Gandiva | Gandiva

[zgatt]

NAME: Gandiva ELEMENT: Earth COST: 4 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: 7|7 (animated) TEXT: Weapon: deal 7 damage and chance to destroy opponent's weapon. Cannot equip shield while in play.	NAME: Gandiva ELEMENT: Earth COST: 4 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: 8|8 (animated) TEXT: Weapon: deal 8 damage and chance to destroy opponent's weapon. Cannot equip shield while in play.

ART: zgatt (embarrassingly enough) IDEA: zgatt NOTES: Flavor: Gandiva is the legendary bow, from the ancient Indian epic Mahabharata, wielded by the hero Arjuna. It is accompanied by an inexhaustible quiver and fires with overwhelming force. Arjuna routinely used the bow's strength to cut the strings and even break the shafts of his enemies' bows. Because of the power and weight of the bow, it can only be wielded by the greatest of heroes. The element and abilities are chosen based on the properties of the legendary bow. Chance to destroy is obvious, while the shield restriction is in relation to the weight of the bow. Destruction and weight are both more closely associated with Earth, so that ended up being the element. The bow of legend, when twanged, was said to emit the sound of thunder, but I found no way of fitting that in. I thought of making this bow Air property to match that, but Air already had Owl's Eye. Mechanics: 50% chance to destroy enemy's weapon on each successful hit. Does not affect immaterial weapons.No shield card can be played by the weapon's owner when this is in play (this includes animated state). Return currently equipped shield (if any) to owner's hand when this card is played.Animated versions retain both properties. Multiple animated Gandivas will each attempt to destroy the opponent's weapon. Metagame implications: This bow can be used to neuter decks that rely heavily on weapon abilities (such as vamp dagger-, discord-, lobo-, or pulvy-based decks). This is particularly useful if you rely on a lot of creature abilities or permanents, as Pulvy and Lobo decks completely demolish all attempts at setting up.You can also use this to absolutely wreck stall decks by gifting it to them ( http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,30838.0.html) (thereby preventing them from equipping shields).[/list]

[/table][/tr][/table]

[zgatt]

I changed the element from Fire to Earth for a couple of reasons. Firstly, it looks like fire already is extremely versatile in the current PVP metagame and does not seem to need any further help. Secondly, the mechanic of overwhelming / destroying the opponent seems to fit more with Earth than with Fire.

[dragonsdemesne]

I like the card quite a lot.  The only change I'd make (and it's quite minor) is that if you play this while you have a shield out, I think that the shield should be destroyed rather than return to your hand.  The reason for this is to prevent reuse of your own dimensional shield/wings by purposely bouncing it when it's at 0 turns.

[zgatt]

Ah, I hadn't considered that. But isn't destroying your own shield a bit too much? Perhaps it would be more fair if it returned the shield to the top of the owner's deck? Looking at it another way, returning to your hand doesn't seem too bad, since you'd still have to spend quanta to play it again and you'd also have to wait till Gandiva is either replaced or destroyed.

[Jaymanfu]

Could probably reduce the cost a bit (weapons are always undercost a bit) espcially since it prevents you from using a shield. Still might have limited uses since earth already has a weapon that can destroy things and you can still have a shield with it, its cheaper and you can destroy other things. And rush can use longsword/gavel. But interesting

[zgatt]

Could probably reduce the cost a bit (weapons are always undercost a bit) espcially since it prevents you from using a shield. Still might have limited uses since earth already has a weapon that can destroy things and you can still have a shield with it, its cheaper and you can destroy other things. And rush can use longsword/gavel. But interesting

Okay, thanks. Yeah, I had a slight feeling that it might have been too expensive. Is 4 a better cost? And yes, this one is, in the long run, inferior to Pulverizer. It has an advantage immediately out the door because it does not rely on a duo element for its ability.

The other reason for the "no shield" feature is that I plan to include this in an "annoyer" set built around the Gift | Gift (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,30838.0.html) card (where every card has a certain double-edged effect that can be put to very effective use against unprepared opponents). For example, this card would be extremely harmful to decks which rely on Bonewall, Dim Shields, Wings, etc., since you can build up potential damage and bounce their shield by gifting this card.

[Jaymanfu]

Okay, thanks. Yeah, I had a slight feeling that it might have been too expensive. Is 4 a better cost? And yes, this one is, in the long run, inferior to Pulverizer. It has an advantage immediately out the door because it does not rely on a duo element for its ability.

The other reason for the "no shield" feature is that I intend to include this in an "annoyer" set built around the Gift | Gift (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,30838.0.html) card (where every card has a certain double-edged effect that can be put to very effective use against unprepared opponents). For example, this card would be extremely harmful to decks which rely on Bonewall, Dim Shields, Wings, etc., since you can build up potential damage and bounce their shield by gifting this card.

Ya 4-5 cost is probably better. Oh and ya it would be a nice combo with Gift

[zgatt]

Okay thanks, I have updated the cost to 4