Welcome Back Kotter Edition
Old Thread: >>43542385
>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
>Formatting FAQ
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://www.photojoiner.net/
>/ccg/ sets (completed and in development)
http://pastebin.com/hsVAbnMj
>>43573292
This seems very random in what it does
>>43573292
Costing seems about right.
>>43573301
I think this has some wording issues. Maybe use Commandeer's wording instead? Costing seems fine, though you can just flat steal a creature for the same cost, so part of me thinks that it might be too expensive.
"Gain control of target creature spell. (The permanent enters the battlefield under your control.)"
>>43573323
You know, at first glance this seems fine, but I can't tell for certain if it'd really be okay or not. It may be a touch weak considering the opponent can mana fix with the mana you return to them, since they choose what colors it is. But it's still a 2 mana hard counter, so...
>>43573361
Sift putting the cards back on top but in a random order makes me like it a lot more. Personally I think the mechanic is in a really good place there.
>>43573361
Harness just needs 'into its owner's graveyard' see Desertion
>>43573391
Huh, I didn't even know that card existed. Thanks.
>>43573301
It's a choose one, with a hidden choose both option if you stick it on a manland.
>>43573361
Back to fateseal I see. Don't know how playable Expropriate is, only a control deck would want that effect and I'm not sure it will want to play big sorceries like this.
>>43573384
Thanks, it took a lot of feedback but it feels pretty good now.
>Nurse
Bit weak compared to Souls' Attendant, but maybe your set calls for that. Also, you can make the life gain a "may" to prevent issues with lifegain hate or conversion to life loss.
>>43573391
I'm with >>43573411, I totally missed that card. I mean they both do the same thing, essentially, except the Commandeer suggestion gets around "can't be countered", which is niche but can be important.
>Hall
Hm. I think making it a choice would make it more interesting, but that might just be me. By that I mean making the land tap to give itself Extort until end of turn.
>>43573428
>Necromatic Feedback
I really don't like the double hybrid in the cost. It should probably just be 1(B/G)U. Other than that, it's different enough from Soul Manipulation.
>>43573428
>fateseal
Not quite. The random element prevents the Sifting player from abusing it too hard, which I think was what it was lacking. If you're the one that was pointing out that the bottom of the library was basically the same as exiling, you pretty much fueled the change along with another Anon.
>Feedback
I feel like this should be UUB, since it's a hard counter that hits all spell types and that's the standard for those kinds of spells, to contain UU in the cost if they are gold. Plus, the yard grab makes it extra spicy value, and while I can appreciate it in green, the spell itself really feels UB to me. Maybe it's the name(no way).
>>43573450
Neat to have an activated ability counter in a set that is gunna have more of those. It's weird, there's nothing especially green about Voidslime, but from several designs in these threads I've seen it seems to have grandfathered that in as a GU ability. Wonder if that's going to end up the case, like counter removal just sorta ending up black.
>Hall
I might do something like that. The only thing is extort is already an optional CMC+1 thing, so tapping the land to give extort makes it even less likely to be worth it. Currently what I've done to make it more interesting is changing it to tapping for colorless, since at first it was a WB painland. I like the colorless a lot more because then you can't just shove it in anything and have it pay for its own extort. Might have it ETB tapped like the exalted land.
>>43573472
>it's a hard counter
Not quite. It mana leaks for the toughness of the returned creature.
>>43573483
Well, playtesting will tell you for sure if you need to have the Hall etb tapped or not, but probably not. I just figured it made it more interesting, I wasn't convinced it was OP as it is.
>voidslime
Yeah, I think what happened is they wanted a Cancel+, and wedged it into GU since G has that link with Muraganda where it "hates" abilities, so it was kind of a throwback flavor fit that just so happened to mesh with the mechanics.
>Infiltrator
I remember this. Solid common.
>>43573491
Yeah, I misspoke. I meant "hard" as in "counters everything" which is not the right terminology to use. I actually don't know what the proper term for a "total counter" is, honestly.
>Mitosis
Seems fine to me. Cackling Counterpart+.
Repostin this hunk of junk if anyone wants to give it a looksee
>>43573472
>>43573462
It originally started off as UBB, since I wanted to make a gold counterspell that was weighted towards the nonblue colors. I can't remember why I shoved green in there (cost too restrictive?).
It's not a true hard counter, since hard counters are "Counter target spell. Full stop." It's unrestricted though, since it doesn't care about the properties of the spell.
>Mana Dregs
It's too bad those suspend cards don't interact well with cascade (or rather, interact too well). You have to be careful with cheap cascade, as if you build your deck right then it's essentially a tutor.
>Sift
I admit I missed the random part, however the sift itself now feels less useful. Especially large sifts, since with small sifts you still have a reasonable idea of what the opponent is drawing immediately. Perhaps the Illusion token should be bigger or have flying, so the emphasis is on what card is exiled rather than deck stacking. (For the record, I'm totes okay with fateseal.)
>>43573450
>>43573483
Green was able to counter activated abilities as part of its artifact hate. I wouldn't necessarily say that it's a green ability (since then it could be mono), but a way of differentiating GU counters from other gold counters.
I would put Stymie at a higher rarity, not particularly for power level reasons but because uncommonly seen abilities should be, well, uncommon.
>>43573509
>I just figured it made it more interesting,
I think I articulated poorly, whoops. Putting my thoughts together a bit more, I think the thing I see in that is that extort already has that dynamic. You gotta pay extra to get the tiny drain. Since tapping a land is basically paying 1 mana, it's just expounding on the same decision making that extort is already packing. That's how I see it, at least.
>>43573529
>I would put Stymie at a higher rarity, not particularly for power level reasons but because uncommonly seen abilities should be, well, uncommon.
That makes a good bit of sense, but the set they're doing is big on activated abilities.
Lightning Rod is neat. I feel like the metalcraft doesn't even need to be a metalcraft though, honestly. Like, I could see that just being tacked on the card always.
>>43573529
>Lightning Rod
Good card. Flavor and mechanical win.
