Ramp Edition (mo mana, mo problems)
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
OT:
>>47822403
>>47882311
Probably fine, but something about the wording is bothering me and I can't determine what.
>>47882330
Primal seems okay, but I'm not sure how much I like mechanics with no early game presence. I guess it depends on how they play and what other cards have them, really.
>>47882352
Coiling Oracle's big sister. Seems fine.
>>47882488
I recall this card causing something of a stir. It's more complex than it "needs" to be but for a reason, and it's rare. I'd probably make it monoblack but that's just me.
>>47882691
Priest of Urabrask was uncommon, and I think this should be too.
>>47882734
It was meant to be a rare but it looks like I was too quick to save this
>>47882814
No worries, we all do that once in a while. Rare is probably fine too, now that I'm noticing it makes six red mana, not five like I thought when I first looked at it.
>>47882911
This is a nifty hate card.
>>47883028
Not bad. Name doesn't really convey what the card does to me though.
>>47883080
I like the two-sided nature of the +2. The rest really doesn't make him feel like a warrior at all. The +2 and ult gel mechanically but thematically the card feels a bit all over. Last two abilities feel like they want to be on some kind of shaman or something.
>>47883285
I think this might be overcosted; it does nothing on its own and can take a huge hit with a single removal spell if you have multiple Auras on one creature. I'm not really sure what the proper costing is, but I can tell you I might prefer seeing it as an Instant instead. Makes a cool combat trick.
>>47878140
Quite like this card. Most people won't however. It plays a bit messy.
>>47882330
Primal sounds and seems mono green. Card is balanced.
>>47882352
Aii ;-; >>47882666 This. So good.
Seems *slightly* too weak though. Keep in mind cards get exponentially stronger, most of the time, when the costs go up.
>>47882488
Should be mono black. I don't quite like how fast it makes the game, but sure. You can do it.
>>47882691
I really don't like how the mana is lasts only for your upkeep.
>>47882911
This is annoying ;-;
>>47883080
The -3 is a bit too powerful. Do 3, 4, or 5 cards.
>>47883285
This is way overcosted. Do -1 and have it be enchantments, or do 1WG and make it enchanted creatures.
Or something like that.
>>47884486
I don't buy this in mono-red.
>>47884486
>3-CMC, one sided Death Pits of Rath
NOPE.
Also
>Not Element of Wrath
ya done fuc'd up.
>>47884486
Is the edge case where you hit a Walker common enough for this to specify "permanents" instead of "creatures"?
>>47882311
The land should enter tapped desu
Anyone here remember Adversary?
>>47884542
At the very least twice as easy to remove as Pits of Rath.
Guess it could be Element of Wrath tho.
>>47884751
It is for me. It's also a safeguard for new permanent types.
>>47885202
No idea.
>>47885511
Should draw a card or gain life, at the very least. That card itself is not worth a card.
>>47885887
No reason this shouldn't target.
>>47885887
>>47885921
Also no reason it shouldn't be controller instead of owner, destroying stolen permanents is a pretty fringe case
>>47885887
Should probably say "non-creature permanents" unless you want to throw Black in there.
>>47886283
It replaces whatever you destroy with an 8/8 trampler, so it doesn't have to include black.
>>47884751
>>47884486
If a creature/pw stops being such, can damage still potentially occur and thus destroy the permanent, or would every theoretical source fail to connect.
>>47886283
Nah.
>>47886547
Meant for >>47886315
>>47886526
You can't deal damage to non-creature, non-player, non-Planeswalkers. Damage can be marked on non-creatures, if they've been dealt damage already and then turned into a non-creature, but even turning them into non-creatures at instant speed in response to the trigger wouldn't save that permanent from a Death Pits of Rath effect.
>>47886612
While it functions, i find the mechanics strange, it functions favorably with cost increasers and x only values (C) despite being "payable" with anything.
Personally i think making it a cmc 1 or 0 with multikicker for +1 costing (C) looks better.
>>47885824
>Should draw a card or gain life, at the very least. That card itself is not worth a card.
It's 1 mana ramp for 1, I'd say that's pretty good.
>>47885824
>At the very least twice as easy to remove as Pits of Rath.
"It dies to removal" is literally the worst, most cliche excuse someone can ever make for a poor design. You should be ashamed of yourself.
>>47888150
Can't be played turn 1 unless you have duals. Though you can put it on an opponent's plains.
>>47882241
So many lines of text...
Man, space on Planeswalker cards really is at a premium. I wanted to make his -1 turning into a 7/7 indestructible creature to match the other WURBG slivers, but that just takes up so much space...
>>47888245
The issue is the MSE PW template. It doesn't really let you use more space for one ability and less for another to keep a larger font size; it scales them all equally. The best way to do it I've found is to edit the text in a photo editor after you make the blank card with art in MSE.
