Planner Chaos/Remakes edition!
>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://old.photojoiner.net/
http://photojoiner.net/
http://www.fotor.com/features/photo-stitch.html
>/ccg/ sets (completed and in development)
http://pastebin.com/hsVAbnMj
OT: >>47412897
>>47462105
>Silver-bordered cards with modern rarity-border added
Not sure this is worded correctly, but you get the idea.
>>47462105
I love the casting cost.
>>47462037
This + blood rain would be a silly wincon. Also I'm not sure if the first line's wording works. Ususally this kind of stuff uses replacement effects but this doesn't place anything so maybe it is fine.
>>47462521
This would see so much modern play. Like a majority of the time this is as good or better then mana leak. I feel this should be an uncommon.
>>47463891
This feels UR not R.
>>47463891
Should be a curse. Also way overpowered and should at LEAST have some sort of cumulative upkeep.
>>47464166
When ~ enters the battlefield, it gains hexproof until end of turn if [U] was spent to cast it, and gains lifelink until end of turn if [B] was spent to cast it.
See Dawnglow Infusion and similar.
>>47463699
See also Goblin Sleigh Ride, though MagicCards just uses the same black border template on it for some reason.
I think I could make a whole cycle of these.
>>47464440
>>47464440
>>47464440
I'm having fun.
>>47463699
>>47463699
>>47464741
>>47464320
Pretty sure you don't need to give it explicit Flash if you have it cast as part of the resolution of the ability.
>... exile the top card of your library. If it is a sorcery card, you may cast it.
If you said "until end of turn" (a la Daxos of Meletis), you'd need to obey timing restrictions, but this wording is closer to standard "You may cast it without paying its mana cost" sans the free-ness.
Also, only sorceries, and not instants too?
>>47464213
>>47462037
The proper wording is probably
>Mana doesn't empty from your mana pool as steps and phases end.
A la Omnath, Locus of Mana.
>>47464440
Costs aren't allowed to target. Also, probably better as
>Sacrifice a black creature, exile a blue instant spell you control, and tap an untapped green creature with trample you control: ...
>>47464491
Requiring a second combat phase seems like a massive hoop to jump through for a 6/1 with haste, especially since I lose a creature in the bargain.
>>47463279
>>47463649
I'm surprised you like it. It's pretty hard to design for though.
>>47464778
The point is to make the cost as strange as possible. Just a fun exercise.
>>47464440
>>47464440
>>47464387
This reminded me of a DInosaur in Marvel.
>>47465333
It should only draw one card, not that many.
>>47465408
OK, done.
>>47465545
Abilities don't have colors. Also colorless mana costs were Koz's thing.
>>47465545
>Literally preexisting Emrakul with a lower annihilatornumber
>4 mana cheaper
Not only is it busted, it's also a shitty concept.
>>47465545
If this were me, I'd make it
>Unsure of the mana cost, probably something like 17 at least.
>When you cast ~, you control target player during that player's next turn.
>Flying, hexproof
>At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep, that player sacrifices four permanents. [alternatively, "that player sacrifices an artifact, a creature, an enchantment, and a planeswalker."]
Last ability to tie into Delirium from SOI. Also, because Emrakul had the biggest Annihilator out of the original titans.
Does this card seem balanced?
>>47463891
Very controlly card for red, not so great for aggro since the opponent can just skip the combat phase they weren't using anyway. Turn manipulation is traditionally blue, but lately I've been thinking that red should get some too. See also Fatespinner.
>>47464166
Interesting use of hybrid mana. I imagine you'd get better play changing hexproof to unblockable to give the deck some reach, and changing stats to 3/1. (Reach the aggro concept, not the keyword.)
>>47464213
You should either kill this card or drop the draw. Removing the countering rider from Remand makes it stronger. But shifting it to white, a colour with far better aggro options, gives it a far larger power boost than you'd think.
>>47464320
Feels wrong in WU. Green and Red are the colours of anti-counterspells. Since red is the second spell colour after blue, I'd suggest dropping blue for red.
>>47464349
>>47464369
>Push Forward
That second option reads weird. Just make it give first strike straight up. You'd need a very high as-fan on haste to make it constantly relevant. If it's intended to be a bonus option for decks that opt into a haste-heavy aggro strategy rather than consistently available, then consider moving to build-around uncommon and making the second option much more powerful.
>Viashino Raid-Leader
See above comment on as-fan. Complexity says this should sit at uncommon, but this one might want to move down to common if you have a typical as-fan for haste.
>>47464387
That ability works within the Layers system on its own, but it will wreak havoc once you start adding other effects that grant haste/trample. In a nutshell, nothing will work like you expect it to, so that means you should kill this ability.
>>47466402
>but it will wreak havoc once you start adding other effects that grant haste/trample.
Not him, but how? I think you're really overestimating how confusing this might be.
>>47466455
Probably time stamps. I don't care enough to double check and sort through the logic.
>>47464440
>referencing the stack
OH SHIT NIGGA WHAT ARE YOU DOING
In seriousness though, I'm pretty sure you meant "a blue instant you control" but it would be far more elegant to just discard the card. The losing of trample is just... bizarre. I have to assume you're the same guy behind (>>47464349 >>47464369) in which case I can imagine your entire set may need to be reworked. I'm getting the sense the set will probably create far too many unintuitive rules interactions to be playable.
>>47464491
"...only during additional/extra combat phases on your turn."
Honestly I don't know if the game can even support this templating, you'd probably technically have to houserule it in like a silver-border card. Try the Ask A Judge threads, galvanicAutogenitor might have a better idea.
>>47464628
This card actually has no real cost, and it's really secretly an anti-blue sideboard card.
>Put a creature on top...
Costs can be paid in any order. (601.2h) This means you can mill five first and then put your own creature on top. If it's a valuable creature with a good ETB...
>target blue creature you don't control.
Besides the colour hosing part, this is an element that is dependant on what your opponent is packing rather that something you can sideboard in/out against. It's the reason landwalk was abandoned. Also, targeting is part of the effect, not the cost.
>>47464716
Pretty sure that rider isn't even technically possible in the rules as is. You would actually have to use the Snow mana mechanic to achieve what you're after. (Rebrand Snow to some other subtype.)
>>47464760
Legal team says you can't print this. Sorry mate. (Hilarious concept though.)
>>47464781
I get how the Blend cost is black, but it still feels wrong since the Scratch half is now a red mechanic and not black.
>>47464852
>The point is to make the cost as strange as possible. Just a fun exercise.
Oh, I see where you're going with these now.
This is perhaps the most sane and practical cost so far.
>>47466359
Not a card I want to play, or play against, desu.
One last card for tonight. I know White is kinda strange, but I need it for Aura manipulation like this. And I want Auras to represent the magic runes he gets in the game.
>>47464983
Okay, so now that I know that you know these spells are clearly not meant to be practical, I'm just going to suggest a more workable template.
When you discard ~, if you have drawn or more cards this turn, you may pay 1 life for each creature you control. If you do, <token> and ~ deals 2 damage to each other creature.
>>47465333
Brothers Yamazaki thinks this card is pretty cool.
>>47465545
>can't be ... exiled
This would technically have to be a separate ability to work properly. Also you'd still be able to exile it from the graveyard or library or hand, so you'd have to add a bit more text if you meant "can't be exiled from anywhere."
>loses their next turn
Change to "skips." Time Walk said "loses" during Alpha playtesting, but everybody thought it means "loses the game."
>loses colours, sacrifices
You've basically created "each player sacrifices all coloured permanents they control, and then sacrices some more permanents for each multicoloured permanent they controlled." (ie, Annihilator way-more-than-6)
>>47466359
>Does this card seem balanced?
There's a $50 card called Scapeshift that enables combo. This card is a souped up version. No, it's not balanced, and is basically "You win the game."
>>47466746
Could probably stand to be a 3/2 since it comes with a free Equipment/Aura. Or a 2/2 for 2RW. See how it goes in your set at all three costs.
