Jump to content



Member Since 31 Jan 2017
Offline Last Active Today, 12:42 PM

#7028278 AGM Archetype Design Contest #2! (Trap Phase)

Posted by .Belle on 08 August 2017 - 10:48 PM

I don't know if that was intentional but Delta Tri can equip Union monsters from the GY to it and it gets the Union effect, can’t it? I think it has to do with the “appropriate” clause, so that’s what I’m using to justify that my cards can get their equips despite not equipping the typical way. Upon further research Union Hanger also does this. Weird that I remembered Delta Tri before Union Hanger.

Exactly. I just wanted to clarify that monster that equip stuff (without appropriate clause) won't get the effects of Union monsters that affect their equipped monsters, which actually matters balance-wise.

#7018592 [Leaderboard] Season 16 Postseason (Match 1-1)

Posted by .Belle on 25 June 2017 - 01:32 AM

(I never noticed that there was no other Thunder Mosters that were XYZ, wowzers...)

To start, bit sad that they are both generic XYZ's in regards to the whole R4 2 N/S Mats, but I won't hold it against the cards. Would have just been a bit more interesting. Anyway, to each individual card:

Card A:
The first part of the effect is really cool, with a cascade-style of play (have X on the field, then drop this guy, then drop another card, then drop ANOTHER card if you haven't played one normally etc. etc.). It would allow some of the slower decks to catch up just by controlling one guy, sort of a nexus if you will, and it would be a great asset to the "hunder" archetype. The second effect is weirdly generic, I didn't realise that you could destroy something and it not go to the GY, but then again some can negate their own "destruction", so it is nice to have the backup. Fluff-wise, I don't see how this fits the archetype it is part of (not a family-related name), but I can let that slide.
ATK/DEF seems to be generically average for R4, if on the lower side in some cases. No protection, but that's not what the card is designed around. Honestly, I could see it being used in play even outside of a "hunder" deck.

Card B:
First off, the name doesn't link into the Diva side of things (at lease, not that I can find), but that's a nit-pick if I ever made one, so disregard that.
Powerful first effect, giving extra attack to make it match up to the upper-scale of the R4s, even some of the lower R5s, and giving it much more protection from battle and from targeted effects/removal/lock-down. The second effect is quite utility, and can be a bit useless if the effects it is blocking are either Summoning other stuff (since even though you can use it during either player's turns in a Thunder deck, it isn't a Quick Effect as stated), or are cards that also have the target blocking abilities. That said, being able to negate key components of a deck is quite useful, and as it doesn't have a cap-off point as to when it can get its effects back, it becomes rather strong.
This card is one that I can see being used regularly, as it is very strong. I do feel as if it is a bit too strong for the requirements of 2 N/S Lv4 Mats, maybe upping it to 3 to make it fairer, but still a very decent card, and completely different from the first card.

This is difficult. Both cards are commendable in their execution, and both card makers should be pleased. They each perform a different role, with the first being an engine, and the second being more of a mini-me boss monster. The question is, which one fits better into a Thunder deck, since I can see both being used outside of it. And, unfortunately for Card B, Card A has it beat here. It is designed around a deck type, and as such isn't a generic mini-boss.

As such, my final vote goes to "Powhunder" (Card A)

(Side note: N/S here is for "Non Specific")

Hmm.. the vote is good for the most part. However, I believe there is a misunderstanding regarding the bolded part. Based on Card B's wording, I believe its creator wanted the effect to be quick effect, similar to SQ Xyzs, and that little difference would affect the card's performance a lot. So I think I'll have to reject the vote for now. Once that specific issue was addressed, the vote will be gladly accepted.

#7014690 Ivory Dancer

Posted by .Belle on 09 June 2017 - 12:45 PM


PE: If a card(s) is sent to your GY, except after being activated: You can destroy this card, and if you do, add 1 of those cards from your Graveyard to your hand. During the End Phase of the turn this card is activated: You can draw 1 card. You can only use this effect of "Ivory Dancer" once per turn.

