Balanced lands that make more than 1 mana 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
OT: >>47932713
Would a card like this be balanced? Or would the effect be too underwhelming for the cost?
>>47971972
>>47971974
These are both hilariously broken. Also, the wording on Changeling's Vengeance is wrong in numerous places
How is changeling's vengeance broken?
Star-Lord. While I did enjoy the movie, I'm a bit peeved at how the comics version of the character changed due to it. So, this version of Star-Lord is a strategist, just so we're clear.
>>47971972
Ugh, I really hate that mana cost. I could see it being mono-White with a generic mana cost so you can cast it with the other colors though. Oh, and the mana cost needs to be higher. Not sure on the balance, however. Maybe cut down on the colors for one. R giving Haste is a good idea, but I don't know about the rest.
>>47971974
Still working on this? Sorry, don't really know how to balance it.
>>47972192
3 mana, potentially get a huge number of tokens (which by the way need a creature type and color/colorless status) and then on top of that add a bunch of bonuses (most of which need rewording)
>>47972212
actually correction: only the green one needs rewording. should be "put a +1/+1 counter on those creatures," I believe. Tbh, though. I would just go back to the drawing board with that card.
>>47972195
Seems kind of odd. Why does it cantrip? Why last turn? Also, it should be that the OWNER shuffles it into his or her library.
>>47972229
The cantrip was kind of a last minute decision. Will probably change that. It doesn't say last turn, it says this turn. You're right about the owner. My mistake.
>>47972235
Ah, misread that, sorry.
I posted this in the last thread. After some comments there and from a friend, made a couple minor tweaks. Pretty happy with this version. (FYI: The original concept was "Brion Stoutarm, Ignited," But I changed it so I could use this art that I love, but looks nothing like Brion).
>>47972195
>>47972229
Alright. Fixed the wording, got rid of the cantrip, and lowered the cost by one, since you no longer draw. Decent? OP? UP?
Does a card like this seem playable in formats like modern or legacy?
>>47972315
For commander this would break the game.
>>47972254
Eh... Not really feeling it right now. For the first ability, I think if you changed it to +1, you could make it
>Put a 5/5 white Giant creature token onto the battlefield.
Second is OK I guess, but third is... I dunno, I feel like it's just too much. What is the flavor behind this guy, exactly? Some kinda leader?
>>47972279
Yeah, I think it's fine. Though since it's an Instant, I kinda want to make it
>If a creature with power 5 or greater is attacking
Like the Traps.
>>47972315
This seems absolutely ridiculous. It would get banned in Commander as soon as it was spoiled.
>>47972355
Giant King from Lorwyn. Humongous, even among Giants. Known for being able to throw other giants. That's all I've got, as he isn't part of a set or anything, just a random idea. I like the +1 idea, since the kithkin are weird, and I know the ult seems strong, so I was thinking of making them smaller giants (Maybe 4/4-6/6?)
Took some tips from the last thread and fixed this guy. Thoughts? Is he still too weak, or is he OP?
>>47972582
oops
>>47972657
Even with all the restrictions, this isn't a great idea. I believe Maro actually had a similar idea, which was ultimately replaced with Miracle. From what I heard, R&D cut it simply because it takes out a large amount of randomness from the game by guaranteeing the player something. Think about it. The only times players have an absolute guarantee on a card is in Commander and Vanguard.
>>47972201
At the moment your creatures attack (that is, are declared as attackers) the only possible targets for that damage will usually be your other attacking creatures, if I understand correctly. Maybe have it trigger when your creature "blocks or becomes blocked?" I understand that's pretty different in function, though.
>>47972833
Oh shit. How did I not even see that? Hmm, well, I guess I could split it up into two different abilities. Or just allow the ability to hit any creature, though I'm not sure about that. Thanks for pointing that out though.
For the edition.
>>47973061
>Amulet of Vigor
>>47973130
It still won't untap during your next untap step.
What do you guys think of these cards?
>>47973061
Hm. Sure. I can buy it. Seems worse than a Karoo usually.
>>47973446
I don't know if you can cast Failed Ruse without a target. Mass Downvote is clearly broken. Kappa has the wrong border and seems to aggressively costed compared to Frenzied Tilling. User is busted in any format. Echo Chamber seems fine, though its drawback doesn't make much sense in either color or function. Trump has awful wording and is undercosted.