>>47464741
you forgot about the anus mana symbol
>>47465545
you forgot protection form Squirrels
>>47466455
What >>47466470 said, time stamps.
>>47464387 (Raptor Pack v1)
>Cast Raptor Pack first.
>Cast Mass Hysteria second (All creatures have haste.)
>Cast Hill Giant (vanilla 3/3)
Your Hill Giant has haste, but NOT trample.
>Cast Mass Hysteria first
>Cast Raptor Pack second
>Cast Hill Giant
Your Hill Giant has haste AND trample.
Another example of the Layers sytem from MaRo himself: "Creatures with flying are blue."
If played with Levitation (creatures have flying) then you have flying creatures that aren't blue.
If played with Gravity Sphere (creatures lose flying) then you have blue creatures that don't fly.
>these two results are independant of timestamp order
>>47466470
This template works now. Yay!
>>47467059
>Your Hill Giant has haste, but NOT trample.
Why?
>>47469422
Because pack raptor has already checked to see if its ability applies.
>>47469450
I'm pretty sure you're wrong. Look at this card. He's a ruling for it.
>6/15/2010: Stalwart Shield-Bearers continually checks which creatures you control have defender and gives the bonus only to them. If an effect causes a creature with defender to lose defender (as Shoal Serpent does), Stalwart Shield-Bearers stops giving it the bonus for as long as it doesn't have defender. On the other hand, if a spell or ability causes a creature to be able to attack as though it didn't have defender (as Warmonger's Chariot does), Stalwart Shield-Bearers continues to give it the bonus because it never actually loses the defender ability.
Why wouldn't the raptor also continually checj the status of other creatures?
>>47469450
>>47469590
Wait, this is a better example.
>9/25/2006: If a creature without flanking is given flanking by another effect, then this ability will grant a second instance. Similarly, if a creature loses flanking, then it won't get the Calvary Master instance either.
>>47464387
>>47466470
>>47467059
>>47469422
>>47469450
>>47469590
>>47469613
Wait, hang on a sec, I think I derped.
Forgot about the Dependancy section. (613.7)
That section ALWAYS trips me up.
(Timestamp order is default, Dependancies are so rare that they're easy to forget.)
Original card should work as intended, my post at >>47467059 is incorrect. (MaRo's example is still correct though.)
>>47470468
Wow, that is fucking ridiculous. And as far as I can tell, the mindfuckery only happens because color effects and ability effects happen on different layers, which strikes me as needlessly complex.
>>47470565
In terms of mindfuckery, the Layer system is generally a lot better than the original system of "everything applies in the same layer in timestamp order only." Most interactions are actually a lot more intuitive now than they used to be, and the ones that aren't weren't much better under the old system.
P/T modifications were generally a big winner in the Layer system, since Wizards can now specify base power and toughness values. P/T switches are perhaps less intuitive however, but that mechanic is something Wizards rarely goes to, and for good reason.
>>47470847
I wasn't saying that the layer system is bad itself, merely that one part about how the color layer is separate from the ability layer.
Away from my computer right now, so no image.
>Preempt BX
>Instant
>Destroy target creature whose power isn't equal to its base power.
Obviously lack of precedent means templating might be off. It's supposed to be gold but I don't know which color to use as a second. I think it makes sense in both WB and UB.
>>47471963
Isn't deathtouch more of asharingan thing with the black flames?
>>47472419
[SPOILER]sharingan developes into the rinnegan so its a shared pwer
>sharigan>full tomoe>magksharingan>infinitemgksharingan>rinnegan.thesagedidntneedtheforthstepmostlylikelybecauseofsejutsuandbeingdirectfromkaguya[/SPOILER]
>>47473392
>can't even spoiler textDisgusting.
>>47465545
>not 13 mana
>>47473392
Anyone got a mediocre at best for this?
I see where he went wrong and its an easy mistake but still.
Inspired by another anon.
I was tempted to add "tapped and attacking", but that would just be ridiculous, right?
>>47474941
Is that Prime? God, DC is so silly sometimes.
>>47475471
I can only note with amusement that she does not in fact have the Flagbearer creature type.
Though, incidentally, I think legends are supposed to use their full name and title the first time they're mentioned in rules text, and their name by itself only after.
>>47475471
senpai you need to add legendary before creature
>>47475471
Of course it's Prime. Who else would say something so dumb? Seriously though, I really loved what they did with Prime during Blackest Night, it was great. Too bad they pulled the plug after.
>card
Why is this not a legend?
>>47475568
>legend name
That's the convention, but it's not absolutely necessary - comp rules say that any instance of the shortened name stands in for the full name. (See Theros gods for examples). That said, the card isn't so crowded that the full name can't fit.
>>47475471
If you upped it by 1 cmc you might be able to, using Rabblemaster as a comparison point. Also axe a subtype so it's actually legendary.Prime is awesome. I was half-expecting him to be the big reveal in Rebirth.
>>47475639
>>47475568
>>47475595
>>47475599
I used the short name because otherwise MSE fucks up the... word placement? It looked ugly. Can't have that. I'll keep tinkering with the balance.
Based on a suggestion an anon gave me.
>>47475639
Rebirth? Haven't even been paying attention to that garbage. DC's pretty much dead to me. Same for Marvel. Sure, Cap is a Hydra agent. Totally not just shock value in an attempt to drive up sales in the same manner as clickbait articles on the internet.
>>47475725
Yeah, sometimes it lumps words together for some reason.
>Reach
I still don't think Reach works in any color besides Green. White and Blue can already block flyers with their own flyers, and Red and Black don't care that much about blocking anyway, on top of having some flyers as well.
>>47475746
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/123140679358/does-red-have-reach-now
>>47475746
I really like reach in red. That so many people feel like red can't into blocking is one of the reasons it's so pigeonholed into just hasty goblins and burn. Plus I'm one of those fags against flying in red beyond the obligatory Dragon and Phoenix.
>>47475783
This doesn't prove anything. I said "I don't think Reach is Red." This says "Wizards thinks Reach is Red." Until they start making a concentrated effort to get Reach in Red, which they haven't in the, what, 10 months Maro made that post, I'm not going to budge.
>>47475847
>That so many people feel like red can't into blocking
I didn't say Red can't block, just that it doesn't care much about it. The same way that White doesn't care much about draw. It has it, sure, but it's certainly not a top priority.
>>47475999
Surely whatever Wizards thinks about the color pie is by definition the truth about the color pie? They're the arbiters of what is and isn't in color, after all; whatever they say goes.
>>47476123
Why you postin' my cards, son?
>>47476169
Just posting my favorite cards.
>>47476123
Usually I trust Wizards, yes, but they have made decisions I disagree with before, and likely will in the future. If Wizards made Reach a recurring thing in Red, I would tell people that when giving feedback, but I still wouldn't like it much and avoid it in my own cards.
>>47476308
The "at random" will severely limit the amount of play this sees.
>>47475999
I think Strange should be a Planeswalker.
>>47475999
feels like 7 mana
>>47477829
>Target opponent discards that card.
Which card?
OH GOD
>>47477829
"Whenever" rather than "When" for abilities that could trigger multiple times.
Gank is either missing some lines or has wrong wording. And if it's a Distress variant then it needs to cost more.
Too much gold at common. B04, R01 and R02 are also too similar.
>>47476751
How do these two cards relate to each other?
>>47477970
>>47477948
Fixed them.
>>47478767
>>47477970
How many should i have a common at max?
>>47478767
"Cast ~ only during an opponent's upkeep."
None of these make use of their small timing window, and are essentially sorceries that your opponents get a chance to counter if they were previously tapped out.
>>47478900
>>47478767
Well, the red one is a fairer Wheel.
>>47478850
"1, T: Add A or B to your mana pool."
Saves on line space. They're really bad at filtering, and will mostly be used for the cycling.
>>47478850
How about doing it like this instead ?
> 1, T: Add W or U to your mana pool.
>>47478900
>"Cast ~ only during an opponent's upkeep."
Thanks.