ME: Cannot be used as a Synchro Material, except for the Summon of a LIGHT Synchro Monster. When this card is Normal Summoned: You can target 1 card in your GY; add it to your hand. You cannot Special Summon monsters during the turn you activate this effect, except Synchro Monsters. If this card would be used as a Synchro Material, you can also use 1 other monster in your hand as Synchro Materials, but banish this card when it leaves the field.

An improved version of the card I used in my latest 1v1 contest. Ivory Dancer is a Pendulum Tuner that more than one deck can viably tech, much like Eccentric Archfiend or OEPD. As a scale, she can recover anything sent to the GY and provide a slow draw that help maintain card advantage. As a monster, she can recover any single card from your GY at a cost of no SS unless your field or hand is well prepared for the Synchro Summon, through the latter will get her banished and waste her Pendulum Tuner body. When I made the card, I overlooked the facts that her Pendulum effect can grab powerful Normal S/T like Raigeki or ROTA, and that she is essentially a recurring Tuner without any drawbacks, so I added restrictions accordingly.

#7012819 [Leaderboard] Dragon Sage vs Belle

Posted by .Belle on 31 May 2017 - 09:29 PM

I'm up for it.

#6997099 [Finished]Catman's Cardmaker Challenge #2

Posted by .Belle on 05 April 2017 - 02:36 PM


#6996129 [Finished]Catman's Cardmaker Challenge #2

Posted by .Belle on 02 April 2017 - 06:31 PM

Count me in.

#6989705 [Finished]VCCR_1: Rival Rumble [FINISHED]

Posted by .Belle on 17 March 2017 - 07:20 PM

I'm in!



#6981786 [Finished]Buddy Cards!

Posted by .Belle on 17 February 2017 - 11:03 AM


#6981775 [Finished][SCS 12] Legend of 8 / CC Monthly Series (Feb 2017) [JUDGING]

Posted by .Belle on 17 February 2017 - 10:31 AM


#6981295 Reverie Archetype (14/14)

Posted by .Belle on 15 February 2017 - 11:58 PM

Bump. More reviews would be nice _/\_

#6980171 [Finished][SCS 12] Legend of 8 / CC Monthly Series (Feb 2017) [JUDGING]

Posted by .Belle on 12 February 2017 - 06:29 AM

Definitely joining this!

#6979877 Reverie Archetype (14/14)

Posted by .Belle on 11 February 2017 - 03:16 AM

Bump. Again, make sure to check out the changelog!

#6977708 Reverie Archetype (14/14)

Posted by .Belle on 03 February 2017 - 11:46 PM

Spent yesterday evening and the entire night farming Pegasus event on duel link, so guess I'll let the poor soul rest a bit (his or mine? idek...) and be a responsible cardmaker.

Okay, so aside from the spells and the maindeck monster's self summons, there are still a couple mechanics that will need fixing to accommodate a face-down banished state.


For starters, the synchro's ability to summon using face-down archetypical materials, at the moment with its current wording, would not work because of public knowledge (face-down banished cards are technically not part of any archetype) and that shuffling banished cards back into the deck does not reveal them. In terms of mechanics, this wouldn't fly in a real-world scenario because of the ease of chets. To accommodate, you would need to do a similar thing to the spells and have them flipped face-up. Even then, I'm not sure this would work very well in terms of wording; you'll need to bring it forth to people that are going to be much more well-versed in this sort of thing. As Terrie said, cards like Samurai do work (my mistake) with how they're worded; they simply state face-down banished cards.


As well, again, the mechanic of the monsters changing attribute when being face-down banished still doesn't work very well (having changed characteristics while being banished face-down is a mechanical nightmare) and would work better if simply it just changed attribute when banished.


Finally, regarding keeping the mechanic, there's a saying among writers of "being willing to murder your darlings". Simply put, this means that when it comes to revising or receiving criticism, nothing is off the table to be changed. Any and every aspect is just as viable as the next to be modified. That said, it doesn't mean you need to change to simply banished face-up, although I maintain the opinion that doing so wouldn't change anything with how your archetype plays and would be much simpler in terms of rulings and mechanics.


