Ask the Idea Guru

[OldTrees]

Light card called Construct that copies a target permanent and gives you a "light version". Changes costs and generation to light.

For example you targeted an Owls Eye and get a version that costs  to use. Targeted pillars generate

Thoughts on this and possible costs.

Why Light?

Parallel Universe costs slightly less than most copied creatures.
What would (would not can) be copied?
It is slightly more useful than just copying a permanent. It might deserve a +0-1 casting cost after this calculation.

[furballdn]

What is the difference between doing 1 damage to all creatures on the field (t-storm), making all creatures on the field take 1 damage per turn (plague), and repeatable, once a turn 1 damage to all the field (basically if t-storm was a permanent) in terms of cost/balance?

If I want to make a creature that gains attack every time one of your permanents is destroyed, how much attack should it gain? I'm thinking between 3-5.

[Zaealix]

multi-cast T-storms would do 1 damage to all creatures on the opponent's field, including newly summoned creatures.
However, Plague only inflicts poison on all creatures on the opponent's field that were already out. Any creatures summoned after that would be safe.

[OldTrees]

What is the difference between doing 1 damage to all creatures on the field (t-storm), making all creatures on the field take 1 damage per turn (plague), and repeatable, once a turn 1 damage to all the field (basically if t-storm was a permanent) in terms of cost/balance?

If I want to make a creature that gains attack every time one of your permanents is destroyed, how much attack should it gain? I'm thinking between 3-5.

1 damage takes effect faster than 1 damage per turn but deals less damage.
1 damage per attack (fire shield) is similar to 1 damage per turn (thunderstorm per turn).
Plague is 4 + 1 card [~= 6-7q]
Fire Shield is 6 + Shield slot + 1 card [~= 11-12q]
Thunderstorm per turn would either be a shield or cost around 10 + 1 card.

I would go for 3 attack.

[furballdn]

How much is taking up a shield slot worth? What about weapon slot? What's the difference between two permanents with identical everythings, but one is a weapon and the other is just a permanent?

Would a weapon that acted like fire shield (1 damage to all opponent's creatures) be better with just that effect or should it have to be activated each turn? How much? I'm thinking of 2 per turn if it needs an upkeep. If it affects your own creatures it gets the standard -2 cost right?

Has the idea of a card that brings bad things upon its owner but has the ability to switch sides been done (sort of like cymothoa, only you need to activate its ability to switch sides)?

What would be a good negative parasitic effect? Cymothoa's was deal damage each card played, but what about just passively adding poison onto the owner? How much poison per turn is good? 1? 2? 3?

[OldTrees]

How much is taking up a shield slot worth? What about weapon slot? What's the difference between two permanents with identical everythings, but one is a weapon and the other is just a permanent?

Would a weapon that acted like fire shield (1 damage to all opponent's creatures) be better with just that effect or should it have to be activated each turn? How much? I'm thinking of 2 per turn if it needs an upkeep. If it affects your own creatures it gets the standard -2 cost right?

Has the idea of a card that brings bad things upon its owner but has the ability to switch sides been done (sort of like cymothoa, only you need to activate its ability to switch sides)?

What would be a good negative parasitic effect? Cymothoa's was deal damage each card played, but what about just passively adding poison onto the owner? How much poison per turn is good? 1? 2? 3?

Taking a unique slot is usually estimated as a -3 casting cost.
The difference (beyond the simple usage change 1:6) is that cards that take special slots prevent other cards that use that slot and tend to be less reliable/more dead draws.
Damage per attack is best implemented as an active yet non activated effect. Damage per turn would be best as an activated ability.

2 edged effects do not have a standard cost reduction. It depends entirely on how much net advantage a powergamer can squeeze out of the card.

The ability to switch sides has been done as a core effect. However it could still be used as an implementation mechanic.

I think the damage was sufficient. Neurotoxin (+1 poison per card) should be hard to inflict. The more potent the alternative damage source, the more vulnerable and expensive it should be.

[Jyiber]

Light card called Construct that copies a target permanent and gives you a "light version". Changes costs and generation to light.

For example you targeted an Owls Eye and get a version that costs  to use. Targeted pillars generate

Thoughts on this and possible costs.

Why Light?

Parallel Universe costs slightly less than most copied creatures.
What would (would not can) be copied?
It is slightly more useful than just copying a permanent. It might deserve a +0-1 casting cost after this calculation.

Any non-immaterial permanent is target-able. Animated weapons are technically creatures, so not them. I think the median cost for permanents is lower than creatures so...  6|5 or 5|4.


Interesting choice in Light, eh? I think it would give Light a way to match Permanents, without having direct PC.

Also give a small, if not circumstantial boost to Crusaders and their potential in a mono light deck. They'd be able to use weapon skills from other elements.

Light is also thematically opposite of Dark, so instead of steal... copy.

[OldTrees]

Light card called Construct that copies a target permanent and gives you a "light version". Changes costs and generation to light.

