What is your thoughts on this ?
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,39347.msg489308.html#new
The mechanic is: Drain X quanta and [Effect].
It is in the same category as
X quanta: [Effect]
or
Absorb X quanta. [Effect]
Is it useful in a case where the current version are not? Or is it more useful in a case the current version are used?
Something to note is that the proposed mechanic has more of a drawback than an activation cost and less of a drawback than an absorption cost. Since it has a drawback relative to the default (activation cost), it would be used as a disadvantage to a card to balance the card without raising other costs. It is less of a drawback than absorb. Thus it would be used when the desired disadvantage is less than the disadvantage imposed by Absorb. How significant is the disadvantage imposed by absorb? Flooding used to have Absorb
. This cost was discovered to be much too high. It now only has Absorb
. This implies that absorb costs are a high magnitude disadvantage.
However there are other low magnitude disadvantages that are less complex. Stat changes are a low magnitude disadvantage on skill based cards (where this disadvantage would make sense). Stock quanta (Fire Bolt, Ice Bolt, ...) is another low magnitude disadvantage.
I would suggest trying this disadvantage on permanents with abilities that are designed to be played before the
regular casting cost would allow them to be played.
In most cases I do not think this mechanic would be a better design than a higher casting cost with the manual activation mechanic. However there would be exceptions.