Build the Wall! edition
To make cards, download MSE for free from here
http://magicseteditor.sourceforge.net/
>Mechanics doc (For the making of color pie appropriate cards)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgaKCOzyqM48dFdKRXpxTDRJelRGWVZabFhUU0RMcEE
>Read this before you post your shitty card!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jn1J1Mj-EvxMxca8aSRBDj766rSN8oSQgLMOXs10BUM
>Q: Can there be a sixth color?
A: http://pastebin.com/kNAgwj7i
>Q: What's the difference between multicolor and hybrid?
A: http://pastebin.com/yBnGki1C
>Art sources.
http://digital-art-gallery.com/
http://www.artstation.com/
http://drawcrowd.com/
http://fantasygallery.net/
http://grognard.booru.org/
http://fantasy-art-engine.tumblr.com/
>Stitch cards together with
http://old.photojoiner.net/
>/ccg/ sets (completed and in development)
http://pastebin.com/hsVAbnMj
The evergreen keywords are outdated.
Reach is now Tertiary in red.
Intimidate and landwalk is gone, it's gone man.
No menace.
>>47647065
just pretend we pre-Khans in here okay? :'^)
>>47647081
Why would you willingly and knowingly use an old OP image?
>>47647108
I used the first one I clicked on that I had saved so uh yeah that's what ye get.
>>47647065
>Reach is now Tertiary in red.
Show me evidence of this beyond Maro's post.
>>47647169
Skyraker Giant.
And then Tears of Valakut. Deals damage directly and only to creatures with flying.
>>47647169
Reach being tertiary in red is a strange beast. On one hand, it's not very red because it's defensive. Red doesn't do defensive. On the other hand, red is friends with green, and it could be a mutual keyword, but they already have two: haste and trample. So I'm still trying to figure out why people think it is for sure, when we haven't seen it happen enough to make that judgement call. And it's not like MaRo has ever gone back on anything he's said; look where Skulk is right now.
I'd wait for another year before taking a hard stance on it, personally. That is, unless you feel the need to be opinionated about it. Which is fine, and you are free to do of course. I won't be giving anything in red Reach in the forseeable future unless it's for flavor, like with that giant.
>Spock mind controls people
He does? Huh. I have only rudimentary knowledge about him aside from knowing he's the Spider Man we deserve.
>>47647267
this just feels so wrong and always will
fucc the maro post this is ugly
>>47647269
Reach is important in green because green doesn't get fliers. Without it, green would mechanically suffer.
Red gets fliers, it doesn't need reach.
>>47647299
Red is second after green in lack of fliers.
You rarely if ever see a red creature under 4cmc that has flying.
>>47647299
This post implies I was commenting on green reach at all, which is not the case, so I wonder why you even wrote it.
Still working on this.
>>47647269
>On the other hand, red is friends with green
You'll notice however, that Red and Green have two different damage effects. Red gets "damage to creatures without flying" and Green gets "damage to creatures with flying" so they're definitely at odds there.
>And it's not like MaRo has ever gone back on anything he's said; look where Skulk is right now.
He later regretted Mentor of the Meek. I remember because people on /tg/ were bringing it up like he's a massive hypocrite because he said over a year earlier that he thought it was fine.
>He does? Huh. I have only rudimentary knowledge about him aside from knowing he's the Spider Man we deserve.
Well, he originally used mind control to swap his and Peter's minds so he could have Pete's body. Then later he used mind-control tech on some Spidey villains to try and reform them. Didn't work out well.
>>47647267
>The exception proves the rule.
>>47647667
>You'll notice however, that Red and Green have two different damage effects. Red gets "damage to creatures without flying" and Green gets "damage to creatures with flying" so they're definitely at odds there.
To be fair I did cite this for the express purpose of pointing out they already share two keywords so that saying they could both have reach because of it is a flimsy rationale. You are correct though; red does tend to favor damaging nonfliers and green fliers.
>MaRo
He is but a man, and man can be wrong about a great many things, as well as a hyprocrite. Aren't we all? Not that I am defending him; I personally think he has some bias issues and that's bad for a developer, but people give the dude too much grief.
>spidey
I feel like the detain on combat damage should really be an activated ability instead. I also think vigilance represents his Spidey Sense really well, but so might Hexproof. In fact, given his reflexes and whatnot as well... maybe First strike, hexproof, [1WU]: Detain target creature. (i know you won't use detain and type it out but you get the idea)
>>47646549
>Build the Wall! edition
I have a wall idea I've been kicking around. I want it to be very effective against creatures, but fold to just about any sort of non-creature based removal.
>>47647269
First red was a shitty blue, now its a shitty green. Excellent.
>>47648194
I'm retarded. Got too excited and forgot to post the image.
>>47648194
>fold to just about any sort of non-creature based removal.
Here's something I edited from Wall of Shadows.
>~ can't be the target of spells that can target only creatures or of abilities that can target only creatures.
How do I into blue?
>>47648253
That's neat wording, but not what I meant. My fault for bad wording. I mean I don't want creatures to be able to easily kill Draining Bulwark. I made it with trample, double strike, trample, and combat trick abilities in mind, all ways to squeeze value out of low p/t creatures.
>>47647714
Ofc it's an exception when it hasn't even been around as a tietary mechanic for less than a year.
>>47648276
I would change the name of resolution, because that's a game term for what happens when a spell hits the top of the stack and all players pass priority.
Maybe resolute, or steadfast, or something.
>>47648395
Funny thing is steadfast was original word for it.
Totally forgot about resolution being resolved.
>>47648194
>First red was a shitty blue, now its a shitty green. Excellent.
U wot m8? How exactly does my post convey this? I hope you're being cheeky.
>>47648212
Yeah, sure. And it's uncommon so it won't get drafted enough to slow things down too much, I don't think. If you wanted it to be super vulnerable you could just give it the illusion drawback too.
>>47648276
>Diremptor
It's fragile, but strong. Would make RW Horde decks a nightmare.
>Bird-Man
Yeah, this one's busted. Resolution is a strong spin on indestructible, but the token gen is the meat of the issue.
