Ramp edition. (Mo' mana, mo' problems.)
>To make cards, download MSE for free from here
http://magicseteditor.sourceforge.net/
>Formatting Guide
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jn1J1Mj-EvxMxca8aSRBDj766rSN8oSQgLMOXs10BUM
>Mechanics doc (For the making of color pie appropriate cards)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgaKCOzyqM48dFdKRXpxTDRJelRGWVZabFhUU0RMcEE
>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
>Q: What is precedence?
A: http://pastebin.com/pGxMLwc7
>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
>Old thread
>>44400468
>>44454068
does that make sense for an Elk to do?
>>44454212
Elk are not noble.
Have you ever met an Elk?
They're cunts.
Any way to word it so you can't have two of these going at the same time? Don't want to have such an easy hard lock.
I also have no idea what to call this.
>>44454376
Is the intent that they skip every other untap step?
"Whenever a permanent becomes tapped, that permanent doesn't untap during it's controller's next untap step"
Possibly not quite what you want, but somewhat close?
>>44454446
>ramps you by untapping a land
>de-ramps you by phasing out a land
>gets blown out by instant speed removal
I like cards with downsides, but what is this card even supposed to do?
Landfall? Instants?
>>44454645
look at the size of the snake compared to the city, rethink the manacost and power toughness
>>44454696
maybe it's a tiny city?
>>44454634
>Is the intent that they skip every other untap step?
Yes.
>"Whenever a permanent becomes tapped, that permanent doesn't untap during it's controller's next untap step"
Thanks, that'll probably work just fine.
>>44454650
Jerk off all over Titania, Protector of Argoth, maybe?
>>44454650
If you already have a land in yard, you're never down a land in response to removal since it reanimates one before it sacs one.
>Ramp Edition
Check it. In this set, each color is "tilted", and has an equal focus on both the classic abilities of the color, and the more fringe case stuff.
Here's the black commons for the set, which feature a heavy sacrifice and creature death theme, as well as mono-black Swamp-based ramp.
Any critiques and name-calling would be appreciated. Feel free to tell me my shit stinks, but at least explain why so I can improve it.
>>44455252
Is there enough precedence for Swamp based ramp beyond Korlash? It can search for them to hand as part of its tutoring capability, but I can't find any other example of being able to put them onto the field.
>>44455716
Well, that's the thing, isn't it?
There's plenty that sticks it in your hand, so I'm taking it one (logical) step further and jamming it onto the field directly. There's also massive history of black getting black-based ramp, from Cabal Coffers to Crypt Ghast.
CB07-Unceasing Ooze is meant to be a "colorshifted" Rampant Growth for black in light of this, and a fair number of cards care about the number of Swamps you control.
>>44455801
>so I'm taking it one (logical) step further
Please be careful with this sort of logic.
>Blue can put creatures from the battlefield into their owners' hands.
>Blue can counter creature spells, putting them into the graveyard.
>The next "logical" step is to combine both effects so Blue can send creatures on the battlefield into the graveyard.
>>44455949
>named Wastes
Wizards makes anus mana a thing, but they can't make a basic land subtype for it?
>>44454212
It's an undead elk, at what point do you draw the line of what it "makes sense" for any of that to be happening? If it makes sense to you in the setting then it makes sense.
>>44454446
This is pretty sweet. You could maybe find a way to reduce the cost by 1 since the main effect is hard to abuse but it's also probably fine as is.
>>44455162
Seems annoying as shit in a normal deck (for both players, since it's hard to control when the fog happens) and potentially downright broken in a deck that is almost entirely lands. I appreciate the design but am essentially concerned about how fun it would actually make the game.
>>44455252
Lost in the Dark seems a tad strong. It could be a sorcery, cost 1B, only count basics or maybe some combination of the two and still be a solid removal spell.
Cruel Irony could cost slightly less. You'll probably build to abuse it with tokens or something and can time it well so it's not exactly symmetrical in impact but it's still a bit slow. I'd test it at around 1BB or 3B and go from there.
Festering Troll is just really bland, 4 power deathtouch is fairly lame when you could just get something that kills everything in one hit anyway at that price and that actually threatens more face damage. At the very least you could give it some sort of regeneration effect, it is a troll and seems like it would be most likely to see use in decks that want to focus on grinding out the opponent through attrition so that gives it some slight glimmer of hope to maybe see a tiny bit of play.
Reckless Hate is pretty weak, it doesn't push much damage and looks like you will just 2-for-1 yourself for 3 mana most of the time.
In general black uses rituals rather than ramp, things like Swampsucker seem fine but you should probably avoid stuff like Unceasing Ooze. There are better ways to make black ramp work other than just giving them green cards, especially since they're enemies.
>>44456026
Domain too stronk.
So can we talk about how they're printing a land that is strictly better than a basic in the exact same set that the new basic is introduced? That's pretty poor design, right?
>>44456088
Speaking of the new basic, this would have been the perfect time to do Barry's Land. Seriously, why does it not have a subtype? They wanted to do it then specifically to support domain up to 6 but all of the reasons they couldn't boiled down to "the rules manager doesn't want us to add a sixth basic land to the game and the alternative abilities are too complex." Apparently the rules manager was wrong so why didn't we finally get the unreleased domain support card?
Opinions? It's my first attempt at a card.
>>44456194
>first attempt at a card
>Flip card
>ohboyherewego.jpg
>Wall of text
>Demon
>Keyword kitchen sink
NOOOPE.
>>44456178
Cards that are strictly better than wastes already exist so it doesn't matter.
>>44456255
Okay. Thanks for the feedback.
>>44455920
That's fair. It's also why I'm vetting them here before moving any further.
>>44456070
>Lost in the Dark
Gotta say I agree. Changed to 1B, Instant, any creature p/t less than number of basic swamps.
>Cruel Irony
Moved to 2BB, and we'll see how it goes. I'm a little hesitant on giving black a common wipe-ish effect.
>Festering Troll
Yeah, that thing is pretty phoned in. I was looking to give black a curve-topper, but felt like I needed to give it a keyword. I'll try 6/6 for 4BB with 2B: Regen.
>Reckless Hate
Not every card has to be good, but this one is a couple of different card ideas mashed into one.
Changed to 2B, Instant, Target creature you control gets +1/+1 for each basic Swamp you control and gains deathtouch until end of turn. Sacrifice it at the beginning of the next end step.
