Nicol Bolas 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
>>47932713
Old card, older dragon
>>47933056
>Creature
>Planeswalker frame, loyalty, and abilities
aka no subject edition good job!
>>47932867
Does your set have RoE levels of ramp/a major subfocus of massive mana costs? If no, I'd say scrap these. (but they are cool. Why some ally and others enemy tho?)
>>47932867
Draftability, from left to right
>final few passes, probably makes the deck if I didn't draft a glut of good creatures
>Pick if pack has no bombs, a piker's a piker.
>Last pick, would hate to play it
>Last pick, would never play it
>Picking early if I'm committing to aggro, otherwise picking if pack has no bombs. 3 power trades well.
Made this card to rep myself.
Thoughts?
>>47934049
>to rep myself
>counter target colored spell
fuckin' racist.
>>47933332
Well grixis has access to gold tokens in my set. The set is more going tall then most sets, but not to a ROE/BFZ amount.
The split is for different cycles for each color pairs.
>>47933378
Scrap some of the abilities and rework them or up the power level slightly?
>>47934166
8 mana is a lot and you need significant ramp/durdle to accommodate them. Ramping with just gold tokens for Invokers is probably not a good idea.
Also, don't use loot as your keyword. It's already part of mtg jargon and people will interpret it to mean something else.
Reposting this for consideration. Got some feedback that convinced me to tweak the original design.
>>47934877
I'd honestly change the first ability to something more interactive, like an attack trigger. Make his reckless combattery inspire the mercs with Vanishing around him to stick around:
"Whenever ~ attacks, choose any number of creatures you control with counters on them, then give each another counter of a kind already there."
Or something like that. Attack trigger Proliferate, basically.
>>47934166
I'm honestly not sure I like gold tokens in blue, since blue can make mana, but usually only for artifacts and maybe creature abilities at most. Card seems balanced otherwise though. I think it'd be a better red card with a loot into two Gold tokens, but that's just me.
>>47934049
The counter ability is too good; it is a super cheap counter that will hit 90% of what gets played, easily. It doesn't even require a tap.
>>47933326
>spellshaper
My nigga. Seems pretty okay to me, but 3 damage on demand might be a bit much, even at 3 mana. It depends on the environment it's in, really.
>>47933056
Not really a fan of super-expensive PWs, or Nicol Bolas, but this seems like something he'd do/be. I dunno about becoming a creature though; I feel like "going Gideon" isn't something he'd do since it'd kinda be a step backwards to before his spark ignited, and I can't see him relishing that idea.
>>47932867
I agree with the other anon; some of these are very underwhelming. Alheim is okay, but could probably also grant trample. Sungrove is way overcosted; I think you could to three tokens for 8 here. Willbrine could do two counters without too much worry, I think, and Vongas is just... really disappointing. Add some life loss or something maybe? Sidron is actually pretty good, to be honest. Good way to end the game some of the time, and vicious against token strategies, which BR should be hating on anyway.
>>47935278
Ran out of room to comment about my card wall.
So, first iteration of red is ready for critique. I have some concerns, but I'm sure they'll get ironed out easily enough with some input. Firewild started as an uncommon and should probably go back to being one, but I stuck it in common because maybe it'll work, and I used the uncommon slot for Writhing Flame, which probably needs adjustment. I was thinking of making it 1RR. Battle-Tempered probably needs to be 2R, but I also have need of more cheap spells, so I pushed it a little. Red is feeling a little pricey, but it's fast at least when you do cast stuff. I feel the haste stacking kinda fits with the Madness theme, or at least I hope it does. I could also move Scag Trekker to common; it originally was but I was worried about complexity so I moved it. It was also 1/1 when it was common, but maybe it could be a piker for 1R at common? Not too sure.
As always, any feedback/critique is appreciated, and I apologize to those of you on mobile for the wall o' cards.
>>47935357
>Delerium Lash
>A spell that literally does nothing
w o w.
also it is broken out the ass. Like seriously broken.Vintage playable broken.
>>47935511
I was trying to do Madness Fling. I'm sure you guessed that though, by your spoilers. It's really that bad?
>>47935530
>Turn two Flame Rift
>Turn three Delirium Lash discarding Draco to the face
>It's really that bad?
Do you even need to ask?
>>47935530
>>47935554
for comparison, this card is banned in Modern.
>>47935554
>>47935581
Hm, point. This is what I get for attempting to be clever. I'll get rid of it. I can use that slot to do something cheap instead.
I dunno why I thought a card that could fling an Eldrazi from your hand was a good idea. It's a good thing I don't work at WotC, ain't it.
>>47935554
>>47935581
>>47935593
What if I made it where you could discard X cards and Delirium Lash would deal damage equal to the number of cards discarded instead? That'd be a lot less dangerous for starters.
>>47935609
If you wanted that it has to be rare. A design like that is pretty much unheard of & ridiculous in the common slot.
And then people would probably complain that it is a really shit rare & just use like I'dunno Crater's Claws instead of it or something.
also just wanna mention how much I love Shoal combo what even was Wizards thinking
>>47935635
Point once more. I'll just toss the concept. No big deal, I wasn't really attached to it.Firewild is mai waifu.I usually have a lot of trouble doing stuff for red because I always want to try new things for it, and expand what it can do, but I am not that great a designer (never have been) and I usually end up doing what I just did at least once.
>>47935357
Fervant Tantsor should add two mana to be on par with BTE.
Cindertamer should have firebreathing rather than shade ability. You can buff its base toughness.
Mangy Lion I would rather have check defending player for damage, but any opponent also works.
Erratic Impulse - have the draw-a-card come before the impulse draw. It's also not very good and could cost 1R.
Unnerving Strike should have up-to-one-target on the black kicker so you can still burn players on an empty board.
Delirium Lash - Fling at least asks that you get your big creature on the board first.
Just have Battle-Tempered give it a power bonus if its attacking.
Impulse Forger - either refer to "the exiled card" or "cards exiled with ~" for clarity.
Memory Flood is cool. I really like it.
Writhing Flame is pushed. Either more mana or sac at end of turn. It's a neat concept though.
Fever Pitch I like.
Scag Trekker is really pushed and if anything, needs to be upped to rare or to lose one of its abilities.
>>47935705
Thanks for the feedback, anon.
>Tantsor
I was concerned that since the mana was of any color, and BTE is uncommon, that two mana would be way too good.
>Cindertamer
You are right, I dunno why I did that. 1/2 or 1/3?
>Mangy Lion
Functional reprint of Bloodcrazed Goblin. I could change it but that'd make it a touch worse.
>Erratic Impulse
Madness cost stays the same though?
>Delirium Lash
Going far, far away.
