Custom Card Thread

custom-cards

#1

Wanted to create a thread to catalog and share everyone’s custom card ideas. Please reply with your custom cards! (Use http://faeria-cards.com/create/ to create your own)

See also:






#2

Here are my concepts, some of them are from the April contest.



#3

Lots of great stuff here, well done. The Kraken is likely a touch too strong, but the effects are all pretty unique, and best of all, promote the board/tactics/strategy/movement.

In terms of flavour, should the Parrot have flying?


#4

Thanks!

The Kraken is likely a touch too strong

I wanted to give it something that makes it useful late game as an aquatic creature, as it’s too easy for aquatic creatures to get stranded otherwise.

In terms of flavour, should the Parrot have flying?

Probably. Just an oversight.

Edit: here’s an updated parrot, now more like Birds of Paradise!


#5

And another card, just 'cus. Can you tell I want aquatic blue to be a thing?


#6

I like the idea and the flavour of the Kobold Bomber, but, balancing and color identity issues aside, I feel there’s a fatal flaw in it, and this flaw is hidden in the word “over”. I suppose what you had in mind while designing this card it is ilustrated by the white arrow in the following image:


But what happen in situations illustrated by black arrow? Are both creatures affected? None of them? One, chosen by some rule? Or probably each of them takes half of the damage? I can see how any interpretation can be viewed as “weird” or “inconsistent” by some players.


#7

Perhaps not fatal though, since players will get used to the exact delineation. It is understandable that it feels vague, and perhaps there is a more specific term in English (translation of course would likely not resolve this when moving the concept into other languages). The principle, to my thinking, is a good one because it is unique.

It is a worthwhile question - hopefully we can come up with a suitable resolution.


#8

The way I had it in mind was it only works if it jumps directly over the creature, so the white arrow would work but the black arrow would not. It is borderline, though.


#9

Here’s some more Aquatic synergy cards that could help make the archetype work.


#10

I read Flood as transform into an Ocean at first, which would be cool - although you’d have to add “unoccupied”.
I’m not sure about flooding a mountain, either - although I guess Baeru does.
It’s possibly stepping on green’s … turf :slight_smile:.
I guess the intended use is to give aquatic creatures access. That does seem strategic in a way, although it’s quite a gamble having a card like that in your deck.


Tsunami is yet more “random unexpected damage” - one more thing to worry about. IMHO the game already has a bit too much random damage - so much that you can’t really try and counter it all, you’ve just gotta cross your fingers.

So, i’d give it a 5 or 6 land cost (so that you get a good warning) and drop the price - that way it becomes strategic. I’m also thinking it doesn’t need the “flying or aquatic” qualifier from a gameplay perspective (as those are very color-specific - and fish do get owned by tsunamis).

I guess increasing the land-cost would put it into mid/late game, which means there’s already lots of land. Balancing it would be tricky then.

But the core mechanic is quite a good idea.


#11

I read Flood as transform into an Ocean at first, which would be cool - although you’d have to add “unoccupied”.
I’m not sure about flooding a mountain, either - although I guess Baeru does.
It’s possibly stepping on green’s … turf :slight_smile:.

I think green is king of land generation, blue of land manipulation, and red of land destruction (although only Meteor can destroy lands currently).

So, i’d give it a 5 or 6 land cost (so that you get a good warning) and drop the price - that way it becomes strategic. I’m also thinking it doesn’t need the “flying or aquatic” qualifier from a gameplay perspective (as those are very color-specific - and fish do get owned by tsunamis).

I think any more than 4 lakes would be too cumbersome. Also, I like the flying/aquatic exemption because it answers the question of “What happens to creatures that are on ocean tiles?” and also because the spell damages both players’ creatures, it lets you tailor your deck around it.


#12


#13

Really good concept here !

Love the majority of those cards. But no idea about impact on the balance.

I think the aquatic part can be a good thing to work because it’s a great diffence with other game like HS.


#14

For something completely different, here’s a new mechanic: Traps. You cast the spell and target a friendly land. The spell is revealed to the opponent but the land chosen is not. When the opponent moves one of their creatures onto that land, the trap triggers and is removed. Jump and Charge creatures can move over traps. Casting a trap on a land already occupied by an enemy creature will only trigger when a new creature moves onto it.


#15

Aquatic is interesting. It’s more defense than offense. I’ll agree there could be more done with it, and I like some of the ideas here - best are Tsunami, blood-rage shark, Kraken and Man O’ War IMHO (ignoring balance).


Traps introduces invisibility. I’m not sure how strategic that can be. It might be a bit annoying to play against.
They’re very likely to be used adjacent to your orb (except for the Wolf Trap).
As for balance, I think all but Land Mine need a price increase. They’re also events, which has a small value of its own (for Disciples etc).
Are they your own items or are they neutral (I guess Dust Devil and Whirlpool could be abused if neutral)? Will Hellfire or Groundshaker hit them?


#16

Are they your own items or are they neutral (I guess Dust Devil and Whirlpool could be abused if neutral)?

They would only affect enemy creatures. They would not be hit by Hellfire or Groundshaker.

Also, here’s some more Aquatic creature ideas, including a concept for how a neutral aquatic creature could work.


#17

These are just my balance IMHOs. I like the concepts.


  • Fireship’s attack power doesn’t seem very important - most structures are 3 or less. If it was 2/5 or something (2 so that the attack benefit is useful) it would feel ok.

  • The shoal feels pretty powerful. 3,2,1 damage hits (unless you use spells, and only hellfire would do more than 1 damage, except for last nightmare and transforms). Buffing it would create a nightmare - e.g. Elderbloom, now it hits as 5,4,3,2,1,0,0. Perhaps if you made it divine and reset its attack to 3 on summon or something - even then it’s a great harvester. Quite tricky to balance.

  • Salmon seems slightly strong, as it’s far easier to take 2 damage than 1. Perhaps gain +2/+1.


An aquatic one:


#18

Lightning Eel: Funny anti-synergy with other aquatic creatures but still very interesting. Does it damage creatures centered around itself or the enemy it attacks?


#19

Added “of itself”.

Perhaps it would be better with just “enemy creatures”, because now I kinda feel it’s a bit weak.


#20

Here’s an idea to help multicolored decks: 2-color lands with a cycle to go with them, and the explorers’ father.