Natural Selection | Evolution

[OldTrees]

Would this work better as a permanent (Environment) with slower ability turnover (Gradual Evolution)?

Maybe, but I tend to dislike field permanents that are only useful with one in play (like Nightfall and Flooding). Plus, this could lead to destroy-the-permanent-when-you-get-a-mutant-with-steal-or-destroy exploits.

I feel the current mechanic is too entropic. A slower less dramatic yet sustained effect might fit Evolution and Life better.

The mechanic is certainly entropic, but from an evolutionary perspective the mutation idea makes sense (obviously apart from the speed). The theme is completely Life.

I also dislike permanents that are not useful in multiples. Thus my suggestion was broad enough to cover permanents that do and don't stack.
The increased certainty could be balanced with the slower rate when compared to the mutation spell.

Agreed the theme of mutation does fit Life. The speed and short lifespan of each mutation was the part of the mechanic I was commenting on.

[oblivion1212]

simply, this makes all creatures (you control, right?) mutants, though not necessarily mutating them?

just giving them same-element skills + happy-time-target for parallel/twin universe, right?

what happens to creatures with abilities? do they lose previous ones? are they unaffected by the granting of abilities but still mutants?

nice card, btw 

[Xenocidius]

That is correct.

Creatures with abilities lose them.

Also note that any creatures you play after you use the spell will be normal.

[UserClone]

IF you use Parallel Universe, will the copied creature also have a random ability each turn?

[Xenocidius]

That's a good question. I assume the Evolution passive skill will be copied, so yes; it will gain a new ability and random stat boost upon TU, then a new ability each turn.

[moomoose]

The mechanic is certainly entropic, but from an evolutionary perspective the mutation idea makes sense (obviously apart from the speed). The theme is completely Life.

some things, even if they make sense thematically, should not be taken from certain elements.  other elements may come up with themes which necessitate on dead effects, but that's 's thing.  mutant's are 's.  if quanta is not included in the application card, it is ripping so hard on entropy's territory. but i guess people don't have a problem with that these days with so many people lacking necessary critical thinking skills of their own, so i'm sure this card will do well in the polls with this current generation of voters.

 

[Heartsriker]

The mechanic is certainly entropic, but from an evolutionary perspective the mutation idea makes sense (obviously apart from the speed). The theme is completely Life.

some things, even if they make sense thematically, should not be taken from certain elements.  other elements may come up with themes which necessitate on dead effects, but that's 's thing.  mutant's are 's.  if quanta is not included in the application card, it is ripping so hard on entropy's territory. but i guess people don't have a problem with that these days with so many people lacking necessary critical thinking skills of their own, so i'm sure this card will do well in the polls with this current generation of voters.

Ohoho, being sore here aren't you? Ultimately it doesn't matter because you're not the one deciding whether it's Entropy or Life, and noone cares if the card is " ripping so hard on entropy's territory" Because the main thing is about the effect. If people like the effect, they'll vote for it, except for you dearest, who'll probably whine about how a card doesn't fit the element voting it down because of that. Assuming this card is going to make it, it'll be the developers who change the card's stats, not you. So why don't you just stop the arguments?

[Scaredgirl]

The mechanic is certainly entropic, but from an evolutionary perspective the mutation idea makes sense (obviously apart from the speed). The theme is completely Life.

some things, even if they make sense thematically, should not be taken from certain elements.  other elements may come up with themes which necessitate on dead effects, but that's 's thing.  mutant's are 's.  if quanta is not included in the application card, it is ripping so hard on entropy's territory. but i guess people don't have a problem with that these days with so many people lacking necessary critical thinking skills of their own, so i'm sure this card will do well in the polls with this current generation of voters.

I agree. The mechanics of this card are just screaming for . I mean if you said the mechanics only to someone and ask them to guess the element, is there a single person on earth who would say something other than ? Like moomoose said, if you really want, you can make any card fit to any element, but there is often one element where it makes most sense, and in this case it's clearly .

Different elements should specialize in different things. This is what should be the core of all Elements card design. There are way too many comments like "Element X does not have Y, so I made a card like that". But that's getting a bit off-topic.


As for the mechanics.. I think the idea would be much cooler if the creatures would adapt to their situation, because evolution is not really about random things happening, it's about natural selection and survival of the fittest. Here's how I would do it:

EXAMPLE 1:
Your opponent bolts down one creature. All other creatures would gain +1 HP.

EXAMPLE 2:
Your opponent plays a Shield. All your creatures would gain +1 Attack.

EXAMPLE 3:
Your opponent plays Dimensional Shield, all your creatures would gain Momentum.

EXAMPLE 4:
Otyugh eats your creature. All other creatures would become poisonous (cause poisoning in ingested)


Something like that would fit better to evolution theme, although it would of course be a nightmare to code.

[OldTrees]

@SG
Reactive change like you are describing is a much less fitting mechanic for Evolution. A giraffe does not grow a longer neck in response to a shortage of food. Rather the giraffes that already had longer necks due to genetic variation would produce more offspring. Variation then Selection not vice versa.

[Scaredgirl]

@SG
Reactive change like you are describing is a much less fitting mechanic for Evolution. A giraffe does not grow a longer neck in response to a shortage of food. Rather the giraffes that already had longer necks due to genetic variation would produce more offspring. Variation then Selection not vice versa.

I disagree.

Yes, I know how evolution works and how giraffes came to be. But this is not a classroom, this is an online game with heavy limitations on how to make a concept like evolution work. Creatures in elements do not have genetic variation or produce offspring, therefore we cannot make it perfect.

The point is that the way the card is set up now, is just 100% random effects regardless for the environment. That is not evolution. Sure it's the first step of evolution, but the whole evolving part is completely missing.

Lets take that giraffe as an example and use it in Elements.

I play a bunch of "Giraffes".
I play "Evolution".
My opponent plays "Competition for Food".
Next round my Giraffes have a long neck and can attack over the shield.

While this is of course not exactly how evolution works, especially since it suggests that the change is fast, it's still pretty close to it given the heavy limitations we have. Evolution is about organisms adapting to their environment to survive, and that's exactly how my suggestion works.

[Pineapple]

No, evolution is not about adapting to the environment but about those who can't adapt dying and the offspring of those who can adapt taking up the space that would've been taken up by those who couldn't adapt. That's why this card isn't called Adaptation | Evolution but Natural Selection | Evolution.

Examples:

You do not play Natural Selection.
Your opponent plays Hostile Environment.
None of your creatures have an ability to counter it.

OR

You do not play Natural Selection.
Your opponent plays Hostile Environment.
All of your creatures have an ability to counter it.

OR

You play Natural Selection.
Opponent plays Hostile Environment.
Half of your creatures don't have an ability to counter it, while the other half do.

[Scaredgirl]

No, evolution is not about adapting to the environment but about those who can't adapt dying and the offspring of those who can adapt taking up the space that would've been taken up by those who couldn't adapt. That's why this card isn't called Adaptation | Evolution but Natural Selection | Evolution.

Unless I'm mistaken, you two seem to look this thing as that same creature suddenly gaining new special powers, like a hungry Giraffe whose neck suddenly grows longer so that he can eat more. Everyone knows that is not evolution. Thematically, the idea behind my suggestion was that current creatures are basically replaced by ones who are better suited for that environment. That is how evolution works over a long period of time.

I don't understand how you can say "evolution is not about adapting to the environment" because that's exactly what it is. Through natural selection, species adapt to their environment, just like Giraffes adapted to lack of food by developing longer necks.