Strider Tigerwolf Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 [center][img]http://yugico.com/customcard/90132.jpg[/img] Lore: 2 Level 4 Fiend-Type monsters [color=#000000][font=Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif][size=3]You can Xyz Summon this card using 2 "Dark World" or "Fabled" monsters. Once per turn, you can detach 1 Xyz Material from this card: Activate 1 of the following effects:[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif][size=3]● Target 1 card on the field: discard 1 card, then banish that target.[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif][size=3]● Target 1 Fiend-Type monster in your Graveyard or in your Banished Zone: discard 1 card, then add that target to your hand.[/size][/font][/color][/center] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekazu4u Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 And I thought the Dark World Xyzs from yesterday taught people that Dark World doesn't need any Xyzs, particularly level 4s. I suppose fabled could use it, but then again I never run that deck so I have no idea how it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marquispullie Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 Fableds could use it..if they had any GOOD level 4's that could spam...lol not too many fabled decks run the 4s in it anyway. unless your using fabled-dark world...then its a little more understandable/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Tigerwolf Posted July 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 I kinda wanted to make this card mainly for Belige Abuse. I intended to make it as "another option" type of card besides Utopia in Dark World/Fabled Decks. It's rather slow, but it has potential in bringing about unique plays, and can even "return itself to the Extra Deck (since it can't go to hand)" for Grapha revival, if it leaves the field it becomes Gate Food, The reason I put "Fabled" in the name was just because it's a LIGHT Fiend-Type monster , so mainly its cosmetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suibon Posted July 30, 2012 Report Share Posted July 30, 2012 [center]So it fuels combos while doing some removal of its own. And you add more fuel to the fire by making it discard while having its tank of Exceed Material be replenished.[/center] [center]Combo-broken.[/center] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Tigerwolf Posted July 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 @Suibon - ...until you star posting some examples of "brokeness" AND ways to fix that...please refrain from commenting on my threads... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekazu4u Posted July 31, 2012 Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 Suibon, I have come to the conclusion that you either think everything is broken, and thus should be banned, or it is not "meta-ready" and thus should be banned. You can't have it both ways. You can either be the type of idiot that thinks everything is broken, or you have to be the type of idiot that thinks that everything that isn't good can be banned without it hurting the game at all. You can't really be both, it just doesn't make sense. About the only card I have seen that you think is balanced is Airknight Parshath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerion Brightflame Posted July 31, 2012 Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 It's wierd. The card is made slightly OP from its own effect. Mostly the reatch materials part of it. The normal effect isn't to bad becuase, unless i'm mistaken this causes Dark worlds to miss the timing, as there is still a part of the effect that needs to resolve first. However, as stated in a lot of stuff before, Dark Worlds can't actually summon Rank 4 with any ease. Rank 5 yes, Rank 4 no. So, it kind of balances through that. Still, i say take off the material addition effect, and its a decent enough card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Tigerwolf Posted July 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 Hmmm...maybe you're right on the "reattach" effect, but the Dark World monsters don't miss the timing since the discard is part of the effect. The wording is the same as that with Gates of Dark World.edited the card! Now if you manage to pull off the effect twice, the card DOESN'T become Gate food Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekazu4u Posted July 31, 2012 Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 Wait, how is this card even slightly OP'd? If anything it is UP'd. First, you gotta get out 2 level 4s. So you gotta play a bad cards to do that. Then, you get out this thing, which really isn't that amazing. You just gave up 2 grapha targets, just to get a free potential +1 if you have a Dark World in hand. Thats not even better than the +1 you would have gotten if you had just revived Grapha, TBH. It also has got lesser ATK than Grapha. So yea, I don't see any reason why this card could be considered OP'd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Tigerwolf Posted July 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 but...this card is also a grapha target.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekazu4u Posted July 31, 2012 Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 [quote] [color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3] but...this card is also a grapha target.... [/quote][/size][/font][/color] [font="tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif"][color="#5a5a5a"][size=3]Uh...