Field of Play

[Numnut]

Has anybody ever thought of separating the field of play?  We are allowed to have three rows of creatures.  What if we made it so each row can only hold a specific class of monster.  For example the top row would only hold flying creatures, middle row would hold everything that sits on earth.  Bottom row would be everything that burrows.  Water creatures could probably sit on the middle and bottom rows.  Flying creatures could inhabit the top two rows, filling the top row first.

This would have an interesting effect on rush decks because you would be limited in any specific type of creature.

[asymmetry]

Since the release of this card and its unupped sister, having any sort of auto-arrangement while playing creatures would be against the game nature. (besides, they already have an apparently "random" but fixed order)  One of the hardcore elementalists (maybe Puppy, can't remember)  once posted an image that showed the order of all permanents and creatures when played, in case you're still interested.

[suxerz]

I agree, I don't think this game will ever be that way since I believe that this game is all about simplicity. Besides, if that would ever happen I can only see it as limiting deck strategy - certain mono decks will be overkill and some will be simply.. dead.

And not sure which Puppy's thread, but smuglapse's Game Mechanics (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,11691.0.html) thread have the creature/permanent arrangement too.

[manaboy100]

Pretty good idea, so flood only kills Ground creature? Since Flying is, well flying, and Water/Dived/Burrowed won't get wet

[teffy]

Flying Creatures drown in flood.
Immortal or burrowed creatures not.

It´s ok, that flying creatures drown in flood. Some of the popular creatures for Fractal (Phoenix, Photon) fly. Fireflys fly. Flooding limits your creature slots to 7.

[Numnut]

Pretty good idea, so flood only kills Ground creature? Since Flying is, well flying, and Water/Dived/Burrowed won't get wet

I would think that only flying creatures would survive.  Even burrowed creatures should be vulnerable to a flood.  I just think of earthworms during a rainstorm.  They begin to suffocate when the ground becomes too saturated.

[Numnut]

Since the release of this card and its unupped sister, having any sort of auto-arrangement while playing creatures would be against the game nature. (besides, they already have an apparently "random" but fixed order)  One of the hardcore elementalists (maybe Puppy, can't remember)  once posted an image that showed the order of all permanents and creatures when played, in case you're still interested.

If they adjusted the field of play this card could easily be adjusted to read, "Drown (kill) any non-water creature in the middle/bottom rows."  That would take into account that flying creatures shouldn't be harmed.

[teffy]

I like our current creature positioning system. It makes sure, that the cards can be read in the best possible way.It also makes the field look better, since the creatures don´t appear on one side of the field, the field would look asymmetric with your idea.

When >7 creatures are on the field, creatures overlap. With the idea to position air creatures in the top row (and so on), the overlap will happen more often.

I don´t think that your idea has chances to be implemented. It doesn´t make sense for our current game mechanics. And btw, a FFQ, which can have 7 Fireflys maximum, is kind of useless. (Or Pharaoh+8 Scarabs max.)

[Numnut]

I like our current creature positioning system. It makes sure, that the cards can be read in the best possible way.It also makes the field look better, since the creatures don´t appear on one side of the field, the field would look asymmetric with your idea.

When >7 creatures are on the field, creatures overlap. With the idea to position air creatures in the top row (and so on), the overlap will happen more often.

I don´t think that your idea has chances to be implemented. It doesn´t make sense for our current game mechanics. And btw, a FFQ, which can have 7 Fireflys maximum, is kind of useless. (Or Pharaoh+8 Scarabs max.)

I also like how the game is set up now - I just thought I would throw out the idea to see what everybody else thought.  And FFQ/pharaoh wouldn't be limited to 7 creatures, because if you have too many flying creatures I would have them start filling the ground (middle) level, because flying creatures can be on both the air and ground.

But I can agree that this probably won't happen, but I also wanted to see what kind of response the idea would have.

[Xrbeta]

This is pointless only 1 cards targets creatures depending on what row your in...