>Battle-Tempered
replaced the blocker burn with a +1/+0. It was probably too cheap anyway for what it was.
>Impulse Forger
They use all kinds of different wording for impulse draw when they refer to the cards. Went with "that card" to mirror Abbot.
>Memory Flood
Thanks, I really like it a lot too.
>Writing Flame
So 1RR then? I kinda figured.
>Fever Pitch
It gets a lot of love. I'm glad.
>Scag Trekker
Yeah? Huh. I wouldn't have thought. Well, I guess with Madness in the set it's kinda good, yeah. I dunno about wanting it at rare, so I'll either have to change it or think of something.
>>47936041
I like this. It's clever.
>>47936653
Is this supposed to be interesting because red doesn't typically get bears without them costing RR? Or is this part of a greater set? You do have a symbol, after all.
>>47934166
I mean they're invokers. Even with good limited ramp strategy they are not particularly powerful cards.
You have them at common, they're probably fine as is for a draft format. Some cards have to be dregs.
>>47936694
It's just a subtle joke about how every red 2/2 creature with a 1R casting cost has a downside attached to it. http://magiccards.info/query?q=mana%3D1r+pow%3D2+tou%3D2&v=card&s=cname
I just made up a symbol because I think just having a square is ugly.
Speaking of jokes, I made this as a joke a while ago, but I still think it would work.
What would this card cost for each color?
>>47937257
That's actually a fantastic way of handling dual lands in my opinion.
>>47937380
I imagine 6-7, considering it's a spell and not an actual creature.
>>47937257
I designed it in a kick trying to experiment with known mechanics on foreign card types. Surprisingly it's both useful and strong for how simple it is.
>>47937380
WUBRG if you want it for each color, looking at Fusion Elemental
>>47937097
I had a feeling the flavor text was a clue. I guess I was right.
>>47937257
Not bad. Could be done with a counter instead of the DFC but I like DFCs because counters can get muddled.
>>47937380
This if you mean five color >>47937645; otherwise, for each color:
>G
6 is probably fine if it's color-heavy; 7 if not.
>W
Probably shouldn't be doing it, since it's the antithesis of what white does, but if it did, it would be some kind of Avatar, and probably not be vanilla. It'd have some other effect/thematic thing and be 8-9.
>R
Saccing a bunch of mountains. Like, all of them. Untapped.
>U
No.
>B
Similar to white, but with a downside attached as well as the aforementioned additional effect/trinket text. If the downside is large enough, 6 or so. If it's not that big a deal, 7-8, color-heavy.
>>47937777
>U
>No.
uh...
leviathan
>>47937380
Color doesn't determine how much something costs bruh. A color either has something or it doesn't.
>>47937890
I guess there's Reef Worm. But blue does not typically, and really should not, be making huge ass tokens. That's really green and maybe black's gig, with red along for the ride and white when it's thematic.
I'm almost done writing a program that automatically rips card data from online based off names and creates a MSE set using the High res template
would this interest anyone?my usage of it is going to be to quickly set up high quality proxies that I can have printed out
>>47937991
this sounds like an awesome program desu
I probably wouldn't use it personally but it sounds great.
Would this be uncommon, or rare?
>>47938015
Rare, most likely. Only because you can easily use black discard to make it cost 3.
>>47937960
Blue is like the second color for huge ass beat sticks, way more than white and red. For creatures 8/8 and bigger, there are 23 green, 15 blue, 9 black, 4 red, and only 1 white.
>>47937960
Might be interesting as a "Titanic Illusion" sort of thing, with the standard "sac when targeted" illusion problem.
people mentioned that they weren't super excited about the BUG faction rare and I noticed that I didn't have a leviathan yet so I tried something.
>>47938079
>token
You forgot this part. It's kind of important. But this debate is also kind of pointless because we already know blue CAN do big tokens via Reef Worm, and all I am arguing is that, from my point of view, that card is atypical and blue is not the best color to be doing it. Really, only green should be.
>>47938086
Hm. I kinda like this idea, even if I don't think Blue typically has any business making tokens that big. I'd be fine with it.
>>47938284
>token
So it's okay if it's a blue 8/8 flash creature, but not a blue instant that makes a 8/8 token? By that logic, it can't even be green since green does not get instant spells that make tokens that big.
>>47938149
Not a Black effect, should be WG.
>>47938345
I'm not too sure why this is so important to you, changing my opinion, but sure, okay, you win, I guess?
>>47938367
Good. Hopefully this keeps you from spouting more bullshit in the future.
>>47938398
Only if you promise to do the same. Also,you didn't win.
>>47935581
>>47935673
I've actually tested the combo a lot in modern and if it wasn't for the artificial turn 4 rule it could totally be unbanned.
>>47938149
Make it exile all creature cards from all graveyards instead for colour reasons.
Flat exile from graveyards is white, exiling creatures is GB.
Great card otherwise.
>>47934236
>>47935278
>>47933332
>>47933378
>>47936816
Thanks for the feedback, I'll try to find a suitable fix for the invokers.
As for gold, I'll move it out of blue again and see what else I can do to make it go tall.
As for loot it's name does need to change. (probably this mechanic as well.)
>>47939199
You don't need the "then" on the cantrip.
Augment 2 (This creature enters the battlefield with a +1/+1 counter on it for each time its augment cost was paid.)
>>47935278
>Make his reckless combattery inspire
He's not reckless, though. He's enduring. Persistent. Plus, I have that idea covered in the red rares.
>>47940070
>>47940220
Not sure what you're getting at here, man. Devoted Druid, nor any cards like it, are in the set. Infinite mana generated by two fragile creatures, one of them 5cmc, is in no way gamebreaking, either.
>>47940280
"fragile" is irrelevant. You can activate their abilities in response to any removal used on them.
"Infinite mana........Is in no way gamebreaking, either."
riiiiiiiiiiiiight.
>>47940314
Pili-Pala + Grand Architect doesn't seem to be tearing through the modern meta. Also, again, Devoted Druid isn't in the set. I'm designing for limited. Synergy outside of that is not something that overly concerns me, beyond average power level card comparisons.
Super dead thread.
>>47941372
Why is this Black?
>>47941578
Because it hits creatures.
I hope the wording on this is correct.
>>47941609
Yeah, but in a way that is really White.
>>47941710
What part is really white?
>>47941647
I think its "no cards in hand" instead of "an empty hand".
>>47941765
The part where it's overlapping with Exclusion Ritual.
>>47941710
This.
It's basically an Oblivion Ring with some extra "can't cast" restrictions, which are categorically white.
