Tie-breaking Vote for Existing Card Rework Competition

[tyranim]

rofl! tie!!!!

[Kamietsu]

Because it has ended in a tie...AGAIN, I am extending the deadline to cast your votes for another day.

[PhantomFox]

But adrenaline is useful.

This is complicated AND pointless.

I already addressed the usefulness of the card, and gave a way to implement it based on the precedent already established by another card.  Back up your points or concede mine.

[Daxx]

How to you propose to 'rethink' a card?  You take a card that is underused and make it better.

In fact, this is wrong for two different reasons. The first is that just making something indiscriminately better doesn't mean that you have successfully "rethought" a card. I could give Dragonflies an extra 5 attack and the vampire ability, and lots of people would start using them. The second is that you're not really so much rethinking the card as much as you are tacking a new mechanic onto a vanilla creature - the Golem being simply a convenient vehicle for the mechanic, rather than being intrinsically suited to having it.

It is by far and large not useless Daxx.  If it were useless, it would not have gotten this far.

Internet polls: the most trusted of all sources. Let's be honest - previous polls have proved that half the people voting aren't even reading the text, they're just looking at the picture.

The main use is to grow more powerful when damaged.  Though now that I think of it, HP probably should start out on a prime number.  If someone throws an icebolt, firebolt, or drain life at it, it would go from, say, a 3/7 into a 6/4, or a 9/1. 
The mechanic makes sense.  In simple terms: its attack goes up when its HP goes down and vise versa.
As for implementation... the scarab card works around storing changes in the number of scarabs on the field, and buffs HP by that difference at the end of the turn.  This card could be based on the same principle. 

Yes, the mechanic could work much more effectively that way. You originally stated it as being an instant effect, however, which was intrinsically much more complicated and prone to failure. Even so, this isn't really my main beef with your suggestion; I'm more concerned that what you have here is a worthwhile entry for a new card competition rather than for a reworking competition. On that basis I am supporting Kael's Abomination over your Golem.

[PhantomFox]

It is by far and large not useless Daxx.  If it were useless, it would not have gotten this far.

Internet polls: the most trusted of all sources. Let's be honest - previous polls have proved that half the people voting aren't even reading the text, they're just looking at the picture.

What picture?  We're using the card's original art, no?     And I'm not sure I understand your definition of 'rework'.  How can you rework a vanilla creature besides tweaking its stats around?  And most cards with abilities don't need reworking.  Are all vanilla creatures unsuitable for this competition?  I figured Earth suited the mechanic best (with Gravity being a close second).  I'm afraid I'm a bit confused.

[Daxx]

I was being sardonic when mentioning the picture. The point I was making was that people have a poor track record in evaluating competition entries properly, so appeals ad populum don't really hold much water.

I would expect a reworked vanilla creature to have an ability which a) more closely matched the idea/feel/name of the card from a setting perspective, and b) was mechanically appropriate in context (which could mean, amongst other things: not diverging from existing ideas too radically, not being too clunky or difficult to implement, being appropriate for the element in question). I think your idea as submitted didn't come up to scratch on either of those counts, as I detailed in my earlier criticism.

[ivalmian]

still a tie...

[PhantomFox]

Eh, I felt it was appropriate enough.  The concepts of Stability, Earth, and Golems seem to gel in my mind.  But I guess we'll just have to disagree with this one.  Though you are right about the ad populum point.  It was a stretch at best.

[Terroking]

Still 15-15.

The only argument I would raise vs. Kael's entry is what would happen to the unupped mutate effect? with 50% of turning into an abom and 40% of a mutant, you're looking at 90% of a mutant (Stats not taken into account). That's really close to the upped version.

[Delreich]

The unupped abom suggested here only has variable stats, no ability. So the 'mutation' skill is mostly unchanged.

[Kael Hate]

Still 15-15.

The only argument I would raise vs. Kael's entry is what would happen to the unupped mutate effect? with 50% of turning into an abom and 40% of a mutant, you're looking at 90% of a mutant (Stats not taken into account). That's really close to the upped version.

The Abomination result from mutation will give a Vanilla Abomination as it always has but the stats for the abomination are random rather than the set 5|5. The resulting Amboniation may be 8|2 or even be the 5|5 but will never have an ability by default.

[Amilir]

The new abomination suits the element and the card.  The new golem has no real relation to its element or itself.  Its less stable, not more, because its stats change more frequently.  A better fitting idea might be:

Stability:  X Golem returns to its original state at the end of every turn.