[5/5] Purifying Flames of Revelation

[Blake]

If this card is Normal Summoned: You can Special Summon 1 LIGHT Spellcaster or LIGHT Wyrm monster from your hand or Graveyard in Defense Position, but its effects are negated, and it is banished when it leaves the field. You can banish this card from your hand; send 1 LIGHT Spellcaster Tuner monster from your Deck to the Graveyard. You can only use each effect of "Invokeflame Dancer" once per turn.

 

If you control a LIGHT Tuner monster: You can Special Summon this card from your hand in Defense Position, but you cannot Special Summon monsters from your hand for the rest of the turn. You can banish this card from your Graveyard; during this turn, when a LIGHT Tuner monster(s) is used as Synchro Material, you can treat it as a Level 2 monster. You can only use each effect of "Lordflame Dancer" once per turn.

 

1 Tuner + 1 or more monsters

When this card is Synchro Summoned: You can banish 1 LIGHT Spellcaster monster from your Deck. Quick Effect: You can banish this card from the Graveyard; return 2 banished cards to their owner's Graveyard, except "Soulflame Dancer". This effect of "Soulflame Dancer" can only be activated once per turn.

 

1 Tuner + 1 or more monsters

If this card is Synchro Summoned using only Tuner monsters: Draw 2 cards. Quick Effect: You can banish this card from your Graveyard and target 2 cards in either player's Graveyard; banish them. You can only use each effect of "Wildflame Dragon" once per turn.

 

Banish up to 3 LIGHT Tuner monsters from your Graveyard and target an equal number of face-up cards on the field; Banish them. If you control a LIGHT Wyrm Synchro Monster, cards and effects cannot be activated in response to this card's activation. You can only activate 1 "Apocalypse of the Purifying Flames" per turn.

Felt like designing some cards, so why not follow up on an older theme?

https://forum.yugiohcardmaker.net/topic/362559-post-contest-purifying-flames-of-purgation/

This was a theme I built around a card I submitted for a contest, and the flavor for that card is there. And these... slightly diverge from that.

 

Where all of the cards in the original theme are based on Jack's monsters (with a twist), but are overall less chaotic in tone, these are based on other cards, but are more chaotic than that character's original versions. One or two of these should be pretty blatant, but shrug.

 

These are also meant to be a weird mix of generic and not quite, especially given that they're designed to be Rival cards.

 

[spoiler=Design Notes. Read after critiquing.]

Invokeflame Dancer is meant to be a playstarter in most regards, as it can set up DawnDancer while also having itself banished to be handily recovered with PureDragon. Don't think I need to say too much about the NS effect, but it is an accidental boost to Metaphys, so... yay?

 

Lordflame Dancer should be the second most clear if you understand the play on the name. Effect-wise, just gives more devotion + the ability to manipulate your levels so that you can more easily make the Level 8 from the Level 4s. Or just ladder about with SoulDancer for WildDragon for value. It's also another speedy-ish banish for PureDragon.

 

Soulflame Dancer is meant to make hitting 2 4s not feel like total garbage, while being able to set up her own plays. Flicker+Dawn = Soul without a Normal Summon, which means you can use your LifeDancer and SkyDancer effects without the turn delay, due to her banishing a copy of one of them on her own. It does occur to me in the FlickerDawn scenario that you already have Dawn and could just use your NS, so her own restock may be overkill, hm... But it's also technically disruption so shrug. And NS is a big deal, so more shrug.

 

Wildflame Dragon should be blatant. Even more than LordDancer. That said, it's meant as a way to reward you for devoting resources that don't neccesarily lead to a Pureflame play, while serving a stronger disruption niche.

 

Apocalypse... is meant to be a silly meme card. You're going to want to banish most of your things via their own effects for value, so while this has ANIMEME value, I don't think it's really a good card. Then again, banish 1-for-1 isn't that bad as a genericish thing, so maybe I should put a minimum on it? IDK. Maybe 1 target per 2 banished.

 

[Darj]

Why should we read the design notes after critiquing? Wouldn't it be better if reviewers read them first to better understand your intentions, purpose, etc. with your cards and consequently deliver a more accurate review, rather than trying to find, or guess, your intentions with your cards, at the risk of missing something or getting something wrong?

 

I want to drop some thoughts on the set, but that little clause at the end threw me off-guard and now want the above question to be clarified first.

