Adversary is a new, custom format for Magic: The Gathering intended to be played over Cockatrice.
35 Adversaries and counting!
>How is it played?
In Adversary, players select an Adversary card from an existing archive, or create their own. These Adversaries enter play from turn one, and possess abilities that change the way the game is played. If you've ever tried out Vanguard, you'll feel right at home. Adversary uses 61-card decks (including the Adversary card).
The format is Modern Singleton, and the banlist can be found here: http://pastebin.com/4JUSJp01
>How are Adversaries balanced?
Each Adversary is assigned three values: a life total, a starting hand size, and a level. The life total and starting hand size are used to balance Adversaries based on the power of their abilities. In the event that they cannot be effectively balanced this way, Adversaries are also assigned a level, indicating that they are only suited for play against Adversaries of a similar level.
>How can I make my own Adversary?
Post your desired rules text, color identity, illustration and artist-to-credit in this thread and I might make it for you! Alternatively, make it yourself in Photoshop or an MTG card creation program. I will then add it to the .xml file and it will become available to everyone.
>What is Cockatrice and where do I download it?
http://www.woogerworks.com/
>Adversary files and installation guide
http://pastebin.com/TCGtFAXF
>Player List
http://pastebin.com/m05wzSJF
>Level Guideline
http://pastebin.com/4fV7y17f
>Photoshop Template
https://www.dropbox.com/s/g9i30t9lxpmf0ni/5%20Shared%20Adversary%20Template.psd?dl=0
>Obligatory Playlist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTeRLM_ki84&list=PL1A0CA0B29E547F8A
>Previous Thread
>>44383481
For a limited time, proposed Adversaries will only be added to the .xml file if they are pitched by people who have played at least one Adversary match on Cockatrice. This is to encourage playing as well as creating, since both are just as important in helping the format to grow. If you've played a match but you've already had three or more of your Adversaries added to the .xml, people with less than three accepted Adversaries will take priority. This restriction will be removed after the next update.
>>44403956
Hey mate, you should eventually remove the creator-biased middleman and upload a template to MSE or something.
Repostan
>Karesh of the Spider's Stratagem (X)
>Adversary – (B/U/G)
>All cards in your hand have Megamorph. You may turn them up paying their mana cost.
>All face down cards you control have +0/+2, Hexproof and Vigilance
>Whenever a card turns face up it becomes unblockable until the end of turn.
>{15/9}
>>44404228
>All creature cards in your hand have Megamorph*
>>44404228
Repostan
>Karesh of the Spider's Stratagem (X)
>Adversary – (B/U/G)
>Whenever you would cast a spell from your hand you may pay (3) instead and manifest it.
>All face down cards you control gain +0/+2, Hexproof and Vigilance
>Whenever a card turns face up it becomes unblockable until the end of turn.
>{15/9}
Alternate version.
Ossium here, at work again so cant use trip. Going to be on a plane for a few hours later today but for the next couple Ill either have a lot of free time or none. If its the former I can play a few games as I got a deck more or less together yesterday, just need to make a few cuts.
>>44404228
>>44404590
I like them both. The first is a lower leveled one than the second one. Even still, turning every creature into a 3cmc 2/4 Hexproof Vigilance is very good. If youre going for the spider theme i would honestly ditch the Vigilance for Reach and Id imagine him being a 3/upper 2. I think to be an even 2 youd have to drop the Hexproof and maybe even tone the unblockable down to intimidate.
The second one is easily a 3 (maybe higher) and seems pretty powerful (everything said above still applies). It allows you to turn useless spells into pretty damn good creatures for fairly cheap. I could imagine this deck running as a 'draw as many cards and make as much colorless as possible to make an army of threatening tokens.' Either way, they both look fun as morph and megamorph were always pretty meh abilities and this makes it more interesting.
>>44404996
Is Ossium your Cockatrice name, by the way?
>>44405045
Cockatrice name is DesteuctiveDeus. I can use Deus or something as a trip if that would be simpler.
>>44403976
Images like this should be sorted/grouped by level.
>>44403976
Who designed Kypris? How lewd.
>>44404996
I'm not really going for a spider theme. In reality the character is supposed to be a Raksasha mercenary leader contracted for the purpose of information gathering & erasure, surveillance and tactical management for both the Dromoka and Silumgar broods (specially the latter). He also works with the Kolagan brood on occasion, when they need a more elaborate attack plan than an all-out frontal assault to take a fortified stronghold. So yeah "of the Spider's Stratagem" is just a title referring to the deviousness of his plans, which often rely on deceit and utter secrecy. That's why face down creatures gain hexproof, because nobody knows who Karesh's agents are, thus, they can't be targeted.
But if you ask me both are around the same strength. The first one has the creatures become stronger when put face up, but the second one has the advantage that it can put sorceries and instants as tokens to set up ruses.
>>44403976
>calico
>not broken as fuck
choose one. jesus christ look at the other level 3s. there must be only a bunch of retards playing this if noone has broken her wide open yet. im talking wider than your moms vagina open. just seeing that one broken shit is enough for me to nope right out of this terrible format
>>44403976
Just in case anyone is curious, the count-by-level is:
7 level 1 Adversaries,
11 level 2 Adversaries,
14 level 3 Adversaries,
2 level 4 Adversaries,
and 1 level 5 Adversary.
>>44405235
It's done alphabetically, which is also fine I think since it makes it easy to find a specific Adversary. Sorting by level would be acceptable too though. But I don't think it really matters that much.
I'm gonna go and repost the latter Adversaries from the last thread so they may be discussed.
>>44405388
As discussed in other threads, the aim of the format isn't to create a balanced, fair format, but to let everyone bring their favorite custom cards and have fun with the the strategies they like most.
This isn't the format for people who like to be competitive.
Go away.
>>44405388
Calico has been broken open wider than my mother's vagina, yes. She will likely be increased to level 4 in the next update, or otherwise nerfed.
>>44405309
Sigma is clearly the O.G. half-naked-chair-sitter. And she's even tasteful about it.
>>44404163
I would, but I don't know the first thing about MSE. Photoshop is my area of expertise.
>>44405433
>>44405463
Why do you guys even bother replying?, We aren't /b/tards, we should be able to tell something's bait when we see it.
>>44405475
>Deus is completely broken in both ways. I know you put him at max level, but literally nothing can compete with that ability as worded
My Deus deck has actually been beaten in a 1v1. Also, level 5's are intended to be ganged up on by two or more lower level Adversaries. They're like boss battles.
>guaranteed to draw a 7-10 card i win turn 0 hand now.
The intent is to still have 60 normal cards in your Deus deck and then have all the Adversaries piled on top of that, for a grand total of 95 cards. I'd put that in the rules text but as you've observed, it's quite lengthy already and I think it's implied.
>The easiest way to fix all of this is to amend the format rules to allow for sideboards
Sideboards are allowed.
>Then eliminate the ability on deus that lets you put extra adversaries in your library, and just include them in your sideboard instead.
That actually sounds like a good way to make his effect more intuitive. It's very likely I'll make that change in the next update.
>>44405433
I don't think anyone has said we don't want to make this balanced. We've got people actively playtesting, and unless I'm wrong the whole original purpose of the Adversary levels was to help balance things by sorting Adversaries to tiers so you know who is a fair match up against who.
>>44405519
Tiering isn't good enough. /tg/ cannot EVER balance a format like this. It is impossible to expect this format to not be broken by people actually trying, so you have to concede that this format is only useful for people wanting to try out their crazy ideas and who want to have fun.
I've already questioned Hawk about this in previous threads, creating a competitive format isn't and shouldn't be the goal.
>>44405433
>>44405519
>>44405487
Adversary isn't intended to be fully competitive, but it's not intended to be an unbalanced mess either.
In order for the system to be functional, the level categories need to be reliable indications of any given Adversary's power. If an Adversary is very blatantly mislevelled, as it seems increasingly clear that Calico may be, it's alright for people to point that out and it will be addressed.
>>44405548
It doesn't have to be blatantly wrong to be unbalanced. There will always be a clearly dominant deck and you won't be able to stop this. The constant tweaking will drive you insane.
>>44405387
Obviously its hard to tell without playtesting but I feel the manifest version will be better overall. The single +1/+1 counter from megamorph, while relevant, isnt as good as the utility of every nonland card in your deck becoming a creature if you chose.
That said, I think it may actually be better to make each one into its own unique adversary as either one, while exactly the same with the exception of a couple words, will likely be built and played fairly drastically differently (at least I know I would build them very differently).
The megamorph one Id build as deathtouch creatures and when damages opponent effects. Flop something face down and then flip it next turn with a counter and swing for unblockable, proc effect and profit. Or throw down a deathtough so that you can put them out as fairly beefy blockers that are hard to remove and flip them up when something they cant successfully block comes out or a big threat swings to kill it.
While you could do the same with the manifest one I think hed be better as a control build with very few creatures as all your spells are now modal of 'I can counter/kill or become a blocker.' Keep the opponent/s locked out and steadily build up an army and swing. Draw cards and lots of mana generation.
If you only want one/only one can be accepted Id focus on the manifest one since he has more versatility in how he can be built and, depending what level you want him at, maybe adjust his passive buffs some.
