| (http://i28.servimg.com/u/f28/10/08/58/46/nightm10.png) | Invasive Creatures Series: They are everywhere and you cannot get rid of them. So small but so numerous, you crush 3 and 9 appear from nowhere. They swarm and insinuate. Here is your nightmare: the invasive creatures. Made with love by SnoWeb |
Red Locust - Why not when it devours it createes another locust rather than the normal devour +1/+1?Good Idea - I changed it.
Shatterpillar | Rorschach Fly - Don't like em. Can't see a positive use and even for nighmare bit meh.and with nightmare and devourer?
Par is the perfect balance point. Balanced is within rounding enforced by integer casting costs of the par value. Underpar means less powerful than balanced. This varies from being only perceptible through theory, to protestations of underpowered, to 0 or negative benefit. Abovepar goes the other way of course.As all these creatures are relying a lot on synergies with other cards, I preferred to make them a bit underpar. As I cannot foresee all the possible interactions, I avoid this way to generate a game breaking combo. For now, Sand ant might be one of these dangerous cards. I'll work on it do fix this latter today.
A series is more credible if it does not try to force the idea into every element.The problem is that I only realise if an idea is good or not after I discussed it with some people. Here for example I realised that Caulerpa and Shatterpillar were not very promising whereas you realised that grasshopper was.
[...]
Please do not try to create a card for each element.
It is a good idea to keep them barely underpar. (just be careful how much)Par is the perfect balance point. Balanced is within rounding enforced by integer casting costs of the par value. Underpar means less powerful than balanced. This varies from being only perceptible through theory, to protestations of underpowered, to 0 or negative benefit. Abovepar goes the other way of course.As all these creatures are relying a lot on synergies with other cards, I preferred to make them a bit underpar. As I cannot foresee all the possible interactions, I avoid this way to generate a game breaking combo. For now, Sand ant might be one of these dangerous cards. I'll work on it do fix this latter today.A series is more credible if it does not try to force the idea into every element.The problem is that I only realise if an idea is good or not after I discussed it with some people. Here for example I realised that Caulerpa and Shatterpillar were not very promising whereas you realised that grasshopper was.
[...]
Please do not try to create a card for each element.
I am sorry if it's to much but during the night I had another idea: :death Death: Maggot | Maggot (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,23385.0.html).
Almost all cards have a discard-triggered ability. Unless you have a clogged hand or the opponent uses nightmare, it's not very often you can discard unless you sacrifice deck efficiency.The cards are not design to be discarded by the player (all the effects are negative ones) but by its opponent. The whole purpose of this series is to make creatures which can be use with nightmare but which strength is not just high attack (like Ghost of the past) but something more insidious (a swarm, a denial, a CC or even a card control ability). This is sort of a brain storming to generate 1/2 viable ideas that could lead to nightmare-friendly creatures totally different from Ghost of the past.
Some abilities are rather blurry and overall I don't like the idea of cards that are especially designed to be discarded.This is interesting. Can you tell me which one. I'll try to reword them or to add explanations in the notes. Overall 4t, if you don't like the nightmare mechanic, this is not a series for you.