Arcane Wonders Forum

Mage Wars => Creative => Custom Cards => Topic started by: ACG on October 11, 2013, 03:44:29 PM

Title: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 11, 2013, 03:44:29 PM
Edit: Below is a list of all cards I have currently made, as of 13 Feb 2014:

(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=2) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=3) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_4.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=4) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_5.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=5) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_6.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=6) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_7.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=7) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_8.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=8) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_9.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=9) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_10.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=10) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_11.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=11) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_12.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=12) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_13.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=13) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_14.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=14) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_15.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=15) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_16.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=16) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_17.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=17) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_18.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=18) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_19.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=19) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_20.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=20) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_21.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=21) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_22.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=22) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_23.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=23) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_24.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=24) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_25.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=25) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_26.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=26) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_27.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=27) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_28.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=28) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_29.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=29) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_30.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=30) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_31.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=31) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_32.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=32) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_33.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=33) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_34.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=34) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_35.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=35) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_36.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=36) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_37.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=37) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_38.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=38) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_39.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=39) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_40.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=40) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_41.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=41) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_42.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=42) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_43.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=43) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_44.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=44) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_45.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=45) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_46.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=46) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_47.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=47) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_48.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=48) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_49.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=49) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_50.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=50) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_51.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=51) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_52.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=52) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_53.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=53) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_54.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=54) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_55.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=55) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_56.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=56) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_57.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=57) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_58.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=58) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_59.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=59) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_60.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=60) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_61.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=61) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_62.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=62) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_63.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=63) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_64.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=64) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_65.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=65) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_66.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=66) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_67.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=67) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_68.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=68) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_69.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=69) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_70.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=70) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_71.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=71) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_72.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=72) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_73.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=73) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_74.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=74) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_75.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=75) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_76.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=76) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_77.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=77) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_78.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=78) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_79.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=79) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_80.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=80) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_81.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=81) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_82.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=82) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_83.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=83) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_84.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=84) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_85.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=85) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_86.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=86) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_87.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=87) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_88.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=88) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_89.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=89) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_90.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=90) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_91.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=91) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_92.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=92) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_93.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=93) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_94.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=94) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_95.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=95) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_96.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=96) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_97.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=97) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_98.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=98) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_99.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=99) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/dc7f171f29729a88b46d_100.jpg) (http://www.use.com/dc7f171f29729a88b46d?p=100)(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/60ed10837d808c474d04.jpg) (http://www.use.com/60ed10837d808c474d04)

Update 1 March 2014:

(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8?p=2) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8_3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8?p=3) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8_4.jpg) (http://www.use.com/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8?p=4) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8_5.jpg) (http://www.use.com/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8?p=5)

Update 8 Mar 2014:
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=2) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=3) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_4.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=4) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_5.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=5) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_6.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=6) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_7.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=7)

Update 23 May 2014:
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=2) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=3) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_4.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=4) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_5.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=5) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_6.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=6)

Update 19 Oct 2014

(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/289beff748da348f9f78_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/289beff748da348f9f78?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/289beff748da348f9f78_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/289beff748da348f9f78?p=2) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/289beff748da348f9f78_3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/289beff748da348f9f78?p=3) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/289beff748da348f9f78_4.jpg) (http://www.use.com/289beff748da348f9f78?p=4) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/289beff748da348f9f78_5.jpg) (http://www.use.com/289beff748da348f9f78?p=5) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/289beff748da348f9f78_6.jpg) (http://www.use.com/289beff748da348f9f78?p=6) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/289beff748da348f9f78_7.jpg) (http://www.use.com/289beff748da348f9f78?p=7) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/289beff748da348f9f78_8.jpg) (http://www.use.com/289beff748da348f9f78?p=8)

I am always open to feedback and suggestions. The cards are stored in JPG format with images twice the size (and the same dimensions) as standard cards, so they should be relatively easy to print out and try for anybody who feels like testing them. I will be slowly adding more cards over time.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 12, 2013, 09:21:11 AM
Wow!

Foldspace Rift. I love this Arcane teleport wall. Having it usable by either player follows the rule of every wall that it can be a double edged sword. The fact it does nothing without a second wall in play justifies its low cost. I would make it "Does Not Block LOS" (unclear) as then it has no function as a LOS blocker (a Fog Bank needs its purpose). As it is discretionary, I see it has no Passage Attack symbol. My only quibble is the Dune / Star Trek name reference: I think thematically as a fantasy game you would need to call it something like "Teleportal" or "Mordok's Portal" to make it more world-specific.

Reanimate Flesh. This is a lovely idea but it seems too cheap. For less mana than Heal's 8 dice, I know I can heal exactly 9 damage from my Elite or myself. Although the 0-0 range hurts. I like how the specific order means you can't use it at less than 4 life. I think a variant spell which uses your concept of giving Dark direct heal but at a steep price would be "Temporary Revival. Cost X mana where X = total damage on target. Heal all damage on target, replace with X/3 (round up) Rot markers" and also change target to a Living non-Mage Creature. This would make it an interesting two-way spell (like Negate) that forces you to heal any target non-Mage creature to full health but infects them with Rot instead. This follows the Warlock's "killing you slowly and painfully" style. For your spell, maybe reduce it to 9 healing, Dark 2 and remove the "Friendly"?

Akiro's Battle Manual. This is just awesome. The name, the card parameters, everything. I hope the designers like this and will send you something to use this idea. A shame it is not synergetic with Horn but maybe because Battle Orders is so weak, we give up on Horn for a future variant Warlord. I love this card, being able to get those double action flip flops is great. Like Mordok's Tome, this adds such a clever unquantifiable extra benefit.

What great ideas. Post the rest here?
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ringkichard on October 12, 2013, 09:38:54 AM
Does Battle Manual break the game? Control of the initiative determines who gets to do what in what order during the upkeep. For example, the player with initiative gets to decide who gets to use Battle Manual first.

Might work better as a ready marker ability, though that's kinda klunky.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 12, 2013, 10:00:34 AM
He made the Tome Legendary to avoid that exact issue.

It's about leveraging the burst sequence: "last Action > last Final QC > first Early QC > (opponent's Early QC) > first Action"

In a battle of equal activation markers, the burst opportunity alternates. Obviously extra activation markers then give you overlap (a Warlord plays Horde), denying the opponent this burst "opportunity window".

However, this Tome allows you to pay 2 for that burst. If you don't pay 2, then the opponent finally gets his delayed Initiative. It doesn't steal Initiative but skips it. You need to pay 2 every turn to keep Initiative. And it can be simply Dissolved. Sometimes, you need a set-up round of being off-initiative to pull off burst attacks. If opponent tries a combination Teleport trick across rounds on your distant Warlord, this stops that nonsense.

I have thought about a similar concept for Forcemaster: "Amulet of Patience: you may pass actions anytime". To allow the Forcemaster to leverage her skirmisher tactics pop-in acting last then pop-out next round. It also tries to make Invisible Stalker a threat as opponent will generally have more creatures than Forcemaster.

I think this Tome is subtly strong (like Mordok's Tome) but not broken. But may be wrong. Something to add to your Warlord thread, ring?
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ringkichard on October 12, 2013, 10:14:50 AM
It's nifty, no doubt about that! (I also really like your amulet of patience)

I'm just imagining potential rules nightmares. Like, I have Initiative and  there are multiple "Start of Upkeep" effects. Their order is determined by the player with initiative, but that player can change half way through the order?

Maybe if it occurred during channeling instead of upkeep. "may choose to channel 2 less this round and immediately gains the initiative."
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 12, 2013, 10:18:01 AM
It's nifty, no doubt about that! (I also really like your amulet of patience)

I'm just imagining potential rules nightmares. Like, I have Initiative and  there are multiple "Start of Upkeep" effects. Their order is determined by the player with initiative, but that player can change half way through the order?

Maybe if it occurred during channeling instead of upkeep. "may choose to channel 2 less this round and immediately gains the initiative."

Good point! Yes, your wording is superior.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: wtcannonjr on October 12, 2013, 10:23:10 AM
It's nifty, no doubt about that! (I also really like your amulet of patience)

I'm just imagining potential rules nightmares. Like, I have Initiative and  there are multiple "Start of Upkeep" effects. Their order is determined by the player with initiative, but that player can change half way through the order?

Maybe if it occurred during channeling instead of upkeep. "may choose to channel 2 less this round and immediately gains the initiative."

Current rules, as stated above, cover this. The mage with initiative at the Start of the Round or Phase decides order of spell effects. This would allow the player without the tome if they held initiative at the start of the Upkeep Phase to sequence things in their favor before the tome effect takes place.

Doesn't seem a problem here.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ringkichard on October 12, 2013, 10:29:20 AM
There's a bit of an arms race issue, though. It works for now because no other card has an effect during channeling, but one day there might be another, and then the problem comes back again. This would have to be the only card ever to trigger this way. Which might be ok, but its a big commitment of design space.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ringkichard on October 12, 2013, 10:35:39 AM
wtcannon, often upkeep actions will trigger other actions: a burn damage will kill a creature, and then that death triggers Rise Again, or upkeep isn't paid and then an enchantment falls off, and then something else happens and so on.

You can't just determine the order at the top of the round, you have to adjudicate after each effect.

I'm not saying that I can prove it doesn't work, just that it makes me nervous.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: wtcannonjr on October 12, 2013, 10:37:49 AM
There's a bit of an arms race issue, though. It works for now because no other card has an effect during channeling, but one day there might be another, and then the problem comes back again. This would have to be the only card ever to trigger this way. Which might be ok, but its a big commitment of design space.

Understood.

For me it is an open system design which I enjoy. The game system has more potential to model complex reality compared with a closed system.

However, as you point out, this aspect of the design does create added complexity in testing as new elements are added.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 12, 2013, 10:39:27 AM
Quote
What great ideas. Post the rest here?

Sure, I can do that. It will probably take up a lot of space on the page, though. The reason I linked to BGG is so that I could just update there and not have an endless list of cards here. I guess maybe the best way to do things is to leave a "database" of cards in the thread on BGG, and post new ones in this thread. With that in mind, here are the rest that I have at the moment:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1796169_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1798448_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1798306_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1796975_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1799330_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1798673_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1798657_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1796978_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1797286_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1799208_md.jpg)

Blink X - teleport the target of this attack to a zone of your choice, up to X zones away)

Quote
Foldspace Rift. I love this Arcane teleport wall. Having it usable by either player follows the rule of every wall that it can be a double edged sword. The fact it does nothing without a second wall in play justifies its low cost. I would make it "Does Not Block LOS" (unclear) as then it has no function as a LOS blocker (a Fog Bank needs its purpose). As it is discretionary, I see it has no Passage Attack symbol. My only quibble is the Dune / Star Trek name reference: I think thematically as a fantasy game you would need to call it something like "Teleportal" or "Mordok's Portal" to make it more world-specific.

Thanks for the advice; you're quite right on the LOS issue - I'll change that. I'll think about a new name.

Quote
Reanimate Flesh. This is a lovely idea but seems too cheap. For less mana than Heal's 8 dice, I know I can heal exactly 9 damage from my Elite or myself. I like how the specific order means you can't use it at less than 3 life. Although the 0-0 range hurts. I think a variant spell which uses your concept of giving Dark direct healing but at a steep price would be "Price of Beauty. Cost X mana where X = total damage on target. Remove all damage on target, replace with X/3 (round up) Rot markers". Change target to any Living Non-Mage Creature. This would make it an interesting two-way spell (like Negate) that forces you to heal any target non-Mage creature to full health but infects them with Rot instead. This follows the Warlock's "killing you slowly and painfully" style.

Yes, still balancing this one. Pricing these cards is difficult without playtesting.

Regarding the timing on Battle Manual: I worded it that way for simplicity. I initially intended for it to occur during  the initiative phase (During initiative, mage may pay 2 mana to take the initiative token regardless of which player held it in the previous round) but this seemed more elegant. If the timing is an issue, I am sure a better wording can be found.

Thanks for all the feedback so far.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: sIKE on October 12, 2013, 12:31:48 PM
Might change it to the beginning of the Actions Phase, this would avoid any Ready Stage issues and only effecting Actions.

My question, is does this card steal the opponents initiative, meaning I would have three rounds in a row with initiative or does it flip my opponents next initiative with mine that would follow his/hers?
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: jacksmack on October 12, 2013, 12:34:51 PM
Absolutely great ideas.

Very original and well thought up.

I would never use cards like this, just like i dont play promos.

BUT!!! i love how you made the cards printable, so for people who dont care about promos / no promos they can actually use them.

I very much hope that your ideas get noted by AW because they really bring something new and interesting to the table.


@ Ringkichard
i still think the wall servers a purpose with actually BLOCKING LOS.
such as: Block the enemys archer while your creatures can walk through it to melee it down.

edit:
sry wasnt you ring.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ringkichard on October 12, 2013, 04:40:04 PM
I don't think I commented on the LOS of the wall.

Bottle is fun, though! Potentially quite strong, actually.

Also, you've got a talent for funny flavor text.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 13, 2013, 06:42:30 AM
Quote
@ Ringkichard
i still think the wall servers a purpose with actually BLOCKING LOS.
such as: Block the enemys archer while your creatures can walk through it to melee it down.

Actually, it was Deckbuilder that commented on LoS. The main point was that Fog Bank costs the same and has less utility. I have corrected this issue, along with renaming the card; here is the updated version:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1799854_md.jpg)

Quote
My question, is does this card steal the opponents initiative, meaning I would have three rounds in a row with initiative or does it flip my opponents next initiative with mine that would follow his/hers?

The intent of the card is to allow a player to take the initiative pretty much whenever they like. If they want to hog it for 10 rounds in a row and are willing to expend the mana, they may do that. Of course, they should probably expect a dissolve headed their way.

Quote
Also, you've got a talent for funny flavor text.
Thanks!

Here is the latest card: Simulacrum. Thematically, the idea is that it is a construct that thinks it is a person. Thanks to its link with its creator's mind, it can cast any spell. Unfortunately, every round it becomes more "independent" (which translates into +upkeep,+channeling, which effectively steals mana from its controller), so eventually it will have to be put down.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1799855_md.jpg)

(I considered giving it lifebond, but that seemed like too much. Maybe for another creature.)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 13, 2013, 11:46:03 AM
This shows outstanding creativity, ACG. Here's my feedback on the rest.

Dreamcatcher. Nice title and idea but I don't think it will see competitive play, even with Lotus. Problem is Sleep is psychic so situational, Idol of Pestilence hurts Sleep etc. Situational augmenting benefits are always suspect as they are "win more". If you have Sleep on so many enemies, you don't need the extra Channelling. It may be useful in some niche match-ups where both players use Sleep effects. Also, what is the Dreamcatcher? Why is it flammable? Keeping to the card title, the Forcemaster really needs extra creature actions to time her attacks so I think this card will be very useful if it said "Zone Exclusive. Unique. You control all opponent's creatures with Sleep markers instead of that opponent". I appreciate Nightmare below is "in the same set" but +X Channelling is a bit vanilla in comparison.

Phase Barrier. I'm having trouble visualising what this Burnproof Acid Immune Force barrier is. Preventing damage out-of-turn during Damage and Effects step breaks the structure of the game (not even enchantments can do this). I also think you could create something more unique than a simple physical Force Wall by making it an Illusion. "Phantasmal Veil: Illusion Wall. Mind 1. Cost 4. No Access. No LOS. Extendable. Incorporeal. 1 Life. Once per round, before a friendly Action phase, Phantasmal Veil may lose its No Access and No LOS traits until the end of that round. Flip its Ready marker to Used to indicate this use." This retains your one-way accessibility concept whilst retaining the game adherence (so far) that walls apply to all players (here you only control when you open the wall to everyone).

I have considered a hard counter enchantment: "Counter Spell, Arcane 1, cost 2+X, reveal to counter attack spell or incantation of printed cost X targeting only this object". I also considered the hypothetical Endow keyword: "Pay 2 mana once before Damage and Effects to gain either 1 extra die or +2 on the effect die for that attack". Or alternatively the Stalwart keyword: "Pay 2 mana once before Avoid Attacks to gain either +2 armour or +2 on your defence roll for that attack". These are all uses of mana as temporary buffs or as a straight counter (with a 2 mana premium). The problem with phase barrier's mechanic is that it pumps life upon seeing an opponent's dice roll. There's currently no window for this, even enchantments can only be triggered between attack steps, not during. I also suspect the designers do not want to turn the game into an economic efficiency-based Eurogame where mana is the bidding currency for temporary benefits.

Green Slime. Nice idea of a self-replicating weenie! I think it's bit too weak a threat. For those stats, I'd add Flame +2 (traditionally use fire vs. Green Slime), Poison Attack (only affects living), Rot 11+ Devour (it turned you into Green Slime) and text: "Can only cast Green Slime spells. Cantrip while no other Green Slime is in its zone. Gain +1 attack for each adjacent zone with a friendly Green Slime. If Green Slime Devours a creature, it gains a Growth token" (Innate Life trumps Nonliving Finite Life). You differentiate it from Jelly (Jelly is acidic, Slime is more limited poison), encourage it to spread out across the arena and it can be vicious (6 dice Rot 7+ if victim is teleported into the centre of a 5 zone cross of 5 Slime). This may seem powerful but is so slow to set up and as Slow Full Action Attack, they are a specialist threat. This is why Jelly is so good as its utility is crippled by Slow Nonliving Full Action Attack.

Nightmare. Another really nice idea but I think this is too powerful as is. Firstly it needs Nonliving and all Incorporeal creatures so far have Upkeep +1. I also don't think it needs its "does not wake target" text. Attack on Sleeper is 3 dice critical with Sleep 7+ so has 50% chance of waking target (far more exciting). I'd add text "Mages suffer Daze instead of Sleep". Fast Flying makes it too much a creature assassin so I'd lose both, instead add text "when activated, pay 1 to teleport to any zone with a Sleep marker" as it interacts with any mage's Sleep effects. I like hybrid schools. I often feel mage books build themselves because spells are mainly in 1 school, like playing mono-colour in Magic, except you have to splash for essentials. However hybrid makes a card more expensive usually (Lord of Fire fits Warlock training perfectly). I always felt Bridge Trolls should have been just Nature 1 War 1 to be more played. So after nerfing the card above, I'd probably reduce it to Mind 1 Dark 1 (so costs Mind or Dark mages 3 points, rest 4 points).

I always wished the Forcemaster had this level 1 Mind creature: "Mind Worm: pest, psychic quick action melee attack 0 dice no damage unavoidable Taint 4+". This has your same idea of feeding on Sleeping victims without waking them while also potentially useful against other living creatures including mages,

Shadow. Yet another clever idea, using the Guard marker as a Banish 1 round (an Invisible guard cannot guard) to pump a Fast Elusive strike. It's like the "every other turn" more powerful attack of monster strikers in D&D 4E. I've only a few minor quibbles. It needs Nonliving, all Incorporeal creatures so far have Upkeep +1, the D&D Shadow sapped strength so Weak 9+ makes sense, Devour as D&D Shadows permanently killed victims and Light +2 extra vulnerability. I would consider the extra text "when Shadow devours a living creature, you may pay mana = 9 minus the creature level devoured to summon another Shadow in its zone from your spellbook". This creates the "devour to multiply" mechanic in line with our D&D expectations. Shadow is a Spirit cousin of Gray Wraith, just more of a pouncing assassin.

Spatial Disjunction. Lovely idea, all smoke and mirrors, no damage, befitting an arcane trickster. However, it is far too powerful. No need to create a Blink keyword, just replace with Push (lower cost to 2+4 magebind 2). Explaining why Blink teleport 2 is too powerful is another subject altogether. Make it a random direction like Repulse. Call it a "Circle of Repulsion" or similar instead. I really love the flavour text!

Haunted. I like all the concepts behind it, the creature paying for that murder by being harassed by spirits with haste. Obviously it needs Spirit support (like Shadow, Nightmare etc). It can be used with friendly creatures to create a walking spawnpoint like the Tome (except a cantrip crucially) and Warlock can collect both it (cantrip) and another curse via curseweaving. No quibbles here, just needs Spirit support, perhaps for any future Witch.

Murkh's Belt. I've long advocated a similar upkeep enchantments mechanic to encourage the Warlord to use Commands, not persistent enchantments. This is a far better idea than my over-powerful Epic conjuration. I think you overpriced it, 6 cost and War 2 would be fine for an in-zone only effect. The Warlord needs all the help he can get.

