Jump to content

Welcome to Yugioh Card Maker Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account

Benachu666

Benachu666

Member Since 19 Sep 2017
Member ID: 881,126
Currently Not online
Offline Last Active Jun 14 2018 02:33 AM
-----

In Topic: Test for a little concept for multiples: The Peculiar Clocktower [Written]

13 June 2018 - 08:28 AM

so final countdown FTK :). apart from that, cool card.


In Topic: transformation cards

30 April 2018 - 03:29 AM

I would say to use the Extra Deck for the Transformations but assuming your monsters have more than 1 transformation, and the average deck has 15-20 monsters, you'll be running atleast 15-25 transformations at any given time.

 

The Extra Deck has a 15 card limit

So a Transformation Deck with a 30 card limit should work out nicely.

 

The idea of the mechanic is that "Transforming" is NOT "Summoning". It's the same monster but with a different form.

 

Logic: Transformers and DBZ come to mind. Optimus Prime is a giant robot that turns into a Rig (Same character, different form). Saiyans from DBZ constantly go to new forms but their names don't change (again, same characters, different forms).

 

Now Pokemon and Digimon are a bit different in this. Pokemon: Charmander changes into Charmeleon, which changes the character. Digimon: Agumon changes into Greymon, which changes the character. This change, while technically not Summoning, does place a new monster on the field. Now with Pokemon, Destroying Charizard would also destroy Charmeleon and Charmander. With Digimon, Destroying Greymon will NOT destroy Agumon. Same with DBZ, Destroying SSJ Goku will not destroy the base. But with Transformers, Since the base is linked to the transformation, destroying Optimus Prime in his robot form will also destroy the transformation.

 

I like the idea of reversion because if your opponent destroys 1, they have to be able to launch a second attack to destroy the base. I hope my rant made enough sense on this subject.

 

i don't think that really classifies as a rant but anyway moving on. i can see the concerns with making the cards double back because it would be tedious in higher level tournaments (which i am guessing have really fast time keeping) when the player would have to pull the card out of the sleeve then put it back in to transform it. in the manger they actually have had monsters with this mechanic before so it would make sense that if yugioh would use this idea the company would go with the extra deck tho i still am a fan of the double back from magic the gathering. 

 

As for the digimon being in the second category i would have to say it belongs in the first as they with the dbz example you gave because they only have temporary transformations where if they are defeated the revert back to the normal form, the Optimus prime example would be another type of transformation as it is an interchangeable transformation which he can switch threw and does not revert back to its normal form after defeat. the fact is if optimus would be put into yugioh it wouldn't be based off this mechanic but more have effects active based on the battle position he was in :)

 

tho i guess i should keep on topic otherwise i will get into trouble from the admin. 


In Topic: transformation cards

29 April 2018 - 06:21 AM

I'm not going to review the cards themselves so I can look at your mechanic.

 

Alright, I have to say, the Transform mechanic is okay and an interesting idea (trigger summon evolution), but I have one question. The Transform form is on the back of the card. That causes... problems. That means people will be able to see the card you have while it's in the deck, the hand, etc. It also causes problems with face-down plays. I suggest replacing "transform this card" with "transform this card into "TF'd Version 2.0"" and placing the Transform cards in a separate pile, like a Transform Deck, and adding the pre-Transformed form as a sort of material requirement to the Transform card. Also, if you do this, it may be an idea to rework the Transform mechanics to do something with the used card. Maybe you can do this, using an example:

 

When "Danny Fenton" is Transformed into "Danny Phantom", place "Fenton" into the Transform Deck and move "Phantom" from the Transform Deck to the exact same position "Fenton" was at. You switch the exact places of the two cards. Then, when "Phantom" leaves the field, switch it back with "Fenton", returning "Phantom" to the Transform Deck and placing "Fenton" where "Phantom" would go.

 

OR: When Fenton is TF'd into Phantom, put Phantom on top of Fenton in the exact position Fenton is. When Fenton/Phantom leaves the field, move Phantom back to the TF Deck.

 

As it is now, the mechanic causes a lot of problems.

 

well the cards are there for examples because the forum rules require it but straight to the point. ''The Transform form is on the back of the card. That causes... problems.'' i did state that for this to work the player would have to be using non-clear back sleeves but another thing that happens in magic is the use of legal proxy card which has a normal backing and takes the place of the transformation card in the deck and and the transformation card is put aside until the time the proxy is played then the player puts the proxy aside and puts the real card into play. the issue i would have with having two separate cards is the obtaining of said cards threw booster packs or just in singles tho i guess yugioh has done that in the past so i can't validate that issue :)

 

Mechanically speaking, wouldn't it be easier to simply overlay the transformation on the base? Also, when the monster would be destroyed, you can just toss the transformation back into the transformation deck and that would be like reverting back to normal.

 

I like the revert back idea :) 


In Topic: poison type and poison points mechanic

23 April 2018 - 08:21 AM

yeh sorry about the wording in the effects tho thank you. i was thinking of all the types and wondered why there wasn't any type dealing with poison(tho i guess subtype could work as well) and i also got that idea from MTGs poison counter mechanic but i thought it would be better to make it points instead of counters. 

 

feel free to use it if ya want and it is possible to incorporate with other types :).


In Topic: Quick attack

23 April 2018 - 03:31 AM

a simple but interesting idea tho question. does it use that monsters attack for the turn?