Inanimate Golem

[Eleazar]

I thought about this card:

Card Name: Inanimate Golem/Inanimate Giant
Card Cost: 3 / 2
Stats: 8|3 / 8|3
Passive Skill: Inanimate - Inanimate Golem cannot attack.
Active Skill: Breath of Life - Inanimate Golem can attack this turn. (Skill Cost: 2 / 2 )

Comments and suggestions, please.

[ScytherLoL]

Ok first of all i like the idea of a creature that comes into play and can't attack immediately.

The one question I do have is about cost.

Do you really think that for 3 a 8|6 creature is actually Balanced? The idea is great but i think you need to change the costs. For a creature of that magnitude you may want to either do two things:
 1. Change the cost up (ie. make it 6 )
 2. Change the Hp (somewhere around 2-3) this way it is suspectable to being killed.

Both these options will help balance out the card.

2 is great for the ability I would keep that.

I do like the card, the name and the skill it has just need to look at how much it costs is all.

Thanks

Scyther

[assassim]

Lobo this guy ^^

[Eleazar]

Do you really think that for 3 a 8|6 creature is actually Balanced? The idea is great but i think you need to change the costs. For a creature of that magnitude you may want to either do two things:
 1. Change the cost up (ie. make it 6 )
 2. Change the Hp (somewhere around 2-3) this way it is suspectable to being killed.

I suggested this cost because a creature that doesn't attack shouldn't cost too much. But, yeah, maybe it's OP. How about 6 for the unupped, and 5 for the upped?

(Oh, by the way, Congratulations for the Card Curator position. You're for sure the best suited for it.)

[ScytherLoL]

Thankyou for your comment.

From what I can see the main issue is with the cost. I think 6 would balance it a lot more even though it can't attack on the first turn it is tremendously strong and hard to kill so would hang around for sometime. Making it a strong card in the long run.

Good work. Any ideas for art?

Scyther

[Eleazar]

I tried to find a suitable image on DeviantArt and Google, but failed. But I thought of a stone sleeping golem, or something like that.

Lobo this guy ^^

If it was lobo'd, wouldn't the passive skill be lobo'd too?

-card idea updated with the new cost-

[ajm6]

I was going to agree with assassim but you're right loboing him would be a bad idea for an opponent. I'm not sure how the AI would react to it though. I'm not sure how I feel about the cost increase 2 life means you can't really splash so you would need to run pillars to use him if he's going to cost 6 I think the ability cost should be reduced to 1

[ScytherLoL]

I would assume so as when you Lobo Devourer it takes off both passive (devour) and active (burrow) at the same time.

Sleeping Golem would be great i will ask around and see what I can get.

Scyther

[Eleazar]

Sleeping Golem would be great i will ask around and see what I can get.

I would appreciate that, thanks.

And ajm6 got a point: If it has the 2 cost, it can't attack that many times. So, the cost shouldn't be so high. What do you think Scyther?

[Kaine]

Well, when lobotomizing removes both active & passive skill, then I could lobotomize it myself to save the 2 ?

That would give me an 8/8 creature for 6 & a little

[casthegamer]

i don't think this is OP at all.

the cost of the ability more than compensates for the small cost to play it.

look at forest spectre for example

forest spectre
total damage done after (x) turns (1)2 (2)6 (3)12 (4)20 (5)30 (6)42 (7)56
total quantum paid after (x) turns (1)3 (2)4 (3)5   (4)6   (5)7   (6)8   (7)9

inanimate giant
total damage done after (x) turns (1)8 (2)16 (3)24 (4)32 (5)40 (6)48 (7)56
total quantum paid after (x) turns (1)3 (2)5   (3)7   (4)9   (5)11 (6)13 (7)15

as you can see after 7 turns they've both done the same amount of damage, but for inanimate giant you had both a larger initial cost, and a larger cost over time. after turn seven spectre is a 14|15 creature while giant remains an 8|6 and still must pay the cost to attack while spectre can continue to outclass the giant without paying any more quantum.

[casthegamer]

That would give me an 8/86 creature for 6 & a little

it would be difficult to build a deck around this though. however you do it your balancing at least three elements. if you try to do it just straight  / you would have to hope to draw a lobotomizer or you just have a bunch of 8|6 lumps doing nothing.