Caustic Finale | Caustic Finale

[GG]

NAME: Caustic Finale ELEMENT: Death COST: 2 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Whenever a creature dies, four poison counters are distributed to other creatures.	NAME: Caustic Finale ELEMENT: Death COST: 2 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Whenever a creature dies, six poison counters are distributed to other creatures.

ART: lillylva (http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1330350) IDEA: GirlsGeneration NOTES: The poison counters are distributed to any creature on both sides of the field; (for the unupgraded version) a single creature could gain four counters, or four creatures can each gain one. The whole point is to use the synergy with other death cards like bonewall that benefit from this chain deaths. And yes, I got the card name from DotA Sand King's ability name. SERIES: Field Effects (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,23187.msg314888#msg314888)

[GG]

Okay. Now for the discussion. There are several ideas that I want to experiment with this card, especially because the card could be a bit UP right now. Here's the list of ideas.


- (my first idea) Whenever a creature dies, infect two (three) other creatures.
 (Maximum poison counter is hence 1)

- (current idea) Whenever a creature dies, four (six) poison counters are distributed to creatures.

- Whenever a creature dies, four (six) poison counters are distributed to creatures AND players.

- Whenever a creature dies, deal ? damage to both players.


What do you think?

[OldTrees]

I like the current 4|6 infection counters idea.

Again another good fit as a field mechanic.

[ratcharmer]

I like it

It reminds me a lot of Sunnygreens' card outbreak (in armory), but it might actually be easier to code for etc.

It could be really strong in a stall or quinted vulture deck. Using boneyard & aflatoxin you could keep a lot of fragile creatures on the board, which would then die after a turn or two, spreading more infection.

The setup would take a while, but it'd be extremely tough to beat once it got going.

[frayedhope]

Very good idea, it's just my opinion but I think that 4 and 6 are just a little bit too high though, maybe 2|3, seeing as this will happen every time anything dies?  Imagine this with retrovirus, ouch.   It would be like plague on steroids even with counters of 2|3.  Honestly, I'd say counters of 1|1, stackable with multiple instances of the card would be completely fine for 3|2 cost... 4|6 counters for 2|2 cost would be some of the best creature control imaginable, haha.

Anyways, all that aside, it really is an awesome idea for a new card.

Edit:  Ohhh, I think I get it now, 4|6 total poison counters, not 4|6 to everything.  In that case, disregard everything I just said except for the first three words of the post, haha.

[WakSkylicker]

Wouldn't this be a little OP in a stall? Just murder all your opponent's creatures, 4|6 damage a turn once one is dead.

[ratcharmer]

Wouldn't this be a little OP in a stall? Just murder all your opponent's creatures, 4|6 damage a turn once one is dead.

The counters go on random creatures, not your opponent.

[Pineapple]

Wouldn't this be a little OP in a stall? Just murder all your opponent's creatures, 4|6 damage a turn once one is dead.

The counters go on random creatures, not your opponent.

He meant that as a form of creature control itself, it is OP.

I kinda agree, since most decks are designed to play creatures as early as possible, this makes you stop playing creatures until all the ones on the field die.
Its metagame role is kinda like that of eternity, where you either wait to ambush all your creatures at once. However, having this role being taken by a spell card... (six copies that do not have summoning sickness)
I think that you should decrease the poison counters to 3 and 4 and increase the cost to 3 and 3.
Regardless, it's an interesting, original mechanic so I'd definitely vote for it in the crucible.

[OldTrees]

Wouldn't this be a little OP in a stall? Just murder all your opponent's creatures, 4|6 damage a turn once one is dead.

The counters go on random creatures, not your opponent.

He meant that as a form of creature control itself, it is OP.

I kinda agree, since most decks are designed to play creatures as early as possible, this makes you stop playing creatures until all the ones on the field die.
Its metagame role is kinda like that of eternity, where you either wait to ambush all your creatures at once. However, having this role being taken by a spell card... (six copies that do not have summoning sickness)
I think that you should decrease the poison counters to 3 and 4 and increase the cost to 3 and 3.
Regardless, it's an interesting, original mechanic so I'd definitely vote for it in the crucible.

It is a permanent not a spell.
You are right to compare it to Eternity because it would alter the metagame if added. However I do not think it will be OP due to the slow speed of infection. It would shift the balance toward larger decks though which is a good thing IMO. I think 40 card decks should be the size for a rush, 30 for a combo and 50 for a stall. This moves us towards that.

[ratcharmer]

Actually, I think you have a point. 6 infection counters is kind of a lot, especially if it works with any death for any reason.

I wouldn't object to cutting the number of infection counters down a ways.

[icecoldbro]

Actually, I think you have a point. 6 infection counters is kind of a lot, especially if it works with any death for any reason.

I wouldn't object to cutting the number of infection counters down a ways.

2-3 seems like a fair and still pretty powerful number to me.

[TheIdioticIdiot]

I don't know...
4/6 poison is kinda OP....
death stall will rule...