Ask the Idea Guru

[OldTrees]

Would a and spirit generator be a good idea?
Has it been attempted?

Has a Forest Spirit / Fire Spirit generator been attempted?
Not to my knowledge or search.

Would it be a good idea?
I see almost no problems but also almost no benefit. Creatures with abilities that need to be activated once per turn tend to not fit generation. There are exceptions like the exponential generators.

I personally can think of an idea-maybe some sort of spell that does damage for how many creatures you have/ how much life you have?

It would need a theme that made sense of the connection and still fit Life. However Life currently is vulnerable to CC. The first version of that spell would increase the importance of CC against Life.

[EmeraldTiger]

has anyone done a  spirit where it gains +1|+1 per card drawn?

[Rutarete]

has anyone done a  spirit where it gains +1|+1 per card drawn?

It has been done similarly here (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=19592.0), so it should be useful for reference and comparison.

[Jocko]

I've been thinking lately of doing a series of vanilla creatures. What element/s do you consider they don't need new vanilla creatures?

[Zaealix]

For the most part, no new vanillias are needed I think...I gues  and possibly  could use one, as they don't actually have 'vanilla' creatures...But Those elements are two of the strongest around. So I'd say no.

[OldTrees]

has anyone done a  spirit where it gains +1|+1 per card drawn?

It has been done similarly here (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=19592.0), so it should be useful for reference and comparison.

Rutarete is correct. It has not been done yet.

I've been thinking lately of doing a series of vanilla creatures. What element/s do you consider they don't need new vanilla creatures?

I try to avoid making suggestions to Zanz that he has considered already. Almost all vanilla cards fall into this category. There is the possibility of creatures with minor abilities such that the ability does not justify a cost increase from the cost for the stats. These are semivanilla creatures.

What element(s) would benefit from more vanilla/semivanilla cards?
Aether might want something smaller than Phase Spider.
Light would benefit from a semivanilla creature with a passive ability that had synergy with Luciferin.

However for the most part vanilla creatures are not useful additions anymore and semivanilla creatures are not useful in themselves but rather as a means of adding valuable abilities that have minor effects into the game.

[furballdn]

Which element could use a good mid range attacker with a unique but not particularly great or complicated ability?

[OldTrees]

Which element could use a good mid range attacker with a unique but not particularly great or complicated ability?

Each element has what I would term a mid ranged attacker except unupped mono  (Pegasus without dive and Crusader without Endow don't pass my test).
  Phase Spider,  Wyrm/Eye,  Gargoyle,  Mummy,  Golem,  Abomination,
  Lava Golem,  Charger,  Cockatrice,  Archangel,  Ghost,  Toadfish.

Does any element require and additional one? Not in my opinion.

So if you know an ability that is great despite not being particularly powerful or complicated then put it in the element the fits that ability closest.

[rowcla]

Cost evaluation needed for http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,33754.0/topicseen.html

[OldTrees]

Cost evaluation needed for http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,33754.0/topicseen.html

The upped image and text disagree about the stats. I used the table.

Master of Ice has 2 primary usages that tend not to overlap. I will evaluate them separately.

Master of Ice is a Allied only version of Arctic Squid when used to Freeze your creatures for Catapulting. Arctic Squid is not balanced with this usage in mind and is not used for this purpose because it is UP in this usage compared to using multiple Freezes. Therefore to be balanced Master of Ice must be better than Arctic Squid at this usage and still not overshoot Freeze.
Master of Ice costs 4+X +1 card for X freezes. (atk ignored because the freezing rocks win condition ignores such low attacks)
Arctic Squid costs 3+2X +1 card for X freezes. (atk ignored because the freezing rocks win condition ignores such low attacks)
For an expected X>1 Master of Ice fulfills the first requirement.
Freeze costs X +X cards for X freezes.
For an expected X<6 Master of Ice fulfills the second requirement.
Launches required usually fall in this 2-5 range.
A cost of 3-5 would be balanced here.

Master of Ice can also be used as a faster version of Vulture. (Water freezes much faster than Death kills)
Master of Ice costs 4 |4 + 1 card has 0|2 attack, minor hp and increases +1|+1 per creature frozen (Ice Shield likely)
Vulture  costs 3 |3 + 1 card has 0|1 attack, minor hp and increases +1|+1 per death trigger (Cat or CC likely)
Using Ice Shield, Master of Ice increases by +X|+X where X starts at roughly 30% of the opposing offense and slowly shrinks to 17.7%.
Since Master of Ice does increase faster than Vulture it should cost more than Vulture. I would estimate that a 5 |4 + 1 card casting cost with 0 attack would be balanced with Vulture. If Vulture is OP/UP then adjust this estimate as you would adjust Vulture.

Sidenote: Master of Ice can be used as AntiCC.

[The_Mormegil]

Master of Ice can also be used as a faster version of Vulture. (Water freezes much faster than Death kills)

A note: doesn't your normal cost theory agree on the fact that Vultures are severely UP? In fact, I don't believe they are ever used competitively... This might be worth mentioning when comparing Master of Ice to Vultures.

[OldTrees]

Master of Ice can also be used as a faster version of Vulture. (Water freezes much faster than Death kills)

A note: doesn't your normal cost theory agree on the fact that Vultures are severely UP? In fact, I don't believe they are ever used competitively... This might be worth mentioning when comparing Master of Ice to Vultures.

I know that Vultures need lots of deck support to be effective. However that was expected of free growth.
My first cost theory was a descriptive theory that assumed that most of the cards were balanced within the range of +/- .5quanta. This was a good assumption since most of the cards were. Cards with more difficult to measure abilities like Scavenger can be miscalculation under that assumption. The later step of discussing and critiquing each estimate lacked voices.
I am surprised to hear that it is not being used competitively (you mean among balanced cards not OP cards right?). Vulture + Skull Shield seemed like a cheap defense & win condition in theory. If vulture is UP then similar fixes would be desired for Master of Ice from my estimate.