Which is the thing: With any mechanic you've given an archetype, if there's another way to do it that accomplishes just as much but in much simpler terms, then something needs to be changed. Either you should go to the simpler method, or you should give your archetype a reason it has to do things the way it does. Right now, this archetype doesn't use face-down banishment to any degree more than simply banishing cards normally accomplishes. As well, as great as flavor should be, it shouldn't trump gameplay when it comes to designing how an archetype works and plays out (at least when it comes to Advanced Custom Cards here).




So to sum this up in a neater package for what I'm suggesting:

- Review the card's effects if you're going to stick with face-down banished cards; work towards having no holes in how they work and that the wording/effects are airtight as far as modern rulings/mechanics go.

- Review the use of face-down banishment as a mechanic; give it a reason that it's used that no other mechanic can fulfill. There's territory to be tread here with this mechanic, and doing so will really open up the archetype to set itself apart from others that simply just banish.

Let me response to this about balance and gameplay design first. Aside from flavor, the reason I use banished face-down as a concept is to, as you said, create something that set itself apart from others aka unique (well, as of now it's not easy to be absolutely unique, but this is the closest I got). And about balance, while they currently exploiting Desires, banished face-up cards in general would be abusable by many many other things (Sarco+Necroface and many other cards can banish multiple cards at once, not to mention ability to recycle any banished cards at will.) Hope this meet ur 2nd suggestion


As for the 1st, I've done some research. It seems I was wrong about some concepts, so I edited Twilight and Cosmo and changed their dual attributes to simply apply when they're banished, aka whenever revealed. Also Twilight now have a clear text clarifying how it have to reveal its mats b4 shuffling. Thanks for pointing that out guys.


Ooh, more Face-Down Banished stuff, huzzah! First off, I've got an Archetype that does that too, Stormfront, you should look it up because you might find stuff you like. Now for a couple of the cards.

To begin, the cards will be better to understand if you change "Special Summon this card that was Banished Face-Down" to "Special Summon this Face-Down Banished card"

Reverie Twilight can still be summoned using Face-Down Banished Archetype-specific materials, however you will need to add a clause stating that the cards need to be revealed BEFORE they are shuffled into the Deck to prevent cheating as they're not public knowledge and therefore you could honestly be shuffling your Pot of Desires and Allure of Darkness or some other such thing and they wouldn't be able to tell, so if you want to keep being able to use Face-Down Banished Reverie cards, you will need to state you'll have to reveal them before you Synchro - I'd write it "You may reveal and use Face-Down Banished "Reverie" Monsters as part of the Synchro Summon of this card by shuffling them into the Deck." but have the other people here check me to be certain that's the best way to word it.

Reverie Moment has a difficulty: you're Banishing a Reverie Monster Face-Up, and you control an opponent's Monster as long as the Reverie Monster remains Banished, but every Reverie Monster you have automatically flips itself Face-Down if it's Banished, meaning it's no longer public knowledge and you are therefore no longer able to determine if it's still Banished for the effect of Moment. In other words, you need to either change Moment's effect or make the Reverie Monsters have some sort of clause allowing them to be Banished Face-Up - I would just add "While this card is Face-Up in your Banished cards: You may change it to be Banished Face-Down." or some other such thing.

I've checked about this before for some of my cards, and unfortunately Face-Down Banished cards have no characteristics besides being Banished - no Type, no Attribute, no ATK/DEF, not even a Set Number or 8-Digit Password as if that mattered…maybe I'll make cards that do that someday…anyways, you can't change ANYTHING about a card while it's Banished Face-Down, so that part of Cosmo isn't possible. It would be super cool, but yeah, it doesn't work, sorry.

Thanks for pointing out my mistakes. I'll definitely take a look at your archetype. As for wording, I dont know if this is only myself, but I find the term "face-down banished card" sounds... weird. While shorter, it doesnt sound like something that would have been used on official card texts. Therefore, I'll be keeping my wording for now, but should more ppl disagree with me I'm willing to change.


Also, some balance changes were made due to DP's feedback, make sure to check them out in changelog!

#6977139 Reverie Archetype (14/14)

Posted by .Belle on 02 February 2017 - 03:12 AM

Hi folks, this will be my first archetype posted here, all comments appreciated!





Extra Deck