Death Bless |Bless Death

[az4rel]

NAME: Death Bless ELEMENT: Death COST: 3 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: - TEXT: Upon creature death, Death creatures recover 5 HP.s	NAME: Bless Death ELEMENT: Death COST: 3 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: - TEXT: Upon creature death,  all your creatures regain 3 Hp. except for devouring creatures.

ART: Az4ReL IDEA: Az4ReL also thanks to OldTrees, Kuroaitou and YoYoBro NOTES: deavouring creatures means creatures in the act of devour aka. using the ability. I dont want them to get double bonus for eating a creature tha they already ate.but in orther to keep sort of a combo with available the rest of the creatures do get healed. Necrofagia would be the name of the ability (just writing it so i dont forget) SERIES: mayor arcana; death card #13 series.

 

card remade again(edit: 5 times now).... this time I think it´s ballanced.

[OldTrees]

Way to inexpensive.
The unupped is 2 plagues + 1 more plague and a mass unburrow/materialize however the unupped only costs as much as 2 plagues.

[az4rel]

Way to inexpensive.
The unupped is 2 plagues + 1 more plague and a mass unburrow/materialize however the unupped only costs as much as 2 plagues.

thanks you are right. what about this?

or I could lower the poison.

[OldTrees]

I would recommend the two (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,18934.0.html) of you work together.

[az4rel]

now it should be fine.

[AnonymousRevival]

Please change the title name as well.

[az4rel]

finaly I think im done with this card.

[DrunkDestroyer]

I'm not too sure which card I am supposed to comment on, but they both seem quite excessive to me.
Firstly, I am not sure I like the transition from spell to permanent on the original card. None of the current cards do that, and to keep things simpler it often helps to follow their guidlines, and therefore be more likely to be accepted by the community/enter the game.
I am assuming I should be commenting on 'reaper'. To me, it still seems pretty overpowered. Trying to make a spell costing 10+ is pretty hard to balance (I'm seeing what you're doing with the 13's, is this intentional?). This is the equivalent to 3 plagues (12  ) and more since it targets immortal/burrowed creatures (maybe + 2 or 3  ), and leaves immortal and burrowed creatures targetable (Nothing to compare this to, but I would assume that it would be between 2-6 . Very unspecific, but no other card comes close to doing this so we have no idea).
Obviously, things done in groups are always cheaper, and you can reduce the cost a bit since it would also in theory affect your own creatures (which probably wouldn't happen since you would account for it in deckbuilding, or which can work to your advantage in Death), but I am still seeing the cost of the spell as less than it should be for it's effects. Personally I would try to keep the cost as low as possible, so I'd modify the card a little more.

And as a side note, I love the art here. You did a great job on them. Death Angel is probably my favourite with the colour scheme and schetchy look. If this doesn't do it for you I would definetely find an excuse to put that art in a card.

[az4rel]

I'm not too sure which card I am supposed to comment on, but they both seem quite excessive to me.
Firstly, I am not sure I like the transition from spell to permanent on the original card. None of the current cards do that, and to keep things simpler it often helps to follow their guidlines, and therefore be more likely to be accepted by the community/enter the game.
I am assuming I should be commenting on 'reaper'. To me, it still seems pretty overpowered. Trying to make a spell costing 10+ is pretty hard to balance (I'm seeing what you're doing with the 13's, is this intentional?). This is the equivalent to 3 plagues (12  ) and more since it targets immortal/burrowed creatures (maybe + 2 or 3  ), and leaves immortal and burrowed creatures targetable (Nothing to compare this to, but I would assume that it would be between 2-6 . Very unspecific, but no other card comes close to doing this so we have no idea).
Obviously, things done in groups are always cheaper, and you can reduce the cost a bit since it would also in theory affect your own creatures (which probably wouldn't happen since you would account for it in deckbuilding, or which can work to your advantage in Death), but I am still seeing the cost of the spell as less than it should be for it's effects. Personally I would try to keep the cost as low as possible, so I'd modify the card a little more.

And as a side note, I love the art here. You did a great job on them. Death Angel is probably my favourite with the colour scheme and schetchy look. If this doesn't do it for you I would definetely find an excuse to put that art in a card.

actually the reaper was the original idea death angel is the last one ive donebut im about to change it again any ways.

[az4rel]

ok it is definitely more balanced now.

