Spell type suggestion: Boomerang

[hainkarga]

Hello,
First of all, i admit the name sounds funky The ability i suggest is a feature for spell cards which makes them return to your hand after use, making them like permanents which cannot be destroyed, but has a very high casting cost. Some examples;

10
Destroy the targeted permanent. Returns to your hand after use.

10
Deals 5 damage to target. Returns to your hand after use.

7
Deals 4 damage to target creature. Returns to your hand after use.

12
Steal target permanent. Returns to your hand after use.

10
Inflicts 2 poison. Returns to your hand after use.

What do you think ?

[lava golem]

I'd pack like all of those in an Anti-FG deck

[Malignant]

I like the idea, though not sure on how to balance it

[guy_fawkes]

MtG buyback? =D

[Hotshot2k4]

Those would be awfully powerful in the endgame, and their high cost would make them nearly useless in rainbow decks that didn't have an incredible amount of towers to power them. If one such card was made for every element and balanced properly, I think it would be an excellent addition to the game.

[Kuross]

I'm sorta on the fence on this one, but am leaning more towards a no. On one hand, the ability to bounce spells back and forth sounds interesting (yeah, MtG buy back fer shure), but I agree the endgame would abuse these to no end. Perhaps if there was a way to force a discard (and we all know that didn't go over too well last time it was suggested) it would be a viable card to introduce. Until then, or there some way to balance the card, I'd say it's a no go for now.

The only upside I see is that mono decks would make use of these far better than rainbows and thus would give mono decks a hand up versus rainbows.

[Mot]

I like this idea. But instead of returning them to your hand, why not just make them permanents like Hourglasses?

[xdude]

So, you want protected permanents which can activate their skill on the first turn?

[geekz_always_win]

It's kind of suspicious though, it would hurt fractal and drawing decks significantly since the only way you can get rid of them is discarding. It's not as good as it might seem...

Good concept too. Maybe have one for each type of spell, like how the nymphs have each of the alchemy spells.

Too expensive anyways, 10 quanta for one small poison is ridiculous, no matter how many times you use it. Arsenic is 1 poison per turn for 2 death, yours can't be more than 6 ( 2x Arsenic cost and maybe 2 quanta for protecting.

[manaboy100]

Instead taking the card back to hand, reshuffle them back into the deck! We need no more Eternity to fight deckouts! >:3

[ddevans96]

hm....this is a really nice idea. I have a few suggestions, which might be expanding on ideas thus far.

1. Make them return to the top of your deck, so you have to either use them after your set up or draw past them.

2. Make them cost less and have less effect. Bring the costs closer to 5 instead of 10, for example.

3. Create one for every element and keep it in flavor. Reusable steal could be kind of OP. I'll post some ideas in a minute.

Also, this series would be so much fun to create art for. Do you mind if I give it a shot?

[Hodari]

I'm sorta on the fence on this one, but am leaning more towards a no. On one hand, the ability to bounce spells back and forth sounds interesting (yeah, MtG buy back fer shure), but I agree the endgame would abuse these to no end. Perhaps if there was a way to force a discard (and we all know that didn't go over too well last time it was suggested) it would be a viable card to introduce. Until then, or there some way to balance the card, I'd say it's a no go for now.

The only upside I see is that mono decks would make use of these far better than rainbows and thus would give mono decks a hand up versus rainbows.

I believe the biggest issue people had involving forced discards was your opponent being able to force them, not you playing a card that would make you discard something yourself which would be much less of a problem.  I still don't think this would be the best way to balance cards like this though.

If nothing else, these should be limited to one use per turn though.  Also in determining the cost for it, you would need to keep in mind that some elements have creatures which generate extra quanta while others do not(Pests and RoLs in particular would become even more useful in combination with a series like this).  Either new quanta-generating creatures would have to be added for the elements which don't already have them(and perhaps some adjustments made on the ones that DO have them but rarely use them currently like Air) or the costs for elements which do have them should be significantly higher and/or the effect of the spells should be weaker for those elements.