Oak Guardian | Oak Warrior

[Schattenfresser]

Hi,
here is the reposting of the latest version of the Oak Warrior and Oak Guardian. I attach the old versions to the start post

NAME: Oak Guardian ELEMENT: Life COST: 7 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 3 | 5 ABILITY: Protection: All life creatures under your control gain +0|+2.	NAME: Oak Warrior ELEMENT: Life COST: 8 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 7 | 5 ABILITY: Protection: All life creatures under your control gain +0|+2.

ART: Jarkko Samuli Vanhalakka IDEA: Schattenfresser NOTES: * works as combination with Dryads: Link (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,3159.0.html) * you can lobotomize the ability * will be 3|7 / 7|7 as long as the ability is active * works likes Nightfall SERIES: -

[Scaredgirl]

Why do you have two versions?

[Schattenfresser]

Why do you have two versions?

I posted the attached version first. After some feedback I changed the cards but I didn't get feedback to the latest version. I posted the older version so that people can say which way is better and if I should change something else.

[Scaredgirl]

Well, I would say the new version is much better. Cards with both "N" and "M" are too complex.

[Schattenfresser]

I decided to add a poll to the thread because only SG posted something. I hope that i get a little bit more feedback.

Vote and Discuss

[Kuroaitou]

The attack on the upgraded Oak Warrior could be dropped just a tad, just because for 1 extra  , you can gain a potential +4 AP (which is a bit absurd in my opinion). I looked at your other creature, and I feel weird about having 'multiple' creatures being reliant on one another (FFQ, and Rustlers have good synergies with Fireflies for example, but are not necessarily).

Otherwise, the ability is decent. Could explain a potential deck (besides mono-life) that could take benefits of this?

[Schattenfresser]

The attack on the upgraded Oak Warrior could be dropped just a tad, just because for 1 extra  , you can gain a potential +4 AP (which is a bit absurd in my opinion). I looked at your other creature, and I feel weird about having 'multiple' creatures being reliant on one another (FFQ, and Rustlers have good synergies with Fireflies for example, but are not necessarily).

Otherwise, the ability is decent. Could explain a potential deck (besides mono-life) that could take benefits of this?

The increase of the attack isn't to much in my opinion because it's justifiable to increase the attack for the upped version about 2 and then you have to pay 1 for the other increase about 2.
The Steel Golem gains +2|+3 without raised costs or the Abyss Crawler gains +3|+3 with the same raise. This are vanilla creature but the ability isn't the strongest and very situational so that it shouldn't restrict the attack gain very much.

A potential deck could be a life/fire-deck with rage potions or fire nymph. And the card is designed to be used in mono-life or life heavy decks because you wouldn't use the card without Dryads. The cards is without them only a very expensive medium-damage creature. That's the reason why I think about decreasing the cost of both version about 1.

[Dm]

Instead of having the ability it has, which actually needs a dryad, you could change it to something like :

"Increases any monsters def by X (X = a set number of your choice.)"

[Kurohami]

I absolutely love this card and the dryad, I don't understand why it doesn't get much love in the voting in crucible. I think the reason is if they vote for it they have to vote for both because one of them alone is just useless and if they saw something really good they are not going to let these two cards take all their votes.

[Schattenfresser]

Instead of having the ability it has, which actually needs a dryad, you could change it to something like :

"Increases any monsters def by X (X = a set number of your choice.)"

The option "Change the ability." is currently in lead and nobody besides you posted a other form of the ability. Maybe they like your idea. ???
Ok, I think the value of x should be 2 because a HP-bonus of 3 would make every monster immun to a single RoF and a bonus of 1 doesn't have much of an effect. But +2 would make Giant Frogs immun to unbuffed Elite Otys and Paradox and it would bring the most of the monster out of the rang of RoF (except very vunerable monsters like Fire Golems).
And the Bonus won't work on the Oaks as long as only one is under your controll, but a second Oak gives the bonus.

[wizelsnarf]

Instead of having the ability it has, which actually needs a dryad, you could change it to something like :

"Increases any monsters def by X (X = a set number of your choice.)"

The option "Change the ability." is currently in lead and nobody besides you posted a other form of the ability. Maybe they like your idea. ???
Ok, I think the value of x should be 2 because a HP-bonus of 3 would make every monster immun to a single RoF and a bonus of 1 doesn't have much of an effect. But +2 would make Giant Frogs immun to unbuffed Elite Otys and Paradox and it would bring the most of the monster out of the rang of RoF (except very vunerable monsters like Fire Golems).
And the Bonus won't work on the Oaks as long as only one is under your controll, but a second Oak gives the bonus.

I think you should go with this, specifically +1 hp for life creatures for each oak guardian... It fits the name and you would have to have 2 out to be immune to elite otyugh...

[Dm]

Great in theory, but let's face this : I have 1 oak guardian. let's not exaggerate. plus.. 1 fractal. 1x9, correct? that makes 9 oak guardian.

Well then I throw in.. 6 devourer. ^^

normally, devourer's unburied would all die with one RoF, correct? or even oty's; or a few other things.

so, 9 oak guardians = 9 extra hp, plus devourer's natural 2 hp, makes 11 hp just for one devourer. if we aim all in just one devourer, that makes.. well, over 80 hp. That if X is every oak guardian adds hp with the number they have in field.

IF they add only 1 hp, 2+9 =11