This lets it trade with something early on, and get a hefty pump to close out a game.
As I said earlier, the point of the set is to expand on the edge cases of each color while highlighting their central themes. Since black gets black ramp, it feels fitting that it has a strictly worse Rampant Growth.
Thanks for the input!
>>44456344
Black doesn't get 6/6 for 6 cmc at common
>>44456286
Like I care. Your card reeks of bait.
>>44456178
There are already a bunch of strictly-better Wastes that I'm not too bothered. They really half-assed the implementation though, like a lot of other things in Return to Zendikar.
>>44456194
You really need to look at official cards for proper wording of abilities, specifically the updated oracle version. Your card is also doing a lot of things that blue does not get to do. Props at least for getting split art.
>>44456380
Didn't someone make a chart that broke down all the P/T of creatures for each color at different CMCs and rarities?
>>44456380
>6/6 for 6 in black
I've been working on green for too long. Let's try 5/4 for 4BB.
>>44456194
>>44456286
I honestly thought it was a joke post but on the off chance that you are a real person:
- Specifically untapping a land isn't really blue, when they get it at all it's normally in the form of a general "untap permanent" effect. It seems like a minor quibble but it's the first three words and sends up a red flag.
- A 3 cmc creature that taps to draw a card is really good, you'd normally get looting at that cost. You certainly wouldn't get it with several other upsides and no cost other than tapping.
- The second ability doesn't do anything as written and I'm honestly not sure what the intent is. Whatever the case, this will never gain soul counters and thus will never flip.
- On the flipped side, blue doesn't get either first strike or regeneration and regeneration is a keyword action like scry so doesn't actually do anything when just written on a card on its own. I can't keep my head twisted like that long enough to read the ability but there's enough wrong here that it doesn't seem entirely necessary, the card already needs a complete reworking.
So again I'm assuming you're just trolling for replies (if so don't flatter yourself, I have way too much time on my hands and sometimes talk to literally nobody so that's a pretty low bar) but if this was an honest attempt you should spend a little more time to looking over actual cards in Gatherer to get a better sense of things.
>>44456267
True, but I was partially expecting them to turn over a new leaf. That they're apparently going to continue to print lands that are significantly better than Wastes sends a strange signal, this is one of the biggest changes to the game ever and yet it essentially isn't going to matter at all in most formats since you will have more than enough "T: Add Anus" lands to fill out your mana base without even touching them. It will see use in standard and EDH but that's probably it. At least a subtype would have given it some sort of niche edge over other cards.
>>44456648
I'd hardly rate this as a massive change, as most of it is just a different syntax. Wastes just seem like something for limited and a bit of a bone for EDH.
>>44456397
As far as I know, he only did it for vanilla creatures.
>>44456483
Possibly with the double black. Note that there are only two 6 cmc black creatures with power 5 or greater - Bog Serpent (5U 5/5 with downsides) and Twisted Abomination (5U 5/3 B:Regen and swampcycling 2).
I wanted Eyes to be a thing.Grant us eyes, Kos
>>44456748
Yup—I was just looking through Gatherer to doublecheck my intuition.
Using Twisted Abomination as a reference, I feel comfortable giving it and extra point of toughness with 2B additional to regen, and no Swampcycling upside.
>>44456748
Any links?
>>44456344
I can understand the urge to warp the pie for the sake of novel gameplay, I've flirted with the idea of making counterspells and card draw 5-color so I'm not in much of a position to judge. Just know that this is a fairly large deviation if it becomes a major feature of the set, ramp and rituals are very different things. It wouldn't be particularly difficult to at least disguise it better either, something like "1B, You may discard a card, Return target Swamp from your graveyard to the battlefield tapped" works in black's graveyard recursion territory.
>>44456397
This one? I apparently also have more detailed versions for just blue and white saved if someone is interested in seeing those for some reason, you never know what is going to be a helpful reference.
>>44456797
>Grant us eyes, Kos
For a second I thought you were talking about Agrus Kos. I mean, you were talking about Kozilek, right?
>>44456865
Thank you kindly. Heh, looking at that chart reminds of me Endless One, and how, despite being incredibly simple, it beats out a large amount of creatures at any CMC.
I'm thinking about designing a 200ish card limited set with the gimmick that black was utterly destroyed by white. What are your thoughts?
Would you run it?
>>44456843
I like this
>>44456969
No. It's a freaking nightmare right now. Why noncombat damage when it doesn't even have a ping ability? Why not a replacement effect?
>>44456865
Doesn't seem particularly useful since it doesn't distinguish color weight. How often are you making vanilla creatures anyways that you can't just look them up?
>>44456969
Somewhat interesting fight legend. I think it should be any damage, and adjust costs to suit.
>>44457059
>Why noncombat damage when it doesn't even have a ping ability?
I didn't wanna reprint Beguiler of Wills, I wanted to do something flavorful. He turns Fight spells into creature stealing, as long as he's stronger than them. I wasn't aware that a card needed to be an all-in-one package to be viable.
>>44457142
>I wasn't aware that a card needed to be an all-in-one package to be viable.
Eh, it doesn't. My stupid brain just has trouble looking at designs that don't support themselves.
>He turns Fight spells into creature stealing, as long as he's stronger than them.
??? Nothing about the card says anything about power, or the amount of reins counters. I think you missed something.
>>44457258
The implication is that you have to use a fight spell to trigger the ability, but it'd be useless if Miraag didn't survive (i.e. he fights Kozilek or some shit, he's not gonna survive to gain control of it) so he has to be stronger than what he fights for it to work
>>44457263
Wrong thread dude. But I will tell you right now that SJWs and the identity politics that influences them are a cancer on society. Their very philosophy pits them against everyone else in the world, and they use bullying, blacklisting, censorship, and slander to get what they want. However, they are self-defeating, as extremist opinions become more and more prevalent, pushing the moderates out, making their communities smaller and smaller, as well as more outwardly and obviously toxic, thus decreasing their sway over others.
>>44457319
This is what happens when I stay up too late.
>>44457319
Note that since it's a triggered ability rather than a replacement effect, he's going to kill the creature before the regeneration happens.
>>44457258
His cost and p/t seem at odds with his abilities.
>>44455162
Lost in the Woods is a card, and this is several magnitudes more powerful.
>>44457358
How so? Yes, I am this ignorant of Magic. This is exactly why my cards take fucking forever to complete.