New mechanic. Well, relatively new, I mentioned it on reddit once.
>>47888443
>>47888448
>>47888457
>>47888461
>>47888443
So... "counter target spell targeting this spell and retain your card count"? I dunno man, seems kinda good. You'd have to be careful what you did with it and how you costed it. I'm not too sure it's a good idea.
>>47888448
>>47888457
>>47888461
Okay I see what you are doing with this. Getting things on-cast on the regular is probably a bad idea; it limits counterplay and makes the game "who can use their turn better?" which would just be boring all-around I think. Not that the mechanic itself isn't interesting; I've never seen it or anything like it myself in these threads, but what you are doing with it is probably not a very good idea for a fun draft environment.
>>47888489
I should also mention that this will play a lot like Forecast, which also kinda made for stagnant play since you can't really interact with Forecast cards without forcing a discard.
>>47888489
>Getting things on-cast on the regular is probably a bad idea; it limits counterplay and makes the game "who can use their turn better?"
Hmm, I guess so. But casting and returning say the Knight for 2/1 tokens is really mana inefficient, especially since there's a large payoff to actually letting it resolve.
>>47888499
Well, you can counter it after they pay the Reconsider cost, while the Reconsider ability is on the stack unless they have enough mana to activate it again.
>>47888646
I get that the costing isn't seeming to be a problem, it's the interactability that's the issue. And it's actually worth a lot of mana to not lose cards; that's why Forecast was so expensive if the ability was any good at all. The main problem with being able to "counter" Reconsider cards is that in order to counter them, you have to be sure they can't be Reconsidered, OR have two counterspells ready. That's a lot of effort, and a huge loss of cards compared to the dude who just pays some mana to get his card back if he doesn't want it to be countered, and might get something out of the initial cast to boot, depending on the card in question. See the problem? It's not with Reconsider, it's with what you are trying to do with it. It is just something you have to tread lightly with, and I'm not sure I'd agree with it either way, but hey, I'm just one jerkoff. See what you can do with it before you throw it aside.
Okay, first full draft of green rares in the rough. I got a ton of great feedback last time with the red rares, and it really helped me to pull them in a better direction. So, I'd appreciate hearing whatever thoughts you all have on these.I'll be in classes most of the day, so I won't be able to address anything until later.Thanks in advance!
>>47889464
Riftborne Wildling is one of the coolest cards I've seen in those threads. Flavor text and art is also great
>>47889464
>Riftborne
Truly, truly excellent. Possibly too powerful. Still excellent.
>>47889464
okey then here we go for a full one;
>01
Yep that's a thing. I don't consider it very interesting, but it's a card.
>02
das a lot o' frogs.
>03
>Steadfast
This is weird. Especially next to Riftborne Wilding. AKA "Not Melira"
>04
Speaking of which yep still acool card.
>05
This card 99% of the time instawins in limited on activating Incarnate. Careful with that.
>06
Feels weird. Far too slow to make any real impact imo, beyond you know the vigilant bear.
>07
Such value. Much punch.
>08
But I can't use it in EDH ;_;
>09
Frogs are cool.
Overall;
Needs more spice. I'd scrap 01 & 03 completely, not interesting enough imo. I like the idea of some of these cards, but not quite there yet. Needs some work fo sho.
Current faction rares
>>47889464
1, 3, and 4 are crazy sick dude, very nice cards.
>>47890485
Headliner and Apocalypser are cool. The others look boring for flashy three color rares.
>>47889886
>>47890007
>>47891723
Thanks, anons! I really appreciate that.
>>47890214
Thanks for all of the feedback, anon.
>Steadfast
After considering it for a while, I believe you're right. A lot of my cards WANT counters removed, to a certain degree. While this version combos well with vanishing (as was the intention), I believe it also clashes with a number of my cards and will probably result in a lot of feel-bad experiences for the player using it. So, I reworked it. What do you think?
>>47890485
>Jubilitic Headliner
Still fantastic.
>Mindslip Savant
I'd rework it to draw a card for each card put into exile from a hand that turn, that way it scales with how hard you dream it. As is, it's a bit lackluster.
>Untqalt Apocalypser
Suicide removal spell or self-enabling evasion. Either way, very nice. I like this one as well.
>Hideling Hero
Deceptively powerful, as cards like Mastery of the Unseen have proven. However, using cards from the hand instead of the library does eliminate the card advantage Mastery generates. So, I think a "whenever a permanent you control is turned face-up" triggered ability of some kind would help it feel better and more exciting. Might have to change the p/t to keep it balanced if you do, though.
>Host of History
Big vanilla body is a bit boring for a faction rare, even if that card happens to be awesome flavorfully. Least excited about this one mechanically, but the concept is very cool.
>>47895876
>return target land card from a graveyard to the battlefield under your control tapped.