>None of these make use of their small timing window, and are essentially sorceries that your opponents get a chance to counter if they were previously tapped out.
That's wrong for all of them, if most of them could be cast sorcery speed they would be broken. Enact balance and uplift (based on balancing act/upheavel) are abused through floating mana during main phase and casting spells after the effect and bargain with the enemy, cycle of fate, and Tillings grace (symetrical yawgamoth's bargain, wheel of fortune and heartbeat) are all cards that could be abused the same way and even win the same turn you cast them if they were sorcery speed.
>>47478990
fair enough
>>47478964
>Well, the red one is a fairer Wheel.
Yeah, I'm annoyed at how similar it is to day's undoing in functionality but I couldn't think of any other red effects that would work with the drawback.
>"1, T: Add A or B to your mana pool."
Thanks
>They're really bad at filtering, and will mostly be used for the cycling.
They might be a little weak, yeah. The 'land' portion of the card should be a bit weaker than the onslaught lands to make up for the slight increase in versatility but it might be too much. if you compare tranquil thicket to forest than I think the most comparable land to these is the rootwater depths cycle, which was pretty bad (though not totally unplayable). You think if I combined current filtering ability with rootwater depth's ability it would be good enough?
Working on skulk variations - which one do you think is most fair for a set mechanic (primarily GW or GWR)
"This creature can't be blocked by creatures with lesser power."
"This creature can't be blocked by creatures with lesser toughness."
"This creature can't be blocked by creatures with greater toughness."
I was thinking about the middle one but I'd like to hear second opinions.
>>47479360
First was used in avacyn restored so id go with that.
![Image[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/qddAXtr.png "Image[1].png")
>>47471767
Not sure using base P/T is a good idea.
BG if you go with the Lorwyn Elves.
Definitely steal the templating of pic related.
>>47473849
I can imagine that card getting pretty degenerate, but at least it leads to massive card disadvantage with cards like Banishing Light.
>>47474941
Why not just cut out the middle man and go to straight exiling? Breaks colour pie, but at least the card would be more straightforward.
>>47475329
>Noxious Crawler
If you switch to "-1/-1 for each +1/+1 counter" it creates more potential interactions (eg, Hardened Scales), but could also be more difficult to balance. Just something to keep in mind when you tweak.
>>47475429
Wrong template, use this:
>converted mana cost less than or equal to
Also the variability on this card may be problematic. You may want to change to 3/3 base and Devour 1 if playtesting goes that way.
>>47475471
>I was tempted to add "tapped and attacking", but that would just be ridiculous, right?
Since the original Soldiers aren't required to attack, the ability is ridiculous either way, especially at two mana. To keep the army spiralling out of control, the opponent has to have the larger initial army (horizontally AND vertically), or a way to kill Jeanne. If you can keep Jeanne alive and/or unblockable, she'll be unstoppable.
At two mana, your options are going to naturally be somewhat limited. The easiest way to fix her up is to add a mana payment to the triggered ability. Other changes include using +1/+1 counters instead, giving +X/+X, and granting abilities. Possibly a combination of these changes.
>>47475599
Should cost her 3WW base.
>>47475725
Modern development suggests a monowhite 3-drop 3/3 should be uncommon or rare. Leaning to uncommon since this card isn't terribly exciting.
>>47475732
Might be okay at WW, but try 2W too.
>>47475783
Repeatable removal is a red flag. Watch this card like a hawk. See also Gruul Ragebeast, and note the levers Wizards uses to make sure it didn't dominate too hard.
>is a creature; all colours have access to creature kill
>requires a new creature for each instance
>forced to fight, not optional
>fighting creature takes damage
>>47475847
Just give it trample AND reach. Trample only works on offence, Reach only works on defence, so power level is not an issue. Also move to uncommon, because you do not want P/T switching at common, unless your set is for rules savvy players who understand Layer 7. Such as this example:
>Squire (1/2)
>Cast Thaumaturgy (2/1)
>Cast Titan's Strength (+3/+1 -> 2/5)
The P/T swap happened BEFORE Titan's Strength, but is applied AFTER.
It might seem counterintuitive, but that's the way the rules work. You don't want this coming up in every game, which is what will happen at common.
>>47475999
Not a Doctor Strange reader, but that ability is pretty unwieldy. You've also got a nested IF clause in there. But it's basically "scry + mini-Cascade" and Cascade is known to be extremely powerful. If this is meant to be a showcase card, it might be easier to just use Cascade. Either way, drop the "draw if you don't cast" bit because it's just extraneous power.
>>47476035
Landfall trigger is nigh-useless. Lands normally don't enter on enemy turns. All it's good for is protecting from damage-based board wipes. Landfall triggers should do something that can be used proactively.
Yes, this card can find some sort of weird combo, but it's never going to be a good combo as-is.
>>47476112
Nice take on red defence.
>>47478850
(same person, despite the set symbol)
Any way to make this effect less wordy?
>>47476123 (>>47476169)
Consider also removing a fixed number of counters to cast any card for free, costing at URG, but only getting counters on opponent shuffles. It would make her more pro-active in punishing opponents if you want that sort of card.
Triggering on your own shuffles is problematic because you're encouraging players to shuffle. Sensei's Divining Top wasn't banned for power level issues, it was banned for logistics (ie, game length) issues. Similarly, Wizards has reduced shuffling because it just makes games take longer.
In short, if you keep the card as is, watch it like a hawk not because of power level reasons, but for game length reasons, especially if it's meant to be a Constructed card.
>>47476169
Call them Reputation counters. If it's unique to this card, put the counters directly on the card instead of the player.
>>47476185
Might be fine at five mana, my gut says six mana; try both. See also the SoK Maro cycle, in particular Masumaro, First to Live.
>>47476196
First trigger is expected to happen repeatedly, so the correct word is "whenever." I very much like the interaction between the triggers.
>>47476308
Green reach is generally statted defensively. (ie, higher Toughness.)
Red reach can be statted defensively, but the historic precedent is squared or offensive stats.
>>47476323
Reach is secondary in red, but it's not used often since red is the most aggro colour. Wizards has been trying to give red a lategame path recently, especially in a control shell. Chandra, Flamecaller is an example of that. Red reach having square/offensive stats is intentional, to keep it distinct from green reach.
>>47476359
I feel like it may need to up either the cast cost or equip cost, but it's probably fine as is.
>>47476981
Interesting way to redo Animate Dead. Might need to cost six mana since you're adding flying and haste to the creature, with the haste probably being the bigger part of its power here. (Most reanimation goes for huge creatures.)
>>47477817
Interesting board wipe effect, but not sure about using sacrifice/exile. Unless your set has some reason to use sacrifice/exile specifically, stick to destroy/discard.
>>47479360
Greater toughness feels red.
Lesser T could make sense as a W/G since they like toughness.
>>47480802
Target player reveals his or her hand. Choose a card. Put that card on the bottom of its owner's library, then search that player's library for a card with the same converted mana cost, reveal it, and put it into it's owner's hand. That player shuffles his or her library.
Also hybrid mana comes after normal mana.
>>47480802
You don't have to find a card while searching if it has a stated quality, just so you're aware.
>>47480802
This, >>47481032
You'll have to make it reveal cards from the top and give them the first card with the same CMC.
>>47477829
>>47478184
As >>47477970 said, too many Gold tokens at common, and you've got some cards that are extremely similar. Pick the ones you like, redo the others.
>>47478767
Interesting cycle, nice mirror to the Return to Dust cycle. I can see where you're going with this (opponent gets first use) but it doesn't really do that very well.
>Enact Balance (white)
Casting it on the opponent's upkeep doesn't really change it. It's still a 3-mana Balance in most cases.
>Uplift (blue)
More interesting use since Upheaval was used on your own turn with floating mana to win a game. Not a great card though, since bouncing lands means extending game length. That's why you'll notice most cards of this sort now only bounce nonlands.