>>47941775
Ah, right
>>47941765
Not him, but while both black and white can exile creatures, thus is an enchantment, which is a more white way to do it, and it creates a silence effect which is also white, so the entire thing feels way more WU than UB.
>>47941780
>>47941782
>>47941801
Circu and Alhammarret have similar effects in BU and U respectively. Additionally, the card exiled is never returned, making it quite a bit different from an O-Ring effect.
>>47941822
>Additionally, the card exiled is never returned, making it quite a bit different from an O-Ring effect.
Again, Exclusion Ritual.
>>47941835
The existence of the effect in white does not limit it to that color, especially when examples of similar effects in other colors exist.
>>47941863
It's not about the existence of the effect, it's about the prevalence.
There are a lot more cards with the same overall effects as >>47941372 in White than there are in Black.
When someone asks "Why is this Black?" in this instance, you need a reason for why you're going against the normal color placement for these effects. It's technically doable in Black, but the question remains "Why are you choosing to do this in Black when it is typically a White effect?"
>>47941901
WU is more creature oriented in my set. It mostly focuses on tokens, tokens-matter stuff, and ETB effects. UB is much more control-oriented, and is where an effect like this meshes the best.
As for prevalence, I would not have this effect in these colors below rare.
Thought about making him just "Brion Stoutarm, Ascended," but I love this art and it doesn't look like Brion
>>47942263
Is... Is that a giant that flings giants?
Also, how broken is pic related?
>>47942497
It's shit.
>>47943136
Helpful.
>>47942497
It needs to be colored. Otherwise, what's the point of it being a commander. With a deck built around it, it's ability is strong enough that it could maybe even be WUBRG. That way it's kinda rough to cast, and you can superfriends to your heart's content. I would play the shit out of a 5-color Xytht Superfriends EDH deck.
>>47942497
You are paying at least 7 mana for MAYBE getting another Planeswalker, except yours is at 2 loyalty and doesn't do anything useful on the first turn.
I'd play this maybe if it was 1 or 2 mana and my meta was VERY Planeswalker heavy, and maybe not even then. It's shit.
On mobile atm so here's a card idea I made up based on an alternate universe Innistrad
>Witch Hunter of the Fells
>2RW
>Creature - Human Knight
>Haste
>When ~ or another human enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 red and white Human creature token with haste onto the battlefield.
>At the beginning of each upkeep, if two or more spells were cast last turn, transform ~.
>2/2
Transforms into
>Purifier of the Fells
>Creature - Human Knight
>First Strike
>At the beginning of each combat phase, destroy target non-Human creature with toughness less than or equal to the number of Human creatures you control.
>At the beginning of each upkeep, if no spells were cast last turn, transform ~.
>3/4
My stab at the impossible dream."Contraption" is an Artifact subtype, and the Assemble ability's CR definition has some extra verbiage to make Steamflogger Boss work even though a card in hand isn't a Contraption until it hits the battlefield.
>>47942263
I'd probably make it a 6-drop. Otherwise, nice.
>Incurable (This can't be exiled, returned to its owner's hand, or put into a library from the battlefield.)
What do you think about this as a mechanic?
>>47944768
>Get an incurable creature on the field
>Make it indestructible & hexproof
>It can never leave the battlefield
>>47941372
I think you should save it for another set and come up with something else appropriately UB.
>>47944814
So don't make it a creature mechanic
>>47944814
sac effects
>>47944768
dumb. it's hardly going to come up and not worth keywording.
>>47945853
>dumb. it's hardly going to come up and not worth keywording.
I guess you and Wizard R&D disagree on that
> I wouldn't be surprised to see it or something like it someday.
Self-tutoring cards: will it ever be a good idea?
>>47945916
>Would "incurable" (from today's article, in particular the "can't be exiled" part) have finally FINALLY given creatures a way to survive being sacrificed or reduced to 0 toughness, when combined with Rest in Peace? (Go to exile instead of the graveyard, oops, can't be exiled, guess I'll just hang around here on the field whistles) Or did you think of an answer to that problem?
>One might observe that incurable didn’t make it to print. I definitely thought of an answer to a problem.
>>47939746
Fixed and thank you.
>>47946306
Gaining mana to play with is really outside Blue's wheelhouse.
>>47946332
blue seems to get it, but only if there is a heavy restriction on what you can spend the mana on
>>47946468
>>47946306
Mana only for instants and sorceries is not a heavy enough restriction.
>>47946545
But mana for artifacts is?
>>47946734
Generally, yes. Most blue decks play instants and sorceries - ramp is just adding to existing strategies. Very few play artifacts - ramp is enabling off beat decks.
>>47946734
Yes. Because blue cares about artifacts.
>>47946306
make it GU or RU and it will be fine
>>47946096
If you mean Squadron Hawk style abilities, no, because it generates too much card advantage and takes up a shitton of card space.
If you mean things that activate from the library ("Whenever [foo], if ~ is in your library, you may search your library for a card named ~, reveal it, and put it in your hand...), no, because things activating from hidden zones is an awful thing and doesn't really work within the pacing and rules of the game.
How much would you cost an instant speed ponder or preordain?
How's the cost?
>>47947999
2 mana probably, I don't think preordain's effect is better than anticipate and ponder is worse that preordain without heavy shuffle effects.
>>47948136
It seems appropriate, but I don't really know what to use as reference. It's still a rather narrow effect, so it could probably even stand to be less.
The effect itself seems more GW though.
>>47948136
Trample is secondary red, and destroying blocked/blocking creatures is def white. This isn't black. Either GW as >>47949146 said, or WR, but that's pushing it a bit.
Rolled 3, 5 = 8 (2d6)
Thread's derailing so let's throw this trainwreck of a card in here
So, just got back from vacation. Ah... look, I'm really sorry about how much I fucked up the thread last time. I really do feel terrible about it. It was a really, REALLY stupid thing to do, and I'm definitely going to think before I act in the future so I avoid doing more stupid this like that.
>Clayface
This is a card that I've had around for quite a while. I think it's one of the first /co/ cards I actually posted, now that I think about it. Really, I'm just trying to finalize it now. So, the idea here is "absorb and replace" basically. I toyed around with Indestructible for a while due to how Clayface is pretty much indestructible, but I think the giant P/T is good enough by itself.
>>47949930
"Trainwreck?" Well, let's see...
Oh fuck, you were right. Yeah, I think I'd just have it trigger on your next turn rather than fuck with combat so thoroughly it looks like that Happy Holidays card. Uh, let's try something like...
>Double strike, vigilance
>Whenever a creature attacks you or a planeswalker you control, put a vengeance counter on that creature.
