Crusader | Crusader

[jmizzle7]

Well this is a pleasant surprise!

With all the great card ideas springing up as of late, I figured mine was starting to become an afterthought. Thanks Zanz, and everyone for your votes/support!

I only partially agree with SG's comment about having Endow cost another quantum type. Yes, it might make some sense from a good/evil standpoint, but then you are effectively locking yourself into those two elements when you play Crusader. I wanted to keep it more open-ended, so I kept everything in the element.

[Marvaddin]

Maybe its just me, but I think Crusader shouldnt be able to target flying weapons. Well, its already good enough getting +X/+2, in addition to 3/5, and the weapon skill, I think. Even if he can target them, then ignoring Antimatter to get just good bonuses looks pretty ridiculous. What can support this idea?

As a side comment, looks like a Morning Glory in his hand. Once he really cant use it, maybe the image can use another weapon, like Pulvy, Eternity or Titan?

[Nume]

Eh it just looks like a generic bright sword to me, but yeah . Its better to not have a specific weapon visible imo because he can use any (besides glory ) so why focus on one in the art?

[Memorystick]

Seriously, you guys are concerned that Crusaders benefit from the combo of:

1) Draw and play a weapon
2) Draw and play Animate on that weapon
3) Draw and play Blessing on that weapon
4) Draw and play Crusader.
5) IF both Crusader and the animated/blessed weapon are still alive, use Endow on that weapon

???

I'm sorry, but there are four-card combos that end games -- I'm not worried about one that merely creates a supercritter.  Sure, you can EM halfbloods with it, but that's because halfbloods are slow, have no coherent strategy, and basically consistently die to any deck with lots of healing and phat creatures.

Actually, only the crusader(s) needs to survive- you can hold the weapon, animate, and buff(s) in your hand while you wait for the crusader's summoning sickness (and possibly silence) to wear off.

[assassim]

"It's about dammed time!"
                     - Starcraft 2 Marine

Sweet idea brought forth by jmizzle7 in the early days of the forum. Glad it finally got the recognition it deserves.

[~Napalm]

Zomg! bulb!

-2 Archangel, +2 Crusader; RoL/Hope could be so much lolz with these guys!

[jmizzle7]

Eh it just looks like a generic bright sword to me, but yeah . Its better to not have a specific weapon visible imo because he can use any (besides glory ) so why focus on one in the art?

That's Crusader's weapon. When the Crusader uses the Endow skill, it doesn't equip a weapon. It channels the targeted weapon's energy and uses it in combat.

[Kael Hate]

Shows how dark the crusader is

[kobisjeruk]

actually...



(just to show how it would look like in , not an actual, formal/official change to the card)

[Kael Hate]

actually...



(just to show how it would look like in , not an actual, formal/official change to the card)

Yes I really like this. Moringstar being immune makes sense, thing of light and all that. Its also a would be a rare I'd want to get.

[kobisjeruk]

from a flavor standpoint, if it changes from -> , 'endow' do not fit anymore
it would be something like 'augmentation' or 'graft'

but this is getting off topic, crusader isnt gonna get a full elemental makeover (no matter how much you and i think it is better suited in kael)

[Scaredgirl]

I only partially agree with SG's comment about having Endow cost another quantum type. Yes, it might make some sense from a good/evil standpoint, but then you are effectively locking yourself into those two elements when you play Crusader. I wanted to keep it more open-ended, so I kept everything in the element.

I think that the theme should always come before gameplay. You cannot give a Pig | Huge Pig the ability to fly just because it would make more sense in some gameplay aspect of Elements. It's a pig, it shouldn't fly.

I apply the same logic here. For me, it doesn't make sense that a Crusader is put in the same category as a Guardian Angel. Latter is clearly a creature of light, and how most people define "good". Crusaders on the other hand did all kinds of nasty stuff like killing etc. Like really evil stuff.

I'm not a big fan of "Dark Crusader" either, because it's missing the whole "good but evil" theme that I like. But if I had to choose, I would probably go with Dark Crusader because I see Crusades as much more "dark" than "light".

I guess I kind of see mono- Crusader as some kind of insult to our understanding of human history.