[Blake]

Why should we read the design notes after critiquing? Wouldn't it be better if reviewers read them first to better understand your intentions, purpose, etc. with your cards and consequently deliver a more accurate review, rather than trying to find, or guess, your intentions with your cards, at the risk of missing something or getting something wrong?

 

I want to drop some thoughts on the set, but that little clause at the end threw me off-guard and now want the above question to be clarified first.

Design notes cloud honest reviews. Assessing the card without outside information, other than context like the rest of the archetype, is important to getting genuine feedback.

 

You can change your mind after reading, but it's best to get the initial pure thoughts, because they're not stuck in OH BUT INTENTIONS. This is why I don't use them during contests, hosting or not, because they only lead to skewed results.

[Darj]

Design notes cloud honest reviews. Assessing the card without outside information, other than context like the rest of the archetype, is important to getting genuine feedback.

 

You can change your mind after reading, but it's best to get the initial pure thoughts, because they're not stuck in OH BUT INTENTIONS. This is why I don't use them during contests, hosting or not, because they only lead to skewed results.

I see. Personally I don't agree with this approach of "review first, then I explain" because, well, it's difficult for a reviewer know all the cards, interactions and in-an-outs in the game, while when a card maker makes a card, normally he/she already knows where it would fit, what roles it would play, if it fills any niches, etc.; that's why he/she made the card in the first place.

 

For example, in my case, in something like this, I can see there is some Synchro laddering scheme going on, they can make use of LIGHT Spellcaster Tuners that want to be in the grave, if any, and they may or may not sinergize with LIGHT Spellcasters, Blue-Eyes, Yang Zings or Metaphys, but since I don't know these archetypes beyond the duels I watch, then my review would be skewed; I wouldn't call this as genuine feedback. If I was a master duelist and knew every card, archetype, engine, interaction, combo, etc. out there, then yeah, that wouldn't be an issue, but I'm not; and pretty sure it is difficult to find one because of all the cards and interactions one would have to know.

 

On the other hand, if I were to read the design notes first, I would get a better idea of what you had in mind when you made these cards, and then I would be able to give a more accurate review. Also I would see things you missed or didn't, potentially saving me from stating things you already know.

 

Not to mention that this approach feels like you are testing the reviewers... which AFAIK is not the purpose of AC, or CC section for that matter.

 

EDIT:

To stay on topic, I will drop my thoughts as requested:

 

Pre-notes:

As mentioned above, it appears to be a syncho laddering engine, and one that provides draw power with the Synchro6 and disruption with their grave effects, while being capable of working on their own; then the interactions they can have with other LIGHTS, be them Tuners, Spellcasters or Wyrms gives them flexibility to either adopt some of these monsters as techs, Trick Clown comes to mind, or support decks that include monsters with these traits.

In addition they don't seem overpowering in the slightes, and their only power card is the Spell, which isn't searchable and requires grave setup.

 

Post-notes:

Yeah, seem you were aware of Blue-Eyes and Metaphys, and needless to say, they work well with the rest of the archetype, which admittedly I didn't take a look to until after reading the notes.

 

P.D. 2 questions:

From which CFV archetype you took the artworks?

On which cards is this set based on? I legitimately cannot tell xD

[Blake]

You don't have to know every card. You can critique based on what you know. But being spoon fed reasoning taints what you know. I'm not testing you. I'm looking for pure feedback. As soon as you tell someone the intent, many will throw aside the impact in favor of the designsr'sintent, and that needs to be avoided at all costs.

[Darj]

Ah, I was editing my post above to stay on topic but you replied before I was done. Please take a look above to read my thoughts xD

 

Anyway, I get what you mean with reviewers being biased after reading the intent, but I would say it's the task of the reviewer to not be biased or influenced by the notes and remain objective with his/her review but that's a different topic.

[Blake]

The card arts are from Kagero's Dragon Dancers or Perdition. Some Perdition Dancers to fit both.

 

These cards are based on, in order:

Synchron Exploerer (7/0 Lv. 2 with a revival effect)

Road (Lord) Synchron (8/16 Lv. 4 with a level 2 effect)

Armory Arm (12/18 Lv. 4 Synchro)

Stardust Charge Warrior (20/13 Lv. 6 Synchro that draws cards)

Apocalypse: N/A