Forest Wall | Forest Wall

[QueenBee]

Oh this should at least cost the same quanta as bonewall. 7|5 even if it couldn't be increased through the spawning part. decks with 6 bonewall and 6 of these would be very annoying

[godmatrix]

Oh this should at least cost the same quanta as bonewall. 7|5 even if it couldn't be increased through the spawning part. decks with 6 bonewall and 6 of these would be very annoying

I see. I guess a 7|5 could work Actually, I think a 7|6 would be better, since in this case it would be just too easy to make if it had a 5|4 cost. Relating to that other question, I didn't think about malignant cells to be honest, but I think it would be no; Since I said it needed creatures with skills to work, I was intending to let creatures with skills that needed to be pressed(by a mouse) to actually count towards the +2 counter. I will do this sometime tomorrow or the next day, since today is a busy day.

[OdinVanguard]

Interesting, it doesn't gain shields when creatures are played, only when created by skills and effects eh?

I think you may be able to bring cost down a little bit here, given that you are looking at requiring at least 2-3 cards to get it rolling well.

Some I can think of are: shield + boneyard + cat, Shield + creature + mitosis, shield + ffq, shield + pharaoh

Given that this won't help with most creature attacks, it will serve a purpose similar to mirror or emerald shield (although a bit broader).

By the way, do you consider poison damage as non-physical? That could be one very popular use... though it will be quite a heavy counter to some deck types.

[Drake_XIV]

You forget Shield + Afla

[OdinVanguard]

You forget Shield + Afla

Yep, must've missed that one.

That's a 3 card really, since it takes a creature to get it rolling as well... Although since it could be used on the opponent's creatures maybe thats not so much of an issue.

[godmatrix]

Yes it does, also any deck using Aflatoxin and using this shield would probably not be a good idea. Seeing as I don't really know many decks that use them, I do know most decks need the aflatoxin a lot and if they use Emp bonds why stuff your hands with Forest wall? Also, if they don't use life and go for SoP then it would make it all the more reason not to include life at all.

[moomoose]

all shields currently in game have the word shield in their description, even bonewall, i would include that in the text to ensure that it is apparent which slot this will be placed in.

i like the concept of expanding the bonewall mechanic to a spell absorbing function- however, i agree with OT.  this card is entirely too potent as currently constructed.  it nullifies a wide breadth of cards, and its a bit on the easy side to refresh.

there are ways to address these issues, i just dont know if youll like them.

[Annele]

all shields currently in game have the word shield in their description, even bonewall, i would include that in the text to ensure that it is apparent which slot this will be placed in.

It does say shield in the description. It's the same as Bone Wall.

[OdinVanguard]

all shields currently in game have the word shield in their description, even bonewall, i would include that in the text to ensure that it is apparent which slot this will be placed in.

i like the concept of expanding the bonewall mechanic to a spell absorbing function- however, i agree with OT.  this card is entirely too potent as currently constructed.  it nullifies a wide breadth of cards, and its a bit on the easy side to refresh.

there are ways to address these issues, i just dont know if youll like them.

If it is limited to just "damage" instead of "effects" (which is much more broad), that would help a little I think.

[moomoose]

odd, i could have sworn it said something other than shields.  in any event, moving on-

i would actually go the other route, personally (if it only blocks spell damage, then life already has something better).  instead of having it be a shield, have it a be a non-shield permanent that nullifies #(~3ish) spell cards or effects cast by the opponent, and remove the additive bonus from 'spawning' creatures.  or, as a non shield permanent, blocks the next x targets of the creatures you control, gaining a block per creature spawned would be bearable here.