Magical Spring

[Bringerofcake]

 

Draw a number of cards equal to the number of face-up Spell/Trap Cards your opponent controls, then discard a number of cards equal to the number of face-up Spell/Trap Cards you control. Until the end of your opponent's next turn after this card is activated, Spell/Trap Cards your opponent controls cannot be destroyed (by battle or card effect), also their activation and effects cannot be negated. You can only activate 1 "Magical Spring" per turn.

 

I had absolutely no idea this card existed, or why it's even a Secret Rare.

 

Discuss.

[Wildflame]

If it didn't count itself, it would be decent against Fire Fist and Pendulum-based decks. As it is, meh.

[Sleepy]

Spell/Trap Cards your opponent controls cannot be destroyed by battle huh?.... Wat.

 

This is meant to be usable when Pendulums get more common, though if both sides are using them, you are as likely to not benefit too much after all half the time... It's really too dependent on the scenario of "opponent uses Pendulums and/or Continuous cards like Fiendish Chain/Tenki/Whirlwind clones/etc, and you have none of that in your deck of choice".

[evilfusion]

Spell/Trap Cards your opponent controls cannot be destroyed by battle huh?.... Wat.

 

This is meant to be usable when Pendulums get more common, though if both sides are using them, you are as likely to not benefit too much after all half the time... It's really too dependent on the scenario of "opponent uses Pendulums and/or Continuous cards like Fiendish Chain/Tenki/Whirlwind clones/etc, and you have none of that in your deck of choice".

 

Trap Monsters. They still count as Traps, but they can be destroyed in battle.

[Armoire]

It's nice that it's a quick-play, so you can use it during their turn. I had a Shaddoll user hit me with this for game when I was using NK's. I didn't expect it at all.

But against decks with lingering Spells/Traps, it's like a better Maxx "C".

[Althemia]

It's good against DDs tbh, since the entire thing is a downside for them. Other than that, meh

[Lonk]

It's good against DDs tbh, since the entire thing is a downside for them. Other than that, meh

 

Too bad Leonidas's existence would render that point null and void.

[玄魔の王]

Too bad Leonidas's existence would render that point null and void.

And Lease Laundering's, since they can chain it to wipe their board and leave you discarding for a draw of 1.

[Althemia]

Too bad Leonidas's existence would render that point null and void.

You still draw upwards to 5, I wouldn't necessarily say that that renders this null and void.

[Lonk]

You still draw upwards to 5, I wouldn't necessarily say that that renders this null and void.

 

It doesn't.  It only renders the hope for killing them with their own cards null and void.

[Delibirb]

It could be an interesting tech in Shaddolls but there really are better options.

[Toffee.]

So... The most pro way to use this is to chain this to some Spell/Trap while they have 2 Pendulum Monsters in said zones?

[SirReal]

So... The most pro way to use this is to chain this to some Spell/Trap while they have 2 Pendulum Monsters in said zones?

This could be a weird way to deal with chain burn now that I think of it. You just have to run DDD Leonidas in your side and...

 

You know what I'm working way too hard to justify this card. I arguing a side against freaking Chain Burn. 

 

Short: Decent Anti-Pendulum Card(+0 against 2 Pendulum Zones filled) and a really gimmicky side against Fire Fist. Overall Score: Meh

[JadenxAtemYAOI]

Dark Worlds might like this card. Shame not many continuous cards are used aside from Fire Fist.

[Slinky]

Dark Worlds might like this card. Shame not many continuous cards are used aside from Fire Fist.

 

...DDs, Madolche, Qliphorts, and Crystal Beasts if that pendulum rumor is a thing