>Sift
Yeah I like Fateseal too but it's a bit much, I'll admit that. Making the token fly is a thought; it'd make the card more appealing and I could keep it pricier, which I wanted to do. I see your point about digging deep with Sift, but I wanted to make it a point never to make Sift 1 or Sift 2 cards on the other side of that coin, because Sift 1 is just Ingest, and Sift 2 is kinda pointless, so I figured I'd be doing a lot of Sift 3-5. Sift 2 isn't utterly worthless, and I might do it once, but I don't really care for it, which does make the action itself suffer a bit, since there's a "sweet spot" where it feels better, as opposed to Scry or Fateseal where no matter what you get to do as far as card count it feels good.
>Stymie
I will consider that, but as has been stated, since the set features Wizards heavily, and activated abilities heavily, I wanted to make sure there would be some counter play that wasn't hard to get.
>>43573533
I get ya.
>Wrest
I like this, and I feel like it would actually be appropriate in UB if you felt compelled to do so. I may actually steal this idea from you.
>>43573545
I remember this guy too. He went through a lot of changes.
>>43573573
Yet another good idea. Man, stuff like this really makes me feel uncreative.
This is so many fucking words for a common but the ability kinda necessitates it.
>>43573573
Reminds me a lot of plaxcaster frogling. Also, fun interaction with planeswalkers (well, fun for the person using it).
>>43573591
Consider just codifying sift to one number, maybe? Like, just always have sift hit 4 cards or 3 cards. It's an option.
And you're right, summoning wrest could be UB. Something to consider. Go ahead and try the design yourself.
>>43573573
I think using frost titans wording would look cleaner but that's just me
>>43573614
I dunno how much I like flying and first strike being two separate abilities there, just because they're both basically evasion.
>>43573619
Codifying sift does sound like it'd streamline things a touch, but then I couldn't do this with it.
>Echostep
Squadron Hawk in green? It fits, and the black hate is interesting. I feel like maybe it should be 3/2 but I think it shouldn't break anything as it is, given that it's pretty much as efficiently costed as the Hawk was.
>>43573639
I suppose it does come off as somewhat redundant. Perhaps I should instead do this.
>>43573652
>black hate is interesting
Not just black hate. It triggers on cast, so that counterspells don't stop it either. Gotta get that UB hate in there.
Mindtrap Shade is neat. Could easily be mono black, but I assume it's gold for design skeleton fitting reasons?
>>43573663
The issue there is that it already has hexproof, which is what those self bounce abilities are generally for. As is, I personally feel it's too niche.
>>43573668
That and I don't like black getting flying on utility creatures that aren't huge demons on its own.
I missed the "on cast" part or just didn't process it; though it does make me think it should have a smaller body at that rate now that you mention it.
>>43573652
You could boost the initial p/t or drop the cost on this
>>43573626
I didn't want Abrupt Decays to get through, but I realized that it lets you put counters in response to removal. Which I like.
>>43573663
>>43573614
Alternatively, try vigilance instead of lifelink. Since first strike is also a good defensive ability.
>>43573619
It might be more interesting if it only triggered on discard or counterspell. As is it feels a bit too...good-stuffy.
>>43573639
This bonus feels like it would almost never come up.
>>43573680
2/2 it is then.
>>43573676
I'll fiddle with it to see if I can get it someplace interesting. There are going to be a lot of "guildmage" creatures in this set and I wanted to do a combat-oriented one for WU, since the faction's flavor is that it prefers to "buff" itself and fight in a more mundane way than most Wizards would approve of.
>>43573652
Are you going to do anything that cares about exiled cards? Because that can add value to cards that just sift, beyond shuffling the top of their library. Doesn't need to be processing, but cards like Warden of the Beyond that could perhaps care about the specifics of the exiled card.
still making dumb shit in the middle of the night
>>43573719
Ha. That's some good flavor.
>>43573719
I do have that as a thing that happens, yes. Pic related. I'll only ever have the cards care about the card being exiled, not when it's in exile, because I don't really care for exile becoming a place where cards come and go too much.
>Ikanotisaur
Doesn't seem to have changed since I last saw it, I don't think?
>>43573731
Oops, that still has old sift. Derp.
>>43573728
... there has GOT to be something I am missing here.
New Ætherblade Elite. Not gonna spend too much more time on it if it doesn't feel right; I got too many ideas to stew on the one card all night.
>>43573747
>... there has GOT to be something I am missing here.
When it etbs you have to (probably) sacrifice a creature and gain 7 life for your 4/4 lifelinker. On evoke it burns itself and you just gain 7 life.
Probs dumb.
Elite looks better like this. Prowess is a bit more awkward because it is less likely you can cast a spell when you are activating an ability but that is getting into super nitpick mode where it's most likely not actually an issue with a card but just a thing to note.
S'good because now the two activated abilities are different. Blue is for surviving spells, white is for surviving creatures.
>>43573731
I meant on non-Sift cards that could synergize with Sift cards. Because the bulk of Mindtrap Shade is its flight and its pump, with the sifting being close to a do-nothing bonus.
>Doesn't seem to have changed since I last saw it, I don't think?
Nyet. Though I did consider removing trample, but then it felt too small.
>>43573728
That's an odd combination of effects. Should be black rather than white. 7 lifegain is also a lot. (And there's always the good ol' fight target creature you control as an alternative.)
>>43573794
That's some amazing art.
>>43573782
No I got all that, I was just trying to figure out why I'd want to play a creature that asploded something of mine even if it did give me a good chunk of life. It's a strange card because all the colors are right, but when you look at it you go "this is a monoblack card". The evoke cost make me chuckle though.
Glad the Elite is in a better place. I still have trouble remembering to use Prowess as an evergreen, so I didn't even consider it first time 'round.
>card
Stop being clever, it's disheartening.
>PLANAR NAME DROP ALERT
Also, this might need to be GG.
>>43573794
Goddammit with the cards and the making of the insecurities. I demand you make shitty cards from now on.
>sift
Well, I may or may not have plans for a UB card that cares about the number of cards exiled with regards to P/T. That might suffice.
>>43573816
So fucking done.
>>43573820
You could probably get away with 1G if its a 1/1.
>>43573836
Doesn't need "another creature", but I suspect that's a copy/paste flub.
It might actually be a little much. Maybe more suitable as a Legendary Land, I think.
>>43573820
Card seems about right, my only slight worry is that it's a hexproof seal on board at common, which might get kinda unfun to play with. GG is probably right though, since total p/t puts it at 2/3.
