=Legendary CardMakers=

[-Griffin]

Sorry Icy, but that card is horribly UP'd - adding two cards with no/minimal costs and quickly disposing of them for good advantage would make it worse than flat-out running Gift of Greed in most Decks.

[-Griffin]

Sorry Icy, but that card is horribly UP'd - adding two cards with no/minimal costs and quickly disposing of them for good advantage would make it worse than flat-out running Gift of Greed in most Decks.

[Guest JoshIcy]

Sorry Icy' date=' but that card is [i']horribly[/i] UP'd - adding two cards with no/minimal costs and quickly disposing of them for good advantage would make it worse than flat-out running Gift of Greed in most Decks.

 

Its an idea. That's why I posted it here. So we could work out the concept -_-"...

[Guest JoshIcy]

Sorry Icy' date=' but that card is [i']horribly[/i] UP'd - adding two cards with no/minimal costs and quickly disposing of them for good advantage would make it worse than flat-out running Gift of Greed in most Decks.

 

Its an idea. That's why I posted it here. So we could work out the concept -_-"...

[Guest JoshIcy]

Sorry Icy' date=' but that card is [i']horribly[/i] UP'd - adding two cards with no/minimal costs and quickly disposing of them for good advantage would make it worse than flat-out running Gift of Greed in most Decks.

 

Its an idea. That's why I posted it here. So we could work out the concept -_-"...

[MarbleZone]

Assuming they would have more than 1 card in their deck' date=' should any hit the grave/return to the deck then the effect of this card would cancel out.

[/quote']

 

I'm not trolling, I genuinely didn't understand what you meant - my example: they add a Green Gadget and Red Gadget.

Later on in the duel, they play a Green Gadget and it is sent to the Graveyard for whatever reason - how do you know that Green Gadget is still the one he added to his hand all those turns earlier? If the original Green Gadget remained in his hand all along, and the one that hit the grave was a second copy drawn later, the effect shouldn't be negated - but you have no way of knowing that.

You can't negate the effect if the conditions are still met, unless you further specify the rulings in the text box...

 

Sorry if I'm missing something.

 

EDIT: Well, I just read the first post and apparently I'm not supposed to be posting here, but hey, for what's it worth, I left some discussion. Apologies. ;)

[MarbleZone]

Assuming they would have more than 1 card in their deck' date=' should any hit the grave/return to the deck then the effect of this card would cancel out.

[/quote']

 

I'm not trolling, I genuinely didn't understand what you meant - my example: they add a Green Gadget and Red Gadget.

Later on in the duel, they play a Green Gadget and it is sent to the Graveyard for whatever reason - how do you know that Green Gadget is still the one he added to his hand all those turns earlier? If the original Green Gadget remained in his hand all along, and the one that hit the grave was a second copy drawn later, the effect shouldn't be negated - but you have no way of knowing that.

You can't negate the effect if the conditions are still met, unless you further specify the rulings in the text box...

 

Sorry if I'm missing something.

 

EDIT: Well, I just read the first post and apparently I'm not supposed to be posting here, but hey, for what's it worth, I left some discussion. Apologies. ;)

[MarbleZone]

Assuming they would have more than 1 card in their deck' date=' should any hit the grave/return to the deck then the effect of this card would cancel out.

[/quote']

 

I'm not trolling, I genuinely didn't understand what you meant - my example: they add a Green Gadget and Red Gadget.

Later on in the duel, they play a Green Gadget and it is sent to the Graveyard for whatever reason - how do you know that Green Gadget is still the one he added to his hand all those turns earlier? If the original Green Gadget remained in his hand all along, and the one that hit the grave was a second copy drawn later, the effect shouldn't be negated - but you have no way of knowing that.

You can't negate the effect if the conditions are still met, unless you further specify the rulings in the text box...

 

Sorry if I'm missing something.

 

EDIT: Well, I just read the first post and apparently I'm not supposed to be posting here, but hey, for what's it worth, I left some discussion. Apologies. ;)

[-Griffin]

Sending them to the RFG/Graveyard in the only way I could imagine it being of use - the hand is just UP'd pretty much by default.

[-Griffin]

Sending them to the RFG/Graveyard in the only way I could imagine it being of use - the hand is just UP'd pretty much by default.

