Spirit Exchange | Spirit Exchange

[Drake_XIV]

doesn't make sense unless you explicitly mention Conversion.  As is, Soul Exchange has a darker feel.  And implies some sacrifice on the user's part.  So, maybe or , working off name alone.

[~Zytoc~]

doesn't make sense unless you explicitly mention Conversion.  As is, Soul Exchange has a darker feel.  And implies some sacrifice on the user's part.  So, maybe or , working off name alone.

There is ,so,this kinda feel like Death .

[russianspy1234]

I don't know about letting the effect stack, it seems unfair to lockdown creature playing indefinitely, it gives you time to get those photons and sparks, which will certainly be switched for something better.

I do like the idea though.

One question, why  ? Doesn't fit in my opinion.

why not light?  what element would fit better, other than entropy cuz everything fits entropy?

Consider the element of Steal.

going for an even exchange, which doesn't seem quite the field of darkness.  i could retheme it as treachery, but that gives darkness full domain over "theft"

It should cost the 12|10 or so. Imagine a deck with 6 of those and a slow UG/poison deck.

It would be better if the effect activates after BOTH players play a creature. Even if I have only sparks, it wouldn't be so exploitable.

yeah that's the intent, though i left it open in creatureless decks as a possible use.  i didn't realize it pretty much completely overshadows the "valid" use.

[~Zytoc~]

Changing 'soul' to 'spirit' does not make it . It's still, . Of course Spirit means Soul too.

[russianspy1234]

Changing 'soul' to 'spirit' does not make it . It's still, . Of course Spirit means Soul too.

eh i dont know, i changed it to spirit to get away from the soul catcher connection, but death is the domain of death, not spirits.  the two are generally related, but not necessarily.  with this card, nothing is dying, they are just exchanging spirits.  light might not be the best fit for it, but i dont think death is either.  i could give it to life, and theme it similar to empathic bond... that would also discourage just sticking RoLs and this into a deck thats mono of another element.

[Drake_XIV]

Spirits still give off the feel.  It seems you are trying to hard to fit this into . 

[russianspy1234]

Spirits still give off the feel.  It seems you are trying to hard to fit this into .

yeah light is not the best fit, i was going off of MtG where white is the domain of spirits.  i dunno though, it seems like death is more the domain of things without spirits/souls, bone dragons, skeletons, viruses.  death just doesnt seem be the best way for exchanging two things that are both still alive...

[Drake_XIV]

Indeed.  What if you just change the name to Conversion?  Working under that with the elementals' influence, the creatures change sides.

[Annele]

Hold on. The card says "The next 2 creatures played switch PLACES". I see more synergy with flooding than anything else.

[ndclub]

I thought he meant sides no matter what the card says. Also about the problems people are having with the name I also think it should just be called conversion.

[Drake_XIV]

Hold on. The card says "The next 2 creatures played switch PLACES". I see more synergy with flooding than anything else.

That seems rather situational.  And would require a lot of micromanaging.

[Annele]

Hold on. The card says "The next 2 creatures played switch PLACES". I see more synergy with flooding than anything else.

That seems rather situational.  And would require a lot of micromanaging.

Just reading the card. If this is not what the card is intended to do, I suggest re-wording it.