current version are used?

Something to note is that the proposed mechanic has more of a drawback than an activation cost and less of a drawback than an absorption cost. Since it has a drawback relative to the default (activation cost), it would be used as a disadvantage to a card to balance the card without raising other costs. It is less of a drawback than absorb. Thus it would be used when the desired disadvantage is less than the disadvantage imposed by Absorb. How significant is the disadvantage imposed by absorb? Flooding used to have Absorb  . This cost was discovered to be much too high. It now only has Absorb  . This implies that absorb costs are a high magnitude disadvantage.

However there are other low magnitude disadvantages that are less complex. Stat changes are a low magnitude disadvantage on skill based cards (where this disadvantage would make sense). Stock quanta (Fire Bolt, Ice Bolt, ...) is another low magnitude disadvantage.

I would suggest trying this disadvantage on permanents with abilities that are designed to be played before the regular casting cost would allow them to be played.

In most cases I do not think this mechanic would be a better design than a higher casting cost with the manual activation mechanic. However there would be exceptions.