Sunn O))) Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 Oncer per turn: You can banish 1 monster from your Graveyard; Special Summon a number of "Fish & Bread" Tokens (Fish-Type/EARTH/Level 1/ATK 0/DEF 0) equal to the Level of the banished monster to anywhere on the field. If this card is destroyed by a card effect: You can activate this effect; Special Summon this card during your 3rd Standby Phase after activation, and if you do, gain 2000 Life Points. Decided to remake my Jesus card. Please comment and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIBONE LUIS Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 I think you should take double damage from cards attacking it, because he'd turn the other cheek. Lol Also I think it would balance out the immortality eff and spam/clog eff And not to mention major OCG errors. Oncer per turn, You can banish 1 monster from your Graveyard; Special Summon a number of "Fish & Bread Tokens" (Fish-Type/EARTH/Level 1/ATK 0/DEF 0) equal to the Level of the banished monster to anywhere on the field. If this card is destroyed: Special Summon this card during your 3rd Standby Phase after activation, and you gain 2000 Life Points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunn O))) Posted January 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 Major OCG errors? It's "Once per turn:". The revival effect is worded like Number 62: Galaxy-Eyes Prime Photon Dragon, sooooo. The revival effect is pretty balanced, since you have to wait 3 turns. N62 comes back after 2 turns and it has like 4000 atk. I guess I should fix the Token effect, since it could lead to OTKs and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIBONE LUIS Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 When cards have the : after text it implies a cost, so I do beleive that is a error, btw Xyz monsters have a much higher cost than level 4 monsters thus making this card OP Major OCG errors? It's "Once per turn:". The revival effect is worded like Number 62: Galaxy-Eyes Prime Photon Dragon, sooooo. The revival effect is pretty balanced, since you have to wait 3 turns. N62 comes back after 2 turns and it has like 4000 atk. I guess I should fix the Token effect, since it could lead to OTKs and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunn O))) Posted January 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 Here's the link http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Problem-Solving_Card_Text The colon goes after "Once per turn". The only thing OP about this card is that it gives you tokens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIBONE LUIS Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 And it's immortal and makes you gain 2000 LP each time it's brought back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunn O))) Posted January 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 It takes 3 turns for it to come back, and it will only come back if destroyed by a card effect. If you destroy it by battle, which is pretty easy considering it has 0 atk, itwon't come back. Also, gaining 2000 LP doesn't mean much anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyng's Old Account Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 ...it will only come back if destroyed by a card effect. If you destroy it by battle, which is pretty easy considering it has 0 atk, itwon't come back... I'm afraid I have to stop you there. You have phrased it saying when this card is destroyed. That includes battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunn O))) Posted January 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 Ah, yes. I need to change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vision Magician Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 Am I the only one that finds this card to be offensive? (And no, I'm not Christian, but I have enough respect for religious people to not belittle their faith by turning something they believe in into a playing card.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyng's Old Account Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 Am I the only one that finds this card to be offensive? (And no, I'm not Christian, but I have enough respect for religious people to not belittle their faith by turning something they believe in into a playing card.) Not sure, but at the moment I certainly don't, and here's why: As of right now, you have no proof this card was made to 'belittle' anyone's faith whatsoever. Did you not consider that maybe Scarlet Witch was conveying their faith through creating this to represent Christ? Furthermore, how does turning something they believe in into a playing card necessarily imply belittlement? I recall that Kali, the Hindu Goddess of Destruction, was portrayed by Hi-Rez Studios, in their MOBA "SMITE", as a quite sexually objectified character (wearing little else other than a loin cloth and a ribbon over her buxom, and stiletto heels to boot.) This card, in contrast, does nothing to offend anyone - it merely represents beliefs of the Faith through its effects, image, and stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunn O))) Posted January 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 I wasn't trying to offend anyone. Anyway, it's just a card, on internet, based on a religious symbol. People getting offended over things like this is the reason we will never get the awesomeness that is Satan Claus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Imperiused Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 I kind of feel like we need an entire biblical card lineup, now. And I've only just begun on the Aztec pantheon! So little time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
death00 Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 did anyone else notice he said "Satan Claus"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted January 8, 2014 Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 did anyone else notice he said "Satan Claus"? That was the original name, wasnt it? Regardless I heard we are getting it as "Santa Claws" for the TCG. It isnt wrong to be offended by this any more than it is to make this card in the first place, Scarlet. Surely the offense can be understood, if not agreed with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunn O))) Posted January 8, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2014 That was the original name, wasnt it? Regardless I heard we are getting it as "Santa Claws" for the TCG. It isnt wrong to be offended by this any more than it is to make this card in the first place, Scarlet. Surely the offense can be understood, if not agreed with? Santa Claws will never be as good as Satan Claus. I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.