Gauntlet Girl

[Dragon™]

[align=center]Don't jack off to the pic... O:

 

 

Lore-

When this card is destroyed by your opponent, you can add up to 2 "Gauntlet Girl" from your Deck to your hand. While you control 2 face-up "Gauntlet Girl", all "Gauntlet Girl" you control cannot be destroyed by battle. You can send this card back to your Deck to negate the effect of a Spell Card and destroy it, then shuffle your Deck.

 

OPed? Kiss my bass.

 

IMG Credit to Jazin Kay (or whoever the original artist is...)[/align]

[snetonobre]

Yeah I'm neutral. I didn't like it but I don't hate it. I'll give 7.

I would give you less but I can't give to you a bad note only because I didn't liked the card.

 

Well it have an acceptable ATK and DEF but the effect...

Well it is a average except by the fact that is very easy to summon two of her when destroyed by battle, thus none of them being capable of being destroyed by battle. Normally monsters that cannot be destroyed by battle have low stats. Normally monsters that have a effect that allows the summon of two monsters have low stats. Understand? This card is too powerfull for it's effects because a average lv4 monster have a ATK of 1600 and a defense lower than the ATK. a monster with such stats and effect would be forbidden, limited or semi-limited.

 

I think that it has some OCG errors in that part of the "all Gauntlet Girl you [...]" in that all but I don't remember the right way of writing this.

 

If this card would be released in the TCG it will have it's legs reprinted to avoid sexual content.

[ragnarok1945]

nothing imbalanced on the effect at all

 

I DID wish you had made it more than just can't be destroyed in battle for controlling 2 of them, but whatever

 

I'll give you 9.3/10 for it

[Dragon™]

Yeah I'm neutral. I didn't like it but I don't hate it. I'll give 7.

I would give you less but I can't give to you a bad note only because I didn't liked the card.

 

Well it have an acceptable ATK and DEF but the effect...

Well it is a average except by the fact that is very easy to summon two of her when destroyed by battle' date=' thus none of them being capable of being destroyed by battle.[/b'] Normally monsters that cannot be destroyed by battle have low stats. Normally monsters that have a effect that allows the summon of two monsters have low stats. Understand? This card is too powerfull for it's effects because a average lv4 monster have a ATK of 1600 and a defense lower than the ATK. a monster with such stats and effect would be forbidden, limited or semi-limited.

 

I think that it has some OCG errors in that part of the "all Gauntlet Girl you [...]" in that all but I don't remember the right way of writing this.

 

If this card would be released in the TCG it will have it's legs reprinted to avoid sexual content.

 

It's not that easy to Summon both of them, because of the mild attack (nowwadays and some old times, they made a lot of 1800-1900 or even 2000 Level 4 monsters...) and Trap Hole is a danger, etc... I do understand your point though. Also, there's lots of Semi-Limits-Forbiddens out there, now whats wrong with that? It only makes the game more fun. But, I am going to make this card Level 5, to have that 1-Tribute drawback... You made me think a bit. Thanks a lot for your great thought and in-depth decision about the card.

 

nothing imbalanced on the effect at all

 

I DID wish you had made it more than just can't be destroyed in battle for controlling 2 of them' date=' but whatever

 

I'll give you 9.3/10 for it

[/quote']

 

Lol, ragna ragna ragna.... You're always the person who gives me good rates. Thanks, and also I'm going to change it to Level 5.

[Darj]

I believe that when you are referring to 2 or more monsters with an specific name, you have to write the name in plural (see "Nimble Momonga" as an example). In that case, the second effect should be:

 

While you control 2 face-up "Gauntlet Girl", all "Gauntlet Girls" you control cannot be destroyed by battle.

 

Her last effect doesn't specify from where the card is returned to the Deck (from the field? from the grave?). I know it's obvious, but you could specify to prevent confusion. Also, you do not use "send this card back to your your Deck to...", but "return this card to the Deck to...".

 

Now, as for the effect, I see that this card has more uses than becoming an indestructible (by battle) duo: It provides card advantage (but it's slower than "Thunder Dragon"), it negates Spells and returns to the Deck a the same Time. Plus it's "Honestable".

I think it would work well in almost any LIGHT or Warrior Deck, as long as you run 3 to abuse the first effect.

 

I don't think it's OP'ed, but I may be missing something.

[FSBolthof]

I like it 9/10

[RAEGING D0GKING]

It reminds me of a card.

Nice effect.

But returning it back to the deck? well that part sorta seems ok.

9.8/10