>>44457357
Good catch, will edit the wording
>>44457383
Not him, but I say just replace the damage Miraag would deal with a counter.
>If ~ would deal noncombat damage to another creature, put a reins counter on that creature instead.
>>44457382
The decks he would support want a much lower curve than he is
>>44457448
OK. Well, the art is clearly a Giant. I guess I'll have to find something else. Oh right, any recommendations on CMC and P/T?
>>44457494
4/4 is a pretty common giant p/t. 5 cmc would be a better cost
>>44457620
landfall abuse and ramp in a self-mill style? Me likey, though I have to ask was it your intent for the ability to be useless when targeting nonbasics that enter tapped or have ETB costs?
>>44457549
OK, thanks.
>>44457770
You also keep in mind that the only thing red about it is first strike.
>>44457770
I would have gone with 'Redirect all damage that would be dealt to other creatures you control to ~.'
Also no lifelink.
>>44457811
The equipment thing and making your other creatures bigger is also red. Argus Kos and Jor Kadeen say hi.
>>44453711
I'd like a sideways ovoid shape of the astrolical cancer symbol, with another circle in the middle, if possible. If it's easier to make the three circles overlap, or make it have an overall circular shape, I'm a taker.
>>44454376
What on earth does this do.
>>44454446
That's really nice :D
>>44454696
What the fuck. Don't you know about Reptile Habitat Furnishing. Jesus.
>>44454779
That's really good. Feels like it should cost more, but it can't. Maybe G cost, kicker [1U/R]?
>>44455162
Ehhh. Other two anon's are right on point.
>>44455933
Rather have:
"For each card in target player's hand, that player discards it unless he or she pays [1]."
It still would be really good.
>>44455949
Need more anus.
>>44455986
Ha. Nice. Probably would sit better at uncommon though.
>>44456026
Wastes is basic.
>>44456088
Cool card. I'd play it, somewhere.
>>44456178
That's shit design, over a shit design of a 6th color that does about 70% of what each other color does. Maybe not black, but can't say I care much about this block.
>>44456802
That's broken :[
Make it cost XX.
>>44456843
THIS IS GOOD.
>>44456865
I wouldn't mind seeing some bleeding myself, if it's little, well distributed, and makes sense.
A Unified Will for creatures, in white, I'm game.
Dash Hopes was fun.
>>44456969
Nope.
>>44457258
Dash gooood. I'd remove the FS though. It's a bit too win-more, and nigh useless at power 6+
>>44457382
Cut FS, and vigilance, and make him a 3/3. I understand muhlore, but it's pretty insane, and he's not gonna be blocked. You could maybe give him a situational hexproof.
>>44457620
Nice, it could be cmc 2, and just be green, but, it's your card.
>>44457720 I hope so.
>>44457830
What's the point when he has indestructible? Besides, I actually want Hexproof so the opponent can still hurt your creatures with stuff that damages all creatures, or just all your creatures. Supes can't save everyone.
>>44457811
What >>44457852 said. I've always seen Equipment interaction as being something that should really be explored in RW. And Red and White are pretty much the only colors that interact with Equipment positively.
>>44448529
Yey!
>>44457852
You could make it a white card without batting an eye. Its fine to leave it as is, but it could use something that makes it a bit more red leaning. As it is it's basically armament master and puresteel paladin stapled together.
>>44457896
>Wastes is basic.
My questions was why didn't they made a separate subtype for Wastes.
>Luminescent Lotus
Eh, maybe if others say it's too strong. No offense to you, I'm going off the advice of a few other anons from before. (There was an earlier version that allowed you to make mana in any combinations of colors, and some anons suggested just getting one color.)
>Batman
I'll keep an eye on him.
>You could maybe give him a situational hexproof.
The exile ability is his protection instead of Hexproof.
>>44457720
>>44457896
>Nice, it could be cmc 2, and just be green, but, it's your card.
I'm fine with it not working with taplands. The biggest concern was fetches which is why I edge it up to 3.
>>44457896
Thanks for the feedback!
>>44457989
>Luminescent Lotus
At three colors its a Gilded Lotus, which while a good card was not tremendously powerful in its standard environments.
>>44457989
No offense taken, but compare it to Darksteel Ingot, Astral Cornucopia, Everflowing Chalice, or Gilded Lotus.
Ah I misread a Batman bit. He's way better than I thought at first. I'd remove the evergreens then.
>>44456843
I didn't know I could get hard from a card. I learned something today.
>>44458685
Tweaked these cards from the last posting, taking into account feedback.
A bit of background on the set: It's set 2 in a savage-themed block, centered around a huge inter-tribal war sparked by the destruction of a powerful artifact that resulted in all the monocolor tribes splitting up over the loss of their figureheads (each color was made up of two families, and those families are now at war with each other across all colors). This resulted in new factions of enemy color pairs headed up by opportunistic new leadership, and that's where things are at right now. So, basically, RW and BW are fighting over control of W, and so on.
Each color combo is getting one non-evergreen keyword, and one new keyword ability, for reference.
Changes:
New BG keyword ability: Grisly (replaced Reclaim, which seemed pretty boring). I wondered why there weren't more cards that rewarded recycling, and so I decided to try a keyword ability that does so. I also like how it plays off Morbid in a fluffy way. Downside is it might be too narrow and/or parasitic to play well, since it relies on other mechanics to work. I considered removing Morbid and replacing it with Undying, since the set will use +1/+1 counters. Thoughts on that?
New UR keyword: Aspire (replaces Versatile, which basically functioned on being equipped or enchanted). I like the "second spell" mechanics, so I decided to try making them a theme. Also, note that UR's non-evergreen theme keyword isn't suitable for creatures, so it couldn't be on this one. It's going to either be Rebound or Flashback most likely, but I haven't decided yet.
I'll root through the thread and post some feedback while I tinker and wait to be told how ho-hum these are.
>>44459367
I agree with replacing Morbid with Undying, and suggest replacing converge with Sunburst - you need more simple keywords as all your new keyword abilities are open-ended.
There's not very many cards that reward grabbing cards from your graveyard because that itself is usually its own enough reward. Aspire is cool enough. Fervent should probably just be "when this creature dies during combat" (see Cathedral Membrane).
>>44459213
Very neat. Fits the colors very well too, well done. Cost should be appropriate too.