Rally. Yet another improvement on a mechanic I proposed (mine was an Epic enchantment like Divine Intervention to teleport any creature to Warlord's side, adding a Guard marker on it). I like how LOS is not needed as this encourages Warlord to use earth walls. This is really powerful so must be a full action, not a QC. It's so powerful that I would add "No more than 1 creature from each zone" so as to encourage prior territory gain. Also, as an Epic spell, I would call it something more grandiose like "Summon the Horde!" Nice spell if nerfed slightly!

Magic Bottle. Nice idea (as always). However, creating this quick cast summon mechanic may "let the genie out of the bottle" so to speak. I am not comfortable with this as it could make future creatures with coming into play effects too powerful if summoned via a quick action. However, you are spending a quick action preparing it (or Battle Forge) so it is a combo prep for action burst mechanic, like Enchantment Transfusion. So maybe it would do the game good to have more combo enablers. Out of all your ideas, this has the greatest possibility for abuse. I'm comfortable with potions not using up an item slot (the "only one" rule prevents abuse). I'm not so comfortable that dissolving it after it has 3 mana can trigger its summon. I would nerf the text to "You may bind any non-Epic creature from a trained School to the Magic Bottle. When Magic Bottle has at least 3 mana on it, you may destroy it as a quick action to summon the bound creature in your zone." This means Dissolve effects (Orchid) can still destroy the Bottle without letting out the creature otherwise there is an unstoppable inevitability of it just like with Enchantment Transfusion and current "move to counter targeting" FAQ rule. I limited it to trained School creatures so that Air Wizard can have classic Whirling Spirit, Beastmaster can bind a Grizzly into it etc. This is the one card here that could be a great combo enabler but needs thorough testing and by limiting the quick action to in-school creatures, we are retaining the mage's theme and limiting possible future abuse.

Anyway, you asked for feedback. I hope you don't mind the minor criticisms as I've been mostly highly positive, and it's only one person's opinion. What's important is you impress the design team with your undoubted creativity and ability to translate fantasy tropes into game mechanics. I hope they take you on as a Playtester as you've got a flair for (a) great mechanics innovation and (b) theme, including flavour text. A perfect combination, ACG!
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 13, 2013, 12:39:10 PM
You've just recently added a new one whilst I was typing the above!

Simulacrum. I fear this was a rush job. It is far too powerful. There is no drawback to Mind Tokens really, just an extra spell you can cast. So let's put some limitations on this Simulacrum. I'd word this different. "He may cast any quick action spells. Each time he casts a spell, you lose life equal to the spell level cast." He has no channelling and no upkeep. For that cost 8, I'd make him Mind 1 Dark 1 (especially as not Unique) and 9 life (like a cat). But I'd also add "Regenerate 2: During upkeep, if Simulacrum has damage, mage loses 1 life". Here the shortening of your life theme (far worse than damage) is being emphasised. Multiple simulacrums (of this nerfed variant) give you a cheap half-decent body (compared to other familiars) with spell casting flexibility - but at a price! The restriction on no full actions removes creature casting and powerful attack and incantations. Obviously he is not a mage so any Equipment he casts will be range 2 on a mage.

I appreciate this deviates a bit from your concept (flavour text reminiscent of that great film The Prestige) but by adding this soul-leeching side to it (hence Dark), I think it adds more than it takes away. Currently, this card is just too amazingly good.

I can't get over how innovative and clever your mechanics are. And the flavour text demonstrating the concept so well. Wow.

Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 13, 2013, 07:53:33 PM
Wow, that's a lot of feedback. Thanks for such detailed comments!

I don't have time to respond to all of that immediately, so I'll just focus on Simulacrum and Spatial Disjunction for now. Here is a modified Simulacrum incorporating some of your suggestions:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1800481_md.jpg)

I kept the upkeep/channeling because it was a mechanic that I wanted to implement (one of the inspirations for the Simulacrum). The regenerate/life drain is a good idea, but I made the life drain always trigger so that it was more of a drawback. I am still debating whether to make it part dark. Also, note that the type is now "homunculus," because that seems more fitting.

Regarding Spatial Disjunction, I want to keep the teleport effect. What if instead I just nerf Blink? For instance:

Blink X - This creature is randomly teleported X many times. Each time it is teleported, roll the D12 to determine a direction at random. If there is an adjacent zone in that direction into which the creature may legally teleport, it teleports to that zone. If not, the Blink fails and any remaining teleports from this blink are cancelled.

This is more in line with how blink works in many roguelikes anyway. And, it also lets me do this:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1800482_md.jpg)

Will respond to other comments when I have more time. Thanks again for all the comments!
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 13, 2013, 08:32:31 PM
Telportitis made me laugh! Very useful curse! Blink as a random direction also solves the Spatial Disjunction issue as well, makes it less powerful than Push. Blink 2 may return to where you started or move it diagonally etc. It's the Chaos Sorceror all over again! Like.

Simulacrum is definitely neater without Mind tokens. Homunculus is definitely the right creature type, because it is a Living Construct! Why Psychic Immunity? It's not Poison Immune as it's got blood. Surely it has got a mind? It has its dreams, poor thing... My only reservation is "any spell". Ability to cast a future combo of full action incantations (above level 2) seems potentially abusable. Still, the life -1 transference as well as 3 mana transference makes it steep price to pay.

I'm going to challenge you to create 2 cards to cleverly leverage the Ape's underused traits: Rage and Climbing.

I am thinking of a Resilient or Incorporeal creature with Rage that Taunts its victim. As for Climbing, I am thinking of a Teleport to any zone bordered by a wall when using full action Climb. But I'm sure you will come up with better ideas with proper flavour to fit mechanics. That's the part I have trouble with. I lack the imagination to fit clever mechanics into a recognisable entity, a talent you have.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 13, 2013, 11:28:13 PM
Okay, I like challenges!

Here's a card to make Climbing more useful:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1800823_md.jpg)

It's a useful place for a nature mage to turtle while building up strength. I wasn't really sure how to price it.

(Edit: cleared up some issues with the card)

Next, here's a card to make Rage a more interesting mechanic, and also buff existing creatures with Rage.
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1800825_md.jpg)

It can be used on a normal grunt, but on a creature that has rage it is especially useful as you can stockpile rage counters for multi-attack rampages. I don't know if it is too powerful; I suppose that is what playtesting is for. Certainly counterstrikers and damage barrier aficionados need to be careful. Note that Rage only affects the first attack per round, so the extra attack(s) have only the normal amount of dice.

(Edit: altered effect of card to make it more interesting/thematic)

Finally, I updated Shadow. Your suggestion of Light vulnerability makes a lot of sense; I also buffed its attack a little by adding piercing. I don't want to add a weak effect, mostly to avoid overlap with the Wraith. I also changed the image so the shadow is harder to see. It doesn't need text specifying nonliving, because the incorporeal trait includes the nonliving trait by default. It isn't really intended to mimic D&D shadows in particular, so I don't feel too bad about leaving out certain details.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1800626_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 14, 2013, 06:07:51 PM
Some new ideas:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1801343_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1801345_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1801346_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1801348_md.jpg)

Also, an update of Murkh's Belt (just a price change, and some flavor text modification)

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1801344_md.jpg)

Regarding Green Slime (@DeckBuilder):

I suppose it is kind of weak. I was thinking that the difficulty of eliminating them might make up for their stats, but Slow/Full Attack may be more of a disadvantage than I anticipated. Your proposal for the modified cantrip trait does seem more elegant. Flame +2 and Rot seem like more good ideas. I will think more about the revision.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 14, 2013, 07:38:39 PM
Climbing. You have a really nice idea combining Climbing and Trees here. But the card is horribly over-costed. Here is my counter-idea, completely inspired by your idea of Climbing Trees.

"Tree Sanctuary". Cost 9. Tree Plant Conjuration. Nature 1 Arcane 1. Armour 1 Life 8. Living. Flame +2. Hydro Immunity. Regeneration 2. Epic. Zone Exclusive. Your creatures with Climbing gain Flying while in a zone with a controlled Tree. As a full action, your mage may pay 3 mana to Teleport from this Tree to any other controlled Tree or vice versa.

Yes, a mage with Eagleclaw Boots can Fly (destroy the Tree if you can't Dissolve the Boots or Push him out the zone, it's not unbreakable). Slam loses Flying and Restrain obviously prevents Flying. Tree Walk is the classic Dryad magic, hopefully not too broken as a full action. There must be other creatures with Climbing (e.g. Poison Ivy, a slow climbing poisonous vine creature). Anyway, I think your idea of linking Climbing and Tree is very nice.

Rage. I like your Berserker Frenzy but after nerfing Battle Fury, I think multiple attacks rampage (no limit) is far too open to abuse. Any new attack still qualifies for Rage bonus (like with Battle Fury). As well as Bear Strength, Vampirism etc. The more elegantly simpler text that is less open to abuse would be "Gain Rage +1, Bloodthirsty +0 and Counterstrike. Treat friendly non-mage creatures as an enemy." Rage + Counterstrike is a huge combo, especially with Growth around, so leveraging the fantasy trope of Barabarian Berserker attacking its own allies makes sense. Perhaps make it cheaper 2+3 due to this drawback.

Shadow. Yes this is great. A sneaky assassin, not very powerful but very flavoursome and also different to the Wraith. I also like the darker image but how about just a black square? (Post-ironic humour.)


I was wondering about some of your really good flavour text. Is that how you come up with ideas? Sometimes, like with the Simulacrum or Spatial Disjunction, the flavour text seems the germ for the idea. If this is the case, then here is a flavour text famous saying to inspire you: "You are what you eat".
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 15, 2013, 03:43:47 AM
Murkh's Belt. Just realised that this does not work with hidden enchantments as how do we know if it is non-War? It needs "revealed" in the text which then takes away its potency. To compensate, I would add "non-War enchantments cost 2 more mana to reveal in its zone." My only reservation is mana denial is not very Warlord.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 15, 2013, 06:22:35 AM
Quote
Rage. I like your Berserker Frenzy but after nerfing Battle Fury, I think multiple attacks rampage (no limit) is far too open to abuse. Any new attack still qualifies for Rage bonus (like with Battle Fury). As well as Bear Strength, Vampirism etc. The more elegantly simpler text that is less open to abuse would be "Gain Rage +1, Bloodthirsty +0 and Counterstrike. Treat friendly non-mage creatures as an enemy." Rage + Counterstrike is a huge combo, especially with Growth around, so leveraging the fantasy trope of Barabarian Berserker attacking its own allies makes sense. Perhaps make it cheaper 2+3 due to this drawback.

Okay. Given that Battle fury was errata'd, maybe that sort of effect should be avoided without some sort of counterbalancing penalty (I was thinking maybe taking additional non-enraging damage for each additional strike, but actually there may be a better way). Your proposed fix sounds like a different sort of spell altogether (something that might be used as a quasi-curse); maybe call it "bloodrage" or "confusion". Here is a counter-proposal for a change: limit the number of additional strikes to 1 but allow the player to boost the strength of the second strike. Also, new attacks do not qualify for the rage bonus, because rage gives melee +X, which only applies to the first attack made each round.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1801696_md.jpg)

I like your Tree Sanctuary idea. Flying is probably a better idea than invisible; it is certainly easier to price.

Quote
Sometimes, like with the Simulacrum or Spatial Disjunction, the flavour text seems the germ for the idea. If this is the case, then here is a flavour text famous saying to inspire you: "You are what you eat".

I don't know if I would say that my ideas come from flavor text; generally they come more from figuring out how to implement interesting combinations of mechanics (e.g. spellbinding creatures = Magic bottle) or figuring out how to implement a fun effect from a different game (e.g. Borgnjor's Revivification = Reanimate Flesh). But here is an idea inspired by that flavor text:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1801698_md.jpg)

Regarding Murkh's Belt: Currently, enchantments with the Upkeep +X trait are not paid for until they are revealed anyway, so I think it is a moot point. While an enchantment is unrevealed, it has no characteristics, and once it is revealed, you know what it is anyway.

And I agree that mana denial is not really warlord-esque, but he needs something he can use against enchantment heavy builds, given his lack of arcane skills.

Some more responses:

Quote
Dreamcatcher. Nice title and idea but I don't think it will see competitive play, even with Lotus. Problem is Sleep is psychic so situational, Idol of Pestilence hurts Sleep etc. Situational augmenting benefits are always suspect as they are "win more". If you have Sleep on so many enemies, you don't need the extra Channelling. It may be useful in some niche match-ups where both players use Sleep effects. Also, what is the Dreamcatcher? Why is it flammable? Keeping to the card title, the Forcemaster really needs extra creature actions to time her attacks so I think this card will be very useful if it said "Zone Exclusive. Unique. You control all opponent's creatures with Sleep markers instead of that opponent". I appreciate Nightmare below is "in the same set" but +X Channelling is a bit vanilla in comparison.

The ability to control creatures with a sleep marker is another think I have considered, but I think that may be the basis for yet another spell. As you imply, it is hard to keep creatures asleep. So what if this card also made it harder to awaken creatures, such as placing a damage threshold or requiring a d12 roll? You'd still have to make them fall asleep, but they would be less likely to get up.

Quote
Phase Barrier. I'm having trouble visualising what this Burnproof Acid Immune Force barrier is. Preventing damage out-of-turn during Damage and Effects step breaks the structure of the game (not even enchantments can do this). I also think you could create something more unique than a simple physical Force Wall by making it an Illusion. "Phantasmal Veil: Illusion Wall. Mind 1. Cost 4. No Access. No LOS. Extendable. Incorporeal. 1 Life. Once per round, before a friendly Action phase, Phantasmal Veil may lose its No Access and No LOS traits until the end of that round. Flip its Ready marker to Used to indicate this use." This retains your one-way accessibility concept whilst retaining the game adherence (so far) that walls apply to all players (here you only control when you open the wall to everyone).

Thematically, this is a wall of mental force (like forcefield). When attacked, the caster must concentrate to prevent the wall from disintegrating. The caster can phase out the wall to allow a friendly creature to fire through it. Nice idea with the illusion wall, although I'm not sure why it would block access. It does give me an idea for an enchantment that lets you create a secret passage through a wall, though. I will think about possible modifications to this ability to put it more in line with how other timing mechanics work while preserving the flavor.

Quote
Nightmare. Another really nice idea but I think this is too powerful as is. Firstly it needs Nonliving and all Incorporeal creatures so far have Upkeep +1. I also don't think it needs its "does not wake target" text. Attack on Sleeper is 3 dice critical with Sleep 7+ so has 50% chance of waking target (far more exciting). I'd add text "Mages suffer Daze instead of Sleep". Fast Flying makes it too much a creature assassin so I'd lose both, instead add text "when activated, pay 1 to teleport to any zone with a Sleep marker" as it interacts with any mage's Sleep effects. I like hybrid schools. I often feel mage books build themselves because spells are mainly in 1 school, like playing mono-colour in Magic, except you have to splash for essentials. However hybrid makes a card more expensive usually (Lord of Fire fits Warlock training perfectly). I always felt Bridge Trolls should have been just Nature 1 War 1 to be more played. So after nerfing the card above, I'd probably reduce it to Mind 1 Dark 1 (so costs Mind or Dark mages 3 points, rest 4 points).

Good point about the chance of target falling back to sleep; that simplifies  things. Upkeep is probably a good idea too. Fast is unnecessary; the teleport to zone with sleep marker is a better implementation. Flying was intended to aid with survival, but I suppose incorporeal is already pretty good for that.

Quote
Haunted. I like all the concepts behind it, the creature paying for that murder by being harassed by spirits with haste. Obviously it needs Spirit support (like Shadow, Nightmare etc). It can be used with friendly creatures to create a walking spawnpoint like the Tome (except a cantrip crucially) and Warlock can collect both it (cantrip) and another curse via curseweaving. No quibbles here, just needs Spirit support, perhaps for any future Witch.

What opinion do you have about the cost of the card? It is a powerful spawnpoint, but it is also hard to reveal. Wasn't sure how to price it. Should it be cheaper?

Quote
Magic Bottle. Nice idea (as always). However, creating this quick cast summon mechanic may "let the genie out of the bottle" so to speak. I am not comfortable with this as it could make future creatures with coming into play effects too powerful if summoned via a quick action. However, you are spending a quick action preparing it (or Battle Forge) so it is a combo prep for action burst mechanic, like Enchantment Transfusion. So maybe it would do the game good to have more combo enablers. Out of all your ideas, this has the greatest possibility for abuse. I'm comfortable with potions not using up an item slot (the "only one" rule prevents abuse). I'm not so comfortable that dissolving it after it has 3 mana can trigger its summon. I would nerf the text to "You may bind any non-Epic creature from a trained School to the Magic Bottle. When Magic Bottle has at least 3 mana on it, you may destroy it as a quick action to summon the bound creature in your zone." This means Dissolve effects (Orchid) can still destroy the Bottle without letting out the creature otherwise there is an unstoppable inevitability of it just like with Enchantment Transfusion and current "move to counter targeting" FAQ rule. I limited it to trained School creatures so that Air Wizard can have classic Whirling Spirit, Beastmaster can bind a Grizzly into it etc. This is the one card here that could be a great combo enabler but needs thorough testing and by limiting the quick action to in-school creatures, we are retaining the mage's theme and limiting possible future abuse.

You're probably right. I'll make sure the mage has to break the bottle. In school creatures only is an interesting idea, though I'm not sure how to justify it thematically. One idea I was playing around with was letting the mage throw the bottle to summon the creature in an adjacent zone. Thoughts?
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 15, 2013, 07:59:55 PM
Illusionist. My favourite mage subclass! You've taken Magic's illusionary mask, morph mechanic and target illusion to reveal as your inspiration. Illusion Creatures is undoubtedly clever (but also perhaps a bit too complex). The problem is Reanimate uses face down cards too. Also some may not like the line of sight to an unknown creature (or bluff). As for Shroud, I think its "first time" rule is unnecessary and too easy to get round.

The problem with the illusionist in Mage Wars is the Wizard is meant to be a trickster as well as a specialist elementalist. Arcane has plenty of trickery like versatile Teleport and Transfusion (as well as magic control). Mind is a schizophrenic school of telepathy (psychic) and telekinesis (force). Arcane grants access to mythological creatures and aberrations while Mind grants access to extra-dimensional entities. Neither seems appropriate. So how do we create an illusionist?

The real trickery in the game is in the embedding and instant speed revealing of enchantments. I just love the pre-planned set-up. So here is a similar idea I had to your hidden creatures concept. She is essentially a trickster like your illusionist.



ENCHANTRESS. Spell Points 120. Armour 0. Life 32. Channelling 10. High Elf
Trained in all enchantments. Attack spells cost triple.

Startling Transformation. When you summon a living creature, pay 2 mana to search your spellbook for an enchantment or a living creature and attach it as a hidden enchantment. You may reveal an attached creature like any enchantment by paying any excess cost to its host cost, destroying the host and replacing it, transfering any damage, conditions and attachments on the host to it.

Loyal Followers. Your non-Legendary living creatures are Cantrips.

Basic Melee 3



Not having a school but rather being trained in all enchantments creates an extremely varied mage, like the wizard. She can be built in many ways. However, she does pay more for most spells, relying on her large enchantments toolbox but fewer other spells hence needs her Cantrip ability to reuse her double-cost creatures. Her main ability though is Startling Transformation. The guessing game over what that hidden card is and the possibilities from instant-speed revealing is intriguing. There is the tempo play with a free action buff or the surprise play of replacing it with a creature with many unexpected traits. Anyway, I mention her because we had both thought of the similar face-down idea.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 15, 2013, 10:11:01 PM
I like the enchantress a lot. Her transformation is a lot more elegantly worded than my illusion creatures ability, though with a different flavor. Being trained in no school but rather in a type of spell is certainly a change from the norm, though one that makes a lot of sense (and lends itself best to the enchantment spell type, thematically. I have previously considered an "artificer" mage that specializes in equipment). I will see if I can simplify the illusionist; I have an idea for a second ability to replace shroud that should fit her trickery theme more.

Here are updated versions of the phase barrier and slime. Phase barrier grows semi-exponentially in price to avoid abuse of multiples, though turtling in a corner is still possible (considering making it unique; interested in your thoughts on matter). Slime is slow, but once it corners you, you may have difficulty escaping.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1802438_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1802437_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 15, 2013, 10:25:13 PM
Blink Toad. It's a wizard control minion. Seems fun. Cripple 9+ for 1 spell point, 6 mana, defence 8+ and 5 life will be attractive for Gate builds.

Plague Moth. Nice idea to wordplay on "plague of moths" with the innovative multiple summons mechanic. Nobody will risk valuable poison enchantments on these fragile things. Moths are attracted to flame so give them the ability to Teleport to any burn counters for 1 mana (like Nightmare's Sleep) when activated as well as a full action 0 dice no damage unavoidable rot 12+ with +1 for each other Plague Moth in the zone. Teleport to burn free action helps its full action attack, and the action economy of multiple summons makes them tempting. Elusive?

