Seijaku | Seijaku

[ddevans96]

What Essence said. These two cards are completely different mechanics.

[Rutarete]

What Essence said. These two cards are completely different mechanics.

I also agree.

[willng3]

What the other two three said...the Element, the mechanic and the name are totally different.

I like this card a lot more after the change.  And the name is pretty awesome IMO

[ZephyrPhantom]

Woah, that's a lot of support right there, thanks guys! 

I had done some browsing and found the cards you were talking about:

Shuriken | Silent Shuriken by Hyroen (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,7517.0.html)
Evaria's Remake as Shuriken | Shuriken (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,18248.0.html)

Seijaku
- Other
- Deals a steady amount of damage when Animated.
- Relies on a chance to increase damage potential, making it benefical to ATK buff and Endow.


Shuriken (Using Eva's version)
- Air
- Can self-animate in a diving manner, but is useless to animate itself.
- Could possibly be Endowed by a Crusader as an Animate Weapon source.
- If buffed at all, would rely on an HP buff to work.

I think the differences are good enough, so I will resubmit this to the Crucible.

[TimerClock14]

Umm...no offense intended, TC14, but I entirely disagree.  The two are "incredibly similar" in that they're both throwing stars, but mechanically they couldn't be more different.  It's like saying that Morning Star and Lobotomizer are "incredibly similar" because they're both sword-shaped.

Can we get a second opinion on this?

Upon closer inspection, that's not the only thing that is similar.

The attack for the unupgraded are exactly the same, and the upgraded differ slightly.

However, you all are completely correct that the mechanics differ far too greatly. Zblader has decided to go with this, and I will not object.

Apologies for any inconveniences.


EDIT:
CURATOR COMMENT:
-Please change the TYPE section in the second column of your table to match the text in the first column. ("weapon" should be "Permanent(weapon)")

[ZephyrPhantom]

Apologies for any inconveniences.

You caught a mistake anyway, so it's all good. ^_^

Fixed.

[zse]

Interesting card and mechanism. I bet this, if implemented in game, would generate massive amount of discussion like Hax Shields do now.

My only concern in this card is using it with Crusader. Would it be possible to get those doubled damages =12+8|20+14 with that 2 card combo? Not that it would be totally OP, but it would only cost 10 .

[ZephyrPhantom]

Interesting card and mechanism. I bet this, if implemented in game, would generate massive amount of discussion like Hax Shields do now.

My only concern in this card is using it with Crusader. Would it be possible to get those doubled damages =12+8|20+14 with that 2 card combo? Not that it would be totally OP, but it would only cost 10 .

Yes, you could get double damage but with a 30% | 35% chance you're paying 3 Other to get a weapon that can deal 5.2 damage | 9.45 damage as Essence stated earlier, which seems okay considering the damage ratio for Short Bow and Gavel and Short Sword: Ratio for Seijaku
Unupgraded 5.2/3 = 1.73 damage for 1 quantum.
Upgraded 9.45/3 =  3.15 damage for 1 quantum.
Ratio for Short Bow/Gavel (W/Mark damage)
Unupgraded 4/2 = 2 damage for 1 quantum.
Upgraded 7/2 = 3.5 damage for 1 quantum.
Ratio for Short Sword
Unupgraded 3/1 = 3 damage for 1 quantum.
Upgraded 6/1 = 6 damage for 1 quantum.Short Sword is still overall the most cost efficient, but it's often used in rush decks that don't have the mark for Short Bow or Gavel. Seijaku has the best ability out of the three for animation and sadering but as a result it does slightly less damage and works in different decks