>>43573834
Thank you??? hahareal talk your cards are usually neat too and you can actually do sets. i just love evoke and unearth too much
>>43573853
I could revert it back to ETB tapped and graft 0.
>>43573867
Cute. But it's black so it's ok. You'll be forced to destroy your own flyers if you have to.
>>43573816
This is great.
>>43573867
I went with GG because it also has the side effect of making the card a touch harder to cast, given that the set is multicolor-oriented.
>card
>i'm just making silly cards hurrrr
Dammit man, some of us actually have to try.
>>43573880
That's a real cool land. I'd use it in a heartbeat. It might be a bit too good though? Unfortunately the only thing I can think of is making the manland ability cost more, like 2GU or something.
>>43573902
This is a bit scary because, unless I have the rulings wrong, you could spend RRRR to make two creatures an opponent controls legendary and one of them then has to die. While that's super heavy red and a turn's worth of mana, it's still pretty sick repeatable creature destruction.
>>43573893
At first I thought this was too good, but making it also noncreature permanents makes it more of a fun build around card. No idea what I'd do with it, but it seems fun.
>>43573889
Still like this. I was gonna suggest you make the Hedron land an artifact creature but I think that is actually ill-advisable.
>>43573893
Hm. This feels a touch cheap. It's like "splice a battlegrowth onto every permanent spell you cast".
>>43573901
Nice board wipe. Fits in well with the spendier ones like Phyrexian Rebirth and all that.
>>43573902
Humorous, but I am curious if it actually works. I'd have to hit Gatherer I guess.
>>43573323
>Self mill deck
>Manage to cast a Dead Drop or whatever around turn 4
>"I counter my own spell."
>Progenitus, Door to Nothingness, Eldrazi, Blightsteel, you get the picture.
I want this deck to be real.
>>43573893
A problem I came across doing something like this was that graft represents two abilities - one of which is an "as this enters the battlefield" ability. And "as enters" abilities happen before the creature actually enters and becomes a permanent (so giving graft N to permanents is effectively graft 0).
>>43573953
That's hilarious
>>43573893
>>43573964
Maybe something like this? "Nonland, noncreature permanents and noncreature spells you control have graft"
>>43573964
>The Tay tree
Please tell me you used that picture knowing where it's from.
>>43573953
Fold into Aether
>>43573987
Riven, or is there something i'm missing? (Also how did I not use Graftworld for a throw away name.)
>>43573901
This is an odd card, as the decks that want wraths are often using them against decks that have more creatures than them.
>>43574019
Relentless Mystic frightens me something fierce.
Double graft for the double counter transfer.
>>43574042
Dredge did nothing wrong.
Soul of Lotus feels a tad too expensive at 5. I want to say that you could get away with 2GG (compare Somberwald Sage).
>>43574019
>knows Riven
My gentleman of African descent.
>>43574066
>Dredge did nothing wrong.
ohohohohohoho
Also, I love simic so that snake octopus hydra is an instant 10/10 from me
>>43573889
Why are the tokens also lands? They don't tap for mana (though I guess there's Urborg), and white does not have a lot of land synergies.
>>43574067
>first google hit for Riven is some League of Legend character
>Riven was 18 fucking years ago
>>43574019
Fold into Aether merely taunts me with what I'll never have by giving me a small taste. In my mind I have already named that beautiful, unnamed spell "Dazzling Flourish", and had even taken a nap immediately afterward just so the prospect of it not being a real card may haunt my dreams as soon as possible. O, maker of this card, know you are yearned for.
...Anyway, here's a card.
I return just in time for the thread to die. I hate when it takes too long to find decent art.
>>43574158
I have a sorcery that basically does this same thing. Seeing a repeatable version is kinda neat.
>>43574091
I like every part of this except the +1. I feel like it should also deal with artifacts, but I understand the need for utility as well.
>>43574086
It's so silly it's great.
>>43574066
The flavor text makes it.
>>43574042
I remember this. I also remember a lot of debate surrounding it.
>>43574019
These both have tremendous value.
>>43573981
Seems okay. Would be a complete downer to have this played against you though, since 9/10 times the person doing it has no creatures to worry about, or is gonna sac them anyway to slap you in the face.
>>43574280
That red art is Fated Conflagration.
>>43574291
FIGURES.
I'll hunt for something new. Thanks for the heads up.
>>43574296
I always hate finding the perfect art for a card and to find out it's already in use.
This is the first draft of the legendary leaders of my set. The setting is a sprawling, endless cave system. The denizens have no knowledge of any sort of 'surface'. The Dwarves (R/W) build great fortresses of light, for they fear to tread in the dark. Their great cities are the hubs of civilization in the caves.
The humans (B/W) are not as rooted as the dwarves, but with that comes versatility. They have their own, smaller, darker settlements further into the systems than the Dwarves dare to tread, and serve as couriers, merchants, and explorers. The humans are highly spiritual, and their caravans are said to be guarded by generations of ghosts.
The merfolk, in their great, dark seas, are usually unseen by the dry dwellers. That is, until, a third of the city suddenly floods from an unexpected breach. The merfolk are constantly building new tunnels, and mapping the current ones. For every one path of dry land, there exist at least 3 different flooded channels.
The Elves are dark, seclusive beings. They exist for the great mushroom forests to feed off of, and be tended by. The fungi they worship are parasites of their life's energies. The elves are carnivores, and feared by all the civilizations of the caves.
The Machinations (U/R) are an army of robots and artifacts that are scarce more than myth to the Dwarves. The Humans and Merfolk know better. No one is quite yet sure what their goal is, but they're growing, whatever they are. Rumors hold that there was once a council of powerful artificers that was creating them, and now there only remains one: The Thaumaturge.
>>43576201
Lots of text man . maybe too much text. But good. But the Dwarf tokens? Red only ? And not r/w
>>43576201
>WB guy
Seems fine. Interesting ability and needs some steam to get going. I'd prefer if he exiles instead of destroys to avoid him feeding into his own mass of ghosts.
>GB gal
Really interesting ramp tool. Feels fine with how costing it is to use. Could be a 3/4. Also you can save on text space by using @ to put only their name, not their title which is fine for for doing with leg-dairy creatures.
