A challenge to Written Cards to debate the manner in which this card impacts the game.

[-Griffin]

I first considered posting this as another one of my challenges to Realistic, but I don't really trust them to "get it" - I then considered card contests, but I don't think they'd fare much better. That left me with TCG or Written, so I'm posting this in Written. The following card has some interesting design elements that, to some, might not be apparent at first. Rather than considering playability (when you see the card, that should be obvious), please consider the way it impacts the game.

|Enigma Assassin|Fiend/DARK/[b]Fusion[/b]|Level 11|0 ATK|0 DEF|
|During your opponent's Standby Phase, you can flip this card in your Extra Deck face-up to destroy 1 card on the field. You cannot activate the effect of "Enigma Assassin" until the End Phase of your opponent's next turn.|
NB:
- A player's Extra-Deck is assumed to start face-down and to never be flipped over. This cannot be activated if already face-up.
- Multiple Enigma Assassins cannot trigger in the same Standby Phase


Everything in the spoiler below is my own analysis on the card. This is a "spoiler" and will take away a lot of the fun of the game. You can look at it before you post, but please spend a significant amount of time considering it before looking ahead. When I've done this sort of thing before in Realistic, I leave the following out because those threads were to gauge the capacity of RC and to show many of them how little they knew about balance. I trust I know enough about this section and the point of this thread is to generate an interesting, hopefully active topic of debate.

[spoiler=.]
Please have actual opinions by this point so that they might be different to mine and that you can disagree, rather than seeing mine and going, "Oh yeah, that makes sense" and falling into some heard mentality.

http://pastebin.com/Z2in7gd0
[/spoiler]

Also, if you wish, include suggested fixes, or thoughts on how it could be taken in another interesting direction.

[Mysty]

My grading policy:
+: I approve
0: toss-up
-: I disapprove

1. So as it sounds, you get three free +1s since it doesn't appear you can turn them face-down or use them for anything if they're face-up.
Definitely broken. However, if you say i should merit it based on the other merits because it doesn't promote luck, then I'll follow that.
0

3. For some reason, I don't believe the Extra Deck size will be bumped to 20 and will stay at 15.
Basically, the Extra Deck gerts reduced to 15 - number of these allowed.
This increases skill because it has the player think about what Extra Deck cards will bring their best plays and which ones won't. Sure, there will be times when you think "I should've had this other card", but that's the situation in the Main Deck as well; the idea is to improve consistency of what your deck is supposed to do.
+

5. I very much like your reason here. However, restricted timing, easily accessed "free" +1s are still +1s.
0

7. This also gives more destruction to decks that have it. The most effect this will probably have overall is let the decks with so much destruction relax a bit and add more cards of the theme to the deck. However, I still don't see the good of adding more destruction. "Free" generic +1s are "free" generic +1s.
-

9. Your logic here is impeccable. Always having access to a destruction of a face-down card makes you really think about whether attacking to get rid of it is a good idea or using one of your free destruction cards or waiting for another destruction card is the best move.
+

11. Boss monsters become invalid, and Gadgets [s]and Crystal Beasts[/s] become meta. The idea of the boss monster is that it's supposed to be tough to stop (which is already ignored in the game anyway, but this just makes it even easier to get rid of them).
-

13. I quite much agree with this point as well; decks relying on certain cards or being destroyed in battle become very much weaker, if not invalid.
-

+: 2
0: 2
-: 3
Total: -1

Overall rating: Both players having access to a broken card doesn't make it okay, even if you could increase the consistency of getting that card to 100%. I, however, like this idea.
Maybe make it so it can't hit boss monsters and important S/Ts (maybe adjust it so it hits only face-up Level 4 or lower monsters or face-down Spell or Trap cards). That should eliminate many of its problems and keep its main uses.
Otherwise, I wouldn't let this at 3. Probably 1, maybe 2.

[~Nightshade~]

[s]Bannable because it doesn't have fusion materials and thus breaks the game[/s]

It's costless monster destruction, making sure any monster your opponent summons is quickly and easily destroyed, sliding the game into a "who can summon Stardust/more then 1 monster" state wins. Bannable, of course. Even at 1, it's still easy destruction that gets rid of most major threats and cannot be stopped by battle or common S/T destruction effects.

[Bringerofcake]

NOTE: This is without looking at your analysis (and apparently the card).

[s]So essentially, it becomes "Your Extra Deck is now 14 cards. Destroy 1 card per turn". I feel it would negatively impact the game, as it is, as many have already said, literally free in every way (save for extra deck space) card destruction, and creates slippery slope situations from turn 2 onward, not to mention shifting the entire turn balance.