Working on Mythics now. It's the home stretch for the set, which feels weird since I've been working on it for so long.
Anyway, Mythics are a pain in the ass to balance, so I appreciate whatever feedback you guys have.
>>47972968
I think this card can easily cost just W/B.
>>47973548
Mass Downvote needs to target before the downvote counter goes on a target, so it can't just destroy any permanent. Echo Chamber flavorwise is supposed to demonstrate people believing anything without question and suppressing any dissent. I don't see the problem with the other cards though.
>>47973748
It would be amazing in a +1/+1 counter heavy format.
>>47973733
>2UU: Draw two
How about no?
>>47974520
Arcanis has T: Draw three. Multiple draws on a body can be balanced. What would you suggest for the cost?
>>47974570
Tapping is far more restrictive though. I think the first ability should be redesigned. Please tell me want you want the card to do, both by itself and when interacting with other cards in your set, and be as detailed as possible. If you have cards you want it to work well with (official or custom), post them as well (as one big image, using PhotoJoiner).
>>47973733
Finn Drel, etc 2UU
3/3
When ~ etbs, draw a card.
Whenever a creature is exiled, return it to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.
UUU: Exile target creature.
>>47974666
I know how to use photojoiner, anon, I've been around for a minute.
>What I want the card to do
That's pretty simple. I want it to be tied thematically to the themes of the block, and I want it to complete this character's arc, which started in the last set. So, exile matters, pursuit of knowledge at all costs, etc. Functionally, I want it to be able to draw cards and affect the boardstate in a way that feels interesting and "mythic."
>>47975075
That's a really interesting idea, Kazy. I might use that, thanks.
>>47975220
This is a really neat idea, but strikes me as too cheap for a colorless wrath.
>>47972968
Unfortunately, objects don't have a base power or toughness characteristic. That terminology is only used as a p/t changing effect.
>>47975075
>>47975313
Yeah, Kazy's idea is really good. Though it should probably be
>Whenever a creature card is put into exile from the battlefield, return it to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.
It should also be noted that, the way the activated ability works, you do have the fringe case where Finn leaves the battlefield after the activated ability is put onto the stack, but before it resolves, meaning the return ability won't trigger, and the creature is stranded. You could just add a "if ~ is on the battlefield" clause to prevent this. Wait, actually, it's not so fringe, manipulation of the stack means Finn can do it by himself.
>>47976218
I adapted Kazy's idea and came up with this. Unsure of the costs and the p/t, but I like this concept much more than my original.
>>47976961
Hmm. Well, Kazy's was far more exciting due to the fact that it was an activated ability that can be used multiple times a turn, and how it easily combos with other cards. Maybe each upkeep and each end step? I'll probably post a design or two of my own later.
>>47976961
This one is much better. Kazy wanting blue to get "Mana: Exile target creature" is beyond retarded.
>>47976961
Hm. What I liked about the card originally was the Deadeye Navigator + Bragoish + control aspect of it.
The fact that they've got to recast it is interesting though.
>>47977260
They get it back on the next turn, and so do you. It's not that bad.
>>47977260
You can still permanently exile a nonland if you bounce or sac it before the end step.
>>47977355
But he can do it only once per turn now.
It's like making a card like:
Cost: ?W
?W: ~ this 3 damage to target creature or player.
Whenever ~ deals damage to a creature or player, you gain that much life instead.
>>47977260
>beyond retarded
Oh, but Blue having "Exile target nonland permanent" is just fine for you. In both cases, the ability is a part of a whole that replicates a Blue ability. Flicker for Kazy, Boomerang for this.
>>47977502
>fine
When did "better" means that it is fine?
>>47977502
Just look at >>47977492
You can clearly see that the card idea is beyond retarded.
>>47977492
>But he can do it only once per turn now.
...And that makes a perceived color pie violation better in your opinion? So, what, is
>W, Sacrifice ~: ~ deals 3 damage to target creature or player.
better than
>W: ~ deals 3 damage to target creature or player.
in your eyes? A color pie violation is still a color pie violation. And technically, Blue has more precedence for "Exile target creature" than "Exile target nonland permanent."
>>47977406
I love it, all it needs is a quote.
