Grim Reaper's Touch | Grim Reaper's Grasp

[Pella]

NAME: Grim Reaper's Touch ELEMENT: Death COST: 3 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Triggers death effects. Target creature either is stunned for 2 turns or dies.	NAME: Grim Reaper's Grasp ELEMENT: Death COST: 2 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Triggers death effects. Target creature either is stunned for 2 turns or dies.

ART: Krava, obtained from here. IDEA: Pella NOTES: An idea to add a different kind of CC to the Death element. Stun = Delay, as in Basilisk Blood's effect. Chance to die is same as for Skull Shield. Card triggers death effects when played, 'cuz that's what the Grim Reaper does.  If target creature dies, death effects are triggered again. SERIES:

[Drake_XIV]

What are the chances of killing?

[Pella]

I don't know.  Need help with that.  Not sure how to balance that properly.  My first thought was 25%, but maybe 10% would be better.

[Drake_XIV]

Maybe just have it have the same percentage as Skull Shield.

[Pella]

Maybe just have it have the same percentage as Skull Shield.

Done.

[OdinVanguard]

Seems a little on the expensive side to me. Two turn stun is much less effective than freeze since there are some things freeze will prevent (passive skills like devour and light) that stun does not prevent. Freeze only costs 1 ... even the squid skill version is only 2

Now, granted, this card also has a small chance to kill the target. However, if I remember correctly skull shield kill rate scales as:

50% / target HP

That means this is only really effective for very small creatures... At that rate I'd be better off using a bolt, poison, chaos seed, etc. All of which cost less. So, I think a small cost drop is in order.

That aside, it would make a fun way to help power death effects, which the element could always benefit from.

[Pella]

Good comments, Odin.  I used the word "stun" to mean the same effect as "delay", like Basilisk Blood does.  I think we're on the same page there, but I'm not completely sure.  I didn't think a creature could Devour while in that state, though.  I've never seen that skill work passively.

What sort of cost drop did you have in mind?  3 | 3 ?  2 | 2 ?  2 | 3 ?  I see your point.  I've been playing for a month or so now, yet I'm still inexperienced in proper balancing of these things.  I appreciate your input.

[OdinVanguard]

Good comments, Odin.  I used the word "stun" to mean the same effect as "delay", like Basilisk Blood does.  I think we're on the same page there, but I'm not completely sure.  I didn't think a creature could Devour while in that state, though.  I've never seen that skill work passively.

What sort of cost drop did you have in mind?  3 | 3 ?  2 | 2 ?  2 | 3 ?  I see your point.  I've been playing for a month or so now, yet I'm still inexperienced in proper balancing of these things.  I appreciate your input.

When I said "Devour" I meant the devourer's skill (the one that drains quanta) not the Otyugh's skill (the one that eats other creatures)... Sorry if there was confusion there. Its a hazard of having two things with a name and skill that are so similar.

Either 3 or 2 would seem about right... for mid to large size creatures, that should probably put the kill rate on par with unupped mutation. For smaller ones it also fits since its kill rate should balance out with bolts.

[Pella]

Oh, right.  Forgot about the Devourer.  Thanks.

[thinking out loud] Okay, Basilisk Blood delays for 6 turns for 2 | 1 .   Squid | Octopus freezes for 3 | 4  turns for a cost of 5 | 5 , but it's repeatable.  The Freeze spell freezes for 3 | 4 turns for only 1 | 1 .  Skull Shield has the same chance to kill as my proposed card and costs 3 | 2 .  And my proposed card delays for 2 | 3 turns.  How to balance this?  hmmmmmmm..... [/tol]

Okay, I've narrowed it down to these possibilities.
1) 3 | 2   would make it cost the same as Skull Shield | Skull Buckler.  That seems reasonable to me.
2) On the other hand, the number of turns for the upped version increases, so that would justify keeping the cost at 3 | 3 .
3) Lastly, I could keep the stun at 2 turns for both cards and lower the cost, making it 3 | 2 , again, the same cost as SS|SB.  I briefly considered going 2 | 1 , but that seems too OP when you add in the chance to kill.

Thoughts?  Odin?  Anyone?

[OdinVanguard]

I like 3 / 2 with 2 turn stun for both myself. Puts unupped in line with skull shield and upped in line with mutation, cost wise. Not sure what mutations kill chance is off the top of my head though.

... Just thought I'd bring it up, but what if it also triggered a death effect regardless of if it kills the target or not. That would certainly add in some extra utility. Its not a completely new idea, but it is a fairly unique twist on it I think.

[Pella]

Mutation's kill chance is 25%.

If I understand you correctly, your latest idea is the card triggers a death effect (presumably because The Reaper showed up), and it also stuns or kills a creature?  That fits into the Death theme, for sure.  If it does that, it should produce only one death effect, though.  I don't think it should produce its own death effect, then have a second one created when a creature dies.... or should it?

Edit:  IMO, the chance for creating two death effects does not make the card OP.  Spells like Thunderstorm or Rain of Fire, for example, can create many death effects in one turn.  I think it fits the thematic for The Reaper's appearance in and of itself to create a death effect, and then for a second death effect to occur if the creature dies.  I'll go ahead and modify it to that for now, pending further input from the community.

[Drake_XIV]

You could ask vrt to use his art.

Spoiler for Hidden:

Also, there's:

Spoiler for Hidden:

You could crop off a hand to use.