[/size][/color][/font] [color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]No? [/size][/font][/color] [color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]Its an Xyz .-.[/size][/font][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Tigerwolf Posted July 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 That's incorrect. Grapha targets a "Dark World monster", Xyzs, Synchros, Fusions, Rituals included. The only difference is that Xyz, Synchros, and Fusions would return to the Extra Deck since they can't go to the hand. Same ruling with Compulsory Evac. Device. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekazu4u Posted July 31, 2012 Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 [quote] [color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]That's incorrect. Grapha targets a "Dark World monster", Xyzs, Synchros, Fusions, Rituals included. The only difference is that Xyz, Synchros, and Fusions would return to the Extra Deck since they can't go to the hand. Same ruling with Compulsory Evac. Device. [/quote][/size][/font][/color] [color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]... if the monster can't return to the hand, Grapha cannot be Special Summoned. Obviously. Since it is a condition to return it to the hand.[/size][/font][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Tigerwolf Posted July 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 It took me a while to find a ruling O_o Learned something new! Thanks Kazu! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekazu4u Posted July 31, 2012 Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 [quote name='Kenji Inuma' timestamp='1343766743' post='5993724'] It took me a while to find a ruling O_o Learned something new! Thanks Kazu! [/quote] Uh, yea, its not a card specific ruling, anything like that works like that. For example, Genex Ally Birdman. Its only when it is specifically designated as an effect not cost or condition does it spin things to the Extra Deck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormented Posted July 31, 2012 Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 IMO it feels bland, what does it actually do to help you?, sending a card to the bottom of the deck? Oh SCARY, plus it's random +50 ATK&DEF are pointless. Make it more useful otherwise I wouldn't let it go anywhere near my deck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suibon Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 [quote name='Kenji Inuma' timestamp='1343756158' post='5993603'] @Suibon - ...until you star posting some examples of "brokeness" AND ways to fix that...please refrain from commenting on my threads... [/quote] [center]Wait, are you telling me to post actual broken cards -- imperfect cards? Wait, what?[/center] [center]And I can go castigate whoever I like, as long as I am in the spirit of castigating, and as long as the card needs to be flushed.[/center] [center]But speaking of which: this change of Saphree I find welcoming, though I would it to just bounce the target and not send said monster back to the deck.[/center][quote name='thekazu4u' timestamp='1343759544' post='5993641'] Suibon, I have come to the conclusion that you either think everything is broken, and thus should be banned, or it is not "meta-ready" and thus should be banned. You can't have it both ways. You can either be the type of idiot that thinks everything is broken, or you have to be the type of idiot that thinks that everything that isn't good can be banned without it hurting the game at all. You can't really be both, it just doesn't make sense. About the only card I have seen that you think is balanced is Airknight Parshath. [/quote] [center]I like many cards -- but I have my genuine f***ing hatreds too.[/center] [center]My want is to see cards that benefit gameplay and strategy -- not cards that make you gain advantage up the wazoo, not cards that you can drop confidently, without a care in the world beyond the potential for negation. But then again I am a child of a different age, and this age feels as alien to me as a hick transported to the mid-16th century Italy.[/center] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekazu4u Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 [quote] [center][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]But then again I am a child of a different age, and this age feels as alien to me as a hick transported to the mid-16th century Italy. [/quote][/background][/center] [center][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]You sure act like a child of a different age. No, I don't mean Yugioh, have you been watching loads of old cheezy movies or something? [/background][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)][quote] [/background][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]My want is to see cards that benefit gameplay and strategy -- not cards that make you gain advantage up the wazoo, not cards that you can drop confidently, without a care in the world beyond the potential for negation. [/quote][/background][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]S[/background][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]Sure, I wan't to see that too. The problem is, first off, you are thinking