Hematite Sapper Charges | Steel Sapper Charges

[OdinVanguard]

NAME: Hematite Sapper Charges ELEMENT: Earth COST: 3 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Sap : Sacrifice a burrowed ally to destroy your opponent's weapon and shield and inflict 8 damage to them. (3 uses)	NAME: Steel Sapper Charges ELEMENT: Earth COST: 3 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Sap : Sacrifice a burrowed ally to destroy your opponent's weapon and shield and inflict 10 damage to them. (3 uses)

ART: OdinVanguard Created using Bryce7 and Hexagon IDEA: OdinVaguard NOTES: "Today is a day to remain firmly grounded" "Sometimes the things we take for granted as the most stable and safe can also be the most dangerous. Use this to your advantage." A fun earth themed destruction card to give earth some extra punch, and burrowing some new versatility. Idea is straightforward. You sacrifice a burrowed creature to destroy your opponent's weapon and shield and deal some decent damage to them in the process. Total damage output comes to 1.25 times unstable gas for unused or 1.5 times unstable gas for upped version. The downside is that it more turns to disperse. Immaterial weapons and shields will not be destroyed, and mirror shields will reflect the damage (just like unstable gas would be) These cards do not stack. After being depleted, the card is removed from play. If one of these is hit by a deflagrate or other PC, all charges are lost (or destroyed) at once. …Maybe antlions will see a little more love now SERIES:

[Drake_XIV]

The feels like quite a bit on one card...

[OdinVanguard]

The feels like quite a bit on one card...

Ya, I hear you on that. It was tricky making it all fit... but I'm not sure how to capture the concept better. I.e. burrowing under the enemies defenses and blowing the ground out from under them.

[Rutarete]

I don't think the +2 damage for the upgrade is worth a cost increase here (total of just 6 more damage). If anything, that +1 cost is for the art change
At first I was confused about the name, but now I see the theme. I like the duos it encourages (darkness, entropy), but my main worry is one thing: SoFo. I can see it already - someone posting a deck called SoFo Sappers. I'm not sure how OP it would be, since you still need X burrowed creatures, but it would still be a very powerful combination. I see why it fits in Earth, but adding this rivals Fire in terms of PC-CC.

[OdinVanguard]

I don't think the +2 damage for the upgrade is worth a cost increase here (total of just 6 more damage). If anything, that +1 cost is for the art change
At first I was confused about the name, but now I see the theme. I like the duos it encourages (darkness, entropy), but my main worry is one thing: SoFo. I can see it already - someone posting a deck called SoFo Sappers. I'm not sure how OP it would be, since you still need X burrowed creatures, but it would still be a very powerful combination. I see why it fits in Earth, but adding this rivals Fire in terms of PC-CC.

Hmm... I'll drop the upgrade cost to match the unupgraded version then.
Yes, the PC is very high here. I actually was debating adding in a activation cost, but I thought putting in a forced duo would make it a little too restricted...
How does it rival fire in terms of CC though? The damage is only inflicted upon the opponent, not an enemy creature.

[Rutarete]

What I was saying, is that the amount of PC would rival the amount of CC

[OdinVanguard]

Ah, gotcha

[andretimpa]

This makes me think of an antliontal TTK

[Higurashi]

Since I don't think this affects balance in any significant manner: Wings should not be destroyable. Depending on if you think Wings makes the player fly or not, Wings would also protect the weapon. I don't think the latter is necessary.

Not sure if I think Reflectives should reflect since you're burrowing behind their defences. I do agree they shouldn't be destroyed though. When in doubt of thematics, I turn to balance. Do Reflectives need a buff? Yes. Would reflecting this be a buff? Yes. Let them reflect.

[OdinVanguard]

Since I don't think this affects balance in any significant manner: Wings should not be destroyable. Depending on if you think Wings makes the player fly or not, Wings would also protect the weapon. I don't think the latter is necessary.

Not sure if I think Reflectives should reflect since you're burrowing behind their defences. I do agree they shouldn't be destroyed though. When in doubt of thematics, I turn to balance. Do Reflectives need a buff? Yes. Would reflecting this be a buff? Yes. Let them reflect.

Interesting, didn't think about wings when I made this... I suppose it makes sense not to have it affect wings.

[mwaetht]

That looks like an exception that'd be pretty complicated to explain, especially on a card that has enough text placed upon itself already. Even if you go the Voodoo Doll route and not explain it, you still need to put in text hinting at the exception.