>>44458685
9 lines is a bit extreme. The concept is pretty neat, but the verbosity plus the "fateseal on roids" feel this has has some unfun vibes. I can't comment on the costing except to say it feels a touch cheap.
>>44458590
More wordswordswords. Interesting concept, but again, it's so wordy it's a turn off. As flavorful as the gold token option is, I would get rid of it and keep the other three.
>>44457770
I don't care for Supes having lifelink. I also think he'd be more flavorful with Absorb than Indestructible, since he isn't truly invulnerable, especially to magic and extreme trauma (well, maybe not true now, who knows, his powers haven't been set in stone EVER).
>>44457620
Apt Golgari ramp. Would giving it haste be too strange? I just picture this thing slapping down manlands, and haste isn't unheard of in green and black.
>>44457258
Hm. This guy seems too buff. 6/6 first strike for 7, even in multicolor, is already amazing as hell.
>>44456969
This just feels too convoluted to be good. Simple is better for this type of thing.
>>44456926
Having attempted a set that didn't have a color represented in monocolor, I can tell you it's HARD. It's gonna be a huge challenge, and you can expect people not to buy into it.
>>44456866
>if you do, untap that creature and it gains haste until end of turn
I think?
I like the card all around. Would EDH with.
>>44459464
>Morbid
Alright, will do. It seemed pretty obvious to do but I thought I would ask first.
>converge
I think they are gonna kill sunburst, and I'm not sure fiddling with all the counters is necessarily easier or cleaner.
>Fervent
Oh oops, I didn't save the current version. I did change it to be more like Cathedral Membrane as suggested last thread, but thanks for catching that, I'll fix the collage.
>Aspire
Glad this seems fun.
>>44459367
Couldn't you use 'When this creature dies during combat' for fervent?
>>44460037
Yes, as I mentioned in a subsequent post I accidentally posted the wrong version of that card, since someone suggested Cathedral Membrane wording last thread. Change has been made.
>>44457896
I'm not too thrilled with how it's going. Trying to find a way to preserve the white outline on the inside of the Cancer "arms."
I'll chip away at it some more. Have a mockup, though.
>>44460392
That's looking pretty good c:!
You could try maybe make them overlap, and move them a little, if it makes it better.
>>44461711
"In that card's mana cost"
The game can't really see the text box normally.
Make the tokens Elementals, like every other 3/1 with haste. Dragons are bigger than that. Even illusions.
The activated ability is a bit pushed, it might not even need it.
>>44456648
Hey, thanks! I really appreciate everything you've pointed out, and I'll get to reworking it!
So I'm working on a Sci-fi themed set with a Robots vs Aliens backdrop, and I'm having trouble coming up with group abilities. So far I've got this
>R/W - Human faction with Fast robots (Valkyries, Scopedogs, the like)
>Transform - Literally the same as it was in Innistrad
>G/R - Human faction with Super Robots (Mazingers, Getters, Voltrons, etc)
>Hotblood - This Creature gets +1/+0 for each other attacking creature with Hotblood.
>B/G - Hivemind Alien faction (The Flood, basically)
>Infest - When this creature deals combat damage to a player, that player takes the top card of their deck and puts it into play face down under your control as a 0/1 Broodmite with "Sacrifice Broodmite: Deal 1 damage to target creature."
The other two factions I had coming up were a U/B second alien faction who were more space-elf like with a focus on drawing/discarding and a W/U human faction (Though this could be changed to a third alien faction) using gundam expys. The problem is I barely play Blue and can't come up with good abilities for either of them. What do you guys think would work?
I know I'm using Vigilance a lot. I'm trying to cut down on it, but having it on this guy opens up some interesting options.
>>44458551
The difference between Luminescent Lotus and those cards is that they can be paid with colorless, no, sorry, GENERIC mana. (Fuck you Wizards.) And Luminescent is always 5 mana, so you'll have to assemble three colors just to get as much mana as a Gilded Lotus.
>>44459516
>Supes
Yeah, I've gotten a few suggestions about removing Lifelink. I'll remove it. Not sure on Absorb though, going to stick with Indestructible for now at least.
>Siegfried
Already changed to 4/4 for 3RW.
>Shiklah
Wording modified from Dominus of Fealty.
>>44463961
>Hotblood
Sounds an awful lot like Battlecry. Mechanic also doesn't feel very RG.
>Infest
Please look at more Oracle wording on actual Magic cards. For the record, face-down permanents are always 2/2.
>>44464316
>face-down permanents
Face-down CARDS, sorry.
>>44459367
>Savage anon on a second set
I have been gone for a while! I can't say much that hasn't already been said, but I do agree that there are too many ability words here. Also, not seeing a custom keyword for a new set is odd; is there any particular reason that you're avoiding it?
Anyway, nice to see you again, anon!
>>44457989
>My questions was why didn't they made a separate subtype for Wastes.
see >>44456088
>>44457896
>That's shit design, over a shit design of a 6th color that does about 70% of what each other color does. Maybe not black, but can't say I care much about this block.
Colorless already did a shit copies of every other color's shtick.
>>44456194
Flip cards *cannot* flip back. Period.
You probably want two sided cards which, among other things, are able to transform back.
I like pacts.
>>44467066
Pact of Inspiration just goes into combo decks, as its not something you want to use reactively. Black doesn't strip abilities, and even without that it's likely still undercosted as an instant one-sided Infest.
>>44467175
>>44467175
I suppose the black upkeep could cost a little more.
The combo applications of the blue one speak for themselves, but it isn't a terrible thing to hold up, if it's a question of stopping a win or irreparable damage to your board. Obviously main phasing two of them into a win con is much more appealing but I think it's reasonably situated.
>>44467194
>Time Spiral
>>44467363
It's kind of Turn to Froggy but it's not like every TS block card was off color.
>>44461711
This is crazy at that cost. Every turn you spawn about 6-9 chargers and get +1 CA for zero mana, plus it can't be bolted for good measure. It basically reads "1UURR, your opponent loses if they can't remove this within two turns tops and even then is probably far enough behind to die shortly after."
>>44456385
Look, I'm sorry. I'm just a fan trying to express my love by contributing something. Another poster was kind enough to give me genuine feedback, for which I'm grateful. Apparently there's still a lot for me to learn, and I should have tempered my excitement to produce this card with a more thorough understanding of the rules. My misunderstanding had caused a lot of ill will. I cannot profess my regret any more without sacrificing my integrity. Is that what you wish?
