Alice Moonflowyr Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 LORE 2 Level 6 Monsters You can detatch one Xyz Material from this card: Your opponent draws two cards, then returns two cards from their hand to the bottom of their Deck. When this card has no Xyz Materials: You can banish this card to draw 3 cards. This effect of "Blue Dragon Fortress" can only be used once per turn. This banished card cannot be returned to the Graveyard or Extra Deck or be Special Summoned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazubat Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 LORE 2 Level 6 Monsters You can detatch one Xyz Material from this card: Your opponent draws two cards, then returns two cards from their hand to the bottom of their Deck. When this card has no Xyz Materials: You can banish this card to draw 3 cards. This card cannot leave the Banished Zone once it enters it. you get to draw 3 cards? Are you freaking insane, this card is crazy powerful, being Vanilla Material it's easy to summon, and since it doesn't have a "once per turn" you can keep on using the first effect again and again. Also, Banished Zone is not a used term, so you might want to change it to "This banished card cannot be returned to the Graveyard or Extra Deck or be Special Summoned". Just added that since your way is kind of weird for Yu-Gi-Oh, and this explains what it can't do anymore. The first effect is not even a big problem, actually it helps your opponent out by giving them 2 new cards and then returning 2 cards they might not need, but since you can just use it again and again to get 3 cards, this card is really more useful for you even if your opponent gets 4 new cards possibly. So make it 1-2 card instead, and give it more rescritions. I would also suggest it to have a "cannot be Special Summoned, except by Xyz Summon since you could just CotH this and get 3 cards :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 you get to draw 3 cards? Are you freaking insane, this card is crazy powerful, being Vanilla Material it's easy to summon, and since it doesn't have a "once per turn" you can keep on using the first effect again and again. Also, Banished Zone is not a used term, so you might want to change it to "This banished card cannot be returned to the Graveyard or Extra Deck or be Special Summoned". Just added that since your way is kind of weird for Yu-Gi-Oh, and this explains what it can't do anymore. The first effect is not even a big problem, actually it helps your opponent out by giving them 2 new cards and then returning 2 cards they might not need, but since you can just use it again and again to get 3 cards, this card is really more useful for you even if your opponent gets 4 new cards possibly. So make it 1-2 card instead, and give it more rescritions. I would also suggest it to have a "cannot be Special Summoned, except by Xyz Summon since you could just CotH this and get 3 cards :/ I'll add a OPT clause, but it doesnt need a "cannot be Special Summoned, except by Xyz Summon". Once you use the effect you technically cant get it back anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazubat Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 I'll add a OPT clause, but it doesnt need a "cannot be Special Summoned, except by Xyz Summon". Once you use the effect you technically cant get it back anyway. If it gets destroyed, and you then use Call or something to get 3 cards. Just noticed something, remove to and add a semi-colon instead as it is a cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 If it gets destroyed, and you then use Call or something to get 3 cards. I know that already -.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazubat Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 I know that already -.- Well if thats the case you should have that clause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Well if thats the case you should have that clause. Ehh. It feels somewhat uneccessary to me. What cases are there where you wouldnt Summon him, just give your opp his reshuffles and then get yourself a +2 all at that one time? I'll add it, it just feels pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazubat Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Its not pointless if you also add the once per turn. Otherwise as you said yes it's completly pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 It needs an OTP clause on the +2 part of its effect to stop from massive plusses in one turn from that card. But the detatch eff doesnt need an OTP clause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazubat Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 It needs an OTP clause on the +2 part of its effect to stop from massive plusses in one turn from that card. But the detatch eff doesnt need an OTP clause. I'm not sure what you mean, that is completly not what I said, and giving it that won't matter anyways since you're moving it from the field, unless you mean a "this effect of... can only be used once per turn". But I don't understand why this would balance it at all, yes you can't use multiple, but chances of you can getting 2 of this card out is pretty hard anyways. Unless you're running Hieratics of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Instead of having it: "Once per turn, you can detatch one Xyz material from this card to do X" I have after his "If this card has no Xyz Materials, you can banish this card: Draw 3 cards" a "This effect of "Blue Fortress Dragon" can only be used once per turn." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazubat Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Instead of having it: "Once per turn, you can detatch one Xyz material from this card to do X" I have after his "If this card has no Xyz Materials, you can banish this card: Draw 3 cards" a "This effect of "Blue Fortress Dragon" can only be used once per turn." Yes, and so? You realize you're still simply refering to it's secondary effect only right? Honestly that wouldn't matter too much, but having it able to summon itself, use it's effect to shuffle some of your opponent's hand into the deck (twice for that matter) and then drawing 3 cards the same turn gives this major pluses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Yes, and so? You realize you're still simply refering to it's secondary effect only right? Honestly that wouldn't matter too much, but having it able to summon itself, use it's effect to shuffle some of your opponent's hand into the deck (twice for that matter) and then drawing 3 cards the same turn gives this major pluses. ..............................why the hell would I word it like this unless I was only referring to its secondary effect. why, why, why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathanael D. Striker Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 I smell a double edged sword here. The problem I see with the first effect is that you give your opponent a chance to get the best set up. What if they draw two cards that they need, then return two that they don't? That defeats the purpose of using this card's effect in the first place. And banishing this for essentially a +2 (-1 Xyz Summon + 3 cards drawn = +2), which I'm not much of a fan of. Though, that effect would only give use if your opponent doesn't get what they need and finish you off before hand. This card may be strong in theory, but I'm not sure about it in practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazubat Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 ..............................why the hell would I word it like this unless I was only referring to its secondary effect. why, why, why. well if you do that the card will still be broken. But not my card, you can do with it what you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Not exactly broken. As Striker said, a double edged sword. You're risking your opponenet getting just the right cards to fck you up with, and he gets 4 chances to do so, in exchange for a +2 on your side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazubat Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Not exactly broken. As Striker said, a double edged sword. You're risking your opponenet getting just the right cards to fck you up with, and he gets 4 chances to do so, in exchange for a +2 on your side. hmm, not really, you can use this right, simply make sure to summon it when your opponent doesn't have any cards, and they will just draw and shuffle at the same time. And really 3 cards for yourself is WAAAY better than your opponent getting some random cards they might/might not need. At least in my opinion. Anyways, just do what you feel is best for the card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted February 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Hmmm... I could change it so the opp draws 2 cards and returns 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazubat Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Hmmm... I could change it so the opp draws 2 cards and returns 1. that could work as well. Do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.