Also, really like the backstory. Are we doing flavor text? Obviously only for ones that dont already have a wall of text but I think it would be cool.
>Akira, Disciple of Hisoka (X)
>Adversary – (U/R)
>Sorcery and instant cards you cast gain the Arcane subtype in addition to all their other types.
>Instant cards in your hand have Splice into Arcane (x) where (x) is their converted mana cost.
>{15/9}
My version of the Rath Metamagician that was posted last thread. Now it should be balanced for lvl2 or even lvl1.
>>44405388
is burned out on turn 2/3. No one thought very much about life totals mattering that much.
>Prince Zael, Saint of Blades (X)
>Adversary – (W/R)
>Equipment you control have (0) equip.
>Metalcraft – Each creature you control obtain +X/+0, where X is the number of equipment cards attached to it. Activate this ability only if you control three artifacts or more.
>(4)(W)(T): Gain control of target equipment.
>{16/8}
Final version of Prince Zael from last thread.
>>44406003
Ranth here, I like this a lot.
>Vuliev, Ohrzov Delegate (X)
>Adversary – (WB)
>Creature spells you cast have Extort.
>(W)(B)(T): Put a 0/3 white Spirit token with Flying and Extort.
>{17/7}
Revised version of Vuliev.
>>44405539
>>44405548
While referencing the EDH RC is typically a quick way to let things devolve into arguing I think the motto of EDH should be applied here
Build competitively, play casually.Or Build Casually, play competitively. Whichever is preferred.
As I think it gets the point across of 'take it seriously but have fun.' We're all here for various reasons but the shared one is we like Magic and are interested in something different and willing to build that different thing for ourselves and others to enjoy.
Its hard to be a rules committee for something, and there will be things done/made that people dont like. Unfortunately that is inevitable but hopefully it gets worked through to a point that pleases the majority and doesnt alienate the rest.
>>44406069
I got 4 I posted last thread with names, pics, and revised abilities. Still need to be judged for level but I was aiming for 2-3.
Theyre the RW reparations, GB dredge, B human/zombie, and The Nameless King. Ill repost them here in a bit once I get home.
>The Nameless King
>Adversary – (W/B)
>You can't gain life.
>You have no maximum hand size.
>Whenever you're dealt damage you may prevent that damage by discarding a card from your hand for each 1 damage dealt to you.
>Pay 1 life: Draw a Card
>{21/7}
Revised Nameless King.
>>44406036
It's been a while since I made a card, so I was tempted despite the new restrictions.
I think I'll make a few more. They'll all go in a 'reserve' folder to be added at a later date.
>>44406118
Right now I'm just posting the modifications I made to several cards I found interesting.
>>44406069
Vuliev guy here. Originally his ability was supposed to be "bring back his old friends(enemies?) to fight on his behalf", moreso than just creating spirits. How about:
>Vuliev, Ohrzov Delegate (X)
>Adversary – (WB)
>Creature spells you cast have Extort.
>(x)(W)(B)(T): Put a token onto the battlefield that is a copy of target creature with mana cost (x) or less in your graveyard. The token gains gains the creature type spirit, flying and extort.
>{16/6}
>>44406003
oh boy, splice lightning bolt splice serum vision. lightning bolt you splice manaleak. do anything, splice a counterspell, splice cantrip. uncounterable spell, splice wincon.
>>44406188
The no maximum hand size I agree with cause originally I was tossing around the idea of giving that to him anyway. However, unless youre trying to make him higher level, the 21 life is a bit much. With 21 life he has pretty much no drawback, other than you cant gain life but a lot of decks do very well without lifegain.
It also makes it to where you dont really need to use his ability until youre real low on health at which point your hand and board becomes your life total. The 10 life was there to try and make sure you had enough life to survive for a couple turns but just little enough to make you have to use his ability. While he could potentially use some more life I think doubling it is excessive. Also cause that means turn 1 you could draw 20 cards and not have to discard any of them.
Starting with my favorite, artist name in pic description.
Lamahk, Aspiring Lich (2)
Color Identity- B
1B/P, sacrifice a creature: Draw a card. If the sacrificed creature was a Human put a 2/2 Black Zombie creature token onto the battlefield.
BB, pay 2 life: Return target Human or Zombie creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield, that creature loses all creature types and becomes a Zombie.
Life 16, Hand 7
[flavor] Tainted by power, cursed with ambition. [/flavor]
An anon said it would likely be better if I removed Phyrexian completely for thematic reasons, and I did from the second ability but I just like the first too much with the choice.
Luffin, The Clever Weaponsmith {2}
Adversary - {RG}
At the beginning of your upkeep, target artifact becomes an equipment until the end of turn and equip it to creature you control. Equipped creature gets +x/+x where x is it's converted mana cost.
{20}{6}
and if there was going to be flavortext it'd say
{"Whats I'm supposd to do wiff a scroll rak?"}
{"You're supposs to kill wiff it, ya dingus!"}
Peacemaker Gwana Din (2)maybe 1
Color Identity - RW
Pay 1 life: Target opponent gains 1 life. Draw a card.
Whenever an opponent discards a card you gain 1 life.
Life 18, Hand 6
[flavor] "His cause is just, let us just hope he does not martyr himself to it." - Priest of the Order [/flavor]
>>44406209
That's one gorgeous card. One of the best looking ones so far. It also feels like it really does embody the spirit of Red / White.
>>44406286
Concept is yours, so do as you please. I really like your version though, but be aware it most likely end up at a higher level. Not that there's anything wrong with it.
>>44406296
>splice lightning bolt splice serum vision. lightning bolt you splice manaleak. do anything, splice a counterspell, splice cantrip. uncounterable spell, splice wincon.
I never asked for this. Lvl 3, 4 even, in which case I'd give it a more intimidating name. How does "Akira, Minamo Renegade" sound?
>>44406454
I'm fine with reducing life total. Guy already is Necropotence in megaroids, so I figured it wouldn't matter if I pushed it a little bit further.
Reduce life to {14} and it may be balanced for lvl4.
Also yeah, you could potentially sac all your life turn 1, keep 17-18 cards in hand and then use 'em as shield, which is broken, but very fun.
Galossa, the Mother Tree (3)maybe, Dredge is supposedly powerful so
Color Identity- GB
1: Target creature card in your graveyard gains Dredge X, where X is equal to that creature's power divided by two, rounded up.
At the beginning of your upkeep put the top two cards of your library into your graveyard.
Life-20 Hand Size-7
[flavor] No tree in her forest ever truly dies. [/flavor]
>Morrow, Lich Seer (X)
>Adversary – U/B
>Play with the top card of your library revealed.
>As long as the top card of your library is an instant, enchantment or a sorcery card, you may play the top card of your library. If it is a creature card, discard cards from the top of your library until a card of any other type is revealed.
>{13}{8}
Ravana, Tyrant of the Pack
Color Identity- BUG
1U: The next creature you cast this turn gains Exploit and "Whenever this creature exploits a creature you may return target creature with power less than the sacrificed creature's power an opponent controls to their owner's hand."
B: The next creature you cast this turn gains Exploit and "Whenever this creature exploits a creature you may draw a card."
1G: The next creature you cast this turn gains Exploit and "Whenever this creature exploits a creature you may gain life equal to the sacrificed creature's toughness."
Life 16, Hand 6
[flavor] Strength lets you survive. Cunning lets you thrive. Both lets you rule. [/flavor]
>>44406760
Reposting his art cause it's cool as shit. It's actually not even a CG picture, that's a real dude in makeup/suit/whatever it is.
I think 14 life would probably be decent for a 4. If you took out the no maximum hand size it could potentially even be a 3. For a while I actually toyed with the idea of having a 'your hand size cannot change' clause as well to try to prevent shenanigans.
I suppose it would depend on what level he should sit at, if we need more 3's or 4's.
>>44406885
The Nameless King (4)
Color Identity- WB
You cannot gain life and have no maximum hand size.
Whenever you're dealt damage you may prevent that damage by discarding a card from your hand for each 1 damage dealt to you.
Pay 1 life: Draw a Card
Life 14, Hand 7
[flavor] His name, as his conscience, has been lost to time. [/flavor]
Seems like a decent point for him to be at. If we need him to be down a level change 'you have no maximum hand size' to 'your hand size cannot change.' That way the core of him still stays as is but you can't have a grip of 20 cards constantly, which should tone down his power.
>>44406950
Actually, I just realized that the sac a permanent part of the damage prevention clause wasn't there. That makes him a lot more risky actually.
>>44406719
Personally, I find the concept hilarious. Is there anything like the Nicol Bolas wielding Nicol Bolas shenanigans that can be done with this?
>>44407013
That is essentially what Fina started off as. Then someone requested it be changed to 'activated abilities', then it was 'activated and keyword abilities', then 'activated, triggered and keyword abilities', then 'rules text', and now back to 'abilities'.
What a ride.
>>44407019
That's sort of the wacky thing I was looking for. It's suppose to enable for whacky shenanigans, but it's not secular to it. You can move both ways about it, building up for a Nicol Bolas wielding Nicol Bolas or you can try a straigh up aggro using your opponent's mana rock to hit them over the head with it. Also Myr Landshaper might help enable for wielding enchantments or something silly like that
>>44404163
>>44405463
Actually, this should be simple enough. It's doable with card blanks, and the only thing I'm not sure about doing is the colored borders.
