Cards made for Commander edition! (Or another other format you like.)
To make cards, download MSE for free from here
http://magicseteditor.sourceforge.net/
>Mechanics doc (For the making of color pie appropriate cards)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgaKCOzyqM48dFdKRXpxTDRJelRGWVZabFhUU0RMcEE
>Read this before you post your shitty card!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jn1J1Mj-EvxMxca8aSRBDj766rSN8oSQgLMOXs10BUM
>Q: Can there be a sixth color?
A: http://pastebin.com/kNAgwj7i
>Q: What's the difference between multicolor and hybrid?
A: http://pastebin.com/yBnGki1C
>Art sources.
http://digital-art-gallery.com/
http://www.artstation.com/
http://drawcrowd.com/
http://fantasygallery.net/
http://grognard.booru.org/
http://fantasy-art-engine.tumblr.com/
>Stitch cards together with
http://old.photojoiner.net/
>/ccg/ sets (completed and in development)
http://pastebin.com/hsVAbnMj
OT: >>47737459
>>47773233
>>47773260
>Are you the anon I was arguing with over "Champion N creatures" a few days ago?
Yes. And the reason why is going to explain part of my problem with all of this stuff, like expanding the rules: I am far too cynical to just say, "Yeah, go for it!" I have been on these threads for years now, and I have seen way too many brain-dead morons morons posting their completely shit cards to just automatically assume the cards or mechanics people make will be good. I REALLY need convincing that something is a good idea, especially when it could easily be replaced with something else that already exists. So yeah, what >>47773310 said.
Oh, a good example of this is that anon who wanted to make Pokemon cards a while ago. I tried to help him. I really did. But every time he posted his poorly designed, out-of-color, barely even Magic cards, I just wanted to slap him. And don't think that guy learned anything the entire time he was here. Fucking hell, I think I put more thought and effort into getting his cards to work mechanically than he did.
>>47773371
I think the second ability should be something like
>Whenever a creature you control attacks or blocks, each other creature you control attacks or blocks this turn if able.
Also not entirely sure why you have this. It's just a big downside.
Oh, by the way, the post about "Frontier Magic" in the last thread was a reference to the Magic game variant of the same name. However, it's also incredibly obscure, which is what caused a lot of trouble for the guy who used to be here (Frontier Fellow) who posted cards specifically made for the format.
Oh, and this.
>>47773475
It can't be a triggered ability, since it will resolve after attackers or blockers are declared; it has to be an attacking/blocking restriction. See Viashino Bey. I can always push the creature if the downside is too big.
>>47773523
I dislike cards that explicitly refer to your commander and do nothing outside of the format. You can probably just have this trigger for any legendary creature.
>>47773641
Ah, good idea. I'm planning on making a cycle. How're the changes to this? Oh, and decided to change trigger to cast, since ETB without casting is pointless anyway.
>>47773427
Oh, and it should be added that when I first started coming to these threads, we had to deal with trolls like Cooldown guy (pic related). So there is probably a voice in the back of my head that tells me a radically new ability/mechanic/whatever is probably just a troll.
>>47773799
Well, if it helps at all, I'm honestly not trying to troll. I just like the mental image of being the commander of your deck yourself - effectively, this spell is your loyalty ability, to make a poor analogy. It doesn't cripple yourself, it doesn't break the format over your knee (if I'm careful about design), and it doesn't blatantly break the color pie any more than any other spell does. Creatures have practically infinite design space, but while this is more limited, I don't see a problem.
>>47774006
>I just like the mental image of being the commander of your deck yourself - effectively, this spell is your loyalty ability, to make a poor analogy.
Ah, I see. Yeah, I really like the flavor of Magic, but when it breaks down, it's not very fun. I think there was something similar where someone was asking that, if the players are physical bodies in the game, why he couldn't just walk over to his opponent at 1 life, with no creatures, and just stab him. I mean, there's always going to be a breakdown here. But what you say about making spells your loyalty abilities is interesting. Has me thinking of some weird version of Vanguard with different cards that essentially put planeswalkers in the place of Vanguard cards. Which I think would be interesting to experiment with.
>>47773260
>>47773427
I agree with the idea that you should thoroughly examine your motives for breaking a rule before actually breaking it. There are some "unwritten" rules of magic that can be set aside when you're doing something that needs them gone. However, some unwritten rules require more caution than others. The Legendary supertype is only applied to permanents because it's primarily only relevant on permanents.
Personally. I think Instants or Sorceries as Commanders are a bad idea. If you absolutely felt you had to make a noncreature commander to represent the player's influence as leading their own army, I feel you'd be much better off using a Legendary Enchantment.
>>47774332
A novel idea, but it's probably too much effort just for a gold land.
>>47774391
It's also somewhat meant to be an enabler for some creatures that get additional benefits when enchanted or that care about how many enchantments you have.
Since I have a card for the shield that I really like, I decided to make Steve separate from Captain America.
>>47774522
And here's the shield. Hmm, should I do the first, triangular shield? Eh, probably not.
>>47774565
That unattach ability needs a mana cost.
First one for Bucky. Um... yeah. not really sure what to do with him, though I do like him having F-Strike. For some reason, I was thinking of giving him the Shade-pump ability, though I'm not entirely sure why. But if it's a good idea, please tell me.
>>47774694
Crap. Is 2 for 2 damage really too good? OK, what should it be? 1? 2?
>>47774735
Honestly, I think Bucky's less "nuke the other person into the ground," and more "I can go toe-to-toe with ANYONE." Try something along the lines of "All creatures blocking or blocked by ~ lose all abilities until end of turn." Maybe make him a 2/3 or even a 3/3 and give him double strike instead, too.
>>47774998
>"I can go toe-to-toe with ANYONE."
Yeah, I guess that sounds right. Well, to be honest, my knowledge of Bucky comes primarily from the movie Winter Soldier. I'm sorry, I'm just far more of a DC fan than a Marvel fan. Oh, and by the way:Hail Hydra.
>Try something along the lines of "All creatures blocking or blocked by ~ lose all abilities until end of turn."
Eh, not so sure about this part. I guess the idea is to hit creatures with Strike abilities before they hit him, and to get rid of Indestructible? I'll think about it. Actually, I'm going to have to be careful with getting rid of Indestructible. I have it on a few cards right now, and I don't want to turn that into the new "can't be regenerated." Speaking of, Doomsday, with a new ability so he can kill Superman in combat.