[-Griffin]

Sending them to the RFG/Graveyard in the only way I could imagine it being of use - the hand is just UP'd pretty much by default.

[Guest JoshIcy]

Sending them to the RFG/Graveyard in the only way I could imagine it being of use - the hand is just UP'd pretty much by default.

 

But I want to force the opponent to not want to play their good moves, by handing it to them and making the costs rather insane (so to speak) but still balanced.

[Guest JoshIcy]

Sending them to the RFG/Graveyard in the only way I could imagine it being of use - the hand is just UP'd pretty much by default.

 

But I want to force the opponent to not want to play their good moves, by handing it to them and making the costs rather insane (so to speak) but still balanced.

[Guest JoshIcy]

Sending them to the RFG/Graveyard in the only way I could imagine it being of use - the hand is just UP'd pretty much by default.

 

But I want to force the opponent to not want to play their good moves, by handing it to them and making the costs rather insane (so to speak) but still balanced.

[-Griffin]

Sending them to the RFG/Graveyard in the only way I could imagine it being of use - the hand is just UP'd pretty much by default.

 

But I want to force the opponent to not want to play their good moves' date=' by handing it to them and making the costs rather insane (so to speak) but still balanced.

[/quote']

 

You're giving them access to every card in their Deck - they'll probably get something costless and not worry in the slightest.

[-Griffin]

Sending them to the RFG/Graveyard in the only way I could imagine it being of use - the hand is just UP'd pretty much by default.

 

But I want to force the opponent to not want to play their good moves' date=' by handing it to them and making the costs rather insane (so to speak) but still balanced.

[/quote']

 

You're giving them access to every card in their Deck - they'll probably get something costless and not worry in the slightest.

[-Griffin]

Sending them to the RFG/Graveyard in the only way I could imagine it being of use - the hand is just UP'd pretty much by default.

 

But I want to force the opponent to not want to play their good moves' date=' by handing it to them and making the costs rather insane (so to speak) but still balanced.

[/quote']

 

You're giving them access to every card in their Deck - they'll probably get something costless and not worry in the slightest.

[Guest JoshIcy]

So introduce some cost, and remember... This is brainstorming.

[Guest JoshIcy]

So introduce some cost, and remember... This is brainstorming.

[Guest JoshIcy]

So introduce some cost, and remember... This is brainstorming.

[Guest JoshIcy]

So introduce some cost, and remember... This is brainstorming.

[Guest JoshIcy]

Playing around with the idea again...

 

EDIT: Should probably be like 300-400 damage. But again... Discussing the idea here.

[Alordzynix]

What do you really mean with "That Idea"? I think I know what you mean with it but if I'm right then that card wouldn't be played the way you meant it to be played.

[Guest JoshIcy]

What do you really mean with "That Idea"? I think I know what you mean with it but if I'm right then that card wouldn't be played the way you meant it to be played.

 

If you've read above... I want to create a Set that gives your opponent advantage, at an even greater disadvantage.

[Alordzynix]

What do you really mean with "That Idea"? I think I know what you mean with it but if I'm right then that card wouldn't be played the way you meant it to be played.

 

If you've read above... I want to create a Set that gives your opponent advantage' date=' at an even greater disadvantage.

[/quote']

I've the read above but that wasn't really what I understood of it. But I think thats just me.

 

500 could be too much. Personally I would change it to 400 or change the higher than 6 cards in hand to an equal to or more than 4/5 cards in hand, mostly because of the fact is is a cost and therefor you cannot use a card like Gorz on it and secondly to stop it from it being abused as a burn card. But I definitely like the concept, inflicting damage with as cost giving your opponent the change to change a bad hand. I guess you can compare it a bit with Bistro Butcher and Chainsaw Insect only it isn't really a downside you just negate but something you focus more on.

 

There are two sides to this idea: If you would use a deck using a lot of cards like this, it could put you in a to big of a disadvantage by giving your opponent all his best cards and on the other side to make the cards worth it they could become to overpowered, like now if you keep both cards as they are then it would be a 2 Card OTK. Activating the Quick-Play Spell Card first and then during your opponent's draw phase that trap card. 8 Cards in hand 8*500=4000. Spell Doubles all costs = 8000.

So I think it is going to be difficult making them so they aren't overpowered but also aren't worthless. But definitely a great, interesting and unique concept, would really like to see how you work it out.