Curicast

[SecondSeraphim]

So the general idea is that the monsters modify their abilities using the spells as fuel.

 

Curicastor Mage         LIGHT/Spellcaster LV 3            ATK: 1200 / DEF: 1000

Once per turn, during either player’s turn, you may target a monster the opponent controls; discard a “Curicasted” card and destroy that target. You may only activate this effect of Curicastor Mage” once per turn.

 

Curicastor Wizard       LIGHT/Spellcaster LV 3            ATK: 1200 / DEF: 1000

Once per turn, during either player’s turn, you may target a monster the opponent controls; discard a “Curicasted” card and banish that target. You may only activate this effect of Curicastor Wizard” once per turn.

 

Curicastor Magician   LIGHT/Spellcaster LV 3            ATK: 1200 / DEF: 1000

Once per turn, during either player’s turn, you may target a monster the opponent controls; discard a “Curicasted” card and return that target to the hand. You may only activate this effect of Curicastor Magician” once per turn.

 

Curicastor Warlock     LIGHT/Spellcaster LV 3            ATK: 1200 / DEF: 1000

Once per turn, during either player’s turn, you may target a monster the opponent controls; discard a “Curicasted” card and shuffle that target into the deck. You may only activate this effect of Curicastor Warlock” once per turn.

 

Curicastor Sorcerer     LIGHT/Spellcaster LV 3            ATK: 1200 / DEF: 1000

Once per turn, during either player’s turn, you may target a monster the opponent controls; discard a “Curicasted” card, also the ATK of that monster becomes 0 until the End Phase. You may only activate this effect of Curicastor Sorcerer” once per turn.

 

Curicasted Inferno                  Spell/Normal

If this card is discarded by the effect of a “Curicastor” monster that targeted an opponent’s monster; inflict damage to the opponent’s LP equal to the Original ATK of that targeted monster. While this card is in your GY, “Curicastor” monsters you control gain 100 ATK.

 

Curicasted Lifedrain                Spell/Normal

If this card is discarded by the effect of a “Curicastor” monster that targeted an opponent’s monster; gain LP equal to the original ATK of that targeted monster. While this card is in your GY, “Curicastor” monsters you control gain 100 ATK.

 

Curicasted Powerdrain           Spell/Normal

If this card is discarded by the effect of a “Curicastor” monster that targeted an opponent’s monster; one “Curicastor” monster you control gains ATK equal to the original ATK of that targeted monster. While this card is in your GY, “Curicastor” monsters you control gain 100 ATK.

 

Curicast University                          Spell/Field

Once per turn if you Normal or Special Summon a “Curicastor” monster you may add a “Curicasted” card from your deck to your hand. While you control this face-up card, or while this card is in your GY, “Curicastor” monsters you control gain 100 ATK.

 

Curicast Renewal                    Trap/Normal

Shuffle either 2 or 4 “Curicasted” cards from your GY into your deck, then for every 2 cards added to your deck draw 1 card, also “Curicastor” monsters you currently control gain 200 ATK x the number of added cards, until the end of the turn.

[Dova]

So, the monsters have several problems, the first being theming. They have the same Level, the same Type, the same Attribute, the same ATK and DEF, basically the same effect, and different variations on the same name. That's really, really boring. They have nothing differentiating themselves from one another other than what they do to the targeted monster, and don't have any extra effect that give them their own unique flavour. All that does is speak of lazyness, and I'm sure you're not that. Second problem: getting around monsters that cannot be targeted and Spell/Trap Cards. Third problem: Power. Shuffling into the Deck is one of the best forms of removal there is, and yet you have you both destroying and shuffling on basically the same type of card. Warlock is purely a better card than any other card in the archetype, with Wizard and Inferno being a little behind. There is no reason not to focus on Warlock. There is no reason to run Mage when you have literally every other means of removal at your disposal. There is nothing differentiating the cards from each other than some of them being better than others. None of them solves a problem the others don't, with the exception of all of them having better removal than Mage, and you have nothing there to help with consistency and speed. I really don't know what you were trying to do with the monsters.

 

As for the Normal Spells; I like the idea of cards being used in unusual ways. And this means of having Spells you can't activate is pretty interesting, but you don't do anything with it. These cards lack speed and consistency again, and the they lack a win condition. Again, non-targetable boss controlled by your opponent; wyd. I suggest a complete rework from the ground up, perhaps leaving the S/T, as none of the monsters have any redeemable qualities.

[~~~~]

This is a really interesting archetype, very creative indeed. I can imagine an engine focused around Wizard and Warlock with University and maybe Renewal.

 

Only problem I see is that the S/T and monsters are supported differently. Renewal should be able shuffle monsters as well as S/T. University should be able to search the monsters. And the monsters should be able to discard other monsters. You can easily remedy this by saying "Curicast" card instead of "Curicasted" card where appropriate.

 

Honestly Dova it doesn't matter that the cards are rather same-y or some of them aren't worth using. And it doesn't matter that target protection shits on them either. Take for example Paleozoics. They are all very similar not only to each other but for the most part to existing backrow as well. All of the removal targets so they have the same problem, yet the deck was made by konami and was meta for a while. Not saying that Curicast are on the same level but the problems you bring up just don't matter.

