Dark Matter | Dark Matter

[Hazardus10]

NAME: Dark Matter ELEMENT: Gravity COST: 7 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 8 | 7 TEXT: Engulf: Dark Matter consume a creature and produce quanta equal to half its cost.	NAME: Dark Matter ELEMENT: Gravity COST: 6 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 8 | 7 TEXT: Engulf: Dark Matter consume a creature and produce quanta equal to half its cost.

ART: Hazardus10 IDEA: Hazardus10 NOTES: This card was made for DM1321, gravity being his favourite element,I used dark matter. Dark matter is what keeps the universe from collapsing by using gravity. DM = Dark Matter SERIES:

[kimham8a]

Personally, I find Dm1321's personality to more likely be fire. Gravity and Darkness work too though, because he keeps his fire inside.

[aefields]

I like the combination with the name (I'm a science buff).

[Drake_XIV]

By consume, I hope you mean sacrifice?  There's something to be said about just autokilling off your opponent's cards.

[OdinVanguard]

By consume, I hope you mean sacrifice?  There's something to be said about just autokilling off your opponent's cards.

Indeed, if it is a targeted effect this card would be very overpowered if enemy creatures could get consumed.

On the other hand, it may be possible to balance inclusion of enemy creatures if the selection is random.

Essentially, this card would then become a heavily offensive weapon with a high chance of consuming its allies.

It would make for an interesting standalone creature (i.e. decks centered around having a single one of these on the field).

If this is an avenue you want to take it, however, there should probably be some kind of restriction on what can get eaten (like something akin to devour or paradox).

Similarly, if an enemy gets eaten, the quanta should probably go to the consumed cards owner.

[Drake_XIV]

To be honest, I'm not a big fan of just resorting to randomness to balance an otherwise troublesome mechanic, although I have been guilty of that myself.

And even if the quanta is returned to the owner, there is still the matter of the fact that the creature is gone.  One of the pitfalls in not having a graveyard system is that creature playing is limited outside of [Aflatoxin] [Mitosis] and [Fractal], thus raising the cost of a creature higher than just a simple refund...

[OdinVanguard]

To be honest, I'm not a big fan of just resorting to randomness to balance an otherwise troublesome mechanic, although I have been guilty of that myself.

And even if the quanta is returned to the owner, there is still the matter of the fact that the creature is gone.  One of the pitfalls in not having a graveyard system is that creature playing is limited outside of [Aflatoxin] [Mitosis] and [Fractal], thus raising the cost of a creature higher than just a simple refund...

Very true. This is why an additional restriction / balance of some kind would still be needed.

[Drake_XIV]

What if it were to Sacrifice target creature and then drain quanta equal to half it's cost [rounded up]?

[Hazardus10]

What if it were to Sacrifice target creature and then drain quanta equal to half it's cost [rounded up]?

Yes round up.

I should specify engulf (in darkness) doesn't eat the creature merely, puts the target creature in delay (1 turn), while quanta = to 1/2 its cost is produced.

[UnderneathTheLens]

What if it were to Sacrifice target creature and then drain quanta equal to half it's cost [rounded up]?

Yes round up.

I should specify engulf (in darkness) doesn't eat the creature merely, puts the target creature in delay (1 turn), while quanta = to 1/2 its cost is produced.

Yea the word "consume" implies killing, generally. Well, this changes everything.

[OdinVanguard]

Indeed... that is a much different beast to balance then.

[Drake_XIV]

Well, that changes things...