>squirrel
I've seen collective done before in different iterations. That's fine. Not sure about a creature being able to copy itself on the cheap for this cheap, AND having collective.
>Cradler
The lack of a nontoken clause will probably break this in half. Check Pawn of Ulamog.
>>47648374
>Menace is announced
>Number of cards with Menace:
>Origins: 3
>Battle for Zendikar: 3
>Oath of the Gatewatch: 6
>Shadows over Innistrad: 9
>Reach is announced as tertiary in Red
>Number of Red cards with Reach:
>Origins: 1
>Battle for Zendikar: 0
>Oath of the Gatewatch: 0
>Shadows over Innistrad: 0
I'm sorry, you were saying? There has been more than enough time for them to print at least just a few more Red cards with Reach. Yet they haven't printed ANY after Skyraker. And it's not like they're down on Reach specifically, it still gets printed a bunch.
Taking a break from rares, now working on a special cycle of mythics for my set.
>>47648797
Why are you using the colorshifted frame? Also, not a fan of how repeatable that ability is, or that it exiles. If it destroyed, or forced a sac, and the opponent got the Frog, I could see it. Well, on that power level, not on that card. It's really not White or Green at all.
>>47648853
>Also, not a fan of how repeatable that ability is
Comparable to Ethersworn Adjudicator.
>It's really not White or Green at all.
Wait, do you mean your suggestions, or my card? Because caring about numbers of creatures and making creature tokens is both green and white, while exiling creatures is also white.
>Why are you using the colorshifted frame?
Just a fun flavor thing I'm trying. My set deals a lot with time travel, and each card in this cycle is going to be a legendary creature from the plane's past, so I used the timeshifted symbol and frame.
>>47648760
Tertiary means it maybe gets it like 2 times per year.
>>47648939
>Comparable to Ethersworn Adjudicator.
There's a big difference between destruction and exile. Also, Ethersworn needs two other colors to use that ability.
>Wait, do you mean your suggestions, or my card?
I was referring specifically to the exile ability, though I was a bit hasty when I said that, because White does exile stuff, though Maro has said that they're trying to cut back on "straight up exile" in White. For the purpose of this card though, it's not really relevant. However, exiling something isn't something I really see as belonging to the specific GW combination (it's definitely more WB), but it is just one card.
>>47648276
It's hard to use Diremptor because you get the mana after damage, so it doesn't work well with Firebreath attacks. I get that the idea is probably to get it from First Strike, but that means you have to build your deck as a weird mixed bag of First Strikers that don't ever benefit from it, and firebreathers that are useless without them.
>>47649074
I've been doing a lot of exile matters stuff in this block, and GW in this set specifically works with exile quite a bit. I don't think I've made anything too outlandish or blatantly out of color, though. If you take extreme exception to something, let me know.
Anyway, continuing on.
>>47649313
Pretty cool, but you might want to tone that down to a 2/4
I am also not seeing the reason for black on the card
>>47649426
Exiling and casting your opponent's creatures is pretty black, I would say.
>>47649435
Maybe if it interacted with the graveyard or hand, but honestly I am not an expert on this junk
>>47649435
I would specify "exile that creature", because on first read I thought you exiled Ganna and the top card of your library.
>>47649623
Casting their creatures from exile is functionally identical to casting their creatures from their graveyard. You're still indirectly "stealing" their creatures and casting them for yourself.
>>47649815
I can do that. Thanks, anon.
>>47649313
>>47648797
Why are you using special snowflake frames?
It makes you look amateurish.
>>47647269
It's more of a matter for limited. Red doesn't get flyers below rare, and reach helps with that.
Similarly, green doesn't get haste below rare and is really tertiary for haste (black is secondary and gets it at common/uncommon to encourage BR aggro).
Reach was also the only evergreen keyword that was primary in one color and absent in all the rest, so I could see wanting to use it more often.
>>47649815
I changed it to "exile that card," similar to Unscythe, since it isn't a permanent anymore at the point of exile, but the wording is more specific now.
>>47650006
My block deals a lot with time travel. This cycle is a series of legendary creatures from the past of my plane, and so I'm using the timeshifted frame and symbol for this cycle only. It's a fun flavor thing I'm trying.
>>47650084
personally i dont care what frames people use but you shuld know that youre using the planar chaos color shifted frame, not the future sight time shifted frame
>>47650084
>This cycle is a series of legendary creatures from the past of my plane
Not him, but if you want to show "past" why not use the old Magic frame? Oh, and I don't see what that has to do with the set symbol.
>>47650127
I still can't think of a great way to word the "can block anything, no exceptions" ability.
>>47650222
The future sight frame was used for futureshifted cards, or cards from some time in the future. My cards are supposed to be from the past, and so using that frame didn't make sense. The timshifted cards in Planar Chaos represent cards from an alternate time, which is closer to what I was going for.
>>47650274
>why not use the old Magic frame?
That was the original idea, actually, but the differences in the frame sizes warped the card art and looked pretty bad. I still might switch to that, if I get my art issues taken care of.
>>47650274
Not him, but the purple symbol was used on time spiral timeshifted cards
>>47650389
I've tried to use the planeshift frame to represent departures from convention, but people get too focused on it not being an exact color-shift. You'll find much less resistance when using futureshift frames.
(Also, not all divergent timeline cards used the special template,such as AEther Membrane and Needlepeak Spider.)
>>47650274
>>47650127
Can't block flying though
Well, after some quick googling, I fixed the font and warping issues I was having with the old frames. Do you guys prefer these to the timeshifted planar chaos frames?
>>47650084
It's alright. I wonder if you could cost this higher so it could have more power and a bigger butt.
>>47649313
Needs to tone down the power with double strike. Really feels like it needs blue since it's "drawing" you cards, unless you change it such that you can only cast the cards that turn.
>>47648797
Repeatable removal in GW feels wrong, especially on top of everything else going on.
>>47651063
They set the tone much better.