The Black Contract. I am unsure about this. Alternate win conditions are nice. The high stakes game is appropriately Mephistophelean. But the "you can't win for X turns then I lose" just seems so brutal, this sledgehammer when other cards are delicate tools in comparison. I don't really like "the can't be destroyed" rule either. I think this may be better done as a Zone Exclusive Conjuration (around 11 cost, 2 armour, 8 life, Dark 3) which says "your mage is indestructible and cannot guard. If this conjuration is destroyed, your mage is destroyed instead." This would be the exact same concept, but it focuses the game on the preservation/destruction of the conjuration instead.

Berserker Frenzy. Melee +X applies to the first attack in each action. Battle Fury gives you another quick atack action so would apply both times. The wording here does not apply. However, I think it would be far more elegant to say "In declare attacks step, you may remove 1 Rage token to gain double-strike or sweeping". Bloodthirsty +1 at that cost (3 spell points for War or Nature, 7 mana). It's a spellpoints expensive enchantment so better be good.

Baby Mimic. Another nice idea. I think it's a bit too good with Channelling 2 and Regenerate 2! I think dropping both to 1 but it does not destroy itself to cast its Devoured creature would be nicer. It's rather good as it is now, I'd be loathed to destroy a Regen 2 creature like that!

Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 15, 2013, 11:45:43 PM
Green Slime. I really like it. It's so slow but left alone... Cripple is a nice condition, perfectly suited of course! Only minor quibble is just shorten text to "when it devours a corporeal creature".

Phase Barrier. Nice idea but is it not a safe haven (except flyers) for Forcemaster with 2 Barriers (6 upkeep) in the corner where he can always fire out? How about replacing Indestructible with Resilient, infinty symbol life and Upkeep = damage counters on Phase Barrier. Indestructible seems so black-and-white silver bullet.


I think Forcemaster would benefit from this "wall"...

Spatial Juxtaposition
Cost 5, quick, range 0-1, zone barrier, wall conjuration, Mind 1 Arcane 1
Extendable, Indestructible
The 2 zones bordering Spatial Juxtaposition are considered 1 zone for range and movement

This would create zones that are rectangles or L shaped for purposes of range and movement. The Wizard and the Forcemaster could literally landscape the arena by "deleting" the borders between squares with these walls. Note that Zone Exclusive and conjurations of same name may each occupy a different square in the larger zone. For the Forcemaster, this would give her creatures like Psylok and Thoughtspore better range and more board control with Pull/Push. For the Wizard, it allows guarding multiple Zone Exclusive conjurations with the same creature(s).
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 16, 2013, 08:47:02 AM
Card Updates:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1802787_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1802789_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1802782_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1802779_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1802780_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1802770_md.jpg)

New Cards:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1802792_md.jpg)


Quote
Plague Moth. Nice idea to wordplay on "plague of moths" with the innovative multiple summons mechanic. Nobody will risk valuable poison enchantments on these fragile things. Moths are attracted to flame so give them the ability to Teleport to any burn counters for 1 mana (like Nightmare's Sleep) when activated as well as a full action 0 dice no damage unavoidable rot 12+ with +1 for each other Plague Moth in the zone. Teleport to burn free action helps its full action attack, and the action economy of multiple summons makes them tempting. Elusive?

Counterproposal seen above to address issue of reluctance to bind spell. Spell was originally an exercise in how to spellbind an enchantment, so I think I want to keep it focused on enchantments, though your idea would work well for another moth spell. If there are a lot of these, might need to introduce "swarm" keyword (allowing player to summon additional copies of a cheap monster).

Quote
The Black Contract. I am unsure about this. Alternate win conditions are nice. The high stakes game is appropriately Mephistophelean. But the "you can't win for X turns then I lose" just seems so brutal, this sledgehammer when other cards are delicate tools in comparison. I don't really like "the can't be destroyed" rule either. I think this may be better done as a Zone Exclusive Conjuration (around 11 cost, 2 armour, 8 life, Dark 3) which says "your mage is indestructible and cannot guard. If this conjuration is destroyed, your mage is destroyed instead." This would be the exact same concept, but it focuses the game on the preservation/destruction of the conjuration instead.

Funny, I had the exact same idea (though as a new spell, not a replacement). Thematically, the mage turns into a lich by sealing his soul in stone. It's basically a horcrux. See Lich's Soulstone above. I want to keep The Black Contract for its theme, but I don't see many alternatives to redesign it while preserving the flavor; what if it was harder to put into play (ex. required a few turns preparation)?

Quote
Berserker Frenzy. Melee +X applies to the first attack in each action. Battle Fury gives you another quick atack action so would apply both times. The wording here does not apply. However, I think it would be far more elegant to say "In declare attacks step, you may remove 1 Rage token to gain double-strike or sweeping". Bloodthirsty +1 at that cost (3 spell points for War or Nature, 7 mana). It's a spellpoints expensive enchantment so better be good.

Quote
Phase Barrier. Nice idea but is it not a safe haven (except flyers) for Forcemaster with 2 Barriers (6 upkeep) in the corner where he can always fire out? How about replacing Indestructible with Resilient, infinty symbol life and Upkeep = damage counters on Phase Barrier. Indestructible seems so black-and-white silver bullet.

Excellent suggestions. I gave Berserker Frenzy the option for triplestrike, so that it still benefits creatures with pre-existing rage issues more than those without; no sweeping, though (the berserker is intent on murdering its chosen target). You're right about the rules for Melee+1; I thought it was first time per round, not first time per attack. No need to give the Phase barrier infinite life; Indestructible operates in the same way (it can still be damaged, just not destroyed by the damage).

Quote
Baby Mimic. Another nice idea. I think it's a bit too good with Channelling 2 and Regenerate 2! I think dropping both to 1 but it does not destroy itself to cast its Devoured creature would be nicer. It's rather good as it is now, I'd be loathed to destroy a Regen 2 creature like that!

Made it less desirable to keep. I think 2 channeling is all right, since it is very limited in what it can cast. The self-destruction is really just a mechanically simple way to represent the Mimic shifting into a different form, so I can't really remove the part about it "destroying" itself.


Also note changes to Magic Bottle. It is more limited in what it can cast, but now you can throw it into an adjacent zone.

Edit: Just realized that Berserker Frenzy should specify melee attack. Will fix in future update.

Edit:

Quote
Spatial Juxtaposition
Cost 5, quick, range 0-1, zone barrier, wall conjuration, Mind 1 Arcane 1
Extendable, Indestructible
The 2 zones bordering Spatial Juxtaposition are considered 1 zone for range and movement

This would create zones that are rectangles or L shaped for purposes of range and movement. The Wizard and the Forcemaster could literally landscape the arena by "deleting" the borders between squares with these walls. Note that Zone Exclusive and conjurations of same name may each occupy a different square in the larger zone. For the Forcemaster, this would give her creatures like Psylok and Thoughtspore better range and more board control with Pull/Push. For the Wizard, it allows guarding multiple Zone Exclusive conjurations with the same creature(s).

Nice! Though I'm not sure what the thematic justification for it being a mind spell is; it sounds like a pure arcane spell to me. Juxtaposition sounds like two things occupying the same space, whereas this spell sounds more like a topological deformation of the arena; perhaps call it "Spatial Deformation?"

Also, thinking a bit more about the Enchantress, I wonder if having all of her non-legendary creatures be cantrips might be too powerful? I realize that they are expensive, but there are some creatures that are definitely prone to abuse, especially with her other power - consider for instance, a gorgon archer bound to a fox. Fox runs fast to a good place at the end of a round, turns into the archer and starts shooting next round. This is a total of 10 spellpoints, which is decent - but eliminating the archer does not end the threat, as the mage can just do the exact same thing again. Turning non-cantrip spells into cantrips seems risky from a spellbook balance perspective.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 17, 2013, 06:39:01 AM
New Cards:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1803884_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1803886_md.jpg)

Keyword:
Torment: This creature suffers from imaginary injuries inflicted by the Illusory Tormentor. It gains -3 Life for each Torment marker, which are removed when the Tormentor is destroyed.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on October 17, 2013, 11:44:03 AM
Strange as it might sound coming from me, I think you're over thinking the illusionist. The illusonist uses illusions, making enemies sense things that aren't there. Therefore the illusionist should be trained in mind, and should be able to influence and bend the mind of his or her enemies.

I'm thinking of a masking ability to do this. Rather than having illusion creatures or conjurations be actual creatures or conjurations, they should be enchantments that look like particular creatures or conjurations when they are face down. So their casting costs would be the same as whatever creature they're pretending to be, but their reveal cost would always be 2. When cast they have the same target as the thing they look like does, but when revealed the illusion targets a creature or conjuration in the same zone as them. An illusion must be revealed immediately after it is targeted by an attack or spell. After its effects resolve, it is destroyed. If a facedown illusion is required to use any if its facedown effects, it must be revealed instead.

So being pushed into an illusion wall reveals it, prevents bashing, and makes the pushed creature go all the way through.

When an illusion creature is attacked, it is revealed, and that attack is redirected to another creature in the same zone as the illusion (not the attacker).

An illusion creature can be targeted by any enchantment that could target a creature. The enchantment becomes an illusion, and it disappears when the illusion creature is revealed.

Illusion creatures cannot attack or guard. (They are also revealed when taunted, or afflicted by any other status condition.)

The illusionist would be able to substitute their mage card with another mage card at the start of the game. The illusionist would also have a substitute ability cardl. The illusionist's real stats are pretty different than whatever mage that he or she is pretending to be. Channeling is 0. Mana is 90, armor is zero, health is 31. Spellbook points are 120.

I'm also thinking that after being revealed, the illusionist would be able to cause illusory status conditions, such as nightmare (making targeted creature see whatever they fear most),
Dreamy (making targeted creature see something they love and run after it. like taunt, but without requiring the affected creature to attack, just to move to follow the illusion.)
Also could have a spell that affects a creature's depth perception (Dazes and condition that makes creature roll effect die to decide direction of its move actions.)

His illusion ability I already described. He also has the basic melee attack. I'm also thinking he'd have an incantation ability that has a small chance of stumbling the enemy mage once per round after a certain number of turns have passed since its casting. After more time has passed, this changes to illusory suffocation. They don't think they can breath, so they don't.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 17, 2013, 01:14:24 PM
Nice ideas! Some comments:

Quote
I'm thinking of a masking ability to do this. Rather than having illusion creatures or conjurations be actual creatures or conjurations, they should be enchantments that look like particular creatures or conjurations when they are face down. So their casting costs would be the same as whatever creature they're pretending to be, but their reveal cost would always be 2. When cast they have the same target as the thing they look like does, but when revealed the illusion targets a creature or conjuration in the same zone as them. An illusion must be revealed immediately after it is targeted by an attack or spell. After its effects resolve, it is destroyed. If a facedown illusion is required to use any if its facedown effects, it must be revealed instead.

This is great, but how can it be implemented in practice? (See card below for one proposal) We can't make doublesided cards, nor can we simply put two cards in one sleeve (since not everybody uses sleeves). The only sensible way that I can see is to bind one card to another; obviously, your opponent would be able to see that you were doing this.

Quote
The illusionist would be able to substitute their mage card with another mage card at the start of the game. The illusionist would also have a substitute ability cardl. The illusionist's real stats are pretty different than whatever mage that he or she is pretending to be. Channeling is 0. Mana is 90, armor is zero, health is 31. Spellbook points are 120.

This is an amazing idea, and would be a lot of fun, but unfortunately I don't think it is feasible due to differences between different game contexts. I assume that the idea is that the opponent would not initially know that they were playing against the illusionist. However, while this is certainly possible in a tournament or other formal game setting, it is not feasible in a casual game, where often only one of the people has a copy of the game and the others are simply using his/her set of cards. In this context, it would be fairly obvious if one player was secretly the illusionist. Any mage should be able to function in any game context, otherwise the scope of the game is limited. There is probably another way to implement this mage-switching mechanic, though (for some reason it makes me think of race-switching in Achron). Do I understand your proposal correctly?

Anyway, your comments have inspired me to take another stab at the illusionist, approaching the problem from a "masking" perspective rather than an "unknown creature" perspective. First, the card:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1804238_md.jpg)

Features to note:

-The "flexible mind" is to support the need for extra cards to fuel the illusions. Why not simply draw bound cards or illusions from the spellbook upon casting, you ask? Simple - that would give the illusionist far too much flexibility, since she would be able to decide what spells to use after seeing her opponent's choices. This is a compromise thematically justified by the difficulty of maintaining detailed illusions - I guess long practice has let her mentally juggle more thoughts than the average mage.

- The illusionist must decide at the time of casting whether the visible spell is the real object, or just an illusion. She can't just invest a small amount of mana now and decide whether to spend the rest later.

- Masks will tend to be about the same cost as the object that they hide.

Thanks for your comments; they definitely helped me to see the problem in a new light.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: wtcannonjr on October 17, 2013, 08:53:43 PM
These are fun ideas about the Illusionist. Here is my concept.

I was thinking of an Illusionist as a mist-like being that is harder to damage. Give the Mage the Incorporeal Trait and lower life to balance. Normal attack might be only 2 dice. This mage also has the special ability of being harder to target for enemy range attacks or spells. Range is always calculated as +1 zone from actual. For example, a 0-0 zone attack would not be able to target the Illusionist.

Illusions are represented as Enchantments with Illusion sub-type and Illusionist Only. The illusion enchantments can move from zone to zone by paying mana. It may even need an action marker or ready marker to track usage. Each illusion could target an enemy creature in its zone and turn the creature's face up action marker to the used face down side. This represents the time wasted by the enemy creature dealing with something that wasn't really there.

As an enchantment the illusion could then be dispelled using the current rules set. Levels of illusions could be created that had other effects or different movement rates. Each illusion would probably need the Upkeep Trait to balance too many in play at one time.

Keep the ideas coming. This is fun.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 18, 2013, 07:55:21 AM
Interesting idea for an incorporeal mage. Is the idea that the illusionist is not actually in the arena and is just projecting her image?

Good idea to make illusions enchantments. I think it would need a new keyword, such as "Illusion: this enchantment has an action marker. It may only take move actions and actions printed on its card." There are a lot of possibilities with that model, and I like that they can be dispelled but not attacked.

I have wondered why no enchantments that target equipment have yet been released. Here are some possibilities to combat this deficiency:

A little something to help the warlord:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1804942_md.jpg)

Some other useful enchantments:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1804944_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1804945_md.jpg)

Here is a modified version of Dreamcatcher:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1805440_md.jpg)

I also decided to try my hand at making spawnpoints more attractive, since they are underused at the moment. First attempt:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1805441_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: wtcannonjr on October 18, 2013, 03:19:15 PM
Interesting idea for an incorporeal mage. Is the idea that the illusionist is not actually in the arena and is just projecting her image?



Sorta. I was thinking the mage would be in the arena but you wouldn't know for sure which image was real and which was an illusion. You could use multiple cards to represent the mage, but it would need so many additional rules it wouldn't be worth it. I was shooting for the effect without all the rules in my description of the Illusionist.

Cool ideas about enchantments that target equipment. I can see this fitting the Paladin mage very nicely.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Wiz-Pig on October 19, 2013, 10:14:07 AM
Cool ideas for enchanting equipment, but if you actually want to help the Warlord you.need to give him a cost advantage. If a spell is War three he pays the same amount as war1 mind1 but has a cost advantage over other mages. As it stands this costs the same for Forcemaster and only 1 more for all other mages.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 19, 2013, 02:53:18 PM
Quote
Sorta. I was thinking the mage would be in the arena but you wouldn't know for sure which image was real and which was an illusion. You could use multiple cards to represent the mage, but it would need so many additional rules it wouldn't be worth it. I was shooting for the effect without all the rules in my description of the Illusionist.

I see. I would recommend rewriting the text of the trait then, rather than just referring to the Incorporeal trait, which has some baggage associated with it that you may not want (Nonliving status, vulnerability to certain types of attacks that may not make sense under this thematic explanation.

Quote
Cool ideas for enchanting equipment, but if you actually want to help the Warlord you.need to give him a cost advantage. If a spell is War three he pays the same amount as war1 mind1 but has a cost advantage over other mages. As it stands this costs the same for Forcemaster and only 1 more for all other mages.

The purpose of Animate is not to give the Warlord something that he can get cheaper than other mages; it is to alleviate the problem of some of his best equipment being mutually exclusive, a common complaint (e.g. his hammer and his horn). This spell benefits him not because it is cheaper for him but because its benefit affects him more than other mages.

The reason I made it war/mind was thematic - like dancing scimitar, it is the animation of an inanimate object, requiring the mage's concentration.

New cards:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1806309_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1806312_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1806310_md.jpg)

The idea behind the Archivist is that he is basically a magical librarian. He has broad knowledge of the basics, but has trouble actually casting the more advanced spells. He also has a phenomenal memory. I originally considered giving him 150 spellbook points, but decided that it was probably not necessary and would just break a nice pattern.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 20, 2013, 11:13:58 PM
Some new cards. First, the creatures:

Fun with the initiative mechanic. I may have underpriced him.
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1807795_md.jpg)

I am really curious to know other thoughts on this one; pricing him is really hard, as is trying to find degenerate strategies involving him. But, as a fantasy trope, this game has to have one:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1807796_md.jpg)

Here's a little something for the Warlord:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1807797_md.jpg)

This one should be fun. Note that, as the quote suggests, it works both ways, although non-mind mages are unlikely to have the spells needed to take advantage of this fact.
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1807799_md.jpg)

This trinket could be useful if you have an escape plan; otherwise, it just delays the inevitable. Another trope that needs a card.
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1807800_md.jpg)

Vampire Blood Mage. Pretty self explanatory.
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1807802_md.jpg)

Okay, this one requires some explanation. It is partly inspired by the idea of an incorporeal mage, partly designed to make the Dreamcatcher more useful, and partly the result of other mechanics I have been thinking about for a while. The story I have come up with is this: Basically, a dark mage once decided to use magic to bring a person from her dream into the real world, for whatever reason (to see if she could, I suppose). To her surprise, she succeeded, and the Dreamwalker entered our world. As a figment from the Dream World, he has a very different constitution than most mages. Rather than health, he is made of mana and will disappear if his mana is ever used up. His dream powers allow him to inflict sleep on creatures, much like the priest inflicts Malakai's fire (now that I think about it, it might be a good idea to make his ability only apply to psychic attacks, to mirror the priest and balance it a bit - thoughts?). Playing as the dreamwalker should be a unique experience.
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1807801_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 21, 2013, 06:10:00 PM
Wow, ACG, you've been busy! I disappear for a long weekend in Amsterdam and I've got a lot of catching up to do (although I confess I did look at the forum on my phone daily, rather sad really). So, in reverse order...

Atraxus, Dwarf Veteran. Nice idea to have schizophrenic traits based on Initiative (like "when attacking / when defending" cards in Magic). It's too good though, even with anti-synergy (e.g. Bloodthirsty, Charge). I'm not keen on the idea of a stubby legged Dwarf being elusive. Have you considered Goblin Veteran? (Opportunity for humourous flavour text, e.g. "Goblin = moron, Goblin Veteran = oxymoron"). I'd try combo traits. For example: "With initiative, gain Fast and Elusive. Off initiative, gain Vigilant and Intercept" (goblin skirmisher/guardsman).  I really like the schizophrenic traits idea, especially if they are anti-synergetic between the 2 combo pairs.

Chimera. Of course, a nice game mechanics interpretation. It's too expensive on Spellpoints (bound creatures) and too cheap to cast. To alleviate the former, make it Arcane 1 Nature 1. I'd price it at X = highest cost of bound creatures + total spell levels of all creatures bound. Currently, you could have a Fast Flying Grizzly for 20 which is too cheap. This is a combo enabler and because it closes the door to freely inventing creatures in the future ("what if we splice X and Y?"), it's too open to abuse. It gives too much freedom hence restricts design.

Standing Orders. Great tech. Make it War 1 as it is Warlord Only. I like the Soldier targeting. Simple and just what the Warlord needs.

Psychic Network. A bit limited. Open to abuse with Illusory Tormentor, Nightmare etc. Also this is hardly a double edged sword! I prefer a subtler "see through your eyes" ability. Something like a psychic enchantment that said "the controller of this enchantment may cast spells originating from this creature. When this creature is damaged, the enchantment's controller suffers an equal amount of damage." This would make it more likely to appear in builds outside of mages with psychic spells, granting everyone access to remote casting at a price.