>>44407071
I'd potentially limit it to only being able to be used on stuff you control. Also, something else I just realized is that as is you can use it on an equipment and then that equipment gives whatever it did originally plus the +X/+X.
Adding in that 'target non-equipment artifact you control' and include either a flat rate equip cost (like 3 or something) or make the equip cost equal to it's CMC and I think that that would probably be lvl 2 qualifiable.
As is it would probably be cheat out expensive artifact asap and start slapping it onto shit like Honey Badger or Goblin Graveler.
>>44407321
Well think of Assault suit. Even if there were equipment on a creature you control, you didn't control the equipment. So this wouldn't steal artifact, it just puts them on creature you control for a turn. And it wouldn't bone Affinity, because Artifacts that are creatures themselves can't be equipped under any circumstances.
>Nyctae, Despair Enigma (X)
>Adversary - (U/B)
>Whenever a player would lose life, they instead reveal that many cards from the top of his or her library and puts them in the graveyard.
>Whenever a player would gain life, they instead put that many cards from their graveyard on the bottom of their library in any order.
>{14/5}
>>44407321
Cheating out big artifacts could be a stratagy.
>Also, something else I just realized is that as is you can use it on an equipment and then that equipment gives whatever it did originally plus the +X/+X.
Okay I got ya, lemme try again
How bout this
Luffin, The Clever Weaponsmith {2}
Adversary - {RG}
At the beginning of your upkeep, target non-equipment artifact becomes an equipment until the end of turn.
You may attach it to target creature you control.
Equipped creature gets +x/+x where x is its converted mana cost.
{20}{6}
{"Whats I'm supposd to do wiff a scroll rak?"}
{"You're supposs to kill wiff it, ya dingus!"}
>>44407547
That's just Mindcrank though.
>>44407439
While it wouldn't be permanent I was more worried about it abusing things like Arcbound Ravager and Atog. Combine them with Liquimetal Coating, Mycosynth Lattice, and Myr Landshaper and someone could just steal someone's land every turn and sac it for profit while they build their board.
Would everyone do this? No, course not. But we got to think of worst case scenario and plan accordingly.
The absolute safest, while still being able to borrow your opponents stuff, would be: Gain control of target non-equipment non-land artifact until end of turn. It becomes an equipment with 'equipped creature gets +X/+X, where X is equal this permanents converted mana cost.' and 'Equip X.'
Or something.
>>44407551
>>44407625
You'll need to word the +X/+X as I did cause the way you have it makes it seem like the X is the creature's CMC instead of the artifacts.
Other than that, I think what you have is workable. I'm still torn on the free equip but as an 'until end of turn' thing It could probably stick just fine, especially since it doesn't give anything like Trample. I imagine it doing pretty good in aggro-midrange.
>>44407683
"Rules text" refers specifically to the text inside the text box as far as the game is concerned. But if there really is no rules text that isn't an ability, then ability is the better way to go.
>>44407625
>>44407688
You don't get it.
The thing is you don't control the equipment.
You aren't stealing it
You can't sacrifice it, because you don't control it. Your opponents still control the artifact, but they can't equip it, because it's only an equipment on your turn.
Again, think of ASSAULT SUIT. If you give it off to another player, they control the creature, not the equipment.
If you take control of a creature with Avacyn's Collar, the collar stays on the creature, but you don't control the collar. If the creature dies the person who stole it gets a 1/1 spirit, but the equipment will still be controlled by the owner.
>>44407683
>"rules text" to my knowledge hasn't been used on a card before.
There's Giant Fan, but... That's from Unglued.
I guess I'll change it back to 'all abilities'. Hopefully the cycle ends there.
>If you want to copy less than the entirety of the human card, tell me what you want to copy, and I'll figure out the correct wording.
Thanks for offering.
>>44406760
I said this in the last thread, but that's a really fuckin' dangerous play because he only covers damage. Life loss will kill you at 1 because you can't discard to prevent it, the way the card is worded.
>>44406209
I think this one is a little over the top for 2. And quite frankly the last ability is AIDS. You simply can't play an equipment-based deck against this guy. I'm all for bad matchups, but this is, like, actual competitive Modern bad.
Also, why 8 cards?
>>44407547
I'm thinking this is proooobably about a 4 or 5, since anyone using it will be prepared for self-mill...
>Trilias, Famed Warleader
>Adversary - (W/G)
>Creatures you control have Renown 1.
>Renowned creatures you control have hexproof.
>{25, 5}
---
>Aruga Vil, Matron of Graves
> Adversary - U/B/G
> You may cast spells as though they had Delve.
> Whenever you would put a card in exile, you may pay 2 life and put it on the bottom of your library instead.
>{16/6}
>>44407854
If Zael were being added in the next update, he'd be somewhat more balanced. As it stands, I was just making a card to pass the time, so I didn't bother making any changes beyond syntax.
When it comes time to add him, or any other Adversary I put to virtual paper in the meantime, I'm much more likely to make a few adjustments.
>>44407817
Well, it needed to have some kind of downside anyways.
>>44407758
You don't own it but you do control it. The reason Assault Suit works the way it does is because they gain control of the creature it is attached to and Assault Suit just goes along for the ride.
With what you are doing you are taking the equipment from their side of the field and equipping it one of your creatures, the only way this is possible is by gaining control of the artifact first since you can't equip an opponent's creature, meaning that the thing you just made an equipment can't be equipped to anything other than your opponent's creatures as demonstrated here:
702.6a Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. "Equip [cost]" means "[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature YOU CONTROL. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery."
The way you have it doesn't fundamentally work.
Figured I'd finally get to work on this idea.
>Govaran, Phyrexian Defector (X)
>Adversary – (B/R)
>(B/P)(B/P)(B/P)(T): Opponent reveals his hand. Choose a card from there. Opponent discards it.
>(3)(R/P)(R/P)(T): Gain control of target creature until end of turn. Untap that creature, It gains haste until end of turn. Add an Isurgence counter to Govaran.
>(B/P)(R/P), Remove X Insurgence counters: Gain control of target creature with converted mana cost X.
>{24}{5}
When I posted this Hawk said it was too strong, so I made the abilities much more expensive. A note, (B/P) and (R/P) mean phyrexian black and red respectively.
>>44407854
>>44407894
The eight cards are meant to represent Zael the character being a greatly proficient, dextrous and resourceful warrior.
Anyways, if you don't like the third ability how about...
>(4)(W): Take control of target unequipped equipment.
Or
>Equipment spells cost (1) less to cost.
A piece of trivia, the third ability was meant to represent Zael's innate ability to command magical weapons, his capacity to shut down their powers and make them follow his will, even with those belonging to his foes. This is the reason why he's known as the Saint of Blades.
Besides that he can summon unenchanted blades and his sword allows him to face in equal conditions foes of superhuman strength even if he's not significantly stronger than any other warrior.
Sorry for the blog.
Ossium again, without trip for a while before going offline.
>>44407964
I like it, what were the mana costs beforehand?
>>44407962
That's why Leffen forcibly Equips it to your creature and there is no equip cost, because there is no interaction between Leffen player and his opponent's equipment beyond the upkeep trigger
301.5d An Equipment’s controller is separate from the equipped creature’s controller; the two need not be the same. Changing control of the creature doesn’t change control of the Equipment, and vice versa. Only the Equipment’s controller can activate its abilities. However, if the Equipment grants an ability to the equipped creature (with “gains” or “has”), the equipped creature’s controller is the only one who can activate that ability.
>>44408158
Don't get me wrong, I get the design and I like the flavour. I just am not a fan of the equipment stealing because of a few things:
An equipment based deck not headed by Zael is fucked as soon as it goes online. And although the mana cost is large, equipment based decks are probably going to take a while to really get started anyway. The effect, although probably not too powerful for level 2, just seems like such a hoser that you're just never going to get to use it because nobody is going to play an equipment-based deck into Zael.
>I can't come up with names: (3)
>Adversary: RGW or RG
>When a land enters the battlefield under your control, if you control exactly three lands, put a 3/3 green Beast creature token onto the battlefield.
Just something I had thought up recently and wanted to share, might need a bit of tweaking.
>>44408288
Doesn't seem strong enough for level 3.
>>44408211
(B) for the first ability and (3)(R) for the second.
>>44408307
Fetches/Evolving Wilds gets two 3/3s off of simply entering the battlefield, and then you have cards like Scythe Tiger to regulate the amount of lands you control.
The biggest downside is not being able to cast anything for larger than 3 mana unless you use mana dorks or fancy lands or just ignore the free beasts.
I am still new, and don't have a good grasp on the levels though.
>>44408288
Caller of the Beasts {2}
Adversary {RG}
>At your upkeep, if you control exactly three land put a 3/4 Beast onto the battlefield
>(1)(R)(G), Sacrifice a land: Put a 3/4 Beast onto the battlefield
>Whenever you play a land from your hand onto the battlefield search your library and put a basic land onto the battlefield tapped
>[flavor/]"He might have a name but it's not in any language a man can speak"[flavor]
Thought about sprucing it up a bit
>>44408385
Yeah, I'm still not sure that's strong enough for level 3. Guess it'd require testing because there's probably lots of interesting interactions.
