Immortality/Immateriality split

[Bloodshadow]

For once I'll listen to your Ethereality/Immortality thing.

No, Immortal creatures should not be immune to certain effects, because it should be easier to get rid of them. In the case of Otyughs, Immortal creatures can still be eaten, but they don't die. They are always on the field with 0 HP.

[Bloodshadow]

So, what's the point? If it gets to 0 and doesn't die, it's the same as having unlimited life. Is there something I'm missing.

It does have unlimited life. However, you can easily get rid of it, via freezing, mutation, reverse time, etc. And if an Immortal creature is lobotomized while having 0 HP, it dies instantly.

[bobcamel]

*facepalm*

I forgot to mention. Otys and Maxwells won't have any effect, as the instant-death effects don't work on Immortal creatures, and, er... Oh, and the random mutation death also can't occur this way.

[bobcamel]

Currently, there is one status. It gives a Time element mark on a creature and makes it untargetable. There is discussion on it, though... so I made this. Discuss if it's good or bad idea, and such.


Immateriality: Status.
This status gives the creature an Aether mark on it and makes it untargetable for all skills, yours or enemy's.
Acquired by being a Phase Dragon and from new cards of sorts. Flown Morning Star is also Immaterial.

Immortality: Status.
This status gives the creature a Time mark on it, and makes it not die when its HP reaches 0. It can still be targeted by any skill.
Acquired by Immortality of an Anubis, being an Immortal, some new cards may have this.


Also, some related card ideas.

Tesla's Apprentice: 3/4 creature (6 Aether quanta)
Technology (2 Time quanta): A targeted creature receives a device that enables it to shift phases, making it Immaterial.


Pros and cons of Immortality in comparision to Immortality

Pros:
-You can bless it or copy it
-You can use other boosts on it
-It still is relatively safe

Cons:
-The enemy can copy it too
-The status may be removed with some spell or creature ability, possibly even Lobotomize
-It can be frozen
-It can still be removed from the field with Reverse Time

So, what do you think? Diccussion!

[Celidion]

So, what's the point? If it gets to 0 and doesn't die, it's the same as having unlimited life. Is there something I'm missing.

[Delreich]

Immortality would be pretty useless. Sure, it'll keep things safe from RoF and Plague, but those are rarely important anyway and Fallens, Otys and Ulis are still just as threatening as without immortality.

The only thing that needs to changed as far as these statuses goes is the wording. No, Anubis is not overpowered, or it would be as common as Otys, Fallens and Sundials.

[jmizzle7]

Okay, so this seems to be a discussion not on differentiating the terms immortal/immaterial into two distinct statuses, but rather on creating a new status called immortal. Immaterial status is the same as Shroud status from Magic: the Gathering. Immortal status is a brand new idea that Bobcamel is proposing. In Elements, the terms immaterial and immortal are synonymous.

I personally don't see a need for the two to have different meanings. There is enough unnecessary confusion already.

[Demagog]

I'm on a similar boat with Bob. I'd say devouring an immortal creature should kill whatever did the devouring though... if you swallow something and it doesn't die, it's probably going to kill you.

I personally don't see a need for the two to have different meanings. There is enough unnecessary confusion already.

I'm pretty sure people are intelligent enough to learn the difference between the two.

[Canto]

The easiest way to deal with it is to just borrow from Magic and make things without a specific target (FireStorm for example) able to hit them. 

My personal method would be a sundial type card that allows you to remove the status for a somewhat severe cost (I would say 25 HP or skipping a turn)