Colorshifted frames have a very distinct, singular function, so any card using them that does not fit that function will be jarring. It's kind of like a card saying "Creatures you control get flying".
>>47651103
>It's alright. I wonder if you could cost this higher so it could have more power and a bigger butt.
You don't want it to have higher power, though. You want as many creatures as possible to be able to survive a hit from it, so you can steal them.
>Needs to tone down the power with double strike.
No, it's a 5cmc mythic legend, three power is fine even with double strike. Dragon-Style Twins is comparable, and even has prowess to boot.
>Really feels like it needs blue since it's "drawing" you cards, unless you change it such that you can only cast the cards that turn.
Black has plenty of cards with similar effects, including Colfenor's Plans, Fiend of the Shadows, Hedonist's Trove, Praetor's Grasp, and Nightveil Specter.
>Repeatable removal in GW feels wrong, especially on top of everything else going on.
Not sure exactly what you mean by "everything else," anon. If you could elaborate, I can address it. But white has plenty of cases of repeatable removal, and both colors are good with tokens. I see no particular issue with it.
>>47651203
I'll stick with these, then. Thanks!
Not sure if I'm happy with the cost on this one. Thoughts?
>>47651414
>You don't want it to have higher power, though. You want as many creatures as possible to be able to survive a hit from it, so you can steal them.
What happens is that you flash it in to steal something, then your opponents never attack into it until they find removal. There's no reason to try to attack around with it, and there's no incentive for you to attack with it and provoke blocks. Might as well make it something that just steals on etb.
>>47651414
>Black has plenty of cards with similar effects
Colfenor's Plans has a massive downside, and none of the others draw cards from your deck.
>>47651615
>What happens is that you flash it in to steal something, then your opponents never attack into it until they find removal.
Which makes it a game changer in limited. Even stealing one thing and then walling your opponent is huge. I don't want it to be an efficient attacker on top of that.
>Colfenor's Plans has a massive downside, and none of the others draw cards from your deck.
But the effects are still similar. Additionally, red exiles cards from the top of your own library frequently, while black lets you play exiled cards for longer specified times. This is a marriage of those effects, which is why the card is multicolored and not hybrid.
>>47651775
you can marry Jump and Plummet and still not get a UG card
>>47652682
Jump and Plummet combine to make an effect which is out of color for UG. This does not. I keep an open mind, but unless you can provide me with some really compelling evidence, I'm not changing it.
>>47652682
Sometimes you actually can.
See Recoil, which can functionally become blue/black artifact or enchantment removal.
So... it looks like these guys are nearly finalized. I think my only questions I have is if Batman's ability could be reduced by 1, and if I should remove Lifelink from Steph.
>>47654281
I would say that Batman's ability is fine at its current cost, but agree that lifelink should be removed from Stephanie.
>>47654281
Also, congrats on nearly finishing the Bat-cycle. I know you've been working on them for a long time. Props to you, COanon.
>>47654281
Batman can permanently exile himself if you go a turn without attacking.
You might want to make it "at the beginning of your next declare attackers step".
>>47654744
Even if he declares zero attackers, the Declare Attackers step isn't skipped.
>>47654780
Someone could end the turn on you with an effect before your declare attackers step though.
>>47654848
Good for them, then. That's what those sort of effects are for.
>>47654744
>>47654848
Yeah, I'm not really going to complain if someone's crafty enough to do that, and I'm probably not going to modify the card to somehow work around that. I mean, it's like saying a spell can be countered. Yeah, I realize there are ways to disrupt these cards, but that's something I'm going to have to deal with.
>>47654496
>>47654651
Awesome, thank you, thank you, thank you. Yeah, been quite a while. Feels nice to finish them though. Big Batman fan, so... yeah. Well, time to move on to other stuff now.
>Border Captain
Lifelink doesn't really combo with player damage, so I'm kinda curious as to why it gives it to unblocked creatures only. I think the card is good overall though.
>>47655012
>Lifelink doesn't really combo with player damage
wat
Evolve or die.
>>47655275
Well, it's not an ability that combos with player damage in a way that it doesn't with creature/planeswalker damage. Infect, for example, has different interactions with all three.
>>47655012
>I'm kinda curious as to why it gives it to unblocked creatures only.
The mechanical subtheme for R/B in the set involves discouraging or preventing blocks. This card rewards drafting and building along those lines.
>>47655340
See, stuff like Battle Leap I don't really see the synergy. When you give a creature Deathtouch, you want it to be blocked. I mean, what's the point of giving something Deathtouch if it's not going to hit a creature? If it were me, I'd make it BG and make it so the creature had to be blocked. Which, incidentally, would combo with Menace.
>>47655508
You use battle leap to prevent chump blocking. Suddenly, their 1/1 token can't block and they have to make a much harder choice of whether or not to block, and what to block with.
>>47655552
But, unless the defending player is far behind, I imagine the only time they would be willing to essentially sacrifice a valuable creature to block if is the attacking creature had a high amount of power, which doesn't really need Deathtouch to be dangerous. I'll stop, to be honest, I don't play much anyway, probably not thinking about this right or something.
>>47655690
The point is that it discourages blocking, but if they block anyway, you can make sure that block is more in your favor.
>>47655552
but if they have one 1/1 token that gets panic, it's quite likely have more that they can chump with. especially since your set/block has a token theme.
Does the big cost justify the effect?
>>47655992
Them's the breaks. Some cards aren't useful in every situation, anon. In that case, since you're in red and black, hopefully you drafted something to clear the board.
I think countering is too strong, so this just returns the spell to hand instead. Not sure if the coin flips are too excessive or not though. But it's difficult to manipulate, and pretty much the only other "random" ability is to reveal the top of the library, which can be manipulated, or incorporate a shuffle, which is time-consuming.
>>47655996
Probably. I mean, it's a 4/4 without protection and will just get wiped off the board if you don't have a good target.
>>47656139
Should I adjust the cost?
>Wanda
Since the effect is symmetrical, I honestly think you could go with countering. However, I think the card will be much more fun to play with as-is.
>>47656234
>Should I adjust the cost?