>Whenever ~ attacks, you may remove any number of vengeance counters from permanents your opponents control. For each vengeance counter removed from a creature this way, put a token that's a copy of ~ onto the battlefield attacking that creature's controller or a planeswalker that player controls. Exile the tokens at end of combat.
Probably busted to all hell. Might want to just use the standard RW 1/1 Soldiers. Other than that... just have Kyral ping the attacking creature's controller. Boring, I know, but that doesn't mean it's bad.
>>47950097
I called it a trainwreck because it's literally a joke. A friend and I were drunk one night and wanted to figure out a way to make a creature that attacks on your opponent's turn. As for serious card design, here's one.
>>47938149
I don't like that this has trample because it makes the unique ability about exiling graveyards irrelevant
Youre making them jump through hoops to block your leviathan and then giving it trample to make blocking almost pointless anyway
Random ideas, ho!
Prez. Because why not? Also, probably broken, right? I came up with the "majority rule" win-con first, and realized I could do something funny by making it a Citizen lord later. Not quite sure how to balance out the two aspects.
>>47950284
Oh... I mean... with the name and art, I thought you were at least trying to make something serious out of it.
>Vat-Pod
Supplant Form provides a good template for this. I'm not sure of costs to balance it, but the wording should be something like
>Return target creature blocked by ~ to its owner's hand. You put a token that's a copy of that creature onto the battlefield tapped, except it's a Mutant Plant in addition to its other types.
>>47950419
I don't know about this. Needs an enabler, but holy fuck can it do damage in the right deck. Maybe make it so it can't hit players?
>>47944768
I think the "something like it" will be more like, "If this would leave the battlefield for any zone other than the graveyard, instead it doesn't" or something.
>>47941901
>>47941822
>>47941782
>>47941710
>>47941578
Look at circu, then kill yourselves
The people in this general are retarded when it comes to color identity
>>47947665
Squadron hawk is a beloved card though
I don't see how you can take a beloved card and say "it's a terrible idea! Never ever again"
>>47950520
>1 example
you sure showed them!
>>47950475
Noxious crawler is a little too strong, at 4 mana it would be more balanced
The naga isn't necessarily broken just really dangerous, if there's any evasion granting effects like "target creature is unblockable this turn" it could be really oppressive in limited
The green black one is hard to wrap my head around, are you really gaining anything with the devour?
>>47950453
>I don't know about this. Needs an enabler, but holy fuck can it do damage in the right deck. Maybe make it so it can't hit players?
Not hitting players is fine, because its probably keeping the board clear by itself. Although it might need to specify "other creatures" or "creatures your opponents control" because the edge case where it accidentally blows itself up would be a little unintuitive.
>>47950545
I think beloved cards can stay beloved because of their uniqueness. Making a whole cycle of Squadron creatures would dilute that magic. Although a tribal squadron creature would make me want to cry. Squadron Goblin or Merfolk, oh my.
>>47950558
There's also grimoire thief, and another I can't remember the name of
Prolly more I haven't seen too
>>47950615
I never recommended a whole cycle of squadron hawk creatures
One poster asked about self tutoring spells, and he responded by saying that squadron is a horrible bad idea and it should never occur again in any form, that's not how he worded but given what he was responding to, that's basically what he said
What's wrong with an overcosted sorcery that finds another from your deck?
There's room to play with these ideas, even though there is risk of them being too powerful
I just don't understand why the custom card thread of all places is filled with people who seem to hate innovative and powerful cards
>>47950623
Not any of the people you responded to but pointing out that certain cards exist doesn't actually constitute an argument for or against a particular color identity. You have to take your examples and convince the other anons that the ability is UB instead of WU. The problem being that there's enough precedence to support either option. Again, you have to make a good argument to convince the other anons your idea is right.
>>47950615
Definitely not Mythic. And It could easily have a bigger body with those abilities for 7 mana. Honestly, though, I think it's just kind of boring. Maybe the seal counters could do something else? Tapping a creature is hardly worth it.
>>47950658
It's not my idea, I'm just pointing out that counter example exist, and when there argument rests entirely on "precedent says this effect is this color" and they have no other argument as to why a card does or does not fit a certain color combo, all it takes is a couple counter examples and they are left with nothing but their whiny subjective bullshit, aka the only thing you find in these threads
When somebody chooses the color combo for their custom card, they have some kind of flavor and mechanical ideas in mind, sometimes these ideas exist on the fringes of color identity but as long as they aren't outright contradicting the color pie, all these faggots whining that this effect "is more often this color" should shut the fuck up
>>47950623
>There's also grimoire thief
Which makes it suitable in blue, sure.
The question was never "Why is this blue", it was "Why is this black?" with the obvious implication of "Instead of white?".
>>47950658
Also it's not anybody's responsibility to prove that an effect is "more UB than UW"
If a card could be one color combo but is more commonly another, there's nothing wrong with it being the less common color/combo, it's up to the distress job of the designer
Everybody who thinks each card should always be the color with purely the highest number of other cards that share a similar effect is making a very stupid mistake, it's one thing to have that opinion and another to act like everybody who breaks from that pattern is designing cards incorrectly
>>47950749
>distress job = disgression
Reminder that there is literally no justification for control magic effects being blue rather than black.
>>47950749
>Also it's not anybody's responsibility to prove that an effect is "more UB than UW"
I said that because I assumed you were >>47950520 Because whoever that guy is, yes, does need to make a good argument for UB instead of just pointing at a card.
>>47950770
He can make an argument but my point is he does not need to prove that the color combo he chose is "more fitting" than another combo, only that it fits the colors he chose, if there's any support for his choice in the existing cards, and if he can supplement that with flavor considerations, that is more than enough, he does not need to also prove why it shouldn't be the color combo you stupid faggots demand that it be
Thought this would be fun. Can't tell if it's actually good or not though.
>>47950758
Are you joking? Mind-magic is solidly in Blue, that's the entire flavor of Control Magic-type spells.
>>47950655
>I just don't understand why the custom card thread of all places is filled with people who seem to hate innovative and powerful cards
Well, he asked for discussion and got discussion about why people dislike them. It's not that people hate innovative and powerful cards. People post cards of wildly different spiciness and power all the time, but people are careful about posting wild designs that have shown a very dangerous impact in the past. There's room for balancing Urza block free spells, but you hardly see any discussion of those either.
>>47950717
Maybe another shot? Gave it a P/T boost, a more powerful effect, and, conveniently, seven lines of text.
>>47950794
If he were to argue for one but not against the other, we end up back to "Well, this is possible, but so is this" which doesn't really accomplish anything. Also, I don't have an opinion either way as to the color of the card, again, I'm not any of the other anons in this conversation.