>>44408385
Yeah, that's a lvl1 at best. Also a pretty plain concept. Not interesting enough to make a card imo.
>>44408416
>>44408446
Dang, guess I overshot.
>>44408414
That's pretty neat, really digging the difficulty at getting exactly three lands. I was thinking of adding a trample clause somewhere, but wasn't too sure where to put it.
>>44408214
The problem there is still that you cant equip across battlefields. Without a bunch of extra clauses on him it just doesnt work without him gaining control of it.
He cant equip an opponents artifact to your creature because the very way equip works doesnt allow it.
For it to work how you want it would have to read:
At the beginning of your upkeep target non equipment artifact becomes an equipment with 'equipped creature gets +x/+x where x is this permanents converted mana cost,' 'Equip 0,' and 'return this card to its owners control at end of turn.' If the artifact is controlled by an opponent then that opponent gains control of target creature you control and that creature can't be sacrificed this turn. That opponent equips target equipment to target creature you own and then you gain control of that creature.
Which is just way too much. So without coming up with your own keyword or finding some weird loophole in the rules you have to have it gain control until end of turn.
>>44408414
Now that's a lvl3. A lvl4 even.
>>44408385
Let me show you how strong a lvl3 approximately is.
>Tarrask, Roil Singularity (3)
>Adversary - (W/U/B/R/G)
>Landfall – Whenever a land enters the battlefield under your control Elemental creatures you control obtain +2/+2 until the end of turn.
>Sacrifice a creature, (T): Put an X/X Elemental token creature where X is the sacrificed creature's converted mana cost.
>{30/5}
>>44408336
I will say that the abilities are costed decently, though I worry that his second ability is too expensive to make the last one worth it. I imagine moat games only being able to grab a 2cmc creature or less.
Personally Id either rework the final ability or the second ability some to get them in line more. My first thought would be to change CMC to power.
>>44408645
Is this an actual adversary? Cause thats cool as shit.
>>44408645
Dang, that seems a little bit better than Manabarbs and a Mana Short on each end step.
This is my one and only guilty pleasure card.Please no bully.
>>44408645
Is this a genuine pitch? I quite like it.
>>44408746
No, not yet anyways. I based it on this card from BfZ, Planar Outburst.
>>44408889
Yeah, sure. Add it if you want.Also I'll bully you and your waifu until you both go crying to momma ya fuckin' weeb.
>>44408537
It was hard getting the tokens exactly right because I felt 3/4 was right. Outside of bolt, but not a neck breaker
>>44408645
>Now that's a lvl3. A lvl4 even.
Well lands.dec usually runs pampant, but this has a controlled pace, but yeah level 3 sounds good
>>44408624
Sigh*
Everything not in quotation isn't in the text
>At the beginning of your upkeep, target non-equipment artifact (doesn't need to remind the player that creature artifacts can be equipments, but due to rule 301.5c can't become equipped) becomes an equipment until the end of turn (When an artifact stops becoming an equipment, it fall off the creature) with 'equiped creature gains +x/+x'.' (There is no equip cost thus making it impossible to unattach or attach equipment to other creatures)
Attach that equipment to a creature you control. (This is a case of Leffen taking action to forcibly take the equipment and attaching it to a creature. Emphasis on "attach", not equipping, because equipping is a player action)(note: Leffen player doesn't necessarily control equipment attached to his creature, due to rule 301.5d, thus making it impossible to sacrifice the equipment unless Leffen player initially controlled it (Due to this rule Leffen player doesn't naturally gain control))
So without the quotations
At the beginning of your upkeep, target artifact non-equipment becomes an equipment until the end of turn and equip it to creature you control. Equipped creature gets +x/+x where x is it's converted mana cost.
>>44408889
>Turn 1 Blightsteel Colossus
Yeah no. How bout instead
>Tap: Exile a non-land card from target opponent's hand. Until end of turn, you may cast that card and you may spend mana as though it were mana of any color to cast it. You may only activate this ability on your turn
>Exile target spell you control: Untap
>>44408889
M8 I think that's over the top for level 3.
Playing with hand revealed is a magnificently huge disadvantage, and Seraph is in the colours to exploit it, too.
That, combined with the last ability, is too much for level 3 imo. >>44409044 makes it more reasonable,
>>44408955
Alright, I'll re-word Chronominus. I'm amazed you can even read his rules text at that resolution.
>>44409044
>Tap: Exile a non-land card from target opponent's hand. Until end of turn, you may cast that card and you may spend mana as though it were mana of any color to cast it. You may only activate this ability on your turn
That was word-for-word my first draft, actually, except it was '{5}, {T}:' and there was nothing stopping her from untapping. I didn't think of exiling your own cards to untap her, though. That's good. I think I'm going to use that.
>>44409112
>>44409044
On second thought, that's far too wordy. I don't like using abilities if I can't fit them into a reasonable number of lines at a readable text size.
I'll go back to the drawing board instead.
>>44408889
I thought definitely had to be more than level 3 until I reread it and realized she doesn't untap, meaning the ability to cast a card from the opponent's hand is basically once per game. Assuming that is the intention and I'm not misunderstanding it, you should simplify that ability by including something like "Activate this ability only once per game." or require the removal of a counter that she only gets one of (and has no way to generate more of) as a cost. I think the wording and elegance of the card comes out better that way than having it be a tap-to-activate ability that leaves her tapped for the rest of the game.
>>44409112
>I didn't think of exiling your own cards to untap her, though. That's good. I think I'm going to use that.
just something I remember from Nivmagus Elemental
>>44409178
Is it? It seems perfectly concise to me
>>44408987
The problem is that his ability still says equip, which is an established keyword with a very specific meaning and set of rules behind it. On top of that, without having the Equip ability or something like 'Enchant creature' it cant 'attach' to anything and thus defeats the purpose.
Also, Equip is an activated ability that certain cards have, namely Artifact - Equipment, not a player action, whatever you mean by that. However, making something into an equipment does not grant the Equip ability or the ability to attach to anything. Much the same as how turning a creatures type to Wall doesnt grant Defender.
As I have said many times, it plain doesnt work how you have it. Either way, Im about to get on a plane and Im not the one who judges these worthy anyway so take it up with Hawk. Hopefully you listen to him, not entirely sure why youre not ok with the original I suggested anyway.
>>44409212
>Is it? It seems perfectly concise to me
>>44409273
Kek.
Anyone else think we should have an IRC channel or something going? It might make communicating easier. Or maybe not; after all, we have these threads.
>>44409273
Looks good to me, m8. Although I was thinking replace
>Exile target permanent: Untap
with
>Exile target spell: Untap
See pic related
It's to make it harder than just pumping out a bunch of tokens and then destroying a hand
>>44409273
It is quite a lot of text but it still all fits in rather neatly.
However, I think the original 'exile a non-land card from your hand' would work well enough for untapping her. At that point youre pretty much trading your spells for an opponents. Maybe making the cast ability cast like 2 or something if youre worried about it being too easy and/or only allowing you to untap her during your untap step IF you exile a card.
>Sanmaar, Mind's Razor (2)
> ADVERSARY (U/B/G)
>Your minimum deck size is reduced by twenty.
>(15/5)
This is worth a shot.
Alright, reviews for everyone coming up starting from the top.
>>44409769
Interesting, Im not sure that starting life/hand needs to be reduced honestly. The smaller deck can be as much a hindrance as a help and other than higher percentage of hitting cards theres no upside. Or, if you feel that starting life should be lower than potentially raise starting hand as having nore cards in your opening hand shortens the turn clock for your deck.
Alright last try
Luffin, The Clever Weaponsmith {3}
Adversary - {RG}
At the beginning of your upkeep, target non-equipment artifact becomes an equipment until the end of turn.
You may attach it to target creature you control.
Equipped creature gets +x/+x where x is its converted mana cost and has an equip cost of (0).
Oracle text: (Note you do not take control of artifact for the turn, but it's still attached creature you control)
{20}{6}
Can't find better art.
>>44409892
That's actually a fucking huge upside.
>>44409974
Final final changes
>Sanmaar, Mind's Razor (2)
> ADVERSARY (U/B/R)
>Your minimum deck size is reduced by twenty.
>(15/5)
>>44409974
It is, I agree, but Im thinking that targeted draw/mill/mill exile hitting them that much harder should hopefully keep it in check. Combined with your deck having less total cards which means less versatility and answers. While this is likely a combo players dream Im thinking the increased fragility of the deck and less room for answers should compensate, but testing will tell.
>>44409974
>>44409892
>>44410003
>>Sanmaar, Mind's Razor (2)
>> ADVERSARY (U/B/R)
>>You cannot win the game with laboratory maniac
>>Your deck may only contain 16 cards.
>>(40/10)
hue might be interesting
>>44410080(W)(U)(B), Remove a dignity counter: Forget to disable color key layer when posting joke card.
>>44410101
Nice digits. Question, will you be adding that Elemental adversary in the end?
>>44403976
>Deus's text
I hope that's seen editing, because as it stands, it would be trying to pull a new Adversary out of your sideboard. At least, given the last rulings I saw on what constitutes "outside the game".
Okay. Completely overhauled. Thoughts?
>>44410544
This was discussed a little earlier in the thread, the sideboard thing specifically.
