dark_bakura Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Really Good.. Uria is actually in my summon special deck. The problem is' date=' Considering that card is actually a continous trap, It might be tributed in the event of summoning Uria. I have summoned Uria frequently. It's great, I would personally make it a continous magic anyway, 9/10[/quote'] if you play sevral uria in your deck... then when this card is destroyed by the first uria... it can boost the next uria's atk... thats why i made it continous trap.... and it suits uria more anyway... plz point out my errors for me so i can correct it......... and what you think that made it overpower???? "Corrected OCG" This card can only be activated while you control a face-up "Uria' date=' Lord of Searing Flames". While this card is face-up on the field, you can activate the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" during either players turn. The activation and effect of this card cannot be negated. This card cannot be destroyed by your opponent's card effects. When "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" is removed from your side of the field, destroy this card. "Spell cards that are destroyed by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" are negated"... You don't need to state that seeing as Uria negates the activation on any spells/traps in responce to it's effect, so this is just repeating it. Effect doesn't have a capital unless it's typed with Monster Effect. A few "d" and "ed" missing from words, plus it only said "When "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" is removed from your side, destroy this card"... It didn't say "from your side of the field". I think that's all. Overpower wise... Seeing as it helps Uria greatly but cannot be destroyed, and doesn't cost a thing to activate it. So basically your opponent won't have any spells/traps on the field and you can do this all for free. Personally I think it need's a cost, because the effect takes an already powerful effect, and makes it even more powerful.[/quote'] well i think that uria's effect only says that your opponent cannot activate cards in respond to uria's effect... i dont think it negates the effect.. anyways........ thank for pointing out alot of my mistakes....... appriciate it.. I thought about that last night. It's debatable that effect because if your opponent activates a spell/trap when you activate Uria's effect, well that as far as I'm concerned is in responce to Uria's effect. If you did want to put something like that in there, say "Your opponent cannot activate any Spell/Trap Cards targeted by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames"." OR "Negate the activation of Spell/Trap Cards targeted by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames"."... I think thats what you meant with what you said originally. what i ment is that when your opponent activates a spell, you can destroy with uria's effect and it negates the effect of the spell....... I thought that's what you meant! That's quite unique to be honest... this card allows you to chain an opponent's spell card with Uria's effect. Well seeing as it does this, the trap does need a downfall, just to balance it a bit more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantasy Dreamz Posted May 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Really Good.. Uria is actually in my summon special deck. The problem is' date=' Considering that card is actually a continous trap, It might be tributed in the event of summoning Uria. I have summoned Uria frequently. It's great, I would personally make it a continous magic anyway, 9/10[/quote'] if you play sevral uria in your deck... then when this card is destroyed by the first uria... it can boost the next uria's atk... thats why i made it continous trap.... and it suits uria more anyway... plz point out my errors for me so i can correct it......... and what you think that made it overpower???? "Corrected OCG" This card can only be activated while you control a face-up "Uria' date=' Lord of Searing Flames". While this card is face-up on the field, you can activate the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" during either players turn. The activation and effect of this card cannot be negated. This card cannot be destroyed by your opponent's card effects. When "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" is removed from your side of the field, destroy this card. "Spell cards that are destroyed by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" are negated"... You don't need to state that seeing as Uria negates the activation on any spells/traps in responce to it's effect, so this is just repeating it. Effect doesn't have a capital unless it's typed with Monster Effect. A few "d" and "ed" missing from words, plus it only said "When "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" is removed from your side, destroy this card"... It didn't say "from your side of the field". I think that's all. Overpower wise... Seeing as it helps Uria greatly but cannot be destroyed, and doesn't cost a thing to activate it. So basically your opponent won't have any spells/traps on the field and you can do this all for free. Personally I think it need's a cost, because the effect takes an already powerful effect, and makes it even more powerful.[/quote'] well i think that uria's effect only says that your opponent cannot activate cards in respond to uria's effect... i dont think it negates the effect.. anyways........ thank for pointing out alot of my mistakes....... appriciate it.. I thought about that last night. It's debatable that effect because if your opponent activates a spell/trap when you activate Uria's effect, well that as far as I'm concerned is in responce to Uria's effect. If you did want to put something like that in there, say "Your opponent cannot activate any Spell/Trap Cards targeted by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames"." OR "Negate the activation of Spell/Trap Cards targeted by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames"."