DERP

That's it. The whole reason this card exists is to make Turn 2 a viable position to open the game with. However, I feel this is too far to go, as you can continually crunch opponent's strategies and fall further and further down the slope.[/s]

EDIT: After realizing the card's actual activation timing, my opinion is dramatically changed. Still, we must remember that both sides would definitely run this card, and thus the game (I feel) would be a tad slower, as now we'd be having 2 turn MSTs and stall plays and such going on. Whether this is good or bad is up to the player and the Deck.

EDIT: After reading what you wrote, I have to say that I would disagree with you on the negation options (in the last paragraph). Here is a list of the most common cards that *can* stop this card:

Stardust
Stardust/Assault
Shooting Star
Divine Wrath
MBaaS
Dragunity Knight-Trident (or whatever the one that gets rid of Extra Deck cards is)

That's a total of 6 cards, only one of which is run often in most Decks. MBaaS and Divine Wrath, while generic, are generally unused. So I would say that there aren't really enough answers to it, especially with the ease that this can be recycled. Avarice, Eruption, Reincarnation, there are a lot more answers to its return than its removal.

However, this card, especially when run in threes, would facilitate the usage of such cards more as answers to Assassin, as well as other opponent monsters. However, that shifts the game into another bad situation, as now, Decks have to draw into their destruction negating cards in order to keep the status quo, forcing them to use them on Assassin while not being able to use them on other threats.


EDIT: Also, the the curb.

[Mehmani]

Meh, with Veiler running around this isn't too much of a problem. Limited it would be harmless.

[Bringerofcake]

[quote=Effect Veiler]1 face-up Effect Monster [b]your opponent controls.[/b][/quote]

Extra Deck doesn't count.

[Mehmani]

Okay then - it's a free +1 destruction that cannot be stopped by any card currently known to exist. Limited it would still be harmless.

[Bringerofcake]

[quote name='Mikhail Tal' timestamp='1298562573' post='5031404']
Okay then - it's a free +1 destruction that cannot be stopped by any card currently known to exist. Limited it would still be harmless.
[/quote]

[quote name='A Veritable Truth' timestamp='1298498146' post='5029669']
Here is a list of the most common cards that *can* stop this card:
Stardust
Stardust/Assault
Shooting Star
Divine Wrath
MBaaS
Dragunity Knight-Trident (or whatever the one that gets rid of Extra Deck cards is)
That's a total of 6 cards,
[/quote]


With Assassin, the lesser run generic cards in this list (namely Divine Wrath and MBaaS) would more than likely be run more to keep their cards alive. However, the ease of recycling Assassin, along with it being at 3, would make it stupidly difficult to protect against any other destruction, as deckspace is difficult enough to manage at this point. A limit would actually balance it out IMO. As I said, its ease of recyclability makes it difficult to keep down forever, and if I'm right, a semi-limit would be perfect. I feel that it'd be a problem at 3, as totally countering it would consume too many resources for the opponent, and leaving it alone would do the same. 1 would make it too easy on the other hand, a slight bump. To keep its impact on the game as intended, 2 is the optimal number, IMO.

[-Griffin]

I find it interesting that everyone is treating the 'free +1s' as a bad thing. I guess the form it was posted in was somewhat deceptive, but I hoped that my first paragraph would have made it clear - the way this works, with no luck and affecting all players in the way it does - makes this more of a game mechanic than a card. It basically gives you 3 'escapes' during the game. I feel we've veered a little from where we should be by rating it so much as a card in places. Still, it has its pros and cons - I'll throw in some ideas I've had and comment on others.

[quote name='Mystery Guest' timestamp='1298482960' post='5029133']
<snip>
11. Boss monsters become invalid, and Gadgets [s]and Crystal Beasts[/s] become meta. The idea of the boss monster is that it's supposed to be tough to stop (which is already ignored in the game anyway, but this just makes it even easier to get rid of them).
-
<snip>
[/quote]

The snipped bits I felt were covered by the start of this post, or I agreed with. This bit, however, I'm so-so about since boss monsters do become less valid, but I'm not sure that's much of an issue in the TCG. In the NGD, it'd be a serious issue, since we've taken measures to ensure boss monsters are really worthwhile. The TCG, on the other hand, has cards to remove most of them left right and center. Not helping the situation, agreed, but I feel it's being inserted into a format where the situation of boss monster value is beyond help - they need self-protection from this stuff, the ability to OTK, or they're invalid in the TCG, end of.

[quote name='Nexus Prophet-Evanm7' timestamp='1298495939' post='5029586']
[s]Bannable because it doesn't have fusion materials and thus breaks the game[/s]

It's costless monster destruction, making sure any monster your opponent summons is quickly and easily destroyed, sliding the game into a "who can summon Stardust/more then 1 monster" state wins. Bannable, of course. Even at 1, it's still easy destruction that gets rid of most major threats and cannot be stopped by battle or common S/T destruction effects.
[/quote]

The 'costless monster destruction' bit makes me think you are rating this as a card, as does much of this. It also doesn't destroy 'any monster quickly' - you usually have to wait at least a full turn, and even then only kill one every two turns.