>Bargain with the Enemy (black)
Everybody gets Yawgmoth's Bargain, which was supposed to be a more balanced Necropotence but ended up being even more powerful. Problem is, you can build your deck full of Instants/Flash to win or defacto win on the upkeep while the opponent has no such preparation.
>Cycle of Fate (red)
I think the Return to Dust cycle would be a better execution, but at least this one seems to do its job. (Great for aggro and anti-control.)
>Tilling's Grace
Flashing in on an opponent's turn really doesn't make it any more restricted than Mana Flare. The thing with Mana Flare was that if you cast it straight away, your opponent already gets the first chance to use the double mana. This card doesn't actually need Flash to do what you're trying to do with it.
>>47478850
Use the standardised, simpler template.
1, T: Add W or U to your mana pool.
For Constructed, Cycling costs might be better at 2 mana, or they might be better as they are. For Limited, I honestly don't know, but my gut says keep them as they are.
>>47481032
Thanks.
I'll word it so that they either search for a card with equal cmc and shuffle the other one in or give them back the card in hand since that's the intended functionality anyway.
Also, would they be forced to find a card if the library was revealed?
>>47481086
Thanks, but that changes it way too much.
>>47481222
>3-mana Balance
Balancing act, which saw little play at 4 mana and the play it did see was due to floating mana mainphase and casting a bomb after wrathing the board (or in response using quicken tricks)
If you have a better suggestion for white though I'm all years.
>since bouncing lands means extending game length
I don't *think* I care (much), not bouncing lands makes this have a drastically different functionality (as a card for permanentless decks) as well.
>you can build your deck full of Instants/Flash to win or defacto win on the upkeep while the opponent has no such preparation
I really don't think that there is a deck which can win on consistently on upkeep after casting this, even facing against 0 interaction considering if you're playing a dedicated combo deck, you are giving your opponent 19-15 cards depending on self damage to find an answer, I'm not really concerned about it's implications in combo decks. I think it is actually stronger in aggro decks against control decks.
>The thing with Mana Flare was that if you cast it straight away, your opponent already gets the first chance to use the double mana
That's true if you casted it on curve, but my experience with heartbeat of spring was you generally casted when you were about to win or psuedo-win. I'm definitely open to something else for this one too though.
>>47480811
Not just for that card, or I would have put the counters on the card, of course.
I'll think about your Alekto suggestions though.
>>47478987
>B1, B2, B3
You should use the updated Convoke/Delve template, there's a counterintuitive interaction with your old template here. Also "consume" as a name feels wrong, since the word implies you are completely eating the creature/permanent.
>B2
So you've got Consume, which wants black to have +1/+1 counters, and then you've got this mechanic that hates them. Reconsider your archetypes.
>GW1
Move to uncommon. Works as a build-around.
>R1
Might be safe and fair at 2RR. Act of Aggression had the life payment option to hit three mana. Word of Seizing had split second and could get any permanent. On the other hand, the potential 2-for-1 use on defence means 3RR could well be the correct cost.
>RW1
Move to uncommon or rare. Works as a build-around.
>RW2
Lightning Helix and Warleader's Helix say hello. With such large numbers, make it single target and/or Sorcery.
>U1
Depending on how accessible +1/+1 counters are, you might want to cost this at 5 mana.
>W1
Set-themed Glorious Anthem, solid enabler. See also Cathar's Crusade and Abzan Ascendancy.
>W2
Seems alright. Might be better as Sorcery. See also Children of Korlis.
>W3
White is supposed to be terrible at card draw, and should not be getting a cantrip on such a versatile card. See also Common Bond and Seeds of Strength for alternative templating options.
>W4
Move to uncommon and Sorcery. Rule of thumb, if it can work as a Sorcery then it should be a Sorcery. Instant is reserved for cards that only work at Instant speed (eg, Counterspell) or that you want to be Instant for a specific reason. Should almost certainly be 1 life per counter and if counters aren't too easy to amass, maybe 4 mana.
>W5
Very bad card for gameplay. It not only nixes an opposing army, but also increases your own. Also should be rare even if you put it in anyway.
>WB1
Seems okay.
>WB2
Simple card, but rare is the right spot since you're putting both counter types out at once.
>>47481236
If you don't mind them finding the same card again, just make the opponent do the searching.
>>47480210
>Alan Scott
Not sure what to make of this.
>Killed to Death
Oh, I was just trying to be as pedantic as possible. Probably should've just given it a silver-border
>Breaks colour pie
What? Black does exile creatures, just not as often as White. Silence the Believers, Oblivion Strike, Grip of Desolation, Dark Impostor, Gild, etc.
>Donna Troy
Eh... I feel kinda odd having it cast for two W when the ability only needs one W. I mean, I get that Serra Angel is very similar and sits at 3WW, but... haven't we kinda gotten past SA now?
>Krypto
It's at 2W already.
>>47480512
>Doctor Strange
Ugh, I fucking hate magic in fiction. It's always so poorly defined as to be nearly incomprehensible. This is just me going "Oh, magic is Blue and Red and cares about spells, so let's do that." I kinda hate the magical characters I have to do. Fuck them all. Doctor Strange, Wiccan, Scarlet Witch, Brother Voodoo, Zatanna and Zachary Zatarra, Enchantress, etc. Here's pretty much the only magic-user card I actually like, and even then I tried to make him more of a con artist than magician.
>>47480811
>Reach is secondary in red, but it's not used often
I bet you Hexproof/Shroud is more White than Reach is Red.
>>47481269
Kami of the Honored Dead says hello. Statting at 3/2 or 2/3 could be more interesting for gameplay, but try 2/4 too.
>>47481431
>Balancing Act
Fair point.
>Bargain with the Enemy
Definitely more of a Constructed concern. Cards like Elvish/Simian Spirit Guide, High Tide + Twiddle, Pyretic Ritual, zero-drops, free spells, and dredge enable all sorts of zero mana silliness. When you can pull out 10 cards quickly, the odds of pulling off a combo are pretty high. Even if you don't get your winning combo immediately, you still have a good chance of starting a smaller combo that leads into the winning combo.
>>47480802
It's easier to reveal the library. You're searching it anyway, so you already know the full contents. I think this one of these templates should work okay.
>Should work
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. Choose a card from it. That player exiles the chosen card. Then reveal that player's library and choose a card with the same converted mana cost as the exiled card. Put the chosen card into that player's hand, then shuffle the exiled card into its owner's library.
>Not sure about the word "exchange"
Target opponent reveals his or her hand and library. Choose a card from the revealed library and a card from revealed hand with the same converted mana cost. Exchange those cards, then shuffle that player's library.
Just a note, if you reveal the library before choosing the card to shuffle back in, you give the player perfect information about what's available and what's not and create the opportunity to turn it into a straight up Coercion + reveal library.
>>47481609
>Alan Scott, Green Lantern
It means that cards like Banishing Light or Oblivion Ring don't target as a spell, but as a permanent. Therefore they can exile Alan Scott for exactly three mana.
>Killed to Death
Black got to exile creatures because the set needed it, not because it's a black thing per se. The needs of the set means plenty of mechanics can be bled outside of their normal colours.
Silence the Believers was in an Aura-heavy set. Black is not allowed to deal with enchantments or Auras directly. The Bestow mechanic weakens black's normal "destroy" effects, so the card is there to deal with Auras indirectly. Note that it still doesn't actually destroy the Auras, it exiles them wholesale with the creatures as if the whole mass were one creature.
>Donna Troy
Yeah, we're well past Serra Angel, but as a 4/4 flyer at 5 mana with no downside, you don't want it too easy to splash for.
>Krypto, the Superdog
I meant as in testing at both costs. My gut says WW is the correct cost with that downside, but 2W could also be the correct.
>Doctor Strange
Fair enough.
>I bet you Hexproof/Shroud is more White than Reach is Red.
You are correct on this, but this is because one of white's gameplay aspects is the ability to protect its creatures.
>>47483446
Hm. I'm not sure about this at uncommon, but it's clever. I'm on the fence whether I like it or not, but I will say it's a pretty good colorless removal spell.