...Where did everyone go?
>>47773799
>hit 5 times for 3 mana or for free
What the shit that's broken as fuck. If you have a flier on turn three or four, you literally win the game.
>>47777668
Again, this is stuff by Cooldown guy, an infamous troll on these threads. Pic related is the first card I ever saw him post, and it's a very good example of his work. Be warned, the picture you are about to view contains highly disturbing imagery.I get the urge to tear my hair out every time I look at it.
>>47777998
Counterspell :^)
Your move.
>>47779341
Is this art from Myst or Riven or something? Ability is cute, but screams for a silver border.
>>47779452
Funnily enough, the comp rules doesn't actually specify the Chaos ability like this. If it were me, I think I'd just make it
>Whenever you trigger a chaos ability, you may copy that ability.
>>47779494
Seems very niche. And I don't just mean because it's made for a specific format.
>>47779512
Interesting.
>>47779452
Maybe make it "Whenever you roll CHAOS, you may copy another target triggered ability."
I want to thank everyone who took the time to look over my red rares. I'm sorry that I didn't get home in time to answer your comments in the last thread specifically, but the amount and depth of the feedback was fantastic and very helpful. I made changes to several cards after reading what you had to say (hopefully taking them in better directions), and I'm working on changing others. I won't repost everything, but this is what I have so far. Let me know what you think.
>>47779795
Minor formatting error with RRo8.
>>47779838
Yeah, I see that now. Not sure how I managed that, but thanks! Consider it fixed.
>>47779795
For the DFC, I'm still not completely sold on it. I do think this is a step in the right direction, however. Changing the 13 damage so it isn't permanent is a great improvement. As for the frontside, I'm not sure if the mana costs match up well to Ludevic's Test Subject. Again, I think I'd give the backside a lifespan itself. Maybe change it so you don't have to remove the counters to transform it, but the backside has Vanishing?
>Flash Fission
Eh, not a huge fan of how you're going to have two cards in exile like this but they're treated differently. Maybe change to Sorcery and make it
>Draw two cards, then exile a card from your hand.
And then add the damage bit to the end. That's probably far too easy to manipulate though. Yeah, shit's tough.
The other cards look pretty cool though.
>>47779341
which myst game was this from?
>>47769279
Sure I'll try it at 3cc.
>>47780425
>Ability makes a White token and a Black token.
>Doesn't require mana of each color.
>Tokens have total P/T of 3/3.
>Creature has P/T of 2/1.
Muh 'tism.
In all seriousness, it looks like a fun common. I'd like to hear how it performs in draft though. It could be just a tad to good at blocking for your environment.
>>47779964
>Ludevic's Test Subject
Assuming you add one extra counter to achieve the bare minimum to trigger damage, the mana commitment ends up being identical.
>Vanishing on the back side
Eh, I'm not a huge fan of the idea of limiting access to such a heavy investment, and I think lowering the total investment to accommodate vanishing would make the design more swingy.
>Flash Fission
>Draw two cards, then exile a card from your hand
I think that would make it too similar to Blast of Genius, and take it outside of monored territory.
Thanks for the help, man.
>>47780567
>Chronolossus
Eh, I guess that's a good point.
>Flash Fission
Like I said, this isn't easy. Maybe... maybe you could make it a thing where you reveal the top 2, probably after a Scry, and an opponent exiles one and you draw the other. But then the card deals damage to something equal to the exiled card's CMC.
>>47780567
>>47780622
Hmm, or maybe Flash Fission could be an enchantment.
>[mana cost], Discard a card: Exile the top two cards of your library. Until end of turn, you may play cards exiled this way.
I realize this gets rid of the damage aspect, but I was trying to focus more on the "Fission" idea.
>>47780622
>>47780672
The problem is, it has to be an instant, and it has to deal damage in some way, in order to fill the necessary holes in my set skeleton. You are right, though, it is difficult.
>>47780368
Looks like Myst 3: Exile.
>>47780731
OK, one last try before I back off for tonight. This is probably going to be stupid, so... yeah.
>Exile the top card of your library. ~ deals X damage to target creature or player, where X is the exiled card's converted mana cost.
>Exile the top card of your library. Add an amount of R to your mana pool equal to the exiled card's converted mana cost.
>whatcouldpossiblygowrong.jpg
r9
>>47780775
In an environment with Top or other repeated deck stacking? Ridiculous.
In an environment without these things? Fun, swingy, and possibly build-around, but also possibly massively backfiring.
Is this designed to be a skill-testing card, or a fun gamble card, because this evokes one of those things Maro brought up in his recent article series about knowing your audience (with regards to Molten Sentry).
>>47781321
Dude, I was just reaching. Though obviously it will greatly benefit from Scry and library manipulation. I mean, if it were my set, I'd try to make it something that would be fun to see in draft, and a build-around card in constructed, where it can be used to its maximum effect.
And speaking of build-around cards...
>>47781462
>Dude, I was just reaching. Though obviously it will greatly benefit from Scry and library manipulation. I mean, if it were my set, I'd try to make it something that would be fun to see in draft, and a build-around card in constructed, where it can be used to its maximum effect.
Ah, sorry, didn't mean to come off too strongly. I think both are cool ideas, although I prefer the former more than the latter. I enjoy the element of randomness in Magic, but there's a lot of careful stepping to be done with design in that area, because it can end up with a card that nobody likes.
>>47781181
>have only this card in hand
>counter any spell
Maybe it should have "Bounce one land back to your hand and discard your hand, counter target spell."
>>47781500
Oh, sorry, I didn't mean to make it sound like I was defensive or something. Of course, that's the problem with the internet, there's no tone of voice.
And I get what you mean. I usually avoid the more swingy designs myself, but, again, reaching. And I thought it might be fun. Plus, it fits Red.
>>47781511
>have only this card in hand
>counter any spell
Would a "Force of Will, for Hellbent" counterspell be too egregious?
>Force of Madness
>3UB
>Instant
>You may cast Force of Madness without paying its mana cost if you have no other cards in hand.
>Counter target spell.
Honestly not sure if it would break eternal formats over its knee or not. Not a lot of decks want to be hellbent for long term, but might be too powerful for protecting decks that dump their hand easily.
here's another hybrid counterspell
>>47781511
a counterspell that's free with hellbent doesn't seem like a problem desu. the kind of decks that play counterspells get hit the hardest by lacking cards in hand anyway
Frontiers guy here, coming at ya with some hot new cards. Literally not refined at all, so fire away.
