Critical Mass | Critical Mass

[OldTrees]

If you destroy the Permanent, would Ruby Dragons continue pummeling you with 2's or will it smash you with 12's?

If Critical Mass is destroyed creatures will attack with their normal attack.

[unknown89089]

I meant 15, but anyways, so it's kind of like Nightfall/Eclipse, if it's destroyed, the creatures revert back to the original thing.

[cometbah]

If you destroy the Permanent, would Ruby Dragons continue pummeling you with 2's or will it smash you with 12's?

I would assume that, since it's described as a 'permanent' reduction, once the Dragon gets changed to 2/2, it will stay 2/2 until further altered.

It's not that I "don't like the idea"
It's that I don't think it should lean so far against fire(and any offensive creature).
Would you think it right if this card worked the other way? Limiting HP to be no higher than attack?  Then it would be partial against gravity.

Consider that  is the only element with all but one of its creatures completely unaffected by Gravity Shield, and the one that may be affected grows in a manageable manner.

It makes little sense to thence conclude that  is 'leaning too far against  '. Similarly, it makes little sense to declare that the Otyugh is 'leaning too far against fire' simply because an un-upgraded Otyugh could devour every single upgraded creature, or that is anti-:death because there is not a single upgraded creature that could withstand a Firestorm (dragons and well-fed condors aside), or even that is too particular against because a single Firestorm could wipe out every single creature other than buffed up Golems.

It makes even less sense to declare that something should not work particularly against offensive creatures. Would it follow that nothing should work particularly well against defensive creatures either? Or balanced creatures, or low-HP creatures, or low-attack creatures, or creatures that rely on abilities?

People who play with have been warned (heh) from the start- fire creatures are very, very fragile and lack subtlety. It's a disadvantage they would have to live with, just like the expensiveness / (partial) immortality exchange for , or bargain-price-creatures / total lack of direct CC (and other disadvantages) for , or insane-buffs-from-death / no repeatable ways of actually causing death for .

Moreover, to parallel your 'pack an Enchant' argument - why not just pack a Momentum? =9

[OldTrees]

If you destroy the Permanent, would Ruby Dragons continue pummeling you with 2's or will it smash you with 12's?

I would assume that, since it's described as a 'permanent' reduction, once the Dragon gets changed to 2/2, it will stay 2/2 until further altered.

It is described as limited not as reduction. The limit will be removed when the permanent is destroyed.

[cometbah]

If you destroy the Permanent, would Ruby Dragons continue pummeling you with 2's or will it smash you with 12's?

I would assume that, since it's described as a 'permanent' reduction, once the Dragon gets changed to 2/2, it will stay 2/2 until further altered.

It is described as limited not as reduction. The limit will be removed when the permanent is destroyed.

Quote:

 NOTES:
   If an attacking creature's attack value is greater than its maximum HP, its attack is reduced until they are equal, permanently.

[OldTrees]

If you destroy the Permanent, would Ruby Dragons continue pummeling you with 2's or will it smash you with 12's?

I would assume that, since it's described as a 'permanent' reduction, once the Dragon gets changed to 2/2, it will stay 2/2 until further altered.

It is described as limited not as reduction. The limit will be removed when the permanent is destroyed.

Quote:

 NOTES:
   If an attacking creature's attack value is greater than its maximum HP, its attack is reduced until they are equal, permanently.

I was wrong. Thanks for the correction.

I think it would be better if that clause in the notes were removed. It is balanced if the effect is removed with the permanent. A permanent reduction would require a slightly higher cost IMO. I personally would favor the shield causing a 1 turn effect that is renewed every attack.

[cometbah]

If you destroy the Permanent, would Ruby Dragons continue pummeling you with 2's or will it smash you with 12's?

I would assume that, since it's described as a 'permanent' reduction, once the Dragon gets changed to 2/2, it will stay 2/2 until further altered.

It is described as limited not as reduction. The limit will be removed when the permanent is destroyed.

