[H&V] Heroes & Villains: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity
Mechanics | Heroic Decks | Archenemy Deck | Design Notes

CardName: Fetishes of Fortune Cost: 2R Type: Sorcery - Trove Pow/Tgh: / Rules Text: Install (You may play this card face down as an asset. At end of turn, it gets a charge counter. You may cast it keeping the charge counters.) Discard your hand, then draw a card for each charge counter on Fetishes of Fortune. Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: [H&V] Heroes & Villains Uncommon

Fetishes of Fortune
{2}{r}
 
 U 
Sorcery – Trove
Install (You may play this card face down as an asset. At end of turn, it gets a charge counter. You may cast it keeping the charge counters.)
Discard your hand, then draw a card for each charge counter on Fetishes of Fortune.
Updated on 13 Jul 2018 by SecretInfiltrator

History: [-]

2018-07-12 21:45:16: SecretInfiltrator created and commented on the card Fetishes of Fortune
Dwarf

or

Dungeon

Troves are complements to Traps that benefit the controller rather than hurt the opponent.

While face down, are they 2/2? Can the opponent do anything about them?

If not, how is the secrecy about which one it is important? Why not just set aside face up?

They are assets - a simplified variant of scenes/structures. The opponent can attack them and blast them with direct damage that isn't restricted to players or only certain permanent types (i. e. the "any target" variety).

The secrecy is relevant because Troves are assets you want to protect and accumulate counters on, while Traps (at least the ones not following the old template) are the ones you want your opponent to "run into" (what this entails is explored currently: attacking it, targeting it etc.).

Cards with printed card type asset are also imaginable - those then would be face up.

Is the "... keeping the charge counters" part necessary? I would image something like this would be more valuable: "Assets can be attacked and are destroyed by being dealt damage." The mechanics page doesn't mention the actual details of installing so I can't recall was it any amount of damage or was it somehow related to the number of charge counters.

The above link ("assets") contains the provisory rules that say: "Any amount of damage is enough to destroy an asset."

This obviously is subject to change once I get the critical mass of cards to playtest this, but currently the correct answer.

The phrase "keeping the charge counters" is not my favorite part of the reminder text and its removal is a question of playtest feedback.

I am working under the assumption that assets get as much reminder text as planeswalkers - currently being a really stripped down version of them.

Okay, I would suggest then: "Assets can be attacked and are destroyed by being dealt any amount of damage." Seems like an crucial thing to cover, especially when it can be done so easily.

> "I am working under the assumption that assets get as much reminder text as planeswalkers"

So... none at all?

> done so easily.

Breaking the length of allowed reminder text even if replacing another phrase is indeed a way to make things easy on yourself.

> So... none at all?

Exactly. The amount of reminder text right there. Morph doesn't tell you that a "2/2 colorless creature" can attack and block.

If it helps: In the grander scheme of things assets might get a chance at a previous introduction and will defintely have a rules insert for those who start out on this custom set.

Ok; I suggest the reminder for install to just be "Play as an asset" then. If we had custom card frames, doing that would also help a lot.

> I suggest the reminder for install to just be "Play as an asset" then.

That might be where I end up. Currently getting a charge counter is part of installing, but it might become an inherent ability to assets.

I'll know more after playtest which will happen the soonest in a month. If I keep my current pace and dedication to this particular project. (Insert laugh track.)

Only signed-in users are permitted to comment on this cardset. Would you like to sign in?