>UG gal
She is pretty underwhelming. Yes, she gives you creatures island walk and makes an island and provides draw sometimes, but at 7 it's pretty low impact over all. I'd like of prefer to just run a stormtide leviathan. You can drop her cmc to 6, maybe 5 easily.
>UR person
Really slow, feels kind of off for UR but he's fine. Right power level for cost and rarity.Would only see play in commander.
>RW dorf
Same feelings as before. He still feels like a U creature over all. The issue is Defender is just not RW unless it's secretly a fast card, but he's super slow. Also I feel the tokens should be WR not just W. Also the keywords are only capitalized if they are the first word of the sentence, or list. So uncapitalize both instance of defender in the card text.
>>43573301
It's just a weakened desertion
>>43577163
>Your card
Maybe make it deal damage instead of lose life just to make it a little more red? Besides that I really like it, though might be concerned about it being too cheap. Yes its devotion, but thats a big effect for 5 CMC.
>my cards
Yeah I'll cut the cost on UG. The cost is actually a relic from when she was something different that had to do with being above or below 4 power. How's 5 CMC sound to you?
EDH is sorta what I had in mind for the UR guy anyway. Giant UR creatures don't see much play anywhere else, so I figured I might as well make it good.
What about cutting P/T by one, cutting its CMC by one, getting it out a little quicker? Or taking away defender from the main card? I really like the idea, and I think it can fit RW, but I'm open to changing it.
Political lands! :D
>>43577355
This is brokd.You get to use it on main phase, they only get to use it on instant-speed.
>>43577332
>Dorf changes
The issue is less his CMC or stats, but the style of play with the card. He is a very slow card. This isn't a card you drop and immediately take action with him. You wait a turn or two to build up an army of dorfs. But taking things slow is just really not in the nature of RW. Most RW big guys have haste because of how fast the color pairing naturally is. If his "defenders can attack" ability didn't cost mana and instead required you to lets say, sac a land, or discard a card, it would be more RW because you could do it easily on the turn you play him.
>>43577355
Nice. You can shorten the text to, ".. one mana of any color to his or her ...". Try slapping some flavor text on it!
>>43577433
Love the card. What about this?
>>43577355
>>43577469
This is much, much more R/W. I find it funny he is in shock range. I feel him spawning a 2/2 on entry may be a bit too much power, but I'm not too sure honestly. I think it will be fine for now but in play-testing it could be too strong of a tempo swing.
>>43577710
I figure since the combined stats are only 6/5 for 5, and its a mythic, and the token has defender, it's not too bad.
>your card
That cards pretty funky. It's good I guess. One of those janky draft cards your opponent probably wouldn't see coming.
>>43577425
>>43577433
>>43577535
>>43577754
I made pic related and realized i should have the things mentioned in the flavortext as actual cards in the set.
I always like writing little sub plots in cards. It's something always cool to find when looking through your shity commons that they are actually related past being in the same set.
I posted these in the commander thread and got some solid criticism, now it's your turn:
My EDH playgroup is working on making custom commanders for archetypes that don't have a viable commander (UR artifacts, BG infect, etc). What do you guys think of these in terms of power level and flavor?
Keep in mind these are only going to be used as commanders, with no other custom cards in the decks.
>>43578487
Need some p/t, boss
>>43578736
>tfw you post the wrong version of a card
Cool mythic. Would be good in limited.
>>43575345
You could find an image of an scorpion hitting itself, it would be great.
This card may seem wonky due to the current wording of convoke, but how it functions is each creature you tap reduces the cost by the chosen color/colorless. If you look at older convoke spells they have the proper wording.
>>43578785
It is really weird to have lifelink on a BR creature, even tough lifelink is something black does, it is not very BR. I did a quick search and there is only 1 BR creature with lifelink, try to avoid it if possible.
>>43578785
Why is he red? Menace (fear) is more prevalent in black and lifelink seem clunky in red. Also 5/3 for 6 mana might be fine, but double black and red?
>>43578918
I agree it's odd but that's what the double B is for. I want to keep the colors and the blood sucking theme. Any suggested changes?
>>43578991
Menace is RB. The double B is because of how B leaning the card is. I would have the devotion lower if it fit it's colors more cleanly. Sometimes commons are a bit clunky.
>>43579009
Add some spaces to the end of the last line so it's not covered by the P/T box. Fine as is, kind of needs some cheese but it's fine.
>>43578918
>It is really weird to have lifelink on a BR creature, even tough lifelink is something black does, it is not very BR. I did a quick search and there is only 1 BR creature with lifelink, try to avoid it if possible.
You're lousy
>>43579072
Well, you could give him the "vampire" way of blood sucking, giving him a +1/+1 whenever he deals damage to a player.
You could give him bloodthirst.
Give him an ability to pay life in exchange of getting +X/+0 until end of turn or something.
Reduce his power and give him a triggered ability like "whenever ~ ETB/attacks it deals X damage to target player and you gain/lose X life."
>>43579072
Don't listen to anons who have no clue how gold design works.
Presence of Passion can probably be the same CMC as curse of the nightly hunt, at 1RG. The extra part of blocking each turn if able isn't as pertinent since that'll only matter the first turn something drops or if it has vigilance.
>>43579365
Designing multicolor cards is not just putting together two or more colors.
This is why Nephilims looks like a huge mess, it is hard to find something in which the 4 colors agree.
This is probably also why there is no GB creature with lifelink, even though lifelink is black and gaining life is green.
>>43579334
This fine?
>>43579365
I dunno man, I worry it can lead to some really good trades because RG has a lot of stat value creatures. You also get the first swing with them having to block, so if your creatures don't die to theres they are fucked.
>>43579831
Considering he has an evasive skill, I think you should either set X to a fixed value or up his rarity.
>>43579815
>This is why Nephilims looks like a huge mess, it is hard to find something in which the 4 colors agree.
No, they look like a huge mess because it's hard to make an interesting design that incorporates all four colors, without superfluous colors, that isn't a huge mess.
>This is probably also why there is no GB creature with lifelink, even though lifelink is black and gaining life is green.
That's dumb though. It just hasn't happened because multicolor cards aren't especially common, and in sets with GB there is also usually WB, which wants to eat up all the lifelink slots. They can only have so much of a mechanic in a set, after all.
