Generic Spell [Neutralization]

[Alpakha]

I feel like it needs a cost, but it is a +0 (at least, I think it is). It gets rid of problem cards at that moment and disrupts draw (the part I'm iffy about). Anyway, any reviews will be appreciated.

[Zazubat]

I feel like it needs a cost, but it is a +0 (at least, I think it is). It gets rid of problem cards at that moment and disrupts draw (the part I'm iffy about). Anyway, any reviews will be appreciated.

It's basicly Back to Square One, just that it's more useful since there's no cost, it doesn't return the card right away, it's a quick-play and that it can return any kind of card. The only balance right now is that it can only be activated once per turn, but even then it's still pretty unbalanced. I would suggest a discard cost like BtSO has, or something like that, otherwise it's pretty nice. The art is also pretty cool, did you make it yourself?

[Sora1499]

No, a discard cost would kill this, Zazu. The card itself seems alright because the banished card goes back to your opponent, so this doesn't function as a retarded MST + Smashing combo. In that sense, it does have more versatility than both of those. I wouldn't call it brilliantly designed, but it doesn't warrant any changes.

[Zazubat]

No, a discard cost would kill this, Zazu. The card itself seems alright because the banished card goes back to your opponent, so this doesn't function as a retarded MST + Smashing combo. In that sense, it does have more versatility than both of those. I wouldn't call it brilliantly designed, but it doesn't warrant any changes.

You don't upgrade a card without giving them more rescritions. But then again, Heavy Storm...
You win this round Sora,  but personally I suggest a discard/something else clause.

[Sora1499]

Just realized its a quick play... That's pretty crazy, Kvn. I'd make it a normal spell.

[Zazubat]

Just realized its a quick play... That's pretty crazy, Kvn. I'd make it a normal spell.

That too makes it pretty powerful, making it a normal spell might bring it down to a level where I can find it acceptable to leave it without a cost.

[Darkneptune]

i think if you wanted to add a discard cost, why not pay lifepoints? lost of cards have discarding as costs but paying life points could actually be beneficial to you depending on the face-up cards at the moment... if im not mistaken there is a monster card that reverses life gain into life loss and vice versa. Prime material dragon was it?

[Bleaknight]

Life Points aren't real costs unless it's a huge amount of them. Anyway I think this could be good enough as a Normal Spell, since as a Quick-Play it's probably broken. 

[Alpakha]

The reason it's a quick play is to disrupt plays (rabbit, tgu, various xyz monster, etc.). If I make it a Normal Spell then it loses a lot of it's versatility. If I added a discard cost it's a -1 and life point costs are useless. I could make it into a trap but then it would be slow. Where it's at right now I feel like it would be semi limited. Idk, I'll change it when I get a good idea. @Zazi, thx but I found the art. I forgot from where.

[Alpakha]

bump

[Sora1499]

[quote name="Philip J. Fry" post="6147756" timestamp="1361403692"]The reason it's a quick play is to disrupt plays (rabbit, tgu, various xyz monster, etc.). If I make it a Normal Spell then it loses a lot of it's versatility. If I added a discard cost it's a -1 and life point costs are useless. I could make it into a trap but then it would be slow. Where it's at right now I feel like it would be semi limited. Idk, I'll change it when I get a good idea. @Zazi, thx but I found the art. I forgot from where.[/quote] But it's pretty busted as a quick play, yet fine as a normal spell. Design > playability nine times out of ten.