Ah, I think you could definitely reduce it. 4RG, MAYBE 3RG. However, I think it would be better at its current cost if it just had some sort of protection. Maybe think about Regen.
>I think the card will be much more fun to play with as-is.
Yeah, I knew that countering would be a lot more annoying for unlucky players, which is why it returns to hand, as a sort of "better luck next time." But I think the effect is still impactful, since you're not going to get the mana back, and it could mess up your play.
I have a few cards from a set I'm making with mechanics I want reviewed. Also, is there an easy way to put multiple cards in one picture? I haven't figured that out, and I feel that it would be useful to know.
>>47656451
>>47655996
>>47656234
If you lose the ETB trigger, or lose haste, you can cut the cost.
>>47656469
>>47656363
I'll drop it to 4RG, but I'll forego the protection. I don't like engines to be entirely self-sufficient.
>Kaine
Use shift + enter to avoid the text running into the flipped P/T on the front side like that. DFC's can have weird formatting, like pic related. Mechanically, I love the give and take of the card; each side plays off the other well.
>>47656451
Photojoiner. It's in the OP.
>>47656517
>Use shift + enter to avoid the text running into the flipped P/T
Huh, cool. Thanks for that.
>>47656659
No problem! I've been working with DFC's for two sets now, and that was a problem I ran into a lot at first. Drove me crazy.
>Medusa
RW is an odd color combination for such a defensive card, but I do always love seeing fresh takes on what colors can do together. She's one hell of a wall.
>>47656747
>Medusa
Well, it's one of those things were I just stuck two different abilities together because I thought the combo works well for the character. I'll probably tinker with it some more in the future.
>Abyssal Entity
I feel like that's a bit of a steep cost for that ability. If it were just discard I probably wouldn't have a problem with it, but even then... I dunno, it might just be me, but doing that for just one counter seems strange. But at the same time you probably want to avoid just locking something out, right? Maybe if there were some other benefit, like the entity itself got a counter of some kind (most likely +1/+1). Maybe attach a mana cost and have it exile from a graveyard instead?
>>47656872
There are zero +1/+1 counters in this set. In fact, apart from Planeswalkers, this set has no counter type other than time counters.
>If it were just discard I probably wouldn't have a problem with it
The first set had an "exile matters" theme, pic related for example, so there's a lot of exile scattered throughout the block. It helps the two play better together. Additionally, with all of the vanishing and counters matter stuff in this set, the ability to remove counters at no mana cost is, I feel, deceptively powerful.
>>47656747
But... Why not just use Hex Parasite?
Kinda weak when that and Hexmage exist.
>>47657225
They aren't in the set, so I'm not balancing around them. I design primarily with a closed limited environment in mind.
>>47657374
Is there a sufficient counter presence to make it worth it?
Will discarding a card to remove just one counter be worth it?
If not, what about removing up to two counters? Or paying with a cost other than a card from hand, like maybe a card from graveyard?
Or could you add another ability, like maybe Deathtouch (being abyssal) to make up for it?
I just think it seems a little weak right now, with the ability's cost so high. 1 card to remove 1 counter is almost never worth it, barring things like Divinity counters or something.
>>47657506
>Is there a sufficient counter presence to make it worth it?
Definitely
>Will discarding a card to remove just one counter be worth it?
Sometimes.Popping a Vanishing creature early or removing a counter from a card which relies on having that counter are both impactful plays. There are also several cards in the set which trigger from counters being removed from permanents, and this gives you a reliable way to trigger those cards. Plus, it's an evasive 6/6, which certainly isn't bad.
>>47657660
Alright. Depends on the environment.
As for evasion, trample isn't usually black except on the biggest demons. Intimidate might also fit the flavor of "scary abyssal horror" better, too. Just my opinion though, it's probably fine as is.
Well, I'm sure everyone knows about this guy, right? OK, for serious, I have no clue how to cost this, and the ability is crazy complex. It's a DFC not because the guy actually transforms, but because the ability is too complex to be on one card. And it's still not exactly right, but I can live with it for now. So, this guy, for some reason, has magical guns that only appear at night. When he shoots people with them, they turn to stone until the next morning. This is why I'm reusing the Werewolf daytime-nighttime mechanic.
>>47657854
Where do you get this template?
>>47657909
What, the frame? From the MSE forums. Not hard at all to find. Just use the link in the OP for MSE to start.
>>47657854
I think you could use tap effects rather than counters.
>>47648212
Needs to also set the P/T of those creatures since P/T-setting abilities are also negated this way. You'll note that every single card that removes abilities also sets a P/T.
>>47657933
Shit, I think I might just do that.
Still uncertain if the white pact is too weak. Perhaps it should be a pact reverse damage or second sunrise. Opinions?
>>47657926
It's giving me the gay "can't create file" error
Too cheap?
>>47658169
Do you have MSE installed in one of your Program Files folders?
>>47658177
Not a fan of this, you could easily get away with practically the same thing on one card.
>As long as there are five or more time counters on ~, it gets +5/+1 and has flying.
I suggest differentiating the two sides more.
>>47658177
Impossible to tell in isolation. I'd need to see what synergies it has with the other cards in its set. If it were printed today as a one-off, probably not.
>>47658186
nvm figured it out
how do I get the m15 fonts to work now?
>>47658235
Like you would any other font.
>>47651414
this card is ultra broken
>>47658163
Would something like this function?
Pact - You may exile this card face down from your hand. Activate this ability only when you could cast a sorcery.
Reveal your hand to target opponent. They choose a card from it. Discard that card. If you do, you may cast this card from exile without paying it's mana cost.
I dislike the fiddling with emblems.
>>47658315
>Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.
sorry, had the wording wrong
>>47655364
I like it
>>47658315
Memory issues mostly. The emblem is there to help you (and moreso your opponent) remember that there is "something" that you can play as an instant in exile.
Your alternate wording could work like morph creatures, but then you've traded an emblem token for some other type of token in order to have the reminder text. Emblems that exile were the best way I could come up with.
>>47658462
It's not an issue when you have the card already face down in exile as a reminder.
