Ghost of the Future | Ghost of the Future

[Annele]

Still needs an attack decrease, I agree 3 may be too low, then what about 4? No damage-reducing shields (apart from Hope) would block it then, and it would still be a quite lower attaker then.

So a weak, cockatrice-equivalent attacker that basically puts a free hourglass on your opponent's side of the field? Sorry, but I just don't think you quite understand the nature of the mechanics...

Quite. The downside of allowing your opponent to draw an extra card without consequence is, in my opinion, pretty darn dangerous. Even if they don't have a large deck, doing this on a 30-card deck could have nasty reprecussions. All decent decks should have a use for every card, after all.

The problem is, as it is right now, it completly overshadows GotP. Can't remember where it was said, but one of the reasons a card is OP is where it would make another existing card irrelevant. I am totally in love with the idea, as it sparks up so many possibilities, but you might as well get rid of GotP if you add this card.

[OldTrees]

Still needs an attack decrease, I agree 3 may be too low, then what about 4? No damage-reducing shields (apart from Hope) would block it then, and it would still be a quite lower attaker then.

So a weak, cockatrice-equivalent attacker that basically puts a free hourglass on your opponent's side of the field? Sorry, but I just don't think you quite understand the nature of the mechanics...

Quite. The downside of allowing your opponent to draw an extra card without consequence is, in my opinion, pretty darn dangerous. Even if they don't have a large deck, doing this on a 30-card deck could have nasty reprecussions. All decent decks should have a use for every card, after all.

The problem is, as it is right now, it completly overshadows GotP. Can't remember where it was said, but one of the reasons a card is OP is where it would make another existing card irrelevant. I am totally in love with the idea, as it sparks up so many possibilities, but you might as well get rid of GotP if you add this card.

Is this still true? Would everyone prefer to give their opponent 1 card as a tax per attack (no escaping this cost) for -3 |-5 and -1|-4 attack?

[Poker Alho]

Still needs an attack decrease, I agree 3 may be too low, then what about 4? No damage-reducing shields (apart from Hope) would block it then, and it would still be a quite lower attaker then.

So a weak, cockatrice-equivalent attacker that basically puts a free hourglass on your opponent's side of the field? Sorry, but I just don't think you quite understand the nature of the mechanics...

Quite. The downside of allowing your opponent to draw an extra card without consequence is, in my opinion, pretty darn dangerous. Even if they don't have a large deck, doing this on a 30-card deck could have nasty reprecussions. All decent decks should have a use for every card, after all.

The problem is, as it is right now, it completly overshadows GotP. Can't remember where it was said, but one of the reasons a card is OP is where it would make another existing card irrelevant. I am totally in love with the idea, as it sparks up so many possibilities, but you might as well get rid of GotP if you add this card.

i dont really agree with you, the 2 cards are quite distinct and would actually clash with eachother on the same deck if you are thinking of ghostmare, unless GotF would still attack even if the opponent couldnt draw due to nightmare

besides, i think you underestimate the drawback of GotF, giving draws to the opponent can be very dangerous and potentially cost you a game

[Drake_XIV]

I think it was in the terms of the attack niche.  In that respect, GotF overshadows GotP in efficient attacking.

[Poker Alho]

I think it was in the terms of the attack niche.  In that respect, GotF overshadows GotP in efficient attacking.

that would only be true if GotP also forced the opponent to draw. You cant compare both cards on attack efficiency if you are ignoring an important aspect of the card

[OldTrees]

I think it was in the terms of the attack niche.  In that respect, GotF overshadows GotP in efficient attacking.

that would only be true if GotP also forced the opponent to draw. You cant compare both cards on attack efficiency if you are ignoring an important aspect of the card

First you must convert the card disadvantage into quanta.

[Annele]

I still think this card is OP, but I also think you guys are right. A simple +1 to the unupped cost might help balance.

[esran]

this card is fine the way it is. it is in no way OP, because it wont atttack if opponents hand is full. i like the mechanic, and think it is a creative card. not sure what deck would run this though.

[Annele]

this card is fine the way it is. it is in no way OP, because it wont atttack if opponents hand is full. i like the mechanic, and think it is a creative card. not sure what deck would run this though.

A deck-out deck probably. Or a rush deck that can afford to give your opponent an extra turn.

[Drake_XIV]

I think it was in the terms of the attack niche.  In that respect, GotF overshadows GotP in efficient attacking.

that would only be true if GotP also forced the opponent to draw. You cant compare both cards on attack efficiency if you are ignoring an important aspect of the card

First you must convert the card disadvantage into quanta.

It really depends if one considers that a drawback.  Considering its cost and that the hand will get full eventually and no longer draw cards, it can be easily abused for simple rushing, which will easily go past the hand limit and the effect is no longer a hindrance.

[Poker Alho]

I think it was in the terms of the attack niche.  In that respect, GotF overshadows GotP in efficient attacking.

that would only be true if GotP also forced the opponent to draw. You cant compare both cards on attack efficiency if you are ignoring an important aspect of the card

First you must convert the card disadvantage into quanta.

It really depends if one considers that a drawback.  Considering its cost and that the hand will get full eventually and no longer draw cards, it can be easily abused for simple rushing, which will easily go past the hand limit and the effect is no longer a hindrance.

and that would only hold true if you were able to cast silence the rest of the game to prevent the other deck from playing his hand... at max, and not countig PU,mitosis, adrenaline etc... you could make the other deck draw 6 more cards, many of them that will get played the next turn, even more if the other player isnt dumb and knows its gonna draw like crazy the rest of the game

[Drake_XIV]

And that's assuming they have quanta to dump their hand out like that.  And if they can, they're just getting closer to decking out.