>>47782844
Good name
>>47782681
ayy waddup fellow western plane bro
Linger in Pain seems a bit overcosted with the drawback. I think 1B or just B would be fine.
dark ritual effects aren't in black's color pie anymore, only red.
Loot should be worded "you may put A nonland permanent CARD from among them"
Doombearer's looting effect breaks color pie and I don't think it would be overpowered if it just drew cards.
rampant scramble's wording is a bit confusing.
minor gripe, but purge should be worded "artifact or land." also it should say "purge deals damage to you equal to."
rough-tumble rider should be worded either worded "when ~ dies, you may exile it. if you do, (effect)," or "If ~ would die, instead you may exile it. If you do, (effect)." It depends on whether or not you want it to trigger dies effects.
Cull the Flames should return to owner's hand. also should probably cost 2.
minor gripe, but energy crunch should be worded "he or she."
rampant devil could get away with being a 2 drop. It should also just have potshot 1.
>>47782844
pun names best names. could probably be a 4 drop.
>>47782940
That's just Clash?
>>47782962
duel favors the caster by being "equal or greater"
NEW SET SYMBOL:
Frontiers has a cowboy hat for a set symbol.
>>47783071
Whenever ~ becomes blocked by a creature, it gets +2/+1 and gains trample until end of turn.
>>47783071
Hm. The name/flavor implications of that don't really fit what the creature does, at least not to me. I'd expect some kind of artifact interaction with a name like that. In fact, I'd love to see more artifact love in your set, since it was the age of the iron horse and the gun. >>47783108 has the wording corrections down otherwise.
>>47782940
>ranger as a creature type
Is that meaningful for your set? Also, we have two anons doing Western-themed sets now? Interesting. Duel... eh, I didn't care for Clash very much, but that's a personal taste issue. I think you should tie the destroy effect to the opponent you target with the trigger, because otherwise, if they have no creatures, you have to kill The Stranger, or one of your own creatures if it fits the bill. Unless that's on purpose...
>>47782844
I dig this card. As has been said, it might be able to be cheaper, since it opens your lands up to a silly amount of hate they otherwise avoid being lands.
>>47782681
>Lingering Pain
"gets" not "gains". Creatures "gain" keywords and "get" P/T adjustments. The card itself is kinda... well I don't think a common should lose you the game, ever. Compare to Disfigure.
>Dread Sun
Black doesn't ritual that much anymore, that's more red's deal now.
>Sudden Shot
Fine, but could probably be 3B.
>Reaper
Loot needs to be reworded: "To loot 3, reveal the top three cards of your library. You may put one revealed nonland permanent card into your hand, and the rest into your graveyard." Not really a fan of loot, but I haven't seen people saying it's super unbalanced, so... eh. Hot opinions and all that.
>Doombearer
Probably fine at that cost. Probably fine even without the discard maybe, but keeping it is the safe bet.
>Scramble
I like this a lot, actually. But not at common. Feels more like an uncommon, and I think it should cost a touch more.
>Purge
Damage needs a source.
>Horsepack Shepherd
Seems fine.
>Rider Stampede
Also seems fine. Not sure on the cost though.
(cont)
>>47782940
>could probably be a 4 drop.
Man, that'd make it look even more unfair next to Nature's Revolt, wouldn't it? I guess not making your opponents' lands into dudes is a mixed blessing rather than an upside, though. I had been imagining it'd need to be 2GGW or 3GGW.
>>47783250
>>47782681
(cont)
>Infinite Destinations
Explore needs a "then" in the first clause. Instead of "if it is" use "otherwise" if I recall right. Explore feels strange in white. White does grab lands, but usually as part of "balance" effects.
>Rough-Tumble
Odd flavor, but should be fine I suppose.
>Explorer
Can probably be 1G nowadays.
>Cull
I don't get the flavor here at all. The flames of... anger? It's an interesting spin on bounce though, given the restriction. Not sure about the cantrip.
>Crunch
"If that player does"; it feels pushed but might prove to be okay since it's rare.
>Devil
Use Frenzy wording here for the buff effects, substituting "is" and "isn't" accordingly.
>>47783250
ranger is the closest to a normal fantasy term I could think of for cowboys lol
I took a break from ccg for awhile and during that time I started working on my western set (Darador)
needing to kill himself or another friendly creature wasn't the intent but that is some spicy flavor, so I think i'll keep it
>>47783323
What were you working on before, if you don't mind me asking? I might have seen some of it; I have been in and out of these threads for years.
>>47783323
The Scout creature type is probably functional enough for that purpose.
>>47783333
for awhile it was counters matter set (pic related), but I lost interest because I realized I had done kind of a shit job worldbuilding. I also did some noir plane stuff for a lil bit
>>47783385
I recall some of these, but not the set symbol. Odd. I do also remember a noir set floating around. Well, anyway, welcome back. Things are a bit different around here probably, but the threads have stayed pretty good for the most part these last few months.
>>47783250
Vikvet has competing abilities. It looks like you want to use the discard outlet to cast madness cards but in doing so you forfeit the impulse draw, so you might as well have just cast the madness card normally. Unless you scry for a land, which is not the most exciting play.
I also dislike scry into impulse in mono red. Red gets it card advantage dirt cheap, with the downside that you have to use it now or lose it. Scrying to find the right card takes away from the spontaneity.
Keep the madness trigger, which can be a fairly fun ability, but find something else for it to spellshape.
Inspired by chancellor of the annex
>>47784053
Do you want this to reduce the demon's cost or the first spell?
>>47784107
the first spell. it's meant to be a counterpart to Chncellor of the Annex. But i think he is maybe to strong... (for combo-decks and so on)
Newest version inbound.
>>47784371
Not a fan of Delve: From the Hand edition. Cost reduction mechanics involving manaless resources are hard to balance already, and it's a lot easier to get cards into your hand than into your graveyard. Psionic Emrakul could be played turn 1 on the draw every game, with no additional setup required.
>>47779795
An issue of over-complexity with Riftborne;
It has vanishing so the tokens are going away on your upkeep anyway. You can actually just make it "At the beginning of your upkeep, you may pay etc. etc."
