Chronoblast | Chronoblast

[furballdn]

NAME: Chronoblast ELEMENT: Time COST: 6 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Opponent's creatures take damage. Newer creatures take more damage. Removes invinsibility.	NAME: Chronoblast ELEMENT: Time COST: 4 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Opponent's creatures take damage. Newer creatures take more damage. Removes invinsibility.

ART: EmeraldTiger IDEA: furballdn NOTES: Creatures take damage based on the panel they are on. Creatures in slot 1 take 1 damage, creatures in slot 2 take 2 damage, creatures in slot 3 take 3 damage...etc SERIES:

[Drake_XIV]

Something got botched in the tables...

Interesting mass CC, but I feel the 2 drop in upgrading may be a bit much...

[mypetmachine]

Feels OP to me. If one's opponent has a fairly full field, this would easily outshine RoF.

[furballdn]

Feels OP to me. If one's opponent has a fairly full field, this would easily outshine RoF.

Kidding right?

This is weaker than RoF so it has a -1 cost compared to RoF. It is only "equal" to RoF in terms of damage done when the enemy has 5 creatures, and better if they have more.

If the opponent has a fairly full field? That's a pretty big if, since most decks don't use a full field. In most games, you usually don't even see more than 7 creatures from someone.

[Anarook]

Lets do a table comparison. -note I'm not the best at these things...

Chronoblast

# of target	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
Damage to target	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
Total damage	1	3	6	10	15	21	28	36	45	55	66

Rain of Fire

# of target	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
Damage to target	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3
Total damage	3	6	9	12	15	18	21	24	27	30	33

At 5 creatures RoF and Chronoblast do the same amount of total damage. However, Chronoblast starts to kill most creatures around this same point whereas RoF typically weakens creatures rather than kills them.
Note also that at 11 creatures Chronoblast does double the damage of RoF.

Mind you this is a bit skewed as the HP of individual creatures is variable.

You're typically not going to waste an AoE spell on less than 4 or 5 creatures which in my opinion places Chronoblast in a range where it should cost at least as much as, if not more than, RoF.

[jawdirk]

Chronoblast's damage profile is skewed in the direction that you'd expect the HP of creatures coming out to be skewed, so it might tend to do just enough damage to kill. For example, if a green deck puts out a leaf dragon, 2 frogs, and 2 cockatrices in that order, it will kill the dragon, a frog, and a cockatrice, and leave the other creatures at 1 hp. This is stronger than what RoF would do in that specific situation. I'm not saying it is necessarily better than RoF, but it might be surprisingly good because it ramps in the same direction that a player would normally ramp the HP of the creatures he plays.

[odideph]

Chronoblast's damage profile is skewed in the direction that you'd expect the HP of creatures coming out to be skewed, so it might tend to do just enough damage to kill. For example, if a green deck puts out a leaf dragon, 2 frogs, and 2 cockatrices in that order, it will kill the dragon, a frog, and a cockatrice, and leave the other creatures at 1 hp. This is stronger than what RoF would do in that specific situation. I'm not saying it is necessarily better than RoF, but it might be surprisingly good because it ramps in the same direction that a player would normally ramp the HP of the creatures he plays.

Indeed, but considering the fact that more often than not, creatures in the first 4-ish slots live and die and get replaced by other creatures, this card would probably deal its minimal damages way more often than the stronger ones. The really interesting part comes from those creatures that arrive late in the game but have some very strong ability or damage. Those will get insta-gibbed by Chronoblast.

I don't mind giving Time mass CC, so my only concern with this would be the casting cost, which, as someone else already said, should be equal to Rain of Fire for the reasons he stated, and the reasons i just stated above.

[Avenger]

Invinsibility->Invisibility