| |
| NAME: | Hieroglyph
| | ELEMENT: | Time
| | COST: | 4 
| | TYPE: | Permanent
| | ATK|HP: | -
| | ABILITY: | : Unveiled Secrets
Destroy the top card of target player's deck.
|
| | NAME: | Eye of Ra
| | ELEMENT: | Time
| | COST: | 3
| | TYPE: | Permanent
| | ATK|HP: | -
| | ABILITY: | : Unveiled Secrets
Destroy the top card of target player's deck.
|
|
The original idea was definitely more complex, had other purposes, created different scenarios et cetera. This could seem like a completely different idea altogether. But it's not: the purpose of the competition as I saw it was to review our old ideas (as a community if not as individuals), salvaging what we could and resurrecting intresting concepts and unexplored mechanics. When I first saw the Time Rune, I noticed it had an ability - Flash Forward - that would actually be a good concept if made on a standalone card. I got rid of the Rune Series theme, of the possibility to target both creatures and permanents, of the Deja Vu effect, I got rid even of the "time bubble" effect (see later in the development notes why). I decided that I would resurrect the idea of Flash Forward, the idea of a card that destroys a player's deck instead of things in play.
I kept, however, the general runic flavor of the card - renaming it to Hieroglyph | Eye of Ra seems appropriate as a "Time Rune", as the relationship between Time and ancient Egypt is strong already. I also changed the name of the ability to "Unveiled Secrets", because while a generic Time Rune can certainly flash you into the future, a Hieroglyph probably cannot. These are, however, minor details.
The ability is both new and already in the game, in that it manipulates the top card of a deck. We already have Mindgate and Rewind that deal with the top card of a target's deck; the ability to destroy it directly is new, though.
Let's analyze what this brings to the game.
First of all, some people wouldn't like this because it completely destroys a card, meaning you can't even have a chance to play it. This is, in a way, like discarding from your hand - which is disliked in Elements.
Some will also claim that the card is OP. Since having 0 cards in your deck means you have lost, thinking about an Aether Stall with 6 of these out is... scary. But I will prove this point wrong later.
Perhaps the most important change, in fact, would be the introduction of a new strategy - deckout. This was already a strategy, although it wasn't really used that much for various reasons; this card, though, brings that strategy to a new level altogether. A side note on this fact would be that the Eternity trick wouldn't work against one of these.
Regarding the balancing issues: we can compare the loss of a card in a deck to the loss of hp, in a way. They are both ways to win a duel. Hps are (as a standard) 100, while cards may vary between 30 and 60. A creature has a cost equal to its attack (mostly true), so it's correct to assume that - by this point of view - 1 quanta is worth 1/100 of a match. This means that "burning" one card out of 30-60 should cost about 2-3 more times than a single damage.
Nonetheless, I chose to make this a permanent with an initial cost (that may be subject to reviews... I kept the original cost, lacking a comparison, but this should be tested) and an ability cost. This is because the deckout strategy has additional advantages on the direct damage.
The first is, you actually burn a card. That's enough of an advantage to justify the choice of a recurring cost. The second is, you can't really stop it. Shields, healing... nothing except PC will save you from this threat.
I think the disadvantage of being WAY slower (you're limited to 6 cards, and each destroys ONE card from the opponent's deck) keeps the two strategies balanced, and would actually make for a deeper gameplay.
And I think the cost I chose for the ability is balanced - 2 quanta for a card is double to triple the cost of a damage.