[Dova]

Honestly Dova it doesn't matter that the cards are rather same-y or some of them aren't worth using. And it doesn't matter that target protection shits on them either. Take for example Paleozoics. They are all very similar not only to each other but for the most part to existing backrow as well. All of the removal targets so they have the same problem, yet the deck was made by konami and was meta for a while. Not saying that Curicast are on the same level but the problems you bring up just don't matter.

 

My powercreep within the archetype points still stands. I admit the first one is just a flavour issue, but that's my opinion while reviewing it, and I still think it is a big issue. Burgess's similarity was an in archetype theme, and yes, they all had the same effect, but it was new for an archetype. It wasn't something we had seen before, and while the Normal Spells themselves are new...the effects on the monsters aren't. And this is ignoring the fact that each Burgess Trap had a different effect and use within the archetype, being useful in handling the many different aspects of keeping an archetype playable, AND they had Xyzs. You might as well compare it to Zoodiac. As for the targeting, yes, Burgess doesn't deal with that either, but they have Quick Effects to actually disrupt your opponent's plays, and do you know what made them meta? Toadally Awesome. This archetype doesn't have an equivalent; not even a Cat Shark. It's not a good comparison. 

 

Of course, sameyness isn't inherently bad. If you add that into your archetype's theming, then it might get you Summon. Again, in Burgess, you have the 1200 on your monsters adding up to produce the 2400 ATK/DEF on the Xyzs. But here, considering the complete lack of variation all round, it just seems boring. Again, just my opinion here. If the author chooses to keep it this way, that is entirely fair; this isn't something like a balanced effect.

 

I can't imagine an engine in its current state. The lack of speed, both inside and outside of the archetype, prevents you from SSing the monsters, and introducing another card to do just that introduces a 4th card into the engine, with only one of them being searchable. In a Predaplant engine, you brick if you open Cobra, but, you only need the one you are running at 3 to do it justice. This engine requires at least 2 cards in order to be useful, either the Field+Monster or Monster+Spell, and bricks if you open only 1 OR open Field+Spell. Again, new cards could help, but working with such a bad original set (even with effects like Warlock), that's why I'm making my suggestions. 

 

I also don't see where you are getting creative from. The mechanic of the two Normal Spells is there, but there's nothing else here to differentiate it, even in the other S/T. Said two Spells cards touch on something that might end up as a unique mechanic, but...it doesn't expand.

[SecondSeraphim]

I kind of agree with both of you. The basic "story" of the archetype is that these are all friends who went to the same magic school, but each focused on different topics of study; it's why each one can twist the same spell into different effects. These cards were actually created before I came up with my "Weave" archetype and could be considered a prototype. I just happened to find the file for them while cleaning my desktop and figured it wouldn't hurt to post. I agree that targeting is a major weakness but couldn't come up with a good way to word the spells to allow them to work without the monsters needing to target.

 

The monsters needing the spells is by design to fit the theme.

 

I see what you mean about Warlock being the best and Mage sucking. Maybe if I make Warlock into a boss monster requiring a tribute?

[Dova]

I kind of agree with both of you. The basic "story" of the archetype is that these are all friends who went to the same magic school, but each focused on different topics of study; it's why each one can twist the same spell into different effects. These cards were actually created before I came up with my "Weave" archetype and could be considered a prototype. I just happened to find the file for them while cleaning my desktop and figured it wouldn't hurt to post. I agree that targeting is a major weakness but couldn't come up with a good way to word the spells to allow them to work without the monsters needing to target.

 

The monsters needing the spells is by design to fit the theme.

 

I see what you mean about Warlock being the best and Mage sucking. Maybe if I make Warlock into a boss monster requiring a tribute?

 

That idea...is pretty cool, actually. Create a few more S/T cards that imply this by name, but University already sets it up. 

 

As for different areas of study; I see them all being at the same area of study; removal. There are other things you can do! Conjuration/Transportation for Summoning their friends from their Deck! Illusion to mess with your opponent and their plays! Protection in order to support the rest of your cards! You say they twist the same spell into different effects, and I can see how you want to modulate their effects just a little here and there to tie them into the one spell, but why not simply have the Spell as...well, the actual discarded Spell. "If this card is discarded for the effect of a "Curicast" monster;" and have said spell go off, but the monsters take it into other unique ways.

 

Of course, this is just my idea. I can understand you wanting to stick with slight variations of destruction, but it's difficult to give monsters with the same stats better/worse effects. I mentioned Warlock being bad, but banishing is almost always better than destruction, meaning Wizard is again a purely better card than Mage. I personally think you have set yourself too many restrictions, and it would be difficult to follow them all. For example, turning Warlock into a boss requiring Tributes means you lose some of that "similar college student" vibe you intended to have going on. Really, it's up to you as to how you want this to pan out.

[SecondSeraphim]

I'm definitely gonna see about rebuilding these guys from the ground up. You were very helpfull. Thanks.