Green is THE flying hate color. And yet there are tons of GU cards with flying. Why? Because gold designs can incorporate whatever they want from either color. Green doesn't go "no this card can't have flying" just like red doesn't go "no this card can't have lifelink."
>>43579831
That is far and away a worse design and also doesn't work at common rarity.
>>43578883
Reminder text isn't exactly rules text, so if you want you could use the old reminder text.
Although you might be overthinking it. With that text the ability makes sense to me.
>>43579932
>>43579867
I'm heavily considering to just going back to the original because it may have been weird but it also worked fine.
>>43579912
Clever card design. I agree with what you are saying also.
>>43580170
I think this is just a liiiittle bit overcosted. Could probably be 4BB.
>>43579912
I would just use a hybrid mana for the self-ping.
Does anyone know what the best way and size to print off homemade cards?
>>43579912
I don't know where you disagree on the nephilim, since I said that it is hard to find something that all the 4 colors agree, so they kind of do a lot of different stuff in a single card.
>multicolor cards aren't especially common
According to the Mtg statistics and trivia from january this year, around 1/10 of the cards in mtg is muticolor. That is pretty common.
There is some dumb stuff in mtg for sure, but I don't really think black and red getting almost no lifelink is a bad design. As I said, it is not wrong to put lifelink on it, but it is something that shouldn't be common.
>>43580372
With the nephilim thing, it's because it's not about the colors agreeing. That's hybrid design. The colors don't have to agree, it's just hard to make something with all four colors and not have it be inelegant.
Wtih the nephilim, they pretty much just gave up and settled for giving them weird abilities.
>>43575345
Kiku's Shadow, Repentance, or more recently, Wrack with Madness.
If it fights itself it would deal damage to itself equal to its power twice because of the wording on fight. 701.10c
Confluences are neat. Doming someone for 6 at instant speed for 3 may not be neat, but who cares.
>I have as many gold cards as mono colors in this faction
That's probably a problem.
>>43580222
I think that's okay, it's a common. I could give it instant speed, and the retribution is you get to bring something back from the graveyard but I don't consider it a priority to be good.
>>43580268
Should be, "Target creature you control blocks target attacking creature." And no idea.
>>43578883
This still works under new convoke
>>43578883
I'd probably go
>sacrifice it unless no mana was spent to cast it.
Wondering if this works as red because it's delayed looting.
>>43581237
I dunno man. Unless is only really used in counter spells like spell pierce, but it works out for your card. Nice design.
>>43581688
Good use of the unearth mechanic, keep in mind it won't technically die when cast for the unearth cost so you are getting the draw without the discard.
>>43582040
>keep in mind it won't technically die when cast for the unearth cost so you are getting the draw without the discard.
Yeah, that was the idea. That's why the unearth is green, since in that mode it's more like an elvish mystic type of deal.
Sindrinker seems alright, since it's just (sometimes)cheap beef with maybe some lifedrain if you have clerics out. This might be able to be an uncommon if you change it to a 4/4. I think I'd like that more.
>>43582122
*elvish visionary
no idea if this is costed right
>>43582122
Nah it's too strong in it's set to be brought down in rarity. BW has a lot of clerics and the set has a lot of convoke support. If I lowered it's P/T it would just get a lower cmc.
>>43582137
>suicide cult druids
cool flavor. I like the card.
>>43582291
It's priced fine ignoring the evoke. I'm not sure on how evoke's interactions work, so could you explain how the card would function with the evoke casting, and what as a player using it you would do?
>>43582340
The sacrifice from evoke is a trigger that you can respond to. During that time you can cast instants and things with flash and tap lands and such. So you cast it for evoke, then tap your lands while it's still on the battlefield, getting the extra mana, and then it is sacrificed. But you still have the mana to work with during that main phase.
I think adventurous vanguard could do without the haste. Not for power reasons, but because I don't see it doing much very often. Otherwise, that's pretty neat. Might even be a bit too weak.
>>43582427
Well obviously the set will have a convoke shock to combo with the goblin. I agree it could be an uncommon though.
Thank you for the explanation, I figured that was how it worked but I was not sure.
le ancestral recall variant
>>43582813
that seems like it could be a lot of memory issues with things moving zones so many times
>>43582813
This feels like a messier version of Visions of Beyond.
Thoughts on this keyword? Also is it worded correctly? It's going to be in RU mostly.
>>43583008
Nothing wrong with the effect but I don't think it should be a keyword.
>>43583057
Well I can't think of anything else for the UR faction. Any suggestions?
>>43583076
Nope. Keywords are tricky
>>43583097
This is one from a failed set. Essentially you get the downside of having the top card of your library revealed for a bonus effect on the card in play. I think I'll go with this one, and have clever's rules text on a creature for fun.
>>43582930
>your
I still don't care for this card and i hope saying so doesn't cause a shitstorm like the last time someone critiqued it. Consider making it a 0/1 that gets +2/+0 until end of turn instead maybe? To be fair that's not very good though. Blue hating creatures types in this manner feels odd in and of itself. I'm just not sure anything beyond 1/1 with flying at cmc1 and common is a good idea. I get the feeling you won't be convinced though, since its still as it was.
Hey /ccg/, I heard you liked hatebears.
>>43584078
The seraph is strictly worse than mulldrifter.
>>43584131
>>43583685
Okay, I'll explain why I didn't change it from the first two shit storms so I don't come off as a stubborn idiot.
>TL;DR
The comparisons people used were all awful, so I ignored them and considered the card's raw power, and saw it as over all too mediocre to matter, even in the high tribal set it was intended to be in.
>Long version
The most direct comparison is to the 2/1 U fliers. From that, we have an old ass card that had an upkeep of U, a U/B defender with wither from a set that had not idea how to balance hybrid mana, and an uncommon from a duel deck. So basically there is a terrible pool to compare it's power level to for the sake of balance from that angle. Looking at it's raw stats show it's sometimes a 2/1, but never going face, and it only really gets that +1 attack if your opponent walks into it.
If we compare it to U 1/1 fliers with a bonus, we have things like Faerie miscreant, Galerider sliver, Jace's Phantasm, Judge's Familiar (but not really because hybrid mana), and Wingcrafter. Yes there are other cards but most of those really old, and those are plenty to compare to.
