Forsaken/Oblivion (Darkness)

[-Samura-]

I had this idea days ago, but only last night i put my hands on work ^^  and had a real fun doing the card following http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,2632.0.html

         

the art is a little dark perhaps .. but hey, it is Darkness =) 

the power of the card it is 'cause it can stack
example: if one player have 3 of these cards in play, his opponent will have to finish his/her turn with no more than 5 cards in hand or else will be force to discard until have only 5

EDIT: better exemplification: (copied from below..)

the example has to obey:

- the "force to draw" at the beginning of the turn always work (it ignores the hand size)
- any card or action including the discard at the end of the turn will be indexed with the hand size

example:
Jane has 7 cards in her hand one of them is a Precognition, has 1 Hourglass and 1 Golden Nymph in play, she end her turn with 10 Time quantum
Joe with zero Forsakens in play, plays 1 Forsaken and end his turn (indexing the hand size of Jane from 7 to 6)
Jane draw (forced) a card in the beginning of her round, have 8 cards, but her hand size is now 6, so she cannot play Precognition, nor do the actions of the GNymph or the HGlass, in the end of the turn she is forced to discard down to have 6 cards at the end of turn.

ps - being the Precognition the most tricky as it is not indexed to the hand size would have to be coded i think .. or it could simply ignore the effect because it is not increasing the hand .. which should be somewhat cool because would strengthened Precognition x]

[midg3333]

interesting... fits well in a devourer denial deck. I like the idea... but it makes denial decks even more annoying 

[Kael Hate]

I like it. Art is cool.

Thnk it needs to have the cost increased by 2 (to 6 and 5 respectively) on both versions to prevent a rush in the opening few turns. Seems way to strong against load/control decks.

What action occurs when you play this card and the opponent is already at maximum hand size when it comes to drawing a card for their turn?

At first I didn't think the name matched the effect, but really being in Oblivion and unaware of what is important could be related to diminished card hand capacity.

[Thalas]

OP, you use 6 pf these and your opponent can have in his hand just 1 card. I will limit the uses.

[-Samura-]

@midg3333, indeed it fits well on a denial xD
hmm.. maybe the cost could be higher, like Kael said.. or like 6 and 4? dunno.. 5 and 3?

What action occurs when you play this card and the opponent is already at maximum hand size when it comes to drawing a card for their turn?

well pointed! .. hmm .. and besides, i think my example was not clear enough, i will start with that:
with the same exemplification for zero - if one player have 0 of these cards in play, his opponent will have to finish his/her turn with no more than 8 cards in hand or else will be force to discard until have only 8; now this would be a triggered effect after the turn ends but before the discard phase (because if we have 8 we have to discard to be 7)... hmm .. so it is confusing .. so i'll rephrase thinking not as the 8 being the maximum but 7.. now if i stated as: if one player have 3 of these cards in play, his opponent will have to finish his/her turn with no more than 4 cards in hand or else will be force to discard until have only 4 ... is not real doing what the card said because with HG some can push cards to the hand more than 4 until the end of turn, which is contradictory (because 4 is the maximum.. it should not be allowed having more than 4) .. also there is the mechanical problem of the force draw in the begin of each turn as you pointed out....  so i'll start over the example obeying:

- the "force to draw" at the beginning of the turn always work (it ignores the hand size)
- any card or action including the discard at the end of the turn will be indexed with the hand size

example:
Jane has 7 cards in her hand one of them is a Precognition, has 1 Hourglass and 1 Golden Nymph in play, she end her turn with 10 Time quantum
Joe with zero Forsakens in play, plays 1 Forsaken and end his turn (indexing the hand size of Jane from 7 to 6)
Jane draw (forced) a card in the beginning of her round, have 8 cards, but her hand size is now 6, so she cannot play Precognition, nor do the actions of the GNymph or the HGlass, in the end of the turn she is forced to discard down to have 6 cards at the end of turn.

ps - being the Precognition the most tricky as it is not indexed to the hand size would have to be coded i think .. or it could simply ignore the effect because it is not increasing the hand .. which should be somewhat cool because would strengthened Precognition x]

@Thalas - dunno really .. if i have 6 on a deck i think few times i will have the luck to put all 6 without them being destroyed, stealed (ouch!) or me being killed before :s

[Wisemage]

its been agreed upon that an opponents hand is supposed to be the only safe spot in the game, so this is a no no.

[Kael Hate]

its been agreed upon that an opponents hand is supposed to be the only safe spot in the game, so this is a no no.

I agree that the Hand should be safe.
This is the best of the hand manipulation card ideas I have seen. The opponent is never forced to discard a key card unless they only have key cards in hand. It also has a weakness in that it does nothing if the opponent is making action.

[Bloodshadow]

I think it's overpowered if it stacks. If it stacks, it should affect both players, so you'll think twice before reducing both of your hands to only two cards.

[xdawnbydeath]

Even if it affected both hands, I would still use it.  If I am thinking correctly, it would severely limit the power of fractal, which is still an unfair card imo.

[Glitch]

I think this card is a great card.  The only decks that would be hurt by this would be slow decks, like rainbows, that spend the majority of their game with full hands.  This card just might give rush decks an extra edge.

As far as effecting only you and not your opponent, I don't think it's overpowered at all.  As you need six cards to do it, I sincerely doubt you'll limit anyone's hand-size to one.  A more realistic result would be having two or three of these out.  Even then, I don't see it being that difficult of a thing to deal with.

As this is an art thread, excellent work Samura.  +Karma

[coinich]

I think the cost is ok only if it affects both players.  Either way however, its a good idea.

[-Samura-]

@Wisemage, the hand would not turn be an unsafe spot with this card as, like Kael pointed, you can always keep the strategic cards in your hand, also in the middle game the shorten of hand will matter little has you already played almost (if not all) the cards you have in hand - remember that you can play as many pillars/towers in one turn as you want ...

@Bloodshadow, well .. i had think about this card this way, for not be pointless to steal it, like already is the Darkness card Nightfall/Eclipse .. being a weakness if it is stolen UnderPower'd it, not OP'd it like you said .. imo

@xdawnbydeath, indeed, it would cold down fractal rushes... (.. wow i didn't remember of that.. thanks for pointing it out =] )

also, i can't put in better words what Gl1tch said xDDD

I think this card is a great card.  The only decks that would be hurt by this would be slow decks, like rainbows, that spend the majority of their game with full hands.  This card just might give rush decks an extra edge.

As far as effecting only you and not your opponent, I don't think it's overpowered at all.  As you need six cards to do it, I sincerely doubt you'll limit anyone's hand-size to one.  A more realistic result would be having two or three of these out.  Even then, I don't see it being that difficult of a thing to deal with.

As this is an art thread, excellent work Samura.  +Karma

Thanks for the +Karma ... i did enjoyed doing this art ^^ .... i'm glad you liked =]

@coinich, hmm.. but coinich, if affects both players the one how played has always his deck prepared for that, plus the steals would be pointless against it, besides all the other reasons..


ps - i think i'll edit the first post, to clearer the first example.