>>47483626
I actually had to look this up, and found that Aura swap was a real keyword. I'm kinda surprised they worded it like they did given how they worded Ninjutsu and the like. Huh. The more you know, I guess.
>>47483938
If it just specified onto the battlefield you could attach the aura to anything, exchange lets you know it's a straight swap.
>>47484033
I just figured they'd be overly specific with crap like "return this to your hand put an aura card onto the battlefield attached to the thing that card was attached to yadda yadda". I mean if it works, cool. I'm just surprised at it. I'm also wondering if you could just word Ninjutsu or other such abilities the same way given that fact.
>>47484068
Nah exchange doesn't remember quite that much.
>>47483938
I think it's entirely fine at uncommon, power wise it would be ok at common, but it's too "complex" for common.
Been slowly working on this set, and battling the temptation to start another I have a bunch of ideas for. I'm not sure the time I'm spending on this is reflected in the card quality or balance, but I hope so, at least to some degree. Blue is probably the next color that will be ready to post in its entirety, then likely red or black. One of these days I'll get to the multicolor stuff too; at the moment I'm just making them here and there as ideas hit me. Comments and criticisms are greatly appreciated.
I hope the collage is manageable. If not, I'll split them into smaller ones. I just didn't want to take up more than one post for all this.
>>47484393
Traveling Songsmith's G kicker has marginal use when you can't flash it in.
Orzel Familiar is too agressive at common (in limited it is always going to be a 2/1 flyer for W).
Mollify's U ability is also marginal - it's only ever going to stop it from chump blocking.
Aniela is interesting, but should probably grant protection from colors rather than sources (is a blocker a source?).
Community should probably cost 1WW. Free continuous token makers are incredibly powerful, and this also has a really good extra upside.
Regal Griffin's G ability is also marginal. It already has evasion, it's not that big, and so far I don't see a lot of 1/1 flying tokens.
Keeper of Serenity is cool.
Svetlovan Sentinel - triggered abilities from hidden zones are a no-no. "~ costs 2 less to cast for each creature you control that blocked or became blocked this turn." or something. I'm sure there's a Trap you could find a template from.
>>47484587
>songsmith
Point. I wonder if it'd be an problem to just tack Flash onto it.
>Familiar
I was trying for "different Loyal Pegasus". I can take a look at it.
>Mollify
That's what I wanted, actually, so that's fine.
>Aniela
I wasn't sure myself. "Object" sounded wrong and I couldn't think of any other way to word it. I am also tired so I choose to blame that. I'm not 100% sure how to word it the way you are suggesting but I agree if it can be done it might be better.
>community
I can deal with that. It's part of a 2C Legendary enchantment cycle but I imagine most of them will end up tweaked somehow to ruin the symmetry.
>griffin
It needs tweaking. And there will be a fair number of 1/1 flyers actually; making bird tokens will be a subtheme in the set since birds in the fluff are seen as harbingers and omens. So it's a touch more relevant than it seems, but perhaps a change to another green-costed ability is the key either way. Any suggestions?
>keeper
thanks. I am glad you didn't want it to be a RW card, though it could be, and might fit a little better in a flavor vacuum.
>sentinel
Hm, I thought I did pattern it off Traps. Let me check and see what I did wrong. I'll see if I can fix it.
Thanks for going through all of them anon, I appreciate it.
I'm fairly certain that this thread's heroic feedback anon is employed at Wizards, especially given their comments on red Reach. In any case, thank you.
>>47485193
"This permanent enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters on it" + "This permanent enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters on it"
DON'T stack
"Whenever another creature enters the battlefield, if this permanent has a +1/+1 counter on it, you may move a +1/+1 counter from this permanent onto that creature" x2
DOES trigger twice
Evolve is just a triggered ability so it works fine
Not sure if that's what you intended, but it does not seem intuitive
>>47485261
>702.57b If a creature has multiple instances of graft, each one works separately.
Also, replacement effects can totes stack.
>>47485353
Hm, you got a point.
I was thinking you usually need to choose between replacement effects (Kalitas + Rest In Peace) but here after applying one the other can still apply. My bad
>>47485628
Unfortunately does not work like you'd like it to. The X in the casting cost does not do anything, you can always cast it for just a green and get the devour X trigger.
pic related
>>47485661
It should work, it's defining X in the cost as opposed to thromok which defines X in its ability.
>>47463891
I'd think for red it'd be "every player", not a targeted aura.
For the cost i was thinking 3 instead of 2, but ill stick to that for now. Anyone got a better name than promotion counter?
>>47486316
I like that card, I might include it in my set.
>>47481581
>So you've got Consume, which wants black to have +1/+1 counters, and then you've got this mechanic that hates them. Reconsider your archetypes.
The same way that ravnica was all about playing all those multicolored cards and still had Pure.
>Warleader's Helix
Dind't know about this one, might just remove the card due being so familiar
>Set-themed Glorious Anthem
Not really since you put +1/+1 counters on your opponents creatures as well.
>White is supposed to be terrible at card draw, and should not be getting a cantrip on such a versatile card.
I was going to agree with you until I found Shoulder to Shoulder, which is exactly the same card for 2W. It got removed.
>>47486381
Do it up.
This card is so that blue, red and black have enchantment removal in my enchantment set.
>>47486213
Christ. Why would you make an emblem? Why not just an enchantment? Emblems are uniquely planeswalkers' thing AND they are supposed to break the game.
This just turns a card into a commander without the deck restrictions, for four mana, and requires you to have the damn thing out.
Why did you even make this?
>>47485193
>I'm fairly certain that this thread's heroic feedback anon is employed at Wizards, especially given their comments on red Reach.
If you're referring to posts (>>47482147 >>47481982) plus some more further up that responded to every single card... nope. Just a guy who made sets for fun ten years ago and learnt a lot of things. It doesn't take long to realise that MaRo is actually right about a lot of things.
>>47483446
Potential for up to 5-for-1 card advantage, but depends on how heavy multicolour is in your set. Uncommon seems right, but like >>47483938 suggests, definitely consider rare as well. Try it at uncommon first though, force it in a few playtests to see what it's normally hitting for.
>>47483626
Aura swap is an ability that lets you cheat on costs using an installment plan, with an upfront smaller benefit until you pay off in full. It's a little like Suspend or Morph in the way it achieves this. The development challenge is going to be to watch ALL of the Aura cards in the context of Aura Swap. Any Aura that can self-return (eg, Rancor) will significantly boost Aura Swap, so you need to be careful about those sorts of cards.
>>47484393
I want to sleep soon, so I'm not going through your collage right now, but I'll give you a few pointers from my own experience (and really, MaRo will tell you the same thing.)
- Don't worry about rares/uncommons too much. Just get the commons done and then run some playtests. Commons are the core of your set.
- No matter how good or useful any of the feedback here is, your own playtests will reveal a lot more about how well mechanics actually work.
- Regular Magic sets are made mostly for Limited, so expect custom sets to be Limited-oriented. Expect most feedback to be focused on the Limited experience, and compared to real sets.
- That awesome card you made that you so wanna play? Now imagine that your OPPONENT plays it against you. Still awesome? Don't forget the opponent's experience..
>>47485193
I had to re-read this a few times to figure out why you used double Graft instead of just costing XGU with a single Graft X. Just remember to include reminder text. Double evolve might need watching, but my gut says it's okay.
Might be interesting to give this creature non-square P/T.
>>47486316
Artist is Nicholas Kay.
>>47487885
Wizards is ditching the "Æ" ligature in the next block.
>>47485622
Adding another two turns of waiting turns it into Suspend. If people aren't excited by this card, try lowering the cost and making it playable as vanilla, and then upping to Devour 4. Great flavour though.
>>47485628
Interesting creature, it's smart that you didn't give it any evasion. (Would be way too overpowered.) Yes, it should work as you intended.
>>47486003
"...of any color to your mana pool."
Seems fair, but put it at uncommon or rare. Birds of Paradise having Flying was relevant more often than you probably realise, with Auras/Equipment giving them the necessary power.