The best one of these to compare it to are Faerie Mis. and Wingcrafter as they have the same rarity. Wingcrafter has the downside of only having flying if it is soul bound, but the upside of giving another creature you control evasion. F. Mis. is at least a 1/1 flier and sometimes a 1/1 flier and draw. I would consider a 2/1 sometimes rarely + flying to be on equal power level to these cards, and far worse to those not directly compared to but mentioned above.
>>43583851
I hate hatebears!
I love this hatebear. The flavortext feels a bit wonky though. Maybe make it, "All life diserves the chance to flourish, no matter how threatening to your cause." As discard is essentially an abortion of magic/life, and this little guy makes sure it doesn't happen.
>>43584418
Doesn't really address the issue of blue buffing only power and hating creature types in that manner but its not worth another ruined thread arguing about a card nobody even has to use.
>>43574042
I get that you can tap it in response to sacrificing it... I think? Maybe? But shouldn't it have "when this etb, add 3", then the tap effect?
is there anything of this quality for makingPokemon cards
>>43584863
google?
>>43584898
all garbage, sadly. i may have to get Photoshop and do it all manually
>>43584908
I'd be interested in that. I, like many people, got several pokemon cards but I've never actually played the game.
>>43584863
Mse has templates for other games on the forums i think. Try checking there maybe? I could be recalling wrong
>>43585068
couldnt find any, ill keep looking though
>>43586022
>Overseer
Interesting amount of counter movement. I'm not sure if it is too strong as I didn't get to play in the modular meta but this should be fine.
>Experiment
This is kind of crazy if you are running an evolve deck so I would consider making it 3 mana.
>Infector
Fine bear, kind of annoying. I'm kind of feeling it to be 1,T: for the active cost but it should be fine as is.
>Siege Engine
The rarity seems kind of high as it's at most a 4 color 4/4 with trample and proliferate on combat damage to face. If it was a 1/1 or a 1/2 inherently I would agree with it being rare.
>Solarium
Now that is a spicy rare. Very fitting for the colors. I like it. Kind of slow though.
I make yoke
>>43583851
Should read "an opponent" for clarity in case of multiplayer games.
>>43589403
You can leave his mana cost to W, since his ability already makes it cost nothing to play. There shouldn't be a mana cost on the flipped side, since I don't think you can cast cards flipped.
>>43589494
I think this card is a bit too strong. It is giving a 3 mana advantage+(a 3 mana permanent without needing to lose a card in hand) every time you cast an instant or sorcery and there are many good instants and sorceries that lets you draw with red and blue.
At 3 mana cost it can bring in detention spheres, jeskai ascendancy, ghostly prison, blood moon, without to mention the amount of creature artifact/enchantment you can bring in with flash, and ETB effects that lets you draw cards.
>>43589403
Nice but you don't put a cost on the flip end.
>>43590240
I think that art is actually used in some card. Is that not Baron Sengir?
>>43590312
It's not used in card art.
>>43590240
Name in use.
>>43591101
Perhaps "You discard two cards at random" would be a bit better balanced.
If I were to make a set and have it be as close to a real as possible
How many cards should I have?
How many cards should be reprints
reprints?
How many cards of each color should I have?
How many of each type (instant, creature, land, ect )
How many new mechanics should I have?
How many old mechanics should I have?
What's the best way to play test?
Thank you sorry for the questions
>>43591388
I like that one!
>>43591939
>How many cards
Magic origins is the most vanillia set we've had recently and checks in at 272 cards in total. I would consider though for a custom set to aim for 100 or 150 depending on how you feel on it. It will be enough cards to have some things going on and you won't need to have as many shit cards in the set for the sake of filler.
>Reprints
Reprints are toally fine to use in your set and you should use as many as you like. Sometimes Doomblade is really just what would work in your set, and that's okay. I would avoid reprinting big cards though, anything legendary without reason or of rare or mythic rare rarity.
>Color ratio
Color ratio depends mostly on the number of colorless cards. Going back to Magic Origins, it had 24 colorless nonland cards, or 8% of the sets cards being colorless (excluding the lands). Again, if you are running an artifact based set or a colorless based set you can make the ratio higher.
>Card super type ratio
I don't know what speed or style of set you are making, so I went ahead and got the stats of Magic Origins for you. Keep in mind, artifact creatures are being counted in both the artifact and creature percents.
>Creatures: 184 total, 55%
>Instant: 34 total, 12%
>Sorcery: 35 total, 12%
>Enchantment: 27 total, 10% (12 are auras, making auras 5% roughly)
>Nonbasic lands: 9 total, 3%
>Artifacts: 24 total, 8%
>Planeswalker: 5 total, 2% (They are technically creatures also)
I would consider Magic O. to be a good example of a fast set and a good one to start basing it off of. It's okay if it the percentages in your set don't match perfectly but try to keep it similar on the super types.
>Mechanics
I would start off with doing 1 old mechanic and 1 custom mechanic per color. Same rule if you are doing factions of colors.
>Play Test
I would do 2 proxied decks and play test them against each other and do some goldfishing to see how it ratios out.
>>43591939
>How many cards should I have?
Somewhere in the neighborhood of 275/180 for a large/small set. THS=249, BNG/JOU=165, KTK=269, FRF=185, DTK=264, BFZ=274, OGW=184, SOI=297
>How many cards should be reprints?
Up to you. Wizards makes new versions when they could reprint all the time for no real reason (a real reason being when the old version clearly doesn't fit the flavor of the new setting).
>How many cards of each color should I have?
Depends on how many monocolored vs. multicolored vs. colorless cards you want. All 5 colors should have the same number of monocolored cards though.
>How many of each type?
Look at real sets to get a breakdown of which colors have more of which types at which rarity. For example, white usually has the most creatures at common, but green usually has the biggest of the common creatures.
>How many mechanics should I have?
For a single set, probably somewhere around 4-6. Khans block had 13 and that was considered pushing it. Err on the side of more new mechanics than returning ones. Khans block reused delve, morph, and rebound. BFZ reused only landfall and keyworded the rally effect. Try to roughly balance mechanics between colors.
>What's the best way to play test?
Print off some playtest cards and test with ya mates. There's a PT template for MSE that only uses text so it doesn't waste ink.