>>47977576
It doesn't. But if you weren't fine with it, you would have let us know. The fact that you didn't just denounce the card leads me to believe that you still approve of the newer design.
>>47977602
Blue has much more precedence is single bounce than repeatable bounce. Blue usually only bounce repeateadly when it does on itself for evasion.
>>47977728
>>47977746
>>47977355
I can add a "or whenever Finn Feel leaves the battlefield" clause to the last ability. That should prevent stuff from being loopholed into permanent exile.
>>47977728
Just don't jump to conclusions, if I said that I think that one card is better than the other, I simply mean that one card is better than the other, and not that one card is garbage and the other is awesome.
All I wanted to say was that he was going in the right direction.
>>47975938
>Unfortunately, objects don't have a base power or toughness characteristic. That terminology is only used as a p/t changing effect.
Expanding "base P/T" to be something that creatures have at all times is a rules change that I wish would happen. I don't think its too complicated for players to understand and opens up some cool design space.
>>47977839
The problem is not the final result. All colors can do spot removal, what differs them is how they do it.
>>47978158
This one is pretty cool.
Would it be appreciated if I talked about general magic design here? I've been thinking of writing something like that for a while but don't know if people here give a shit.
>>47978120
I feel like I've made a post about why this is broken for a previous version of this, it's basically a 1 mana recollect stapled onto a bayou, you could argue it is a bit weaker due to likely being forced into play it too early to gain advantage, but even so; it is still significantly better than reclaim (which isn't very good to be fair) and has good synergy with land tribals.
I'd have a lot of fun playing with this card, but it shouldn't be in a standard power-leveled set. Its trigger needs a mana cost or something similar.
>>47978158
That is very cool though
>>47978188
Fine, I don't know if you're building for draft but if you are it might be problematically weak at uncommon.
>>47978456
>Would it be appreciated if I talked about general magic design here?
Unless you start saying something retarded, we won't mind. Go for it.
>>47978456
Someone is gonna find what Anon says retarded; we all know that. But yeah >>47978456 go ahead.
>>47975938
>Unfortunately, objects don't have a base power or toughness characteristic.
Of course they do. What makes you think they don't?
>http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/92797265743/do-you-expect-to-ever-start-using-base-power-and
>Do you expect to ever start using "Base power and toughness" on any effects other than polymorphing?
>I believe such a thing could happen.
The terminology is only used for p/t changing effects so far. That doesn't mean it can only be used for p/t changing effects.
>>47975938
>>47979088
Looking further, there's also another post that's more direct:
>http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/146189505998/can-black-border-care-about-a-creatures
>Can black border care about a creature's power/toughness changing (that is, "if <cardname's> power and/or toughness are not the same as its base power/toughness, <effect>")?
>Maybe. It’s messy. Ask Tabak.
So at this point it looks like something that is possible, they just haven't worked out the details for it yet because they haven't attempted to make a card that would require them to.
Either way, Rosewater having replied "Maybe" and "I believe such a thing could happen" means it is not clear cut enough for you to say "objects don't have a base power or toughness characteristic" as though it were a fact.
It's almost more satisfying trying to design an Uncommon.
Would a card like this be balanced in MTG?
>>47979293
How do you expect this to work?
>>47979293
The vast majority of creatures would be duds, sort of like Momir Basic. Probably fine.
This is one of those cool ideas that can only happen in a game not shackled by paper rules. HEX and Hearthstone can get away with it, but its not feasible in Magic for obvious reasons.
>>47979267
You have to reveal that card if its a land in order to prove you get that second draw. "Draw a card and reveal it. If its a land card, you may draw an additional card."
>>47975938
>Unfortunately, objects don't have a base power or toughness characteristic. That terminology is only used as a p/t changing effect.
>Base Power, Base Toughness
>Effects that change the base power and/or base toughness of a creature set one or both of those values to a specific number. See rule 613, “Interaction of Continuous Effects.”
If you believe it's not a value the object has, how is it "changed" according to the rules? They have to have had a Base Power and Base Toughness to start with for a card to be able to "change" them.
Too pushed?
>>47979492
Really, what do you think?
>>47979492
It's fighting itself.
It's an aggressive creature you want to tap before combat. It's a fragile mana dork that wants to attack. It's a trampler that won't survive combat.