Quote:

 NOTES:
   If an attacking creature's attack value is greater than its maximum HP, its attack is reduced until they are equal, permanently.

I was wrong. Thanks for the correction.

I think it would be better if that clause in the notes were removed. It is balanced if the effect is removed with the permanent. A permanent reduction would require a slightly higher cost IMO. I personally would favor the shield causing a 1 turn effect that is renewed every attack.

^^ I was curious as to whether I misinterpreted the description as well... you are more experienced than me =9

Oh and, thanks for actually taking my Darkness rant seriously earlier ^^u

Since the attacking creature gets crippled after the attack occurs (as described in the 'notes' section, and in accordance with, I assume, the way all shields work(e.g. poison being applied after creature attacks through Thorn Carapace, creature being damaged after attacking through Fire Shield)), I don't think a renewing effect of this sort is actually possible to attain.

I could be wrong, of course =)

[OldTrees]

If you destroy the Permanent, would Ruby Dragons continue pummeling you with 2's or will it smash you with 12's?

I would assume that, since it's described as a 'permanent' reduction, once the Dragon gets changed to 2/2, it will stay 2/2 until further altered.

It is described as limited not as reduction. The limit will be removed when the permanent is destroyed.

Quote:

 NOTES:
   If an attacking creature's attack value is greater than its maximum HP, its attack is reduced until they are equal, permanently.

I was wrong. Thanks for the correction.

I think it would be better if that clause in the notes were removed. It is balanced if the effect is removed with the permanent. A permanent reduction would require a slightly higher cost IMO. I personally would favor the shield causing a 1 turn effect that is renewed every attack.

^^ I was curious as to whether I misinterpreted the description as well... you are more experienced than me =9

Oh and, thanks for actually taking my Darkness rant seriously earlier ^^u

Since the attacking creature gets crippled after the attack occurs (as described in the 'notes' section, and in accordance with, I assume, the way all shields work(e.g. poison being applied after creature attacks through Thorn Carapace, creature being damaged after attacking through Fire Shield)), I don't think a renewing effect of this sort is actually possible to attain.

I could be wrong, of course =)

You were right that it does permanently cripple the attacker.

My suggested change is easily within the realms of existing coding:
There are 3 types of stats: Original (seen on card), Full (displayed in the extra information box), Current (displayed on the field.)
A temporary renewing effect would be coded as a 1 turn reduction in the current attack. This would then be renewed next turn when the weakened creature attacked again.

You are welcome. I take everyone seriously. (I am still waiting for you to make those card ideas.)

[Anarook]

I thought of a change that you may or may not like, but I feel
(despite everyone insisting upon taking my statement and trying to counter it as if it were their duty to do so)
that this still serves its purpose while letting up ever so slightly.
~Attacking creatures ATK is halved permanently until its ATK is equal to, or below its HP.

[Sevs]

woah now that i realize that the attack change is permanent, that is kind of ridiculous IMO i understand. Except for damage shields which no permanents have a permanent effect on creatures, and creatures can be healed. this card once played can not be undone.

As for pairing ith eclipse, will it subtract 2 more from the attack once eclipse is destroyed? so upped vampires will be 2|4 and gargoyles who havent stone formed will be reduced to possibly 1. Also situatuational, this can ruin some fire and darkness decks.

On another note this would provide a buff to thunderstorm, essentially reducing most creatures attack by 1.

[johannhowitzer]

Well, I wasn't able to get on the forum all weekend, and now I have some 'splainin' to do!

- The attack change IS permanent, and will last after the shield is destroyed.  The only reason the word "limited" is used in the card text is because I couldn't figure out how to explain the permanent nature of the effect in the text space on the card.  I will add this to the Notes section, and am open to suggestions of how to word the card text better.