>>44410326
I'll be making a card image for it, at the very least. Whether it gets added to the .xml will depend on how things progress after this next update.
>>44410080
Seraph, Paragon NTR Slut
>Tap: Suck a dick
Tap: tap target untapped creature opponent controls, it deals damage to you equal to it's power
>Untap: get cash money
Untap: Gain 5 life
{7}{5}
What started as a stupid joke, might turn into a good mechanic
Even though someone else recommended this last thread, I'm going to re-shill it since I meet the requirements that Hawk set out for adding new Adversaries. And I want a BUG card.
Some people were commenting how it was weird that it was summoning saprolings instead of rats, so to keep the card the same :
Pitterfang, Swamp Mage [2]
BUG
{B}. {T} : Put a 1/1 black Rat creature token onto the battlefield.
{U}, {T} : Untap target creature.
{G}. {T}. Sacrifice a creature : Draw a card.
18 / 7
Before people go "abloo bloo bloo, Green is not the color of sac/draw", there's Fecundity and Greater good, so I think it works fine.
>>44410607
>Okay. Completely overhauled. Thoughts?
idk man. What's stopping you from making a shit deck filled with 60 lands and just playing your opponents deck?
>>44410693
I was thinking a bunch of discard, as discard would be irrelevant to you, and you'd be able to shred their hand ridiculously fast, but that's probably an even better idea.
>>44410693
Because you only get to do it once a turn and they can rifle their hand out faster than you can steal their shit, I wager.
>>44410693
>>44410713
Well, it says 'nonland card' for starters.
>>44410732
Yeah. That's fucking awesome for you.
ALL you have is land. They don't get ANYTHING.
And you... You take their gas.
>>44410753
... Oh, wait, I get what you're saying. That's a very logical objection to the concept.Excuse me while I burn this card and kill myself.
>>44410674
how bout
Pitterfang, Swamp Mage [2]
BUG
{B}. {T}. Sacrifice a creature : Draw a card.
{B}{G}. {T} : Put a 1/1 black and green Rat creature token onto the battlefield with deathtouch.
{B}{G}{U}: {T}. Return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand
17 / 7
>>44410732
the way I imagine it
>Turn one
>Tap: Reveal my hand
>Whiff
>Untap reveal their hand
>Exile shit
>Tap reveal hand
>Whif
>Untap
you get what I'm saying
>>44410765
it was pretty good here >>44409273
we'll get your waifu there, don't worry
>>44410765
I disagree. You SEVERELY cripple yourself only running lands.
>Hurr hurr I steal one of your things, you steal nothing
>Okay, retard
>play tons of shit
They'll literally be dying for board presence if they run only lands. Guaranteed loss.
>>44410803
I think this design without the untap ability is strong enough for level 3. At least for an initial attempt.
>>44410780
That's a lot less elegant and clunky.
>>44410818
You can activate as many times as you want.
Turn 1, play a land, tap and untap Seraph until their hand is empty of everything but fucking lands.
On their draw step, do it again.
>>44410765
I wouldnt, as another anon said, sure you get a card from them a turn and they get nothing but that would leave you casting one spell a turn while theyre still able to cast however many they have mana for. Also, they could just play their hand out every turn and then youre fucked.
It would be a gimmick deck at best, just like the Treasure Hunt deck. If it works, awesome. But it could just as easily not work and youre sitting there all game doing nothing but getting rammed in the ass.
>>44410818
Well if you put an untap in there with
>Exile spell you control (Spell you cast will not resolve and goes to exile): Untap
It would give it more substance and feel less like a one hit shot
>>44410838
>That's a lot less elegant and clunky.
BUG is suppose to be very versatile and more of a tool box, so I made it less of a sword and more like swiss army knife.
The way you had him, he had way too much presence.
>>44410864
See
>>44410849
And you know what, even if you could only activate once every turn, Seraph would be busted the way she's worded.
How do you think they'll just dump their hand? Are they playing 45-onedrops.dek? You take their most castable shit every turn. They can't curve into anything; you curve into their shit.
>>44410849
Easily fixed by adding 'activate this ability only once each turn.'
Personally, I really like the give/take mechanic and think its the best revision so far.
Alright, I think she can be fixed by merging both the tap effect and untap effect into a single tap effect and having no untap effect...
I just don't know how to word that properly. It looks like the most clunky thing in the world if I just remove the untap symbol and put 'Then target opponent blablabla'.
>>44410904
Then have it say 'exile until end of turn' so that you cant exile forever and forces you to cast it that turn or else theyll just get it back.
Shes definitely strong but shes easily remedied down to the others powerlevel.
>>44410906
Are you playing the format? Let's play a game. I'll play as this hypothetical Seraph and we'll see how the games play out.
Any deck that actually needs to cast things from its hand -- that is, decks that don't get free presence such as Thrash -- is hosed by this. Unless your curve maxes out at CMC 2, Seraph picks the hand apart and blows you out. And even then, every turn, she's taking one of your threats. That's two virtual card advantage right there and gives her a way to deal with whatever you might have managed to cast.
And eventually, when you're out of gas, she'll just activate on each of your draw steps to choke you out.
>>44410970
There you go. Exile until end of turn would make it more reasonable, and is also radically different from how the last iteration was worded.
>>44410958
Target opponent and you reveal their hand. Each player who revealed their hand this way chooses a card from the others hand and exiles it until end of turn. Each player may play the card they exiled in this manner and may spend mana as though it were mana of any color to do so.
>>44411016
I proposed that nearly word-for-word earlier (albeit on Cockatrice, not in the thread), but apparently it's too ambiguous in who is allowed to cast what from exile.
>>44410958
Tap: You and your opponent exile a non-land card from your hand. You and your opponent may cast any card exiled by Seraph, False Paragon, any time you may play a sorcery.
>>44411016
Well, this is exploitable by just having nothing castable at instant speed in your deck and activating only on your turn.
>>44411041
The problem was you didn't say "the card they exiled".
>>44403976
Anybody tried any of the following yet?
>Ananta Seshou
>Candidate
>Falgore
>Flekto
>Reeve
>Skaz
>Velan
These are my favorite of all you guys' creations and I'd be interested on creating a deck based around one or two of them.
>>44411142
I've built Flekto and Velan.
>Flekto
Really rewarding once you get to the lategame, but the things you really want to rebound are way too expensive to rebound. I'unno. Kinda fun but you don't get enough mileage out of his ability until late.
>Velan
I built her thinking that when *I* gained life, the opponent would lose life. It's the other way around, so my lifegain was... well... a lot less useful. I built a pretty casual list though, stuck to vampire tribal with a couple zombies.
>>44411142
I've played two Velan's and I have a Velan myself. Akuma has Candidate and Falgore decks. The person who designed Flekto is in the process of making a deck for him.
The others haven't been used yet, as far as I know.
>>44411173
Flekto seems like he would be better if he twinned spells rather than rebounded them, and for cheaper.
I think if he had a different cost like Sacrifice a creature, instead of BRU
>>44411190
Oh, does Candidate work well?, Not being able to play them myself I've been pretty concerned about how my creations fare and wether they are balanced or not.
Final attempt to make this work.
>>44411352
You'd have to ask Akuma, I'm afraid. I haven't had a chance to face that deck yet.
>>44411460
Give me a sec. I planned to review all adversaries, but since you are here I'll give you priority.
I'll have to read all versions, so I'll take a few minutes.
>>44411460
I'd change it to, T: All players reveal their hands. Then, starting with you, each player exiles a non land card from each other players hand. Any player may play cards exiled this way.
Wording needs a bit of work but it's way more shenanigans.
>>44411460
Ummm, doesn't >>44411044
seem a bit shorter. Concise and it allows your opponent to play their own cards if they ramp hard enough into it and if not they can't they can cast what they exiled from you
Just finished my Flekto if anyone wants to play.
>>44411556
>It allows your opponent to play their own cards
Yeah, that's why I didn't use your suggestion. The intent is for the chosen cards to be removed from their owner's arsenal entirely. With that in mind, level 2 was an error: she should be level 3.
>>44411548
Same thing here. Also, in the event of a 1v1v1v1, your version could take about 3 minutes to resolve.
>>44411738
>>It allows your opponent to play their own cards
>Yeah, that's why I didn't use your suggestion.
well that's the thing. If you use it every turn it's not just going to hurt their game, it's going to cripple it just from you playing your adversary
>>44411857
Would you want to use it every turn, though? Up until you have abilities in play that let you see their hand, every use of Seraph's ability would be a gamble. You could end up better off or worse off. And if you're intentionally building a worthless deck to feed your opponent garbage cards, you're still the one stuck with most of the garbage cards since the swaps can never outpace the opponent's draw.
>>44411738
>In the event of a 1v1v1v1
That's kinda the point.
>>44412050
The current version works in a 1v1v1v1, though, you just keep targeting individual players. Being able to exile a card from every other player's hand would arguably be a dramatic increase to Seraph's power, as well as slightly gamebreaking because every player is now potentially having three cards ripped out of their hand every turn.
Another one
>Udrem, Lich Lord of Sanguinia (4)
> (B)
> Skip your draw step.
> If a spell or ability from a source other than CARDNAME would have you draw one or more cards, you draw no cards instead.
