Great Tree | Great Tree

[EmeraldTiger]

Sorry, but i think the table needs to be redone.

[ZephyrPhantom]

Sorry, but i think the table needs to be redone.

You might want to just reupload the table entirely.  On that note, I don't exactly agree with the removal of photosynthesis - sacrificing attack for health can matter in many situationst that involve CC.

[rowcla]

Sorry, but i think the table needs to be redone.

You might want to just reupload the table entirely.  On that note, I don't exactly agree with the removal of photosynthesis - sacrificing attack for health can matter in many situationst that involve CC.

life still has rustlers for photosynthesis

[ZephyrPhantom]

Yes, but Rustlers are not as quanta dependent as this card is. If all life quanta was to become zero for some reason, you would still have an opportunity to use photosyntesis to increase the max HP on your turn before this card dies at the end of your turn.

[rowcla]

Yes, but Rustlers are not as quanta dependent as this card is. If all life quanta was to become zero for some reason, you would still have an opportunity to use photosyntesis to increase the max HP on your turn before this card dies at the end of your turn.

well i didnt choose to get rid of photosynthesis.

[ZephyrPhantom]

I know. I'm just saying having it would benefit the card.

[Kuroaitou]

CURATOR COMMENT
-Please be careful when making changes to your card post; I had to fix the table formatting since they were heavily misalligned/skewed before ^^;
-Capitalize the word, "Tree" in your card image (it's currently lower case)
-Add a icon after the card's COST in the table section for both cards (it should read '7 ', not just '7', to match the card image)

The stats of the card feel a bit contrived (as if the synergy between the light and life elements were forced in order to make this a viable creature). Other than that though, the equation is simple enough to be understood by most people, so if it were implemented, it wouldn't take a huge table to find out the 'optimal' spec to balance out the amount of and quanta you have to make this a durable attacker.

[rowcla]

Changing health to life/2, increasing cost and reseting poll

[ak65ala]

I like the idea, life needs to have more plants. 

A limitation is the small set of decks this creature can be included within.  Any other creature that is dual (FFQ, Lava golem, toadfish, etc...) can also be used within a rainbow deck.  This creature *could* but with needing 8 life to use, then needing even more stored up to keep it from being too weak... it's not a good choice.  That seems to be a limitation for this guy.

More on the mechanics side of things, does the change of life and attack effect it's maximum or it's current?  I'd assume it raises it's maximum life / attack when it grows and then loses from it's current life / attack when it shrinks.  How will poison or damage work towards it in that case?  If it effects max, but not current, then I can have my tree poisoned, use quanta to bring it's max down, then gain life quanta to heal it back up?  On the flip side, if it has lost some life, and I spend life quanta, will that kill it because it will shrink and it's life lost is greater than it's now current life?  Having a genitive effect happen (creature dying) due to a positive action (playing cards) seems to be a bit bitter.

[rowcla]

to the first point a deck based on generating light quanta and photosynthesizing it would be fairly effective (maybe a new rol hope deck)

to the second, i had not thought about that factor, having a decrease in stats each turn would be confusing to work out power, perhaps i should grant it immortality.

please discuss this

[redium]

Strong concept for a card.

[ak65ala]

to the second, i had not thought about that factor, having a decrease in stats each turn would be confusing to work out power, perhaps i should grant it immortality.

Even immortal creatures can lose life (Fire Shield, Thorn Carapace) so that will not be a 100% solution.