... I think thats what you meant with what you said originally. what i ment is that when your opponent activates a spell, you can destroy with uria's effect and it negates the effect of the spell....... I thought that's what you meant! That's quite unique to be honest... this card allows you to chain an opponent's spell card with Uria's effect. Well seeing as it does this, the trap does need a downfall, just to balance it a bit more. thats what everyone says too......... but in my opinion.. its balance cuz uria is hard to summon......... and when uria is on the field, your opponent will definitly try to destroy it first.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_bakura Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Really Good.. Uria is actually in my summon special deck. The problem is' date=' Considering that card is actually a continous trap, It might be tributed in the event of summoning Uria. I have summoned Uria frequently. It's great, I would personally make it a continous magic anyway, 9/10[/quote'] if you play sevral uria in your deck... then when this card is destroyed by the first uria... it can boost the next uria's atk... thats why i made it continous trap.... and it suits uria more anyway... plz point out my errors for me so i can correct it......... and what you think that made it overpower???? "Corrected OCG" This card can only be activated while you control a face-up "Uria' date=' Lord of Searing Flames". While this card is face-up on the field, you can activate the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" during either players turn. The activation and effect of this card cannot be negated. This card cannot be destroyed by your opponent's card effects. When "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" is removed from your side of the field, destroy this card. "Spell cards that are destroyed by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" are negated"... You don't need to state that seeing as Uria negates the activation on any spells/traps in responce to it's effect, so this is just repeating it. Effect doesn't have a capital unless it's typed with Monster Effect. A few "d" and "ed" missing from words, plus it only said "When "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" is removed from your side, destroy this card"... It didn't say "from your side of the field". I think that's all. Overpower wise... Seeing as it helps Uria greatly but cannot be destroyed, and doesn't cost a thing to activate it. So basically your opponent won't have any spells/traps on the field and you can do this all for free. Personally I think it need's a cost, because the effect takes an already powerful effect, and makes it even more powerful.[/quote'] well i think that uria's effect only says that your opponent cannot activate cards in respond to uria's effect... i dont think it negates the effect.. anyways........ thank for pointing out alot of my mistakes....... appriciate it.. I thought about that last night. It's debatable that effect because if your opponent activates a spell/trap when you activate Uria's effect, well that as far as I'm concerned is in responce to Uria's effect. If you did want to put something like that in there, say "Your opponent cannot activate any Spell/Trap Cards targeted by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames"." OR "Negate the activation of Spell/Trap Cards targeted by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames"."... I think thats what you meant with what you said originally. what i ment is that when your opponent activates a spell, you can destroy with uria's effect and it negates the effect of the spell....... I thought that's what you meant! That's quite unique to be honest... this card allows you to chain an opponent's spell card with Uria's effect. Well seeing as it does this, the trap does need a downfall, just to balance it a bit more. thats what everyone says too......... but in my opinion.. its balance cuz uria is hard to summon......... and when uria is on the field, your opponent will definitly try to destroy it first.... Agreed, but then again, debatable. Uria is hard to summon, unless you have a deck based around it, (stupid I know, but with this card I think a Uria based deck would be a good idea). Personally I'd use Raviel (only because he's a fiend) but looking at this card again and what everyone has said I'd have to go with pretty balanced now as well. (Yes I admit, you've won :P) There have been some decent points given as to why it's overpowered and underpowered and in the end, it all seems balanced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantasy Dreamz Posted May 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Really Good.. Uria is actually in my summon special deck. The problem is' date=' Considering that card is actually a continous trap, It might be tributed in the event of summoning Uria. I have summoned Uria frequently. It's great, I would personally make it a continous magic anyway, 9/10[/quote'] if you play sevral uria in your deck... then when this card is destroyed by the first uria... it can boost the next uria's atk... thats why i made it continous trap.... and it suits uria more anyway... plz point out my errors for me so i can correct it......... and what you think that made it overpower???? "Corrected OCG" This card can only be activated while you control a face-up "Uria' date=' Lord of Searing Flames". While this card is face-up on the field, you can activate the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" during either players turn. The activation and effect of this card cannot be negated. This card cannot be destroyed by your opponent's card effects. When "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" is removed