>Pay 1 life: Draw a card.
>Your maximum hand size is zero.
>50/0
>>44412091
Yeah, but everybody can play everyone elses cards, and that's a lot more fun.
>>44412104
Necropotence, the Adversary?
>>44412207
Pretty much
>>44411460
Alright, I'm all caught up. This version should do it, but readying the card I couldn't help but to be reminded of Gifts Ungiven. I couldn't help but to make a version based on it.
>Hawk's Waifu (is for sexual)
>Adversary – (W/U/B)
>(5)(U)(T): select a target opponent. Both player's search each other's library for up to four cards, then their owner selects two. They put those cards in their respective owner's graveyard, then add the other two to their hands.
The wording is terrible, but you get what I'm on about even if its silly, rite?
Anyways, card is good but maybe you should add a small cost besides tapping.
>Makra, Envoy of Excitment
>U/W/R
>At the end of your turn put a excitement counter on Makra
>At the beginning of your upkeep choose one of the following, where X is the number of excitement counters on Makra:
>Draw up to X cards.
>Deal X damage to target creature.
>Search your hand, library and graveyard for an enchantment with converted mana cost X or less and put it onto the battlefield then shuffle your library. You cant cast spells this turn.
17/4
Alright, I just did some hasty playtesting:
I see that Seraph is broken now. I regret spending so much time trying to fix her. I'm going to scrap her and focus on creating other people's Adversaries now. Sorry for the temporary derail.
>>44412400
M8 I think the design here >>44409273 is perfectly fine. Just get rid of the last ability; she doesn't need it.
>>44412459
>>44412400
yeah, we'll brainstorm how to get her to untap later, but for now she's fine like she was >>44409273
>>44412400
I agree with >>44412459, although I'm also going to bump the point I raised in >>44409207 because I still think it improves the elegance of the card's design (unless no one cares about that).
>>44412459
Seconding this. Without that last ability, she is strong enough. She doesn't need to untap. Also helps with the clutter.
>>44412549
I like the idea of a counter. "Activate this only once every game" introduces memory issues, that you're going to solve by putting a counter on her anyway.
Hawk, don't give up on your waifu!
________
BG
Creatures you control have deathtouch.
Whenever a creature you control dies you may draw a card. If you do put a -2/-0 counter onto target creature you control.
16/7
______, Dimir Codemaster
BU
Sorcery cards in your hand with a converted mana cost of 4 or less gain Cipher.
(B)(U),(t), sacrifice a creature. Target creature gains unblockable until end of turn.
20/7
>>44412579
A counter would be a problem if there were ways to populate or otherwise duplicate it, butfor nowthere are no kinds of cards that can interact with Adversaries or counters on them, so that's not a problemfor now.
>>44412666
Nice triples. And I think something that interacts with Adversaries is crossing the line. Commander 2013 made me so unreasonably angry.
Creatures you control have shadow.
(u)(b),(t) Target creature you control gain haste until end of turn. If it is a rogue or a ninja it gets +2/+0 until end of turn.
>>44412207
>>44412214
We already have one of those in the works >>44406188
Both your card and this play pretty different though, but overall I prefer Nameless king. It has the downside of being frail (or the 14ish lives version does) and has more interesting mechanics involved.
>>44412459
>>44412530
>>44412549
>>44412556
F-Fine. Here.
She's not my waifu, okay!?She's my self-insert DMPC.
>>44412883
If you're using "only once per game", she doesn't need to tap.
Your waifu is saved.
I think she's still level 3 though.
>>44412883
Also, I think you can merge the first and last clauses.
"Activate this ability only once per game any time you could cast a sorcery."
would be my first attempt at it.
Two Headed Giant Adversaries when?
>>44403976In order
>your creatures can help cast those spells
Fuck, do I hate that.
Why is this black? And why is it Hooded Hydra?
Strong, but fine.
"Put a */* counter"
The second ability is black.
Previously discussed.
You rally shouldn't give somebody a free Assasinate every turn. Especially not an instant one. Make that cost AT LEAST 2B.
At least it's not [blue effect], [black effect], [white effect].
I gave wording suggestions on this already. I don't think you took my suggestion, but there's nothing like what you want in MTG anyway.
I feel like this really isn't as strong as a level 3.
"Players can't cast creature cards from their hands."
>row 2
I see you did not take my advice, and instead let people build 35~40 card decks. On top of using a level 5.
"Void Channeler" seems super edgy.
Do you want your opponent's instants and sorceries to cost 2 less? If not it's "Instant and sorcery spells you cast cost 2 less to cast."
This should be level 3. Or start with less life.
This got bumped to 3?
Biz-onkers.
We talked about this.
"The next instant or sorcery spell you cast from your hand this turn gains rebound."
Too much text. No way to shorten it.
Too stronk. Those abilities each need to cost (1) more.
Still not red.
Should probably be a level 3.
Not my thing.
Should probably tone the second ability down to "creatures you control can block an additional creature."
That's still not a blue effect.
>row 3
"T, Remove [X] insight counters from CARDNAME:"
Yep.
Are you sure this isn't a level 2?
I guess it's OK.
Er, should that be once per game? Timely Reinforcements was back-breaking for aggro back in the day.
Sure.
Just saying, but this is the third mono-white level 1 so far. Well, that last one shouldn't be a level 1.
I think that's a really awkward way of saying 'if you didn't sacrifice it to pay a cost'
>>44412883
Oh, that's who she is? I thought she was a character from a game called Valkyria Chronicles. I haven't played it myself but I've watched one of my friends play it on occasion and that picture might be one of the character from it. I'm not sure.
>>44403976
>>44413079
>row 4
Yep.
Mmhm.
I approve of the level increase, but on the side of caution advise you to test it a lot.
Also card art.
Sure.
I feel like most of these could do with actual balancing with life total/hand size in mind.
Yeah, I don't see anything wro-
That's not blue.
In fact, that's a fantastic mono-green example.
I guess.
I'm not happy with that wording.
Perhaps "Spells that cost generic mana to cast cost (1) more to cast.
Abilities that cost generic mana to activate cost (1) more to activate."
>>44413079
>>44413164
I've made a note on your comments about Candidate, Chronominus, Elania, Flekto, Grahv, Jim, Luxos, Nemosyn, Olag Nar and Vyndiis.
Deus: I took your advice, but there hasn't been an .xml update since you posted it.
Dralnu: I think the designer intended it to apply to all instants and sorceries.
Fina: At this point I am convinced it is impossible to make people happy with Fina's effect. I get complaints no matter what I change it to. I'm just going to stick with 'all abilities' from now on.
>Too much text. No way to shorten it
Story of my life.
Ignis: I'm okay with it.
Thank you for your input.
>>44413157
It's Selvaria, yes, I just steal her artwork shamelessly.
>>44413079
>"The next instant or sorcery spell you cast from your hand this turn gains rebound."
>Too much text. No way to shorten it.
It's literally one sentence!
>>44405925
Sorry for late reply, but anyways, I always do backstory for my Adversaries. Or at least try to make them fit in the MTG lore somehow.
>Candidate is a political figure of weight in the Arzorious Senate that has dealings with both the Ohrzov Council and House Dimir and aims to seize control over the Senate and use his influence to carry out his plan of unleashing and controlling the Nephilim trapped under the plane for both the prosperity of Ravnica and absolute power over it.
>Ananta Seshou is an Hydra born from an egg in the Orochi Shaman tribe leaded by Sachi. Raised on their ways it became both a shaman and icon of veneration as the only of its kind on Kamigawa. It abandoned its home to study Omnyodo magics under the very monks that raised Seshiro. Is actually a Planeswalker, but his Spark has not been ignited so far.
>Na'Zaram is a space-time traveler that arrived to Dominaria during the apex of the rift crisis that almost destroyed the plane. Has a connection to the Eldrazi and seems to know how they came to be. Can also turn into a dinosaur at will, which doesn't have anything to do with anything, but is cool regardless.
>>44413376
I think he seperates his comments on each Adversary with a line break. Those were commenting on two seperate cards.
>>44413495
Oh god, I'd love to write out some flavor for the vanilla Adversaries at some point, but it would probably be a waste of time when I could be doing more productive things.
>>44413495
>Prince Zael is one of the two sons of a wise Dominarian king. He is the eldest and thus heir to the throne, but doesn't appreciate the court lifestyle nor the possibility of having a positive, meaningful impact over the lives of his would-be subjects, preferring to distract himself from his general apathy towards everything with skirmishes in his dream to follow the path if the warrior. This leaves his admittedly less capable yet far more level-headed brother to take the mantle and act as a regent of sorts. The brothers do love eachother, but the younger is resentful of Zael for squandering his potential and opportunities as he does (maybe I'll create the younger brother too).
>Govaran was a red phyrexian posted around the Seedling Mirran Resistance camp, until one day in an incursion to investigate he attacked none other than Melira, the "Fleshling". She escaped, but not without being wounded. Melira's blood reacted with Govaran's body, causing him to develop his own individuality even further, snapping from the Oil's corrupting control. Now he himself is working alongside the Mirran Resistance, albeit he is of course distrusted by the Mirrans, who suspect it may be a ploy to wipe them out. They are currently devising a way to get rid of Govaran should it be necessary.
>Jareth is a dank meme.