Amulet of Protection. Meh. Hey, you sometimes miss. It should be Holy 1 but still does not compete with the cumulative benefit of current medallion slots. Colossus Belt is really the appropriate "Protection" item. To compete in the Medallion Slot, it must be good and certainly not a situational one-off benefit. Use its ready marker to re-roll an attack on you each turn seems like what a Lucky Charm may grant you?

Haemonologer. I hate the name. Why not just "Blood Mage"? Keep him a Vampire with all the Vampiress traits as an ability. But also "treat as a Dark creature". I also think the mana acceleration (Channelling 13 with vampirism and regeneration to counter damage) is too much. The Blood Mage spends his precious life blood to pump his spells. And sacrifices his creatures too. Something like "Once before each attack you make or each spell you cast, you may lose 1 life or deal 2 damage to a friendly living creature in your zone to gain +1 Melee or +1 Mana". Whatever the benefit, life loss should be the deterrent, not damage.

Dreamwalker. I love it. Morpheus from Neil Gaiman's The Sandman. But the 1 damage = 3 mana equation is too harsh as ethereal is too much of a silver bullet. I assume also non-Living? (Incorporeal creatures currently has both traits written on them). I think cap mana pool at 30 and 1 damage = 2 mana may be better (also dies if less than 0 mana). Is there an issue with Indestructible and "destroyed"? I don't have rules with me. Tranquilize is too clinical a name. "Slumber" maybe? Why not simply "Sleep and Mass Sleep are cantrips for you?". Makes him more of a ranged creature (as he can teleport to that range 2 target). I may be tempted to make his attack 0 dice Taint to kill off sleepers? Especially if you want him with Dark 1 training (why?). Anyway, the idea is really interesting, it just needs a bit of balancing.

Feedback on others to follow soon but Dreamwalker, Standing Orders and schizophrenic Veteran are definitely innovative ideas.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on October 21, 2013, 06:39:10 PM
Why not have the chimaera be a specific combination of three spliced creatures. The original concept of a chimaera was a cross between a lion, a snake and a goat. So it could be an nature 3+arcane 1 animal creature that's treated as a reptile, a cat and a bovid.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 22, 2013, 10:01:46 AM
Quote
Atraxus, Dwarf Veteran. Nice idea to have schizophrenic traits based on Initiative (like "when attacking / when defending" cards in Magic). It's too good though, even with anti-synergy (e.g. Bloodthirsty, Charge). I'm not keen on the idea of a stubby legged Dwarf being elusive. Have you considered Goblin Veteran? (Opportunity for humourous flavour text, e.g. "Goblin = moron, Goblin Veteran = oxymoron"). I'd try combo traits. For example: "With initiative, gain Fast and Elusive. Off initiative, gain Vigilant and Intercept" (goblin skirmisher/guardsman).  I really like the schizophrenic traits idea, especially if they are anti-synergetic between the 2 combo pairs.

Fantastic theme idea. I may have to steal that (with some subtle attribution, of course):
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1809183_md.jpg)
As you can see, I have nerfed him a bit. (Do we actually know what vigilant does yet? I assume it means you get a guard token at the start of every round, or after taking an action, but I haven't yet seen an official definition).

Quote
Why not have the chimaera be a specific combination of three spliced creatures. The original concept of a chimaera was a cross between a lion, a snake and a goat. So it could be an nature 3+arcane 1 animal creature that's treated as a reptile, a cat and a bovid.

Sure, I could do that, but where's the fun in that? Of course, this is not to say that this cannot also be done; another "Classic Chimera" could be created, also with the Chimera subtype.

Quote
Chimera. Of course, a nice game mechanics interpretation. It's too expensive on Spellpoints (bound creatures) and too cheap to cast. To alleviate the former, make it Arcane 1 Nature 1. I'd price it at X = highest cost of bound creatures + total spell levels of all creatures bound. Currently, you could have a Fast Flying Grizzly for 20 which is too cheap. This is a combo enabler and because it closes the door to freely inventing creatures in the future ("what if we splice X and Y?"), it's too open to abuse. It gives too much freedom hence restricts design.

Okay - how's this for a solution: Limit it to only level 1-2 creatures. (still with the living, corporeal, non-legendary restrictions) I doubt any combination of such creatures would be terribly crazy; the real shenanigans start somewhere around level 4. Below is a modified Chimera, with some other traits changed (I changed it to arcane, since that is the school that seems most appropriate - might still be overpriced on spellbook points, since you also have to buy the creatures that you are binding. Another idea is to limit the creatures that can be bound to Animals, though I hope that is not necessary.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808727_md.jpg)

Quote
Psychic Network. A bit limited. Open to abuse with Illusory Tormentor, Nightmare etc. Also this is hardly a double edged sword! I prefer a subtler "see through your eyes" ability. Something like a psychic enchantment that said "the controller of this enchantment may cast spells originating from this creature. When this creature is damaged, the enchantment's controller suffers an equal amount of damage." This would make it more likely to appear in builds outside of mages with psychic spells, granting everyone access to remote casting at a price.

Okay. That sounds like a good idea for a different card ("Painbond"? I'll think on it.). You make a good point about psychic creatures abusing the spell; also, I just realized that most creatures with psychic attacks also have psychic immunity, so they would not be able to make use of the spell anyway. Here's a re-imagined version of the card:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808743_md.jpg)

Quote
Amulet of Protection. Meh. Hey, you sometimes miss. It should be Holy 1 but still does not compete with the cumulative benefit of current medallion slots. Colossus Belt is really the appropriate "Protection" item. To compete in the Medallion Slot, it must be good and certainly not a situational one-off benefit. Use its ready marker to re-roll an attack on you each turn seems like what a Lucky Charm may grant you?

Yes, that would be a good effect for a lucky charm. I am attached to the idea of an item that saves your life, once, though. This amulet is certainly situational; I suppose it will often be passed over. Here is an alternate change, which makes it function a little like the poor man's Divine Intervention:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808747_md.jpg)

Quote
Haemonologer. I hate the name. Why not just "Blood Mage"? Keep him a Vampire with all the Vampiress traits as an ability. But also "treat as a Dark creature". I also think the mana acceleration (Channelling 13 with vampirism and regeneration to counter damage) is too much. The Blood Mage spends his precious life blood to pump his spells. And sacrifices his creatures too. Something like "Once before each attack you make or each spell you cast, you may lose 1 life or deal 2 damage to a friendly living creature in your zone to gain +1 Melee or +1 Mana". Whatever the benefit, life loss should be the deterrent, not damage.

Done (Re: the name). Regarding loss of life vs. damage, part of the idea was that he would replenish damage taken with blood, simulating a vampire's relentless hunger, since he would be driven to melee attack as much as  possible to fuel his dark arts. I see your point about abuse of regenerative items, though. What if I simply restrict his ability more, and make it more expensive? I also added the option to drain his own creatures for mana, though obviously you would only do this to creatures that are about to die.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808771_md.jpg)

Quote
Dreamwalker. I love it. Morpheus from Neil Gaiman's The Sandman. But the 1 damage = 3 mana equation is too harsh as ethereal is too much of a silver bullet. I assume also non-Living? (Incorporeal creatures currently has both traits written on them). I think cap mana pool at 30 and 1 damage = 2 mana may be better (also dies if less than 0 mana). Is there an issue with Indestructible and "destroyed"? I don't have rules with me. Tranquilize is too clinical a name. "Slumber" maybe? Why not simply "Sleep and Mass Sleep are cantrips for you?". Makes him more of a ranged creature (as he can teleport to that range 2 target). I may be tempted to make his attack 0 dice Taint to kill off sleepers? Especially if you want him with Dark 1 training (why?). Anyway, the idea is really interesting, it just needs a bit of balancing.

Okay. Changed the damage/mana ratio. Yes, incorporeal means nonliving, and no, there is no issue with Indestructible, which just means that the creature cannot be destroyed by having more damage than life. I also removed his ability to gain armor and gave him a soft mana cap (I don't like the idea of a strict limit on mana, but I recognize the need to stop his "health" from growing out of hand). I don't want to reference specific spells, so no sleep/mass sleep cantrips. I removed the dark training after some thought; it was mostly in there for thematic reasons (due to his origins in dark magic) Anyway, here is a modified version:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808749_md.jpg)

Some other alterations, minor and otherwise, to cards:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808744_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808740_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808737_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808725_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808742_md.jpg)

Here are some new cards, focusing on Murkh's creations. If it is not already apparent, Murkh is basically an orc who hated magic so much that he devoted his life to its eradication, becoming a powerful mage in the process. This is mostly to justify spells for the warlord that make up for his crippling lack of arcane spells. While I recognize that it is better to leave metamagic to the arcane school in order to leave each school its own specialties, I think that as long as these are restricted to the Warlord, they should not be a problem.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808756_md.jpg)

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808761_md.jpg)
Note: this is intended to be a clockwork golem, but my ability to convey that through art is limited. And yes, the parody of Thunderrift Falcon is intentional. Its magic immunity may be a double-edged sword.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1808757_md.jpg)
Why should you choose the warlord over the Earth wizard? Perhaps this artifact will help with the decision.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 22, 2013, 11:47:25 PM
Some more quick thoughts

Enchant Equipment. They need to be stronger than normal because 1 Dissolve = 2 for 1. You also need more of them as part of a hidden enchantment's strength is not knowing what it is. Enchant Zone is rare so currently you can spot a Trap quite easily. Enchant Conjuration (like Harmonize) is rarer so you can immediately guess it. While I appreciate that Decoy can Enchant any Object, you need more than 3 that target equipment to make them fun. I'd make Enchant Weapon grant Unavoidable and Ethereal (so toolbox of Falcon Precision and Divine Might in 1 spell that can be Dissolved). I'd make Forge Replica a cantrip (and X = equipment level). Both are persistent effects so I would make Animate "when revealed, attach this equipment to a friendly living creature within range 2 in line of sight who can use it like a mage", Mind 1 (Force) and X = equipment level (as there is upkeep +1 to pay). I like how Forge Replica can stay hidden to attract Dissolve. I think if you have a critical mass of enchant equipment spells, perhaps in a set with the Artificer mage who specialises in equipment and enchant equipment (Alchemist and Runemaster are sub-classes), then this idea would work. But the always 2 for 1 Dissolve drawback results in them being "above the power curve", making Dissolve even more of a silver bullet. Which I don't think is the way the designers would want the game to develop.

Dreamcatcher and Mana Amplifier look fine. I think you need to design benefits additional to just mana generators to be interesting (e.g. Dreamwalker's inherent attack if not raised will not wake sleepers). I assume the Amplifier means "Objects with inherent Channel value increase their Channel by 1. Objects with the Channeling +X keyword gains an additional Channeling +1" just like Magic's Mana Flare. As Amplifier is a global effect conjuration, it needs to be Legendary (as well as Epic Zone Exclusive).

Mordok's Shield. I don't think it good to have an arcane physical shield. Promoting wizards to wear armour and carry weapons beyond a staff is not fantasy traditional. I do like your idea of putting the Wizard in danger to harvest mana. Perhaps Mordok's Orb (shield slot) as orb is the missing implement (wands, rod, staff, tome, totem etc) is more appropriate? I think it should perhaps strengthen the mana denial strategy like "all your attacks gain Mana Transfer 1" as Mana Transfer is a keyword in the Codex that I haven't spotted on a card yet.

Robes of the Archmage. I appreciate you are trying to promote casting powerful spells. But surely a far too grandiose name for what is really a situational mana discounter that is not even Legendary? Apart from creatures, there are very few level 3 spells played (else spell books would be pretty small). I like that you have taken the body slot normally reserved for armour. If remaining non-Legendary, I would probably name it the more humbler "Robes of the Magi" and remove the Upkeep +1. In the end though, mana manipulation seems a vanilla benefit. I think what wizard really needs is a Body slot item with "gain +2 on your attack effect die rolls", sacrificing armour for more spell control. But that would be completely redesigning the robes.

Archivist. I love this mage concept, probably because I am a secret librarian. But i do think he is sadly too powerful as he is. I would change "at any time" to "once per round before casting a spell" for more specificity of when this delays play, limiting it to just once per round. That would make him more balanced. I love this mage,

More to follow as I catch up on the rest. Though you are constantly churning great new ideas!
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 24, 2013, 12:34:30 PM
Quote
Enchant Equipment. They need to be stronger than normal because 1 Dissolve = 2 for 1. You also need more of them as part of a hidden enchantment's strength is not knowing what it is. Enchant Zone is rare so currently you can spot a Trap quite easily. Enchant Conjuration (like Harmonize) is rarer so you can immediately guess it. While I appreciate that Decoy can Enchant any Object, you need more than 3 that target equipment to make them fun. I'd make Enchant Weapon grant Unavoidable and Ethereal (so toolbox of Falcon Precision and Divine Might in 1 spell that can be Dissolved). I'd make Forge Replica a cantrip (and X = equipment level). Both are persistent effects so I would make Animate "when revealed, attach this equipment to a friendly living creature within range 2 in line of sight who can use it like a mage", Mind 1 (Force) and X = equipment level (as there is upkeep +1 to pay). I like how Forge Replica can stay hidden to attract Dissolve. I think if you have a critical mass of enchant equipment spells, perhaps in a set with the Artificer mage who specialises in equipment and enchant equipment (Alchemist and Runemaster are sub-classes), then this idea would work. But the always 2 for 1 Dissolve drawback results in them being "above the power curve", making Dissolve even more of a silver bullet. Which I don't think is the way the designers would want the game to develop.

Good idea for Enchant Weapon; makes the weapon's existing attack more useful. Yes, Forge Replica does probably need to be a cantrip (Maybe an Artificer only spell!). I don't like the idea of letting any creature using equipment like a mage; instead, retaining the current functionality of Animate, here is a counter-proposal (which also introduces spellbound equipment and incorporeal creatures with armor):

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1810964_md.jpg)

Point taken, regarding Dissolve. Here is a possible way to combat the problem:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1810962_md.jpg)

Here are some more new cards. I'll get to the rest of your comments later.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1810966_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1811205_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1811204_md.jpg)

Edit: Nerfed Artificer, which was way too powerful. Still may be very powerful, interested in your thoughts on the matter. Also added the Orb of Immolation. Normally I come up with my own quotes, but this one by Terry Pratchett was just too perfect to resist.

Edit: More responses:

Re: Mana Amplifier - Good catch on legendary; two of those could get ridiculous fast. I'll make the fix. I understand that you find mere mana generation abilities to be rather plain (and I agree that, mechanically speaking, they are not that interesting), but the main point of Mana Amplifier is to change the dynamics of the game with respect to familiars and spawnpoints which, with a few notable exceptions (Wizard's Tower, Battle Forge, etc.), are underused. I don't think it really needs to do anything more than this.

Re: Mordok's Shield - I suppose I could make it an orb. I was modelling it mostly on the spiked buckler. Of course, there is no need for it to be limited to the wizard; the arcane school just seemed to be the best fit. I'll think about retheming it, though. Regarding Mana Transfer, see the Artificer for a possible implementation.

Re: Robes of the Archmage - So you think that the body slot opportunity cost is a sufficient downside without the upkeep? I suppose I can see that. Again, though a discount may seem boring, the spells that it allows the mage to cast can be quite impressive indeed, so I believe that the name is warranted, though I wish I could word it better.

Re: Archivist - I'll place some restrictions on the timing of his ability.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 25, 2013, 05:10:45 PM
Some more catch-up feedback...

Atraxus Goblin Veteran. I think you have nerfed him too much. He needs his 1x Defence 8+ (any) so that when he is on the defensive, he can shield/dodge the attack. I also can't envision any goblin as Bloodthirsty (and this compulsion doesn't work with his Skirmisher guerilla tactics side). I'd remove Bloodthirsty +1 and just have Charge +2. Otherwise he looks great fun to play.

Chimera v2. Yes, this is a big improvement. Harder to abuse, gives players reasons to have low level creatures in their book, the costing, it's all good. My only quibble is it should be Arcane 1 Nature 1 to give it more appeal to more mages. Most experiments involve animals hence the 2 schools. It's every player's chance to be creative and splice the creatures you want. The first that comes to my mind is a cost 16 Gremlin Wolf with 1x Defence 8+ Armour 2 Life 17 attack 4 piercing 1 with pay 1 fast teleport. It costs a Nature or Arcane mage 9 spell points so there is a book cost to pay. Falcon Bobcat will be 11 cost 1x Defence 8+ Armour 0 Life 9 attack 3 charge +2 fast flying, effectively 5 dice fast aerial harasser with defence. It would cost any Nature mage 5 spell points. It's not game breaking but it's very good. Chimera is so much creative fun for players but it is a designer's nightmare as they have to ensure every level 1-2 creature cannot be abused via it. I think it adds so much that it's worth the effort but this game is Vancian, not improvisational, the designers want total control over effects.

Psychic Network v2. Yeah, this is better, if a bit niche (psychic = mind mage only really) and situational (too much psychic immune)

Amulet of Protection v2. It's still not good enough for a one-shot endgame neck slot you may never need. It needs a persistent benefit with a cancel damage and obliterate one-shot benefit (forget the blink 3, too similar to a poor man's Divine Intervention). How about an ability "range 0-0 quick action: place a guard marker on a friendly creature"? It allows you to gain the protection of your minions...

Bloodmage v2. I think you should add "vampiric" to his basic melee attack (so he does not use weapons), remove Frost -2 (too much of a nemesis for a frost mage) and rename his remaining great temporary Fly ability as Bat Form or something similar. As for his eponymous ability Blood Magic, I think you can improve it to "if you have insufficient mana to cast a spell, you may take damage equal to the shortfall to cast it as long as this shortfall does not exceed that spell's level". This can only happen once per round by definition, has that feeling of using your own lifeblood when your magical reserves run too low, discourages saving mana (such as by attacking) and encourages high level spells. Just a mechanic to make him even more different?

Dreamwalker v2. Indestructible is "the object cannot be damaged" so the convert damage to mana ability won't trigger. He needs to be armour "dash" (incoproreal) and life "dash" (life 0 destroys them with 0 damage and bypasses indestructible as no damage was dealt). I think Dream Essence should just read "Incorporeal. Dreamwalker's Mana Supply indicates his remaining life. For each point of damage he receives, he instead loses 2 mana and dies if reduced to 0 mana. Each Upkeep, if he has more than 30 mana, he must permanently reduce his Channeling by 1". There are Incorporeal creatures without Psychic Immunity (Whirling Spirit, Invisible Stalker) so leaving this out seems fair as he seems a bit good already. I like "Soporific Presence" as an ability name but think it should be 2x Spell Level. Finally its attack should be Ethereal. Overall, he's a really interesting mage.

Standing Orders v2. I've had a rethink on this. It seems far too expensive. What's the benefit of having Evade bound to this over Mongoose Agility? Charge over Cheetah Speed? Yes, you get a tiny benefit but you spend more mana and risk 2 spells to a single Dispel! I think you can promote long-term planning by giving it a specific timing reveal cost of X and no Channeling (too fiddly for an enchantment). "May only be revealed during Upkeep. Bind a level 1 Command Incantation to it. X = casting cost of the Command. The enchanted Soldier is treated as permanently targeted by that Command". It's powerful but it is deferred benefit, also revealed before Planning and you pay 2 extra over the single use cost, 1 extra spell point and only affects soldiers. I feel you can make it a free repeat use persistent Command on Soldiers.

Shadow v2 and Nightmare v2. Really interesting creatures. All seems fine.

Greatwood Forest v2. The idea of a whole forest dwarfs the Druid's pathetic single plants! I think you should lower the power level. Maybe just "Greatwood Oak", its ability could simply be "Blocks line of sight between Flyers and non-Flyers into and through this zone. Creatures with Climbing gain Flying while in its zone." Also I would reduce it to Nature 2 and cost 8. Its canopy blocks different elevation line of sight whilst allowing any Climbers (including a Mage with Eagleclaw Boots) to gain Flying (whilst not guarding). Also should be "Regenerate 2".

Berserker Frenzy v2. It's too expensive in spell points (simply make it War 1) and casting cost (make it 2+4). Else great.

Murkh's Obelisk v2. I like the idea of protecting yourself against zonal attack spells etc. I think it could just be War 2. I suspect it seems more game-breaking than it is.

Magisbane Golem. Why not "cannot be targeted by spells" (shroud in Magic)? It's a powerful ability so I'd make him cheaper (War 3, cost 13) and more random, perhaps "when activated, Blink 1"? In conjunction with Slow (but quick attack), he makes a nice random rampager. Maybe even Bloodthirsty +0 to reflect clockwork programming? Just suggesting options to make him more different to Iron Golem.

