I'd like a TCG Opinion- Divine Monsters

[Guest JoshIcy]

Apparently Divine Monsters are taking a popularity in Custom Cards. And this is bothering me as they've never been allowed, even after Obelisk came out.

 

Though, since that unspoken rule (since I don't like to have loopholes I make sure not all rules are written); I've allowed it provided that they brought non-gods and Spell/Trap Support along with the thread to make it more of a Legitimate Archetype/Attribute.

 

What I'm asking you all specifically is that, with only 3 Monsters in the OCG/TCG Matching this; should it be allowed in Realistic Cards with little to no limitation? And for the fun of it, the Divine Type/Attribute as a whole. Whatever tickles your tailfeather.

 

This is an opinionated consensus and may or may not reflect my final decision I just want more of a broader opinion before going forward.

[Aximil]

Yes. They're an official type now that proper cards, not just promos, have been released. It's a valid Attribute.

[Guest JoshIcy]

Yes. They're an official type now that proper cards' date=' not just promos, have been released. It's a valid Attribute.

[/quote']

 

The point is that, yes they are. But their spectrum is limited without much else. And without creating an actual foundation beyond "Gods" they remain nothing but vague boss monsters. Leaving little to no room in the creativity department.

[werewolfjedi]

I wouldn't allow entire sets as divine, since the atribute for it is meant to mean it is the lord and master of some domain, and there aren't that many gods out there in the same patheons that overlap.

 

I would allow them, but in limited amounts.

[Aximil]

Well, my whole argument as to why they should be allowed is because they're a valid type. I have nothing else to back me up on this.

[Guest PikaPerson01]

I thought this was gonna be about the "divine" archetype. Like Divine Dragon [insert Name Here] and Divine Knight [insert Name2 Here].

 

On-topic though, I don't see the harm in them. After all, there is zero chance of any of the cards in Realistic Cards being made, so I don't see how rejecting them on a reasoning like that would be valid.

[Guest JoshIcy]

On-topic though' date=' I don't see the harm in them. After all, there is zero chance of any of the cards in Realistic Cards being made, so I don't see how rejecting them on a reasoning like that would be valid.

[/quote']

 

How I always adore your opinion. (Yes I'm flattering you).

And for me, there's always a back project somewhere with creating a Custom Cards based TCG so having threads to look through without running into these is far worst than seeing something like...

 

[spoiler=Random Wtf Card for Example]

|Destiny Hero Dracon Flipper|

| Dragon-Type| Tuner | Dark | Level 3|

|1000/1000|

|Flip: Draw 1 Card.|

 

(Tried to make the example pretty flexible and almost abuseable to the point of stupidity).

 

--

Because then we can just toss it instead of reworking it and not have to deal with more motherloads of Semi-Nomi monsters etc ._."... But I get your point.

[Sephiroth_The_Legend]

Depends. If the card in question is say, the basis or "boss" monster of a set, then i would say it would be acceptable. but as Divine Monsters still really havent had a big impact upon the actual game as it is, you could always continue the "No Divine" rules....

its personal preference really..

[Zkaiser]

The point is that' date=' yes they are. But their spectrum is limited without much else. And without creating an actual foundation beyond "Gods" they remain nothing but vague boss monsters. Leaving little to no room in the creativity department.

[/quote'] What says that a DIVINE/Divine - Beast has to be a boss monster? Types and Attributes are just to classify the monsters. If a person want to make a set of monsters that are based on the Greek Gods or if they want it to be shown that a monster is god-like they should be able to use use the divine type.

 

If lack of creativity is a concern we should ban kids from making dragons, so that we don't have to see fifty-million ULiMaTE DRaGOn LoRDs oF DaRKNeSs.

[Chaos Flame]

Well I think they shouldn't be abused, but maybe the boss monster of an elemental based archetype? I just try to avoid using them.

[Umbra]

They are an Attribute just like the other six we have, and thus should not be restricted or banned in any way. I don't see any reason to treat them differently just because there's not that many of them.

[Chaos Flame]

Well, its just that being "divine" makes them either poorly made or gods (and there are enough of those).

[Scatty]

Yes. They're an official type now that proper cards' date=' not just promos, have been released. It's a valid Attribute.

[/quote']

 

The point is that, yes they are. But their spectrum is limited without much else. And without creating an actual foundation beyond "Gods" they remain nothing but vague boss monsters. Leaving little to no room in the creativity department.

 

You just gave me the idea of making a 6-7 card set of DIVINE Level 4 monsters. It will be up tomorrow.

[-Griffin]

DIVINEs are, 9 times out of 10, badly made.

If they weren't allowed to make DIVINEs, they would be replaced with badly made monsters of other attributes.

[Toffee.]

Thing is, we can expect alot of newbies to be like: "I MAED A GAHD CARD LOLOLOLLOLOL!!!!11"

 

Divine-Beast is a valid type, and Divine is a valid Attribute.

It doesnt mean your card has the ability to be "immune to spell/traps".

 

......So I say, let them have there fun.

(as we can expect alot of Divine-Beast-Type monsters to start appearing now)

[Guest JoshIcy]

Yes. They're an official type now that proper cards' date=' not just promos, have been released. It's a valid Attribute.

[/quote']

 

The point is that, yes they are. But their spectrum is limited without much else. And without creating an actual foundation beyond "Gods" they remain nothing but vague boss monsters. Leaving little to no room in the creativity department.

 

You just gave me the idea of making a 6-7 card set of DIVINE Level 4 monsters. It will be up tomorrow.

I expect a link via PM then xD

 

DIVINEs are' date=' 9 times out of 10, badly made.

If they weren't allowed to make DIVINEs, they would be replaced with badly made monsters of other attributes.

[/quote']

 

I guess I'll continue with what I was doing then; provided that some can slip through the cracks under rare exceptions (that again will not be defined to prevent loopholes). Thanks.