MArcomage

you need 3 dragons to have a net gain of 4 stock; there are commons that works better.
I suggest to lower the cost (3/3/3) and to give stock based on rarity:
gain stock for each dragon in hand (c-3,u-4,r-5)

Good idea. Modified it a little. My intent is to encourage the use of Dragon-based decks.

Sad face that this card wasn't flagged "interesting." Trying to promote the use of a different type of deck: Dragon.

well, dragon deck already is used (by me at least) and it's quite good in long mode.
To make it more popular I propose to add a new common dragon, a new uncommon dragon (a cheap one) and an uncommon that gives wall and tower and makes neighbouring cards be common dragons (dragon tower or whatever) and a cheapest way to use dragon egg

With regards to the last one, I think the best fix is just to make Dragon egg cheaper. Having it cost the same amount as Scepter of summoning is pretty unreasonable.

dindon wrote:
...make Dragon egg cheaper

Solid idea. I like it. Say to 9?

dindon wrote:
With regards to the last one, I think the best fix is just to make Dragon egg cheaper. Having it cost the same amount as Scepter of summoning is pretty unreasonable.

well, quite obvious indeed.
It was already proposed a reduction years ago (by you)
http://arcomage.netvor.sk/?location=Forum_thread&current_thread=794&thread_current_page=0
since the cost was not changed I came out with this dragon's birth idea.
I suggest 10 gems.

Well I don't know... but we surely need more common/uncommon dragons.

Actually, Dragon egg cost 20G initially.

Fithz wrote:
well, quite obvious indeed.
It was already proposed a reduction years ago (by you)
since the cost was not changed I came out with this dragon's birth idea.
I suggest 10 gems.

Ha, it figures I said the exact same thing 2 years ago. I'm so predictable. Anyways, yeah, I agree that 10 gems is reasonable.