It's pulled in too many directions, making it bad at all of its jobs.
>>47979350
You would use a random card generator to determine which card you get.
>>47979217
By the rules, objects do not have base power and toughness. That's not to say they cannot in the future have base power and toughness, it just requires a rewriting of the rules. Its similar to how copies of permanent spells do nothing unless you add additional rules.
You can break existing rules on the assumption that you're also fixing then, just expect to get called out on it.
>>47980366
>By the rules, objects do not have base power and toughness.
Where in the rules are you seeing that?
>>47980366
The rules don't seem to confirm it one way or the other. You're just as bad, pretending it's a definite case when it's ambiguous.
>>47979418
Objects have "power" and "toughness". This is what different effects modify. "Base power and toughness" is an effect that applies in layer 7b, and it's only with respect to this layer that the term is used.
>>47980525
Again, it states that it "changes" the base power and toughness. It doesn't "give" or "apply" Base Power and Toughness, it "changes" it.
How can you "change" something an object does not have?
>>47980138
The idea of a Mega Elesh Norn at a lower CMC is somewhat worrying to me, even given its tribal biases restricting it somewhat.
Thoughts?
>>47980610
Templated wrong, but more importantly, not really how Magic design philosophy works (Magic tends to avoid pairing cards so strongly like this) or how this effect should be done. The idea of YGO-style fusion would probably work best with Champion or DFCs.
>When ~ enters the battlefield, if you control a creature named Voice of Resurgence, exile that creature and transform ~.
Watch as I'm walking into that b8 trap, though.
>>47980939
I imagine he's going off new meld spoilers.
>>47980992
If he is, he's still doing it wrong. It's worded nothing like Meld.
For those of you who don't know who this character is: Congrats. You're looking at Marvel's Drizzt knockoff. He was just as poorly conceived and received as that implies. But I decided to make a card for him because why not.
>>47980992
>meld
I'm going to continue to believe this is bullshit until I see the official reveals.
>>47980992
>>47981052
>>47981132
Hadn't seen it, but it sort of looks like bullshit. The art looks legit, but it just seems like a weird mechanic, and super clunky for Limited, which has always been one of their main design focuses. Why would they choose a mechanic that is nigh impossible to pull off in Limited as their main set mechanic?
Are the back sides BFM-style wiiiiiide doublecards? Or do you like... stack them, so that one's a DFC and one's not? It's just... why?
![aZVg2VL[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/wgMrctv.jpg "aZVg2VL[1].jpg")
>>47981198
It's real.
People have found some test cards that were "accidentally" included in BFZ packs. They use BFZ cards for them, but it's obvious they were using it to test the printing process.
>>47981198
Yeah, it's super weird. I think it's just people getting official art and making their own cards. I saw a claimed Liliana spoiler. It's like a 2BB or something with 4 loyalty and a -8 that gives you FIFTY Zombies. Yeah, right.
>>47981288
>It's real.
And your proof of this is an OGW card that's been printed across two cards? Am I missing something? Writhing Township certainly doesn't look like it's been cut in half.
>>47981132
Busted as hell with that totally unnecessary regen clause
I assume that's his flavor? Unkillable drow edge lord?
>>47981362
Ugh, yes. He was a normal Kree until he bumped into some freaks called "Nameless" or something who proceeded to infect him with some alien shit that takes his soul but grants him great power (what a shock). The Nameless love hurting themselves (edge alert), so the alien shit got really good at healing them, making them pretty much indestructible. Wraith here travels around the galaxy as a broody loner on his space motorcycle (fuck me) wielding a super-kewl shape-shifting gun. It is exactly as painful as it sounds.
Also, not sure about why the Regen clause is broken. It's worse than straight Indestructible. Though I can see that I should probably just up the cost. Oh, and the last ability is because he doesn't have a soul, it's hard to recognize him as a living creature or some shit. Also because I saw the ability on Wall of Shadows (modified) and always thought it was neat.
>>47981460
It's not that the regen clause is crazy OP in and of itself, it's the fact that he's already really really powerful without it, and he would be powerful with just it and not the other abilities, he has 4 abilities and any 2 would be strong
His hexproof vs creature removal + his regen clause alone is just really annoying
>>47981515
Ah. I'll cut the pseudo-Hexproof then. And probably up the cost to 4BB. Or BBBBB because edge. No wait, I did that already, and this guy actually has justification (creature type).