>>47950419
I'd drop 1 power and toughness to give it lifelink
>>47950810
Not that guy, but maybe change it so instead creatures with seal counters on them have Indestructible. To help your creatures, of course.
>>47950830
>which doesn't really accomplish anything
Sure it does, you can move on and talk about different aspects of the card
>>47950799
That needs to be more expensive. 2 mana is nuts. Maybe you could keep that CMC if you got rid of the counters, but kept the cumulative upkeep
>>47950799
Maybe:
>At the beginning of your upkeep, put a +1/+1 counter on enchanted creature. Then, sacrifice ~ unless you pay {1} for each +1/+1 counter on enchanted creature.
>>47950848
A solid idea, although I probably wouldn't want to call them seal counters if I'm putting them on my own creatures. Maybe "Angel of Seven Blessings".
A side-grade to Loxodon Smiter, for the other half of "Fuck you, Liliana of the Veil".
>>47950810
See, now you have the opposite problem. it's better, I think, but if your gonna have that kind of lockdown ability, you should have to pay some sort of cost to move a counter. I don't really know what, though. >>47950848 had a decent alternative idea, but I think it would still need to cost something.
>>47950867
Oh whoops. I thought for sure I'd changed the mana cost to 1UR. Well, the idea behind the +1/+1 counters is that, yeah, it does get bigger, but eventually it's going to come around and smack you in the face.
>>47950899
The wording is taken almost verbatim from the comp rules text for Cumulative Upkeep, so I think I'm going to keep it as it as for now.
>Oathsworn
Weird. Are you sure you don't want to make that second ability only work on abilities your opponents control?
>>47950799
>Mind-magic is solidly in Blue
Except for the four most precise types of mind magic. Blue can't remove specific cards from hands, remove specific cards from decks, control players, or (commonly) get unconditional tutors. Control magic is literally the only hostile mind influencing effect that shows up in blue. It has nothing that could lead someone to believe that it is the mind control color.
>>47950919
Agh, this is hard. Giving >>47950848 a shot. They get pseudo-totem armor instead of straight indestructible, and it passes out counters on ETB instead of at will. And a name change because sealing your own dudes doesn't click with me.
>>47950986
Fixed wording to match Totem Armor and not regenerate. And to properly target on ETB.
>>47950986
I... actually like that a lot. 3rd time's the charm, I think. This way, the counters give a good, but one-time benefit instead of a lasting effect for free.
>>47950985
Yes, Black does mind magic too, but it certainly doesn't come up as much in flavor as it does for Blue. Also, you'll notice that things like discard and search-exile in Black are versions of hard removal, something Black is very much known for. Whereas Blue, is not. Blue is the softest of all the colors. This is partially why it gets to control creatures, because the owner always has ways to take it back. Whereas Black will just kill the creature straight away, making it much harder to get back. Again, Black is hard, Blue is soft. In fact, you could say that Blue's mind control stuff is somewhat similar to White's O-Ring. They both answer a creature threat, but not permanently (in most cases), and there's always the danger of the owner taking it back, making it a threat again.
>>47951145
You are forgetting one important thing: blue does everything while black does nothing, therefore black should have more and blue should have less.
Moving on to another weird card.
>>47951177
Seems like a lot of unnecessary flip-flopping around for the whole field. The simple solution would be a one-time trigger or an activated one.
>>47951177
Because it happens every turn, starting from the moment I hits play, it feels kinda clunky, as if it should be some kind of static effect
Functionally the power switch occurs until the creature leaves the batttlefield (and a little after)
It's not necessarily bad just weird, if you had some sort of interest in instant speed using a p/t matters effect in the upkeep then letting this card switch p/t after, this card would be perfect for the job, but if you have no interest in that, it might as well he static
>>47951205
>>47951203
To be honest, I could figure out how to word a static effect that would do exactly that, and settled for a repeating trigger.
"Switch each creature's power and toughness." is the first thing that comes to mind, but it reads weird as hell. Maybe it just needs reminder text.
>>47951175
>blue does everything while black does nothing
Wow, I'm so used to Red players bitching about how Blue has everything, and how things that Blue have rightfully belong to Red. This is new.
>>47951177
I feel like this would be infinitely better if it just worked indefinitely. Uh...
>When ~ enters the battlefield, switch each creature's power and toughness until ~ leaves the battlefield.
>Whenever another creature enters the battlefield, switch its power and toughness until ~ leaves the battlefield.
Eh... wow, I wish there were an easier way to do this.
>>47951227
Mono red is at least always viable.
>>47951223
Maybe there isn't a good static wording and your wording was best
"Switch each creatures power and toughness" seems off if only because it's the same wording as a one time effect, only without a duration, which means it needs a definite starting point like "when this enters the battlefield" but then it only applies to creatures that were on the battlefield at the time, rather than affecting all creatures at all times
>>47951223
It would be something like "As long as ~ is on the battlefield, switch each creature's power and toughness."
>>47951318
That seems good
>>47950419
Did somebody say random ideas?
>>47950545
>>47947665
Squadron hawk is obnoxious because it's so cheap. I remember when they did it in masques block to help spellshapers and it didn't show up at all (mostly because everyone was getting their dicks wrecked by rebels, but still)
Eternal Servant 1BB
Creature- Zombie Horror
Whenever ~ dies, you may search your library and graveyard for a creature card named ~ and put it into your hand, then shuffle your library.
1/3
Phalanx Grunt 2W
Creature- Cat Soldier
When ~ enters the battlefield, you may search your library for a creature card named ~ and put it into your hand. Then shuffle your library.
As long as you control exactly three other creatures named ~, ~ gets +1/+1, has first strike, and is indestructible.
2/1
Kayls of New Sap 4GG
Legendary Creature- Treefolk Shaman
When ~ enters the battlefield, you may search your library for up to three cards named ~ and put them into your hand. Then shuffle your library.
~'s power and toughness are equal to the number of cards in your hand.
Grandeur-- 2GG, Discard a card named ~ from your hand: Put X +1/+1 counters on target creature, where X is ~'s power.
*/*
Mnemonic Alteration 3UU
Sorcery
Search target player's library for up to three cards with the same name as a nonland permanent they control, then that player reveals their hand. Choose that many cards from that player's hand and shuffle them into their library, and put the searched cards into their hand.
>Holy shit there has to be a better way to word this.
Firing Line 1R
Instant
~ deals 1 damage to target creature or player, then search your library for a card named ~ and put it into your hand.
At the beginning of your upkeep, if there are exactly four cards named ~ in your graveyard, you may pay 2R. If you do, put one into your hand and shuffle the rest into your library.
