Mortal Avenger | Death Avenger

[Vangelios]

"Final Versoin"

NAME: Mortal Avenger ELEMENT: Death COST: 8 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 7 | 4 TEXT: Revenge: If Mortal Avenger is targeted by enemy spell or ability cause 3 damage and 2 poison in the opponent.	NAME: Death Avenger ELEMENT: Death COST: 8 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 8 | 5 TEXT: Revenge: If Death Avenger is targeted by enemy spell or ability cause 3 damage and 2 poison in the opponent.

ART: by Young Kim* http://yokiart.blogspot.com.br/2012/02/dk-t8-wip.html#comment-form IDEA: Vangelios NOTES: SERIES:

***********************************************************************************************************************

NAME: Death Avenger ELEMENT: Death COST: 9 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 7 | 4 TEXT: If Mortal Avenger is targeted by the enemy spell or ability,  causes 7 damage in the opponent.	NAME: Deadly Avenger ELEMENT: Death COST: 9 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 8 | 4 TEXT: If Mortal Avenger is targeted by the enemy spell or ability,  causes 8 damage in the opponent.

ART: by Young Kim* http://yokiart.blogspot.com.br/2012/02/dk-t8-wip.html#comment-form IDEA: Vangelios NOTES: *About art I sent an email to Yong, I explained that it was for a game,  the site is free and has only the option to donate, the response was "Ok got it.  Sure you have my permission to use this image for a card as long as it is not used to gain profit." I still have the email, and he is a generous person besides being a great artist. SERIES:

[Naesala]

Name on card/topic doesnt reflect name in effect.

[Lneacx]

I think that either the retaliation damage should be higher or the Avenger's health should be higher.  Several CC cards can easily knock it out.  The point is that the opponent has three options when facing the Avenger:

A) Leave it alone; allow it to deal 7 hp's worth of damage PER TURN.
B) Destroy it; take a ONE-TIME hit of 7.

Between the above two, it's still better to target the Avenger than to leave it alone.  Option C is much like B:

C) Delay/Freeze it for a few turns; take a hit of 7.

Choice C is still preferable to A because it'll take a while for the Avenger to recover and become a threat again.  Also, as a late-game fighter ( with the high cost ), it may not even get out of the delay/freeze before the match is over.

Case in point: From what I'm seeing, I'm inferring that Death Avenger is meant as a high-cost, high-power creature with an ability meant to deter CC; however, the retaliation damage isn't high enough to make it worth the cost, nor is it repellent enough to make somebody think twice before killing it.

[AnonymousRevival]

Wait......Death and then mortal avenger? Sorry I don't seem to quite understand........

[Vangelios]

Name on card/topic doesnt reflect name in effect.

Wait......Death and then mortal avenger? Sorry I don't seem to quite understand........

sorry, true had not noticed, I changed the name of the title and forgot to change the text. I will correct. but after, now in work. also would like a review of you on the card.

[AnonymousRevival]

The card text should be:

If Mortal Avenger is targeted by an enemy spell or ability,  deal 7 damages to the opponent.

Well, for the card personally, it could be around GotP (aka 6-7 ).

[Vangelios]

I think that either the retaliation damage should be higher or the Avenger's health should be higher.  Several CC cards can easily knock it out.  The point is that the opponent has three options when facing the Avenger:

A) Leave it alone; allow it to deal 7 hp's worth of damage PER TURN.
B) Destroy it; take a ONE-TIME hit of 7.

Between the above two, it's still better to target the Avenger than to leave it alone.  Option C is much like B:

C) Delay/Freeze it for a few turns; take a hit of 7.

Choice C is still preferable to A because it'll take a while for the Avenger to recover and become a threat again.  Also, as a late-game fighter ( with the high cost ), it may not even get out of the delay/freeze before the match is over.

Case in point: From what I'm seeing, I'm inferring that Death Avenger is meant as a high-cost, high-power creature with an ability meant to deter CC; however, the retaliation damage isn't high enough to make it worth the cost, nor is it repellent enough to make somebody think twice before killing it.

Depends on the situation, where you have a deck of the poison, bone shield, it is much more feasible than a dragon, reverse time it will be a bad option for the opponent. then we have some advantages, and good advantages.

[OldTrees]

*About art I sent an email to Yong, I explained that it was for a game,  the site is free and has only the option to donate, the response was "Ok got it.  Sure you have my permission to use this image for a card as long as it is not used to gain profit."
I still have the email, and he is a generous person besides being a great artist.

There is ad revenue.

However + 91 rep for asking for permission and providing evidence that you might have the right to use it. Few people take the time to ask a professional artist.

[Vangelios]

*About art I sent an email to Yong, I explained that it was for a game,  the site is free and has only the option to donate, the response was "Ok got it.  Sure you have my permission to use this image for a card as long as it is not used to gain profit."
I still have the email, and he is a generous person besides being a great artist.

There is ad revenue.

However + 91 rep for asking for permission and providing evidence that you might have the right to use it. Few people take the time to ask a professional artist.

Thanks for reputation, but forgetting this beautiful art, what is your assessment about the idea of the card?

[OldTrees]

What is your assessment about the idea of the card?

It takes 1 CC to kill. Its ability punishes CC. The ideal setup would be to have the opponent not know which tactic (CC or no CC) is better.
So 0 damage and 7|8 poison are eliminated extremes. Currently I see ambivalence only if there about 2 turns left. This is too little. When would you be ambivalent if it was 4 poison?

Once you hit ambivalence the cost would be 1-2|0-1 quanta higher than the attack.

[jawdirk]

This is a deceptively powerful card. The reason why cards like Crimson Dragon are so powerful is that they deal damage on the turn they are played. Even if you kill the dragon, you've still taken 12 damage (for 10  )

This card is 14 | 16 damage for 9 .

There are counters (shields mostly) but it might need to be toned down a little. I like OldTrees' poison suggestion.

[OldTrees]

@jawdirk
Assuming creatures only survive 1 turn is a bad habit. You post seemed to me to exhibit this habit.