Book of Mirror [Written]

[Loleo]

Book of Mirror

Quick effect

Activate if both player controls 2 or more face-up cards: Discard 1 card; each player sets 2 cards they control.

 

[Pommelo]

Short, simple and nice, if I may add. Though despite the minimalist design, it could use a couple of grammar fixes, in my annoying opinion (lol)

Quote

Activate only if each player controls 2 or more face-up cards. Discard 1 card; each player sets 2 cards they control.

What can I say? Looks good. The fact that it's Quick Effect is just great. Imagine using this card during your opponent's turn while your Deck is Penguin. You're bound to do wonders. Book of Moon is still a relatively good card, it seems that as of late it's been powercrept, so perhaps this one would have a chance to be relevant and not broken. Definitely it's going to destroy some plays as those face-down mobs won't be used as material. Perhaps the scariest part is the fact that it can set Spell/Traps. Possibly the greatest disadvantage is that each player chooses which cards will be Set, so it's pretty strategic to use. Finally, about the wording, I kept it non-targeting, but perhaps it's required. For the time being, I'll leave it as this.

[Loleo]

I just realized I could have the requirement be a separate sentence from the spell to unclutter it with the cost thanks. 

[Sleepy]

This is a bit more of a proper successor to the legacy of Book of Moon as the "swiss knife of Yugioh" that it was for years and years in the game, compared to stuff like the Book of Lunar Eclipce that we recently got.

It is a bit tricky but it is also super versatile. 
Your opponent chooses their own targets but you decide when to activate this card and can do so when they have little choice to fill the quota.
It helps further your flipping needs without having to choose between choosing to help yourself or disrupt the opponent plays.

But where this card shines the most in my opinion is in how it doesn't care about what kind of cards it flips. It can force down floodgates in the right scnearios, recycle stuff like Call of the Haunted, Fiendish Chain, turn off Mystic Mine or Winda, etc.

One thing though, I think the first bit would usually be part of the overall effect like through a colon, something like this:

If both players have 2 or more face-up cards: Discard 1 card; each player flips 2 cards they control face-down.

Since that is the only use and only effect the card provides it is logic that it wouldn't be activated at all anyways unless it is to do this very thing, so the "can only be activated if" is a bit of a redundant clause probably.

Still, all in all pretty great idea.
Also another pro-tip: If I'm not mistaken, this sort of effect that demands your opponent to pick their own poison gets to affect monsters that'd normally be unaffected by this sort of "opponent's" effect. So that's yet another neat bonus.
 

[Pommelo]

15 hours ago, Sleepy said:

One thing though, I think the first bit would usually be part of the overall effect like through a colon, something like this:

If both players have 2 or more face-up cards: Discard 1 card; each player flips 2 cards they control face-down.

Since that is the only use and only effect the card provides it is logic that it wouldn't be activated at all anyways unless it is to do this very thing, so the "can only be activated if" is a bit of a redundant clause probably.

Unfortunately for you, your attempt with alevosía y ventaja to make me look bad didn't work for ya, because we're both wrong xP. After researching a bit, I found a card that might indicate us the structure we should use, which is Chain Summoning. As you can see, it's also a Quick Play with a particular requirement to be activated. Yep, it uses a colon, but it doesn't use the "If" you're using to indicate the condition. Just like Konami is doing nowadays, it goes straight to the point, saying when and how you gotta use the effect. In that case...

Activate if both players have 2 or more face-up cards: Discard 1 card; each player flips 2 cards they control face-down.

At any rate, there's also stuff like Zefra Path, but that one is a continuous Spell with several effects, so not the same case (that thing you say about being redundant because it's the only effect applies)

Eh, I dunno, I just know your evil intention was thwarted. Here's something for you, Ezlypi

[Sleepy]

9 minutes ago, Rayfield Lumina said:

Unfortunately for you, your attempt with alevosía y ventaja to make me look bad didn't work for ya, because we're both wrong xP. After researching a bit, I found a card that might indicate us the structure we should use, which is Chain Summoning. As you can see, it's also a Quick Play with a particular requirement to be activated. Yep, it uses a colon, but it doesn't use the "If" you're using to indicate the condition. Just like Konami is doing nowadays, it goes straight to the point, saying when and how you gotta use the effect. In that case...

Activate if both players have 2 or more face-up cards: Discard 1 card; each player flips 2 cards they control face-down.

