Gamble | Gamble

[moomoose]

NAME: Gamble ELEMENT: Entropy COST: 2 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: A coin flips at the end of your turn, the winner recieves an extra turn.	NAME: Gamble ELEMENT: Entropy COST: 1 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: A coin flips at the end of your turn, the winner recieves an extra turn.

ART: public domain: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1360916 IDEA: moomoose NOTES: allows for one of the two players to take two turns in a row.  if you feel you have more to gain by having two turns in a row than you have to lose by your opponent having two turns in a row, use it.  otherwise, dont. yeah, receives is misspelled, if i make any future changes to the card, it will be fixed then. thought about naming it elemental roulette, but figured id stick with gamble for now. SERIES:

[furballdn]

Interesting idea, but the cost is way too low. An extra turn is worth way more than 2 .

[moomoose]

the cost takes into account that your opponent is equally as likely to have two turns in a row

[furballdn]

Still, the effect of an extra turn is very, very powerful. An extra turn means an extra round of drawing, creature attacking, and quanta gain. Even if it has the benefit of helping your opponent, it can too easily turn the tide of battle. In many cases, this card would be used as "Flip a coin, if it's heads, you win the game".

[moomoose]

and in others it could lose the game, its an even flip.  its just as likely to help you as help kill you.

[johannhowitzer]

furballdn has a valid point here.  Just because a card is 50/50 doesn't mean it would help the game.  Consider the following card:

"Flip a coin; if it's heads, you win, if it's tails, you lose."

Even split, yes, but that one card ends the game either way.  This is a reductio ad absurdum, a counterexample - of course Gamble is less powerful, but the principle is the same.

Also, consider that you wouldn't use this card unless you need to... you'd use it when one turn will save you, and if you don't get that turn, you'll lose anyway.  Thus it has the power to convert a number of your losses into wins, and the only way it will convert wins into losses is by virtue of the fact it takes up space in your deck.

It's an interesting concept, but either way it swings, it's too powerful.

[furballdn]

furballdn has a valid point here.  Just because a card is 50/50 doesn't mean it would help the game.  Consider the following card:

"Flip a coin; if it's heads, you win, if it's tails, you lose."

Even split, yes, but that one card ends the game either way.  This is a reductio ad absurdum, a counterexample - of course Gamble is less powerful, but the principle is the same.

Also, consider that you wouldn't use this card unless you need to... you'd use it when one turn will save you, and if you don't get that turn, you'll lose anyway.  Thus it has the power to convert a number of your losses into wins, and the only way it will convert wins into losses is by virtue of the fact it takes up space in your deck.

It's an interesting concept, but either way it swings, it's too powerful.

Yes. This pretty much sums up what I was thinking.

[moomoose]

except that it will not only be used in the "well, im going to lose anyway" situation.  that is a good use for it, but it is not the only.  could add a self damage component to it, possibly, to lessen the "well, i only have 10hp, im going to lose anyway" use.

also, just a note, the win/loss extension is like saying anything bad is comparable to being hitler (well, that teacher is a little strict, so he is not making my son happy, which takes him from the good side, so he is on hitler's side of the isle).  extension to extremes aren't always the best way to look at things, even in the sense that you portrayed.  not to mention the win/loss card would be dumb, plain and simple.  this is not guaranteeing a win nor a loss, it may help in either direction. 

an alternative, significantly less powerful, less interesting, version would be doing 10-20 damage to the loser of the coin flip.

-or have it be under a sundial like effect where damage to the other player (depending on who wins) cannot be done during the extra turn, or something.

[Drake_XIV]

I advise amending the text as this will be moving up to the Crucible....

[choongmyoung]

If I understand correctly, I suggest that "Toss the coin in the end of your turn. Winner starts the turn".
That way, this card is 1/2 turn and do not give any advantage to your opponent.

[Cheesy111]

I really hate the idea of RNG win cards like this, but they keep popping up in entropy. 

[AvusXIV]

I think something else should be considered: The combo of cheap Gamble and Silence is too awesome. In fact you get an additonal, free turn or it's your next, normal turn (besides, IF, opponent's creature/weapon/permanent abilities, I know).

One Nova and one Aether Tower are enough to play Gamble and Silence in the first turn. Assuming 6 of each in a 30 deck combined with SoB/Precog/Sundial/Hourglass you might play the whole deck quite easily before your opponent even gets one turn. And the extra turns even grant enough quanta to not lack of it for playing all the cards you draw ^^

I think I made a mistake there. The opponent would have two turns if he'd win, so Silence would just more or less negate his extra turn. My bad.