Witch | Sorceress

[Xenocidius]

NAME: Witch ELEMENT: Darkness COST: 7 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 0|3 TEXT: : Witchcraft Cast a random spell	NAME: Sorceress ELEMENT: Darkness COST: 7 TYPE: Darkness ATK|HP: 0|3 TEXT: : Sorcery Cast a random elite spell

ART: http://www.inlovewithhercules.com/?attachment_id=73 (http://www.inlovewithhercules.com/?attachment_id=73) - temporary IDEA: Xenocidius NOTES: Can cast ANY spell in the game EXCEPT alchemy spells, Flying Weapon|Animate Weapon and drain-all-quanta spells. If a targeted spell is cast it will show up with targets on appropriate creatures as per usual, as well as the name of the spell as per usual. Can be cancelled as per usual. Nova Pandemonium Poison Plague Stone Skin Heal Rain of Fire Purify Thunderstorm Silence Chaos Seed Mutation Butterfly Effect Gravity Pull Momentum Acceleration Plate Armor Enchant Artifact Earthquake Mitosis Fire Bolt Deflagration Immolation Freeze Ice Bolt Holy Light Blessing Shockwave Reverse Time Drain Life Steal Nightmare Lightning Parallel Universe Supernova Pandemonium (elite) Deadly Poison Improved Plague Granite Skin Improved Heal Firestorm Purify (elite) Lightning Storm Silence Chaos Power Improved Mutation Butterfly Effect Gravity Force Unstoppable Overdrive Heavy Armor Protect Artifact Quicksand Mitosis Fire Lance Explosion Cremation Congeal Ice Lance Holy Flash Improved Blessing Shockwave Rewind Siphon Life Improved Steal Nightmare Thunderbolt Twin Universe It is incredibly hard to tell whether this is OP or UP. I'd love some advice here. SERIES: None

[johannhowitzer]

This does raise some coding issues; currently cancelling a creature ability after you've clicked the creature consumes the ability's use for that turn.  If this card were implemented, it might have to stay that way to prevent re-rolling abuse; however, also theoretically possible to tag a Witch as having selected a certain spell, so you cannot re-roll on a given turn; if you cancel then click the Witch again, you will get the same effect as the one you cancelled.

What's interesting is that the targeted ones would probably display the effect name in the black box in the center of the screen during the targeting phase, so you'd know what spell you're aiming.

The one I see the most issue with is Miracle, as this technically makes infinite Miracles possible and while it drains all , it doesn't require a minimum of 12-15 - you can get Miracles without packing any at all.  That's a potentially bigger hax than hax shields, as with 6-12 or even more of these out and plenty of , you could expect to get Miracles fairly often.

Rather than "advanced witchcraft," what about "sorcery" for the upped ability name?

[Xenocidius]

This does raise some coding issues; currently cancelling a creature ability after you've clicked the creature consumes the ability's use for that turn.  If this card were implemented, it might have to stay that way to prevent re-rolling abuse; however, also theoretically possible to tag a Witch as having selected a certain spell, so you cannot re-roll on a given turn; if you cancel then click the Witch again, you will get the same effect as the one you cancelled.

I phrased it badly, but I meant that it simply cancels as normal, which you would do if there are no appropriate targets for the spell being cast, and you can't use the ability again this turn.

What's interesting is that the targeted ones would probably display the effect name in the black box in the center of the screen during the targeting phase, so you'd know what spell you're aiming.

Yep, I tested that in the Trainer. It certainly makes it a lot more viable.

The one I see the most issue with is Miracle, as this technically makes infinite Miracles possible and while it drains all , it doesn't require a minimum of 12-15 - you can get Miracles without packing any at all.  That's a potentially bigger hax than hax shields, as with 6-12 or even more of these out and plenty of , you could expect to get Miracles fairly often.

Hmm, that's true. Sky Blitz and Fractal could also be problems - they are meant to only be able to be cast once in a turn. I'll just remove those three spells.

Rather than "advanced witchcraft," what about "sorcery" for the upped ability name?

Good idea is good. I couldn't think of a name for it - which is pretty dumb in retrospect.

[moomoose]

definitely has more of an entropy feel, its sort of like a chaos seed or pandemonium from a creature, but you dont know if the effect is going to be good or bad when you target something- as targeted spells could be a good or bad thing, while the non-target spells dont require any thought, the result is always beneficial to the casting player.

[Xenocidius]

definitely has more of an entropy feel, its sort of like a chaos seed or pandemonium from a creature, but you dont know if the effect is going to be good or bad when you target something- as targeted spells could be a good or bad thing, while the non-target spells dont require any thought, the result is always beneficial to the casting player.

Well, you actually do know - try casting a targeted spell in-game and you'll see.

[moomoose]

good call, i stand corrected.  still, it feels like an entropy effect on a darkness creature, changing the cost to entropy quanta would be a neat converse of were wolf.

the ability itself is similar to a shard idea i had, which i denoted as being entropy-related (creativity- http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,28937.0.html )

[dragonsdemesne]

Even with the randomness, I think that's a very good card, especially in a monoelement.  I think instead of the  activation cost, it should be another element, and a higher cost, maybe  or even  .  Is it possible to mix costs, like could it be  or something?

[moomoose]

if mixed costs are used, it would go into the 'doesnt fit into normal gameplay' level 1 crucible.

i think would be an appropriate cost for a random skill duo element.

[dragonsdemesne]

I guess if the cost were too insane, people would just slap on Shard of Readiness :p  Sure, we could make the card cost 1000 , but put SoR on it and who cares?  So yeah, I suppose it doesn't need to cost too much, but  or even  seems a bit too cheap to me all the same.