| Polaria: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
|
CardName: Burnfrost Axe Cost: 1rr Type: Snow Instant Pow/Tgh: / Rules Text: Burnfrost Axe deals 2 damage to target creature and an additional 2 damage to it for each counter on it. Flavour Text: This spell is capable of melting a square mile of frozen water, and boiling all the fish in that small lake Set/Rarity: Polaria Rare |
History: [-] |
Note: Whenever you create a card that deals damage to something (As opposed to lifeloss), you need to specify a source. On spells, the source is usually the card itself.
So for this it'll be "~ deals 7 damage to target creature."
Another note: Wizards avoids having numbers 7 or greater (or even 6 or greater) on common burn spells, because at around 6 damage or so, the spell basically turns into "destroy target creature". To differentiate black and red removal, they usually have red removal spells occupy damage amounts from 1-5, 6 on occasion, and save the large damage spells for higher rarities.
I like to sometimes see the simplicity of "This thin? Boom." But yeah, probably not a sensible common and sadly the damage nowadays has to come from somewhere. Shortest alternative would be "You" :)
cool it will be 5 :D I like 5 dmg spells, dont know why :P
I'd want this spell to at least do some damage on its own, or put a counter on target creature, to ensure it's never a dead draw (like if your opponent has no counters on any creatures at all). So like...
"~ deals 2 damage to target creature, and an additional 2 damage for each counter on it."
or
"Put a thaw counter on target creature. ~ deals 2 damage to that creature for each counter on it."
It's worth noting that even if you had a spell that deals 100 damage to a creature, barring some odd combo trickiness that involves redirecting damage, it's still not as good as the card Murder.
That means there's a maximum cap on how expensive a card that only deals damage to creatures can reasonably get, especially at rare. I'd say that it's proably
... but like I said... damage redirection. It might be a rare event, but it can't be outright ignored.
What I'm trying to say is that if a spell cost
, was an instant, and only dealt damage to creatures, I'd say it probably does... hmm... maybe 9-10 damage? Do you expect this card to deal more than 9-10 damage to a creature on average? If you're already dealing 9-10 damage to a creature, does it even matter any more that you can deal more damage than that?
chaldust online, i had the same idea, and i like it very much, edit inbound
Cool, then I am pocketing the 'thaw counter' idea for my own snow set. You've inspired me!
thank you very much! Enjoy!
This is like a Polarian Meteor Hammer