The ability is almost exactly the same outside of weird Shift interaction (why you would *want* to remove a time counter from a creature with Vanishing is a bit weird). I can understand the desire for this interaction, but I don't think it is enough to warrant the weirdness of design.
Try the simple route and see how it feels.
>>47784681
There's not much point using impulse wording there, as its only going to be one card and you don't need mana so there's not a huge need to have the duration,
>Claws of the Vampire
>Discard 5 cards for +12 DAMAGE to an attack
>At INSTANT speed
holy shit I'm having Blazing Shoal flashbacks plz make it stop
>>47784751
>>47784371
o it didn't reply sorry the flashbacks were too stronk
>>47784759
I think you need to look at what that card does again.
>>47784371
I've been working to balance a similar ability for a rather long time and lemme say you're doing it about 1000% wrong and in an unbelievably broken way.
So yeah.
>>47784746
It's an instant, which means that you wouldn't be able to play any cards exiled during your opponent's turn except for other instants without the extended duration.
>>47784723
Things triggering "whenever a counter is removed" is a common ability within the set, and allows you to trigger the ability at-will with the right cards. I believe that flexibility creates possibilities for fun plays, and is worth the extra complexity at rare.
>>47784784
I meant you could skip impulse entirely and just cast the card as part of resolution.
>>47784791
Then you could get around timing restrictions for cards, which I didn't want. If I could make it a sorcery, that would be a good route to go down, but it has to be an instant.
Do you think we will get more gods in the future? I mean off Theros. How would you design new gods without devotion? How would you design three-colored gods on Alara, with or without devotion?
>GODS
Uncommon cards yay!
... certain names pending.
>>47785601
>Festival
The Green ability just seems tacked on.
>Furious
I like it. You could probably fit this into mW, mG, or WG as well. But it works as-is.
>Winds
I think I'd just make it a modal "Choose one" spell.
>Exile ~
Why? Usually recursion spells only exile themselves if they let you cast something for free, or they recur more than one thing.
>>47785601
>>47785741
>Festival
Wait, is the Green ability to help get the mana to cast the card? Oh, that makes sense. Though it does look weird seeing this on a hybrid-mana card, especially when it's not one of the colors of the card.
>>47780425
smells like an uncommon
(see Nearheath Chaplain)
Too good for common?
I'd pick it reasonably highly, definitely not FP but it's still pretty spicy... your thoughts? I guess it doesn't hit players.
>>47786051
>Posts the art and not the card
hurrayyyy well there's the art if you want it :|
Yeah the art is way too good for common tho I agree.
>>47786051
>>47786063
Seems like it should be a sorcery, but I see no problem with rarity
>>47786063
Eh... I guess technically it works, but I'd rather have the lifegain need White. I also think the cost would be better at 2RR, but I could be wrong.
>Artifact Creature - Gargoyle
>Defender, reach
>4/2
>probably uncommon
cost me
>>47786393
cost (2) at uncommon.
Low toughness defenders are a'ight and can be cheap.
Green commons V2ish sorta thing! Some cards revamp'd, cards that didn't feel right removed + replaced and whatnot.
>>47787026
Why so much off-color focus? Why not just have a multicolor focus?
>>47787264
>Off-color
>Not multi-color
uh huh :|
>>47787298
Oh for-
WHY YOU NOT MAKE GOLD CARDS?
>>47787388
uh
because these are the mono-green commons and as such they are not the gold commons?
r u daft?
Wait, did you actually think those 14 cards were literally the ENTIRE SET?!
>>47787388
>Green Commons
That might be why, mate
>>47787409
Now I remember why I dislike you. I haven't seen you post gold cards for your set before. As far as I can tell, you've been focusing on mono-color cards that do things with mana of other colors. Why such a focus on off-color cards instead of multicolor cards?
>>47787476
Maybe they're trying to say that they want me to remake Alara Reborn....
>>47787476
>>47787489
I have seen other cards this guy has done, and I just can't recall when he posted a group of multicolor cards for his set.
>>47787482
>Now I remember why I dislike you.
>Asks stupid question gets stupid answer
:'^) Have at ye, scallywag!
>I haven't seen you post gold cards for your set before.
I have literally posted some in this very thread.
>>47787503
>a group of multicolor cards for his set.
I posted a full list of gold commons a while ago but not since due to reworks in progress. As stated though, I have posted gold cards (uncommons) from the set and frequently post potential designs of gold rares so yeah.
>>47787516
>>47787533
I did see those cards, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're part of your set. Sometimes people use the same set symbol just so people know who they are.
Again, my original question: Why the off-color focus?
>>47787544
>Why the off-color focus?
Because it is a multicolor set.
I mean, basically this is like asking why Ravnica has an off-color focus. That's just silly.
>>47787563
There were barely any off-color cards in Return to Ravnica though, you have so many more for Green, and that's one set compared to an entire block. Maybe the first Ravnica block was different, I don't know.
>>47787563
>>47787623
Also, not only are you posting only one color, but only one rarity as well. It's just that you're doing it so much more than I think Wizards has ever done it is why I asked.
>>47787623
>Return to Ravnica
When did I say Return to Ravnica?
>>47787648
When most people say Ravnica without specifying which block, it's because they're just referring to both.
Hey I'm pretty terrible at making set symbols and was wondering if anyone could help?
Still new to the game, so i dont have a good intuition on balancing.
what should this be? creature or instant?
what should it do?
"if target player gets boner, target player discards their hand"
>>47789439
leave pls
Frontiers lad here
Artifacts and enchantments are next on my list of to-do. Thinking of making revolver artifacts, knives, shotguns, hats, and boots. Planning on making mythic cowboy pants. Enchantments are more run-of-the-mill.
>>47789925
other western anon here
what plans do you have for fantasy themes? love the idea of mythic cowboy pants also
While I do like the other version of this, I've been thinking of this setup with the counters for quite some time. If I really want to keep the old version, I'll just put this ability on something else. Surely Jim Gordon isn't the only notable police officer in DC or Marvel, right?
>>47789925
>Planning on making mythic cowboy pants.
I'm interested to hear how this will work. As for your artifact, be careful when you do Equipment, you don't want to go overboard with them. Which is going to be tempting when you have so many items like this.
Any ideas for the balance of this?
>>47790477
Subtypes are always capitalized. Drop the drain to 2. You should either increase the mana cost for the abilities or lower the number of Goats he makes each turn. Being able to sac all 3 each turn is huge.
