Beanstalk | Ygdrasil

[Monox D. I-Fly]

NAME: Beanstalk ELEMENT: Life COST: 6 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Birth: Summon a random creature.	NAME: Ygdrasil ELEMENT: Life COST: 6 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Birth: Summon a random creature.

ART: IDEA: NOTES: SERIES:

[serprex]

I don't get how the upped is an upgrade

[Monox D. I-Fly]

I don't get how the upped is an upgrade

The unupped is limited to creatures.

[OdinVanguard]

Interesting. I almost think it should be an ability given the randomness... Ability and cast cost may need a little balancing, but will probably need in game testing for that.

[Monox D. I-Fly]

Interesting. I almost think it should be an ability given the randomness... Ability and cast cost may need a little balancing, but will probably need in game testing for that.

I made it because I thought  focused on swarming mechanic (I mean their cheap cost, healing is more specialty). With this, you can instantly summon an Emerald Dragon using just 3 you're lucky.

[Treldon]

...or a Rustler...

[Monox D. I-Fly]

*looking through cards*
*realizing that the only creatures cost more than 3 are Emerald Dragon and Green Nymph*
Should I lower the ability cost to ?

[Treldon]

Definitely not  .  perhaps, but considering that out of the 7 creatures 2 costs 3+, another 2 costs 3 the cost of  is about right

[OdinVanguard]

*looking through cards*
*realizing that the only creatures cost more than 3 are Emerald Dragon and Green Nymph*
Should I lower the ability cost to ?

Definitely not  .  perhaps, but considering that out of the 7 creatures 2 costs 3+, another 2 costs 3 the cost of  is about right

Actually, raising might even be in order.
Consider that you are not only factoring in the creature cost itself, but also the card advantage as well.
Typically a card in unupped meta is worth 2 in element quanta for or (e.g. hourglass and mindgate) or 1 off element quanta (sundial).
So if would be a good estimate of the expected value of the creature cost, then you should tac on +2 more to make up for the card advantage if this is in element.
If you go with an off element ability cost, then 3 quanta is probably fine.

[Monox D. I-Fly]

*looking through cards*
*realizing that the only creatures cost more than 3 are Emerald Dragon and Green Nymph*
Should I lower the ability cost to ?

Definitely not  .  perhaps, but considering that out of the 7 creatures 2 costs 3+, another 2 costs 3 the cost of  is about right

Actually, raising might even be in order.
Consider that you are not only factoring in the creature cost itself, but also the card advantage as well.
Typically a card in unupped meta is worth 2 in element quanta for or (e.g. hourglass and mindgate) or 1 off element quanta (sundial).
So if would be a good estimate of the expected value of the creature cost, then you should tac on +2 more to make up for the card advantage if this is in element.
If you go with an off element ability cost, then 3 quanta is probably fine.

But giving up 4 quanta just for a Horned Frog, Rustler, Cockatrice, or Forest Spirit is just... errr... I don't know...

[OdinVanguard]

*looking through cards*
*realizing that the only creatures cost more than 3 are Emerald Dragon and Green Nymph*
Should I lower the ability cost to ?

Definitely not  .  perhaps, but considering that out of the 7 creatures 2 costs 3+, another 2 costs 3 the cost of  is about right

Actually, raising might even be in order.
Consider that you are not only factoring in the creature cost itself, but also the card advantage as well.
Typically a card in unupped meta is worth 2 in element quanta for or (e.g. hourglass and mindgate) or 1 off element quanta (sundial).
So if would be a good estimate of the expected value of the creature cost, then you should tac on +2 more to make up for the card advantage if this is in element.
If you go with an off element ability cost, then 3 quanta is probably fine.

But giving up 4 quanta just for a Horned Frog, Rustler, Cockatrice, or Forest Spirit is just... errr... I don't know...

(2 + 3 + 1 + 2 + 3 + 7 + 10) / 7 = 27 / 7 ~= 4
It sucks but that's the expected value of the cost... you can blame the dragon as an annoying outlier... Thats not even factoring in the card advantage I mentioned.

If that isn't convincing, look at fate egg...


It costs 4 effectively, for a random creature from any element... and ends up being a bit slower to use and more vulnerable compared to this (unless you fork out the extra quanta and card for an SoR).

Alternately, consider the skelly + eternity or skelly + rewind. The cost is just 3 but the death effect requirement makes up for that in a sense.

In any event, 4 seems reasonable to me.

[Treldon]

Spoiler for Hidden:

*looking through cards*
*realizing that the only creatures cost more than 3 are Emerald Dragon and Green Nymph*
Should I lower the ability cost to ?

Definitely not  .  perhaps, but considering that out of the 7 creatures 2 costs 3+, another 2 costs 3 the cost of  is about right

Actually, raising might even be in order.
Consider that you are not only factoring in the creature cost itself, but also the card advantage as well.
Typically a card in unupped meta is worth 2 in element quanta for or (e.g. hourglass and mindgate) or 1 off element quanta (sundial).
So if would be a good estimate of the expected value of the creature cost, then you should tac on +2 more to make up for the card advantage if this is in element.
If you go with an off element ability cost, then 3 quanta is probably fine.

But giving up 4 quanta just for a Horned Frog, Rustler, Cockatrice, or Forest Spirit is just... errr... I don't know...

That's the price of random drawing