At any rate, there's also stuff like Zefra Path, but that one is a continuous Spell with several effects, so not the same case (that thing you say about being redundant because it's the only effect applies)

Eh, I dunno, I just know your evil intention was thwarted. Here's something for you, Ezlypi

Ah so you are implying we should make a "seal of dissaproval" with the angry sheep to be in direct opposition to my giraffe's "seal of apprival"? That's an interesting idea. xD

[Loleo]

32 minutes ago, Rayfield Lumina said:

Unfortunately for you, your attempt with alevosía y ventaja to make me look bad didn't work for ya, because we're both wrong xP. After researching a bit, I found a card that might indicate us the structure we should use, which is Chain Summoning. As you can see, it's also a Quick Play with a particular requirement to be activated. Yep, it uses a colon, but it doesn't use the "If" you're using to indicate the condition. Just like Konami is doing nowadays, it goes straight to the point, saying when and how you gotta use the effect. In that case...

Activate if both players have 2 or more face-up cards: Discard 1 card; each player flips 2 cards they control face-down.

At any rate, there's also stuff like Zefra Path, but that one is a continuous Spell with several effects, so not the same case (that thing you say about being redundant because it's the only effect applies)

Eh, I dunno, I just know your evil intention was thwarted. Here's something for you, Ezlypi

An interesting change you made was "each" to "both" which I will keep, but my original intention is now that there is going to be 4 player yugioh I was trying to be proactive and not assume 2 players. :)

Thx both of you!

[Darj]

The Twin Twister version of Book of Moon. Simple but effective. I like it too. If anything I would bump the flexibility and make it like "up to 2 cards on each side of the field (min. 1 per side)" or something like that just so the card is live when there aren't enough targets around. Similar to how Twin Twisters has the option of only popping 1 for those desperate 2-for-1 plays for the sake of getting rid of an opponent's key Spell/Trap.

[Pommelo]

1 hour ago, Sleepy said:

Ah so you are implying we should make a "seal of dissaproval" with the angry sheep to be in direct opposition to my giraffe's "seal of apprival"? That's an interesting idea. xD

I'm utely in favour of you creating a Seal of disapproval featuring the Angry Sheep, pls pls pls do it! (But don't use it in my content xD)

53 minutes ago, ITSUKOSOADO said:

An interesting change you made was "each" to "both" which I will keep, but my original intention is now that there is going to be 4 player yugioh I was trying to be proactive and not assume 2 players. :)

Thx both of you!

You're welcome n.n

[Loleo]

23 minutes ago, Darj said:

The Twin Twister version of Book of Moon. Simple but effective. I like it too. If anything I would bump the flexibility and make it like "up to 2 cards on each side of the field (min. 1 per side)" or something like that just so the card is live when there aren't enough targets around. Similar to how Twin Twisters has the option of only popping 1 for those desperate 2-for-1 plays for the sake of getting rid of an opponent's key Spell/Trap.

Actually that's a card that already exists and it should be up to 2 but it is not. Mine forces both players to set 2 on their own side of the field, so 4 cards total and you don't pick which ones for your opponent. 

[Darj]

9 minutes ago, ITSUKOSOADO said:

Actually that's a card that already exists and it should be up to 2 but it is not. Mine forces both players to set 2 on their own side of the field, so 4 cards total and you don't pick which ones for your opponent. 

That's where your card would come in. Yours could offer the option of up to 1 per side, but still needs both players to control at least 1 face-up card each so it remains not as flexible.

[Loleo]

Just now, Darj said:

That's where your card would come in. Yours could offer the option of up to 1 per side, but still needs both players to control at least 1 face-up card each so it remains not as flexible.

Interesting idea. I'm going to leave it for now but that's a fair note.

[Sleepy]

2 hours ago, Darj said:

The Twin Twister version of Book of Moon. Simple but effective. I like it too. If anything I would bump the flexibility and make it like "up to 2 cards on each side of the field (min. 1 per side)" or something like that just so the card is live when there aren't enough targets around. Similar to how Twin Twisters has the option of only popping 1 for those desperate 2-for-1 plays for the sake of getting rid of an opponent's key Spell/Trap.

There's one detail to keep into account though, which prevents the suggestion from being strictly better than as is:
Your opponent is choosing their affected cards, if you give them the choice of 1 or 2, they'll only ever pick 2 if they benefit form the second target going belly down.
It'd require the owner of "Book of Mirror" to mandate/declare how many cards your opponent is to flip down (and still leave which ones up to the opponent).
Hmmmm any ideas of how this wording could be done?

[Darj]

I would go for something like: Discard 1 card, then declare a number between 1 and 2 for each player; both players must flip cards they control (their choice) face-down equal to the numbers declared.