Revenant | Wight [Legacy - Forge]

[moomoose]

undead is the passive already on skeletons.  i think Undying, as is, fits.

immunity to gp is more of a nerf to the duo working together than a nerf to gravity against death (or buff of death against gravity, same thing)

[ZephyrPhantom]

"Unholy" isn't technically taken as an ability since Skull Shield is a permanent and doesn't display abilities. Nonetheless, if a different one is needed, something like "reanimated" could work.

Actually, permanents do display abilities, and I'm certain I've seen Skull Shield with a little 'unholy' floating on the bottom.

Undying represents the active ability that prevents Revenant's death. (from the looks of the polls, it seems that's going to be the current ability.)

I was thinking, if we're going to make this a passive that could be put on other elemental cards, we should try to aim for a 'neutral'-ish name that works with all of them.  I'm thinking something along the lines of 'Null' - does anyone else have any ideas?

[Higurashi]

As I said, it's not taken as an ability of a card. The reason being permanents don't display abilities when you mouse over them. Creatures do.
Permanents instead have text written on them that's only quasi-descriptive.

[FlareGlutox]

As I said, it's not taken as an ability of a card. The reason being permanents don't display abilities when you mouse over them. Creatures do.
Permanents instead have text written on them that's only quasi-descriptive.

What about coding? I think in the "unholy"-ability is saved by the game under this name with the effect of skull shield, so it can be easily acessed and selected. If we create a second ability with the same name, it could lead to overwriting the first ability, whether it is displayed on the permanent or not.

[Higurashi]

Nonetheless, if a different one is needed, something like "reanimated" could work.

I know about some code regarding the AI; that's about it. No point in playing guesswork with the rest.

[moomoose]

yeah, making undying a passive makes more sense than an active ability, to me.

[ZephyrPhantom]

As I said, it's not taken as an ability of a card. The reason being permanents don't display abilities when you mouse over them. Creatures do.
Permanents instead have text written on them that's only quasi-descriptive.

Ok, it's fine I guess. I was concerned about the fact it would fit with other elements besides , but when you look at Toadfish and Parasite (same ability, different name), I guess there won't be any problems.

yeah, making undying a passive makes more sense than an active ability, to me.

Why? It gets rid of some of the only counters some elements have (e.g. Mitosis for ), and I feel the other two abilities fit passives better.

[moomoose]

it has plenty of counters, and not every element needs to have a counter for every card.  if you want it weaker, sure, make it an active ability. but thematically i dont think loboing it should fundamentally change it so it dies.  but whatever, im just going to start keeping my opinions to myself since nobody on the forums seems to agree with what i think anyway.

[ZephyrPhantom]

it has plenty of counters, and not every element needs to have a counter for every card.  if you want it weaker, sure, make it an active ability. but thematically i dont think loboing it should fundamentally change it so it dies.  but whatever, im just going to start keeping my opinions to myself since nobody on the forums seems to agree with what i think anyway.

Just my  , but that seems to be more of a case of jumping to conclusions too quickly. (Please ignore this if I'm wrong.) I'd just back down quickly in the future if people actually get irritated. (Right now I'm not angry - promoting discussion is a good idea even if you're wrong, but promoting arguments isn't.)
Is there a reason for all 3 abilities to be passive, or is one of them sufficiently justified as an active? After this point is resolved, I feel it will be Crucible ready.

[AngeDeMort]

The only one that could possibly be made into an active with out making this too powerful would be the status immunity but that thematically doesn't make sense. If you made the dies when healed an active you could lobo it off yourself and then you have a truly (as in no way to kill it at all) immortal creature, and if you made the does not die when at 0 hp an active it dies when loboed and contradicts the whole can only be killed by healing mechanic.

Anyway enough rambling my 2 is that all 3 should be passive abilities mostly because lobotomy for these doesn't thematically make sense (how do you forget that you don't die unless healed or aren't affected by statuses?) but more importantly making 1 lobotomizable can ruin the others or make the card OP.

[ZephyrPhantom]

Actually, if Undying ("does not die if it has 0 or less HP.") is active, it's weaker since Lobo will kill it.

As for why I feel it can be an active:

A revenant is a visible ghost or animated corpse that was believed to return from the grave to terrorize the living.[1] The word "revenant" is derived from the Latin word, revenans, "returning", from the verb "revenire"; in French, "revenant" means "coming back", from the verb "revenir", meaning "to come back".

Belief in revenants lies beneath the universal rituals for propitiating the dead, to keep them in their place. Vivid imagings of revenants emerged in Western Europe (especially Great Britain, and later carried by Anglo-Norman invaders to Ireland) during the High Middle Ages. Though later legend and folklore depicts revenants as returning for a specific purpose (e.g., revenge against the deceased's killer), in most Medieval depictions they simply return to harass their surviving families and neighbours. Revenants share a number of characteristics with folkloric vampires.

If you forget exactly why you wanted to fight, there doesn't really seem to be a point sticking around as a zombie and yelling 'brains!', especially since revenants are semi-intelligent (you'd just be tiring yourself out).

[RagingAlien]

I think Eclipse maybe SHOULD kill this, actually.