of cards that would benefit strategy in 2005. Most things that created strategy then are downright unplayable now, which means they will encourage 0 strategy. Secondly, you seem to ignore the fact that some cards encourage the OPPONENT to have strategy, or encourage players to have strategy in deck building. You only acknowledge one type of strategy: Get the most bang out of effects. You don't acknowledge the fact that strategy exists in (1) minimizing costs (2) deck building (3) playing around threats such as Gorz, Torrential Tribute, Honest, and Heavy Storm and (4) getting the most efficient battle-matchups in addition to simply (5) getting the most bang out of your effects. And remember, no strategy counts if THE CARD IS FREAKING TERRIBLE AND NOBODY USES IT BECAUSE IT IS UNDERPOWERED![/background][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]Speaking of which...[/background][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)][quote] [/background][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]But speaking of which: this change of Saphree I find welcoming, though I would it to just bounce the target and not send said monster back to the deck. [/quote][/background][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]... No, it then would become even MORE unplayable than it is NOW![/background][/size][/font][/color][/center] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suibon Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 [center]I've been reading Pauline Kael's old New Yorker articles, so you could say that I've been perusing movies I've never viewed.[/center] [center][quote][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]You don't acknowledge the fact that strategy exists in (1) minimizing costs (2) deck building (3) playing around threats such as Gorz, Torrential Tribute, Honest, and Heavy Storm and (4) getting the most efficient battle-matchups in addition to simply (5) getting the most bang out of your effects.[/background][/size][/font][/color][/quote][/center] [center]The other four are more or less corollaries of what you say or imply or what I think you imply is a minor matter (#5). Furthermore, as for minimizing costs, it is desirable from the standpoint of a balanced game to retain a semblance of cost-structures, to ensure that the user recognize costs and conditions instead of dodging them (as with Mezuki + Zombie Master with a prepped Graveyard) or else actively and immediately gaining advantage (as with Mermails and Madolches with Madolche Chateau active). I understand the desire to creep, but not where everything is a prelude to untold advantage, all under supervision for the whatever the user sees fits.[/center] [center]Or do I make sense?[/center] [center]But after extended thinking, I recognize my error: bouncing is the weakest of removal options available to the designer, and restraint like this ain't gonna cut it.[/center] [center]Therefore I propose that this be modified like so (beware -- I am not a PSCT whiz):[/center] [center][quote]During either player's turn: You can target 1 card on the field; discard 1 card, then return that target to the hand. If this card has no Xyz Materials: return it to the Extra Deck; add 1 card from your Deck to your hand, then discard that card.[/quote][/center] [center]I defy anyone to say that this is underpowered and/or unfairly costed now.[/center] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekazu4u Posted August 1, 2012 Report Share Posted August 1, 2012 The original version was fine, and yours is fine as well. If anything, yours is more powerful, because it is like the god of all searchers but it has to survive a card to get the real effect off. The other effect is just shiz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Tigerwolf Posted August 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 DONE! Final edit is done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekazu4u Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmeh. Its good now. I think. This card is still quite situational, because of its rank, but is viable in the deck for sure. Idk about others, but I'd run a 2nd Vanguard for this. Also, it can get back a Banished/dead Yata. I'm just pointing out that fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Tigerwolf Posted August 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Yeah. Now I can overlay my 2 Graphas for this? XD Troll. That's what I'd be. But still, it is a viable combo, especially when faced against marshmellons and stuff <-< now this card can get rid of them as it adds a new form of vitality towards DW. Also, its "addition" effect works wonders for both DW AND Fableds, not to mention that both archtypes have easy access to this card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekazu4u Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Ruling time: [quote] [color=#000000][font=Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif][size=3][center][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]You can Xyz Summon this card using 2 "Dark World" or "Fabled" monsters [/quote][/background][/center][/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif][size=3][center][background=rgb(251, 253, 254)]Does this mean I can Xyz Summon it with 1 "Fabled" and 1 "Dark World" monster?[/background][/center][/size][/font][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.