Magisbane, the Purifier. Wow, this is the Warlord's totemic one-handed weapon! I'd remove Upkeep +2, change Mana Drain 2 to Mana Transfer 1 and give it free Dispel (pay X = full cost) or Seeking Dispel (pay 2) ability when it damages a creature as currently it's dispelling far too cheaply, even with its upkeep. An alternate way of removing enchantments as a free action is powerful. I'd also make it a Cantrip. It's an appropriate Dispelling weapon worthy of a Warlord!
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 26, 2013, 05:48:51 AM
Finally caught up with your posts to date, ACG...

Armour Phantom. The equipment chimera. Too powerful. For 9 mana you get Armour 3 (yet Incorporeal 7 Life), Attack 4 Ethereal Reach, Flame -4 Lightning -2 Frost -2. It's far too good and also breaks the "Incorporeal do not have Armour" rule. I'd change from Spirit to a living Simulacrum Humonculus, make it Dark 1 War 1 (different to Chimera's 2 schools). Cost X, no attack, Armour 0, Life Y, Channel 1 Familiar (Wands, Moonglow) and living (Armour, Belt, Sunfire etc). "Bind 2-5 different equipment placed in different locations when comes into play. X = cost of all equipment bound when cast. Y = 2x total spell levels of all equipment on it. You may target equipment on this creature as if it was your mage." This is less broken as a combo enabler than Chimera as those equipment combos will have already been tested. Note that I allowed mage only equipment on it and later adding equipment. Instant assemble is its main attraction, costly in spell points but fun.

Ablate. Exactly what those Enchant Equipment spells need. Perfect support for that concept. As well as protecting equipment.

Seven-League Boots. Seems strong but I think it's ok. A single hinder negates all its abilities.

Artificer. Still a bit too good (assuming he has artifact support). Soulbond Weapon is very powerful and weapons with extra keywords could be broken. How about a gadgeteer? "During upkeep, you may return 1 discarded equipment to your spellbook by paying mana equal to spell level. Before or after each declare attack step involving you, you may switch 1 equipment with 1 same slot equipment in spellbook, paying any additional cost of the replacement equipment." This creates a gadgeteer who always has just the right item for every occasion. Without creating new combo items that could potentially break the game. It also syenrgises well with Broad Expertise. This is not shabby, just needs more contingency book-planning and spell points. Soulbond Weapon requires less skill in comparison.

Orb of Immolation. Nice idea but needs to be better? Burn is not meant to be burst but unreliable persistent damage. So I would make it more reliable, go as far as "when rolling for Burn, re-roll all blanks once". My main worry is Burn is going to be far better with the new set (Plants and Resilient Zombies). Still, this is a pricey Epic conjuration that can be destroyed. You forgot to add "Flame Immunity Hydro+3".
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 28, 2013, 08:57:24 AM
Currently in the process of making modifications to many spells. A few specific responses:

Quote
Orb of Immolation. Nice idea but needs to be better? Burn is not meant to be burst but unreliable persistent damage. So I would make it more reliable, go as far as "when rolling for Burn, re-roll all blanks once". My main worry is Burn is going to be far better with the new set (Plants and Resilient Zombies). Still, this is a pricey Epic conjuration that can be destroyed. You forgot to add "Flame Immunity Hydro+3".

Currently, burns will on average go away after a while, since each burn has a 1/3 chance of disappearing on a given round. What Orb of Immolation does is to make burns stay, on average, indefinitely, since there is now a 1/3 chance of a new burn replacing one that was lost. Of course, at low numbers of burns luck still plays a significant role. If you think this needs to be better, rather than re-rolling blanks (which might be too powerful), what if it gave creatures an extra burn each time they received one from an attack (only from attacks though, or it might get out of hand)?

Quote
Dreamwalker v2. Indestructible is "the object cannot be damaged" so the convert damage to mana ability won't trigger.

Somehow, I missed that clause in indestructible. Not sure why they included that, since "cannot be destroyed by damage" is sufficient and this wording prevents a lot of cool possibilities. I will have to look back over my indestructible cards and make some adjustments, then.

Quote
Magisbane, the Purifier. Wow, this is the Warlord's totemic one-handed weapon! I'd remove Upkeep +2, change Mana Drain 2 to Mana Transfer 1 and give it free Dispel (pay X = full cost) or Seeking Dispel (pay 2) ability when it damages a creature as currently it's dispelling far too cheaply, even with its upkeep. An alternate way of removing enchantments as a free action is powerful. I'd also make it a Cantrip. It's an appropriate Dispelling weapon worthy of a Warlord!

My thought was that the upkeep cost would make up for the cheap dispel, but I can modify it as you describe. However, I don't want to remove its upkeep cost, because thematically I think it ought to drain its wielder. Also, Mana Transfer, while cool, does not make sense in this context because the weapon is obliterating the magical energies, not merely stealing them. Cantrip is a good idea, but to make the weapon more in line with the Magisbane Golem (which presumably uses similar anti-magical principles) I think it might be better to simply make it immune to magic (making it nearly invulnerable, though the Druid's new dissolving plant can still get at it).

New equipment enchantment, with a new possible way to avoid the "2-for-1" problem with dissolve:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1815255_md.jpg)

Keyword: Enhancement - this enchantment increases the printed cost of the card to which it is attached by mana equal to the enchantment's full casting cost.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 29, 2013, 12:41:22 PM
Some adjustments to old cards:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1816895_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1816894_md.jpg)

Some new cards:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1816898_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1816902_md.jpg)

Prophet to follow as soon as I nail down his abilities.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on October 29, 2013, 03:50:21 PM
Or do you want me to foresee what The Prophet can do? (Sorry, I couldn't resist)

Bit tumultuous here but feedback soon, but good work though ACG! Hope they are studying some of these ideas.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 30, 2013, 07:36:49 PM
Quote
Or do you want me to foresee what The Prophet can do?

Ha ha. No need to make a prediction now; the first draft of the Prophet is below. I realize that many of the prophecy mechanics are worded ambiguously or in an unusual way, but it turns out to be difficult to articulate the sort of mechanics that I am going for using the current vocabulary, grammar, and style of mage wars, so this will have to do.

Some altered cards:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1818690_md.jpg)

Your comment about clockwork programming gave me an idea - clearly, Magisbane Golems (and other such "Magisbane" artifacts) are designed for the purpose of killing mages (especially wizards), so why not bring that out a bit more in their behavior? The new Magisbane Golem relentlessly seeks out objects with the channeling trait and destroys them. At the same time, he draws magical attacks to himself. (I want him to still be targetable by conjurations, though). Note that he is perfectly suited to demolishing the dread Wizard's tower, although he is considerably more expensive than the tower. I think this is probably what Murkh had in mind when he made them. Given its limitations, I made it lumbering, rather than slow. I'm unsure how best to price it.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1818691_md.jpg)

Good idea for the artificer; bonding with a weapon seems more like something for a weapons specialist like the Paladin (also forthcoming, BTW). I adjusted your suggestion slightly; now he can simply swap in equipment that he has already cast for a small cost. Thinking about some of the mage-specific equipment that I have been making lately, I think his broad expertise will probably be a substantial enough advantage that he needs nothing else.

New Cards:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1818693_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1818692_md.jpg)

Quote
Hope they are studying some of these ideas.

Thanks for your support. I don't know whether "they" actually look for ideas in this Custom Cards forum (I've read that some companies avoid looking at fan creations to avoid accusations of "stealing ideas"); it would certainly be neat if they did, though.




Edit: I also feel like I should give a deeper thematic explanation of The Book of Secrets.

The idea is that it is an artifact of ancient and terrible power (as such artifacts often tend to be). To most readers, the pages appear blank. Any magical knowledge written in this book is erased from the minds of all and immediately forgotten if it is ever rediscovered or read in some arcane text. Presumably, there will one day be a young mage who discovers that he has the power to read the secrets that have been written in the book, setting him off on an epic quest (probably a trilogy at the very least).

For the mage fortunate enough to have The Book of Secrets (for there is only one), he can stop to write down a spell in the book in order to erase it from the minds of both himself and his competitor(s). In practice, only the Archivist knows where this rare book may be found (and the Artificer, obviously).
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on November 02, 2013, 10:31:03 AM
Quiet moment for more catch-up feedback.

Runic Haste. I like Enhancement as your solution to 2-for-1 loss of Enchant Equipment. I appreciate that a quick action Hunting Bow could not be used twice (only quick spells may be cast with QC marker). However, I am  wary of enablers like this. A future full action ability could become broken with this so its existence restricts future design.

Archivist v2. Looks good. I like this feeble old man challenging: "I shall defeat you with my extensive knowledge of mainly level 1 spells".

Magisbane, the Purifier v2. It's now too expensive. I like Magisbane as a "mana magnet" idea of Upkeep +1 and this cost is countered by its Mana Drain 2 of opponent. As it is, I would reduce its cost to 10 (same as level 3 Sectarus, its opposite).

The Book of Secrets. I love it's concept. However, even once Dissolved, its damage is done, the spells are obliterated. Also the first spell may be Dissolve (especially as equipment is low level Archivist-friendly). I would not make it permanent but more synergetic with Archivist abilities. Something like "Opponents cannot cast the same spell as those at the top of all discard piles. Discard piles cannot be shuffled. When an opponent casts a spell, during Counter Spell step, if you have the same spell in hand, you may reveal it, discard it and pay mana equal to its level to counter that spell." Opponents have to work around a changing temporary spells injunction but also a cheap anticipate to counter benefit. Also, as an Archivist Only item, I would make it Arcane 1 (1 spell point, not 4).

Crystal Ball. I'd make it Planning Phase so you can use the information. I don't normally like memory mechanics but this is manageable.

Prophet. As you know, I dislike memory mechanics. Precognition should just be "When you have Initiative, your opponent must reveal 2 choices during Planning before you choose your spells". In the same vein, I think Anticipate should be "When you don't have Initiative, at the end of Planning, name 1 spell. Opponents may not cast that spell this round." The On/Off mechanic is to allow mirror matches and both mechanics are information based, not mechanical which seems too corporeal for a divination-based mage. I'd give him 32 life. Also Prophet is Holy, not Arcane. I'd make him or her a Seer or a Soothsayer or some other divination-based mage subclass. Prophets don't carry a Crystal Ball, they are divine messengers. I'm sorry that, unlike Archivist and Dreamwalker, I'm not a great fan as it is. However, a divination-based mage is a great idea and I urge you to rethink.

Predict Fate. I love the flavour text! As for the effect, I think you have got a typo as it doesn't make sense as is (24 mana?). I would make it target "Any object" for total versatility and "Reveal only during Deployment. Name any card (including a mage). If an opponent destroys this object with that named card while this enchantment is attached, gain 10 mana. Destroy this enchantment at the end of the round." I think it's currently very fiddly with all those Fate counters on enchantment and its creature etc. The concept of Predict Fate is hard to execute.

Artificer v2. I like. I think this Dwarf artificer from Ivarium (love the choice) would simply be trained in War and Arcane 1, Nature triple, he is neutral and Arcane is always better (e.g. equipment). I like the new mechanic but the package is bit weak for a 9 mana mage as it triggers on duplicates after you wasted mana. How about his second ability as "Gadgeteer. Each Deployment, you may replace 1 equipment with new equipment in the same location by paying mana equal to its extra cost or the replacing equipment's spell level, whichever is greater." He is still reliant on Battle Forge for quick equipment deployment but this is neater and does not leave him at a huge mana disadvantage when switching items around. Which is his "shtick".

Magisbane Golem v2. I like the Lumbering upgrade on an Iron Golem. I like the concept of an Attack Spell magnet but it's too powerful as a nullifier. It's made out of Magisbane, this anti-magic matter. I think you should remove "Lightning +2, Acid +2, Tough -6" and the middle sentence of the text, instead add "Enchantment Immunity. Incantation Immunity. Attack Spells -2" as keywords. Attack spells can damage it but lose 2 attack dice and -2 effect die. Currently, it's a bit broken. I really like your anti-channeling and attack spell magnet mechanics.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on November 02, 2013, 02:32:29 PM
Will need some time to consider some of these comments. Immediate responses:

Quote
The Book of Secrets. I love it's concept. However, even once Dissolved, its damage is done, the spells are obliterated. Also the first spell may be Dissolve (especially as equipment is low level Archivist-friendly). I would not make it permanent but more synergetic with Archivist abilities. Something like "Opponents cannot cast the same spell as those at the top of all discard piles. Discard piles cannot be shuffled. When an opponent casts a spell, during Counter Spell step, if you have the same spell in hand, you may reveal it, discard it and pay mana equal to its level to counter that spell." Opponents have to work around a changing temporary spells injunction but also a cheap anticipate to counter benefit. Also, as an Archivist Only item, I would make it Arcane 1 (1 spell point, not 4).

Good point about permanence of obliteration; I just thought of a different implementation that seems (to me) more interesting than its current one:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1822294_md.jpg)

So the magic of the book only lasts as long as it does, and when it is destroyed all spells hidden within are released again. Note that the only way to unbind spells is to destroy the book. Also more likely to be used. Regarding the spell point cost, it will cost the archivist 2, not 4, because he is trained in level one of each of the requisite schools. In general, the archivist gets multi-school spells more cheaply than other mages.

Quote
Predict Fate. I love the flavour text! As for the effect, I think you have got a typo as it doesn't make sense as is (24 mana?). I would make it target "Any object" for total versatility and "Reveal only during Deployment. Name any card (including a mage). If an opponent destroys this object with that named card while this enchantment is attached, gain 10 mana. Destroy this enchantment at the end of the round." I think it's currently very fiddly with all those Fate counters on enchantment and its creature etc. The concept of Predict Fate is hard to execute.

No typo; the further in the future your prediction is, the more mana you get. If your opponent actually allows you to fulfill a 7 turn prediction, you deserve the mana. I'll think about your other suggestions; I agree that its current wording is rather fiddly.

Regarding the Prophet's school choice: I had a Sword-of-Truth-like prophet in mind when designing it, i.e. a prophet whose predictions come from highly complicated arcane magics, rather than divine revelation. Holy might be a better fit though (maybe even Holy-Arcane). Actually, I kind of want to create a new school (Time magic), but I am not sure if that is a good idea.

Quote
Standing Orders v2. I've had a rethink on this. It seems far too expensive. What's the benefit of having Evade bound to this over Mongoose Agility? Charge over Cheetah Speed? Yes, you get a tiny benefit but you spend more mana and risk 2 spells to a single Dispel! I think you can promote long-term planning by giving it a specific timing reveal cost of X and no Channeling (too fiddly for an enchantment). "May only be revealed during Upkeep. Bind a level 1 Command Incantation to it. X = casting cost of the Command. The enchanted Soldier is treated as permanently targeted by that Command". It's powerful but it is deferred benefit, also revealed before Planning and you pay 2 extra over the single use cost, 1 extra spell point and only affects soldiers. I feel you can make it a free repeat use persistent Command on Soldiers.

As fiddly as enchantments with channeling may be, I feel that "permanent targeting" by an incantation is more fiddly, mechanics-wise. It also means we have to be careful what sorts of commands we make in the future - so far, most commands give an enchantment-like benefit for one attack. What about a command like rally that causes creatures to teleport, or a command that heals creatures, though? I believe the current wording is the most elegant mechanical way to implement this. I do see your point about the expense and risk. I think it would be reasonable to drop the reveal cost to 0, all things considered.

Another possibility is to give some way to cheaply change the bound spell, which would be an advantage over an enchantment. Figuring out how to do this without ruining the theme or being broken will take some thought, though.
 
Here are some (often minor or cosmetic) changes to old spells:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1822303_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1822292_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1822305_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1822297_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1822295_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1822306_md.jpg)

And here are some new cards:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1822302_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1822300_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on November 03, 2013, 08:51:15 AM
ACG, you come up with some really interesting "outside the box" ideas! Like...

Murkh's Acolyte. I absolutely love your flavour text! It reminds me of my D&D campaign's "Anti-Magic League", eco-terrorists who believed arcane magic was polluting the world (they were right, it was creating rifts). Back to the card. He's a saboteur of spawnpoints and mages casting full actions. Maybe slightly too good combat stats (4 life 1 attack fast goblin?) but that's just quibbling. I love it.

Scramble. It's nice to have a Psychic attack spell. I don't like poison Tainited with a Psychic attack (unless Mind Worm or similar). It's also over-costed. Because it is range 0, I'd make it 9+ Stun instead. And that mage benefit (as mages suffer less from a stun) is the obliterate effect (familiars will suffer both). It's very swingy (1 in 3 chance) which is why I don't like it. I'd rather it always returned a random uncast card to the book as the Obliterate effect can destroy strategies on a random d12. This idea may be better added to Magisbane Golem?

The Book of Secrets v2. I like the new mechanic over Obliterate but still too powerful to just growing veto spells. Starting with Dissolve to protect the book. For 2 spell points and 7 mana, this is too much. "Spells bound cost double to cast" is a more appropriate power level?

The Black Contract v2. This is well costed, simple and elegant. Does it need Magecast (as "Mage X Only" is a book inclusion condition)?

Lich's Soulstone v2. Too good, easy to abuse, too similar to "The Black Contract". Living enchantments will slip off, mage can guard his soulstone, Death Ring gives Necro discount. I'd just change benefits to just "Mage gains Indestructible, Finite Life and Pest". To become indestructible like this is a big deal, it needs nerfing. Does not need Unique if Epic. I'd allow it to be range 0-1 like other Zone Exclusives.

Orb of Immolation v2. I think the most elegant benefit would be "At the start of Upkeep, every object that has at least 1 burn marker gains an extra 1 burn marker." This is a rework of your new extra text. That's good enough to "keep the fires burning" so to speak. I'd reduce it to Cost 8 Fire 2 as it is Fire Mage Only, in line with other Epics.

Haunted v3. Looks great. Needs Spirit support. You've listed a few already (Shadow, Nightmare etc).

Standing Orders v3. It's delayed. It's telegraphed. It doesn't explain free persistent benefit of Mongoose Agility over Evade, Critical Strike over Piercing Strike, Bear Strength over Power Strike etc. And then there is the very fiddly Channel on an enchantment that doesn't work (where do you put mana?). Instead I urge you to simply rewrite the text to "You may reveal only when this creature is activated. Search your spellbook for any non-Epic Command, reveal it and pay its cost, returning it to your spellbook. This creature is considered under its effect for this action. Destroy this enchantment." So it is a very versatile one-shot Copy Command so exactly the right Command can be issued as a deferred action. It would be "Prescient Orders", new flavour text. But the game cannot accommodate channelling on an enchantment.

Dreamwalker v3. Looks awesome! My only cosmetic quibble is to maybe change "Presence" to "Touch" as it requires a melee attack?
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on November 04, 2013, 08:51:23 PM
Quote
The Book of Secrets v2. I like the new mechanic over Obliterate but still too powerful to just growing veto spells. Starting with Dissolve to protect the book. For 2 spell points and 7 mana, this is too much. "Spells bound cost double to cast" is a more appropriate power level?

How's this as a solution to binding Dissolve/Explode/Corrosive Orchid/etc?
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1824938_md.jpg)
Now you can bind as many defenses for the book as you like, but it will cost you. This also gives the Archivist a way to get rid of the book if he has bound a dissolve but later decides he wants it back.

Quote
Lich's Soulstone v2. Too good, easy to abuse, too similar to "The Black Contract". Living enchantments will slip off, mage can guard his soulstone, Death Ring gives Necro discount. I'd just change benefits to just "Mage gains Indestructible, Finite Life and Pest". To become indestructible like this is a big deal, it needs nerfing. Does not need Unique if Epic. I'd allow it to be range 0-1 like other Zone Exclusives.

The Nonliving aspect of Soulstone is important to its theme, and I can't think of a good explanation for the Pest trait. Here is an alternative that prevents the necromancer from guarding his soulstone and may be either an advantage or a colossal drawback, depending on his situation: Bloodthirsty +2. It makes sense, since the undead seem pretty hungry for living flesh/blood in general. Altered card:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1824939_md.jpg)

Quote
Standing Orders v3. It's delayed. It's telegraphed. It doesn't explain free persistent benefit of Mongoose Agility over Evade, Critical Strike over Piercing Strike, Bear Strength over Power Strike etc. And then there is the very fiddly Channel on an enchantment that doesn't work (where do you put mana?). Instead I urge you to simply rewrite the text to "You may reveal only when this creature is activated. Search your spellbook for any non-Epic Command, reveal it and pay its cost, returning it to your spellbook. This creature is considered under its effect for this action. Destroy this enchantment." So it is a very versatile one-shot Copy Command so exactly the right Command can be issued as a deferred action. It would be "Prescient Orders", new flavour text. But the game cannot accommodate channelling on an enchantment.