from your side of the field, destroy this card. "Spell cards that are destroyed by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" are negated"... You don't need to state that seeing as Uria negates the activation on any spells/traps in responce to it's effect, so this is just repeating it. Effect doesn't have a capital unless it's typed with Monster Effect. A few "d" and "ed" missing from words, plus it only said "When "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames" is removed from your side, destroy this card"... It didn't say "from your side of the field". I think that's all. Overpower wise... Seeing as it helps Uria greatly but cannot be destroyed, and doesn't cost a thing to activate it. So basically your opponent won't have any spells/traps on the field and you can do this all for free. Personally I think it need's a cost, because the effect takes an already powerful effect, and makes it even more powerful.[/quote'] well i think that uria's effect only says that your opponent cannot activate cards in respond to uria's effect... i dont think it negates the effect.. anyways........ thank for pointing out alot of my mistakes....... appriciate it.. I thought about that last night. It's debatable that effect because if your opponent activates a spell/trap when you activate Uria's effect, well that as far as I'm concerned is in responce to Uria's effect. If you did want to put something like that in there, say "Your opponent cannot activate any Spell/Trap Cards targeted by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames"." OR "Negate the activation of Spell/Trap Cards targeted by the effect of "Uria, Lord of Searing Flames"."... I think thats what you meant with what you said originally. what i ment is that when your opponent activates a spell, you can destroy with uria's effect and it negates the effect of the spell....... I thought that's what you meant! That's quite unique to be honest... this card allows you to chain an opponent's spell card with Uria's effect. Well seeing as it does this, the trap does need a downfall, just to balance it a bit more. thats what everyone says too......... but in my opinion.. its balance cuz uria is hard to summon......... and when uria is on the field, your opponent will definitly try to destroy it first.... Agreed, but then again, debatable. Uria is hard to summon, unless you have a deck based around it, (stupid I know, but with this card I think a Uria based deck would be a good idea). Personally I'd use Raviel (only because he's a fiend) but looking at this card again and what everyone has said I'd have to go with pretty balanced now as well. (Yes I admit, you've won :P) There have been some decent points given as to why it's overpowered and underpowered and in the end, it all seems balanced. hey thnx... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_bakura Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 I won't bother quoting... That's a lot of text lol You're very welcomed :) great card, and great debate over it, thoroughly enjoyed it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grayall Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Add some cost. ^_^Intresting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantasy Dreamz Posted May 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 as i debated earlier....... uria is already hard to summon... and the chace of having uria and this card on the field is very low..... so adding a cost to this card will only make it underpower.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indra Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 wow nice one 8/10 :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantasy Dreamz Posted May 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 thnx... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kizzi Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 as i debated earlier....... uria is already hard to summon... and the chace of having uria and this card on the field is very low..... so adding a cost to this card will only make it underpower....It's already underpowered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantasy Dreamz Posted May 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 i dont see how... can you tell me??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kizzi Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 @anime911:It's a very situational trap version of MST that only works every second turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantasy Dreamz Posted May 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 the effect of my trap says when a spell is destroyed by the effect of uria, it is negated........ and uria can activate its effect during either player's turn... basically you can jam 1 of your opponent's spell during thier turn.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kizzi Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 ...>_>It's a very situational trap version of MST that only works every second turn.Even with the anti-chain ability, it's not gonna be worth stopping with much anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantasy Dreamz Posted May 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 alright......... if you say so.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdt5038 Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Nice card. Great card really. The only thing i would add is "When this card is removed from the feild, Destroy Uria....., When Uria is removed from the feild destroy this card." Then the card wouldn't be Ultra Powered and will only be Super Powered. Kind of like Call of the Haunted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantasy Dreamz Posted June 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 its not hard to destroy uria these days........ so i dont think its overpower... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.