Sacrifice | Oblation

[qetuol]

NAME: Sacrifice ELEMENT: Other COST: 0 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Sacrifice a permanent with a non-zero cost to summon a random creature matching your mark on your side.	NAME: Oblation ELEMENT: Other COST: 0 TYPE: Spell ATK|HP: TEXT: Sacrifice a permanent with a non-zero cost to summon a random upgraded creature matching your mark on your side.

ART: Vladstudio (http://www.vladstudio.com/wallpaper/?firedragon/) IDEA: qetuol NOTES: see below what the "random creature" mean SERIES: -

Creatures pertain in category of probability regarding to its cost. There are 4 categories:

Chance is 56% for creatures which cost is below 30 coins.
Chance is 28% for creatures which cost is 30-60 coins.
Chance is 14% for creatures which cost is above 60 coins.
Rare creatures have 2% chance to appear.
If more creatures belong to a certain category, chances are divided equally.

Lets see an example:
 
Ash/Brimstone Eater & Fire Spirit/Spectre : 28%
Lava Golem/Destroyer : 28%
Phoenices & Crimson/Ruby Dragon: 7%
Fire/Red Nymph : 2%
(sum is 100%)
 
Deja Vu & Scarab & Dune Scorpion : 18%
Fate egg: 28%
Dragon & Anubis: 7%
Pharaoh & Golden Nymph 2 %
 
Spark & Phase Spider/Recluse : 28%
Immortals : 28%
Phase Dragon : 14%
Nymphs : 2%
etc...

[bored_ninja777]

voted for other because i think we need more cards in other.
it also makes it useable in every deck instead of just fire.. Fire has plenty for rushes so giving it this would just be obnoxious. i think maybe give it a cost. sacrificing a permanent is not that huge of a penalty unless it is your only tower/pillar left and you use it then.

[qetuol]

voted for other because i think we need more cards in other.
it also makes it useable in every deck instead of just fire.. Fire has plenty for rushes so giving it this would just be obnoxious. i think maybe give it a cost. sacrificing a permanent is not that huge of a penalty unless it is your only tower/pillar left and you use it then.

please note in version 'other' you cannot sacrifice permanents with zero cost (pillars, pendulums, etc..). 

[Cloudstorm2]

I vote certaintly for the other version: the fire one allows to sacrifice even towers: in a fire lance deck that would be way too OP... Other version is good

[bored_ninja777]

voted for other because i think we need more cards in other.
it also makes it useable in every deck instead of just fire.. Fire has plenty for rushes so giving it this would just be obnoxious. i think maybe give it a cost. sacrificing a permanent is not that huge of a penalty unless it is your only tower/pillar left and you use it then.

please note in version 'other' you cannot sacrifice permanents with zero cost (pillars, pendulums, etc..).

a yes i missed that. well fair enough then. but if u do the fire one .. that is not the case and would be horribly overpowered. i like the "other" version. i still think a small cost of 1 to 3 should be on it. summoning a random can be anywhere from a 1/1 or so to a dragon.

[qetuol]

voted for other because i think we need more cards in other.
it also makes it useable in every deck instead of just fire.. Fire has plenty for rushes so giving it this would just be obnoxious. i think maybe give it a cost. sacrificing a permanent is not that huge of a penalty unless it is your only tower/pillar left and you use it then.

please note in version 'other' you cannot sacrifice permanents with zero cost (pillars, pendulums, etc..).

a yes i missed that. well fair enough then. but if u do the fire one .. that is not the case and would be horribly overpowered. i like the "other" version. i still think a small cost of 1 to 3 should be on it. summoning a random can be anywhere from a 1/1 or so to a dragon.

honestly, i wanted to make the card as a "brother" of Immolation/Cremation
this is the reason of no cost. if the chances are low enough its not a problem to set cost to zero, is it?

[qetuol]

I vote certaintly for the other version: the fire one allows to sacrifice even towers: in a fire lance deck that would be way too OP... Other version is good

sacrificing a tower prevents from creating fire quanta... ash/brimstone eater and fire spirit/spectre costs 1 to 3  which can be generated by a tower during 3 turns... so i think sacrificing a tower prevents from generating much more quanta than 1-3  . still op? please note summoning ash/brimstone eater and fire spirit/spectre has 66% chance.

[bored_ninja777]

if u play say 2 or 3 fire towers/pendulums..and play a brimstone then sac one of the towers and get a random creature... it could be an OP combo for fire.

[Cloudstorm2]

if u play say 2 or 3 fire towers/pendulums..and play a brimstone then sac one of the towers and get a random creature... it could be an OP combo for fire.

That is the reason the fire version is OP, thank you ninja for having this explained 

[qetuol]

what do you think about this:

"Sacrifice a permanent with a non-zero cost to summon a random fire creature on your side."

[bored_ninja777]

it still would be OP if it was Fire only.. if its for all elements it is better because than all elements have a use for it.

[qetuol]

it still would be OP if it was Fire only.. if its for all elements it is better because than all elements have a use for it.

ok then i will pick the non-elemental version, waiting for more votes..