Eternal Spells

[Pineapple]

1) Constructive does not mean more effective with additional copies. It means it buffs/heals rather than removes/damages

I know what it means. I just proposed a way to help balancing (clog your own hand to increase effectiveness).

I must have misunderstood what was meant here:

So, unless the Eternal Spell in question both has discard effects and is constructive (require multiple copies in hand), its use should be limited to once per turn.

As for why constructive effects don't work, constructive effects actually make the card better because it's an easier-to-time ability that can work all turns after being drawn.

1) You have not explained why being constructive would require multiple copies in the hand.
2) Being constructive enables after the fact counters. This is not a minor detail.
3) I believe I have demonstrated 2 examples of constructive effects (The Cockatrice and Heal examples) and have proven that there exists a cost at which they would be balanced.

1&2) I was interpreting the word "constructive effects" as such, because the context implied it as a cost. Obviously, the word by your interpretation does not require multiple copies in the hand. I was merely pointing out that "constructive effects" by your interpretation are a benefit rather than a cost. In other words, Eternal Spells with universal constructive effects are more powerful than Eternal Spells with situational destruction effects.
3) Note that you only show that Eternal Spells can have a niche by being optimal during specific times in a game. You have not addressed how a single Eternal Spell can be used multiple times within a game, both optimal and not.

[Jyiber]

Pineapple vs. OldTrees= I need more popcorn

[OldTrees]

I'm not sure if this is possible, just a random thought : What if the eternal spell card cannot be discarded ? They stay in your hand during the entire game after you draw them.

Easy Antideckout? No.

1) Constructive does not mean more effective with additional copies. It means it buffs/heals rather than removes/damages

I know what it means. I just proposed a way to help balancing (clog your own hand to increase effectiveness).

I must have misunderstood what was meant here:

So, unless the Eternal Spell in question both has discard effects and is constructive (require multiple copies in hand), its use should be limited to once per turn.

As for why constructive effects don't work, constructive effects actually make the card better because it's an easier-to-time ability that can work all turns after being drawn.

1) You have not explained why being constructive would require multiple copies in the hand.
2) Being constructive enables after the fact counters. This is not a minor detail.
3) I believe I have demonstrated 2 examples of constructive effects (The Cockatrice and Heal examples) and have proven that there exists a cost at which they would be balanced.

1&2) I was interpreting the word "constructive effects" as such, because the context implied it as a cost. Obviously, the word by your interpretation does not require multiple copies in the hand. I was merely pointing out that "constructive effects" by your interpretation are a benefit rather than a cost. In other words, Eternal Spells with universal constructive effects are more powerful than Eternal Spells with situational destruction effects.
3) Note that you only show that Eternal Spells can have a niche by being optimal during specific times in a game. You have not addressed how a single Eternal Spell can be used multiple times within a game, both optimal and not.

Ah.
1) Certain destructive cards like Silence, Lightning or even Plague if made eternal would remove large chunks of the metagame. (See the impact Firestall had with 12 copies of CC) This was the interaction that I suggest be avoided by only using constructive effects. Eternal Destuctive effects create an impenetrable defense. Eternal Constructive effects create an unending offense. Elements is structured to handle unending offenses but not to handle impenetrable defenses.

3) Each deck has a different average number of uses. Rushes tend to have few uses while stalls tend to have many uses. In the case of the Cockatrice eternal spell: The rush would use cockatrice, the rush-stall would use the eternal spell and the stall would use fractal. While an eternal spell could be used in any of the three decks (just like the other options), it would be inefficient compared to the alternatives over the course of the average game for that deck.
(Perhaps thinking about the Immolation + Photon vs Pillars niche balancing would help)


Note on Eternal: Silence prevents casting eternal spells. (See Relic)

[storyteller]

I think a very balanceable mechanism, and one that may work for say ALL eternal cards, is to have them deal damage if discarded. Keeps people from building 'draw stalls' and eternal only decks. say, equal to casting cost.

[bobknows]

How about this, when played, eternal spells will make you draw one card, and are then placed on the top of your deck. This would prevent antideckout abuse, make them usable only once per turn, and would also be quite easy for zanz to code(both effects being present ingame already)

[OldTrees]

How about this, when played, eternal spells will make you draw one card, and are then placed on the top of your deck. This would prevent antideckout abuse, make them usable only once per turn, and would also be quite easy for zanz to code(both effects being present ingame already)

The multiuse spell effect is present in game. See Relic.

[EmeraldTiger]

Would an affect for not playing card be appropriate?

How about If a spell that generates one of these in opponent's hand? The card generated is very usable, but another copy is generated in hand if played. to prevent hand from being filled opponent cant play said card.

[OldTrees]

Would an affect for not playing card be appropriate?

How about If a spell that generates one of these in opponent's hand? The card generated is very usable, but another copy is generated in hand if played. to prevent hand from being filled opponent cant play said card.

Probably not. Not playing a card is harder to counter than playing a card.

[Zaealix]

Hrm...Repeatable spells...A few things come to mind:
The obvious damage on a stick.
The obvious heal on a stick.
That Precognition might actually gain some purpose if there is some way to counter the effects of Eternal spells.
Perhaps this could be a buff to Precognition: It can somehow 'debuff' the use of eternal spells, as a way to make it a usable card again. (There's a reason the  nymph is the strongest nymph as far as direct stats are concerned.)
As far as eternal spells, Precognition, again, for as weak as it is, could be converted into a Eternal spell.
Something else I thought of might be thus:
1 - reduce the next attack's damage by 1.
Or something like that. The idea is, the quanta you feed into the spell powers a shield that protects you. Like  's dissapation shield, only under your control, instead of automatic.

[Camoninja]

Does Eternal limit a card so it can only be ued once per turn (like Permanent abilities but without the actual permanent's costs and vulnerabilities)?
Or can it be used like a Rustler?

I'm not sure if this is possible, just a random thought : What if the eternal spell card cannot be discarded ? They stay in your hand during the entire game after you draw them.

Easy Antideckout? No.

What if, if your eighth card is a spell, it's automatically replaced by the top card in your deck? Nightmare only affects creatures, so you wouldn't be getting around Nightmare that way.

[OldTrees]

@Zaealix
No eternal damage spells. Destructive effects are too damaging to the metagame.
Draw is dangerous because it helps OTK decks immensely.
The other two ideas are potential eternal spells.

@Camoninja
Eternal can be used multiple times per turn. Refer to Relic when in doubt. (Relic can be tested in the trainer if won vs a nymph farm)

I'm not sure if this is possible, just a random thought : What if the eternal spell card cannot be discarded ? They stay in your hand during the entire game after you draw them.

Easy Antideckout? No.

What if, if your eighth card is a spell, it's automatically replaced by the top card in your deck? Nightmare only affects creatures, so you wouldn't be getting around Nightmare that way.

Why go with a complicated series of effects rather than a single simple effect?
Also it is better for nerfs to be internal (costs, debuffs) rather than external (rules changes like quanta caps or hand composition restrictions).


New question: If only 3 eternal cards were made, what effects would you expect?

[storyteller]

I think there is potential for damage spells if they have a negative drawback

consider

Inflict
1 
Deal 5 damage to opponent
reduce your max HP by 3