Wording gleaned from Titania and Geth.
>>47895890
Clever, I like this. Cost seems fine. Comparable to Natural Connection, but more limited in what it can search for. Ramps but doesn't fix. Overall, solid card.
>>47897382
>>return target land card from a graveyard to the battlefield under your control tapped.
If he wants it to return a milled land, it can't target.
>>47897605
Ah, good point. I'd defer to Sudden Reclaimation, then. So, what he had, but with the positions of "under your control" and "tapped" swapped.
>>47890485
Requesting art for hideling hero.
Changed the w/u french vanilla to a functional reprint (except type) of vassal soul and the b/w french vanilla to a hybrid child of night (except type).
>>47900094
>druid warrior
>>47897818
Reminder text ended up too long. Fuck me.
>>47890485
>jubilitic
>apocalypser
i like these cards but you need better words
>>47901622
Remember that reminder text does not need to use rule text syntax.
You could probably get away with "You may play this tapped as a land with "{T}: Add {*} to your mana pool" instead." without causing too much confusion.
Also, cast triggers are somewhat rare, and it can cause misplays when people try to give itself haste.
I don't have transform templates
>>47905270
As written she'd die after being transformed if she was dealt 4 or more damage.
>>47905303
You're right, thanks
>>47905270
You could fix this >>47905303 issue by changing the timing and wording on the trigger to mirror Sengir Vampire's trigger wording somewhat:
"When @ dies, if it was dealt combat damage by a creature this turn, return it to the battlefield transformed."
I believe this would work, but I could be wrong.
Sliver Manland when?
>"ALL OF MY LANDS CAN NOW TURN INTO SLIVERS! MUAHAHAHAHA!"
>>47882488
you can't use 'if' with 'would', mate
>>47882241
stupid question:
what does reconsider mean?
>>47907007
Tell that to Rhox Faithmender
>>47886526
>>47886672
Mhmm.
>>47886128
>>47885921
True enough.
>>47899582
I'm a bit worried about how good this is, but doesn't seem broken.
>>47899602
Heh. Cute card. Usually the Human would give reach to Humans. I hope Jumpmaster 5000 isn't the definitive name.
>>47899617
Amazingly good card. Love aggro U.
>>47899658
You know this is offering right? Just making sure.
>>47900094
>>47900234
Meh, I'm fine with one, or two of's with no race type as long as the depicted art is unclear. Card is okay.
>>47901622
I disagree with >>47905048
You can't give it haste because it's not a creature on cast, and it if it could target spells, it would work just fine.
>>47904140
Oh hey you, long time no see. Flavourful card, looks pretty cool for a draft of sorts.
>>47907372
That could cost R and draw a card.
>>47905270
Legendary creatures don't get gendered pronouns unless they're also planeswalkers.
>>47889464
Riftborne Wildling is insane in all the right ways. One tiny thing: I'd cut "and stronger" from the (otherwise excellent) flavor text, because it contradicts what the card actually does.
I haven't much else to say, other than that there's a lot of excellent and original design on display here. Kudos. I can hardly wait to see the full set.
>>47909505
>>47889464
Oh, nevermind. I forgot what Vanishing actually does.
>>47907437
I'm >>47905048
You can't give creature spells haste because that doesn't make sense. Haste does nothig on a spell, and the creature it generates is a different object.
For example, there are certain cards that can bounce spells. If somehow you managed to resolve the creature spell in question before the bounce effect (perhaps by switching targets with yet another card), it will not be returned.
This is what I meant when I said it would lead to misplay.
Players who are not as familiar with the detailed rules will assume they can cast it and then have it target itself, which with the current wording is not possible.
It's your job as a designer to prevent these situations - make your card so that what you'd expect to happen is what actually happens. At common, this principle is even more important.
Just change the trigger to etb.
>>47885986
Nice card, but i had add "When Duel enters the battlefield, if you casted it from your hand,..." to prevent flickering effects and such, because i think this effect is more meant to be on a sorcery.
Away from my computer but I wanted some input on some card ideas
Ritual of Rebirth 1WB
Enchantment
When ~ enters the battlefield, exile target creature card from a graveyard.
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice ~ and put the exiled card onto the battlefield under your control.
Card name - cost
Exile each creature and put two time counters on them, they gain suspend
>>47911545
>111.4. If an effect changes any characteristics of a permanent spell, the effect continues to apply to the permanent when the spell resolves. See rule 400.7.
Sorry, but no. I tried quite a few mechanics that deal with that and the hoops you've got to jump and the memory issues made it a moot proyect.
The spell's characteristics determine the object it becomes when it enters the battlefield. If a spell has its colors changed, it remains of that color until it leaves the battlefield. If it has an ability, it gets that ability.
An idea that just popped in my head.
>>47909505
no p/t
>>47912690
Sigh.