>>47981605
This guy is way too strong as well, unless your set is stacked with nonwhite exile removal (??) and cheap -X/-X effects, like damn
Fucking invincible 4/4 crypt ghast than can pump itself to massive p/t next turn
>>47981515
The wall of shadows ability makes sense, it's actually super underpowered but the principle makes sense, it blanks niche removal, whereas your guy basically just as shroud, the vast majority of effects that target creatures just target creatures
>>47981643
Hmm, makes sense. Well, this one was made a while ago, haven't looked at it in some time. Probably going to ditch Protection. I had this idea I'd have some creatures that were protected from enemy colors, but that kinda fell through. I'll probably cut the Crypt Ghast ability as well. Hmm, actually, I'm not sure about that. I do want him to stand out as a master Shade. Well, I have been playing around with the idea of copying Green's "This creature gets +X/+X until EOT, where X is its power" but I'm still not sure about it. What do you think?
As for Wraith, I think I'm just going to turn him into something like Akroma.
>>47981683
Thanks, but it looks like I'll have to save the ability for something else.
>>47981412
Why is the first and third an orc while the second is human?
For the last one, the ping seems too strong for the cost, as it is essentially 2 damage minimum to target creature and is mitigated only by 1R. It could at least use a tap. And for flavor reasons, I like using "at the beginning of combat on your turn" for red creatures with reoccurring effects.
>>47982164
This is fantasy, sometimes Orcs and humans are friends, unlike the real world
Does a concept around making token instants and sorcery cards seem balanced?
>>47982430
You can't mechanically do this in MtG because tokens cease to exist outside the battlefield. This is not Hearthstone.
>>47982430
As >>47982485 said, this is an idea for HEX or Hearthstone.
Hell, HEX does this. A lot.
>>47982485
>>47982520
Don't respond, it's just a troll. We've seen this happen before.
>>47982430
You can put down enchantmenats that can be sacrificed.
>>47982520
>>47982485
They would be pseudo cards as opposed to tokens which means they can go into your hand.
That said, what do you think of this card, does it seem playable?
>>47981326
>Am I missing something?
Look at the upper left hand corner.
Township was spoiled online, not as a physical card, so it doesn't have to be cut in half.
>>47982554
The most likely way of doing it would be an enchantment with "1G: Remove a whatever counter from ~. Do the rampant growth thing".
Tokens with complex effects are usually frowned upon.
>>47982581
There is no such thing as "pseudo" in mtg, so you would have to make an entire rules section for it.
>>47982581
"When ~ enters the battlefield, choose a player.
Whenever you cast a spell, you may have the chosen player gain control of it."
>>47982786
>>47982813
Oh my god, stop responding, it's a fucking troll.
>>47982853
Well, >>47982581 would actually be an interesting card. Makes One With Nothing not terrible.
>>47982931
>T1: island, generosity and a pact
Win.
Balancing Mythics, round 2.
>>47983232
Reminds me of Hero of Oxid Ridge, if only for the +1/+0 for attacking creatures. I don't quite get how the pinging half of it relates though. They already get first strike, so it's kind of going two directions. Fight up close or fight from afar?
>>47983502
>I don't quite get how the pinging half of it relates though.
It's super first strike. You can ping creatures down until your first strike damage is too much for them to profitably block.
>>47980427
>>47980484
>>47980573
>208. Power/Toughness
>208.1. A creature card has two numbers separated by a slash printed in its lower right corner. The first number is its power (the amount of damage it deals in combat); the second is its toughness (the amount of damage needed to destroy it). For example, 2/3 means the object has power 2 and toughness 3. Power and toughness can be modified or set to particular values by effects.
The game only refers to the printed values as POWER and TOUGHNESS, and that they can be modified or set. A card does not have "base power and toughness", or "initial power and toughness" or even "printed power and toughness." It just has "power" and "toughness".
>302. Creatures
>302.4. Power and toughness are characteristics only creatures have.
>302.4a A creature’s power is the amount of damage it deals in combat.
>302.4b A creature’s toughness is the amount of damage needed to destroy it.
