Mind Control|Mind Control

[Flayne]

So the idea is supported, just not balanced.

Correct.

However you will still need to:
Balance it
Justify "why entropy?"
Justify "why temporary creature control would benefit the game"

These questions need to be addressed even if we agree.

I doubt it would fit as entropy as it runs on luck, infinite probabilities (randomness) and disorder, not direct manipulation of senses or subconscious as that is a direct approach rather than a random one, and it isnt associated with disorder because it only has one direct stage in mind control, not a disorderly function which leads to it.
so my vote goes to  which is the element that is associated with the hypnotic, manipulation/dulling of senses or subconscious.

direct temporary creature control would benefit the game because concept wise, it needs/lacks it. mechanically, it is basically a temporary PU but that leaves teh opponent without their creature. This can be done a max of 6 times to the same creature if targeting it. so in total, you could have control of it for 18-24 turns. But thats only if you are able to draw a all of the same card from your deck. I say lowering the max turns so that it doesn't cause that spamming problem, however the cost has to be lowered aswell so that it is still efficient. But that can possibly make a cheap temporary PU which leaves teh opponent without a creature temporarily. I'd say this is the main reason that mind control is not often supported. But concept wise, i'd say tis necessary, especially in an element that specializes in the manipulation of senses and the subconscious,  Darkness.

I agree it fits Darkness more.

However I underlined a section that needs justification. The game also lacks instant win cards but does not need them nor would they be beneficial. I do not see how the game needs mind control effects. Would you explain? If the game does not need mind control effects and mind control would still be a beneficial addition please explain why.

Instant win cards aren't a concept, since none of the elements would be superior to each other by that much.
Mind control is a concept, by which it fits  specifically, I doubt it would do much harm if the amount of turns lowered to 2 for both cards and the cost is the only thing that is upgraded.
I'm sayin it would be beneficial concept-wise, but mechanically its hard because it is simply derived from a temporary PU effect, but not copying, controlling the single creature.
for example, fractal is considered to be OP by most new players, but infact it has it downfalls due to cost.
its hard to say whether it would be a beneficial card until it has it play testing, which the concept of mind control was never given a chance for play testing.

[OldTrees]

If mind control is mechanically beneficial to the game then that can be shown prior to playtesting. The case needs to be made and I suspect the result will be that mind control is mechanically beneficial. However card designers need to get in the habit of providing such reasoning for their suggestions.

[Flayne]

If mind control is mechanically beneficial to the game then that can be shown prior to playtesting. The case needs to be made and I suspect the result will be that mind control is mechanically beneficial. However card designers need to get in the habit of providing such reasoning for their suggestions.

The only thing i have to say is that permanent mind control is no different to PUing a creature then destroying the original with a lightning.

Temporary mind control weakens that similarity, especially if it is a reasonably low duration for effect.

there are things that we need to consider about it, for example:

If i mind control a creature for 2 turns, and I apply adrenaline to it, when the effect is over, it would make sense that the creature will return to the owner in its new state, still having adrenaline. so what i just did was temporarily benefit myself, but at the same time, caused a negative effect that has the potential to counter myself.

therefore if such a mechanic as i suggested is implemented, then the card is beneficial, because it:

1: has a consequence if you dont use it properly
2: creates a challenge for experienced players to work out a strategy by using such a dangerous effect if they edit the creature in anyway.
3: relates to #2, it may discourage the player to edit the creature in anyway.

those are my reasons.

in conclusion, it creates a new style and difficulty of gameplay.

[Anarook]

As much as I want to avoid it, what if I were to match it to the cost of PU(-1 maybe)
This would discourage using it for immo fodder as it still takes a decent amount of quanta to play.

And yes chances are this is going to be a dark card, I was skeptical of myself when I made it chaos at first, only reasoning I held to it was unpredictability.
And as mentioned when you do control it, you have to be careful of what changes you make to it.