Shadow Splinter
Mage Item - Artifact
Cost: (3)
If Shadow Splinter is a weapon when it is destroyed, it is returned to play.
(2SE): Shadow Splinter becomes a weapon with 3 base attack and 1 durability.
Shadow Splinter
Mage Item - Artifact
Cost: (3)
If Shadow Splinter is a weapon when it is destroyed, it is returned to play.
(2SE): Shadow Splinter becomes a weapon with 3 base attack and 1 durability.
-Doctor of Philosophy, A1 Alliance - Evolution in theory
Original designer of the Serena Superdraw® archetype; connoisseur of all things un-meta
Santa Bomb ©2011, Lamb Slam & Feedbomb ©2012 - All rights reserved
Zaladar - ZTC 3.0: The Feedbomb Dynamo <-- An iconic deck in Shadow Era history - SE v1.5
Listen to past episodes of State of the Era: a dialogue on all things Shadow Era, brought to you by Alliance One
We are all one mind, capable of all imagined, and all conceivable.
Returned to play as what? Artifact I'm assuming, otherwise would be pretty ridiculous.
"IT'S TIME TO DUEL!!!""The Magnificent."Account for any future SC transfers by Gondorian: BP tman507
Member of PFG3
Master of Hand-to-hand Combat
Warrior of the Blue Phoenix
Greatness, Reborn
Official Shadow Era Wiki Moderator
Of course an artifact. It’s an artifact to begin with, so when it re-enters play, it is its base self. You have to activate it to make it a weapon.
-Doctor of Philosophy, A1 Alliance - Evolution in theory
Original designer of the Serena Superdraw® archetype; connoisseur of all things un-meta
Santa Bomb ©2011, Lamb Slam & Feedbomb ©2012 - All rights reserved
Zaladar - ZTC 3.0: The Feedbomb Dynamo <-- An iconic deck in Shadow Era history - SE v1.5
Listen to past episodes of State of the Era: a dialogue on all things Shadow Era, brought to you by Alliance One
We are all one mind, capable of all imagined, and all conceivable.
I like it a lot!
2SE seems a bit costly, but this looks like it'd be tough to buff without breaking it.
Maybe taking an Amulet of Conjuring approach works better:
I also would prefer to give it a lightning or ice attack type, but that's just personal preferenceWhile Shadow Splinter is a weapon, it has Sustain: 1SE and is returned to play as an artifact when destroyed.
(0SE): If Shadow Splinter is an artifact, it becomes a weapon with 3 base attack and 2 durability, and remove 1 of your resources from play.
(Note: I used Clockwork Soldier and Living Ice Wall for reference on the wording.)
Last edited by Kross; 12-24-2018 at 07:38 PM.
Yeah, figured as much, was more so just thinking that the proper wording would specify returning as an artifact, as Kross's suggestion words it.Originally Posted by BlanketEffect
"IT'S TIME TO DUEL!!!""The Magnificent."Account for any future SC transfers by Gondorian: BP tman507
Member of PFG3
Master of Hand-to-hand Combat
Warrior of the Blue Phoenix
Greatness, Reborn
Official Shadow Era Wiki Moderator
I guess my point was that the wording doesn’t need to be included. The thing is only a weapon once it’s been activated. So if it goes to the grave and comes back, it comes back like anything - as though it had just been played (not summoned, mind you) so it would be as though you’d just cast it, in which case it is exactly what the card says it is: an artifact that can be activated to become a weapon. You don’t have to specify it comes back as an artifact; it IS an artifact. And if it hasn’t been activated since entering play it won’t be anything but what it is - it’s not ever going to come back as a weapon, so there’s no reason to specify what can’t happen anyway.
I get the point of the wording you’re saying. My problem with it is that it’s superfluous and unneeded, per the typical wording and the fundamental mechanics of the game itself.
As for your modification, Kross, it seems a bit expensive/costly.
(2SE) for 3 damage, on demand, and that your opponent has to use two sources to kill (if it’s a weapon on his turn) seems pretty strong, but at the same time, that’s (2SE) and nothing to scoff at, in terms of cost, especially on something like a turn by turn basis.i just don’t like the idea of a sustained cost on it like AoC, which basically destroyed its usability. It was everywhere, and then it was no where. That, to me, is the best indication that a card has been overnerfed - when EVERYONE used it, and then no one does.
(Edit: Yes, that’s how Clockwork Soldier is worded. That said, I believe THAT wording is superfluous, also. If it dies and goes to the grave, when it returns to play, it would have to be specified if it were going to stay an ally, because that wouldn’t be implicit,based on the mechanics of how the grave work. However, it shouldn’t need specifying at all, as when it goes to the graveyard, it loses all “memory” of having ever been an ally.)
Last edited by BlanketEffect; 12-26-2018 at 03:42 PM.
-Doctor of Philosophy, A1 Alliance - Evolution in theory
Original designer of the Serena Superdraw® archetype; connoisseur of all things un-meta
Santa Bomb ©2011, Lamb Slam & Feedbomb ©2012 - All rights reserved
Zaladar - ZTC 3.0: The Feedbomb Dynamo <-- An iconic deck in Shadow Era history - SE v1.5
Listen to past episodes of State of the Era: a dialogue on all things Shadow Era, brought to you by Alliance One
We are all one mind, capable of all imagined, and all conceivable.
Apologies if it sounds like I’m being deliberately argumentative or disagreeable, that isn’t the intended case. I’m just a minimalist when it comes to card wordings. I’ve always been of the mindset that there is no reason to include anything but the minimum card text to describe what the card does. I don’t like cards that state (if one knows the mechanics of the game) what could be determined, simply by reading the exact verbiage of the card and applying said game rules to what the card says it does.
It isn’t that I don’t think your concern/thought is valid, it’s that I find the extra specification in the verbiage redundant, and I don’t like that. Plus, even if it did confuse a novice player, the first time it was used it would clarify things pretty definitively, haha.
Last edited by BlanketEffect; 12-26-2018 at 05:11 PM.
-Doctor of Philosophy, A1 Alliance - Evolution in theory
Original designer of the Serena Superdraw® archetype; connoisseur of all things un-meta
Santa Bomb ©2011, Lamb Slam & Feedbomb ©2012 - All rights reserved
Zaladar - ZTC 3.0: The Feedbomb Dynamo <-- An iconic deck in Shadow Era history - SE v1.5
Listen to past episodes of State of the Era: a dialogue on all things Shadow Era, brought to you by Alliance One
We are all one mind, capable of all imagined, and all conceivable.
Bookmarks