For example you targeted an Owls Eye and get a version that costs  to use. Targeted pillars generate

Thoughts on this and possible costs.

Why Light?

Parallel Universe costs slightly less than most copied creatures.
What would (would not can) be copied?
It is slightly more useful than just copying a permanent. It might deserve a +0-1 casting cost after this calculation.

Any non-immaterial permanent is target-able. Animated weapons are technically creatures, so not them. I think the median cost for permanents is lower than creatures so...  6|5 or 5|4.


Interesting choice in Light, eh? I think it would give Light a way to match Permanents, without having direct PC.

Also give a small, if not circumstantial boost to Crusaders and their potential in a mono light deck. They'd be able to use weapon skills from other elements.

Light is also thematically opposite of Dark, so instead of steal... copy.

Photon would not be targeted by Parallel Universe. A Pillar will not be targeted by this effect.
Which permanents would be targeted? Let your competitive side at this question. What would maximize the advantage taken?

[furballdn]

Comments on Sea Devil?

And a tentative 40%|60% on gap?

[Jyiber]

Any non-immaterial permanent is target-able. Animated weapons are technically creatures, so not them. I think the median cost for permanents is lower than creatures so...  6|5 or 5|4.


Interesting choice in Light, eh? I think it would give Light a way to match Permanents, without having direct PC.

Also give a small, if not circumstantial boost to Crusaders and their potential in a mono light deck. They'd be able to use weapon skills from other elements.

Light is also thematically opposite of Dark, so instead of steal... copy.

Photon would not be targeted by Parallel Universe. A Pillar will not be targeted by this effect.
Which permanents would be targeted? Let your competitive side at this question. What would maximize the advantage taken?

That's completely circumstantial. Often, there would be a choice of a few permanents. If the only type of permanent they own are pillars, they might be targeted. But the advantage taken will always be given to what would help my strategy most in that moment. An exception would be for a deck you know well or understand... then you could wait out for something more helpful if you know it's coming.

If you want examples of cards that I might target: Golden Hourglass, Mindgate, Empathetic Bond, Dissipation Shield, Pulverizer (if they can't use it next turn), ... etc.

Off topic: the art for this card would be the image of the card you copied with a transparent light symbol over it.

[OldTrees]

Comments on Sea Devil?

And a tentative 40%|60% on gap?

4 + 1 card +5 attack -> 5 poison
1 + 1 card -> 2 poison
4 + 1 card + 5 poison -> +5 attack
3 + 1 card -> +3 attack
6 attack would be closer to balanced.

2|1 cost for 50% would be my estimate.
"Gapped" is awkward. A term that is linked closer to the effect would be better.

Any non-immaterial permanent is target-able. Animated weapons are technically creatures, so not them. I think the median cost for permanents is lower than creatures so...  6|5 or 5|4.


Interesting choice in Light, eh? I think it would give Light a way to match Permanents, without having direct PC.

Also give a small, if not circumstantial boost to Crusaders and their potential in a mono light deck. They'd be able to use weapon skills from other elements.

Light is also thematically opposite of Dark, so instead of steal... copy.

Photon would not be targeted by Parallel Universe. A Pillar will not be targeted by this effect.
Which permanents would be targeted? Let your competitive side at this question. What would maximize the advantage taken?

That's completely circumstantial. Often, there would be a choice of a few permanents. If the only type of permanent they own are pillars, they might be targeted. But the advantage taken will always be given to what would help my strategy most in that moment. An exception would be for a deck you know well or understand... then you could wait out for something more helpful if you know it's coming.

If you want examples of cards that I might target: Golden Hourglass, Mindgate, Empathetic Bond, Dissipation Shield, Pulverizer (if they can't use it next turn), ... etc.

Off topic: the art for this card would be the image of the card you copied with a transparent light symbol over it.

My question is targeted at getting you to make an accurate estimate based on the incentives of the person building a deck with this card.
Your answer was permanents around 4-5 quanta + 1 card in cost. Compare this to creatures of 8-10 quanta + 1 card for Parallel Universe.

7 quanta + 1 card is to 9 quanta + 1 card as X quanta + 1 card is to 4.5 quanta + 1 card.
What is X? About 3 quanta.

[Jyiber]

My question is targeted at getting you to make an accurate estimate based on the incentives of the person building a deck with this card.
Your answer was permanents around 4-5 quanta + 1 card in cost. Compare this to creatures of 8-10 quanta + 1 card for Parallel Universe.

7 quanta + 1 card is to 9 quanta + 1 card as X quanta + 1 card is to 4.5 quanta + 1 card.
What is X? About 3 quanta.

Ah, you wanted the math. Well...
Since I haven't been on a lot recently I didn't have all the numbers in my head. After browsing the un-upped cards I found most permanents are 3-5 for cost. 7 is the highest and 0 the lowest.

3 seems about right if you make it proportional to Parallel Universe, but slightly low taking into account the benefit of the alterations, but then that only applies to a mono deck with this. I would have gone with 4|3, but I guess 3|2 makes more sense.