Shards (old)

[Pyrodinium]

for relic, i believe that you should be able play relic and target it with reverse time. if it is targeted with reverse time, then it becomes a random creature, so that way it has a point, AND you could include it in a skeleton/reverse time deck 

Per the card's text flavor it should turn into a random creature or permanent.

[Genuinous]

They are fine as they are.... Shards: You learn after 1 game, that you have to wait for upgrade. Relic: Great source of money. I was always very happy to get a few relics as a new player. Don't think it should be changed.

As for the proposed changes, you'd need more consistency:
SoD->Blue Shard : 20->2 : Down to 10%
SoG->Green Shard: 5->1 : Down to 20%
SoR->Yellow Shard: Idk the average cost for creature abilities, but I think it's pretty close to 2. Hence 2->1 : Down to 50%

Thats some great inconsistency. I don't think you can ever find a good way to balance them, besides leaving them as they are.

[Taffer]

They are fine as they are.... Shards: You learn after 1 game, that you have to wait for upgrade. Relic: Great source of money. I was always very happy to get a few relics as a new player. Don't think it should be changed.

As for the proposed changes, you'd need more consistency:
SoD->Blue Shard : 20->2 : Down to 10%
SoG->Green Shard: 5->1 : Down to 20%
SoR->Yellow Shard: Idk the average cost for creature abilities, but I think it's pretty close to 2. Hence 2->1 : Down to 50%

Thats some great inconsistency. I don't think you can ever find a good way to balance them, besides leaving them as they are.

Using the same logic you can show similar "inconsistency" among the new scorpions or nymphs. I don't think that balancing the percentages would make much sense; my only goal was not to make them valuable cards to play. It seems that yellow shard would be more powerful than the others but in truth it wouldn't have any effect on most creatures.

It is clear that recent state of these cards is inconsistent: they are marked as spells and they have cost but you are unable to play them as they remain in your hand. If you vote for consistency but without any effect, then choose poll option 2 or 3.

[Genuinous]

What do you mean, inconsistency among scorpions and nymphs? They seem pretty balanced. By your suggestions, the only Shard, which would make sense to use, would be the Yellow Shard, the others are just waste of space in the deck.

I voted option one. Consistent without any effect. You learn to wait for them.

[Taffer]

What do you mean, inconsistency among scorpions and nymphs?

No, I don't mean they are inconsistent. I said inconsistency could be shown among them using similar logic. But forget it, I admit that it wasn't a good example. 

I voted option one. Consistent without any effect.

I'm telling you a secret: I created option one to isolate a "control group" of voters. I thought that inconsistency of these cards is so obvious that (until now) I considered members of this group the ones who just clicked without even reading the post. Since you have apparently read it, I have to rethink the whole thing.

But seriously, how can you consider a card to be consistent when it tells you that it's a spell for 1 random quantum and it still cannot be played? If it's agreed that shards and relics aren't for playing, then I think option 2 or 3 would be the only reasonable choices.

My suggestions tried to be some "not too breaking changes" just for fun. So you are right, they should remain just "waste of space in the deck" until they are upgraded. I'm really surprised that they are more accepted than I awaited... 

[Genuinous]

It might be bothering for new players, 'oh cool, a rare' and then 'crap, this is useless...'.
However having useless spells (when all are consistently useless) is better than buffing 1 out of the 3. Only SoR would have some use in your new suggestion. So I think it's the best to leave them as they are.

[RagingAlien]

voted for making them 1-cost spells that do nothing. might seem stupid, but at least they will no longer clog up the hand of players than put them in their deck. (Let the unupped shard farms pop all over T50!)

[unknown89089]

Maybe Relic could have like a Pandemonium affect, except on one creature. It starts as a spell, then you choose a creature, and the potion of a random element affects it, ranging from rage pot to liquid shadow.

[Xenocidius]

I believe Zanzarino has stated that Relics will never, EVER become useful. This is so that people can sell them without fear that they will ever have a use. Disagree with Relics suggestion, agree with shards (although yellow shard may be too powerful).

[Taffer]

I have locked the voting due to the recently announced shard changes, see update in OP.

[silux]

if Relic is meant to be sold,let's at least it be worth of 303 (one third of a nynph).
With it selling at 65 I'd rather keep them and grind 20 minutes;I'd sell them only if i need of quick cash to up a card, and you need  23 unupped relics and 1 to upgrade a card!

[Toxx]

I think all shards should stay the same but I kinda like the idea with the relics, I would like all the relics to stay as is for now for a possible better usefullness in the future then what you have said