>>47658555
EACH upkeep? Um, no. If it was only your's than maybe, but absolutely not each.
>>47658621
fuck oops
>>47658489
Exactly what i was thinking, exile is still a game zone, so zero memory issues would exist.
>>47658573
Careful! Lands are counted as colourless, though you could list it as "any mana lands exiled with Homeforge Hearth could produce". Also, get rid of "under", it's not a term in magic. Go look up similar cards and copy their wording!
>>47658624
Way too strong, it has no downside. Personally i'd go with legendary and mythic, but etb tapped at rare with a worse tribe also works. White/black human is valuable as fuck, and clerics had a small amount of support.
Alternatively, make it work for either play during their upkeep, or have a cost to activate.
>>47658591
Unplayable at sorcery, almost entirely worse manamorphose at instant. Option one is pretty much only going to hit a potential blocker as is.
>>47658608
It would see play as a 5cmc damnation, the top half is ridiculously situational, although it does technically make the card better.
The numbers seem arbitrary for no reason, and the mill is an upside. Look at Force of Will for inspiration.
>You may pay 5 life and exile 2 cards from your hand rather than pay Grim Evening's mana cost.
modified some of the cards.
>>47658845
Steal the wording from existing cards, it makes everything better.
Exiling from library is a non factor, and B Pay 4 life: Wrath of God is way too strong.
>>47658842
At the beginning of your upkeep if you control a token permanent you may pay 1 life and tap ~. If you do put a 1/1 white and black Human Cleric creature token onto the battlefield.
Making it triggered is better than activated if you want it to happen onceper turn in this caseand at a specific time.
>>47658833
It's not a good card, but it's a functional card, the issue now is that
>Draw a card.
isn't really in both white and green by itself, and any part of a card must be in both colors for hybrid mana, because hybrid is EASIER to cast, while multi is HARDER to cast and thus can encompass EITHER color in its effects.
>>47658855
Exiled cards exist in a zone already, it doesn't need to go under this card to be referenced
>406.6. An object may have one ability printed on it that causes one or more cards to be exiled, and another ability that refers either to “the exiled cards” or to cards “exiled with [this object].” These abilities are linked: the second refers only to cards that have been exiled due to the first. See rule 607, “Linked Abilities.”
It also doesn't need to specify "another", as it itself is not a basic land.
Lastly, you may want to say what happens if you don't have a basic to sac,
>When ~ etb, exile a basic land you control. If you don't, sacrifice ~.
Note that this does let you tap the card and gain one life before the effect resolves, but it can't produce mana without an exiled land.
>>47658624
0-cost Bitterblossom that also generates mana?
Okay.
Yep.
The tokens don't have flying. Sounds balanced to me.
>>47659037
>>47658842
You have to pay 1 mana and a life to activate the ability at the beginning of your upkeep if you control a token.
>>47659060you can use it to pay for itself
>>47659117
shit true, I'll revise it later.
I'm going on a creative spree for cowboys and indians and I'm designing sample commons for some classic wild west sets.
I get the sense that this actually wouldn't be anywhere near as oppressive as Mind's Desire due to the bulk of yard hate in eternal formats. And the setup required is very different from storm decks.
Still... hmm...
>>47658163
Not to attach MORE rules baggage to Pact, because it seems like a cool effect, but you need to allow yourself to look at the card for as long as its exiled, or otherwise you're not allowed to turn it over to reveal that you can in fact cast it. Probably. This is CR 705.5, by the way, which helps govern Morph.
Also, costs aren't allowed to target as far as I know, and you're technically allowed to pay costs in any order, so the cost needs to be worded as one continuous phrase "Reveal your hand and discard a card of an opponent's choice: ..."
I'd honestly just make it a modification of the rules to support the concept, which I know this thread sometimes hates, but its necessary to grind out design space for novelties. Just rip it from Morph and make revealing and casting it a special action:
>Djinn's Pact
>2UU
>Instant - Pact
>Pact - Reveal your hand and discard a card of an opponent's choice (You may exile this card face down for (?) as a sorcery. You may look at it for as long as it remains exiled. Turn it face up and cast it at any time by paying its Pact cost.)
>Counter each spell
Casting it (by paying an alternative cost) becomes a special action, but that's fine, because it still needs to resolve as a spell, so it makes relative rules sense. The support for being able to look at it and whatnot becomes part of the rules baggage for Pact, with the required text on the card being the bare minimum to explain on the fly. Also, removes the need for an emblem and allows costs to be more flexibly written. Unfortunately, it means Pacts can only be functionally Instants, but that's whatever.
>>47659242
Mocked up those changes because I think its a cool concept and that cleaning up the wording makes them seem far more viable.
>>47658964
>Draw a card. isn't really in both white and green by itself
Every color gets cycling, and that card is essentially a version of Rejuvenate/Renewed Faith.
Some of the current enemy-colored cards from the set. There's two for each enemy color set here's just a few that are workin' well and stuff.
>>47659341
Delete the flavor text. The rules text is too long for flavor text to be acceptable..
>>47659447
You're right. Also, further clarified the reminder text because it needs to be more Suspend-like, I think. Doesn't need the "any time you could cast an Instant" because I forgot that you can only turn cards faceup for Morph/Manifest when you have priority anyways.
>Rather than cast this card from your hand, you may exile it face down for {3} as a sorcery. You may look at it for as long as it remains exiled. Turn it face up and cast it any time by paying its Pact cost.
>>47659394
Cycling is an ability cards have and thus mechanically different, but the gist of what your saying is far enough.
>>47659485
Fuck, wrong image of an old card.
>>47659424
Simple, functional, and not creature cards. Kudos.
Is there a WB enchantment subtheme? Because I can imagine getting away with 1WB: Exile target creature.
>>47659505
>Kudos.
: )
>Is there a WB enchantment subtheme?
sort of. It's more of an interactivity subtheme. I wanted the core removals of the set to be things you engage with and not just "Point at creature = creature dies."
Soulrot was one of the solutions to that. Intervention felt acceptable due to its higher cost.
