Skull Eye | Death Eye

[waterzx]

NAME: Skull Eye ELEMENT: Death COST: 3 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 1 | 5 TEXT: Decay : Quanta production from each pillar / pendulum stack (on both sides) reduced to 75%. Effect non-cumulative.	NAME: Death Eye ELEMENT: Death COST: 5 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 1 | 5 TEXT: Decay : Quanta production from each pillar / pendulum stack (on both sides) reduced to 50%. Effect non-cumulative.

ART: Modified from : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Crystal_skull_british_museum_random9834672.jpg IDEA: waterzx NOTES: Both players will be affected by Skull Eye | Death Eye All pillars and pendulums stack, including quantum pillars will be affected. If one of your stack is supposed to produce 4 quanta, under effect of Skull Eye, only 3 quanta will be produced. This card is made to be a creature to offer more ways to counter. SERIES:

Spoiler for Hidden:

NAME: Skull Eye ELEMENT: Death COST: 3 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 1 | 8 TEXT: Lose 2 HP each turn. Quanta production from each pillar / pendulum stack reduced to 75%. Effect unstackable.	NAME: Death Eye ELEMENT: Death COST: 5 TYPE: Creature ATK|HP: 1 | 8 TEXT: Lose 2 HP each turn. Quanta production from each pillar / pendulum stack reduced to 50%. Effect unstackable.

ART: Modified from : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Crystal_skull_british_museum_random9834672.jpg IDEA: waterzx NOTES: Both players will be affected by Skull Eye | Death Eye All pillars and pendulums stack, including quantum pillars will be affected. If one of your stack is supposed to produce 4 quanta, under effect of Skull Eye, only 3 quanta will be produced. This card is made to be a creature to offer more ways to counter. The cost is probably too low but I prefer a lower cost because yourself will be affected. A high cost may make this card not worth the risk of lowering your quanta production. This is also a very indirect way to boost Soul Catcher as it is not affected by this card. Yet the death of Skull Eye can trigger Soul Catcher. SERIES:

[OldTrees]

Interesting. Buffs quanta denial. But not Pillar denial.

[furballdn]

Round up? Round down? Round to closest integer?

[waterzx]

Interesting. Buffs quanta denial. But not Pillar denial.

So....is this an official approval from the Idea Guru ?

Round up? Round down? Round to closest integer?

Round up would be better. This reduces the effect of denial on small stack of pillars (in earlier games )

[Annele]

I think the costs should be switched. You'll probably use this in a deck without pillars, so unupped effect could be called 'better'.

[waterzx]

I think the costs should be switched. You'll probably use this in a deck without pillars, so unupped effect could be called 'better'.

The only difference between unupped and upped effects is that one is 75% and the other is 50%. Are you missing something ?

[Annele]

I think the costs should be switched. You'll probably use this in a deck without pillars, so unupped effect could be called 'better'.

The only difference between unupped and upped effects is that one is 75% and the other is 50%. Are you missing something ?

Oops, I though it meant it was reduced BY 75%. I need to learn to read.

[OldTrees]

Interesting. Buffs quanta denial. But not Pillar denial.

So....is this an official approval from the Idea Guru ?

I found it interesting enough to follow. It will be one of the possible candidates for my vote when it hits the crucible.

[esran]

seems like the HP needs to be reduced to some CCable amount.

[Annele]

seems like the HP needs to be reduced to some CCable amount.

It loses 2hp per turn.

[waterzx]

seems like the HP needs to be reduced to some CCable amount.

It loses 2hp per turn.

Yes, this can guarantee at least 2 turns of effect before its HP decreases to 4 and becomes susceptible to common CC.

[OldTrees]

seems like the HP needs to be reduced to some CCable amount.

It loses 2hp per turn.

It loses the hp? Its effect would be more useful if it lasted longer.