>>47790437
Not bad. There's always Bullock if you want another cop.
>>47790588
>Not bad. There's always Bullock if you want another cop.
Oh yeah. How did I forget about him? Well, considering that my current design for him isn't going anywhere (which tries to focus on his corrupt tactics), I think I might do that.
>>47790588
>>47790694
Wait a minute. Going up to a guy, smashing his face in, and locking up his buddies, who may not have done anything to you, IS corrupt. The legal way would be to wait for those guys to come to you. Yeah, definitely moving the ability to Bullock.
>>47790588
Roger, how about this?
>>47791031
The colorless stuff is unnecessary unless colorless creatures are a big part of your set. If you really want a restriction, just have the Threaten steal things that entered the battlefield this turn.
That said, you're not going to attack with what you steal unless you flicker it - opponents are going to cast creatures on their second main phase, not your first main phase.
>>47791031
Oh cool, you're doing more. Which of the angels are you doing? Are you planning on doing other stuff, like the Metatron?
>Sariel
The colorless interactions seems really bizarre. Oh, I guess to justify the cost for the effect, right? Eh... I think we can come up with something better.
>>47791113
what if was just a straight steal for 3WUUR and a threat to either flicker your own stuff or steal artifact creatures with the individual abilities?
>>47791125
well I was planning on having colorless creatures in the set, and I think to use in a format such as EDH it could lead to fun interactions.
>>47791188
>>47791146
>>47791125
>>47791113
Something like this, and keep in mind it works with colorless and artifact creatures as well.
>>47791220
Now you're just permanently stealing everything that enters the battlefield for 3 mana.
How abouuut this?
>>47791440
Might as well donate some art to your set. Other the other guy's set, whatevs. Enjoy Fantasy Clint Eastwood.
>Flynn
You realize this could be used offensively, right?
>Deadeye
The activated ability is actually Green. Trust me on this, this one's going to be a bitch to balance. Repeatable hard removal always is.
>Cero
Why "If?" It just needs a triggered ability, not a replacement ability. Try
>Whenever ~ is dealt damage by a noncreature source, @ deals that much damage to that source's controller.
Oh yeah, and @ here is the "legend name," which, for MSE, is everything before the first comma. Wizards isn't always consistent, but generally, the entire name for a legend is used for the first time in a text box, and the legend name used afterwards.
Might as well post the first drafts of the others
>>47791582
Tell me what exactly you are trying to convey with this card. Sorry, as interested as I am in myth, I'm a bit fuzzy with these angels.
>>47791751
STOP NOW
Look, see the link to PhotoJoiner in the OP? Use that to stitch all the remaining cards together into one image, and post THAT, not every card individually.
Here are the current drafts of each angel
>>47791756
In the old texts, he is the Angel of the waning moon and manipulator of the heart. stole men's wives under the full moon.
>>47791703
ach, forgot about the legend name formatting. it's been awhile.
flynn was intended to be used offensively or defensively. i think he should be reduced to 4/1 though.
I was thinking abt that while designing bart, but he's definitely not green and couldn't be twisted to be green. it's more of a color pie bend than a break (see: deadly allure)
cero replaces the damage, as opposed to abilities like spitemare and goblin maniac. that's why he needs to be part white as opposed to mono-red. wording made less confusing.
thanks for the art btw
>>47792371
Reminds me a lot of Blood Funnel. I think I'd like it better at BB or 2B, after looking at Blood Funnel and Goblin Electromancer. The life payment should use a numeral instead of being spelled out, though.
>>47792583
Cool card. And I know how the Frogs work in your setting, but they will forever bug me.
>>47792371
I'd just split it up into two abilities, with the second having you lose life whenever you cast an I/S spell
>>47792672
Aw, why do the frogs bug you, anon?
>>47792774
he's tired of shitty dat boi memes
>>47792774
>>47792800
Ah, no. I get bugged by the Frogs because there's always a disconnect with flavor in my mind. The way time anon uses them typically involves exiling cards from graveyards, which is certainly more Green than Blue. Though even if they were Green, I still have the issue with them being Frogs. Every time, I think "This should make a Spirit or a Zombie, not a Frog."
>>47792800
O shit waddup
Help me finish the snowflake, /tg/
>>47794022
No human being no matter how good you make that +1 will do anything with this other than get its emblem.
>>47794022
>>47794053
Yeah, that's an instant -4 and be done with it. Hell, even if it was on an enchantment at the same cost, but helixing for 2 instead, I'd probably run that thing in the side.
Because we don't have nearly enough "Fuck you, Storm" cards.
>>47794022
You have got to be joking with that emblem. And since we're posting snowflakes, here's this guy. Dang, I need to finish making a character sheet for him.
>>47794121
>>47794053
>>47794209
Fair enough, back to the drawing board. Thanks for being honest about how much that sucked, guys
>>47794228
Yeah, it really screams ult. Delete the current -7 and move the -4 ability down. Well, not entirely sure what to do with this character though. What's the backstory of Conall?
>>47794209
>And since we're posting snowflakes
o baby I haven't posted my snowflake in a long time!
>>47794308
>Gimmickwalker
NOOOOO!!!
Ugh, yeah, I actually remember this one. But I seriously have no feedback to give as it stands now. I have no idea how to handle gimmickwalkers.
>their
AbsolutelyDisgusting.png
>>47781511
>"C-countermagic is too good."
>"Wizards please i cant survive in this atmosphere."
>The midrange green/white/x deck player settles into the earth, clutching an eternal witness, a kitchen finks, and a gavony township. He stares blankly at his copy of collected company. "I'm sorry old friend." he mutters in bitter anguish "It looks like countermagic is just too good..." he throws the cards into the fire, like all midrange players before him, as he kneels before his master, MaRo. "You'll make us better cards right? so we can stop those countermagic decks that are so unfun, right?" MaRo peers into the distance, a gentle smile forming on his face. From nowhere he pulls a card and hands it to the withering corpse that has become the midrange player. The player hides it, violently stuffing it into his worn ultrapro sleeves. All that you can see is "GG : ...enters the battlefield, draw 3 cards...... 4/4"
>MaRo's face contorts into a demonic husk as your vision cuts to black
>>47794330
>Gimmickwalker
I guess you prefer the nonsensical, un-designed faff that is "Stick a bunch of random, unconnected good shit on a card" walkers.