>>47486213
Suddenly, EDH. An Artifact/Enchantment would also work fine, has more interaction options, and can be costed more aggressively. I do understand why you're using an Emblem though.
>>47486316
A nice and straightforward card.
>>47486534
>The same way that ravnica was all about playing all those multicolored cards and still had Pure.
I understand this point, but it's not the one I was making. The thing is that you've got counter-hate and counter-love in black. Is black supposed to be pro-counters or anti-counters in this set? Maybe it depends on which colour it's paired with? Does it use them as an alternative resource ala life payments? From those three cards I feel like you haven't considered it fully at least as far as black is concerned. You haven't shown much more, so it's hard to judge fairly here. I may be wrong.
>Not really since you put +1/+1 counters on your opponents creatures as well.
I missed that. Make it your creatures only, everyone is going to be playing it wrong.. For generic utility cards like this, best not to be too clever.
>Shoulder to Shoulder
Ah, forgot that card. Barely touched white in BFZ Limited. Come to think of it, Wizards has been upping card flow in white and green lately, and nixing blue's card flow. Probably part of normal ebb and flow of design.
>>47464166
It would help if it were spelled correctly first
>>47486567
Don't think you should be giving artifact/enchantment removal to Artifacts, Definitely move to uncommon though.
>>47486642
Seems simple enough, but if you find blue stalling aggro too easily then move to uncommon or reduce toughness.
>>47486855
Metalcraft for Enchantments. I feel like this may need to be uncommon, but common is probably fine.
>>47487885
That's a sneaky take on Essence Backlash. Maybe needs to cost six mana, but the lack of blue definitely feels wrong to me. It's a sneaky counterspell, and only blue has ever been able to modify text.
Is this good as-is? I know the last ability has some odd wording, but I'm about 95% sure it's right.
>>47488253
I'll test the artifact at common, and adjust the cost if necessary.
I'll tack on defender if the crab is too broken without it.
All of the enchantmentcraft stuff is flexible at it's cost.
Question is Ambush Viper too good at common under NWO?
>>47488105
Don't care. I like it.
>>47489486
>filename
Probably, yeah. Mulldrifter was too good for common, and in limited I don't think that this is too much worse.
Alternate name:
Standstill 2: Electric Boogaloo
>>47489667
This seems pretty cool.
>>47489486
I've noticed that Wizards has really restricted ETB draw for Blue creatures recently, so probably.
>>47490231
At first I thought you meant "target Equipment you control", but then I realized it was like that on purpose.
Seems like a nice card, probably best at uncommon though? It's like a nice playable with an occasional (big) upside en Limited; maybe a good sideboard card in Constructed. It depends on how Equipment-heavy the set is, I guess
>>47489667
More like lilting refrain 2, not really like standstill at all.
>>47492174
Should be mythic
>>47492570
wat
>>47492570
No?
I just had to go back two or three threads to find this >>47412796
Does anybody know what's the source, so I can bookmark it or something?
>>47493852
Just copy and paste the text in a text document or something?
>>47493852
>>47494657
If you want, I'll make a PasteBin for it and link it in the OP.
>>47493852
There aren't any hard and fast rules, but if you browse enough cards you notice the trends.
>>47495075
>There aren't any hard and fast rules
This is one of the dumbest statements I've read in these threads.
>>47495108
For ordering effects? There's often precedent, but even looking at cards Wizards has made there's typically a card that's formatted uniquely for many kinds of effects. Keldon Firebombers was one that came up a thread or two ago.
>>47480210
>Not sure using base P/T is a good idea.
>BG if you go with the Lorwyn Elves.
>Definitely steal the templating of pic related.
I made it because now that they specify base power and toughness, something like this is possible.
Copying the Lorwyn Elves thing does something the card isn't supposed to do. It's supposed to be able to kill 1/1's that have been pumped with Become Immense. It's supposed to be able to kill creatures that have been bebuffed by something like Nausea.
>>47495434
They actually don't, base p/t is currently only for setting p/t.
Challenge: Create a card that looks as powerful as possible while not actually being that powerful.
What would Dota cards look like? /r/ing for a Sven card, please.
>>47497508
>What would Dota cards look like?
Well, I've actually—
>/r/ing for a Sven card, please.
>>>/out/
>>47496049
Considering the responses I've gotten from it, I'm tempted to re-post wading bauble, but I'll try something else.
Another thought is...
2uu
Sorcery
Draw a card.
storm.
But I don't actually plan on putting that in any set, and am not too interested in the design.
>>47495393
>ordering effects
>Keldon Firebombers
The second does not follow from the first.
>>47497591
Sorry, nigga, got carried away a bit. But seriously, what were you going to say?
>>47497601
>As an additional cost to cast ~, sacrifice a creature.
>>47497831
He clearly intends for each splice to require a sac.
>>47497772
I've made a few. Though these are all from a while ago, and I haven't really been doing much with them. And no, I never did get around to Sven.
>>47497874
It still would, you splice before costs are paid.
>>47497904
alrighty then
>>47497886
It actually feels thematic. Could you show more, please? There's a lot of abilities in Dota that can be applied to MtG surprisingly easy. I'm still not good at farming tho.
>>47498158
Bring down the power to something more reasonable, and change its ability. Doesn't feel right for it.
>>47497638
My point was that even Wizards often has more than one way of doing things, thus "there are no hard and fast rules" is not a dumb statement.
>>47498417
Creatures with power 1 greater than their CMC aren't exactly uncommon, why do you think it's unreasonable? I'll admit I may have leaned too hard on the triggered ability with two cards instead of one but I thought drawing cards when battling creatures would be exciting on a vigilance creature since it could potentially happen on both your turn and your opponent's turn, and if it makes them not want to block so much the better.
>>47498501
Wow, you've actually just managed to make yourself seem even dumber. Amazing.
>>47498417
Eh... fine, here's one more. I don't want to post a lot because then I'd have to go back and go through the cards, and I'd rather not do that right now. I'd actually like to see what you can come up with.
>farming
What, jungling or last-hitting? Or both? Dota is an incredibly hard game to get into , but it's a blast once you know what you're doing and play with a competent team.
>>47497444
nice trips
this doesn't feel RG in the slightest. RGU at the minimum if you really need RG in it, otherwise I'd probably say it's BWU
>>47498558
Jungling. You might have guessed, I main Sven. Went to /dota/ on /vg/ and read the guide, and I still can't time it right. I'm tempted to try other heroes just to get good. Your cards are well done. Why stop?
>>47498525
It feels OP. Not to be an ass, but seriously, Green has a lot of cards right now that can take tremendous advantage of that ability. Take it with a pinch of salt, but why not "When Terror of the Fells attacks, you may sacrifice two creatures. Draw two cards." Remove its vigilance too.
>>47498686
How about just one card when it blocks or becomes blocked? I really like the concept of a high power, mediocre toughness vigilant creature so if anything is going to go it's the draw ability and I have to figure out something else interesting to put on it that takes advantage of being what it is.
>>47498686
>Why stop?
Because I already have one set I've been working on for a while that I'm trying to finish. Like this stupid motherfucker, for instance. Tried looking for fans of the character for help, it didn't. All they say is that they like his origin and "he's powerful." Like power levels even fucking exist in comics. Look, I'm trying to make a guy who is a Wizard, incredibly powerful, incredibly smart, probably going to be 5 CMC or greater. Does anyone have any advice?
>>47498766
I don't know what the other guy is smoking, but it's not op. It's a 6 drop with no enter or death trigger, protection, evasion or recursion. If anything, drop it from two to one card draw.
>>47498686
>>47498865
Oh, and on Dota: Frankly, I'm not great at jungling myself, so I can't really give you any tips there, other than to do it only when you are certain that you'll get more experience/gold from it that sticking to a land. I've seen a few newbs start jungling that bring a whole team down because they didn't pick a hero that could jungle efficiently, or they just didn't know how to do it well.
