Claymore | Claymore

[Pineapple]

NAME: Claymore ELEMENT: Earth COST: 8 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: 8 | 8 when flying TEXT: Weapon: Deal 8 damage at the end of every turn. Unsuccessful attacks delay the enemy shield for 2 turns.	NAME: Claymore ELEMENT: Earth COST: 8 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: 10 | 10 when flying TEXT: Weapon: Deal 10 damage at the end of every turn. Unsuccessful attacks delay the enemy shield for 2 turns.

ART: IDEA: Pineapple NOTES: The delaying ability is an active ability named "Claymore". Delayed shields act as if not there. Shields that are delayed for 2 turns become un-delayed the 2nd time the enemy ends his turn after the shield is delayed. SERIES:

[Cheesy111]

Does the effect stack?

[Pineapple]

Does the effect stack?

I don't see how it can, but I would guess that the default behavior (without adding stuff to the card text) would be overwriting instead of stacking.

[furballdn]

This seems sorta UP especially compared with titan. Normally, weapons have a much higher attack/cost ratio than 1. Quite useful in giving some way to deal with dim shield and wings though.

[Pineapple]

This seems sorta UP especially compared with titan. Normally, weapons have a much higher attack/cost ratio than 1. Quite useful in giving some way to deal with dim shield and wings though.

Well, compare the cost of Dragons to the respective element's mid-ranged hitters. Higher cost means lower attack/cost ratio. This costs the same as Shrieker, has more HP when animated, and has an ability that further aids it (and all the creatures you control) in dealing damage.

[Cheesy111]

Just to clarify on stacking, AW + Claymore or Crusader + Claymore were my thoughts - looking back on it it seems that Claymore #1 would delay the shield and then the rest of the Claymores or Crusaders would not miss.  Is this a correct interpretation?

[Pineapple]

Just to clarify on stacking, AW + Claymore or Crusader + Claymore were my thoughts - looking back on it it seems that Claymore #1 would delay the shield and then the rest of the Claymores or Crusaders would not miss.  Is this a correct interpretation?

Yes, if the shield is delayed (by Claymore #1), then it's (as far as I know) impossible for the rest of your creatures to miss.

[Rutarete]

Pineapple?? Ok. O.o

I lthink it's much better at 2 turns.

[storyteller]

and I totally see claymore as a powerful Other weapon...

very nice card.

[Pineapple]

and I totally see claymore as a powerful Other weapon...

very nice card.

However, it's pretty hard to make an expensive yet balanced card that costs random quanta. :|

Thanks for the appraisal!

[nilsieboy]

Just to clarify on stacking, AW + Claymore or Crusader + Claymore were my thoughts - looking back on it it seems that Claymore #1 would delay the shield and then the rest of the Claymores or Crusaders would not miss.  Is this a correct interpretation?

Yes, if the shield is delayed (by Claymore #1), then it's (as far as I know) impossible for the rest of your creatures to miss.

what against sundial?

[Pineapple]

Just to clarify on stacking, AW + Claymore or Crusader + Claymore were my thoughts - looking back on it it seems that Claymore #1 would delay the shield and then the rest of the Claymores or Crusaders would not miss.  Is this a correct interpretation?

Yes, if the shield is delayed (by Claymore #1), then it's (as far as I know) impossible for the rest of your creatures to miss.

what against sundial?

...Huh. I guess "unsuccessful attacks" require that they "make an attempt to attack" (freezed and delayed don't count). I guess it can go either way.
To clarify on stacking, it doesn't say that it's cumulative on the card, so by default it overwrites.