Good idea for a new card. I think standing orders can still be made to work, though. I'll think about possible revisions. Though I don't think it necessarily needs channeling, I don't in general agree that enchantments with channeling are impossible. If I understand you correctly, your objection is that there isn't space to place mana on an enchantment since it is underneath the enchanted object. I don't think this would be such an issue, though; part of the card sticks out, and there should be enough space there. Alternately, channeled mana could go on the creature (if it does not channel) or even next to it. Players should not have difficulty remembering what it means, provided there are not a lot of channeling enchantments attached to the same object.

Thinking about other suggested revisions. It may take a while to revise more of the cards. In the meantime, here are some new cards with mechanics centered around alternatives to killing monsters; specifically, returning them to players' spellbooks:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1824935_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1824929_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on November 06, 2013, 04:49:50 PM
I thought of a more elegant way to implement prophecy mechanics.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1826806_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1826810_md.jpg)

Edit: forgot to add that spells targeting the arena are not affected by Premonition. Will add next time I update the Prophet card.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on November 15, 2013, 02:16:05 PM
Been busy lately. I realize that I haven't updated many of the older cards, but right now I feel more motivated to create new ones. I'll get around to addressing concerns with the older cards eventually.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1836472_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1836473_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1836474_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on November 15, 2013, 02:35:18 PM
I like Painbound Link. I think the damage should round up instead of down though. Make it a direct opposite of Vampiric. I would then either remove the Daze component or increase the cost.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on November 16, 2013, 12:23:35 AM
Pain bound link looks really cool. Have you looked at my thread about my idea for a Sympath? This spell seems quite fitting for her.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on November 16, 2013, 12:43:35 AM
I also like the idea of "bounce" cards such as Retreat and Exodus. I think I would make the mana cost of Retreat equal half the mana cost of the target creature. Possibly more than that. Just seems more fair to me. As it is, it is cheaper to cast than sleep and more difficult to overcome.

Another solution might be for you to pay a cheap price to return the creature, but the owner of the creature receives a refund of mana.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on November 16, 2013, 11:45:00 AM
I like Painbound Link. I think the damage should round up instead of down though. Make it a direct opposite of Vampiric. I would then either remove the Daze component or increase the cost.

Good suggestion. I'll do that. The Daze clause of the card was added purely for theme (for one linked psychically to his victims, death could be quite traumatic), but it may be more than the card needs.

Pain bound link looks really cool. Have you looked at my thread about my idea for a Sympath? This spell seems quite fitting for her.

I didn't have the sympath in mind, but you're right, Painbound Link does look perfect for her. It even matches her trainings.

I also like the idea of "bounce" cards such as Retreat and Exodus. I think I would make the mana cost of Retreat equal half the mana cost of the target creature. Possibly more than that. Just seems more fair to me. As it is, it is cheaper to cast than sleep and more difficult to overcome.

Another solution might be for you to pay a cheap price to return the creature, but the owner of the creature receives a refund of mana.

I should probably point out that only friendly creatures may be targeted by retreat, and only if they are soldiers. Otherwise, you are quite right that it would be far too cheap. The intent is to give a cheap way to get a valuable damaged soldier (Thorg, for instance) back into your spellbook so you can bring him out again after he has "recovered", thus saving on spellbook points (since Thorg + Retreat is cheaper than Thorg x2). My reasoning for the pricing is that Resurrecting a creature has the same cost (level + mana cost) in terms of mana. Of course, retreat has an advantage in that it is cheaper in spell points than Resurrection and can prevent a creature from being devoured or otherwise kept from the discard pile. The disadvantage is that it takes more actions and requires removing the creature yourself before it dies, rather than squeezing every last action out of it. Considering these advantages and disadvantages, I am not convinced that a mana refund is necessary.

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1837395_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on November 16, 2013, 01:17:28 PM
Ah, I somehow missed the target of "friendly soldier creature". I saw the effect and immediately jumped for joy at a way to bounce my opponent's creatures back to his spellbook. I still think that bounce is a cool mechanic that should be explored. I can imagine both incantations and enchantments that could have the effect (both for friendly and/or opponent spells) as well as creatures with it built in.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on November 17, 2013, 10:58:01 AM
Ah, I somehow missed the target of "friendly soldier creature". I saw the effect and immediately jumped for joy at a way to bounce my opponent's creatures back to his spellbook. I still think that bounce is a cool mechanic that should be explored. I can imagine both incantations and enchantments that could have the effect (both for friendly and/or opponent spells) as well as creatures with it built in.

I agree. Currently, I think the only official implementation of "bounce" mechanics are in Jinx, changing bound spells, and cantrips. Definitely a lot of room for exploration.

Catching up on feedback, slowly:
Runic Haste. I like Enhancement as your solution to 2-for-1 loss of Enchant Equipment. I appreciate that a quick action Hunting Bow could not be used twice (only quick spells may be cast with QC marker). However, I am  wary of enablers like this. A future full action ability could become broken with this so its existence restricts future design.

Yes, you make a good point. I can see how things like the Meditation Amulet could become too powerful. What if Runic Haste only hastes attacks? I think there is a limit to how reliant an attack can be on its Full Action status to balance it.

New status remover, in the same spirit as Reanimate Flesh:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1838364_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on November 17, 2013, 11:14:36 AM
I dislike Hellforged Cautery being Fire and Dark. Condition removal is the realm of the Holy School.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on November 17, 2013, 12:15:46 PM
I think it's mostly fine. Fire cauterizes wounds, although it comes at the price of a lot of pain (and burns too) So perhaps it would be better to replace non-burn conditions with a burn for each one that was removed, rather than taking direct damage? Maybe give the choice of how many conditions are replaced with burns?

Like Zuberi said, true condition removal is holy school territory, but I think "healing" that comes at a price is fitting for the dark school, or at least the warlock.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on November 17, 2013, 01:17:28 PM
Quote from: Imaginator
I think it's mostly fine. Fire cauterizes wounds, although it comes at the price of a lot of pain (and burns too) So perhaps it would be better to replace non-burn conditions with a burn for each one that was removed, rather than taking direct damage? Maybe give the choice of how many conditions are replaced with burns?

Like Zuberi said, true condition removal is holy school territory, but I think "healing" that comes at a price is fitting for the dark school, or at least the warlock.

I don't like replacing with Burn Conditions at all. Not all conditions are made equal, which is the point of removal costs to begin with. I'm uneasy actually with basing the damage off of half the removal cost, because that reduces the difference between conditions. I would almost like for the damage to equal the removal cost, but that is a really steep price to pay. You'll regain a loss of mana to pay for removal costs, but regenerating damage is not so easy. Thus, I will accept that the damage is equal to half the removal cost, but replacing with Burn Conditions could be a detriment, an improvement, or a simple trade and I don't like it.

As to the Holy vs Dark issue, to me it seems that the pain and the price is coming from the Fire portion of the spell. I don't see what Dark is contributing to it at all. It is unnecessary, makes no thematic sense, and breaks down the boundaries between the Schools of magic that make them distinct. Making it Fire + Holy would explain all effects of the spell, be thematic, and remain within the parameters of existing canon. If instead, you want to give condition removal to a different school and break from tradition, then you could simply make it a single school spell.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on November 18, 2013, 06:12:16 PM
I think it's mostly fine. Fire cauterizes wounds, although it comes at the price of a lot of pain (and burns too) So perhaps it would be better to replace non-burn conditions with a burn for each one that was removed, rather than taking direct damage? Maybe give the choice of how many conditions are replaced with burns?


I don't like replacing with Burn Conditions at all. Not all conditions are made equal, which is the point of removal costs to begin with. I'm uneasy actually with basing the damage off of half the removal cost, because that reduces the difference between conditions. I would almost like for the damage to equal the removal cost, but that is a really steep price to pay. You'll regain a loss of mana to pay for removal costs, but regenerating damage is not so easy. Thus, I will accept that the damage is equal to half the removal cost, but replacing with Burn Conditions could be a detriment, an improvement, or a simple trade and I don't like it.

Well, the average damage done by a burn is 3, and removal costs are typically 2 or 4, so in general this proposal would make the spell even more damaging. On the other hand, burns aren't too difficult to remove if you come prepared. As Zuberi states, it is probably a good idea to tie damage to removal costs. Originally, I had intended for the damage to equal the removal cost, for simplicity. Then I looked at the removal costs for the conditions one would typically remove, and decided that it would be too painful that way.

As to the Holy vs Dark issue, to me it seems that the pain and the price is coming from the Fire portion of the spell. I don't see what Dark is contributing to it at all. It is unnecessary, makes no thematic sense, and breaks down the boundaries between the Schools of magic that make them distinct. Making it Fire + Holy would explain all effects of the spell, be thematic, and remain within the parameters of existing canon. If instead, you want to give condition removal to a different school and break from tradition, then you could simply make it a single school spell.

Perhaps it might help if I explain the inspiration for this spell. I was originally thinking of making a "cauterize" spell to stop bleeding. Unfortunately, bleed is a pretty specific condition, and such a spell would likely never see its way into a spellbook due to its specificity (besides which bleed is already pretty easy to remove). So I decided to keep the idea of purging conditions using fire, but broadened the scope of the flames so they could burn almost any condition out of the target. Clearly, this goes beyond the scope of normal flames, so some other magical component is necessary.

You suggest holy as a second school; holy was actually the first school that I considered ("Cleansing Flames"), but ultimately decided that making it dark was better for a couple of reasons:

1. The holy school already has numerous ways to deal with conditions. Though this spell is versatile, I can't really see any holy mage choosing it over other, less painful options.

2. The theme of sacrificing life or suffering damage in exchange for some benefit is thoroughly dark, as Imaginator notes.

3. Currently, I feel that the holy school has too much of a monopoly on condition removal, a broad category of mechanics. This will change somewhat with the release of cards like Purge Mind (I think that's what it's called), but we need some alternatives.

While I believe that it is necessary to maintain boundaries between different schools of magic, I don't believe that the category of "mechanics that remove status conditions" is something that ought to be restricted to one school. The Holy school should definitely have the simplest, most straightforward spells in this school (in much the same way that the arcane school has the most straightforward antimagic spells), but I think there is still scope for other schools to have more restrictive, conditional alternatives. In this case, Hellforged Cautery gives the warlock a way to burn conditions out of himself or others, which is certainly more painful than magicking them out.

Thematically, the flames of hell will burn out any weakness. Does this rationale make sense?

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1839829_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on November 18, 2013, 07:40:35 PM
Your reasons are well thought out and make sense. I am still not a big fan of the spell, but I understand where you are coming from.

Meanwhile, I am a huge fan of Overextend. It looks fantastic.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on November 19, 2013, 10:58:38 PM
Thanks. Overextend is yet another example of an action-oriented command (as opposed to commands which grant temporary traits, which I feel commands should get away from).

Here' s a card inspired by the Cursed Equipment thread:

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1841081_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on November 27, 2013, 07:59:13 AM
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1848406_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1848409_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1848408_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1848407_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on December 01, 2013, 07:04:24 PM
Finally some updates to old cards:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1852782_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1852780_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1852781_md.jpg)

And a new card:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1852778_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: baronzaltor on December 01, 2013, 07:27:23 PM
I dislike Hellforged Cautery being Fire and Dark. Condition removal is the realm of the Holy School.

To me it seems the schools usually don't have territory over the ends, rather they tend to define the means.

Mind also has a condition removal spell for example.  (Clear Mind, from the more recent Organized Play kit)

A good example though is Resurrection vs Animate Deadů neither school has a signature of raising the dead, simply how they do it. (one brings back a fresh brand new version of the creature, the other is cheaper, but brings back a slow and damaged zombie version.)

Healing is another example: healing in the traditional sense is Holy most of the time, healing by taking from others tends to be dark (Vampirism, Drain Soul, Drain Life) and healing via regrowth tends to be natures way of doing it.
None of them specifically have a claim to healing as a concept unto itself, simply on their style of doing so.

So, Holy really only has claim to condition removal in the form of purification and traditional healer style divine magic.   
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on December 02, 2013, 05:19:23 AM
To me it seems the schools usually don't have territory over the ends, rather they tend to define the means.

Excellent way of putting it; thanks. Schools should specialize in means, not ends. Maybe it is not necessary for every school to have a way of accomplishing a particular end (on the other hand, why not?), but no school should have a monopoly over a significant game mechanic.



Rethinking some Illusion spells:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1853188_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1853187_md.jpg)

A staff for the illusionist:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1853186_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on December 02, 2013, 07:10:52 AM
Quote from: ACG
Schools should specialize in means, not ends.

I can agree to this statement, and I acquiesce that there is nothing inherently wrong with your design decision to make Hellforged Cautery both Fire and Dark. It just isn't the route I think that I would have taken.

I like the improvements you made to Mirror World. The previous incarnation was overpowered in my opinion. The new version is still really powerful. Gaining 4 channeling and 2 actions for the price of 16 mana is an insane deal. However the drawbacks of each creature having an Upkeep cost and the existence of the creatures being dependent on Mirror World's continued existence might be enough to balance it out. I'm not 100% certain. It is kind of a hard card to judge, but very interesting! I would love to see how it tests out.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ringkichard on December 02, 2013, 09:23:55 AM
I'm a firm believer that schools should be restricted from both means and ends, because one of the game's big strengths is the way the ends follow from the means. Restricting means but not ends turns means into window dressing. If there's a dark heal spell and a light heal spell and a earth heal spell and a mind heal spell then why have all the different schools at all?
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on December 02, 2013, 09:39:34 AM
Restricting isn't the same as banning. The dark and nature schools both have healing. But the Holy school has the most and the best healing.

I think certain types of effects and mechanics that "belong" to a specific school can still be used to an extent by other schools' spells. Those spells just won't be as powerful or as plentiful.

Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on December 02, 2013, 09:51:48 AM
Healing was probably a poor example to choose to prove your point Ringkichard. There actually already is a Dark Heal spell, a Holy Heal spell, and a Nature Heal spell. For example: Vampirism, Heal, and Regrowth.

The point of having different schools is to have different play styles. You want each school to play differently and feel differently. At least that's my opinion. You could accomplish this goal by having each school be completely incapable of performing the same tasks. However, you could also accomplish this goal by having them perform the same tasks in different ways. I'm not sure which solution that I prefer, really. I just know that I do want them to remain feeling distinct.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on December 07, 2013, 08:50:18 PM
I like the improvements you made to Mirror World. The previous incarnation was overpowered in my opinion. The new version is still really powerful. Gaining 4 channeling and 2 actions for the price of 16 mana is an insane deal. However the drawbacks of each creature having an Upkeep cost and the existence of the creatures being dependent on Mirror World's continued existence might be enough to balance it out. I'm not 100% certain. It is kind of a hard card to judge, but very interesting! I would love to see how it tests out.

Yes, I agree that the old version was too powerful (I thought of a better way to do it shortly after I posted it). I also prefer a soft limit to a hard limit (upkeep costs rather than an expiration date). I am hoping that the upkeep cost will be enough to balance the high channeling and action advantage.


Updated version of Atraxus:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1859197_md.jpg)

New cards:

A sort of spell mimicking quasi-familiar:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1859200_md.jpg)

A new tree for the Druid, with support for Conjuration-Swarm (my current favorite build):

[edit: just realized that there is a typo (says vine instead of tree). I will fix this the next time I update it].
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1859201_md.jpg)

And some alternate mages:

Alt Warlock: Somewhat masochistic and very aggressive. Focuses on the fire aspect of warlocks, rather than the demons and curses side. Note the low channeling (need to fight to amp up the mana generation)

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1859207_md.jpg)

Alt Wizard: More focused on tricksyness and flexibility than her counterpart. Not sure whether Flexible mind is overpowered/underpriced. Opinions?

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1859208_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on December 08, 2013, 12:14:27 AM
I like Atraxus having different traits depending on who has initiative.

The Lazy Apprentice sounds interesting. The name evokes the idea of a creature rather than a statue in my head though.

I really like Wychwood Mangler. A tree you can bind with that can defend itself sounds pretty cool. I think I would still prefer Vine Tree, but it gives a very interesting alternative.

With the alternate Warlock, I think Master of Pain is a cool idea but something tells me it will need tweaked a little in play testing. I'm not certain if it would fully balance out the 8 Channeling. Maybe have something she can use when not getting beat on such as during the first few rounds. Perhaps simply once per round during the upkeep phase she can take X damage and gain Y mana.

I'm not a fan of Pyromancy on her. Binding a Flame Attack spell (to her?) is decent, but the healing from Burns is not a good idea. First off, it is useless against a great many opponents, and then when it does come into play it is overpowered. Turning a negative condition into a positive condition completely flips the power dynamic of that mechanic.

Bloodlust is a cool idea. Is better than giving her the generic Battle Skill ability.

For the alternate Wizard, I honestly don't like your Blink Mechanic. It just seems too random. The chance that I end up not moving at all, or in a zone I don't wish to go to, is just too great. Meanwhile, the Flexible Mind ability is not useful at all unless the Wizard is swinging a weapon or meditating because she won't have a 3rd spell to cast. If instead you change it to where she does get to prepare a 3rd spell, I would consider that benefit enough. Having 3 spells to choose from would give her increased flexibility and I see no need for her to get an extra cast each round on top of that.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on December 08, 2013, 11:45:42 AM
With the alternate Warlock, I think Master of Pain is a cool idea but something tells me it will need tweaked a little in play testing. I'm not certain if it would fully balance out the 8 Channeling. Maybe have something she can use when not getting beat on such as during the first few rounds. Perhaps simply once per round during the upkeep phase she can take X damage and gain Y mana.

Yes, I was unsure of how to implement it without making it too powerful or weak. At first, it granted 2 mana but could only be used once per round. As it currently stands, I think the main effect is to encourage her to get into battle as soon as possible. Would it be overpowered if she had 9 channeling instead of 8?

With respect to taking damage for mana, it's a good idea, but I have already implemented it with the bloodmage (which is in need of some revision, incidentally) and feel that it fits better there. This is a slightly different flavor - rather than sacrificing health for power, the Warlock's power is amped up in the heat of battle (which fits with bloodlust).

I'm not a fan of Pyromancy on her. Binding a Flame Attack spell (to her?) is decent, but the healing from Burns is not a good idea. First off, it is useless against a great many opponents, and then when it does come into play it is overpowered. Turning a negative condition into a positive condition completely flips the power dynamic of that mechanic.

My thinking was that many of the burns might come from the warlock herself, if she uses spells that hurl fire around without much in the way of targeting (e.g. Firestorm or the salamander I am working on). Of course, she is still vulnerable to the flame damage itself, so she would want to load up on armor/aegis (since -Flame would make burns less likely). It also synergizes well with the Orb of Immolation.

Possibly overpowered; not sure. Fire is so attractive in the current meta that I don't feel too bad encouraging other strategies, and she can still be harmed by the flames. If gaining burns becomes extremely easy, it could be a problem, though. Other opinions?

For the alternate Wizard, I honestly don't like your Blink Mechanic. It just seems too random. The chance that I end up not moving at all, or in a zone I don't wish to go to, is just too great. Meanwhile, the Flexible Mind ability is not useful at all unless the Wizard is swinging a weapon or meditating because she won't have a 3rd spell to cast. If instead you change it to where she does get to prepare a 3rd spell, I would consider that benefit enough. Having 3 spells to choose from would give her increased flexibility and I see no need for her to get an extra cast each round on top of that.

I find your reaction very interesting, because I had been concerned that Alt Wizard was overpowered. Blink is random, but it means that Alt Wizard is essentially immune to being stuck or entangled by conjurations, and can easily escape from slow creatures or get to a range where minimum range>1 weapons can be used. I even nerfed it so that it can only be used once per round. As you say, though, if you are not in NC when you use it, there is a 1/4 - 1/2 chance that nothing happens, and a small chance that you might teleport back to the same zone. As for Flexible Mind, there are other ways for the Alt Wizard to get extra spells to cast, such as Mordok's tome or a wand (both of which are very affordable for her). It also gives an inferior version of Fast, since she can run two zones and then use quickcasts. Your skepticism is encouraging; if I think it is overpowered and you think it is underpowered, maybe it is just right (or maybe the sample size is too small to draw conclusions). I appreciate the feedback.