>>44468127
OK, I'll try harder to give you useful feedback next time. However, until you are more comfortable with the rules, I recommend you stay away from the following things: Multicolor; Phyrexian, hybrid, or snow mana; and unique card frames (DFC, flip, etc.). I also recommend you read the image in the OP, as well as read the various links in the OP about Magic design.
>>44468260
I did, however there were things I clearly didn't properly comprehend, such as how to make a card multicolor (which sounds severely retarded in retrospect) and which I plan to fix by converting the cost to 1BU, or possibly even ramp up the cost to 2BU, as well as fix and streamline the trigger. However, I will also practice first with standard style card creation and get feedback for that, since there are clearly some basics I've failed to grasp.
>>44469508
Modular should go first. I'd also put up the reminder text.
>>44456194
>>44468127
>>44468385
If you don't visit these threads often you should know that we do occasionally get trolls posting questionable cards purely to get a rise out of people, which probably accounts for some of the negativity you've seen. The card has a lot of faults but the basic concept isn't unsalvageable, here's another stab at it. It lost a lot in translation mostly due to design preference, this version gives the player the choice over when the flip him but makes him much more vulnerable in the demon form if you didn't build a lot of counters first which should lead to interesting games for both sides of the table. There's a good chance it's not particularly balanced though, something like a 6/4 flipside or a higher cost could be in order. That's what playtesting is for though, once you get the core idea refined it's just a matter of tweaking numbers until it all flows right.
There are many ways to execute this card, you should try making several more drafts and compare each of them to things in Gatherer. It's a good way to practice your grasp of design while also seeing how close you're getting to the real thing and which ideas are too far off the mark.
>>44465157
I'm using a lot of ability words because the first set was French vanilla, and this one is a loose association of tribes, so i thought ability words would fit the theme. The next set will have custom keywords. Though, i have a lot of people questioning it, so i dunno. It's funny; you make custom keywords and everyone questions if they should exist but if you don't, they ask where your custom keywords are. Oh well. Well see how it feels once i get a few cards made i suppose.
Also i have been around; i was the one making the wizard and civil war sets. But thanks, i did kinda take a hiatus too.
>>44470905
> It's funny; you make custom keywords and everyone questions if they should exist but if you don't, they ask where your custom keywords are.
That's only if you make BAD custom keywords, anon.
>>44471043
I wish that were true.
>>44471791
Are there really a bunch of anons going around giving people shit for no good reason?
>>44471765
>[...] If you do, put a soul counter on ~.
>Remove a soul counter from ~: Regenerate equipped creature.
Meh. Kinda wish it gave some kind of combat or P/T bonus, but I can't really complain at this cost.
>>44471791
>There exists no such thing as subjectivity.
>>44471979
>Meh. Kinda wish it gave some kind of combat or P/T bonus, but I can't really complain at this cost.
What if it was 2 to cast and 0 to equip?
>>44472051
A not shitty Experiment Kraj for 2 cheaper? Hot damn.
>>44469530
For 3 CMC draw two and put any lands you drew straight into play? Should be uncommon.
>>44472051
Hmm... Well, considering that it entirely relies on you having an effective creature already, sure, try that.
>Card
Nice.
>>44471979
No, it does. My statement doesn't deny it either, but be needlessly contrarian if you want.
>>44471928
It's not as bad as all that. But it can be frustrating when people critique but offer no constructive input to resolve the claimed issue. I know I'm not posting these cards just to jack off about them so getting genuine feedback is nice. If you don't like something then say why, essentially. It helps everyone involved. I certainly appreciate the anons who do though, whether they like my stuff or not.
Also fuck captcha making me copy paste codes on my phone for every post.
The name sucks, I know. I just can't thing on a good name for this card.
>>44473390
Man you really do have a hardon for blocking chioces don't you. I think the combat damage trigger is a bit much.
>>44473829
Vengeance ward?
>>44473910
Nice. I could use it.
>>44473647
Sorry, but you sounded like someone butthurt over having a custom keyword of your rejected.
>>44473832
I want to keep the trigger. I am open to changing pretty much everything else (CMC, P/T, etc.) though. Or I could do a tradeoff thing. Like, the player has to pay so much life or you get all their dead creatures. Or should it charge life for each creature? Maybe sac creatures/permanents?
>>44474050
Nah, i try very hard these days not to get too married to the stuff i make. Too many screw ups and bad ideas to think so highly of myself. I'd rather make something that works and is enjoyable, but i do sometimes try to maintain "feel"as much as i can.
As for the card, i like the idea of them having to pay a tax for each critter they dont want you to have.
Why is photojoiner stupid as shit now? And this piece of crap is even worse.
You can see the meat and potatoes anyway.
>>44474608
This is a mess. The best way I could think to correctly word this is
>Trample
>As ~ enters the battlefield, choose a color that isn't black or green.
>When no players control a creature of the chosen color, sacrifice ~.
That said it could be streamlined some as "When no players control a nonblack, nongreen creature, sacrifice ~."
>>44474674
I know that it's a mess, but I really need to make colorless to act as "color" on this card (and others) because of their importance in this set.
>>44474657
Worded weirdly and completely busted. Instant speed, on-curve, token generation with protection from whatever you want?
At first I thought you might have meant X creature tokens with protection but as is it's still pretty overpowered.
Protection is bad and is being phased out for a reason.
I'm not sure what you could offer as a replacement, seeing this color hate cycle you're doing, but at the very least this should not be uncommon.
>>44474760
I really wanted to make it have protection or at least something that "hate" the choosen color because of the cycle.
But I was also thinking on other concept for that card.
>>44474948
This is much better. I assume English isn't your first language, but the grammar and MTG syntax could use work. Also, there are a lot of "memory issues" with this card because everyone will have to remember the color you choose and what you paid for X, so the X should go.
>Enchant creature
>As Inner Spirit Mastery enters the battlefield, choose colorless or a color that isn't red or white.
>Whenever enchanted creature blocks or becomes blocked by a creature of the chosen color, it gets +X/+X until end of turn."
It wouldn't be unreasonable to also give first strike, considering how compartmentalized the effect is. Maybe make the enchantment cost 2RW and give the creature +4+/4 when conditions are met.
