An Izanagi-no-Okami appearance!

[Fukato]

 

Effect: Must be Special Summoned (from your hand) by banishing 1 monster, 1 Spell Card, and 1 Trap Card from your Graveyard. Cannot be Normal Summoned/Set. This card is unaffected by the effects of the type of monsters, type of Spells, and type of Traps that were banished by this card's effect. Once per turn: You can banish 1 card in your Graveyard. Once per turn, when a card is banished: This card gains 500 ATK x the amount of cards that were banished at that time. This card cannot be destroyed by battle while your opponent controls more cards on the field than you.

 

 

 

So basically this card is unaffected by whatever card is banished by his effects like if he was able to banish a counter trap, he is unaffected by counter traps. The summoning conditions also will count as if he banished it by his effect. His ATK gain is just there to make him more powered up than just the base 2000 ATK. So i guess he's pretty overpowered to some extent. And he's a Divine monster because okami literally means god or around that same meaning.

[Trebuchet MS]

I get at what you're trying to say, but I'm having trouble determining the right way to phrase it.

 

It also appears that the ATK boost is permanent. So we start at InO gaining a permanent 2000 ATK that bumps him to 4000 from the get-go, then it nudges him to 6500, 9500... His immunity-to-battle clause quickly becomes redundant once the ATK spirals out of control.

[Fukato]

That is true, the immunity-to-battle is redundant after steadily gaining 500 ATK per turn (if the opponent decides to openly power him up by banishing). And his immunity to whatever card his effect banishes makes him ridiculous because if you banish warrior-types, they just don't work on him and his own effect is negated too.

 

WAIT, thats a loophole... if he banishes warrior-type monsters, will he be unaffected by himself making his effect useless afterwards?

 

I should reword that immunity to whatever banished clause properly.