Wall of Fire | Deadly Flames

[Dominator497]

NAME: Wall of Fire ELEMENT: Fire COST: 6 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Each turn for 5 turns: Non creatures gain +0|-1 All creatures gain +1|-1	NAME: Deadly Flames ELEMENT: Fire COST: 5 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Each turn for 5 turns: Non creatures gain +0|-1 All creatures gain +1|-1

ART: http://jjenkinsphotography.deviantart.com/art/Wall-of-Fire-136317956 IDEA: Dominator497 NOTES: Damage goes to all creatures. 6th edit of the card. Disappears after 5 turns. Not sure if that is the correct number though. First generation: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,30079.msg382425.html#msg382425 SERIES:

[skyironsword]

So... a super expensive version of fire shield, that hurts your own guys. What is the point of this? Also, shields are not spells.

Good idea, but needs some work.

[Dominator497]

How is that? I made the change I was talking about in the extra comments of the card

[xsindomanx]

Spells:
Permanents:

Compare to any of the above cards. I don't see much of a reason to use yours to be honest. Expansive + affecting your own creatures.
As you said, there are certain circumstances where you may want to kill your own creatures, but that's not very often. If I am so worried about a creature affecting me negatively, I'd rather put quint in my deck.

[Vangelios]

humm, the best defense is attack, I prefer to use RoF.

[Dominator497]

Compare to any of the above cards. I don't see much of a reason to use yours to be honest. Expansive + affecting your own creatures.
As you said, there are certain circumstances where you may want to kill your own creatures, but that's not very often. If I am so worried about a creature affecting me negatively, I'd rather put quint in my deck.

So should I lower cost, and make it easier to use? Maybe 6 and 2 or 3  ?

[OdinVanguard]

Right now, this doesn't seem to do much different than fire buckler really. It needs something that sets it apart...
What if you did something like: "Shield: Reduces damage by 1. All non creatures gain +0|-1 each turn, all creatures gain +1|-1 each turn."

[Dominator497]

Right now, this doesn't seem to do much different than fire buckler really. It needs something that sets it apart...
What if you did something like: "Shield: Reduces damage by 1. All non creatures gain +0|-1 each turn, all creatures gain +1|-1 each turn."

Do you think it is still worth limiting turn number? or not?

I'll also lower cost to play

[skyironsword]

Interesting, now it's a mass acceleration for 5 turns. Does it disappear after 5 turns, or just turn into a regular shield?

[Dominator497]

Interesting, now it's a mass acceleration for 5 turns. Does it disappear after 5 turns, or just turn into a regular shield?

Disappear. Adding to notes

[skyironsword]

... hmmm. The card would make more sense if you removed the 'blocks 1 damage'

It not only fits better, it works better too

The only problem I see at the moment is that all fire creatures have extremely low HP...

[xsindomanx]

I agree with skyironsword. The effect of damaging both sides of the field doesn't really fit with the image of a shield.

If used properly, this card might even be slightly OP now