>>47951339
>(mostly because everyone was getting their dicks wrecked by rebels, but still)
I still can't believe Wizards actually thought Rebels and Mercs were evenly matched. It strikes me as something like Skullclamp, where they realize how fucked they are just before the set comes out, after all the decisions have been finalized.
>>47950520
>The people in this general are retarded when it comes to color identity
Would you look at that? You're a person in this general and you're retarded when it comes to color identity. Guess you've got a point after all.
>>47951339
>Holy shit there has to be a better way to word this.
Exile the cards from the library, and then put them into hand, perhaps?
>>47951318
>>47951331
Sure, we'll go with it.
I hate this name but nothing was striking me. Is three damage enough? Too little? Too much?
>>47951339
>Search target player's library for up to three cards with the same name as a nonland permanent they control, then that player reveals their hand. Choose that many cards from that player's hand and shuffle them into their library, and put the searched cards into their hand.
>Holy shit there has to be a better way to word this.
There is.
"Search target player's library for up to three cards that share a name with a nonland permanent that player controls, then exile them. That player reveals his or her hand. Choose a number of cards from his or her hand equal to the number of cards exiled this way, and shuffle the chosen cards into that player's library. That player then puts the cards exiled this way into his or her hand."
Pretty sure, anyway.
>>47951434
I'd rather this dealt 2 damage unless the creature ETBed this turn, then it deals 3 instead. That way you can actually use it in a pinch if need be but it's not as good.
>>47951394
No you
Is there a high res template for M15 available for MSE?
If there isn't, I'm thinking of making one, but it would be a decent amount of effort I'd rather not put in
>>47951434
>>47951447
That is better, thank you. It's always funny to me when you can take a bonus from a card and make it a drawback in another color.
>>47951367
It would have theoretically worked out better if either was better at toolkitting. Also keep in mind black had some mana accel at the time: An early big guy that you cheated out could pump out more stuff tailored to wrecking your opponent's shit, and blowing up whatever their most recent obnoxious rebel was to make them search IT up again instead of something bigger.
It's still stupid, though.
>>47951530
And one that just occurred to me...
Unchained Reaction 1GBR
Creature- Ooze
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may pay X, where X is the number of +1/+1 counters on ~. If you don't, sacrifice it and it deals X damage to you.
2: Put a +1/+1 counter on ~. Any player may play this ability.
3/4
>>47950794
I disagree.
Say someone posted a 1G 2/2 creature with Vigilance. Someone is going to ask "Why is this Green?". Of course, Vigilance is secondary in Green, so it has every right to be Green if it needs to be, but the question will remain. At that point it's basically "What are you trying to do by putting this in the offcolor? What point are you trying to make?".
It is a perfectly valid question, and a designer should always be ready to defend their choices if someone asks about any aspect of their card. It is up to the designer to "prove" why it should be whatever color they chose for it to be.
Toeing the line here with 3 mana. Might be safer at 2.
>>47951629
Living Weapons wants me to say no to this.
>>47950794
>if there's any support for his choice in the existing cards
It's a little different when the support for putting it in the color they chose is only one or two cards.
>>47951629
3 is definitely too much, and it should only generate the two mana for equipment (instead of also the 1 generic any-use mana).
Unless you want it to be legendary or something.
>>47951629
Okay, so turn 1 I'm going to play Cranial Plating and equip it to my Ornithopter.
>>47951620
I agree with you but that's why I mentioned flavor and mechanical considerations
The problem is these cards are judged in a vacuum and then people stick to their judgments and don't listen to the designer
For instance, maybe there is synergy in the set with vigilance for green creatures, maybe the flavor of the card fits green heavily and also vigilance heavily
That would be enough
But I guarantee you if somebody posted a 1G 2/2 vigilance creature, many people in this thread would demand it be 1W instead, and when the designer tried to bring up flavor, etc, you'd hear the same tired "this card is more white than green" stuff, my point is that cards don't need to be the color that fits them most i a vacuum, and working on the fringes and borders of the color pie is a good thing, not a design flaw
>>47951672
Why?
When those cards were made, there was zero support
>>47951757
Not him, but because it's WotC's game and they get to make the final call on where things belong on the pie, and they get to change it. Sure people in these threads can play around, but they have to understand two things:
>it will be questioned
>not everyone will agree with/like it
If they are okay with that, then there shouldn't be a problem. Conversely, people criticizing need to understand that even WotC makes cards we don't agree withdare I mention Snapcaster?and yet they aren't being removed or retconned, so people here are gonna do the same thing, and their existence, along with questioning it, is not necessarily a bad thing.
>>47951808
That's well said, I suppose I was too quick to hate on the conservative viewpoint
>>47951808
I still don't get the Snapcaster hate. Blue does Flashback too, what's the problem? I hope it's not literally just "Oh, but Red needs it MORE!"
>>47951757
Because there have been mistakes in Magic history, and places where the rules were bent or broken to accommodate things the set or a specific card needed while the color pie took a back seat.
Say I made a red enchantment that says "Creatures your opponents control enter the battlefield tapped", what would your response be?
>>47951871
Personally I would have rather it been a UR 2/2, but that's just me. I don't really take a side though, since it's WotC's game; they can do what they like. I don't have to like it, but I can't do much except whine if I don't, so why bother? Whining does nothing but irritate people.
I kinda like this iteration of Hulk. I'd keep it if I were you.
>>47951748
>>47951757
So basically
>Creators need to take comments into account and actually have some idea what they're doing
>Critics need to not shit up half the thread in repeated obnoxious comments because someone tried something new
That about cover it?
Oathbound Guard 2W
Creature- Human Samurai
Defender
Bushido 2
Whenever you take combat damage, sacrifice ~.
3/3
Bloodbound Servant 1B
Creature- Thrull
Whenever ~ takes damage, you gain that much life.
1/2
Descend G
Instant
Target creature loses and can't gain flying until end of turn.
Draw a card.
Ordered Mind 2UUU
Enchantment
You can't draw cards.
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may search your library for a card, put that card into your hand, then shuffle your library.
Brainraze 1RRR
Sorcery
As an additional cost to play ~, discard any number of cards.
Target player discards one plus the number of cards you discarded this way.
>>47951900
>Creators need to take comments into account and actually have some idea what they're doing
>Critics need to not shit up half the thread in repeated obnoxious comments because someone tried something new
Pretty much parroting what's in the OP, yeah. I think most sensible people can agree on something similar to this.
>>47951894
>since it's WotC's game; they can do what they like.
Funny story: R&D wanted Snapcaster to be red, but Taigo was a bitch and insisted it be blue.
>>47951873
>what would your response be?
Not him, but it would be "That's not Red." Then a few different things might happen.
You have a good excuse. I don't really get it, but I leave it at that.
