Guest posts by Ruduen

13

Competitions / Re: Art Competition: MS Paint Card Art #2

« on: December 01, 2010, 08:34:30 pm »

I should do what others seem to do and lay chunks of background color first. Spray paint's not very good for subtle work, although it does work better shrunken down.

14

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Xenophobia l Xenophobia

« on: December 01, 2010, 07:06:39 pm »

If they have no monsters out in the first place... Yeah.

I think the easiest balance is to put a duration on it. That is, make it only last for a number of turns. Even then, with the rest of Aether's arsenal, it could still be dangerous. The fact that Aether still has Fractal at its disposal afterwards...

And even if you have an opposite version of it, it doesn't change the balance of this card. In fact, I'm fairly certain that both cards are fairly powerful. Both together just create a complete lock, so... Yeah.

Neat idea, but it really needs weakening or tweaking.

15

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Kindling | Charcoal

« on: November 29, 2010, 05:26:13 am »

And that's why suggestions are greatly appreciated. Immortal Charcoal wasn't exactly on my mind when I created the idea, so I had always thought of it as slowly killing itself when the effect is used. Having it penetrate immortality by itself seems to be a bit much, so I'm going to try to think of a good way to bypass it. I'm messing between "Sacrifice itself, deals 1 damage for death and 1 bonus damage as a result", "Turns into a diamond or some analog if you make it immortal", or something completely different. Of course, since this is a single card affair, I'm not sure if the second would be applicable, and requiring an addendum on top of everything might bring the length of text to ridiculous levels. Hm...

Shame diamond shield is both a shield and a spell and changing it into a spell on immortality would be a little awkward. Still needs consideration... Hm...

Yet another edit: Settled on a decent compromise, and one that fits the card. It doesn't increase the power by too much, but gives it a little bit more flexibility on upgrade. Changed it into a Sacrifice effect, which helps fulfill its death condition, while still having a small kick. Now, I'm just debating whether or not to keep it in its current, targeted form, or revert it back into the "Double Thunderstorm" form damage-wise.

16

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Katharsis | Katharsis

« on: November 27, 2010, 04:27:18 am »

I would imagine most do. I just tend to be silly when I assume things, and prefer to ask. In this case, there are a few cases that the different versions might come up in that it's nice to keep in mind.

17

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Xylophone | Xylophone

« on: November 27, 2010, 04:21:27 am »

Your opponent's hard, barring nightmare or multiple uses of this, shouldn't ever be full, due to the automatic discard.

That being said, draw power is already fairly strong. Double draw is moreso, and even 2 being enough to flood your opponent's hand at times...

The cost is reasonably high, but even so, if you get two cards and win with them before your opponent gets one, or you end up getting 4 cards...

18

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Kindling | Charcoal

« on: November 27, 2010, 03:35:51 am »

Fixed the cost. Hm... I'm going to toy around with a few more ideas besides the nova. Personally, I think that simply increasing the damage would be a bad way to upgrade it, so I'm going to consider any other additions besides the stat change. While a slight stat boost is nice, I don't really see it as being the best of upgraded versions.

The current idea I'm toying with is to give it a "Burning" effect, where it constantly inflicts damage while it's on the field as well as when it detonates. However, the health for the self-burn would need to be taken into account to balance it. I'll keep thinking of other possibilities and see what could come up, though.

Edit: Okay, new idea hit. I was thinking of making it auto-burn itself, but the balance on it would be tricky, and I didn't want to make it a "Destroy this ASAP to avoid automatic burn". So, I put a cost on it instead. I'm currently toying with the idea of what would happen if the effect were usable more than once per round, among other things. I'm currently thinking about what a "Life restore based on damage dealt" alternative might be like, but at the moment, I'm thinking that's a bit much.

Also, sorry about the template swap in the card, the full text wouldn't fit in the old one.

19

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Katharsis | Katharsis

« on: November 26, 2010, 04:41:09 pm »

I wonder how I missed that line originally.  *Self-facepalm*

Anyhow, since it's a "can use light to pay", what's the general split of quantum after you use it? Does it prefer to use  before the original element, the original element before  , split the two costs evenly, or restrict costs to only  ?

20

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Katharsis | Katharsis

« on: November 26, 2010, 07:13:28 am »

I was under the impression that if you use fractal, you'd have to pay enough (The actual cost part, in the corner), but you'd still lose all of your (The effect part of fractal). Thus, if you had 18 and 3  , for example, the cost of the first fractal would bring you to 9  0  , and the second to 0  0  .

21

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Kindling | Charcoal

« on: November 25, 2010, 07:00:26 pm »

So how many differences does it need before it can be considered a different card? 

Also, I'm not even sure how I managed to mess up the image in that way... Fixed. Again.

22

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Katharsis | Katharsis

« on: November 25, 2010, 06:22:58 am »

Honestly, I'm a little scared at the thought of what this would do for hope fractal. Easy access to fractal if you don't have to worry about the "Drain all" cost, and late game, it makes duplicating any heavy opponent hitters simple.

Outside of that, though, it seem fairly solid. It's an interesting manner of getting a bit more color into a near pure light deck. I'm a little iffy about the cost, but it's difficult to really be sure what's reasonable on something like this.

23

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Squall | Tempest

« on: November 25, 2010, 04:53:49 am »

Yeah. The real question is if a spell change in an upgrade is legitimate. There might not be a specific rule barring it, but it's also been convention that each card always upgrades to the same type.

That being said, I'm not sure it's possible for a "temporary" or "passive" overwrite, since it may end up overwriting other passives, which would make it less temporary. There's no problem with the concept past that, but it could much more effectively be done in a spell that says "Gain 1 air for each creature". This method of doing it seems a bit unnecessarily overcomplicated, and that seems to match the sundial mechanism more effectively in a permanent style.

Points for the way of meeting requirements, but after doing that, I can't really see any benefit to the actual cards from it.

24

Card Idea Competition Submissions / Re: Kite | Kite

« on: November 25, 2010, 03:50:57 am »

I count plenty more than 2 or 3 things that can poison, and nightmare isn't just a counter.

That's assuming that it "targets" each of the a separate time. I was under the assumption that it only targets once, and therefore only applies one counter. And even then, since you can depend on an opponent simply not playing the storm, which means you have to somehow rely on a rather complicated deck to set up a win condition. In any case, if you want to say that thunderstorm "targets" each creature one at a time, instead of doing targeting all creatures in once, it's probably better to state that assumption.