>Thank you sorry for the questions.
Damn right you should be sorry. How dare you.
Fix the wording on this card, plz
improvements also encouraged
>>43591939
http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/78
Start here and look up the other Nuts and Bolts articles.
>>43592548
This should be correct. Also W is way too cheap for what it does. This thing ruins almost every X spell in the game.
>>43592343
>>43592442
>>43592692
Thank you very much anons and namefag very helpful
Nice to see ppl investing themselves in the making of custom sets, I enjoy looking at them.
However, something that bugs me is the complexity of common cards that is pushed too much, and that's understandable considering you want each card to feel special.
Commons are what people see the most in draft, and spending too much time reading them is not enjoyable.
Here is my study on Magic Origins commons — I picked that set since it's a core set and thus feels pretty vanilla — I counted the number of words in each of their textboxes (reminder text not taken in account)
The average common card has 13.3 words in their ability box.
Here's what the tally looks like (on a total of 101 cards) :
>0-4 words : 17 cards
>5-9 words : 23 cards
>10-14 words : 22 cards
>15-19 words : 19 cards
>20-24 words : 9 cards
>25-29 words : 6 cards
>30-39 words : 3 cards
>40-49 words : 1 card
>50+ words : 1 card
So you can establish that kind of layout :
>20% of commons should have 0-5 words in their abilities
>20% should have 5-10 words
>20% should have 10-15 words
>20% should have 15-20 words
>20% should have 20+ words (with half of them under 30 words)
I did not measured the word-count per card type, but we can assume creatures tend to have less wordy textboxes than other cards.
If you ever wondered, the complexity seems equally spread across all colors (blue and black being slightly more complex on average, since they both have one more card with a spell mastery ability, which is an ability word and thus text-heavy.)
I will probably do the same kind of study with BFZ if you are interested. For now, remember to keep it simple
>>43592890
Sorry one last question. How many vanilla or french vanilla creatures should a set have?
>>43593084
Now I look dumb posted that right after you posted your amazing work
>>43593112
kek, and thank you I just like looking at that sort of things
>>43592343
>I would start off with doing 1 old mechanic and 1 custom mechanic per color. Same rule if you are doing factions of colors.
I hope you don't mean unique mechanics for each color, because that would be way too many.
>>43593217
I usually do 2 per faction/color pairing. H-have I been doing too many?
>>43593340
6 mechanics seems to be the high-end for standard-legal sets, so yes
I know you guys are in the Duelyst general.
>>43593378
Well then that explains why I always feel burned out during set making.
>>43593425
Ohshit there is a duelyst general? Also fuck the Sarlac nerf. Abyssian already sucks balls and now the only decent early drop in it has been made only playable on player 2.
Nice Jax also. Interesting for commander.
>>43593146
I assume you only counted rule text right?
Also im sure I'll post them here so you can see me descend into madness.
Why don't we have all this information saved somewhere?
What tribes would you like to see get some love /tg/?
>>43593526
Snakes, spiders, starfish, berserks/barbarians, golem
>>43593526
Snakes, Skeletons, Fish/Krakens/Octopus, Spellshaper.
>>43593526
Nameless.Riggers.
>>43593526
spiders, berserkers, skeletons
>>43593585
The wording is so awkward
>>43593526
Centaur
>>43593526
CRABS. Frogs. Fungus.
>>43593634
It is by necessity. I don't think they can improve it in any way without breaking the functionality.
>>43593634
Painter's Servant + Archetype of Aggression + Nameless Inversion
>>43593480
He's a less broken card now, at least.
>>43593526
Rats, Demons, Clerics, and Badgers. (Those first 3 are obvious from the sets I make.)
>>43593585
>2015
>Still no rigger set
why even magic.
>>43593619
The two effects both seem very disconnected and wonky. How about, "Whenever ~ deals combat damage to a player, exile the top of his or her library."
"During your upkeep, you may exile the top card of your library."
"At the begging of the end of your tunr, you may put a card exiled by ~ an opponent owns and a card exiled by ~ you ontop of each player's library."
>>43593878
They said that they now could not make Contraptions, because nothing will live up to the hype.
There might be one or two more Riggers, since they did errata one guy into one.
>>43593878
>The two effects both seem very disconnected and wonky.
??
It mills the opponent on combat damage so that you can get the card draw effect. The mill two on yourself was to make it an effect you had to work for but for that part I'm not sure how necessary it is or if it should be less.
>>43591388
It should be fine as just discard two
>>43591101
Heads up, this card is actually really, really bad from a power level perspective.
>>43594011
What I am getting at here is the ingest effect on it has on real relationship to the "draw for exiling library". They are disconnected. They don't interact with one another to make a cool rare. It's just some 2/2 flier for 3 that draws. If it lost the ingest effect it would be equally power.
>>43594315
That's definitely a future-sight tier card! :P
>>43589184
None of these are common.>>43589403
>>43594285
>"draw for exiling library"
That's not how the ability works.
>>43594285
What? It makes their library smaller so that your library has more cards in it than theirs so the third ability triggers more often.
>>43594444
Mystic wolf and spirit of the wild are just fine as commons. Otherwise though, yeah. Not common.
>>43593526
Viashinos.
On a lesser extent, homarids and insect like creatures like licids, nantukos and spikes.
>>43595661
>flavor text
god fucking damnit
Enchantment set guy. Is this fine at common or uncommon?
>>43596296
Think of it this way. In limited, if you want answers for enchantments available for just about every player, keep it common. Otherwise, make it uncommon.
>>43596296
Why is this colorless? It's totally white.
>>43596388
Because red and black can't deal with enchantments.
>>43596436
There are still better ways to go about it than "oblivion ring but colorless." Red and black aren't even bothered by auras since they can just kill the creatures the auras are attached to.
>>43596470
They clearly said it was an enchantment set, not an aura set. Yes there will be auras but that is probably not the only thing there. If something like a supertype is the focus of the set, I find it fair that there is a colorless solution for it.
I just want to say that this thread is fantastic. The amount of great OC and great feedback and discussion gives me hope for the future of these threads.
>>43597181
I feel like this card REALLY wants to be legendary. Other than that, it's pretty cute for flavor to mechanics. The reward might be better off being a bit smaller though, considering a single distortion strike, which is in color, gets the job done. That, and a single unsummon (also in color) kills the whale. Basically, I think it's a bit too combo friendly and might wanna draw "only" five cards or something.