Another option that I considered for the Alt Wizard was letting her quickcast be used to cast full spells (instead of having an extra one); that might be too much though. I will probably use it for a different mage.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on December 09, 2013, 04:16:26 AM
Quote from: ACG
Yes, I was unsure of how to implement it without making it too powerful or weak. At first, it granted 2 mana but could only be used once per round. As it currently stands, I think the main effect is to encourage her to get into battle as soon as possible. Would it be overpowered if she had 9 channeling instead of 8?

With respect to taking damage for mana, it's a good idea, but I have already implemented it with the bloodmage (which is in need of some revision, incidentally) and feel that it fits better there. This is a slightly different flavor - rather than sacrificing health for power, the Warlock's power is amped up in the heat of battle (which fits with bloodlust).

The main thing I was thinking about was the fact that it typically takes 3 rounds for combat to start. By that time, she has a 6 mana deficit compared to a large number of her opponents, and the only way for her to compete with their channeling, much less make up this deficit, is to get the crap beaten out of herself. Just doesn't seem like it would work that well in her favor.

Maybe instead of basing it off of her taking damage, you could base it off of her inflicting damage. Of course then you might just want to give her the Mana Drain ability instead of a new ability. Increasing base channeling to 9 is also an idea, thereby reducing the deficit that she needs to compensate for. I'm not completely certain how I would go about fixing it, because I do like the flavor and want you to keep it, but as it currently stands it just seems like too much of a penalty.

Quote from: ACG
My thinking was that many of the burns might come from the warlock herself, if she uses spells that hurl fire around without much in the way of targeting (e.g. Firestorm or the salamander I am working on).

I didn't think about self infliction. With Firestorm you inflict an average of 5 damage on yourself, not counting armor reduction, and gain an average of 1.8 healing. This does increase the benefit of that spell significantly when you cast it in the same zone as your mage, causing you to only take an average of 3.2 damage while opposing creatures take 6.8 average damage. None of the other existing Flame attacks would ever make any sense to inflict upon yourself, though there may be creations from you that do.

This ability would depend on the meta environment. If your opponent's often use Flame attacks, then this is a really good ability. If your opponent's don't, then this is a really poor ability. Unless cards come out to support self infliction, you can't really build anything around this ability.

Quote from: ACG
Blink is random, but it means that Alt Wizard is essentially immune to being stuck or entangled by conjurations, and can easily escape from slow creatures or get to a range where minimum range>1 weapons can be used. I even nerfed it so that it can only be used once per round. As you say, though, if you are not in NC when you use it, there is a 1/4 - 1/2 chance that nothing happens, and a small chance that you might teleport back to the same zone.

With Blink, if you are standing in a center zone, you have a 1/4 chance of not moving. Standing next to a single wall is also a 1/4 chance of not moving. Standing in a corner zone is a 3/8 chance of not moving. That's a very significant chance of not much happening for your investment. Yeah, you get rid of any stuck type conditions you might have, but it seems pricey if that is all you accomplish. On the other hand, even if you do change position, you could end up teleporting some place you really did not want to go.

I would not take this as an accurate judgement of the power of the trait. I freely admit loads of bias by the fact that I simply don't want my positioning determined randomly. I would prefer if the trait was akin to the ability of Blue Gremlin and Gray Wraith, where you spend mana to change your move actions into teleports. Purely a personal preference though.

Quote from: ACG
As for Flexible Mind, there are other ways for the Alt Wizard to get extra spells to cast, such as Mordok's tome or a wand (both of which are very affordable for her). It also gives an inferior version of Fast, since she can run two zones and then use quickcasts.

You are correct, there are probably enough ways for her to utilize the extra spell. Which convinces me that it is overpowered then. I was originally coming from the position that she wouldn't often get to use a 3rd spell, but you have convinced me that she would be able to. This gives a huge action advantage over her opponents
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: lettucemode on December 09, 2013, 11:25:45 AM
ACG, I had an idea for a mana ability on a new, hyper-aggressive Warlock:

Mana Strain: Whenever the Warlock pays the mana cost for an effect she controls, she may pay 2 less mana. If she does, she gains the Channeling -3 trait until the next Upkeep phase.

Replace Master of Pain with that and put her channeling back up to 9. It's still an advantage/disadvantage tradeoff, but it's more controlled and should address Zuberi's points as well.

I really like Bloodlust as an alternative to Battle Skill, well done.

Lazy Apprentice is really cool! It seems a bit too awkward or swingy to play though. 14 mana to get it out is a lot, and once you do get it out it's pretty tough to destroy. I say keep the effects as is but lower the mana cost and durability.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on December 10, 2013, 12:20:51 PM

The main thing I was thinking about was the fact that it typically takes 3 rounds for combat to start. By that time, she has a 6 mana deficit compared to a large number of her opponents, and the only way for her to compete with their channeling, much less make up this deficit, is to get the crap beaten out of herself. Just doesn't seem like it would work that well in her favor.

Maybe instead of basing it off of her taking damage, you could base it off of her inflicting damage. Of course then you might just want to give her the Mana Drain ability instead of a new ability. Increasing base channeling to 9 is also an idea, thereby reducing the deficit that she needs to compensate for. I'm not completely certain how I would go about fixing it, because I do like the flavor and want you to keep it, but as it currently stands it just seems like too much of a penalty.

All right; I think I'll just bump her base channeling up to 9, then. I was worried that she might gain too much man from her ability, but of course it also requires that she take damage (and is controlled mostly by her opponent), so maybe it is not as powerful as I thought.

ACG, I had an idea for a mana ability on a new, hyper-aggressive Warlock:

Mana Strain: Whenever the Warlock pays the mana cost for an effect she controls, she may pay 2 less mana. If she does, she gains the Channeling -3 trait until the next Upkeep phase.

Replace Master of Pain with that and put her channeling back up to 9. It's still an advantage/disadvantage tradeoff, but it's more controlled and should address Zuberi's points as well.

Very nice idea. I think I will stay with the damage based channeling for the warlock, though. As a more flexible variation on your idea (for a future unspecified mage, probably a golem of some sort judging by the theme):

[Mage]Overclock: Once per round, when <Mage> casts a spell, he may gain X many Heat markers to reduce the cost of that spell by 2X. <Mage> has the Upkeep +X trait. During the Upkeep Phase, if his upkeep cost is paid, <Mage> may discard one Heat marker.[/Mage]

Still thinking about ways to change the fire ability. Also considering changes to the wizard.

With Blink, if you are standing in a center zone, you have a 1/4 chance of not moving. Standing next to a single wall is also a 1/4 chance of not moving. Standing in a corner zone is a 3/8 chance of not moving. That's a very significant chance of not much happening for your investment. Yeah, you get rid of any stuck type conditions you might have, but it seems pricey if that is all you accomplish. On the other hand, even if you do change position, you could end up teleporting some place you really did not want to go.

I would not take this as an accurate judgement of the power of the trait. I freely admit loads of bias by the fact that I simply don't want my positioning determined randomly. I would prefer if the trait was akin to the ability of Blue Gremlin and Gray Wraith, where you spend mana to change your move actions into teleports. Purely a personal preference though.

I think that there may be some miscommunication regarding the mechanics of Blink; each teleport is handled separately. So even if the second teleport is cancelled, the first one can still happen. So if you are in a center zone, while it is true that there is a 1/4 chance of your second teleport being cancelled (if it is to a border zone; otherwise it is guaranteed to happen), your first teleport is guaranteed to succeed. Also, each teleport is rolled for separately.

If the teleport was controlled, I think having it built into the mage would be overpowered.

Lazy Apprentice is really cool! It seems a bit too awkward or swingy to play though. 14 mana to get it out is a lot, and once you do get it out it's pretty tough to destroy. I say keep the effects as is but lower the mana cost and durability.

Point taken. I would rather have it see more use, so I'll cheapen/weaken it.

Some new cards (revisions of the old ones still cycling forward, as always):

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1861935_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1861936_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1861944_md.jpg)
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1861939_md.jpg)

Don't think I've posted this on this thread yet, so:
(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1856312_md.jpg)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on December 10, 2013, 01:06:23 PM
Quote from: ACG
I think that there may be some miscommunication regarding the mechanics of Blink; each teleport is handled separately. So even if the second teleport is cancelled, the first one can still happen. So if you are in a center zone, while it is true that there is a 1/4 chance of your second teleport being cancelled (if it is to a border zone; otherwise it is guaranteed to happen), your first teleport is guaranteed to succeed. Also, each teleport is rolled for separately.

I probably did choose my words poorly. With Blink 2 being random:

Start in center zone = First teleport has 100% chance to change zone = Second Teleport has 25% chance to return you back to your starting zone. Thus, you end up where you started at 1/4 of the time.

Start adjacent to a single wall = 6.25% chance of hitting the wall both times = 18.75% chance of teleporting to an adjacent zone and then teleporting right back into your starting zone = 1/4 of the time you end up where you started at.

Start in a corner zone = 25% chance to hit a wall both times = 12.5% chance of teleporting to an adjacent zone and then teleporting right back into your starting zone = 3/8 of the time you end up where you started at.

I would personally never use this ability. I would prepare a teleport spell instead. Positioning is just too important to leave up to chance. To pay 3 mana and an action to not move at all would be incredibly crappy. But even if you do move, you probably aren't going to end up where you wanted to go.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on December 17, 2013, 10:51:25 AM
I've been very busy lately, but here are a few more cards:

Building on the Mana Tree mechanics:
(https://dl-web.dropbox.com/get/mage%20wars/pending%20updates/Final%20Images/Mana%20Ring.jpg?w=AADlngKdxUs4D4nRaOhDCqKcl45sGVvMH9KrZNTL7RLupw)

A non-undead implementation of reanimate:
(https://dl-web.dropbox.com/get/mage%20wars/pending%20updates/Final%20Images/Phoenix.jpg?w=AAB5mzHPwto2fHmWwneSvSVepzIhDndcU8J5fKQSktij8A)

My attempt at partially solving the "teleport problem" that DeckBuilder and others have brought up with the game.
(https://dl-web.dropbox.com/get/mage%20wars/pending%20updates/Final%20Images/Voltaric%20Beacon.jpg?w=AAAFzmXB6ZAEzOkQzSlO-3LV8HVIgbzj7KMBaq1V-kzY6g)


Regarding blink, it sounds like there are disadvantages to range 2 blink compared to range 1; I'll have to reconsider it. Maybe I can just make it the same mana cost as the blink spell, then.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ringkichard on December 18, 2013, 02:25:39 PM
Those don't display for me.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on December 18, 2013, 10:20:26 PM
Yeah, you're right. Sorry; I've been having trouble uploading images to BGG lately, which is where I host these (trouble in the sense that I can't do it). They are too big to attach to my posts, and I don't know where else to host them, so I think I'll probably just wait until BGG fixes its image upload problems. Hopefully that will be soon.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on December 19, 2013, 05:05:06 PM
Never mind; I found an alternate image hosting website that is much more convenient than BGG. Problem solved! Plus, now I can upload my images as thumbnails so they aren't as big on the page.

I also made a custom codex to keep track of the custom traits defined so far.

(http://s13.postimg.org/4w5pox23n/Custom_Codex.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/4w5pox23n/)

(http://s13.postimg.org/ya1g4i4tf/Grahrk_Orc_Berserker.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/ya1g4i4tf/)

(http://s13.postimg.org/gzb1chd5v/Mana_Ring.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/gzb1chd5v/)

(http://s13.postimg.org/sptk7lvc3/Phoenix.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/sptk7lvc3/)

(http://s13.postimg.org/tgmaddxpf/Voltaric_Beacon.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/tgmaddxpf/)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on December 22, 2013, 12:34:27 PM
Here are some updates I finally got around to making:

(http://s17.postimg.org/rg077ipfv/Haste_Brand.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/rg077ipfv/) (http://s17.postimg.org/pph6617wr/Magisbane_Golem.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/pph6617wr/) (http://s17.postimg.org/q3ii5ms0b/Sire.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/q3ii5ms0b/) (http://s17.postimg.org/9z0oq5e17/Standing_Orders.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/9z0oq5e17/) (http://s17.postimg.org/uryi0th6z/The_Lazy_Apprentice.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/uryi0th6z/) (http://s17.postimg.org/nenpflmiz/Warlock.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/nenpflmiz/) (http://s17.postimg.org/dspjlk5zf/Wizard.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/dspjlk5zf/) (http://s17.postimg.org/yn1w3e0cr/Wychwood_Mangler.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/yn1w3e0cr/)

New cards:

(http://s28.postimg.org/a1r4d41pl/Embellish.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/a1r4d41pl/) (http://s28.postimg.org/muf8d1dbd/Haemophilia.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/muf8d1dbd/) (http://s28.postimg.org/p2teudkfd/Magisbane.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/p2teudkfd/) (http://s28.postimg.org/c8vd116zt/Soulbinder_Tooth_of_the_Ghast.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/c8vd116zt/) (http://s28.postimg.org/xwkbbh7e1/Wychwood_Creepervine.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/xwkbbh7e1/)

Updated Codex

(http://s30.postimg.org/8a1exd5fh/Custom_Codex.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/8a1exd5fh/)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on December 31, 2013, 04:50:47 AM
Some more spells:

Old cards updated

(http://s17.postimg.org/777q18uhn/Green_Slime.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/777q18uhn/)

I decided that Green Slime doesn't really need the cantrip trait. I also changed the flavor of its attack; rather than crippling (which didn't make all that much sense anyway), it makes its target stuck, presumably by oozing up around it.

(http://s17.postimg.org/63nlpa9uj/Mana_Amplifier.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/63nlpa9uj/)

Made some of the changes recommended by DeckBuilder. It is now legendary, and the wording is cleaned up a little. I also reduced the health and increased the armor to drop the cost a bit.

(http://s9.postimg.org/e0sdx624b/Plague_Moth.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/e0sdx624b/)

When I first made plague moth, Taratee had not been released and so there was no precedent for quickcast creatures. Now that there is, I decided to remake it to conform to Taratee's precedent. I also gave it a rotting attack (DeckBuilder's advice, again) and changed the ranged poison enchantment ability to make it less awkward. The original challenge was to spellbind an enchantment, but I'm sure I'll find a better way.

(http://s11.postimg.org/y1jzqaz0v/Predict_Fate.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/y1jzqaz0v/)

Changed the mechanics to make them more elegant, dispensing with the "fate" tokens.

(http://s11.postimg.org/b1dcdz173/Shadow.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/b1dcdz173/)

With the new Cloak of Shadows and the Shadow subclass, I decided to give Shadow an upgrade.

New Cards

(http://s27.postimg.org/z37xgszzj/Autoload.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/z37xgszzj/)

A little something for the warlord which should also help with Akiro's Hammer. I realize that others have recommended a "Goblin Engineer" to place load tokens, similar to the Goblin Builder's repair ability. I decided some additional upkeep costs were needed, so I made this an enchantment instead, ignoring the outrage from the goblin unions.

(http://s27.postimg.org/4zyglz31r/Finish_Them_Off.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/4zyglz31r/)

Unsure how to title this one. Mostly a way to obliterate creatures you don't want coming back, with some bloodthirst thrown in since I doubt people would run it otherwise.

(http://s28.postimg.org/lskj6nqd5/The_Arraxian_Covanant.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/lskj6nqd5/)

Warlocks should make pacts with demons; that's just the way things work. Blood reaper is a start. Here is another possibility. Note that the protection goes both ways - a "cannon fodder" defense will cost you life instead of damage (although, knowing warlocks, this may not be a major concern).

(http://s28.postimg.org/ebbbrg0u1/Warlord.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/ebbbrg0u1/)

My attempt at an alt-warlord. I realize that the triple arcane antitraining is a major issue, but I didn't want to break tradition. He has battle orders so that the Horn of Gothos isn't useless, but his orders have a different flavor than his orcish counterpart. His focus tends to earth rather than war, with Geomancy replacing veterans. He also is more defensive in personal combat, with Sturdy replacing Battle Skill.


As always, I welcome comments. With the new image hosting website I have found, updating cards is much easier than it used to be.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on January 05, 2014, 11:06:29 AM
I think the good thing about Blink is that your opponent can't predict your blinking creature's position. The problem is, neither can you. In order for Blink to be helpful, your blinking creature must be prepared for different possible positions. But keep in mind this can also be useful since you still have move actions left after blinking.

However, I don't think this strategy works for a wizard. I doubt a good wizard is ever going to want to zip around the board randomly. They're too calculating and methodical for that. When a wizard moves, it's intentional and planned. The blink ability would however be very useful on a mind mage. The blink ability is SO MUCH more useful if you have mongoose agility and cheetah speed, as well as forcepush/teleport thoughtspores so you can get anywhere in the arena VERY quickly. You keep talking about flexibility with this blinking wizard. While the wizard is flexible, I really don't think that's enough for him to teleport to random zones. I personally think it would be better if you redid it as a Nature/Mind mage.

In fact, this could be good for a shapeshifting mage. I just came up with a really good idea for this and am going to post it now.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on February 09, 2014, 10:51:45 AM
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/e80e7361f311d4704473.jpg) (http://www.use.com/e80e7361f311d4704473) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0437a4de54fcfe354330.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0437a4de54fcfe354330) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/4a2340dfe9d2d9353ed5.jpg) (http://www.use.com/4a2340dfe9d2d9353ed5) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/d9096d4b0c5fec73cbb3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/d9096d4b0c5fec73cbb3) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/c4dc084229535eda5d66.jpg) (http://www.use.com/c4dc084229535eda5d66)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on February 09, 2014, 11:30:41 AM
These cards raise a couple of questions for me. First, with command post would the mage be able to make up the difference in cost using their own mana like is normal for familiars, spawnpoints, and other such objects requiring mana expenditure?

Second, I am unsure how snatch would work originating from a wall with danglevine, and thus not coming from an actual zone to be pushed toward. With a range of 0-0 it can't target anything outside of its zone, but it's not in a zone, so can it not target anything? And if it does target something, say in one of the bordering zones, where does it push it towards? I could understand bashing it into the wall, but if the wall doesn't block passage it would be snatching the target over to the other side of the wall which involves moving away from the wall, which snatch can't do. You can't just push it into the walls space though because the wall is not in a space. And the vine can not target anything outside of the walls space anyways...just kinda confusing.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on February 09, 2014, 11:33:43 AM
Also, how does zone exclusive work on something that isn't occupying a zone? Seems a little meaningless to me.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on February 09, 2014, 12:06:35 PM
First, with command post would the mage be able to make up the difference in cost using their own mana like is normal for familiars, spawnpoints, and other such objects requiring mana expenditure?

Yes. I am using the precedent of Gray Wraith, which pays for its own teleportation (but the mage pays in practice since it has no channeling).

Second, I am unsure how snatch would work originating from a wall with danglevine, and thus not coming from an actual zone to be pushed toward. With a range of 0-0 it can't target anything outside of its zone, but it's not in a zone, so can it not target anything?

My intention was that the Danglevine is considered to be in both zones, but looking more carefully at the rules for walls, it looks like I need to make that more explicit. Thus, it pulls the thing from one zone into the other.

Also, how does zone exclusive work on something that isn't occupying a zone? Seems a little meaningless to me.

You're right; that was a typo. Zone exclusive is meaningless in this context, and was not intended.

Here is an updated Danglevine with these issues clarified.

(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/50da4145df612942fb09.jpg) (http://www.use.com/50da4145df612942fb09)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Zuberi on February 09, 2014, 02:57:41 PM
The update on danglevine helps a lot. It still feels a little messy to me, but it gets everything across and the concept of improving your walls is one I like. Overall nice job with all the new concepts, as usual.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on February 10, 2014, 06:38:34 PM
Can a creature with climbing use the Danglevine to climb faster?
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on February 13, 2014, 03:51:33 PM
Can a creature with climbing use the Danglevine to climb faster?

No - I don't think the Danglevine would like that.

(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/4cac492d3d1d67f2dade_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/4cac492d3d1d67f2dade?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/4cac492d3d1d67f2dade_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/4cac492d3d1d67f2dade?p=2) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/4cac492d3d1d67f2dade_3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/4cac492d3d1d67f2dade?p=3)

Edit: I updated the first page to include a list of all cards as of now.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on March 01, 2014, 09:17:05 AM
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8?p=2) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8_3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8?p=3) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8_4.jpg) (http://www.use.com/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8?p=4) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8_5.jpg) (http://www.use.com/aa37e3f0af3f385990e8?p=5)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on March 01, 2014, 12:17:47 PM
Hi ACG, long time no speak about your cards. We used to chat alot early in this thread (I encouraged you) then life got a bit busy.

As you know, I think you have incredible creativity and you come up with awesome off-the-wall ideas.
The only issue I have sometimes is balance in your great ideas.
Among playtesters, I'm the one who comes up with "too risky" or overpowered ideas that need curbing.
So when I find some of your ideas a bit extreme, imagine how it's taken in a more conservative setting!

