Darj Posted January 30, 2015 Report Share Posted January 30, 2015 I recently thought about this card, and how it would have been amazing if it didn't have that annoying restriction. At worst, it is an Upstart Goblin in mono-type Decks (or dead if you don't draw into any Beast-themed monster); at best, a "beginning of the End" in beast-themed archetypes that badly need the support, such as Hazy Flames. This card following Tenki up would have been sweet. You could be silly and tech Zephyros in non-Winged Beast decks just for the potential +1. So, let's say it didn't lock Spell/Traps and instead had the standard hard OPT clause, or if it locked Spell/Traps after its use (You cannot activate Spell/Traps for the rest of this turn). How strong would it have been? Considering the only relevant deck that could use it would be... Yosenjus? and Bujins in the lower tiers; also it would further push BWs forward along their new support. Discuss this card and/or this hypothetical change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bringerofcake Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 More likely than not it'd just be an upstart goblin for the decks that can run it, since generally decks that run beast/beast-warrior/winged-beast only run one of those types. Honestly I don't see this as too much of an issue, unless Konami decides to release an archetype somewhere down the line that moves through multi-types at breakneck speeds, in which case this card would go the way of super rejuv anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 It'd be iffy with just a hard OPT clause because we are talking about 3 draws, and even if no deck were to currently be able to use it, it is still handling general monster types so it could always become much easier with future expansions of the game. As is, it is like a weird version of Card CarD, which can give a bigger draw effect but the setup required makes it not really worth it. I personally thing they overdid the restriction. I would have added a hard OPT clause but something else for when the draw is 3, or a lack of that "something else" if the draw is only 1 card. Something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 This card became a real heartbreak to us all, simply because you get forced to dedicate your entire turn to it; This locks your Spells, Traps, AND other effects(monsters included). Or at least, based on how I'm reading it. Correct me if I'm wrong, if you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 This card became a real heartbreak to us all, simply because you get forced to dedicate your entire turn to it; This locks your Spells, Traps, AND other effects(monsters included). Or at least, based on how I'm reading it. Correct me if I'm wrong, if you like. Just locks out Spells/Traps. I have a feeling that a new set in the future might give us an archtype specifically designed for abusing this card, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 Just locks out Spells/Traps.But do you find it strange how it says "Other Spell/Trap Cards or effects"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 But do you find it strange how it says "Other Spell/Trap Cards or effects"? I think it might refer to using the effects of active Spells and Traps on the field. If it wanted to include Monster effects, it would have just stated 'other cards or effects this turn' rather than just 'Spell/Trap' Also, I need to note how suggestively terrible the image is with the positioning of Manticore King and King of the Behemoths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinny Posted January 31, 2015 Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 X-sabers anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darj Posted January 31, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2015 As is, it is like a weird version of Card CarD, which can give a bigger draw effect but the setup required makes it not really worth it. I personally thing they overdid the restriction. I would have added a hard OPT clause but something else for when the draw is 3, or a lack of that "something else" if the draw is only 1 card. Something like that. I agree, and the last bit makes sense. Perhaps the same Spell/Trap lock when you draw +3? That would have worked just fine. Just locks out Spells/Traps. I have a feeling that a new set in the future might give us an archtype specifically designed for abusing this card, though. I find this difficult to imagine. The archetype would have to be loaded with monster Quick effects and/or hand-traps to compensate the Spell/Trap lock during your turn. X-sabers anyone? Tried it, even with Garsem for more draws and a focus on Traps to be less affected by the restriction, but I couldn't make it work. Not being able to use Tenki in the same turn as this and viceversa really hurts. And with the new E-Convocation, this may be less desirable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.