[Kuroaitou]

CURATOR COMMENT
-Fix the TYPE section of the table in your non-upped card (instead of 'Spell', it should be 'Permanent', to match the card's icon, OR you need to fix the non-upgraded picture to help the correct Lightning Bolt symbol on the bottom right side of the image so that it's represented as a spell)
-Simplify this as much as you can.~

~ = Listen closely.

While I'm all up for incredibly diverse and complex cards that expand an element, I think you're trying to do -way- too much in one card idea. When you play either of these cards, there's an excessive amount of mechanics happening all at once, and I think that would just confuse people rather than make it more dynamic.

Here's a few things you're doing for your non-upped idea:
-Death creatures gain a passive, Necrofagia, which allows them to recover HP whenever a creature dies. (triggered on creature kill)
-Death creatures have their basic skill replaced (Condor, Virus, Flesh Spider) or are given a skill (Ivory Dragon, Mummy, Skeleton) that allows them to Devour creatures with their OWN element of quanta
-If you activate its 'active' skill, "Morbi", all creatures are plagued, and the opponent is also poisoned

Your upped idea, on the other hand has these effects:
-Death creatures gain the passive, Necrofagia and receive the 'Devour' ability when they are damaged, but NOT killed
-Automatically poisons the opponent each turn for 1 poison counter, similar to Arsenic even though this isn't a weapon


...let's look at all of that - don't you think that this idea is too unfocused as is? You have mechanics that add passives, replace or give a new active skill, and then also either applies poison to the opponent or does a pandemonium-style Plague AOE to every creature.

Here's my advice: out of all of these concepts, focus on the 'Necrofagia' passive giving ability, and scrap the other mechanics - it's the most interesting and potentially useful out of all of the other abilities you're trying to give to a Death creature (not to mention, it's the only one to me that actually makes sense). Simplify the text, and either specify it as a Spell or Permanent, and lower the cost dramatically to accommodate for the change. This way, your idea is read easier by others and gives people a sense of how this card could combine with certain CC cards or death-trigger related creatures/effects, and you'll be set to go.

Example:
"Upon any creature death,
Death creatures recover 5 HP."

vs.

"Death creatures gain Necrofagia and Devour.
morbi:(Sacrifice Card) Poison all Creatures and Opponent."

Which one seems more plausible to you to fit as a card idea?

[az4rel]

CURATOR COMMENT
-Fix the TYPE section of the table in your non-upped card (instead of 'Spell', it should be 'Permanent', to match the card's icon, OR you need to fix the non-upgraded picture to help the correct Lightning Bolt symbol on the bottom right side of the image so that it's represented as a spell)
-Simplify this as much as you can.~

~ = Listen closely.

While I'm all up for incredibly diverse and complex cards that expand an element, I think you're trying to do -way- too much in one card idea. When you play either of these cards, there's an excessive amount of mechanics happening all at once, and I think that would just confuse people rather than make it more dynamic.

Here's a few things you're doing for your non-upped idea:
-Death creatures gain a passive, Necrofagia, which allows them to recover HP whenever a creature dies. (triggered on creature kill)
-Death creatures have their basic skill replaced (Condor, Virus, Flesh Spider) or are given a skill (Ivory Dragon, Mummy, Skeleton) that allows them to Devour creatures with their OWN element of quanta
-If you activate its 'active' skill, "Morbi", all creatures are plagued, and the opponent is also poisoned

Your upped idea, on the other hand has these effects:
-Death creatures gain the passive, Necrofagia and receive the 'Devour' ability when they are damaged, but NOT killed
-Automatically poisons the opponent each turn for 1 poison counter, similar to Arsenic even though this isn't a weapon


...let's look at all of that - don't you think that this idea is too unfocused as is? You have mechanics that add passives, replace or give a new active skill, and then also either applies poison to the opponent or does a pandemonium-style Plague AOE to every creature.

Here's my advice: out of all of these concepts, focus on the 'Necrofagia' passive giving ability, and scrap the other mechanics - it's the most interesting and potentially useful out of all of the other abilities you're trying to give to a Death creature (not to mention, it's the only one to me that actually makes sense). Simplify the text, and either specify it as a Spell or Permanent, and lower the cost dramatically to accommodate for the change. This way, your idea is read easier by others and gives people a sense of how this card could combine with certain CC cards or death-trigger related creatures/effects, and you'll be set to go.

Example:
"Upon any creature death,
Death creatures recover 5 HP."

vs.

"Death creatures gain Necrofagia and Devour.
morbi:(Sacrifice Card) Poison all Creatures and Opponent."

Which one seems more plausible to you to fit as a card idea?

thanks, I think I know now how to fix it all.