(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7229007/etg%20cards/chr_aberration.png) | (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7229007/etg%20cards/chr_aberration_upp.png) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7229007/etg%20cards/aberration.png) | (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7229007/etg%20cards/aberration_upp.png) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
I would use it in a mono water deck.
I suspect something like this should be tied to an element because the effect seems too special to be a generic effect. Unfortunately this reduces it ability to do your intended goal. (Reduces not eliminates)
I was expecting an entropy card that changes all creatures' element and/or ability cost in a random one. (think about it, it might be better)
About the card: I don't really like the idea of letting you play a mono, that's why SoR was changed to time element (I think).
I would use it in a mono water deck.
I suspect something like this should be tied to an element because the effect seems too special to be a generic effect. Unfortunately this reduces it ability to do your intended goal. (Reduces not eliminates)
That was my first idea,too. This would open a new kind of semi-rainbow. Monodeck with splashed in monsters from another element seems pretty cool.
That was my first idea,too. This would open a new kind of semi-rainbow. Monodeck with splashed in monsters from another element seems pretty cool.
Only the skills are paid of mark. Drake's original idea was doing fused costs (random element, but not random quanta) for creatures and for cards played by hand.
I think I'm approaching this the wrong way. I'll probably keep this name and art but do something completely different (using iancudorinmarian's idea as a starting point) and think of another way to make synergies easier to use.I think this idea has potential. It would be sad to discard it.
I think I'm approaching this the wrong way. I'll probably keep this name and art but do something completely different (using iancudorinmarian's idea as a starting point) and think of another way to make synergies easier to use.I think this idea has potential. It would be sad to discard it.
Entropy would also love to have this so it could make use of fallen druid and improved mutation without needing quantum pillars.
For an interesting twist, you could add the lines "Casting cost must be paid with mark quanta."
If you can think of a good name for that, it could open up a sort of "pseudo-quanta". I.e. type other cards that use whatever quanta your mark is...
That could open up some very interesting design avenues.
I would actually really love to get my hands on a card like this one to put into an Egg / Improved Mutation deck. It would free up SoR for use with Egg and might help make the deck a good deal more useful.
Yeah, I'll go with changing it to a :entropy card and borrow ian's idea in another card. I don't know if the duration is UP due to the possibility of using a Supernova instead.Entropy would also love to have this so it could make use of fallen druid and improved mutation without needing quantum pillars.
hadn't thought about that. It can make egg decks easier to work (requiring a duo instead of a kinda-rainbow or reliant in SoR)For an interesting twist, you could add the lines "Casting cost must be paid with mark quanta."
If you can think of a good name for that, it could open up a sort of "pseudo-quanta". I.e. type other cards that use whatever quanta your mark is...
That could open up some very interesting design avenues.
I'm actually surprised this has not been done before. I think 'mark' is as good a name as any other for this pseudo-quanta (and it's easy to understand). Maybe we could use an empty mark to symbolize it?
I agree with OldTrees, this is a very nice concept.
I think this could be one of the most useful type Other cards in the game, next to quantum pillars.
Even an element specific card, it would still be quite useful. Particularly under water or entropy which very often find themselves in need of off element quanta to power creature skills.
I would actually really love to get my hands on a card like this one to put into an Egg / Improved Mutation deck. It would free up SoR for use with Egg and might help make the deck a good deal more useful.
A symbol to used to represent mark quanta in card design would be very useful I think... Maybe something like rainbow, but with an M inside?
This should work out pretty well I think, since :entropy will certainly see a lot of use from it due to their fallen druid and improved mutation spells.I agree with OldTrees, this is a very nice concept.
I think this could be one of the most useful type Other cards in the game, next to quantum pillars.
Even an element specific card, it would still be quite useful. Particularly under water or entropy which very often find themselves in need of off element quanta to power creature skills.
I would actually really love to get my hands on a card like this one to put into an Egg / Improved Mutation deck. It would free up SoR for use with Egg and might help make the deck a good deal more useful.
I went with an in element cost, because I felt it gave too much power to monos, but that it would be alright in a duo. I chose :entropy because of its traditional connection to rainbows. As you said it still would have plenty of uses.A symbol to used to represent mark quanta in card design would be very useful I think... Maybe something like rainbow, but with an M inside?
I think it would be too similar to :rainbow (I actually barely notice the void sign in it)
card updatedSince Entropy has Nova to support its rainbowlike cards, why not choose Water to support its rainbowlike cards?I think I'm approaching this the wrong way. I'll probably keep this name and art but do something completely different (using iancudorinmarian's idea as a starting point) and think of another way to make synergies easier to use.I think this idea has potential. It would be sad to discard it.
Yeah, I'll go with changing it to a :entropy card and borrow ian's idea in another card. I don't know if the duration is UP due to the possibility of using a Supernova instead.For an interesting twist, you could add the lines "Casting cost must be paid with mark quanta."
If you can think of a good name for that, it could open up a sort of "pseudo-quanta". I.e. type other cards that use whatever quanta your mark is...
That could open up some very interesting design avenues.
I'm actually surprised this has not been done before. I think 'mark' is as good a name as any other for this pseudo-quanta (and it's easy to understand). Maybe we could use an empty mark to symbolize it?
Mark quanta is a very clear descriptive name that has been firmly established on the forum. In general spelling mark quanta out is better but an empty mark would be a good symbol. Although the empty mark is also a good symbol for fused. (Who should I credit for the name fused? It is a good descriptor for that other pseudoquanta.)I believe credit for coining "Fused" goes to Drake_XIV.
I only see this being used in a few OP situations. I can't think of what those situations are, but I'm sure they exist. I also can't think of a deck that takes advantage of this.With a 2 turn duration, I think it really should be pretty safe.
So while an interesting idea, definitely needs some testing to really bring out the core of what this idea will do. Or you can do a really good job explaining how it could be used and not abused.
I only see this being used in a few OP situations. -snip-Why do you see it being used in a few OP situations?
So while an interesting idea, definitely needs some testing to really bring out the core of what this idea will do. Or you can do a really good job explaining how it could be used and not abused.
Flying tsunami deck (if this is made into a water card) ... that would be a nightmare to deal with I think.
They laughed at trident, called it useless, it will have its revenge ... :PLol... I've never laughed at it. Actually, I've often wondered why it isn't used more often, now that we have the warden SoPa combo.