You have a bad excuse. I point this out and badger you about it.
You change it. I leave it at that.
You don't respond. Nothing happens.
>>47951894
>UR
Good idea. Though this was back before Wizards decided that they don't need a special reason to break out the gold, people understand mmulticolor just fine.
>Hulk
Cool, thanks.
>>47951919
I'm not surprised. As a blue player, I am usually ashamed of my fellow blue players, and honestly most of the community in general. But they still had to allow it, so... enabling is a modicum of guilt nonetheless, in my viewpoint. But I also don't really want to clog the thread up plucking hairs either.
>>47951922
>good excuse
I think the big issue with this is a lot of us define this differently, and sometimes, when cards are posted in a vacuum, it's hard to "see" it. It's one reason I've taken to posting walls of cards, so at least someone can see what I'm trying for with it. Of course, that has its own problems, namely mobile users hating my guts and people not wanting to give feedback on 25+ cards at a time. Not that I blame them.
>>47951922
>Not him, but it would be "That's not Red."
Ah, but there is a single card where they gave that effect to Red.
That's the entire point of >>47951672
>It's a little different when the support for putting it in the color they chose is only one or two cards.
Because sometimes there is more to the decisions surrounding a card than what the color pie should allow, and those cards can't always be relied on as a legitimate precedent.
>>47951873
>red enchantment with creatures opponents control etb tapped
My response would be that this is normally a white effect but I could see it being red, there is precedent for it in urabrask, and there is precedent for tapping effects in red amongst old cards like smoke, but more importantly, the effect synergizes with a low to the ground red creature deck, particularly hasty creatures
>>47951992
I was just thinking about this, and realized that Sheoldred is the only one 100% in line with her color. White doesn't de-anthem, red doesn't tap, green doesn't freeze, and blue doesn't hand control.
But hey it's Phyrexia, so fuck the color pie!
>>47951919
That is a funny story, if by "story" you're allowing that it's fictional.
>http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/23680242486/did-you-ever-consider-making-snapcaster-mage-red
>I do wish I has asked him about changing it to red to see if the idea interested him.
Tiago never insisted that it be made Blue, it's just that his original design was Blue and nobody ever thought to question it until the playerbase questioned it well after Innistrad already came out.
>>47951992
NPH is one of those things like Time Spiral and Futuresight that are, and always will be, divisive like that. You have an entire plane that was "black flavored" which you haven't really seen since Torment, unless you count black's influence over some aspects of Innistrad. So naturally the cards play with concepts a bit more. Now, if I were told that was the case, and say some Anon made a set that was "white influenced" in a reverse-NPH sort of way, like, maybe it was recently purified but now there's some question as to the order of things so DEUS VULT, and that red card came out, I would question it, but probably relent to the reason. Because there's canon precedent, as well as a thematic reason, and that's really all I can ask for, along with a balanced card.
>>47952021
This also doesn't surprise me. This is why you always vet what you read on the net.
>>47951977
Yeah, I realize that's vague, but it's one of those things were you have to evaluate each card individually.
>>47951992
Actually, New Phyrexia color pie-warping is a good excuse. Thinking one card justifies doing it for other Red cards without a flavor or mechanics reason is a bad excuse.
>>47952046
I'd be excited to see a White-flavored plane. We have a bit of Green-flavored plane in Zendikar, with its heavy ramp focus and "lands matter" themes, so I'd be curious to see how one would get white, red, or blue bleeds on other planes, both stylistically and mechanically.
I realize saying "one" like this is unconventional, but I just wanted to make it as clear as possible. Oh, and the flavor is basically "Evolve or die" so you either find what you need or just lose.
>>47952046
>>47952057
The point isn't whether or not that does serve as justification. The point is that the question deserved to be raised, and required a justification.
You can't simply say "Red can do this because Red has done it before", you still have to explain why it's doing it now. Just the reference card is not enough to support it.
>>47952111
The flavor text makes me expect exile, not Boomerang.
>>47952111
You might want to specify combat damage, or there could be some really weird combo interaction somehow.
>>47952102
>mentioning thematics being key is not enough for you
ZHEN ZHERE IS NO PLEASINGK YOU!
>>47952080
I'd imagine it'd be all five colors being "right" with regards to how to actually run things now that the BBEG/threat has been dealt with. Each color attempting to establish their own brand of order on a now-lawless but otherwise pristine plane. Something like that, I guess.
>>47952093
The "one" does read strangely, and I don't think it's necessary, but this is a pretty extreme version of impulse draw if I ever saw one. Balanced? Hard to say.
>>47952101
I like it. Kicker could probably be a little cheaper if it were more color heavy.
>>47952111
This one... not so much. I would really rather this be UR, though it's clever.
>>47952080
Theoretically Theros' enchantment matters could be called white? A blue focus with a heavy emphasis on scrying your destiny and manipulating your hand would be interesting (cards that need shit to align perfectly to go off, scry everywhere, time sensitive cards, etc.)
Black and green are kind of the spready colors, though.
My other idea for 'white focus' would be an old idea from years ago
>Entire story takes place in a winter-bound mansion with the king on his deathbed and various parties vying for power
>White is the clergy, focus on punish-if-you-do-thing effects, lifegain, and obnoxious rules
>Green is military dudes, landgrab ramp is the political power gained from successful victories, etc.
>Red is a cadre of anarchists that got in and focuses on even destruction shenanigans
>Black is hedonistic and backstabby nobles, with a focus on intimidate and hiring assassins
>Blue is the goddamn problem because I couldn't think of anything for them, probably just a lamesauce mage's guild
No huge effects, no monsters, just politics, betrayal, alliances, and fear in a cold house on a cold hill.
>>47952179
>mentioning thematics being key is not enough for you
That's not what I'm saying. Again, that's not what was being discussed.
The focus on the conversation was not about what constituted a good answer, it was about when asking the question was appropriate.
>>47952207
Call it King of the Hill
>>47952207
>My other idea for 'white focus' would be an old idea from years ago
>No huge effects, no monsters, just politics, betrayal, alliances, and fear in a cold house on a cold hill.
You do realize that your idea is basically Conspiracy, right? Not that that's a bad thing, I like Conspiracy, can't wait for 2.
>>47952245
>it was about when asking the question was appropriate
When you can't easily recognize what's going on with the card, I'd say. Or if you think you do know, but believe perhaps it's gone too far or not doing it right. Personal discretion most likely, but some people are better as knowing when/why to ask than others, which I have certainly seen lead to some frustration around here.