As far as general advice goes, here's mine: Learn every hero, item, and mechanic of the game. No, really. Memorize them all. Learning about the heroes will make sure you know how to counter them, as well as how to work well with your teammates. Learning the items will save you a lot of time, and you can use this information to peek at your enemies' inventories and see how they're doing, as well as knowing which item is best in a certain situation. Knowing the mechanics is also incredibly important due to how competitive the game is, and how the different mechanics interact. What's magic resistance? What's base attack speed? What's pure damage?
>>47499288
Thinking about a set with some strong abnormal tribal for each color, while also containing a good mount of cards that punish for building tribal.
>>47499288
Oh yeah and he feels kind of useless outside of commander. Maybe he should have haste?
Should B be rat or demon? I'm fine with either.
>>47499440
Neither? To be honest, most of the granted abilities seem tacked on rather than thematic.
>>47499364
A little, but that's fine, he's not super good in the source either.
>>47499347
I'm not very happy about bears that are also lords, but there's enough precedence that I can't say anything.
Why do minotaurs get prowess, besides that it's a red evergreen keyword?
Both the spells matter mechanic and the flavor of it being skill don't blend very well with the tribe, your flavor needs to back this up.
>>47499440
Demons aren't 2/2s, and they don't get lifelink very often.
If you do rats, they usually get deathtouch.
>>47499514
>race
>race
>race, or a different race
>race
>class
Why
Also>>47499564
>>47499616
>>47499564
You both bring up really good points. How about:
>Minotaur: Trample/bloodlust 1/provoke
>Rat: Deathtouch/"when ~ hits face that player discards"/"When this creature EtB target player discards"
>Clerics/spirits: Lifelink
>Beasts: Provoke/"GG: Regenerate" or Spiders: Vigilance
>Illusions: Shroud/hexproof/"Can't be sacraficed"/flying
I realize Clerics will fall into the issue of not being a race but I'd prefer it over spirits.
Threw this one together in, like, two minutes. Let's see if it's any good.
>>47500207
>Provoke
Did people care about Provoke even when it was around?
>>47487842
>Don't worry about rares/uncommons too much. Just get the commons done and then run some playtests. Commons are the core of your set.
I am familiar with this notion. Commons are the cards drafters will see the most, and will comprise most of their deck, so they should be solid and carry the themes and mechanics of the set fairly well. I won't be including any "trap" cards in my set, or at least nothing that's as bad as those (I hope) but I'm an amateur designer. This isn't my first set, but it's not as though I'm a pro at this either.
>No matter how good or useful any of the feedback here is, your own playtests will reveal a lot more about how well mechanics actually work.
Gatherer helps as well; seeing what works and what doesn't from there is nice. Also, I have noticed that sometimes WotC doesn't do certain things and it makes me wonder if maybe that's for a reason (mechanically, I mean).
>Regular Magic sets are made mostly for Limited, so expect custom sets to be Limited-oriented. Expect most feedback to be focused on the Limited experience, and compared to real sets.
I know. I am designing this for Limited, and with canon cards in mind as well.
>That awesome card you made that you so wanna play? Now imagine that your OPPONENT plays it against you. Still awesome? Don't forget the opponent's experience.
Indeed. I don't like making cards that can't be answered or played around in some way. Or if I do, on the off chance, make one like that, you usually have to jump through hoops to get it yourself. I don't want to make a set that's not fun to draft, and "pet cards" are something I am trying to avoid. I feel like this is common sense, really.
Thanks for taking the time to at least respond.
>>47488412
Looks like protection, smells like protection, but not protection. Could probably be a bit bigger in P/T.
>>47488687
>Eldrast Charger
Needs a drawback for a red 1-drop 2-power creature.
>Containment Sphere (>>47486567)
In-colour unconditional common removal is set at ~5 mana these days. If an artifact is doing something as efficiently as a regular colour, something's probably wrong. If it stays as exile, it needs to be uncommon; but you need to remove the enchantment-exile part either way. [Colourless] Artifacts do actually have a defined section of the colour pie, and artifact/enchantment removal is not one of them. If you've decided you want to do the Planar Chaos thing and try an alternate colour pie, kudos to you.
>Coral Strider (>>47486642)
Defender isn't actually going to change much. People will draft this card precisely because it's a good defender.
>Question is Ambush Viper too good at common under NWO?
Innistrad is post-NWO, so you should be okay. It skirts breaking the colour pie though. Compare to Immolating Glare and Kill Shot.
>>47489486
A 3/3 flyer in blue with second upside is worth about 5 mana. This card resembles Mulldrifter, so I reckon you should push it to 3UU, or make it a 4/4 for 4UU.
>>47489667
Lilting Refrain cost 1U and had no activation cost, but that was in a time when creatures were weak and spells were OP. You should cost at 1U+1U or U+2U. Keeping more mana open means the blue player needs to more carefully weigh board development against countering.
>>47490128
This card looks like fun.
>>47490231
Interesting way to counter Equipment-heavy decks. Also consider sacrifice for the Equipment instead if it nixes too hard, and maybe you should. If you change to sacrifice, you'll want reminder text. (Control of that equipment doesn't change. You can't sacrifice Equipment you don't control.) See also Ogre Geargrabber and Vulshok Battlemaster.
What type of world would you like to see?
What limited archetypes and themes would you like to see for that world?
>>47491786
Pretty simple and fair common, but feels like it should be black if it's a creature milling more than two at a time. See also Returned Centaur and Balustrade Spy, which are black. Blue creature mill tends to be one or two cards repeatedly.
>>47492174
Kinda curious what sort of set you're making. Whatever it is, I imagine this may be a workhorse creature. If that trigger procs repeatedly and adds bookkeeping to the game too often, move to uncommon.
>>47493852
As mentioned, look for cards with two abilities and compare to find the order, but you can think of the textbox as a timeline of the card's life. Top is when it's cast (born), middle is its life (battlefield) and bottom is its death (death triggers).
>>47495075
Nice plain common.
>>47495098
Feels like it should be GU, but Cold-Eyed Selkie is giving me a cold-eyed stare that just says "stop talking shit about my pet snake before I shank you."
>>47495434
Oh, derp, I just reread your card. I read it as the Gilt-Leaf Winnower ability. Since it's an instant already, perhaps you could try another funky template.
Choose target creature. If that creature's power or toughness would be changed this turn, destroy it instead.
>>47497433
Simple clean card.
>>47497444
I think you could make an argument for this ability in any colour pair/trio, so I'm not going to touch that. It's an interesting form of creature protection though. Most cards like this just use one mana payment to save everything, while this one uses separate mana payments for each creature. That might sound like you've made a fairer card, but it's going to be oppressive in Limited. Mass removal not common, and most creatures die one or two at a time. If you can establish a dominant board position, this creature makes sure you stay dominant unless a board wipe can be found. Probably move to mythic for that reason, or perhaps only trigger on the first dying creature, or only trigger at end of turn for a single creature that died that turn.
>>47503119
Water/pirate world.
Pirate tribal, merfolk tribal, -1/-1 counters no infect.
>>47503475
Creature or enchantment card.
>>47503019
>Cass
I realize it's very similar to Protection, but I don't actually want to use protection because of how it would make Cass unlockable, which I don't want.
>>47503321
Eh... it feels kinda odd for UR to care about stuff like enchantments and planeswalkers.
>>47503323
I'm getting the feeling that this might be too good as-is. First off, just imagine discarding another Cultist for the ability.
>>47503533
This could be interesting.
>>47497601
>>47497831
If you use the sacrifice-as-cost template, some people who won't realise that CARDNAME changes as needed here. Should almost certainly cost RR or 1RR base, even with that creature sacrifice. Splice cost should be 1R or RR.
>>47498158
The ability feels U, GU, or UB to me, but not G. It also doesn't have a place in the game. There's no such thing as a fair trade, because you're also getting a card to replace the creature you just lost or better. As a mechanic, it's basically evasion, so just cut out the middleman and give it trample or menace.
