Code~Red Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 Rate. Also give suggestions pleziez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Zeonark Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 ...Add a cost? It's a Level 10 monster with a possible max of 5000 ATK. D: or from your end, 2500 ATK. And...That's really it. It's kinda short and the second part is slightly balanced since it's your whole hand. But I'd change it to destroying a equal amount since you could discard 1 card and nuke your opponent's field. Mehz.8/10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Code~Red Posted January 15, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 Yes but I made this to be part of an Anti-KageMaru deck. Around here whenever I go down on Saturdays I am always finding people with traps from KageMaru's deck. So I just had to get this idea down. Because KageMaru's traps are always in play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragnarok1945 Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 not the first time I've seen the pic given that the spell/trap doesn't even have to be face up, this is OPed since face downs are too abusable for such atk boosting abilities and 5 card destruction effect is even more OPed, you can lose just ONE card from your hand to make that happen 7/10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huxy2 Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 picture overused level way too high for its effect but good way to pisssss off your opponent 5/10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 5/10 if its first edition it would be a gold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Code~Red Posted January 15, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 Right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.