Stun | Blackout

[Hazardus10]

NAME: Stun ELEMENT: Darkness COST: 5 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Your opponent's pillars and pendulums do not produce quanta next turn.	NAME: Blackout ELEMENT: Darkness COST: 6 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Your opponent's pillars, pendulums, and marks do not produce quanta next turn.

ART: http://sxc.hu (image edited by me) IDEA: Hazardus10 NOTES: SERIES:

[Quantumage]

The card costs too much for what it does. Devourer and EQ both do similar things, quantum denial, but cost less. The unupped version should cost 3 or 2 imo.

[Hazardus10]

The card costs too much for what it does. Devourer and EQ both do similar things, quantum denial, but cost less. The unupped version should cost 3 or 2 imo.

This does quite a bit more.  It act as a substitution, to having many devourers on the field.

[jazzfan27]

I'd suggest changing the upgraded one to

"Your opponents Pillars and Pendulums do not produce quanta this turn.  Your opponents Mark is changed to Dark."

This would provide a lasting effect, and would be strong against False Gods and in Arena.

I'd also include pendulums in the un-upgraded version.

[dragonsdemesne]

This is actually a pretty strong card.  It's comparable to Silence in the sort of niche it fills.  I'd definitely use it in some decks to pull the same sort of tricks that silence does.

A few observations with the card:

1) "this turn" should read "next turn" since your opponent's pillars don't produce quanta on your turn
2) As written, this is currently excluding pendulums and standalone marks; is this intentional?  If so, it becomes much weaker, but it's still fairly useful, but if this is the intent, it should probably be costed 1-2 less.
3) For Blackout, would the mark part include standalone marks that had merged with your deck mark?

[Hazardus10]

This is actually a pretty strong card.  It's comparable to Silence in the sort of niche it fills.  I'd definitely use it in some decks to pull the same sort of tricks that silence does.

A few observations with the card:

1) "this turn" should read "next turn" since your opponent's pillars don't produce quanta on your turn
2) As written, this is currently excluding pendulums and standalone marks; is this intentional?  If so, it becomes much weaker, but it's still fairly useful, but if this is the intent, it should probably be costed 1-2 less.
3) For Blackout, would the mark part include standalone marks that had merged with your deck mark?

I forgot to add pendulums I will fix. Yes standalone marks as well.

[Hazardus10]

updated.

[russianspy1234]

You could just use "permanents" instead of "pillars and pendulums" which would include marks, but not quanta generating creatures.

[Hazardus10]

You could just use "permanents" instead of "pillars and pendulums" which would include marks, but not quanta generating creatures.

Permanents would include shield like solar shield, this card is not meant to prevent quanta production from shields, such as solar buckler/shield.

[OdinVanguard]

Similar cards have been proposed before in various incarnations.

I'll have to look into tracking them down (unless someone else knows where / when they came up)

I am a fan of the mechanic though, so I'll have to keep an eye on this card.

With proper QC support (which is already present under ) this could be quite devestating.

It can give your devourers an extra turn to chew down on quanta. That may not seem huge, but having played against a fair number of such decks, I can definitely attest that it would be very effective.

[Annele]

CURATOR COMMENT

This card will not be permitted into the Crucible due to one or more of the following errors:

• Table filled out incorrectly.

Correct these errors as soon as possible and feel free to submit again when ready.

Thank you. ^_^

Please include a direct link to your art source if you haven't made it yourself.

[QueenBee]

While I have nothing against the card, I would hate to see this make it into the game. I don't like things messing with my quanta!