MArcomage

You can prhase it this way:
if neighbouring cards share a keyword next card will be a rare with that keyword

else stock +3

The part "if not exist" can be removed at this moment since we have a rare for all keywords (if I'm not mistaken)

Thanks, I replaced the text and remove "if not exist", because card text was too long with it, but as I wrote in the note, Enduring hasn't a rare... but if someone create an enduring rare, it will be fine :)

Oh really? Arthoria the Saber

Oh, sorry, I'm blind :) I checked it with filters in decks section and I forgot I had it in opened deck... ;)

Nice concept but it's easier than it seems by the condition to achieve it. E.g. Soldier based decks would give rare soldiers quite easy. Undead decks would do so even easier. Nature decks even more easier. Maybe you should reconsider the condition or reconsider the cost of the card.

Lord wrote:
Nice concept but it's easier than it seems by the condition to achieve it. E.g. Soldier based decks would give rare soldiers quite easy. Undead decks would do so even easier. Nature decks even more easier. Maybe you should reconsider the condition or reconsider the cost of the card.

I thought exactly about keywords you mentioned when I created this concept and I think in nature deck it's already easy to get the rare through the keyword effect, also in Undead deck you have for example Necromancy amplifier or Necromancy. So it can be a good help for pure soldier deck and maybe for burning and I think it's ok. Don't forget that it's uncommon and you can get some needless rare in some situation...
But you're right, maybe cost should be a 2/2/2, what do you think about it?

Indeed it's easy to get rares with Nature, but it's costing 2 turns at least and a lot of resources. It's also easy to get rares with Necromancy Amplifier but again it discards your uncommons to give you rares, and usually Undead decks rely more on Uncommon cards than on Rares, as they are somewhat cheaper and equally strong. So it can only be used in some situations and still costs quite a lot (9/9/9). I think a 7/7/7 cost would be in order and you could keep the +3 stock so that players would have to have 7/7/7 resources to play it but it wouldn't be so expensive after they play it.

Ofcourse this card will help a lot with Burning, Soldier etc. etc. but don't forget those keywords contain quite powerful rares. For example Burning has Phoenix and Efreet.

I thought about adding discard of that neighbouring cards, but it could be an advantage sometimes... And I'm limited by card text length.
Well, if I change cost to 777 and add +3 stock together with rare call, I think I must raise more stock on else trigger, because it's needless when it's margin card (well, you may use magic portal, which could be btw interesting with this, but still...) and then I'm again limited by card text length. So I changed cost to 5/5/5, no stock raise when condition is executed and raise stock to 6 on else. What do you think now? :)

This would be brutal with the Far sight keyword as well, especially as there isn't currently a way to specifically call one into your hand.

Mmm, Far sight Rares, such potential for building or stock refunding.

2 Wildfire gems + Summoner = Phoenix

jbryant3 wrote:
2 Wildfire gems + Summoner = Phoenix

Yes, and what's the chance you get two specific same commons on two exact positions and one specific uncommon between them?