- Ridiculous in some situations maybe, but remember that many, many creatures have more HP than attack, and most of the remaining creatures would only lose a little attack.  This shield is absolutely useless against a Gravity opponent.  It may be powerful against Fire opponents, but they also have the most convenient way to destroy the shield - and the attack reduction won't take effect until the END of the opponent's next turn.  Also, not every Fire creature will be permanently crippled by this... Lava Destroyer is a good example.

- The interaction with Eclipse is thus:

1. Vampire is played.  (4|4)
2. Eclipse is played.  (6|5)
3. Critical Mass is struck by Vampire.  (5|5)
4. Eclipse is destroyed.  (3|4)

[cometbah]

Well, I wasn't able to get on the forum all weekend, and now I have some 'splainin' to do!

- The attack change IS permanent, and will last after the shield is destroyed.  The only reason the word "limited" is used in the card text is because I couldn't figure out how to explain the permanent nature of the effect in the text space on the card.  I will add this to the Notes section, and am open to suggestions of how to word the card text better.

- Ridiculous in some situations maybe, but remember that many, many creatures have more HP than attack, and most of the remaining creatures would only lose a little attack.  This shield is absolutely useless against a Gravity opponent.  It may be powerful against Fire opponents, but they also have the most convenient way to destroy the shield - and the attack reduction won't take effect until the END of the opponent's next turn.  Also, not every Fire creature will be permanently crippled by this... Lava Destroyer is a good example.

- The interaction with Eclipse is thus:

1. Vampire is played.  (4|4)
2. Eclipse is played.  (6|5)
3. Critical Mass is struck by Vampire.  (5|5)
4. Eclipse is destroyed.  (3|4)

- 'Reduce the attacking creature's attack to the value of its defence'?

- It is feasible to end up with negative-damage creatures. For example: Eclipsed Vampire (6|5 ---> 5|5), Drain Life x2 (5|1 ---> 1|1), Basilisk Blood (1|21), De-Eclipse (-1|20). Of course, it's easier just to use Antimatter, and if someone can actually pull of the combo, they deserve much more than the 1 point of healing =9

- Consider Maxwell's Demon as a comparison - anything that could be affected by Critical Mass would be killed outright by Maxwell's Demon. Critical Mass does not have offensive value, does not get rid of creature abilities, never lowers the attack to 0, can be bypassed by a spell that costs 2/1 quantum/quanta, and can be destroyed by a 2/1 cost spell.

A compilation of creatures that would be affected by Critical Mass (and the amount of attack reduction for unupped and upped, respectively), for reference:
Maxwell's Demon: 0/-1
Amethyst Dragon: -5/-6
Fallen Elf: -1/0
Purple Nymph: -2/-1
Bone Dragon: -5/-6
Flesh Recluse: 0/-3
Mummy: -2/-2
Charger: 0/-2
Graviton Firemaster: attack capped at 7/8 (+2 damage goes still goes through before becoming reduced)
Shrieker: -5/-6
Emerald Dragon: -4/-3
Giant Frog: 0/-2
Ash Eater: -1/-1
Ruby Dragon: -9/-13
Fire Spirit: capped at 4/5 (damage still goes through from growth)
Lava Golem: -4/-6; but can be grown
Phoenix: -6/-3
Ice Dragon: -3/-8
Toadfish: -2/0
Steam Machine: Capped at 9/19 (damage still goes through from growth)
Pegasus: -1/0
Dragonfly: 0/-1
Wyrm: 0/-2
Sky Dragon: -3/-6
Firefly: -1/-2
Air Nymph: -1/-4
Devonian Dragon: -5/-9
A single Scarab: -1/-2
Two Scarabs: 0/-1
GotP: -3/-5
Obsidian Dragon: -5/-6
Parasite: 0/-2
Vampire: 0/-1
Gargoyle: -2/-4
Ball Lightning: Unaffected (damage still goes through)
Immortal: 0/-1
Phase Dragon: -2/-4
Phase Recluse: -2/-5
Aether Nymph: -3/-4