Blizzard Sword | Arctic Sword

[waterzx]

NAME: Blizzard Sword ELEMENT: Water COST: 5 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: 3 | 6 when flying TEXT: Weapon : Deal 3 damage, and cast Ice Bolt on opponent at the end of each turn.	NAME: Arctic Sword ELEMENT: Water COST: 5 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: 4 | 6 when flying TEXT: Weapon : Deal 4 damage, and cast Ice Bolt on opponent at the end of each turn.

ART: EmeraldTiger IDEA: Waterzx NOTES: The ice bolt ability behaves like ordinary Ice Bolt spell. 2 damage for every 10  in possession, may freeze opponent's weapon. The Ice Bolt can bypass regular shields but can be reflected by spell-reflection shields. Base damage of Blizzard Sword is 3 physical damage+2 Ice Bolt spell damage=5 SERIES:

Spoiler for Hidden:

NAME: Blizzard Sword ELEMENT: Water COST: 6 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: 4 | 6 when flying TEXT: Weapon : Deal 4 damage, and cast Ice Bolt on opponent at the end of each turn	NAME: Arctic Sword ELEMENT: Water COST: 6 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: 5 | 6 when flying TEXT: Weapon : Deal 5 damage, and cast Ice Bolt on opponent at the end of each turn

ART: IDEA: Waterzx NOTES: 1. Require card art 2. The ice bolt ability behaves like ordinary Ice Bolt spell. 2 damage for every 10  in possession, may freeze opponent's weapon. The Ice Bolt can bypass regular shields but can be reflected by spell-reflection shields. 3. Base damage of Blizzard Sword is 4 physical damage+2 Ice Bolt spell damage=6 4. Balance based on Fahrenheit : A. 2 more base damage --> plus 2 cost B. Blizzard sword deals partly spell damage --> plus 1 cost Conclusion : cost 3 more quanta than Fahrenheit SERIES:

[furballdn]

Seems a bit like fahrenheit. Basically deal 6+ 2 for each 10 you own. Or, 6 + 1 for each 5 you own. Looks like you balanced it similarly to Fahrenheit. 6 quanta for a weapon seems excessive though.

[waterzx]

Seems a bit like fahrenheit. Basically deal 6+ 2 for each 10 you own. Or, 6 + 1 for each 5 you own. Looks like you balanced it similarly to Fahrenheit. 6 quanta for a weapon seems excessive though.

I don't want to cut down the physical damage because I want this weapon to be a combination of physical and spell damage, not just focused on spell damage. As a result, I have to increase the cost for that.

[furballdn]

Cost should not be more than 5 . Either lower the base damage a bit or something. You also have to factor in spell damage can be completely countered.

[waterzx]

Cost should not be more than 5 . Either lower the base damage a bit or something. You also have to factor in spell damage can be completely countered.

And there are more ways to completely counter the purely physical damage of fahrenheit. e.g. wings, dim shield, hax shield (with insane luck)....

If your spell damage is countered, you can also adjust your  level to reduce the damage dealt to yourself.

If this card is really too expensive, the only thing I can do is to lower the physical damage for a lower cost.

[Annele]

I love this idea. needs weapon love. It does cost a bit much though.

[OTL]

Considering it also has the potential to completely lock down your opponent's weapon, I feel it's fairly costed. Can anyone say why they feel it's overcosted?

[karis]

i feel like don't have anyone said that 'just overcost'   

but they said it cost is 'to much' for 'weapon'.  so they said this card cost should be reduce with atk. 

[Rutarete]

If it needs cost reduction, why not upgrade to a lower cost? I think it would be fine

[EmeraldTiger]

[OdinVanguard]

So its basically a fahrenheit that may freeze the enemy's weapon... sounds fun to me. Though in light of the potential freeze effect it should probably do slightly less damage than fahrenheit.

[waterzx]

Thank you so much.

New version is now uploaded. Cost and base damage are reduced by 1.