Also I think I like better the Manifest version too. Yeah, Manifest it is.
I'd have both, but that's wishful thinking, they'd be too similar.
>>44413531
Not a waste. Take a break and write, m8. It'll be fun.
Calico is probably a ridiculous time mage. :^)
>>44413079
Whoops. Starting at "too much text" is row 3, >row 3 is actually row 4. Sorry for the confusion.
>>44413344
I didn't have any commentary on Fina.
>>44413531
>>44413615
I agree, writing is never a waste. Once you create a character you like and have a grip for who he is and what he is supposed to be able to do writing a card for him is both fun and comes naturally to you.
>>44413678
>I didn't have any commentary on Fina.
Oh. I interpreted 'We talked about this' to mean 'there's still an issue' or something along those lines. Nevermind, then. I hope I got the rest right at least.
>>44413615
>Calico is probably a ridiculous time mage. :^)
Not quite a time mage, but she naturally remembers everything that has, is and ever will happen in her life like she's already lived a hundred times before. She's an 'oracle' because she can predict everything with near 100% accuracy. She's 'vacant' because she's really, really bored as a result.
>>44406689
Simple enough. Not broken at all. Maybe it could be spiced up a bit, but eh.
>>44409965
I actually really like this concept, its fun and fresh. The last version looks fine to me. I've never been a rules lawyer, so I can't say if its worded correctly. If I were to do it it'd be...
>At the beginning of your upkeep, target non-equipment artifact looses all card text and becomes an equipment until the end of turn.
>You may attach it to target creature you control.
>Equipped creature gets +x/+x where x is its converted mana cost and has an equip cost of (0).
Its worded that way so to prevent misunderstandings. Also how about you get a pic of something like an Orc smith?, It'd fit the bill far better imo. Plus, Orcs are cool and so are smiths. That's like, twice as cool you know?
>>44412712
>>44412608
Anyone like these? Haven't settled on names yet.
>second post should be a UB, 17/7
>>44412358
>Makra, Envoy of Excitment (3)
>U/W/R
>At the end of your turn put a excitement counter on Makra
>At the beginning of your upkeep choose one of the following, where X is the number of excitement counters on Makra:
>Draw up to X cards.
>Deal X damage to target creature.
>Search your hand, library and graveyard for an enchantment with converted mana cost X or less and put it onto the battlefield then shuffle your library. You cant cast spells this turn.
>17/4
No one have any commentary on this?
>>44414901
Its a good concept but the card is weak as it is. It needs to have a way to raise the excitement counters and to have the option not to spend them. Let me have a hand at it.
>Makra, Envoy of Excitment (3)
>U/W/R
>At the end of your turn and whenever a creature dies put a excitement counter on Makra.
>At the beginning of your upkeep you may choose one of the following, where X is the number of excitement counters on Makra:
>• Draw up to X cards.
>• Deal X damage to target creature or player.
>• Search your hand and library for an enchantment with converted mana cost X or less and put it onto the battlefield then shuffle your library.
>17/4
There, now its a level 3.
It occurs to me that there isn't a Sliver adversary.
This must be rectified.
>Sliver Adversary (2)
>Adversary - B U R W G (because slivers)
>Can only include Sliver type cards in your deck.
>All Slivers cost (1) less
Not sure on health or hand size.
>>44415345
You're not spending the counters though. It's more like experience counters or +1/+1 counters. So e.g.
End of turn 1, gain a counter. 1 Excitement counter.
Upkeep of Turn 2, either Draw up to 1 card, deal 1 damage to a creature or search your hand, library and graveyard for a enchantment with CMC 1 or less and put it onto the battlefield.
End of Turn 2, gain an excitement counter, excitement counters at 2.
Upkeep Turn 3, either Draw up to 2 cards, deal 2 damage to a creature or search your hand, library and graveyard for a enchantment with CMC 2 or less and put it onto the battlefield.
End of Turn 3, gain an excitement counter, counters at 3.
etc, etc.
>>44406769
When I looked at this one at first nothing really stood out or really caught my eye, but when I saw the second ability I understood this was not meant to be just a reanimator like any other, but a graveyard-based draw engine to go through creature-based decks much faster, albeit at a price, discarding, which at the same speeds up how fast you go through your library.
This might be my favorite card from you so far, good job.
>>44415432
Ah, I see. Then your version is just fine. I would keep the edits I made to the abilities though, this adversary not being black doesn't have much business habing Graveyard interaction. Plus, being able to damage players is great too, though maybe a little over the edge.
>>44406815
I like it. Great sacrifice engine that will work wonders with a Sultai/Silumgar-themed deck.
>>44415533
It's only enchantments though, black doesn't get enchantments out of the graveyard, no color but white and green do, and white is the only color that gets specifically enchantments.
As for the damage to players, if you make it being able to do it to players it literally just becomes a clock. A very dangerous clock. It becomes a "By turn 5 you've taken 10 damage from just my Adversary, not including anything else I'm doing." I'd compromise and do a chain reaction kinda thing, where it's deal X damage to up to X target creatures.
>>44406950
>>44406977
Yeah, this version is best. The fact that Permanents can't be sacrified to prevet damage will keep him balanced at lvl4 due to frailty and risk involved.
>>44407547
There was this Adversary , Lich Lord Morghul whic did the same thing as this one, only affecting just the user, incorporating Delve to the spells in hand and just 1 life, which made him interesting. So...
>Whenever you'd lose life, put instead that many cards from the top of your library into the graveyard.
>Whenever a you'd gain life instead put that many cards from your graveyard on the bottom of their library in any order.
>Spells in your hand have Delve.
>{1/7}
>>44415345
wow, that's way overpowered. reign it in there or plus that up to level 4
>>44415812
The original concept or the revised one?
>>44407882
First is standard lvl1 stuff. I actually like it, its nice and simple.
The second ability of the second one is bad though. Paying life to put cards on the bottom of your library where you'll never see them again?, Top or bust yo.
>>44415849
Fuck probably all of them. They don't have much difference. They're all powerful.
quick question.
Why is Rite of Flame banned in a singleton format?
I know we're not really suppose to be working on new Adversaries at the moment, but I've had an idea in my head since this morning and I guess it doesn't hurt to put it down in the thread to see what people think.
CARDNAMEv1 (?)
Color ID: ?
At the beginning on the game, all players exile the top seven cards of their library face-down.
(5): Play a card exiled with CARDNAMEv1 without paying its mana cost. Activate this ability only as a sorcery and only once per turn. Any player may activate this ability.
T, (2): Each player exiles the top card of their library face-down.
T, (1): Look at one card exiled with CARDNAMEv1 and then return it to its face down position.
-----------
I feel like it would be pretty low level, because there's little you can do to build around it or make synergies, and its effect is fairly uniform. Your opponent can benefit from it too, you're just in a slightly better position to benefit from it because you can peek at the exiled cards, giving you a better idea of what you're playing from exile. Personally, I would peg it at either 1 or 2, depending on what starting life/hand size it gets given. I also think it would probably be either colorless, red (because randomness), or five-color (because it can "play" cards of any color). If it were five color, I think that'd be a good reason to move it to level 2.
>>44415897
The original version was card draw, damage based removal and mini enduring ideal. I don't think that's too busted considering some of the other things I see at level two or three.
>>44415995
yes but it gets incrementally or in burger's edit exponentially worse. Do you not see a problem with drawing 5+ cards at the beginning of your upkeep? throw in some removal for early game until you bounce and erupt. It's good. It's flavorful, but it is undeniably powerful as well.
>>44415995
>>44416060
fuck actually every game you are going to TUTOR a Paradox Haze turn three
>>44415345
>>Makra, Envoy of Excitement (3+1/2)
>>R/B
>>At the end of your turn and whenever a creature dies put a excitement counter on Makra.
>>At the beginning of your upkeep you may choose one of the following, where X is the number of excitement counters on Makra:
>>• Draw up to X cards.
>>• Deal X damage to target creature.
>>• Search your hand and library for an enchantment, creature, or artifact with converted mana cost X or less and put it onto the battlefield then shuffle your library. It gains haste and you sacrifice it at the end of the turn.
>>17/4
Retuned it with a real Rakdos vibe here
>>44416086
Yeah, but you have a maximum hand size of 4. And I can guarantee you you're not going to be able to cast 5+ cards a turn in a deck in those colors.
>>44416167
Eeeeugh. Rakdos. Bleagh.
>>44416182
>maximum hand size of 4
no that's the starting handsize. the maximum is always 7 unless anything says otherwise.
>>44416086
>Makra, Envoy of Excitment (X)
>U/W/R
>At the end of your turn or whenever a spell is cast put a excitement counter on Makra
>At the beginning of your upkeep you may remove X excitement counters and choose one of the following:
>Draw up to X cards.
>Deal X damage to up to X target creatures.
>Search your hand, library and graveyard for an enchantment with converted mana cost X or less and put it onto the battlefield then shuffle your library. You cant cast spells this turn.
>17/4
>>44416294
that definitely looks better
>>44416357
I kinda want to change the excitement counter gain to a two liner:
>Whenever a spell is cast, put a excitement counter on Makra.
>At the end of your turn, you may discard your hand, and then put that many excitement counters on Makra.