I tend to design boring commons and insane mythics, so have an uncommon.
>>43597974
This amounts to practically "Other creatures you control have hexproof."
I think that's rare, at least.
>>43598080
What if it didn't have persist?
>>43598107
It doesn't feel like a gren effect I could definitely see it red though
>>43597181
Indeed, things have gotten much better with actual feedback and critique presented in a constructive fashion. And in a short time too. Previous threads were either cesspits or hugboxes with little meaningful feedback or card spam with little intetaction. This is more like they used to be when they were at their peak quality and it is good to see.
>>43598152
It is very reminiscent of Flagbearers too.
>>43598249
I still think it fits better in modern red than white
>>43598281
It's pretty solidly a blue ability
>>43598281
>>43598249
I chose green because green gets the most lures for creatures.
>>43598281
>>43598292
Actually maybe its in every color but black.
>>43598332
The nephilim aren't a good representation of anything
>>43598297
If it just redirected spells that targeted your creatures it could be green, but using your opponents resources against him is blue
>>43598297
Lures for creatures sure but this is instants and sorceries and green really only gets "can't be countered" for that. if it had to do with activated abilities i might be more inclined to agree with you.
>>43598410
It could be red though since it redirects spells
>>43598501
Hexproof is green. This isn't exactly a lure, but still.
Someone on the first drop of this suggested flash. Yes it isn't a black mechanic but I'd argue having a card once in a blue moon go a bit deep into an ally color to be fine. Thoughts?
>>43599282
Flash can be on green and blue for any reason, but it's still a five color ability. Things in any color can get flash to be functional.
Outside of like, a delve combo, this seems more like a card about black fighting graveyard hate, in which case the flash makes sense. If you're worried you could make it cost more and pump the base p/t a little bit.
>>43599192
This isn't hexproof either.
>>43599347
It's intended to discourage, or at least provide a counter to graveyard hate. It has actually got me thinking about ways to design non-blue counter spells that fit in their colors enough to justify them.
>>43573728
Splash white in skred red for this
>>43599485
That shouldn't be a common.
>>43573880
Too powerful
Make it a 1/1 and have it remove all + counters the end step after its creature ability is activated
>>43599349
This is (basically) granting hexproof to other permanents. That's what a green card would do.
Opinions?
Think of this as a black counter draw, counter spell. Or more accurately, a black plagiarism.
>>43600104
Well it is definitely a card for storm decks, and automill decks. It has some good colors for it too. I could see that one zendikar cultivate-style card being used in a deck based around it as well for a way to fish out more lands to use after the turn it's used on.
It's too strong for it's mana cost is the issue. Cruel Ultimatium has a higher CMC and slightly higher color devotion then your card and doesn't do nearly as much. Yes, your card takes away your ability to draw but it's also something you'd cast to end the game. You wouldn't burn it on turn 6 just because you can. This is a win con card, and it needs to be a bit higher. I would argue 8 mana to be fair seeing how it's in really good ramp colors.
>>43600342
Thanks, I decided to add and extra U and G.
>>43600396
Sounds like a good change. Yw.
>P. Haze
I'd make the pay 2. A counter spell and cantrip is really good at 3 mana, seeing how cryptic command is played at 4 with higher devotion for that effect primarily. Also this an uncommon. If it was like, 2 mana to cast and the pay was 1 that would work too.
>>43599485
>When ~ enters the battlefield, it deals 1 damage to each creature and an additional 1 damage to each creature that was dealt damage this turn.
>>43593059
Fuck, what's the 50 one? And did you count flavor text?
>>43599908
This is the "can't be blocked except by creatures with flying and reach" in green argument.
Really trying to make this mechanic work. The issue I've come across is that one citation is laughably worthless a few turns in, and enabling tons of them gets to be oppressive and unfun. When it's right at the ideal amount of them, it's fun and flavorful. Anyone have an idea of how to even it out?
>>43573981
Nice Perish Song.
>>43601674
Make it pay 1 or Tap the permanent with the counter on it to remove a counter. Maybe put a max per permanent.
>>43601674
Action keywords should be verbs.
>Cite N (Put a citation counter on target creature. Creatures with citation counters on them can't block and have "1: Remove a citation counter from this creature.")
Hey ccg, do ability words take up "less space" than keywords in a set? Since they aren't really actual mechanics and instead just signify a theme.
>>43599485
This feels like an uncommon.
Here's a mono green "counter" that I'm hoping can squeak by by being basically fight that just happens on the stack.
>>43602034
If I did "Tap target creature and put X citation counters on it. It remains tapped until its owner pays X", would that be too powerful?(obviously I'd try to cost them accordingly)
>>43602100
Sounds awkward but you're right, thanks. Looks like it's thesaurus time.
>>43602250
>Abilities
Your question is really unclear and hard to tell what it is asking. Are you asking if pseudo keywords should be more common in a set then normal keywords?
>Imp
I'll make it uncommon, as that's what most people say on it and that seems fair.
>Magical Ambush
I would make it like pic related personally but yours work too.
>>43602434
It would be pretty strong and very WU. Strong in limited that is.
>>43602676
>Are you asking if pseudo keywords should be more common in a set then normal keywords?
Ability words. I mean ability words. Things like Morbid or Ferocious where the special word doesn't actually do anything and is pretty much just trinket text. The cards function the same without it. I'm asking if there *could* be more of those in a set than what sets that also have new keywords have.
>>43602740
I suppose you could, but only if you had a strong reason for it
>>43602740
Yeah those are pseudo, at least according to my version of MS2. I would consider any pseudo keywords in a set to be as valid as true keywords in a set. It's also your set, so if you want to do a shit ton of pseudo keywords go ahead. I would avoid doing more then 6 keywords in total though so you don't bog yourself down.
>>43602838
>>43602839
thanks
>>43602740
>>43602839
MSE calls them pseudo to make them sound more different from "keywords" than "ability words".
>>43601030
Flavor text doesn't count
The 50-words one is Nissa's Pilgrimage. 8 (eight) fucking lines.
Excluding Spell Mastery cards, I think Nightsnare hits the top.