>>47952207
>Blue is the goddamn problem because I couldn't think of anything for them, probably just a lamesauce mage's guild
Hm. The Littlefinger types? The "not quite so bad as black, but still manipulative" ones? Maybe the power behind the throne, so what they really want is to choose the successor for everyone else, so they know who really holds all the cards.
>>47952286
Every so often, someone posts some Muraganda-esque stuff. And usually it's pretty clever. But I don't think I've ever seen anyone get more than partway through a set like that, even one that only has it as a faction in Naya colors or something.
>>47952207
Make Blue the surveying council. The people who it will actually be up to deciding whose claim is the most legitimate and deserves the throne. Their bid in the whole scheme is trying to sort out what of the claims is most suitable for them, deciding who is the perfect king for their needs, rather than it really being about legitimacy.
>>47952286
The cheesiest method for getting away with something like this is making a ton of Tokens Matter cards.
Want to do something that would normally be an ETB effect? Put it on a Sorcery and also have the sorcery make a token.
>>47952251
Working title was Cold House.
>>47952256
Conspiracy with less magic and more politics. Magic is probably not the best venue to make it work, as a result. I wanted to see if the mechanical ideas could be done in a very low magic shenanigan: Giant Growth-alike would be sending reinforcements after a guy, Boomerang-alike would be manufacturing some crisis at home they'd have to go handle, Terror-alike would be arranging for someone to meet with an unfortunate accident, etc.
>>47952306
>>47952357
Interesting, but I was saving that angle somewhat for the clergy, for who they're sponsoring. Assuming you don't pull off Thearch Ascendant or something.
The other bit would have been alternate win conditions and heavy defensive stuff. Trying to arrange a much slower, more careful meta.
>>47952509
>but I was saving that angle somewhat for the clergy, for who they're sponsoring
That's perfect, because it gives a reason neither White or Blue are wholly capable of rigging the entire process by themselves. The Clergy and the Council are set against each other in such a way that they appear to be cooperating, but are both in a desperate struggle to outmaneuver the other.
You can even setup color pairs by making them each have a candidate from Black or Green in mind, with Red as a rogue color trying to setup up the truly "Rightful King" rather than letting Blue and White continue to manipulate the succession.
Fear Toxin. I tried doing a version that did stuff with creatures, but I could never think of something that I liked, so I decided to focus on players instead. First draft, so... yeah. Hmm, I should probably actually get around to doing a card for Scarecrow soon.
>>47952127
Red can't tell the difference.
>>47952818
The color that likes shocking things to death won't notice that the things it thought it killed keep coming back? You do know that Red has quite a few cards that can put a creature into exile, right?
>>47952127
>>47952818
It's more likely just a reference to Dead//Gone.
>>47952832
To red, things can only be in one of three forms:
Alive, Dead, and Not of it's concern.
#BringBackGoblinsBeingBadAtEverything2016
>>47952868
Copies don't work with permanent spells.
>>47952894
That's what I feared.
>>47943832
Token generator needs to say 'whenever a nontoken human enters', otherwise he immediately goes infinite.
>>47951914
Didn't he post reasons? Also doesn't he usually? I remember him specifically having a lot of weird ideas and long explanations.
>>47952093
I don't think you would die for running out of library.
You'd LIKELY die from running out of cards to play, but if you can't draw, you can't lose for not being able to draw (hence Obstinate Familiar).
>>47952122
>>47952111
Love them, red needs more tempo bounce.
>>47952894
>Copies don't work with permanent spells.
Technically they could. The problem is entirely logistical: there's no physical card available to represent the permanent, so you'd need a token. As long as you make sure the card notes that a token is created if the spell is a permanent spell, there shouldn't be a problem.
>>47954548
Probably too good IMO. I'd make it tap as a part of the activation cost.
>>47951719
wayy too weak
First time for Question. Angle is sort of a frantic investigator. Well, kung-fu detective, really.
>>47954287
Oh, right. Wow, didn't even realize that. I think running out of gas is enough of a downside though.
>>47954672
It technically doesn't.
>608.3
>If the object that’s resolving is a permanent spell, its resolution involves a single step (unless it’s an Aura). The spell card becomes a permanent and is put onto the battlefield under the control of the spell’s controller.
>706.10
>A copy of a spell is itself a spell, even though it has no spell card associated with it.
So there's not a spell card to put onto the battlefield. A spell on the stack is not actually the spell card itself, so copying it doesn't also make a copy of the spell card associated with that spell.
>>47954846
It's effectively the suspend cost of search for tomorrow, as ramp has gotten weaker, it might actually be too strong.
Dead thread. Might partially be due to the OP not having the proper subject line, which is how most people find these threads.
I made this card to represent Phyrexia infiltrating and corrupting Ravnica. Thoughts?
>>47958883
Feels more blue than anything. Typical reminder text is (This effect lasts indefinitely.)
>>47960367
"Put a charge counter on ~ for each land tapped this way."
I'd play it in EDH
Does this card seem balanced?
>>47960568
I didn't say that because my thought were that if they tap the land for mana, then you didn't tap it and thus don't get the charge counter
>>47960849
If you made this and you've been playing for less than a year, please play longer before trying to design. It's an abomination.
If you made this and you've been playing for more than a year, fill up a bath, plug in your toaster, and jump in while holding it.
>>47960849
It's no Siege Rhino, that's for sure.
>>47960849
Dies to game resets 2/10
>>47960849
This is incredbly OP.
Protection is an ability, as is Indestructible and Hexproof so it;s never going to die. Unblockable may not be one anymore, but it doesn't matter because it has every type of Landwalk (including non-basic), Flying, and Shadow. It has Poison 5, Double Strike, and Haste, so the opponent dies as soon as you cast it.
It also has Echo 5, whatever that means.
You have massively underestimated how many different abilities exist in magic, and what would happen if a creature had them all. Making it cost 4 mana and not even be legendary is just ludicrous.
>>47961039
Beginning of combat, spin the top, tap top, reveal Terminus, pay W. :^)
>>47961039
It has haste and anhilitator 5.
>>47961064
He would have fatesealed 5 your terminus out.
>>47960916
>>47960954
>>47960964
>>47961039
Remember anons, only you can prevent trolling.
>>47961039
He has some crazy abilities like affinity, convoke, and miracle, also Ripple 5 in case you are lucky.
He has Myriad, haste, double strike, poison, and unblockable, so he kills all players in his combat.
He has Awaken 5, so he makes a 5/5 land even if he dies, and he can't be countered because of Split Second.
And then there is the fact that it didn't say keyword abilities, so it basically auto wins or auto loses because it has all abilities ever printed on it.
>>47961226
>making the border silver
that's the real bait anon, you silver-border autists are the worst
![98[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/udDeH3s.jpg "98[1].jpg")