>>47794427
Great false dichotomy. So, planeswalkers are either weird and gimmicky, or they're just a bunch of random abilities on the same card. Fuck yourself.
>>47794664
>false dichotomy
lol no nice try though
>>47793616
Well, none of the cards that do the exiling/token creation are actually blue, just the frogs themselves are. And I do have fluff to back it up, if you're interested.
>>47794724
So, you're just going to mock the accusation, rather than address it? Yeah, thought so. What's your next post going to be, another mocking comment, asserting that you don't see any value in addressing the accusation, or just ":^)"? Or are you going for the trifecta of retardation and do all three?
>>47794778
>Well, none of the cards that do the exiling/token creation are actually blue, just the frogs themselves are.
Yeah, that's another thing that bugs me.
>And I do have fluff to back it up, if you're interested.
Thanks, but no thanks. I've already read it and... well, I think you can see the issue.
>card
Haven't seen this in a while. When did you decide on the multiple triggers? Seems cool enough.
>>47794880
>Or are you going for the trifecta of retardation and do all three?
actually, it's just :^)
>>47794880
>When did you decide on the multiple triggers?
I raised the cost and gave it a better body, so I wanted it to be immediately impactful for the cost.
>Yeah, that's another thing that bugs me.
You don't like off-color tokens? I feel like green frogs would feel more out of place, honestly. But, if you don't like it, you don't like it. Sorry to hear that, man.
>>47794926
Well, it's not just that they're off-color. That I can take. It's that the cards that make them aren't Blue. I mean, at the end of the day, it's just a really weird token to begin with, so it probably shouldn't be surprising that I'd be kinda turned off by it in the first place.
>>47795426
10/10
>>47795426
>Necrourge
ew.
>>47795924
Balanced for a 3 mana walker, but not very exciting beyond the ultimate, which is only so-so.
>>47794421
;^)
did somebody say gimmick walkers?the m? is because i'm working off of a set number of each rarity for each color
>>47796569
10/10 as an izzet fan/player this is the planeswalker i wanted to see and as a ral fanboy this is 999999 times better then that cope out piece of shit wizards made
>>47796569
For a spellslinger, he sure has nothing to do with slinging spells.
>>47796675
he slings some pings boyo
>>47796569
This draws you three cards on the second turn you have it, or builds to a "0: Draw three cards" each turn, which becomes quite an issue if it's played in multiples since previous Rals all contribute to the current Ral's strength.
The mana cost means you get to play it early and immediately start building, and additional copies of it get better and better the earlier the first copy was played.
Remove the cost reduction aspect of the Ultimate. Make it remove the counters after using it, but set the number of cards drawn to the same as the counters removed. Either that, or noticeably increase the cost. It's ridiculous to put a cost reduction effect on something that's already that cheap.
>>47796732
howsislook
>>47796804
Better.
The Arc Lightning part should probably either target a single creature/player or cost something. It quickly becomes very powerful against weenie strats.
>>47796875
I'm on the edge about the arc lightning. multiples are a non-issue given that this set is only going to exist for limited
>>47796804
Put the Energy Counter on Ral, having 4 of these in your deck, and it becomes fucking bonkers.
"+1: Scry 1. Put an energy counter on this card."
>>47796992
multiples won't exist. the set is a draft set and only one of each mythic will ever exist because that's how many I'm printing.
>>47797030
That's kind of silly then. The only reason Energy Counters would be relevant is with multiples.
I think it would work a lot better to be something like:
1UR
+2: Scry 1
-X: ~ deals X damage divided etc.
-2: Draw X cards, where X is equal to the number of Loyalty counters on ~.
>>47797301
Doesn't work. Bestow turns the cards its own into only Aura enchantments if its cost is paid. You'd have to wait until the enchanted creature died before you could use her loyalty abilities.
>>47797301
>>47797386
Wait, 0 loyalty? Man, you did not think this through. At 0 loyalty, it dies as a state-based action. How on earth did you think this was going to work? You think you can activate loyalty abilities on a card that isn't a planeswalker?
>>47797386
>>47797457
Permanents don't have to be planeswalkers in order to activate their loyalty abilities.
>>47797386
>606.2. An activated ability with a loyalty symbol in its cost is a loyalty ability. NORMALLY, only planeswalkers have loyalty abilities.
>606.3. A player may activate a loyalty ability of a PERMANENT he or she controls any time he or she has priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of his or her turn, but only if no player has previously activated a loyalty ability of that permanent that turn.
Emphasis added. Loyalty abilities aren't actually tied to planeswalkers. The only counter argument would be
>306.5. Loyalty is a characteristic only planeswalkers have.
But nothing stops you from putting loyalty counters on non-planeswalkers.
>>47797467
>>47797457
It cast for its bestow, it enters as an Enchantment - Aura. Since it's not a planeswalker, it does not trigger the hidden “This permanent enters the battlefield with a number of loyalty counters on it equal to its printed loyalty number.” that all planeswalkers have, but it also does not die due to SBA for having 0 loyalty (since it doesn't have loyalty).
>>47797519
You're right. Weird. I need to remember not to comment on gimmickwalkers.
Gonna put commons down for a while to work on some rare stuff. For fun.
>>47797527
Yeah, it's definitely an odd case. I agree that I don't think it'd enter with counters. I'm sure if Wizards ever printed a card like that they'd clear it up, but I doubt they ever would.
>>47797538
Mycosynth Lattice + March of the Machines + Experiment Kraj bullshit is what typically leads to this sort of fuckery, but the rules are rather robust with uh... turning your Kraj into a neowalker.
Frontiers anon dropping in for a second
I'm planning on having a colorless subtheme in the set, how do you guys think these drafts look?
>>47794778
I'd cutoff a bit of the cost. There's much better things you can get for 5 cmc.
>>47795426
This is one janky guy. He's great though.
>>47795924
She's pretty solid, I don't like how her name has little to nothing to do with the effects, and the third ability seems to come out of nowhere.
>>47796554
>Not Rude
Do Haste, first strike. It's a small detail to overlook, but you'd want to know it can attack as it enters the battlefield, before how it works with combat damage.
I can't think of anything at the moment, but I think he's deceptively more powerful than on a first glance.
>>47796947
Great card. Looks fun to abuse in a token deck.
>>47797301
I'm beyond amazed that this works. You get bragging rights.