[quote name='A Veritable Truth' timestamp='1298498146' post='5029669']
EDIT: After reading what you wrote, I have to say that I would disagree with you on the negation options (in the last paragraph). Here is a list of the most common cards that *can* stop this card:

Stardust
Stardust/Assault
Shooting Star
Divine Wrath
MBaaS
Dragunity Knight-Trident (or whatever the one that gets rid of Extra Deck cards is)

That's a total of 6 cards, only one of which is run often in most Decks. MBaaS and Divine Wrath, while generic, are generally unused. So I would say that there aren't really enough answers to it, especially with the ease that this can be recycled. Avarice, Eruption, Reincarnation, there are a lot more answers to its return than its removal.
[/quote]

Point taken on only 3 really viable options, but I doubt that many Decks would run Eruption or Reincarnation just for when this is negated - generally Smashing or MST would do the job just as well, and wouldn't make you wait 2 turns a lot of the time. I guess this hurts boss monsters more than I thought, but as my first response suggested, this seems to be a minimal effect.

I'm not sure I agree it would go as far as your last paragraph seems to imply.

[hr]

Also; I figured another good thing this does for the game. - It stops cards that would make you insta-lose. If you're running Uria.dek and your opponent flips [s]the table[/s] Decree or Summons Jinzo, then you've often lost with no question about it - the whole duel is now a Lame Duck. This card means that if any card would insta-kill your Deck, or would do so unless you drew the few outs you had in your Deck, then you can stop a duel from ending because of one card by making use of this. It seems to make more Decks viable since "loses too easily to X" isn't such a problem now, which I consider a plus.

I do agree that @3 might just be too much though. 2 Feels very possible, since 3-0 does not apply to game mechanics and is often flawed anyway. I could see a 'once/twice' per duel phrase on a more refined version.

[-Lightray Daedalus-]

[quote]Stardust
Stardust/Assault
Shooting Star
Divine Wrath
MBaaS
Dragunity Knight-Trident (or whatever the one that gets rid of Extra Deck cards is)[/quote]

All those cards are either useless agaisnt OT card [s](Except the Dragunity Guy[/s]Actually Trident is the worst way to combat this as it is a -4 just to get rid of this incovenient and it is a counterable as the others situations and the card itself is so situational that it just doesnt worth the effort of playing it...>_<)...or just get wasted negating the card.

If the effect that negates the Destruction caused by this card destroys it...It would have to be sent to the Graveyard...
Pot of Avarice
Transmigration Prophesy
Pot of Generosity
Des Feral Imp
are all able to recycle this card to your Extra Deck and you have -1 Yourself for nothing...

Sorry to say but this card basicly breaks the bases of the Game where Extra Deck cards cannot be seen by the opponet until they are put into play...therefore shall never exist...

[-Griffin]

[quote name='-Dae-' timestamp='1298653742' post='5033534']
All those cards are either useless agaisnt OT card (Except the Dragunity Guy)...or just get wasted negating the card.

If the effect that negates the Destruction caused by this card destroys it...It would have to be sent to the Graveyard...
Pot of Avarice
Transmigration Prophesy
Pot of Generosity
Des Feral Imp
are all able to recycle this card to your Extra Deck and you have -1 Yourself for nothing...

Sorry to say but this card basicly breaks the bases of the Game where Extra Deck cards cannot be seen by the opponet until they are put into play...therefore shall never exist...
[/quote]

Massively missing the point. They don't see it until it's activated anyway.

[Bringerofcake]

None of the listed cards (sans Trident) specify where on the field the card needs to be in order to destroy it, which is why you can Divine Wrath Absolute Zero whether it goes to the Extra Deck, the Graveyard, or if it is removed from play.

Also,
[quote name='-Griffin' timestamp='1298569268' post='5031574']
Point taken on only 3 really viable options, but I doubt that many Decks would run Eruption or Reincarnation just for when this is negated - generally Smashing or MST would do the job just as well, and wouldn't make you wait 2 turns a lot of the time.
[/quote]

The cards you suggest, while generic, are also less run on a whole in decks(save for Avarice).

