Essence Dampener | Essence Suppressor

[Glitch]

Why wouldn't you use this?!  It's a PERMANENT, meaning it doesn't effect itself.  You could make fire-bolt cost 192 quanta!  That would be HILARIOUS!  And also it would screw over a lot of decks.

[Malduk]

I dont think it should stack. That would be rather insane  Especially when more advanced spells get introduced to the game.

[Asris]

Unless I'm missing something here, the notes say it will not stack.

[ManOfManySpoons]

As Asiris pointed out, it does not stack. 

It would have devastating effects on Decay, Eternal Phoenix, and (to a lesser extent) Miracle though.  Now it would take the Fractal gods 6 turns per fractal, as opposed to just 3.  It might be too good in this scenario, although I know a lot of us would welcome something to make FG grinding easier, even if it is only in a few cases. 

[Kuroaitou]

As Asiris pointed out, it does not stack. 

It would have devastating effects on Decay, Eternal Phoenix, and (to a lesser extent) Miracle though.  Now it would take the Fractal gods 6 turns per fractal, as opposed to just 3.  It might be too good in this scenario, although I know a lot of us would welcome something to make FG grinding easier, even if it is only in a few cases.

But hell, Decay can already be countered by Permafrost, Jade, Titanium/Diamond, and Mirror Shield already (reflective damage, major damage reduction against mass Devourers, etc.). On the other hand, it could bolster some help against Eternal Phoenix (with the Aether mark x3), but Shard of Sloth has one problem.

Sloth is not a virtue. Zanz himself said that the shards are supposed to represent virtues in-game, and Sloth definitely doesn't fit that description.

Okay, even ignoring the above, I thought that Shards are supposed to be useful for helping the player that carries them, rather than a detriment for (not just the enemy) both players in the game? Shard of Vengeance (previously Restraint) barely passed because it helped the player by punishing the opponent, but in this case, it punishes both players that try to use any form of a spell. Steal, Explosion, Heal, Plague, Rain of Fire, Supernova, etc.

[SunnyGreens]

Card Update:

Change 1: No longer a shard, made it into normal "other" card.
Reason: Did not fit the game's flavor.

Change 2: Upgraded card now costs 1 quanta less.
Reason: Needed something to be upgraded.


Besides that, please read the notes on cards. I try to keep the card text short and to the point, so I flesh out any details in the card notes. Just to be sure: The card does not stack, it only affects spell cards (not skill costs, creatures, or permanents), and finally I felt it should be colorless since it had such an anti-elemental nature to it.

Let me know what you think...

[Bloodshadow]

Hmm... This used to be a Shard? What color was it? It seemed like the antithesis of my Shard of Acumen (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,7180.0.html)...

[jmizzle7]

I believe this card needs to add to the casting cost of spells instead of multiply it. That way there is no particular bias towards one spell over the other. If it makes spells cost 3 more or something, that would be fine, but double makes cards like Fractal, Parallel Universe, Miracle, and Antimatter far from playable, while it hardly touches Protect Artifact, Animate Weapon, Thunderbolt, Chaos Seed, Stone Skin, Deflagration, Siphon, Fire Lance, Ice Lance, etc.... This only really hurts expensive spells, where a flat increase would slow down every spell-based deck.

[Essence]

Help!  Help!  I'm being supressed!

[Retribution]

Help!  Help!  I'm being supressed!

I lol'd. 

I like jmizzle's idea...
I think that the amount of card cost increased should depend on the original spell card cost, though...

[SunnyGreens]

Card Update:

Change 1: Changed Dampener to a fixed quanta cost increase of 2.
Reason: jmizzle7 had a good point, but just as 2x was unfair to expensive cards, I felt +3 was unfair to cheap cards. So, +2.

Change 2: Changed Suppressor to 2 + N/4, where N = spell quanta cost.
Reason: As much as I hate putting in an equation, +2 just doesn't seem that big a deal when you're already shelling out 12 for a Miracle. So the upgraded version increases steadily with the cost of the spell. Miracle would cost 17.

Change 3: Edited notes.
Reason: Clear up mechanics of card.

Change 4: Dampener cost decreased to 4, Suppressor increased to 5.
Reason: The strength of the abilities between the two changed, so I wanted the cost to represent that.


@Essence: I've been waiting for you to comment on the name I picked  , I wasn't disappointed.

@Bloodshadow: It was a lovely shade of purple, different from your shard though. Any similarity is a coincidence though, I hadn't seen any of your shard posts when I thought of making this.

[Retribution]

Card Update:

Change 1: Changed Dampener to a fixed quanta cost increase of 2.
Reason: jmizzle7 had a good point, but just as 2x was unfair to expensive cards, I felt +3 was unfair to cheap cards. So, +2.

Change 2: Changed Suppressor to 2 + N/4, where N = spell quanta cost.
Reason: As much as I hate putting in an equation, +2 just doesn't seem that big a deal when you're already shelling out 12 for a Miracle. So the upgraded version increases steadily with the cost of the spell. Miracle would cost 17.

Change 3: Edited notes.
Reason: Clear up mechanics of card.

@Essence: I've been waiting for you to comment on the name I picked  , I wasn't disappointed.

@Bloodshadow: It was a lovely shade of purple, different from your shard though. Any similarity is a coincidence though, I hadn't seen any of your shard posts when I thought of making this.

I like your math for the upgraded version.
Sounds good, but if fractal was cast and you had an upgraded supressor, would it increase card cost by 4, or 5? And other numbers not divisible by 4.