>>44412608
>>44414840
I only like one, the Dimir Codemaster, but I like it a lot. Cipher is such a great mechanic. And it being able to make things unblockable is really neat too. I'm all for it honestly, the only thing I'd do sould be word it so that all of your sorceries had Cipher, not just those under a certain mana cost.
>>44416426
>excitement counter
could you change the name of the counters.
Excitement counter sounds like a rakdos death circus
>At the end of your turn, you may discard your hand, and then put that many excitement counters on Makra.
Being able to wheel each turn is pretty powerful. I'd keep it somewhere around where it is.
>>44416506
Fair enough.
The image I had in my head is one of those weird japanese-style live game show host people who are always trying to get people involved in the show, or like the frontman of a band or something. Maybe furor counters instead?
>>44408987
Looking at it he's partially right, just arguing very badly. You want attach, not equip. On the cross equipping bit he's completely wrong though, as demonstrated by pic related.
>>44416643
FUCK my life. If only I knew about that card before
Oroku Saki, Ninja Lord [2]
UB
Creature cards in your hand have Ninjutsu {x}, where {x} is that card's mana cost minus {1}. ({X}, Return an unblocked attacker you control to hand: Put this card onto the battlefield from your hand tapped and attacking.)
20 / 7
(I'm dead serious.)
>>44416551
Okay I sorta know what you're going for.... or not
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKMw2it8dQY
>Mirka the Kabuki Playwright
>Adversary {U/W/R}
>Whenever a player plays a spell put a destiny counter on Mirka
>At the beginning of your upkeep you may remove X destiny counters from Mirka and search your library or hand for a sorcery or creature with converted mana cost X or less and play (I specifically said 'play' and not cast) it without paying it's mana cost.
{19/5}
>>44417036
Lore-wise. Mechanic wise, I'm totally going for Enduring-Ideal.adversary because it's my favorite card ever.
>>44403976
Vyndiis, the Purist would only make sense if generic mana cost is instead of colorless mana cost. (Or he actually only metas against certain Eldrazi creatures, but in this case he should be level 1).
Also can we get by any chance a amgic set editor template?
>>44417089
Nah he still make sense, because non-colored artifacts are colorless as well, it'd be better worded as "Colorless spells cost (1) more to cast."
Alternatively, if they were going for a Thalia of Thraben type of effect, it'd be "Spells cost (1) more to cast."
Does pithing needle effect adversaries?
>>44417243
A better question is: Does it effect commanders in the command zone or cards in hand, because then it has the precedent that it does effect things in other zones, and thus affects Adversaries.
>>44404590
>>44413551
I got art for Karesh.
http://svetoslavpetrov.deviantart.com/art/Rakshasa-574205230
Just look at this faggot, just laying back and blazin' it with that shit-eating smirk plastered all over his merry face. He is no warrior, but he doesn't need to move a finger to fuck your shit backwards and he knows it. He is richer, smarter and more charismatic than you and once he's done wrecking your silly deck he'll just take one big puff of dat sick-ass bong and NTR your waifu just because he can.
>>44417243
>>44417309
Pithing Needle does affect commanders.
>http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=253581
6/1/2005 Pithing Needle affects cards regardless of what zone they're in. This includes cards in hand, cards in the graveyard, and exiled cards. For example, a player can't cycle Eternal Dragon or return an Eternal Dragon from his or her graveyard to hand if Pithing Needle naming Eternal Dragon is on the battlefield.
6/1/2005 You can name any card, even if that card doesn't normally have an activated ability. You can't name a token unless that token has the same name as a card.
6/1/2005 If you name a card that has both a mana ability and another activated ability, the mana ability can be activated but the other ability can't be activated.
10/1/2009 Once Pithing Needle has left the battlefield, activated abilities of sources with the chosen name can be activated again.
10/1/2012 Activated abilities include a colon and are written in the form “[cost]: [effect].” Triggered abilities and static abilities of the named card work normally.
>>44417243
>>44417309
>>44417435
Honestly, if the intention of the game is prevent anyone from fucking with Adversaries (and it should), then the Adversary should be treated like an Emblem (or simply have its own rules similar to Emblems), where it cannot be fucked with in any way.
Pithing Needle specifies "card".
>>44417487
ban pithing needle?
Unban rite of flame?
Someone edit the pastebin
>>44417537
No, Pithing Needle is very much a reasonable card to include in a format. It just shouldn't affect Adversaries. Adversaries are not cards. You cannot bounce them to your hand or any shit like that. They're "Adversaries", not cards. They exist on the field before turns even start.
>>44417537
>>44417588
>113.5. An emblem is neither a card nor a permanent. Emblem isn’t a card type.
Just use this as the template.
An Adversary is neither a card nor a permanent. Adversary isn't a card type.
>>44416486
Do you really want unblockable creatures casting wits end,army of the damned, crux of fate, enter the infinite, part the waterveil, temporal trespass, time warp, unburial rites, worst fears, etc? I was aiming for a lower power level, the 4 restriction reflects that.
Also, it would need a restriction for sorceries with variable cmcs. No idea how to handle that.
>Makra, Envoy of Excitment (3)
>U/W/R
>At the end of your turn or whenever a spell is cast put a excitement counter on Makra
>At the beginning of your upkeep you may remove X excitement counters and choose one of the following:
>Draw up to X cards.
>Deal X damage to up to X target creatures.
>Search your hand, library and graveyard for an enchantment with converted mana cost X or less and put it onto the battlefield then shuffle your library. You cant cast spells this turn.
>17/4
Tentatively at a three, NOW WITH ART.
>>44417973
The card draw is absolutely fucking insane. I recommend limiting it to whenever YOU cast a spell. It punishes your opponent way too savagely if you get to draw a fistful of shit because he just took his turn.
>>44418054
The card draw is about on point compared to some of the other bullshit on that list.
>>44418145
If you want your card to be a level 4, maybe.
It's stupid strong.
>>44418162
Arez, Calico, Teren, Luxos, Mihails, Grahv. All of which are 3 and below. I'd say it's about on point.
>>44418267
Pretty much all of those are being pushed for being bumped up.
>>44417660
I actually wouldn't mind. This one was already threading close to a lvl4 and by the time you have the mana to cast those in a lvl4 Adversary combat odds are your opponent already has something similarly broken at his disposal. It may be OK even for lvl3, but that'd have to be determined through playtesting
So yeah, it just might not be as broken as you think.
>>44418336
Fair enough.
>Makra, Envoy of Excitment (3)
>U/W/R
>At the end of your turn or whenever a spell is cast put a excitement counter on Makra
>At the beginning of your upkeep you may remove X excitement counters and choose one of the following:
>Draw up to X cards then discard that many cards.
>Deal X damage to up to X target creatures.
>Search your hand, library and graveyard for an enchantment with converted mana cost X or less and put it onto the battlefield then shuffle your library. You cant cast spells this turn.
>17/4
That better? Now it's looting, not straight card advantage.
>>44418373
I think that would feel like a really powerful 3 or a low tier 4 if not for that starting hand size -- but I don't like that she just gets excitement counters at end of turn. Getting one anytime anyone casts a spell is a lot already, I think.
I wouldn't shit bricks if that made it in at 3, though. Testing tells more and informs decisions to adjust up and down.
>>44418373
Yeah, I like that. It also fits better flavor wise, like she's rifling through her spell book for more fun stuff and tossing out the rest.
>>44418467
>>44418472
There we go then.
>Makra, Envoy of Excitment (3)
>U/W/R
>At the end of your turn or whenever a spell is cast put a excitement counter on Makra
>At the beginning of your upkeep you may remove X excitement counters and choose one of the following:
>Draw up to X cards then discard that many cards.
>Deal X damage to up to X target creatures.
>Search your hand, library and graveyard for an enchantment with converted mana cost X or less and put it onto the battlefield then shuffle your library. You cant cast spells this turn.
>17/4
I guess however/whoever ends up making these.
Are infinites poor form?
I've got a shitload in my decks.
>>44419441
Depends on who you're playing with.
It's a casual format, so you'll see everything under the sun. I get the feeling Hawk is tired of my extra turns, though.
>>44419517
I used Pili-Pala and Grand Architect for infinite mana. Spike was not pleased.
>>44419671
I like Blue Sun's Zenith kills with that mana.
>>44418358
>>44412608
Updated:
Kalen, Dimir Codemaster (3-4)
BU
Sorcery cards in your hand with a converted mana cost gain Cipher.
(B)(U),(t), sacrifice a creature. Target creature gains unblockable until end of turn.
20/7
Making a deck for him now. The sac cost of his activated ability is a sticking point since you want to maximize the number of sorceries you are packing.
What turn are games won/decided in this format? Figuring out curves at this point. Assume a power level of 3-4.
>>44420741
Games tend to go pretty long because of the singleton nature and because, well, there's lots of untapped potential because there's so many adversaries.
>>44420916
Unless you're playing/playing against a combo deck. Or playing with one of the more busted Adversaries at 4 (or whom belong at 4 but aren't).
>>44420916
>>44420933
Will army of the damned or clone legion ever resolve?
>>44420741
*remove the *with a converted mana cost* This failed to delete...for some reason.
>>44420741
Art in case someone wants to make him.
>>44421095
I resolve Army of the Damned all the time.