>>47797386
I think this could cost substantially less.
>>47798927
Heh, 'tis cool.
>>47798936
Really good design.
>>47798942
Reminds me of those Planeshift cards that had the bounce effect. Looks like a fun way card to add to an Alluren deck.
Can you post the art?
>>47800788
First strike comes before haste because it's more pertinent for longer than haste is.
>>47799245
>Eagle pack
wording;
If ~ would die, you may ...
replacement effect, not trigger.
>>47800831
Eh, you're right about that, as a player, though, I'd rather have haste first.
>Image
So, these are the last few cards I need help with before printing. I need some images to put into the cards, and change the name of the ones with 1234 in their names. I'd appreciate any help <3
>>47797301
This is a really cool idea. So when the creature she controls dies, she's stuck making creature tokens forever? That seems fine, actually. I'm impressed that this actually works.
>>47795924
Oh, neat, her hand overlaps. How did you manage that? Also, what the fuck is going on with her right arm/side of her chest?
As for the card, her abilities don't really have much synergy, which is OK but kind of dull. Balanced, though. I might make the +1 target only one opponent; she'd be very strong in multiplayer otherwise.
>>47795426
This is so cool. The name needs work, but the card is magical.Seriously, necrourge sounds like it should have a thread on /d/. Were you going for necromancer/demiurge?
>>47800788
>the third ability seems to come out of nowhere
Each of her abilities are "Your opponents lose something and you gain that something".
>>47801465
>How did you manage that?
I opened the card and the art as layers in GIMP, resized the art to the same size as it appears on the card, then erased the part of the frame covering her hand.
GU common slot being annoying, but I like this one.
Dunno whether I'll use fading of vanishing, fading is less vulnerable to stifle type abuse and easier to work with counter removal effects (like the parallax cycle) but vanishing is preferable otherwise as it just makes more sense.
The logic behind the fixed port is that in my experience port is fun (or at least interesting) for the first few turns it is in play, but just becomes a bore later as you have to tap the same land over and over again, obviously it also makes it less powerful. I might lower the fading/vanishing number to 3 but idk.
I also might move planned city up to a rare but I *think* it is OK balance wise.
I don't know if there is any way to word the b/w enchantment better, possible I could make it not prevent damage to creatures and make it cost 1 less.
>>47802904
Vanishing. Fading confused players, so Vanishing was made to update the wording to be clearer.
will comment on cards soon just wanted to say this
>>47802904
>Fixed port
One does not simply fix Port. I'd take a port for 5 turns over no port at all just about any day of the week.
>Planned City
The drawback against playing multiple cards in a turn I don't think does enough to warrant how much of a crater this would make in the mana fixing game, but it might.
>Nebulous Nothing the Nameless
what even the fuck is that. Activated ability with... and a... w u t?
>>47802728
Looking at keep watch, this probably wouldn't even be too good at 1 cmc, but it should definitely not be 3 unless g/u is really evasive in your set.
>>47799384
>5 color colorless creature
top kek.
>>47799245
>enforcer of justice
>5 mana 3/4 designed to stop control decks or combat tricks
wat?
>Wild Diamond
NOPE
>Solitary Firetender
First strike and double strike don't stack anyway, you could just have the first ability say first strike.
>peacemaker
a 3 mana colorless better than arc lightning is OP on its own, even without the equipment.
>snub nose
"+1/0 for each dead creature in my graveyard"
>no equip cost
Is this some troll I should know about? The rest of the cards don't seem too unreasonable.
>Rarez Quartz
OP, also when, not if.
>explore
What? Why?
>color shifted better version of sinkhole.
No?
>>47799245
>>47803144
>color shifted better version of sinkhole.
I saw this comment and thought "No way that's true." Holy shit I wish I was wrong. Frontiers anon, you must be out of your mind. You know how many times Sinkhole has been printed? Fucking four. Alpha, Beta, Unlimited, and very recently in Eternal Masters. And from Unlimited to Eternal, its rarity changed from common to RARE.
>>47802928
>Fading confused players, so Vanishing was made to update the wording to be clearer.
I get that, but it is a lot harder to work with an a lot easier to break.
Could I change vanishing to be something like dark depths triggered ability so it triggers when it has no counters rather than the last counter is removed? Still harder to work with otherwise but the set(s) will have stifle-type effects.
>>47802964
>I'd take a port for 5 turns over no port at all just about any day of the week.
Yeah, You think it could be 4 turns or does it have to be 3?
>Nebulous Nothing the Nameless
Lol, I just didn't come up with a name yet. It's supposed to trade damage for cards and cards for damage pretty much. Do you actually not get how it works or are you just bothered by the weird wording (I don't know how to word it better)
>>47803144
>Looking at keep watch, this probably wouldn't even be too good at 1 cmc, but it should definitely not be 3
Noted. I actually have nothing against bad cards in the set, so that might be a thing. Ofc I'll have to playtest it to see how genuinely horrible it turns out to be. It's probably genuinely horrible.
>unless g/u is really evasive in your set.
Notably, a ton of things are very evasive in the set. So it could work out. This specific slot has been causin' me problems (Noncreature GU common) so any suggestions would be coolio.
: ) thx
>>47799245
>Blacksand
I'm not entirely sure how the last ability works. Maybe give it Menace normally, and it has
>Whenever you cast a spell, ~ loses menace until end of turn.
>Enforcer
I guess it's OK.
>Exploiting Priest
Seems weird.
>Highland
>When [...] instead
Not how that works. It's either a triggered ability
>When ~ dies, you may exile it. If you do, [...]
Or a replacement ability
>If ~ would die, you may exile it instead. If you do, [...]
Note that the latter means the card won't even touch the graveyard. Also, I don't really see why this needs to be Green. It could easily be WU.
>Nightland
Cool.
>Ranger
Nice.
>Resuscitator
If it's just once per turn, why not turn it into a tap ability?
>Scheming
Art doesn't exactly seem to fit the rest of the set. Probably fine, compare Ashnod's Altar. Colors are a bit weird though. If it had to be multicolor, I'd make it BG. Maybe try mono-Black.
>Solitary Firetender
>four or fewer lands.
Not entirely sure about this one.
>Solitary Shaman
Meh.