Nevertheless, I'm a firm believer that the IDEA is what's priceless, the details can always be fine-tuned.
And you are full of innovative new mechanics that never ceases to amaze.

That said, some of these ideas are not as polished as some of prior work (a high standard to emulate).
You post these to collect feedback and there is nothing worse than nobody commenting so here's mine.
You know that I don't pull my punches so please don't take anything too personal (nothing harsh really).

(Caveat: I'm visiting family, no rulebook, bored hence feedback on your thread as the most interesting new one, so may be rules errors.)

Orb of Obsession
I love the idea, having to block LOS before moving etc. I would make it "non-mage enemy creature" else you are design restricting the Siren creature base. It's as wordy as one of my posts so I'd delete the last line of text. It's Psychic so most Nonliving (not Elementals) and Insects will be immune to it according the subtextual science behind Mage Wars (when they keep consistency). I would also make it Incorporeal as we need greater relevance for Ethereal (we have 3 creatures + 5 conjurations that are Incorporeal, we have at least 23 spells with Ethereal).

Reflection
Light is already the weakest damage type so it doesn't need this. It is also too situational, like Mind Shield, to be ever useful. This also does not add new mechanic, just an optional Reverse Attack for Light. If it was an optional redirect any attack to a friendly creature in your zone (Dark 1) which is funny ("what else are minions for?") then it would be more worthy of your usual creativity. Sorry but a miss in my books.

Sunflower
Ok, I know you like the Defensive Samara Tree Conjurations Druid build. But there is a reason why Flowers are all range 0-0 as they want to avoid Ballistas concentrating on 1 zone, giving you ready marker action firepower. This falls prey to the design flaw of Ballista (which is at least Zone Exclusive). If you made it Nature 3 range 0 then I think this may be more possible. However I really hate ready marker attacks, I think they made a huge error with Flowers because the issue of Temple of Light, Hand of Bim-Shalla and Wizard's Tower (not Sacrificial Altar as they nerfed recursion in Obliterate's wording) was down to having extra QC markers that are ready marker attacks. This was highlighted long before Flowers (even my Resources article highlighted ready marker attacks were incredibly valuable for flexibility and action burst). I was proposing solutions (like Winter Orb's 1 reset) to curb them so as to remove the ugly erratas (and hurt Wizard's Tower) then Flowers came out to legitimise this mechanic. So I am incredibly biased against these mechanics, as I was when I reviewed Ballista. So sorry again, ACG old chap, but this is plain broken as is and needs to be range 0-0 so at least you are limited to 3 Flower attacks max in each zone (due to the Highlander rule) - even then, that's potentially 6 Flowers attacking with a Snatch (non-futureproofed name for Siren's Pull) through Bloodspine all in 1 action burst. Just feel they opened Pandora's Box with Flowers (there are other ways to bypass Nullify to kill Teleport Wands) and this is Ballista-broken.

Blood Pact Robe
I like it. I would nerf it a bit but also make it more flexible. "The first time each round that this Mage takes damage from an enemy attack, place mana equal to that damage on Blood Pact Robe. Blood Pact Robe may summon a Demon whose level is less than the mana on it." Spawnpoints only summon in Deployment anyway, right? Also, I assume Spawnpoints must spend all mana on them? (I always do but is it compulsory?) If not, the Robes needs to stipulate this. The first time gives opponent tactical options and enemy ensures no cheesy self-attacks. Finally I think Enhancement is unnecessary, just give it the 3 Life cantrip effect of Libro Mortis. I'm starting to feel we should minimise new keywords unless they really add to the game and Enhance was added for Enchant Equipment to avoid 2-for-1 which I was never hugely taken with. It's personal prejudice. Overall though, a typical ACG nice idea.

Cursed
Too good. And you know what I think about fiddly mana on enchantments from your Spirit spawnpoint. So it will come as no surprise that I would remove the 1 Channeling, then it's definitely an interesting idea. Probably would be considered "too risky" though sadly. Another nice ACG idea, though its derivative of your Spirit spawnpoint.

Gate of Eternity
I love some of the mechanics (Suspend in Magic). My main issues is it doesn't get Passage Attacks trait so a Push cost 3 kills a mage! The game is totally against kill spells (Drain Soul closest) which I fully support. Also it should be Incorporeal (for reasons given above) and never gain Indestructible, another game principle (objects can be removed). So I'd rechrome it as (a) Incorporeal, (b) Blocks LOS, Passage Attacks and (c) "During each Upkeep, place a Time Token on Gate of Eternity. If a creature whose level is lower than the number of Time Tokens on it passes through it, move all Time Tokens to that creature and remove it from the arena, removing 1 Time Token each Upkeep until it has 0 Time Tokens when it reappears in a random zone (assign and roll a d12)." This is to prevent it being constantly pushed through if it always appeared in an adjoing zone. Because it's mandatory, this gives the opponent tactical plays to send sacrificial minions through allowing safe passage for others. Such a Wall need not be Epic Legendary, could be Extendable and unfortunately would need to be Arcane for Banish consistency. It still is your Time Token Wall idea, but applied to Banish. Clever cards like this would only work if Arcane 1 was the Universal school. Currently the version I've adapted would be an innovative but sadly meta-unbalanced idea. I like your thinking though.

Mycticore
I see no problem with Fungus growing on Golems. Just has to be "Corporeal Creature". I appreciate creature subtype is to provoke Wounded Prey but also create some other unwanted interactions like Rhino Hide and Bull's Endurance and Regrowth. You know how much I hated Plants being given Animal characteristics (as it moves an intuitive RPG skirmish simulation closer to Magic's ridiculous Loxodon Warhammer-wielding Birds of Paradise). So again this is personal taste. However, I like your idea of a Fungus that does damage to you if you fail to kill it in 1 round. It's a bit niche currently, just for Jokhtari Wounded Prey and even then not that good. I'd just change the wordy text to "During upkeep, remove all damage on Mycticore and place it on attached target.". I'd also add Cantrip or tone down level as it will be easy to overdo damage and kill it (aided by opponent) or to Teleport away, destroying it (don't clunkily nerf this as opponent used up a valuable Teleport). This version works well with Flame attacks too so not just for 1 function. It's a good idea but it feels extremely engineered, a bit more elegance is required in my books.

Riftmeister's Mantle
I've already suggested a similar cloak (not in Arcane, we can't give a school its own counters) and sadly, that did not fly. I appreciate competing with 2 great Cloaks has Opportunity Cost and as the first power is situational, you need to give a second power that will be always useful but feel giving a Mage Uncontainable and move action Climbing may be too much so I would add "Unless Restrained" to the second ability, else you are really hurting Nature and Mind which Restrain. You need re-chrome it to not be Arcane. Anyway, my similar idea didn't make it so this is a nice idea that's sadly ahead of its time. I suspect we may see something similar sometime in the future for whoever's still playing a cheesy-Teleport unbalanced game then.

Typing this, I really miss our chats. It's so refreshing to discuss ideas with someone where design, not theme, is the primary driver. You have a far more creative mind than me (I'm good at improving other people's spark of genius) but you need to address balance and meta as well, focus your creativity on what's needed in the game. I know that's hard when inspiration can't be channeled like mana. It's good to see you still crafting nice ideas. And some of your droll witty flavour text really appeals to me too ("the gift that keeps on giving"). I'm surprised there isn't a humorous (but subtle) STD reference for the fungus... Sadly none of my similarly droll flavour text gained favour so again it's a clash of styles I think, as I think they are aiming the game at parents playing with their children, or assume so from a lack of subtlety there.

And if I had a request, please can we have some more Murkh, the Anti-Mage? His flavour test had me in creases (he's my hero, can't wait for the Goblin Mage card) and more seriosuly, the anti-Arcane ideas are very relevant!

Keep up the good work, ACG. I may have been quiet (slightly on orders) but I do read and appreciate your posts here.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on March 01, 2014, 01:12:08 PM
Hi ACG, long time no speak about your cards. We used to chat alot early in this thread (I encouraged you) then life got a bit busy.

As you know, I think you have incredible creativity and you come up with awesome off-the-wall ideas.
The only issue I have sometimes is balance in your great ideas.
Among playtesters, I'm the one who comes up with "too risky" or overpowered ideas that need curbing.
So when I find some of your ideas a bit extreme, imagine how it's taken in a more conservative setting!

Nevertheless, I'm a firm believer that the IDEA is what's priceless, the details can always be fine-tuned.
And you are full of innovative new mechanics that never ceases to amaze.

That said, some of these ideas are not as polished as some of prior work (a high standard to emulate).
You post these to collect feedback and there is nothing worse than nobody commenting so here's mine.
You know that I don't pull my punches so please don't take anything too personal (nothing bard really).

Hello, Deckbuilder,

As always, I appreciate your extraordinarily detailed comments. And thank you for the kind words. My focus is also on mechanics design rather than balance, so I recognize that many of my cards may be over/underpowered.

For the most part, I'll try to implement some of your suggestions the next time I update these cards. I don't have the time to make/post cards as often as I would like, unfortunately.

Some specifics:

Re: Reflection
I realize the mechanics are not very new; my main goal was to provide a counter to the sunflower. Probably not necessary, though.

Re: Sunflower
Point taken.

Re: Blood Pact Robe
Spawnpoints don't have to spend all of their mana. Your suggestions are probably good for balance; I wanted to make it stronger because it provides no armor and takes up a body slot. I also considered making it an amulet, but that would probably be too good.

Re: Cursed
I am thinking of maybe giving it upkeep instead of channeling and lowering the casting cost.

Re: Mycticore
I originally wanted to make it much cheaper, but couldn't think of a way to avoid it being killed off too quickly. I am hesitant to make things cantrips too casually; maybe there could be some sort of Fungal equivalent of the Samara tree to give it that trait, and just reduce it to level one (with corresponding reductions in power)


And if I had a request, please can we have some more Murkh, the Anti-Mage? His flavour test had me in creases (he's my hero, can't wait for the Goblin Mage card) and more seriosuly, the anti-Arcane ideas are very relevant!

I'll see what I can do. If you have specific design challenges, I like having a concrete problem to work on (like how to make Wounded Prey or Rage more useful), but I'll post any Murkh related cards I think of otherwise.

Nice talking to you, as always.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: DeckBuilder on March 01, 2014, 01:32:04 PM
Re: Cursed
I am thinking of maybe giving it upkeep instead of channeling and lowering the casting cost.

Re: Mycticore
I originally wanted to make it much cheaper, but couldn't think of a way to avoid it being killed off too quickly. I am hesitant to make things cantrips too casually; maybe there could be some sort of Fungal equivalent of the Samara tree to give it that trait, and just reduce it to level one (with corresponding reductions in power)

I like your suggestions for Cursed
For Fungus, just make it level 1, it's niche, disposable does nothing unless attacked then you're risking opponent finishing it off.
Now if it did full damage and did not heal itself, that may interesting. Like rot markers that can be scraped off.
Which I guess is what "that nasty rash you caught from Grusilda the Troll" is actually.
You would need to parameterise carefully on Life, Level and Cost but such an evolution would be more usable.

As for Rage, let me dig up some "Resuscitating Unloved Cards" stuff I wrote.
My idea was simply to move the goalposts, rewrite the rules, so that current crap cards became playable.
Also add X cards that makes 3X existing unloved cards played - far more value than cards that don't do this.
But the game is very theme driven, only so much space in a set etc. So foiled again.
You can guess from the title what element we get alot of though instead...

Requests? More humorous flavour test please. Even if you need to reverse engineer a witty text into a card.
I need cheering up as I'm a bit depressed at the ostriche trajectory of the game.
And the inertia of influential ultra-conservative posters I keep clashing with who prefer no change or slow change.

Wake up, the woods are burning! So instead, let's all drip-feed possible solutions that may never materialise.
I've heard of "fighting fire with fire" but fire-fighting current issues this way is like putting out fire with gasoline.
(I think I've laboured the analogy to ashes.)

We want Murkh, the Anti-Mage! (Some of your best work was there, including his Acolytes)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on March 08, 2014, 11:32:15 AM
All right, some edits and some new cards:

First, the edits:
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=3) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_5.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=5) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_6.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=6)

Then, the new cards:

An antimagic crusader:
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=2)

Another present for the Johktari:
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_4.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=4)

The enchantment version of "Foresight"
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66_7.jpg) (http://www.use.com/0cb4db8afc1b9d56fc66?p=7)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on March 08, 2014, 01:22:11 PM
I think 38 might be too high for the Crusader. Fully trained mages are level 6 creatures and have a lot more life than a non-mage. If he does not use magic he is not a mage. Merely not being trained in a particular school of magic does not make him "antimagic", especially if he still can cast spells. If he were really against magic and those who use it he would not cast spells and could not participate in the Mage Wars without some sort of viable alternative to magic. Where does all that extra life and stat boosts come from if he's not trained in anything? Don't orcs have thick hide? Might be better with 1 innate armor and 25 life and then some other sort of edge. Or you could make him a half-giant or something, maybe big enough to be in two zones at once. That would be great for a solo position control strategy.

If they're not using mana and casting spells because they're against magic and magic users, then they need some other resource system. Otherwise I would say rework the theme of that mage to something other than an anti-magic crusader.


I came up with some ideas a while back for non-magical Arena fighters. Aside from the giant, who would probably be innately powerful and not have much need for tech, all the other ideas I came up with were for Ingeniers, who use technology to win their battles. I thought of 3 main schools of Ingeniering: Life, Chemicals, and Geography.

http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=13083.0

Also, I think the boomerang should be destroyed when its attack is cancelled by a successful defense, and should take a round to recharge after use, so that the boomerang has time to come back.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on March 08, 2014, 02:34:35 PM
I think 38 might be too high for the Crusader. Fully trained mages are level 6 creatures and have a lot more life than a non-mage. If he does not use magic he is not a mage. Merely not being trained in a particular school of magic does not make him "antimagic", especially if he still can cast spells. If he were really against magic and those who use it he would not cast spells and could not participate in the Mage Wars without some sort of viable alternative to magic.

I should probably make a comment regarding the intended theme of the crusader: he is anti-magic, but this does not mean that he does not use magic. Murkh and his disciples are somewhat hypocritical; though they condemn magic in all its forms, they are willing to tolerate its use in their quest to eradicate it. Murkh in particular was one of the most powerful mages of his day, although he (presumably) hated the self contradiction in his work (I think Murkh would probably be either pure arcane or arcane/war). But to destroy something, you first have to learn how it works, and it is difficult to be anti-magical without being magical. The crusader is capable of using spells, but his magical training focuses more on the suppression of magic than its use, hence the lack of training in any school. Enchantments are the most magical thing possible (objects of pure magic), so he eschews them out of loathing and zealotry.

I came up with some ideas a while back for non-magical Arena fighters. Aside from the giant, who would probably be innately powerful and not have much need for tech, all the other ideas I came up with were for Ingeniers, who use technology to win their battles. I thought of 3 main schools of Ingeniering: Life, Chemicals, and Geography.

http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=13083.0

Good ideas. Non-mage fighters could definitely be interesting, although there are some compatibility concerns (presumably mages would not be allowed to use non-mage tech, so it would be like a spinoff of Mage Wars that was still compatible with the rest of the game, using the same mechanics).

Also, I think the boomerang should be destroyed when its attack is cancelled by a successful defense, and should take a round to recharge after use, so that the boomerang has time to come back.

An excellent suggestion, I will implement that next time I update the card (regarding destruction upon successful defense). Regarding recharging, I don't think it is justified thematically (I think the boomerang would probably return by the next round given the time units of the game), and I don't think it is necessary for balancing, so I will probably hold off on that.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: wtcannonjr on March 23, 2014, 10:07:18 AM

You're right; that was a typo. Zone exclusive is meaningless in this context, and was not intended.

Here is an updated Danglevine with these issues clarified.

(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/50da4145df612942fb09.jpg) (http://www.use.com/50da4145df612942fb09)

Two comments on Danglevine.

1. Since it can only target a Wall you may want to turn the card to Landscape mode to match the format of all the Wall Conjurations. This helps to visually identify that this spell is not placed in a zone, but rather between zones on a wall.
2. I think it would simply the rules interaction about range attacks from a wall between zones by just removing the attack bar from the spell and creating the effect you want in the text section of the card similar to many other conjurations.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: kailas on March 23, 2014, 01:22:08 PM
you could use these for cards:
http://deligaris.deviantart.com/art/Mage-Wars-card-assets-374857744
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ringkichard on March 23, 2014, 02:02:34 PM
I'd be cautious with those.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: kailas on March 23, 2014, 02:33:53 PM
why is that?
Title: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Sailor Vulcan on March 23, 2014, 07:28:24 PM
Because the original card art is copyrighted. We need to be able to tell the difference between real mage wars cards and those not created by arcane wonders. Otherwise people might confuse fan cards, counterfeit cards and proxies with real cards.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: kailas on March 24, 2014, 04:20:28 AM
Simply writing fan art would solve that. Like promo cards have logo.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Shad0w on March 24, 2014, 09:10:11 AM
We need a spoiler tag enabled. So many images   :o
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on May 23, 2014, 08:27:41 AM
Updates of old cards:
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_5.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=5)

Some new cards, including help for the Priest (Malakai's Oath) and Johktari (Levitation Boots)
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=2) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=3) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_4.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=4)
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/67e402a0e98163613808_6.jpg) (http://www.use.com/67e402a0e98163613808?p=6)
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on October 19, 2014, 02:40:48 PM
It's been a while, but I have some updates and a few new cards to share.

First, the updates:
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995?p=2) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995_3.jpg) (http://www.use.com/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995?p=3) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995_4.jpg) (http://www.use.com/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995?p=4) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995_5.jpg) (http://www.use.com/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995?p=5) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995_6.jpg) (http://www.use.com/b9b66cd79e72e48d3995?p=6)
These are designed to balance the cards and bring them more into line with official rules (for instance, removing enchantment/attack spell/incantation immunity on the golem, which has no official precedent.

Atraxus - minor change (mainly, removed intercept for balancing)
Berserker Frenzy - reformatted. Now it behaves more like an ongoing battle fury. It still fulfulls the original purpose of making the gorilla more attractive as a creature.
Bog Mummy - original version was awkwardly worded. This one is more straightforward, and still innovative - a creature spawnpoint, which can cast spells and move/attacks at the same time! Note the limitation on casting range.
Grarhk - I think this rewording demonstrates the power of a simple innovation in mechanical description - the use of "Special" as a placeholder for an ability described below. This would simplify the number of keywords players have to know - for instance, thornlasher is the only creature with the snatch ability, so why not give it "Special" instead and describe the ability below? This card illustrates the power of this simple technique.
Harshforge Golem - with the advent of Harshforge, many of my magisbane cards make more sense rethemed as harshforge cards. Here is the first one. The golem now provides warlords with a another punishing counter to heavily enchanted creatures.
Mirror World - rewritten once again. Now it is more like the original incarnation, but taking advantage of the dissipate trait. Basically, the Illusionist's spawnpoint. No longer turns illusion creatures into cantrips, though.

And two new cards:
(http://media.use.com/images/s_1/541991581ab47255944d_1.jpg) (http://www.use.com/541991581ab47255944d?p=1) (http://media.use.com/images/s_1/541991581ab47255944d_2.jpg) (http://www.use.com/541991581ab47255944d?p=2)

Amulet of Haste - Ever since seeing the new wizard, I wondered how the hourglass would work. Here is my interpretation. It lets you bank a turn for later, which could be quite powerful (hopefully balanced by the need to use a full action and the inability to stockpile hasted turns.
Alt Wizard - This is mostly a way for me to showcase the "Memory Furnace" ability, which turns your unused spells into usable mana. Might be OP in current incarnation, but that just means it needs tweaking. Original mechanic gave mana equal to the level of the obliterated spell, which is way too powerful.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: echephron on November 16, 2014, 10:06:05 PM
I just made a druid and I wanted a magisbane lily

I would have paid 2nature and 7 mana, though i still say it should have an ethereal attack.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: ACG on November 16, 2014, 10:41:32 PM
Thank you for the pricing feedback.

Strange, I thought I had given it an ethereal attack, but you're right, it lacks one. I'll have to change that.

If you're just playing casually with friends, and feel like including a proxy in your book, I would be delighted to hear how it goes.
Title: Re: ACG's Custom Spells and Mages
Post by: Fausto on May 17, 2018, 03:44:04 PM
Hello, I know this is an old post, but I would like to test these cards, but a lot of the images are lost :(. How can I get the images to test them? Thank you and again sorry for writing in an old post.