[-Lightray Daedalus-]

OK then...But some thing I consider in regards to this card:

[quote]I don't like this since it limits a duelist's choice during a game of what they can bring out, making them more dependent on having got a lucky hand.[/quote]

That's the whole point of the Extra Deck limit...it limits the amount of option so that the player has to skillfully select the options that suits more his Main Deck plays...The balance of the Extra Deck shall only be considered toward what the Main Deck can achieve...and not the other way...where it is necesary to get LUCKY hands in order to make X generic Synchro that was throw in...Limiting the Extra Deck Space just contribute to this...and Also limits this card itself as to wether or not it is worth the Space or if the Main Deck can go without it and not be fully dependant on Extra Decking a playset of that card.

[quote]the timing of this ensures your opponent has a full turn to set up for an attack before you can push for anything, leaving your opponent's interaction minimally affected.[/quote]

Solution to the Problem of having to deal with the card...Not Getting to the point where this card affects you....HOW?
FTKing the opponent before this card becomes a annoyment...Consecuence? card promotes FTKs Decks.

[quote]The main positive point of the card is that it gives removal to Decks that lack it.[/quote]

No Deck lacks removal as generic Removal exist and plenty TBH...the way 1 Deck or other can manage the space is another History...as this card also provides with More weapons to those Deck that doesn't lack removal making the difference meaningless as the difference in the amount of removal both cases have remains the same.

[quote]Decks that are more hurt are those like Ratbox, that need to be attacked, or something like FLIP Worms that need to stay around longer. To be fair though, I'm pretty sure there's enough negation options, even for something in the Extra, that they wouldn't become totally non-viable from step 1.[/quote]

Except they are now forced to find space into their Main Build specifically design to combat this card and have to sacrifice cards that would help in a more equilibrated scenario....No Deck shall be limited in its strategy to be molded to counter a single card.

And I agree that this card is highly bannable...as stated in my last post.

@A Veritable Truth: Which was my point...negating this card and destroy it, sending it to the Graveyard is more contrapoducent that letting get its effect and don't being able to be used again...problem is game state is reduced to being able to get hurt the most by this and you'll be depedant to find ways aroun it all the time...

[-Griffin]

[quote name='-Dae-' timestamp='1298656632' post='5033600']
Solution to the Problem of having to deal with the card...Not Getting to the point where this card affects you....HOW?
FTKing the opponent before this card becomes a annoyment...Consecuence? card promotes FTKs Decks.

[b]No it doesn't stop being silly. Decks will be just as good against FTK Decks as before as they've lost no card that hurts FTK Decks. FTK Decks will be entirely unaffected either way.[/b]

No Deck lacks removal as generic Removal exist and plenty TBH...the way 1 Deck or other can manage the space is another History...as this card also provides with More weapons to those Deck that doesn't lack removal making the difference meaningless as the difference in the amount of removal both cases have remains the same.

[b]Don't agree. Space issues very much exist. Removal is used to answer problems, not to blow up Dandy tokens and jank. Decks that already run removal would probably run less since they can answer their problems anyway due to this, which would mean they get other things, but get options overall to increase strategic depth.[/b]

Except they are now forced to find space into their Main Build specifically design to combat this card and have to sacrifice cards that would help in a more equilibrated scenario....No Deck shall be limited in its strategy to be molded to counter a single card.

[b]No Deck will be 'molded' against this. They'll just double-check Stardust is an easy drop if they've got important assets.[/b]

And I agree that this card is highly bannable...as stated in my last post.

[b]For what reason? Game mechanics need a much better explanation to be removed than a card needs to be banned. This is a game mechanic.[/b]

@A Veritable Truth: Which was my point...negating this card and destroy it, sending it to the Graveyard is more contrapoducent that letting get its effect and don't being able to be used again...problem is game state is reduced to being able to get hurt the most by this and you'll be depedant to find ways aroun it all the time...

[b]You're missing the point. You don't get an extra -1 for negating something in the Extra Deck. Players basically start with 9 cards, 3 of which are this, to use, as part of the game mechanic it is. The card is never physically in the hand, but destroying it still saves you a card, which is entirely equivalent to saving advantage.[/b]
[/quote]

[Bringerofcake]

EDIT: Dammit, I guess I forgot to post my response.

Aw well, no time like the present.
[hr]
And my point is that the recyclability of the card is limited, as the only constantly run card in that list of yours is Avarice. Plus, the majority of the cards on my list are the Stardust cards, which don't lose any field presence (and thus advantage) for longer than the turn the effect is used (Shooting Star doesn't even go as far as to leave the field). Also, you'll be losing advantage if you leave it alone. It's not like your opponent will constantly have Avarice in their hand, or be waiting for the moment that you kill their Assassin so they can return it to the Extra Deck with that Avarice they've been saving up.

On top of that, the way it's worded, ANY Assassin's effect can be used only once every two turns. So it's not as if when you destroy their Assassin, the opponent can reload it back to their Extra and on their next turn kill something again.

[Mehmani]

Use Creature Swap and Gale Dogra HERP DERP