And some newer rares.
>>47659572
Clash of Cultures doesn't quite work, since you always choose modes before resolution (and the revealing of hands). It would need a rewording similar to something like "Each player reveals. You may have ~ deal 2 damage etc. If you don't each player draws etc."
I like Uggo, though I think the shadow ability may need to cost 1 more.
>>47658573
>When ~ enters the battlefield, exile a basic land you control.
>T: Add to your mana pool one mana of any color the exiled land could produce. You gain 1 life.
>>47659646
>Clash of Cultures doesn't quite work
I'll look into it.
>I think the shadow ability may need to cost 1 more.
Nah. At that point in the game you'd have enough mana to spare anyway.
I'm kinda kicking around ideas for a dragon set, but more traditional knights/dragons kinda thang.
Obviously this comes with a few problems like 'wtf does everyone who isn't red and white do?' so I'd kinda like to hear some ideas.
Also keen for any criticism on some of the cards I've thrown together.
>>47659424
>Choose one or both -
>* Destroy target creature.
>* Return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand.
>>47659736
>Creature spells you cast have Devour 1.
the trigger gives it devour after cast, which means you can't devour things as you cast it.
>>47659742
>>47659736
oh wait Devour is an etb thing?
weird...
>>47659572
>>47659646
I actually think it works via the golden rule; although USUALLY you choose modes first, this card clearly specifies otherwise and neither of the modes target.
>>47659693
Should be "Whenever..." rather than "When..."
>>47659771
>I actually think it works via the golden rule; although USUALLY you choose modes first, this card clearly specifies otherwise and neither of the modes target.
Aye, I think it functions fine. Card text specifically states to choose one after the reveal.
>>47658964
Coupled gain and draw is been in both of those colors for a long time
>>47659771
cheers guv, fixed up.
should this be 'choose an artifact, your opponent gains control of it' or is it ok as it is?
alrighty postin' a block faction sorta mechanics post;
Alchemy, the card Tideshift, is from the second set in the block, Morph the first. Thoughts on how it all looks? Interesting?
Heinous?
Ideas for more?
>>47659817
If it did both, sure, but if the card just said "Draw a card" would you ever think it was w/g hybrid?
That's what the Choose One is doing.
>>47659923
omfg this would be the worst thing E V E R.
>>47659837
Neat card, combos with
>>47659886
Quibbler is too big/cheap for common. There's more than enough chaff to bounce back in limited, and half the time it's an upside rather than a cost. I like Bilkers and Multiplicitaur. Nature Gate that only put a card face down would be weaker, but simpler and more evocative of the archetype.
>>47659934
I wanted cheap dragons so I figured they should have downsides to allow for that.
Dragons usually hoard shit, so giving your opponent an advantage when they die seems like fun stuff, especially when you can do combos like that.
Still workin' on dem commons. I kinda like this one.
>>47660053
Should probably be "Until end of turn, that land..."
Neat though. Either reimbursing 1 mana or attacking with the temp-Awakened land.
>>47659736
>>47659742
>>47659755
Just change the wording a bit and it's fine. See link:
http://magiccards.info/query?q=%21Jund
>>47658177
>>47658214
It's cooler when it transforms. Perhaps you could do 0/2 on the first side so it can die to early removal. I don't know how much your limited would focus on counters, but it would combo well with Thing In The Ice if you had removal before Thing transformed.
Also, when you're working with a transformation that can be triggered whenever you want by tapping, adding a combat trick onto the transformation tends to be more interesting. Such is the case with Kindly Stranger and Bloodline Keeper. With more focus on a transformation effect, you can afford to be more aggressive with the transformation requirements and focus less on a big body.
>>47658253
Any particular reason why?
>>47661332
A pseudo unblockable, pseudo hexproof, 4/4 flier that wins every combat for starters.
Bumping with Isamaru V.2 for all those people that want to play Mardu Voltron.
>>47662610
Zurgo is Isamaru v2. This would be v3.
>>47662610
alsothat card is broken a s f u c k
>>47662610
Isamaru is perfectly fine. This is far too undercosted.
>>47662610
>monowhite demon
No sir I don't like it
Legendary mainly so you can't have multiple copies chaining off each other.
>>47662610
>>47662803
>chaining off each other
>has to tap to activate ability
okay then
>>47662752
Monoblue Dragons
Monoblack Hydras
Monored Angels
Monogreen Sphinxes
maybe too strong? (i tried to create a strong competitive card)
should i change player to opponent to avoid to give players too much room for broken shinanigans?
>>47662948
>maybe too strong?
broken because it can hit lands
beyond that, it's unplayably bad.
>>47662948
This is fairly bad outside the one trick that makes it too good (land screwing an opponent). Compare Distress and Castigate.
>>47662850
There's too much going on. Simplify the discard/draw abilities.
>>47662962
>>47662994
What about change card to nonland card but remove the "then draws a card" part?
>>47663043
A perfectly balanced card that would probably see play in standard control decks.
Modern would never replace Thoughtseize with it.
>>47663057
>>47663043
An interesting design proposal;
Keep the target drawing a card.
Add a cantrip to it. So you can target yourself and filter your hand or your opponent without losing value.
Presenting- Magic: Frontiers
>>47663131
>Discard the top card of your library
:'^) But you can't do that.
>>47663138
only works like this
>>47663151
fucked up on the wording brb
>>47663131
revised, just giving me the duplicate file error
>>47663181
Strictly worse this.
Also it's "to target", not "to a target".
>>47663239
It's meant to be a set common but okay
>>47663267
Shock IS a common.
If you want it to remain a sorcery, up its damage to at least 3. Then it's a strictly worse Lightning Bolt but Bolt might be a bit too powerful anyway.
>>47663267
Changed.
Three mechanics so far, Loot, Shootout, and Explore.
>>47662610
>A pseudo unblockable, pseudo hexproof, 4/4 flier that wins every combat for starters.
Being resilient and good in combat doesn't equate to broken, especially with a 1CCCC cost. Can still be exiled, bounced, enchanted, blocked, etc. Plus, the tax effect is symmetrical, which makes protecting it just as hard as removing it.
