Lightning Field | Negation Field

[regen2k9]

NAME: Lightning Field ELEMENT: Aether COST: 7 TYPE: Permanent (Shield) ATK|HP: TEXT: Shield: 25% chance to counter opponent's summons and spells.	NAME: Negation Field ELEMENT: Aether COST: 6 TYPE: Permanent (Shield) ATK|HP: TEXT: Shield: 25% chance to counter opponent's summons and spells.

ART: pioblo, www.sxc.hu user IDEA: regen2k9 NOTES: Cancelled spells and summons never take effect.  In other words, if a creature summon is cancelled, it "disappears" as soon as it would enter the field. I've heard many ETG players wish that there was a way to play counterspells or cards during the opponent's turn.  This is my way to tackle that.  Please help me to balance this card.  There may be issues with the cost or the fact that I made it a shield.  I only made it a shield because I felt that it would be OP to combo this with shields, especially since due to this card, there is a 25% chance that deflags won't work.  Still, if that needs to be changed, just let me know in the comments. SERIES:

[Vangelios]

I like this idea, it is much more balanced than the current shield aehter.

[Jyiber]

Having difficulty articulating what I don't like about this while telling you what I do like.
It's something about the wording and the name, but I really do like the mechanic.

[Chapuz]

And skills. Please, add skills.

[jawdirk]

After quite a bit of thought, I think the card is probably balanced. This card goes well with quanta denial. It gives you a small amount of card advantage, but the quanta cost is on your opponent instead of on you (as with hourglass). It is probably important to keep the card expensive because getting it out before your opponent can play most of his starting hand would be very strong. If it turns out to be UP, then I think you should bump it up to 30%, but keep the cost the same.

It would be challenging to make a deck using this card. It goes well with CC, PC, sundial, and shard of bravery. You might want to only have 1 in your deck ever just to avoid the chance of drawing 2 in your opening hand.

[regen2k9]

And skills. Please, add skills.

Do you think that if I added skills it would be too OP and I should raise the cost by 1 ?  Also, what do others think about adding skills, because I'm definitely considering it.  Furthermore, Jyiber noted that he didn't like the name.  Should I change it?  Maybe to "Static Field" or something like that?

[Vangelios]

And skills. Please, add skills.

Do you think that if I added skills it would be too OP and I should raise the cost by 1 ?  Also, what do others think about adding skills, because I'm definitely considering it.  Furthermore, Jyiber noted that he didn't like the name.  Should I change it?  Maybe to "Static Field" or something like that?

the price is good, the name can be "unstable field" or "field of oscillation" , since there is no guarantee that the opponent will be canceled.
I do not think he need a new skill, I prefer cut the price rather than put an additional skill.

[ndclub]

Not a fan of such heavily randomized effects. Either its worthless or devastating, hard to have in a game where one should not chalk up the win to luck. Counterspells have mixed support from the community because while it would be an interesting mechanic, many complain that they over-complicate magic the gathering. Though your suggestion is simple, I am going to hold my vote due to the randomness factor.

[OldTrees]

And skills. Please, add skills.

Do you think that if I added skills it would be too OP and I should raise the cost by 1 ?  Also, what do others think about adding skills, because I'm definitely considering it.  Furthermore, Jyiber noted that he didn't like the name.  Should I change it?  Maybe to "Static Field" or something like that?

I think that being able to counter anything that isn't an attack would be too powerful. (aka would require too high a cost to be balanced)
I think that being only able to counter spells and activated abilities would still be too powerful.
Combine with Lobotomizer and PC if activated abilities are still a bother.

PS: Creatures are not Summons. They are not considered spells. (Same goes for Permanents)
This would possibly cancel Parallel Universe but would not prevent playing a creature.

[regen2k9]

And skills. Please, add skills.

Do you think that if I added skills it would be too OP and I should raise the cost by 1 ?  Also, what do others think about adding skills, because I'm definitely considering it.  Furthermore, Jyiber noted that he didn't like the name.  Should I change it?  Maybe to "Static Field" or something like that?

I think that being able to counter anything that isn't an attack would be too powerful. (aka would require too high a cost to be balanced)
I think that being only able to counter spells and activated abilities would still be too powerful.
Combine with Lobotomizer and PC if activated abilities are still a bother.

PS: Creatures are not Summons. They are not considered spells. (Same goes for Permanents)
This would possibly cancel Parallel Universe but would not prevent playing a creature.

Ok, so would changing the wording to "Shield: 25% chance to counter opponent's creatures and spells," be better?  In this case, permanents and abilities would still be active, and like you said, lobo and PC can take care of that.  Or is that still to powerful?

[OldTrees]

And skills. Please, add skills.

Do you think that if I added skills it would be too OP and I should raise the cost by 1 ?  Also, what do others think about adding skills, because I'm definitely considering it.  Furthermore, Jyiber noted that he didn't like the name.  Should I change it?  Maybe to "Static Field" or something like that?

I think that being able to counter anything that isn't an attack would be too powerful. (aka would require too high a cost to be balanced)
I think that being only able to counter spells and activated abilities would still be too powerful.
Combine with Lobotomizer and PC if activated abilities are still a bother.

PS: Creatures are not Summons. They are not considered spells. (Same goes for Permanents)
This would possibly cancel Parallel Universe but would not prevent playing a creature.

Ok, so would changing the wording to "Shield: 25% chance to counter opponent's creatures and spells," be better?  In this case, permanents and abilities would still be active, and like you said, lobo and PC can take care of that.  Or is that still to powerful?

How powerful do you think a 25% to kill creatures before they get a single attack would be?

[regen2k9]

And skills. Please, add skills.

Do you think that if I added skills it would be too OP and I should raise the cost by 1 ?  Also, what do others think about adding skills, because I'm definitely considering it.  Furthermore, Jyiber noted that he didn't like the name.  Should I change it?  Maybe to "Static Field" or something like that?

I think that being able to counter anything that isn't an attack would be too powerful. (aka would require too high a cost to be balanced)
I think that being only able to counter spells and activated abilities would still be too powerful.
Combine with Lobotomizer and PC if activated abilities are still a bother.

PS: Creatures are not Summons. They are not considered spells. (Same goes for Permanents)
This would possibly cancel Parallel Universe but would not prevent playing a creature.

Ok, so would changing the wording to "Shield: 25% chance to counter opponent's creatures and spells," be better?  In this case, permanents and abilities would still be active, and like you said, lobo and PC can take care of that.  Or is that still to powerful?

How powerful do you think a 25% to kill creatures before they get a single attack would be?

Idt it would be more powerful then dims imo BUT if you think it's OP I feel like it could work if it only affects creatures (giving PC a 100% chance to destroy it) OR having it affect only spells at a lowered cost (if I don't lower the cost for a spells only version I feel like it becomes pretty UP, since it provides no damage reduction).