No points for spotting the reference, anyway.
>>47912806
>Guardian of the Grove
>Grove of the Guardian
I got it, anon
>>47912806
Risen Sanctuary with convoke?
>>47910815
Amazing how a good card feels and looks so much better with great art.
But Jason TN's a bit like cheating. Same with Mohrbacher.
As for the card, while usually I don't like cards that have no effect on the board as they enter it (be it a static or triggered or delayed triggered ability), I really like it; that deal with me or die scenario makes the Maghainm feel imposing, and you've got a drawing to go with it.
Made this just for you, cause Jason TN :3 <3
A common.
>>47913642
That looting ability is very UB, not UW.
alright couple'o new drafts. Here's Green, blue's coming. Others pending.
>>47914205
Globetwix is a clever way of getting fixing to non-green colors. Subtypes are always capitalized.
Nytir - typically the creature can "attack as though it didn't have defender," so as not to lose defender tribal synergies I guess.
Ice Sculpting is fair. Self Reflection is just giving red's cheap rummaging to blue, but still leaving the option for pure card draw.
>>47914173
Burning Bush looks overcosted, but maybe I'm just used to power creep.
I like Youngling's Game.
Fantasy Lands looks really bad. I'm not liking Dream so far.
Green on the whole doesn't excite me.
>>47913642
black, not white. I'd clarify that "you draw" so there's no potential ambiguity.
>>47912806
Technically Grove of the Guardian costs 6 to activate, since it has to tap itself.
>>47912675
Make Silent is bad in (some) combo decks, but still really good for control. Also, see Render Silent.
>>47911112
Reminder text is wrong, should be "repeat X minus one times".
>>47910815
bretty good
>>47907437
This is way too big a jump in mana production.
>>47911112
Isn't this way, way, way too niche? What's the use of it aside from Indes?
>>47913790
Yeah, I thought of making him 2WUB, but wanted to keep it dual. Hm. Well, here we go.
>>47913750
A good card.
>>47914173
>Prism
Absolutely no incentive to play it face up.
>Youngling
Nothing to say, it's a common being a common.
>Soul
Woad's nice.
>Burning
Good enough. Might be better a 2/5 trampler with flowstone, so it doesn't seem as naked.
>Hideling
Pretty good, solid common.
>Gibber
Meh, vanilla.
>Youngling
Best of the bunch.
>Gwoth
Heh, nice.
>Fall
Works.
>Aquifer
It works. Make it cost G.
>Disconnect
If you're making G the shadow hate, 'tis good.
>Fantasy
Another really solid card.
>>47914920
Also white, becaus of Vig. I wanted to get away without B. Also, no ambiguity whatsoever; if that player had to draw a card, it'd say: "That player draws a card."Seems I can't escape from Esper tho. Here also!
>>47914920
It's a Caged Sun/Gauntlet of power without the +1/+1, at Legendary & Mythic. It's only gonna matter in EDH, ain't that terrible in there.
>>47915684
10/10
>>47915698
Really cool card. Yey for aggro U <3
>>47909505
>>47910815
Thanks, anon! Happy to hear that you like them.
Working on the multicolored rares now. In the meantime, here's an uncommon.
>>47900417
this looks incredible. this is a playmat?? where can I get this
>>47918210
Fuck random, just force the opponent to choose something to enter the arena.
>>47916736
Still don't get why the flipside needs the Shift clause. It doesn't seem to do much for the flavor (more, importantly, french-vanilla Menace would be very compelling from a flavor standpoint) and it just bolts a set mechanic onto an already-complex uncommon.
>>47918520
Why not remove X domination counters as part of the cost?
>T, Remove X domination counters from ~: Gain control of target creature with power X or less.
Is the concern people juking the effect (via sacrifice or pump) and thus wasting the counters?
>>47918520
Ok say the opponent declares attackers. Then before I declare defenders I tap it to steal one of the attackers. Will it still be attacking me?
What happens if it has vigilance and then I use it to defend. Is it both attacking and defending?
>>47919533
Same thing that happens with act of aggression.
>>47919533
A creature that changes control leaves combat. You can then use it to block, but it may already be tapped. This is covered in the rules.
>>47921687
Demonic Tutor doesn't need to be any better you dummy.
>>47921877
That's not better than demonic, it's likely better than infernal for ANT/TES, but not demonic.
>>47919091
The way I see it, the Shift clause is a physical manifestation of the "fighting to change" bit in the flavor text. Attacking literally causes change.
Also, I needed more shift presence in red at uncommon, and it doesn't really fit in anywhere else.
>>47922132
Not that guy, but it's demonic with a drawback that often doesn't matter (must use card this turn) and a massive upgrade (can be cast by pitching cards)
This is to Demonic Tutor as Daze is to Force Spike; not strictly more powerful but much more broken