>Fenris
This is undercoated in every possible way. There's a reason Isamaru and Zurgo are basically vanilla. Stapling a cheap, repeatable buff and cheap, repeatable removal to them is not balanced, nor is it a good idea.
>>47663181
And why not mention these as well. Your card needs an added upside at the very least, so as not to be underwhelming.
>>47663293
Shootout needs work since there's no wording for how a creature with Shootout triggers its Shootout. When it attacks? Taps?
Also I think it should have a number after it so that you can have Shootouts of different values.
So, for example...
>Shootout 3 (when this creature becomes tapped, it and another target creature each deal 3 damage to each other).
>>47662752
My bigger beef is that there's no power-for-price mechanics with a white-spin to make it feel demonic.
Same with Goldnight Castigator from SOI as a mono-red Angel - there's nothing protective about it and it's in fact the opposite. Flameblade Angel is at least retributive.
>>47663400
>Creatures you control don't during your untap step
Don't what?
>>47663418
they just don't
>>47663375
Mind, as an addendum, I'm not sure why you have Shootout when you can just have the already-extant Fight. Fighting is typically Green but it fits perfectly thematically well in Red.
>>47663448
Fighting is too mainstream and a green thing.
Loot is black primary, blue secondary
Shootout is red primary, green secondary
Explore is green primary, white secondary
Need some mainly white and blue mechanics.
>>47663559
Shootout is somewhere between keyworded shock and a shitty fight clone, which is unnecessary to keyword at all. Explore is basically scry plus ten minutes of unnecessary shuffling. Loot is, I think, some kind of mill-draw effect, but your wording is so poor and unclear that I'm not sure. These ideas badly need pruning and refinement. Loot is the only one that strikes me as remotely serviceable, but the number attached to it terrifies me; if I were you, I'd lose the number from loot and drop the other two abilities entirely, then I'd spend the next month reading Oracle text and learning to properly word and format cards.
>>47663660
Should be;
Put two 1/1 red Viashino creature tokens with "Sacrifice this creature: Target creature gains haste until end of turn." onto the battlefield.
that's the normal word order.
alsogonnabehonest I really like this. Awesome common. Would be one of my fav cards in these threads if it was worded correctly : )
Hybrid commons!
Ten of 'em, one for each combo.
Still fiddling with B/R and U/R ones. The rest settled into tests really nicely.
>>47663681
>that's the normal word order.
recent scion and devil tokens say otherwise, but I can see it going either way
>>47663792
No I mean for summoning tokens. You put the token abilities before "onto the battlefield."
>>47663802
When it's just keywords, yes. Anything more complicated has a separate statement.
>>47663882
Fookin' hell then. You'd figure Wizards would be consistent.
>>47663927
They are. You're just unfamiliar with their wordings.
>>47663559
Fighting is primary Green, secondary Red (as you'll observe from the OP). It's perfectly acceptable to have mono-red Fight cards, the same way it's perfectly acceptable to have mono-black Flying cards or mono-blue Hexproof cards.
As it stands Shootout a) doesn't have an activation trigger and so it never happens anyway, and b) just isn't different enough from Fight to make it worth the cardspace.
>>47659424
Aleph's Intervention is overcosted and its effect has nothing to do with green
>>47663138
Barside Chaos doesnt feel like a blue card at all.
>>47664662
Thanks bro, I'm still trying to figure out a way to make shootout unique. Maybe Shootout activates on attack and lets you deal 1 damage to another creature before you actually deal combat damage. This could let someone take care of chump tokens or threaten another creature to not block or risk dying, if not at least trading.
>>47665072
I'm still of the mind that triggered damage is not something that should be common enough to keyword. Such a limited environment would be a mess. A good set keyword accentuates or ties together set themes. What are the themes of your set, mechanically speaking?
>>47665072
There's always the ol' Firstest Strike type of ability.
>Whenever this creature blocks or becomes blocked by a creature, it deals X damage to that creature.
Or, just ability word the Shootout and have it do a variety of things:
>Whenever this creature blocks or becomes blocked by a creature, [DO THING].
This may limit Shootout to "things you want to happen during combat" but the name already sort of implies that.
I think explore should be more like Exploit, in that its a simple action that can have a variety of responses. Maybe pattern it more off of Kinship, and have it be an Ability Word and not a Keyword Ability.
>Explore - When ~ enters the battlefield, look at the top card of your library. If it shares a card type with ~, you may reveal it and gain 5 life."
>>47665485
I have some ideas, lemme just post em real quick.
>>47662948
Just add nonland as they said, and add "
Draw a card." at the end, and it will be a good card.
>>47667893
Target *creature* spell m8
>>47667941
u sure?
why cannot a bolt have deathtouch?
>>47667941
See Soulfire Grand Master.
There's really no reason it wouldn't work.
>>47670357
>>47670133
I don't like where Loot is going. Flash of Insight is a powerful mechanic, and while it's not quite scry, giving combo decks an ability to dig for their combo pieces like this could be dangerous.
>>47670101
To clarify, gonna add "activate once a turn" to prevent abuse.
>>47670695
I was thinking of limiting it to permanents OR sorcery/instants that you could put in your hand. Which would be better?
>>47670793
Being able to loot "physical objects" makes a lot more sense flavorfully.
>>47670810
That's what I thought. Making the rule more concise is my major task.
I made these to be the ally-color counterparts to the enemy-colored commanders released in the Commander 2015 product. Do they seem balanced in as set like that?
>>47671151
Ikeros seems bad. Both expensive, and sacrificing lands in colors not meant to ramp means that he's fairly unplayable. If he discarded cards as a Spellshaper, it might be better?
Nulrog needs to be worded as a replacement effect
>If a player would search his or her library, you may first search that player's library for a card and exile it.
No need to shuffle because they're already going to when they search, whether or not they find the thing they're looking for. It's a nasty card, but I like it. Might need cost adjustments because it turns their fetchlands into a Extract/Bitter Ordeal, but EDH probably has enough redundancy that its fine.
