Caterpillar Wand | Moth wand

[AnnaMall]

NAME: Caterpillar Wand ELEMENT: Life COST: 3  TYPE: Weapon ATK|HP: 4|0 TEXT: Weapon: Deals 4 damage and destroys an opponents deck card.	NAME: Moth Wand ELEMENT: Life COST: 3  TYPE: Weapon ATK|HP: 6|0 TEXT: Weapon: Deals 6 damage and destroys an opponents deck card.

ART: 123RF modded  by AnnaMall IDEA: AnnaMall NOTES: A new form of denial. Each attack will substract 1 card from the opponent's stack. Caterpillar/Moth are known for their devouring abilities ranging from plant tissues to fabrics. Life seems a fitting place for such a harmless creature, even the if the mechanics are not new to life. This card provides another win condition for stalls, which can be matched only by SoBe until now. Splashed in a rush gives life some damage that the jade staff could not provide. After some much appreciated feedback removed immaterial and made flown HP 0.  Thank you all for contributing in my first CIA creating and especially Oldtrees SERIES: none

[Rutarete]

Not sure how balanced it is, (even with the no-animation-clause) but it sure looks fun! If it's OP as is, then my proposed change would be to have a  less than 100% chance to destroy a card

[harry88]

I like the idea! Does look like it could be a bit OP, a 50% chance to destroy would certainly help!

[AnnaMall]

Maybe make it devour a card "on hit" not every turn?

The way I imagine this: 23 card stack for a 30 card deck. Majority of games end by turn 15 or so. 2-3 turns to put it on board. It starts to make a difference around round 12-13. Does this sound a bit on the OP side?

[n00b]

I think being 'on hit' makes it more balanced, though a better option (at least, imo) might be what Rut said... give it a percentage to discard a card, even if it's as high as like 75%, it should still balance it out a bit more

On the other hand, an interesting form of denial plus the first weapon not  able to be flown, good job

[RRQJ]

why immaterial?

[AnnaMall]

why immaterial?

I think of it as a card that needs a deck to be built around it in order to work, so a PC would totally destroy that deck. Secondly needs to be in field for multiple turns in order to make a difference. So it seemed reasonable to make it untargetable.

[Drake_XIV]

Maybe make it destroy card in-deck for every 10 damage it does?

Immaterial prevents Endow.

[AnnaMall]

Maybe make it destroy card in-deck for every 10 damage it does?

Immaterial prevents Endow.

Then dmg need to be upped. Destroy a card every 3 turns for unupped not including damage reduction seems UP.

Another thought was using the life quanta pool, eg destroy ala fahrenheit but that can spiral out of control easier.

[esran]

raise the cost to 5/5 or lower the damage to blockable by shield imo

[OldTrees]

why immaterial?

I think of it as a card that needs a deck to be built around it in order to work, so a PC would totally destroy that deck. Secondly needs to be in field for multiple turns in order to make a difference. So it seemed reasonable to make it untargetable.

PC would slow but not stop such a deck. Immaterial is unnecessary. (It is good to see decent reasons for the oft overused immaterial though. Well thought out.)
I also find it strange that a Life weapon would not be able to be animated. I do see balance issues arising if animated though. Is there another mechanic that can be used to solve those issues instead?

Otherwise it looks fairly balanced.

[esran]

well i actually like immaterial to prevent crusader abuse.