>>44467307
>Obviously main phasing two of them into a win con is much more appealing but I think it's reasonably situated
You are wrong. For a fair amount of combo decks, your card is better than ancestral recall.
Immolation is also scary for burn decks, but not as broken.
>>44474985
Holy mother of broken. Annihilator is a dead keyword too.
I think the new Eldrazi keyword Ingest would be better and maybe the "main" ability could be a "processor" kind of thing, like "Whenever a card would be put into your graveyard from anywhere, you may put a card an opponent owns from exile into that player's graveyard. If you do, put the first card into your hand instead."
Just an idea. As is, this thing is gross. If that's what you were going for, mission accomplished.
>>44475160
Recall can't whiff. If you get greedy and/or don't go into your win with the pact, you lost.
Granted if Treasure Cruise got banned in the formats it did I imagine that would as well. Not saying it isn't busted.
>>44475071
Done. About the first strike, it'd be nice, but I really can't put it without making the card more wordy.
>>44475162
>Annihilator is a dead keyword too.
Say that to the big guy of Bala Ged.
>>44475310
Exile-anator isn't Annihilator.
Granted, in a lot of ways it's way better, but it shouldn't exist and neither should its ancestor. I was pretty bewildered when R&D printed Bane of Bala Ged, but I guess they didn't perjure themselves because they said they wouldn't reprint Annihilator.
>>44475443
Annihilator was a problem as a keyword, not because of its effect.
>>44475241
I said a 'fair amount' not all of them, but yes.
>>44475561
I don't like this cycle. It reads more complicated than it really is, and there's memory issues especially when multiple are on the field. At the very least, it should be "choose white black or green" and find your colorless hate somewhere else.
>>44475511
It was absolutely for its effect, it's "unfun". Why else would so many commander games just be races to resolve an Eldrazi titan? "I'm winning, now I get to win even more and you can't have lands."
Bala Ged was at least only what, 2? And it's 1 card. If anyone uses it in standard I doubt they run 4. It also isn't legendary, so can't be Goryo's Vengeance'd out in modern. It's hardly analogous to the Annihilator titans.
>>44475762
Not that guy, but I've also heard that the problem with Annihilator was the fact that it showed up so often, and the effect in and of itself wasn't that bad.
>>44474361
How's this?
>>44475762
That's not much different to resolving an Iona or Jin-Gitaxias. Annihilator was a problem as they had to use it everywhere.
>>44475825
Glorious.
>>44475749
Ok, I think that you're right. I'll leave the colorless hate for another time. I'll also think in a way to make this cycle less problematic.
>>44477087
"If that card is countered this way, reveal the top card of your library. If it's a land card, put it into your hand. Otherwise, put that card into your graveyard."
Might be better like Coiling Oracle that dumps it to the battlefield if it's a land and to the hand otherwise.
>>44477163
The wording that I used is also correct, see Sinbad. Also, I really want the discard trigger because my set has a keyword called Mania, which is pretty much neo-Madness. Also, there's Ritualism.
Coiling Oracle + hatecolor Counter would be cool, but it would also increase the cost, which is something that I don't really want. >>44472051
>>44456178
Theoretically, it's easier to hunt for basic lands, making Sea Gate Wreckage not -strictly- better.
Although fuck, it's still pretty damn close, and that's kind of a shit rare.
Some minor tweaks (sorry about posting these so much, but I would really rather have my mechanics set in stone before I start making too many cards, so bear with me and I appreciate all the input, thanks anons)
Changes:
>Morbid
Dropped for Undying; I think this will help with some anon's critiques about there being too many ability words; now UG is the only real offender, but I really don't want to use Evolve or Graft and Converge is nice because you only have to worry about it on-cast, so it's not like the others where you have to track the triggers.
>Oppressor
Changed to care about lands. The idea is that it stops being so win-more, and now has a use in helping you if you have a lot of lands, or topdeck some late game. Downside is now it's weak against ramp (so green), but the new upside is that now with the types of exile that BW has access to, you can use Oppressor to help you with a key land exile/destruction, for example.
Thoughts?
>>44477636
>Mania
So, Madness but without the mana cost, and without the ability to just draw-go and discard down for cheap spells? Hm.
>>44477087
Well, my only critique is that if you have to awkwardly word cards to make them work with your mechanics, you might need to rework your mechanics slightly. As a suggestion to change Mania so you can use the Coiling Oracle wording for this:
"Mania -- If ~ would be put into the graveyard from anywhere but the battlefield or stack, <do thing>."
This is funny because it bones mill too, and Cranial Extraction type stuff that yards your cards. But it's really up to you; some folks have referencing the stack, and what you have works well enough I suppose.
>>44476456
Comparing this to Glaring Spotlight, only for the reason that it can pick and choose what to remove I think it should be uncommon. But it's a good card otherwise.
>>44476436
I really like this, but question if it should be rare just because of the tap ability. That's a blowout waiting to happen in Limited, at uncommon.
>>44476111
I personally think the Bestow cost can be cheaper since it's out of color, but it'd need playtesting to be sure. I like the card otherwise.
>>44479022
Oppressor is now fairer, but doesn't feel very WB (more GR or GU if anything). Perhaps nonland permanents? Encourages going wide with tokens or harder-to-remove enchantments. It doesn't necessarily have to be win-more if you tailor the effects to help you preserve your lead rather than pushing you over the top.
>>44479022
>but question if it should be rare just because of the tap ability
The first or the third tap ability? If the first I can change it to choice between the two.
Thanks for your feedback!
>>44480184
Nonland could work, yeah. I'll give it a go and see how it feels. I just feel that BW would be the color combo that cares about how much of (generic) something you own, but yeah, lands weren't the best choice I suppose. I halfway figured since white can't tutor for shit and black can only ramp Swamps once in a while lands would be good but you're right about the flavor not really meshing, since green is the land color.
>tap ability
First one, yeah. Sorry, I didn't specify better. A choice might be okay, or you could strap a minor mana cost to it.
>>44479022
>So, Madness but without the mana cost, and without the ability to just draw-go and discard down for cheap spells? Hm.
Yes, it's like it becomes a different (and uncounterable) spell when you discard it. It's up to the player to think about whenever it's better to pay the cost or to use a discard ability.
It'll mostly be used in cheap spells, but big spells (like a wrath) could aslo have mania with something like "If a spell or ability causes you to discard ~, you may pay [cost]. If you do, do [action]".