Bloodnail seems fine.
I don't like Kukerogg. The exiling doesn't seem particularly RG, and the ability is mechanically difficult. I like his ability to chain Fights, though. Perhaps instead:
>Whenever ~ fights, put a +1/+1 counter on ~.
>2RG: ~ fights target creature you don't control.
Pelkra seems fine.
>>47671011
While it's probably OK as white, green tends to be the one to gain life based on number of lands you control, with Joyous Respite and Bountiful Harvest. While white does have Landbind Ritual, that's more tied with flavor and with it being a White Supremacy card, only working with plains.
Otherwise, I always like cards that encourage mono color. Primal seems pretty cool.
>>47671151
big post coming
>>47671424 here
>>47671151
If they're meant to be the counterpart to the enemy colored ones, they should probably also use the same XP Counter gimmick.
Unless you were going for the secondary new commander, rather than the primary new commander. Like the counterpoint to Mazirek, or Karlov.
They seem underpowered, though. In order:
Ikeros' first ability is weak, sacrificing a land to make something like that. The second ability is nice, yes, but only works with specifically Walls (not just defenders). When cards like Opposition and even Diversionary Tactics in EDH, it's just underwhelming.
Nulrog is more of just a specific hatebear, and really doesn't deserve to be a commander. Gaddock Teeg works as a commander because it's a powerful stop with a very wide range of what he hates. Nulrog here... doesn't.
Bloodnail actually seems pretty good on her own. The one thing is that the triggered ability should come after the activated, since the activated is required for it and it involves a specific type of counter. Looks like a ton of fun, though. Also useful with Forbidden Orchard.
Kukerogg seems really powerful, until you think about it. He's 7 for a 5/5 trample that takes time to grow, and creatures share different types all the time, so having it be "not share a type" rather than "have a new type" would be kinda weird. Also, plain beaters are kinda anathema to commander unless they're REALLY efficient (like your next card), which he isn't.
Pelkra seems really cool, and is probably also the most powerful here. White/green gets a TON of land ramp, meaning she becomes really big, really quick, with a relatively low base cost. The green ability not only gives her protection, provides it as well, with the caveat that you need another creature to target. Definitely playable, and very strong.
>>47671317
I'll take out the land sacrifice effect on Ikeros to help justify the high cost and keep within color limitations. Additional recommendations are welcome.
The one problem I ran into with Nulrog is if something else happens between searching for a card to exile and the opponent searching their library. There's a short window where you've searched their library but it was never shuffled, and the number of effects that could take advantage of that are small, but possible.
Maybe you can help me with this. Kukerogg is supposed to be in a deck that cares about having lots of different creature types, kinda the opposite of tribal. This first flavor attempt is supposed to be a "picky Glutton", where he wants to eat a lot, but nothing he's already eaten before. I admit, it's quite wordy, and I'm looking for other ways to make it work.
>>47671614
If its a replacement effect, there's no priority pass between you searching and them searching. It replaces the effect
>Player B searches their library for a Forest or Island and puts it on the battlefield, then shuffles their library
with
>Player A searches Player B's library for a card and exiles it. Then, Player B searches their library for a Forest or Island and puts it on the battlefield, then shuffles their library.
Without a priority pass, there's no opportunity for triggered abilities to go on the stack. They'll perhaps trigger as a result of Nulrog's replacement ("Whenever a card is exiled" type abilities?) or the search ("Whenever a player searches his or her library", a la Ob Nixilus) or shuffle ("Whenever a player shuffles his or her library") but they won't be put on the stack until the whole affair is done. And since nobody has priority during the resolution of the double-search effect, nobody can activate abilities or cast spells (or even take special actions a la Licids or Morphs).
>>47671441
>>47671770
Ok, I fixed a few things.
Ikeros cmc down 1 and no longer sacs lands.
Nulrog doesn't shuffle and now does more stuff than be a niche hate bear.
For Bloodnail, I was told a while back that triggered abilities always go before activated ones on cards, regardless of context.
Still working on Kukerogg, but made it care about new creature types instead of caring about not sharing any.
Pelkra cmc up 1.
>>47672022
>For Bloodnail, I was told a while back that triggered abilities always go before activated ones on cards, regardless of context.
Not correct. Just from searching creatures with both "Whenever"-based triggered abilities and activated abilities, I was able to find, in the first couple pages
>Aurora Eidolon
>Blood Cultist
>Blasting Station
>Chilling Apparition
>Cinder Pyromancer
While triggered abilities are before activated MOST of the time, it's still not all the time. Many times when they're put before it's because they're ETB abilities or such, that would come into effect before any activated ability would.
It's put in a layout that makes it easier to understand/read, or if it's a spell that Order Matters, like the tiny difference between Preordain and Serum Visions.
>>47672022
>Ikeros
The investment into this card is REALLY huge. 7 mana for a 0/3 wall is fairly weak.
It's also a bit counter-productive. You want to tap your walls before combat to stall an attacker, but then your walls can't block. This is a minor design issue but it's still there.
I'd say shift it to something like, "When ~ enters the battlefield, put two 0/3 yadda yadada" instead of the costed ability. This gives you the investment immediately instead of playing a 5-mana 2/4, which is *absolute garbage*.
I'll comment on the other ones if I think of anything.
>>47650274
>>47650127
you could give it a tap ability like "{T}: Target unblocked creature becomes blocked by ~." I'm not 100% on this wording since I can't think of anything to base it on
>>47651122
I kinda like this one
>>47651122
Very flavorful, but probably a bit weak
>>47656488
>Whenever another creature dies, tap Starving Amphibian
I know it's not quite the same thing, but between just tapping down and Detain this is kind of retreading design space
>>47656451
>1/game mechanics
I don't like it. Seems weird. Don't really have much to say beyond that. Card seems okay enough.
>>47656469
>...as long as the number of nonland permanents you control is greater than the number of lands you control
This seems like it would never come up in most games, but then one card that has it would be stupidly busted because it fits well in affinity or something.