>Wild Diamond
No. Just no. First, at 0 cost, this is just a really bad idea. And for the second ability, the "Oh, but you don't get to use it next turn" excuse doesn't work. It doesn't matter if you don't get to use it on your next turn if it helps you win this turn. It's also something Wizards probably never print now because they learned a while ago that artifacts that make more mana than they cost are bad ideas. Though I'm not sure because this one is legendary.
>Townsman
3 colorless for two Shocks? Nope. Even a 1:1 ratio for colorless damage is too good most of the time.
By the way, I've noticed that a lot of your cards have this space at the bottom for no reason. Why?
>Stone Erratus
Name really doesn't fit the setting. Also seems kinda crazy. And wording probably needs to be changed to include "an additional +3/+3"
>Spurred Boots
Cool.
1/2
>>47799245
>>47803714
>Snub-Nose
Again, setting. Also, you keep getting the wording wrong for this. The typical template is
>[Equipped/Enchanted] creature gets [+P/+T] and has [ability]
>Rarez Quartz
Are you trying to say "rarest?" Wording is wrong, and I'm getting kinda upset that you obviously aren't referring back to Magic cards for these cards. Frankly, it makes you look lazy, like you just don't give a damn. Look, here's a site I use very often, MagicCards.Info It's very easy to use once you get the hang of it, and they have a little starter guide to help you out too. Also, why do people keeping carrying around these weird stones in combat? Feels odd.
>Infinite Destinations
Reminder text is beyond messed up. First, you don't have to say "To explore" unless you're going to be doing it more than once at a time. Second, shuffling this often seems like a major pain in the ass. And I see no reason to include the last sentence in the reminder text.
>Purge
This needs to be purged. I've already said what I think about this here >>47803218
>Steelchaser Hellkite
Meh. Why CMC 3 or less?
2/2
>>47799384
>Pointless Devoid on everything
Why?
>>47800831
Haste feels like it should be first because you're probably going to use that ability first.
>>47803792
Are you guys seriously arguing about this?
I just looked for some examples and first strike always comes before haste. I guess the most recent is Gurmag Swiftwing but there are some in the RTR block too
>>47800788
>Great card. Looks fun to abuse in a token deck.
Thanks, but here's a new version. I changed it to randomly exile because I realized it could be exploited in a wheenie deck. So, with this version, if you have more creatures, you're more likely to lose something. Also changed a few other things to get it to work the way I want to.
>>47803894
Eh, OK.
>>47774735
I love the mechanics on this card it is actually way more interesting than first strike and deathtouch although I don't know why he has first strike with the second ability
>>47782681
for future reference the problem with dark ritual is that the only decks that use fast mana well are the ones that win before the negative card advantage is a problem, so busted storm style combo decks, even aggro decks are too tight on cards to make use of it
>>47804149
>the only decks that use fast mana well are the ones that win before the negative card advantage is a problem
lol no, the vast majority of combo decks care about card advantage (I can't think of a single combo deck with dark ritual which could be said to no care about CA), they just don't tend to be attrition based.
>even aggro decks are too tight on cards to make use of it
Except all of the different aggro and midrange decks that have historically used it? (even control versions of necropotence used it)
The issue with dark ritual is effects which benefit from being in play sooner, the classic example being hypnotic specter, this plays well into combo decks, but ritual has never been broken for storm decks.
Trying this one again.
>>47804149
>Bucky
To be honest, I'm not entirely sure why I did that either. There will be times I put up incomplete cards or cards I'm really unsure just because I have no clue what to do with them myself and I'm looking for help.
Decided to make an Aura that uses "this creature can't be the target of spells or abilities your opponents control." Because why not?
Uncommon attempt :0
>>47800788
>>47806148
Decided to use this art for something. Probably dumb as fuck though.
>>47803218
Yeah sorry fellas I was tired as shit last night. I want to edit the shit out of my artifacts but I posted the ancient versions of them that were OP as fuck.
>>47807851
It would probably work better to say "card types and subtypes".
>>47807851
An object that loses its card types automatically loses any associated subtypes.
>>47806733
I can only see this being played in the durdly of EDH groups, because who needs massive ramp when you're already at 7 mana?
>>47805215
Greatly outclassed by Scythe Tiger. It needs a little more oomph to be worth giving up a land.
>>47804677
Meh. Might as well just use O-Rings instead.
>>47808335
>Greatly outclassed by Scythe Tiger. It needs a little more oomph to be worth giving up a land.
I think it being at instant speed & hybrid (easier to cast) may help push it a tiny bit, but I'll look into some mighty power boosts. I kind of like it simple, but who knows.
Whadya think of this?
>>47808734
this is just reminding me how boring a keyword Exploit was...
>>47808929
It was a boring ability.
I don't know shit about magic so I won't bother trying to stat this, thought the concept was fun but I'm sure it's been done before.
>>47811342
rick is monoblack if that helps
>>47808335
>I can only see this being played in the durdly of EDH groups, because who needs massive ramp when you're already at 7 mana?
I was trying to do something cool with a Suspend X cost, and I came up with this. It's kind of hard to design.
>Meh. Might as well just use O-Rings instead.
Sadly agreed.
>>47811644
Blue/Black.
>>47811342
>>47811644
>>47811806
>[after an hour of pointless arguing]: We'll just have to agree to disagree.
>>47811644
>>47811806
Primarily black but a tinge of blue makes sense I think
>>47811806
rick doesn't try to improve himself or expand his knowledge, which is the most important aspect of blue
Replaced augment with multikicker.
>>47812211
I liked augment better.
>>47812211
Well, you can certainly do a lot more things with Multikicker. Doesn't look like Wizards did all that much with it, so go nuts. Though you kinda have to include Kicker now, or people will ask why you're doing one and not the other.Or you could do Megakicker! (You may pay an additional [cost] as you cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with a +1/+1 counter on it.)
>>47812211
a lot of mechanics are "just kicker"
i like augment better, it's less confusing (for example the multikicker version seems like you only draw if you kicked it)
Attempting to make a set with a surreal horro theme to it, based off of Beksinski / Wayne Barlowe / Giger.
Thoughts on this?
Post silly jokes.
>>47812211
I made an ability with the same name for one of my on-hiatus sets. Kind of an inverse of kicker, fills similar design space. You're welcome to use it if you'd like to and if it suits your set.
And I also like your augment better than multikicker.
>>47812462
>>47812673
>Discard a card: Investigate
hot fuck
>>47812734
>>47812673
>Color has to match the name
God I hate this.