About your wording that interacts with mill and Cranial Extraction, I think that it'd make it very hard to balance. I'd have to tone down almost every card with Mania. Also, my set also have Hellbent, Thresold and the Ritualism thing. Discarding is something that players would really need during draft.
>>44483278
Encoding is a cipher thing. While I think technically the "cast on damage" trigger is contained within the cipher keyword and not within the encoded state currently there are zero cards that encode a spell which would not create such a trigger so for all functional purposes this is either overpowered or just looks confusingly like a card that is underpowered. If you didn't intend for this to be a cipher variant you should choose another word, note how imprint also exiles things "attached" to other things so clearly the precedent is that each type of connection should named to optimize clarity.
Other than that I like the ability as a storage mechanic, there is a lot of design space there. This particular card should probably cost at least 2-3 though since it's much better than "U, 1/1, when it dies draw a card" in the vast majority of cases and that normally costs 1U with a small upside. You just need to test it a bunch to see how big that choice upside is to determine the amount of colorless or maybe just do UU to be both safe and cheap.
>>44481904
In that case it plays kinda like surge, but more narrow. I suppose you'll have to see how it feels in a draft to ensure it's not too parasitic.
>>44481904
The first ability seems to be based off of Miracle's reminder text ("You may cast this card...") but needs to be based off of the rules text ("You may reveal this card as you draw it... When you reveal this card this way, you may...") instead.
Survival bump.
>>44488244
Needs a type but other than that should be fine.
>>44483278
I think this keyword has lots of potential actually. Might steal it.
>mfw not enough lonely nerds to keep the thread alive
Dunno what i was expecting we can hardly keep them alive when the board is busy. Oh well, will post cards when i can access my pc
>>44490074
Go for it man, that's why I post these things.
>>44490596
>>44490074
Archive feels like a UR mechanic given the impulse draw red has andthat blue used to have.
>Page 10
FUCK
Does the "downside" of this justify the 1B, or should I cost it BB to be safe?
>>44495168
BB, I think. I'd personally make it rare but I don't think it has to be, given things like Go For the Throat and whatnot.
Now HERE'S a bad idea. Maybe. Ever since I made Totemic I thought this would be a neat card to make. It should probably cost 1G though, at least.
>>44496431
>Basic removal at rare
Urrgh
>>44496466
It's more due to the cost than the fact that it's removal. And WotC has been making basic removal more expensive as of late, so something that cheap would be a higher rarity for Limited. I mean they made Murderous Cut uncommon. It does chafe a bit I'll admit but all I can say is how I see 'em.
>>44490596
That mechanic is pretty boring, and that card should cost 2 less.
The interesting part about storm was that you would sometimes keep cards in your hand and give up tempo to gain value, for flow you give up tempo, to at most gain the same amount of tempo, it's basically pointless.
I wonder if a strictly better Bone Saw is okay.
Also, Happy New Year, /cct/.
Throwing ideas around.
>>44497655
>Honor Guard's Oath
If a source would deal damage to a creature with the chosen name, you may exile ~. If you do, prevent that damage.
>Snapcaster's Deception
have flashback. The flashback cost is equal to their mana cost.
>Spark of the Ancients
additional loyalty counter on them.
>>44497655
>>44497748
Oh and Snapcasters should be cards not spells as flashback functions in the grave not the stack.
>>44496547
Rare removal should be something special though. Uncommon is as high as basic removal should go as it's something black should have reliable access too.
>>44497748
All noted, thank you. Is your wording of Oath affecting "a creature" and not "a creature you control" intended critique? I can definitely see multiplayer politics opening up with that, but I don't think there's precedent in existing Hidden Agendas for the chosen name to extend to opponents' stuff.
>>44497655
Christ I really need to learn more about Conspiracy and the alternate forms of Magic; we have a lot more people making cards for them and I feel like I'm not qualified to give constructive feedback on them even though I want to contribute.
>>44497788
I dunno, these days 2 mana removal like that does seem fairly special, from what I can see. Though, I haven't looked through Gatherer as much as I should as of late either.
>>44497792
It doesn't really matter either way, its just less words and most of the time you'd be using it on your own stuff anyway.
>>44497795
I'm not sure we need an eternal witness with deathtouch, she's really good value already.
>>44497803
Rare removal is mostly either on creatures, hits more than one creature or hits planeswalkers.
>>44497795
Most of the Conspiracy stuff in the past two weeks or so has been me. My cards from now on are going to have that set symbol.
>>44497823
Fair enough. Text economy on hidden agendas is gonna be an important consideration, their reminder text is fucking massive.
>>44497837
This one is harder to cast, though perhaps I should make her less survivable and 2/1 like the card that inspired it. Also maybe it needs to be 2BG. I dunno, I'm still a touch rusty.
For this card, I thought it'd be interesting to experiment with tapdown in green. I know it's primarily blue and white, but Beast Within taught us that we can have a bit of fun with things as long as they kinda fit the color, which hopefully this does. With any luck the choice makes up for the fact that it is instant instead of a sorcery, but I can change it if need be of course.
>>44497852
Yeah that's fair I suppose.
>>44497855
Oh and snapcasters also needs to be instant or sorcery cards with the chosen name, as you can't flashback permanents. Syndic can also be a pain in multiplayer if more than one person has one.
>>44497876
Not so much harder to cast to warrant it. The trouble is that it's not different enough from EW to be worth the design space in my mind.
>>44497876
This might be an issue as you can't tap an already tapped creature. Normally this isn't an issue as the game just skips over impossible actions but this has a condition riding on it.
>>44497929
I think you can, actually; that's why costs have "tap an untapped creature you control" isn't it? Or is is because of the impossible action so people don't try it?
>>44497908
It's fine; I had other ideas for the slot. Not that they are any healthier. EW may still get a version in this set though since BG cares about that mechanic and reprints, even functional ones, are fine even in custom sets I think.
Let me know if this card is a problem; I am a bit tipsy from New Year's champagne and might not be thinking 100% straight.
>>44497929
>>44497967
Ohhh... nevermind, I looked it up myself. Yeah, okay. Hm. I guess it becomes kinda better than Prey Upon in more than a few cases then. I dunno how to tweak it to make it better though.
>>44497967
She's as problematic as your set allows her to be. Outside of that, I don't think she'd be oppressive or anything as she costs four and relies on other cards.
