Help Me So | Help Me Not

[johannhowitzer]

Masterfurry is right, the card should point out the 3-turn span, and when played it should have the traditional 3...0 counter.  I also like OldTrees' idea about making it a flat +1/-1, instead of increasing each turn.  This makes it easier to keep track of, reduces the potential abuses, and makes it more a true brother to Nightfall.  Nightfall is specific-element and can't cripple your opponent, while this will drain his attack power, but is temporary.

Heaven forbid we should presume to design your card for you, but if you go with flat rate instead of increasing each turn, I feel like +2/-2 is more in line with taking up a space in someone's deck.  That will provide a much more workable stability buff to friendlies, and the stall factor for your opponent won't be as trivial, and more worthy of permanent control.

[Masterfurry]

Masterfurry is right, the card should point out the 3-turn span, and when played it should have the traditional 3...0 counter.  I also like OldTrees' idea about making it a flat +1/-1, instead of increasing each turn.  This makes it easier to keep track of, reduces the potential abuses, and makes it more a true brother to Nightfall.  Nightfall is specific-element and can't cripple your opponent, while this will drain his attack power, but is temporary.

Heaven forbid we should presume to design your card for you, but if you go with flat rate instead of increasing each turn, I feel like +2/-2 is more in line with taking up a space in someone's deck.  That will provide a much more workable stability buff to friendlies, and the stall factor for your opponent won't be as trivial, and more worthy of permanent control.

So what should I change now? lol

[johannhowitzer]

If you take my suggestion, make the permanent last 3 turns (it already does) and provide 0|+2 to friendlies and give -2|0 to enemies until it expires, flat rate.  The current version would be +1/-1 first turn, then +2/-2 and +3/-3.

You get the same net effect unless a shield is in play, but it is simpler to understand, code, and plan with.  Simpler usually means more strategic flexibility and accessibility to new players.

Card text would read something like:

Your creatures gain 0|+2 and enemy creatures gain -2|0.  Lasts 3 turns.

[Masterfurry]

Well what if somebody has 2 of these, then the death and attack is double. Well I am off to bed, talk about it more tomorrow. c ya

[johannhowitzer]

Add in the notes a comment that they don't stack.  Nightfalls don't stack, after all.

But I don't see a problem with them stacking, since you're not adding extra attack and they are temporary.  With six cards, you can get six +2/-2, or three +4/-4.  Net stalling of opponent is the same, assuming he doesn't get more creatures out, and your creatures will be much more stable, but for less time.  It's a trade-off, and trade-offs are natural balancing factors, so they're good!  Do what you want here, stack or don't.

[OldTrees]

Stacking would be a good idea.
More versatility without becoming too powerful.

[Masterfurry]

So how bout this, Nonupped gives you 0/+1 and enemy -1/0 and upped gives you +1/0 and enemy 0/-1. That way it is not really a need to upgrade the Help Me So's to Help Me Not's. and them being able to have maybe 4 on the field at one time. 2 of Help Me So's and 2 of Help Me Not's would be +2/+2 and -2/-2. for 3 turns. And then should it stay that way or all the stats go back to the way they were before the card was played?
?

[OldTrees]

So how bout this, Nonupped gives you 0/+1 and enemy -1/0 and upped gives you +1/0 and enemy 0/-1. That way it is not really a need to upgrade the Help Me So's to Help Me Not's. and them being able to have maybe 4 on the field at one time. 2 of Help Me So's and 2 of Help Me Not's would be +2/+2 and -2/-2. for 3 turns. And then should it stay that way or all the stats go back to the way they were before the card was played?
?

Friendly +1|0, Enemy -0|1 is more valuable(read: needs to cost much more) by far than Friendly +0|1, Enemy -1|0. Also it would fit an aggressive element rather than the unupped's passive element.

So
Unupped
Casting cost: 4
Effect: Lasts 3 turns. Each turn your creatures gain +0|1 and the opponent's creatures gain -1|0.

Upgraded
Casting cost: 7
Effect: Lasts 3 turns. Each turn your creatures gain +1|0 and the opponent's creatures gain -0|1.

[Masterfurry]

Ok, but you mean 0/-1 not -0/1.
Why such a big jump when its being upped. How bout 4 and 6.
And having it in different elements would be harder to play. I am going to go 4 and 6..

[OldTrees]

Ok, but you mean 0/-1 not -0/1.
Why such a big jump when its being upped. How bout 4 and 6.
And having it in different elements would be harder to play. I am going to go 4 and 6..

The big jump is because CC is much more valuable than damage prevention.
The different elements is because the upgraded's aggressive destructive nature is not fitting for Life but the unupped's passive haven like nature is.

Also please change the wording so the 0|+1 is not cut off in the middle. (see my rewordings)

[EmeraldTiger]

if you are going to do fire for upped use this version of image.


There is one formatting error that i see Use the word on the element line not the quanta symbol.
Life not 
Fire not 

[Masterfurry]

if you are going to do fire for upped use this version of image.


There is one formatting error that i see Use the word on the element line not the quanta symbol. What do you mean?
Life not 
Fire not    Ok