>>47499288
The potential board complexity this monster can create...
>>47499347
>>47499440
>>47499514
I feel like these should be 3-drops, but then Lord of the Unreal and Master of the Pearl Trident happened. Now I just feel confused.
>>47499364
Having the ability to develop your board state while still having easy access to counterspells is dangerous. This card is almost certainly not safe anywhere below 5 mana.
>>47501692
Reminds me of Juzam Djinn and its ilk. An efficient beatstick that's played in a way that the downsides don't matter.
>>47501702
If you want him at 3 mana, make him Mythic. Also, don't exile the spell, just discard the card. You shouldn't be messing with the stack.
X, T, [exile a card from your hand / discard a card] with converted mana cost X: <effect>
>>47503321
>Leyline in name
>No leyline ability
Should probably be rare though.
>>47503323
I quite liked the Kindle mechanic. See also Rite of Flame, Accumulated Knowledge, the Burst cycle from Oddysey, Diligent Farmhand, and Pardic Firecat.
>>47503475
Obzedat's Aid with less targets does not justify reduced cost. The shuffle clause on the original Eldrazi titan cards was intended as a foil to the cheaper reanimation in their day. Nowadays, Wizards makes you pay a bit more to cheat creatures back so it doesn't need that shuffle clause.
>>47503533
Seems legit.
>>47503536
Fixed it
>>47503667
>Reminds me of Juzam Djinn and its ilk.
It's actually based on Masked Gorgon.
>>47503670
A 3/3 with flying haste and lifelink is not a ballanced card at 5, especially when it gives all your other creatures haste and lifelink on entry.
>>47503793
Rekindle is strong but not insane.
Arcane chant is a worse goblin electromancer.
>>47503807
>>47503667
>>47503658
Attempt #3
>>47503667
>this ability feels U, GU or UB to me
not him but Briarbridge Patrol basically does that to a MUCH MUCH lesser extent and trample or menace does make more sense then vigilance
>>47503944
Just because a card is a weaker version of another doesn't mean you need to change it.
>Angel
Just go with 6 mana broskii, 7 is too much. Would you really expect a RW deck to hit 7 mana in a draft before the game ends?
Also, as a flavor note, angels are always very similar to the others on their plane. This is just a thing with magic, so I hope you can find more black angels.
>>47503793
>>47503944
Stop deleting your posts, we need to see the development process.
At the very least so we don't suggest something you've done already.
>>47503944
>Arcane Chant
Good name change. May need to up cost to 1UR or might not, since it's not as vulnerable as a creature. Try it both ways. See also Cloud Key, Semblance Anvil, Jace's Sanctum, Arcane Melee, Etherium Sculptor, Goblin Electromancer.
>Arcane chant is a worse goblin electromancer. (>>47503807)
It's not susceptible to creature removal, the one family of mechanics every colour has access to. But yes, in a Limited game, the Electromancer is a better card just for having a body in most cases.
>Hilux Avenger
As a 4/4, you could cost this at 6 mana, possibly 5, especially since it's RW the fastest colour pair. With the impact this thing will have, you should defenitely move to rare. See also Butcher of the Horde.
>Rekindle
A little weaker, but still strong. This version has its merits. Later on when you tinker with the set some more, you may decide that 5 mana for any creature/enchantment is the better fit, or you might not. Who knows.
>>47504035
>Terror of the Fells (>>47498158)
The Patrol needs more mana invested to recoup the loss if you trade, it's not a huge creature, and you'll note that it triggers when damaging "one or more." Double-blocking does doesn't result in two or more clues. I suppose I should have said "does not belong in the game without some serious tweaking," because most mechanics can find a place if you can get the right set of tweaks.
>>47504075
Mardu angels then?
6 mana it is then. For Version 1.
>>47504103
was trying to limit the number of images I use, due to the image limit, the only change was Arcane Chant was three mand
>>47503323
I tried to make Rite of Fame on-a-stick work. Does 3 cmc fix the power balance problems?
>>47504209
I think, personally, that two mana was fine for a first playtest. It's not obviously OP to me. If anything, it needs to be moved to common if you want that graveyard-copies part to matter, which then runs into NWO.
>>47504181
>trying to limit the number of images I use
You just posted a random image.
All of the effort put into this bullshit, all of the time and imagination wasted on achieving COMPLETELY NOTHING
wizards will never print these cards you will never play with them your friends will never care because they like EDH more.
the only people that care is this tiny group of isolated autists stroking eachothers dongs
>>47504345
He says, posting on /tg/ the epitome of wasted time.
>>47504388
atleast most fa/tg/uys are making the most of the time wasted
instead of doing completely nothing with nothing
mtg threads are about a game that is huge IRL and are trying to better themselves at the game or seek ways to have more fun.
dnd threads are about discussing a game that they like or complain about a game they hate
wh40k threads are about a complex fluff or about strategy or modelling and generally trying to better yourself
custom card threads are literally about doing nothing with nothing and then saying nothing meaningful about it and nobody ever got any tangeable use out of these threads.
>>47504345
>All of the effort put into this bullshit, all of the time and imagination wasted on achieving COMPLETELY NOTHING
I use my set to improve my campaign setting
It also occupies me during my holidays
You know, what a hobby is meant to do
>>47503667
>Should almost certainly cost RR or 1RR base
Reverberate costs RR, saccing a creature definitely should reduce the cost by at least 1, looking at diabolical intent, it usually reduces costs by 2.
The splice cost is more debatable, but it is really really hard to get value out of a reverberate when you first have to cast a spell you want to reverberate (or wait for an opponent's spell) which likely needs to cost 3 mana and then cast arcane (likely around 2 mana) + splice cost and even after that the splice breaks even in card advantage and at most gained a mild tempo advantage if you sacced close the worst possible creature, and that would be done on turn 6 without ramp.
I'm glad it worked for the challenge though :P
>>47504531
Why wither?
>>47504345
So, what, we should all have hobbies that produce something? You sound like a Communist. Why don't you go to /v/ and start yelling at people who just want to play videogames?
Also, if you think your post is going to accomplish anything, you are delusional.
>>47504497
Glacial Ray was a potent sideways strategy though, I really can't ignore that, and that was when Shock was the golden standard in burn spells. By all means, try it at 1 mana if you feel like it, but I'm almost certain you'll end up increasing the cost once someone figures out how to break it. And if I'm wrong that's cool too.
>>47504531
Not a fan of the green one because Wither isn't evergreen.
>>47504531
>spirit
>elemental
>spirit cleric
>spirit
>dryad
Why
>>47504531
Wither doesnt make sense with the rest being evergreen keywords.
Give the green one deathtouch or hexproof?
>>47504345
I actually hope to have a decent amount of people play with my cards, though I don't know whether or not I'll be able to actually manage it.
>>47504640
>Glacial Ray was a potent sideways strategy though
Which saw almost no play in standard though, and gained card advantage for only 2 mana.
The reason I posted the card for the challenge was because the first time I was balancing the card I made it only able to copy 2 cmc spells and the more I thought about it (especially looking at reverberate) the more I buffed it.
>I'm almost certain you'll end up increasing the cost once someone figures out how to break it
The normal cost, the splice cost or both?
>>47504880
>[Glacial Ray] saw almost no play in standard though, and gained card advantage for only 2 mana.
Most cards are made for Limited, so it just makes sense to evaluate in the context of Limited for the most part. You're correct about Glacial Ray, but it's also a moot point between us. Apples and oranges.
>[Increase the] normal cost, the splice cost or both?
The normal cost at the very least. Copying a 7 mana Sorcery for 2 mana and an outclassed creature is still powerful. Or copying a spell with multiple spells spliced on. Even hoser cards can't be tuned too powerful.
>>47503235
>-1/-1 counters no infect.
Wither then
>>47503235
>Pirate world
Already done
This started off as basically a tutor before another anon pointed out it could manipulate cards outside the game. Starting to wonder if changing it was a good decision though.
>>47504779
>>47504705
>>47504640
>>47504618