>>44498031
I kinda figured that would be the case. So that's fine. Part of me thinks she could be a touch cheaper since she does nothing on her own but I'll leave it as-is for now and see how the set shapes up around her.
Happy 2016 CCG! Now excuse me as I spend the rest of the night puking.
>>44498039
I'd buff her stats first, so she's useful as a beater if nothing else.
>>44498051
Happy 2016 to you too. I'll toast to booze.
>>44497929
>>44498004
Okay, so I made Alpha Contest cost 1G instead, and left it unchanged. Basically, it's a slightly harder to cast Pit Fight now that can be avoided if the target is untapped, so it should be okay, albeit safer to use on a tapped creature. We'll see what other kinds of feedback it gets when I inevitably repost it.
>>44498090
You could probably still get away with it at G to be honest, Pit fight isn't so strong that a weaker version feels fine.
>>44498090
Another alternative is to have the tap down happen regardless, so you can use a weaker creature to tap down a stronger one. Which I'm totally going to use myself now that I've though of it.
>>44498121
Well tarnation. So, something like this:
"Target creature you control fights target creature you don't control. Tap that creature. It doesn't untap during it's controller's next untap step."
?
Why didn't I think of that. Might call for a card rename though.
>>44498138
Yeah that's what I was thinking
>>44498157
I think I might actually stick with my original for flavor purposes but I'm glad you got something out of the discussion at least.
Excuse me Wizards, but I believe we have some copyright issues to talk about...
>mfw people told me this land was terrible and would never be a thing when I first posted it.
>>44498194
Hmm. It seems too good at first, but it relies on you casting other spells and is more limited than Waste Not since you can only ever trigger it three times assuming you run a playset.
>>44498256
Elderscale Demon, eh? Flying is a bit better than trample so body-wise he's a better critter. He'd be more in line if his casting cost were similar at 4BBB.
>>44498289
Fun little card.
I don't know why, but I have this affinity for making blue 1/1 one-drops. I should probably make this one uncommon though... thoughts on that? I am considering Limited here; at common it might enable too much scry, even if you have to throw around a lot of cards to do it.
>>44498500
Answer: Yes this enables too much scry. Make it uncommon, and possibly lower it to Scry 1 but maybe not.
>>44498516
Uncommon it is. I'll keep it at 2 for now but can always adjust it later.
Ive been mulling this over for a while, but in terms of commander I think something that would help out poor old red/white while still being in flavor is giving them another commander.
If you have an idea for how to do this better then shoot. I was thinking about making a planeswalker ult which did this, but the text size would be stupid.
Anyone got a good idea how to shrink down the text?
>Name a Legendary Creature or Planeswalker that can be your commander, they are now your commander in addition to your other commanders. ?
>>44498540
>Search your library, hand and graveyard for a legendary creature card. Put that card into your command zone, then shuffle your library if you searched it this way.
That creature gains Commander status for the duration of this game."
Seriously only red the first 3 lines of text I ain't reading that L. Ron Hubbard novel of a card but yeah I hope this helps.
>>44498418
>mfw people told me this land was terrible and would never be a thing when I first posted it.
I went to the archive and most of the comments were positive, the only negative comment I could find about it is that it's worse than tendo ice bridge, which is correct.
Maybe you posted it before that though.
>>44498557
Is status even a thing? I know it makes sense, but i dont think thats the right wording?
>>44498593
*brushes comments under rug*
shh I was being dramatic. Tendo Ice Bridge is a rare though, so there should be a clear difference in power level.
That land's not in the set anymore, because it didn't fit well into the set's themes/didn't play well with the set that really relies on having relatively reliable, relatively wide mana bases.
A few cards here + the current land-based common mana fixing. Just getting back into this so I kinda have to go through things and remember where I was going with the set and stuff.
So yeah feedback would be great :0
>>44498654
Ugh woops I updated the lands to all put 2/2 colorless creature tokens with no types, for logistics reasons. They no longer all produce different types of tokens.
Also for set color-matters themes ala pic. I may change them to mono-colored tokens but I'm not sure.
>>44498594
Nah status is for physical states like being tapped or transformed. A commander is designated, although the rules don't support appointing a new commander in the middle of the game, so any wording for it is going to be new ground.
>>44498694
I think, yeah, the only way this card would be possible is with a rules text update.
>>44498704
You cant just slap This creature is your commander in addition to your other commanders for the rest of the game?
>>44498747
You could. If you wrote it in the rules somewhere, you could write anything on a card and it would work.
Just write it in a way that would be easily discussed in a rules document and it would be A-OK.
>>44498654
>land cycle
feels weird that they are all the same creature, but yeah, taplands are fine.
>infinaut's map
Seems fine.
>ion weaver
OK.
>missionary
Probably need another 1 or 2 common fixing cycles if you actually want people to cast 3 color uncommons in draft.
flavortext doesn't make any sense, she never converts anyone. The effect is basically a worse version of Commander Eesha's, so it should be fine if not a little weak.
>on winds of sleep
>exile on winds of sleep
>hating combo/prison decks this much
It's fine otherwise, neither of the effects seem black but whatever.
>eyona's temple
>multicolor set
>this isn't r/w despite having a red effect
Better mogg flunkies are still pretty good.
>>44498662
>insight
Boring linear mechanic. Don't get the point of it. So if I have a shitty boardstate all of my cards become more expensive for some reason? How is that supposed to be fun?
>creative glow
So you have to get 3 colors in play for it to be a worse healing hands? and if you get 5 colors you'll likely have had enough mana that its cost doesn't matter much anyway. Once again why?
>post an image of multiple cards with typos and missing fields and delete in shame
I'll post those properly when I'm not inebriated from New Year's. Good night, /ccg/.
>>44498863
>Probably need another 1 or 2 common fixing cycles if you actually want people to cast 3 color uncommons in draft.
Something I've been working with plenty to make sure it is acceptable. Examples of other variants of mana fixing in the set.
>The effect is basically a worse version of Commander Eesha's, so it should be fine if not a little weak.
I think it interacts in more interesting ways, not impacting buffs. Always looking for how to get the spots to feel "Right", if that makes sense. Will see how it plays.
>Insight
Fuggin' mechanics. Can never find the right one. This one creates an interesting draft archetype over other previous mechanics for the faction. It is a very new thing, I'll see how it rolls and maybe change it again if it doesn't roll so well.