>302.4c To determine a creature’s power and toughness, start with the numbers printed in its lower right corner, then apply any applicable continuous effects. (See rule 613, “Interaction of Continuous Effects.”)
Again, a creature object only has POWER and TOUGHNESS. "Numbers printed in its lower right corner" is the closest the rules get to referring specifically to the printed p/t.
>>47983579
cont.
>208. Power/Toughness
>208.4. Effects that set a creature’s power and/or toughness to specific values may refer to that creature’s “base power,” “base toughness,” or “base power and toughness.” Other continuous effects may further modify the creature’s power and toughness. See rule 613, “Interaction of Continuous Effects.”
BASE POWER and BASE TOUGHNESS are first mentioned here, as values an effect uses to SET the POWER and/or TOUGHNESS. The effect is not changing the "base power/toughness" to something else, it's setting the "power/toughness" to another value.
>613.3b Layer 7b: Effects that set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value are applied. Effects that refer to the base power and/or toughness of a creature apply in this layer.
Second mention of base power and toughness. Again, it reinforces the idea that "base power/toughness" is just a value that effects use to set the "power/toughness".
>Base Power, Base Toughness
>Effects that change the base power and/or base toughness of a creature set one or both of those values to a specific number. See rule 613, “Interaction of Continuous Effects.”
Final mention of "base power and toughness" is in the glossary. Again, it does not refer to a characteristic of the object.
>>47983232
>>47983563
Not him, but I feel like it would be better if it were something like
>Attacking creatures you control have first strike.
>Whenever a creature you control attacks, you may pay R. If you do, that creature deals 1 damage to target creature defending player controls. Otherwise, that creature gets +1/+0 until end of turn.
>>47983579
POWER and TOUGHNESS are the grand total of the base power and any modifying effects. It's right there in the rules you yourself just posted.
>To determine a creature’s power and toughness, start with the numbers printed in its lower right corner, then apply any applicable continuous effects. (See rule 613, “Interaction of Continuous Effects.”)
>>47983614
Not him, but where in that rule does it say "base power and toughness?" It doesn't. You are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. We know that you are trying to refer to the P/T printed on the card itself, but Magic NEVER refers to that as "base power and toughness" which the other guy just proved.
>>47982164
First should be a Human, third one because why not and liked the art.
I could make the cost RR, I want to keep it effective. The at the beginning of combat bit sounds good.
>>47982581
>>47982931
It makes Zedruu really good.
>>47983232
Uh. The pinging is extremely good. Not sure if it's broken tho.
>>47978842
That could be uncommon.
>>47983685
STOP RESPONDING! IT'S A TROLL!
>>47983588
>that creature’s “base power,” “base toughness,” or “base power and toughness.”
Right there.
Break that down.
That creature (an object).
Apostrophe s, indicating something that object possesses.
Base power and toughness.
That object has a base power and toughness.
>>47983680
>where in that rule does it say "base power and toughness?"
That's not the part I was saying was in that rule. The rule outlines that power and toughness are the grand sum, is what I was referring to.
>>47983714
>That object has a base power and toughness.
If it is set by something, yes. Otherwise, no.
>>47980061
Do... you really not see an issue with that?
>>47983709
>our faces when people don't recognize Cooldown Guy or one of his copycats
It's gonna be a long summer.
>card
So while I toil on this one set, I have been tinkering with the basis of the next one. This mechanic is one of the new ones I'm working on to include in it. Thoughts? It'll appear in Bant colors. Set will have a heavy Enchantment focus, including "enchantment Metalcraft" and other stuff that plays nice with them.
>>47983774
T R O L L
R
O
L
L
>>47983740
>The rule outlines that power and toughness are the grand sum
Wrong.
Layer 7a defines the P/T due to CDAs.
Layer 7b sets the P/T to specific values.
Layers 7c and 7d you finally get to add.
Layer 7e you switch.
Determining power and toughness is not just a sum of numbers.
>>47983754
>Otherwise, no.
Show where it says that definitively.
Everything that speaks about base P/T acts as though it exists. Rules that existed before base P/T were introduced fail to mention it, but they don't deny that it exists before modification.
It's simply a minor formatting issue at this point. The rules don't prevent it, they just don't outline it.
>>47983808
Not "sum" as in numbers, the grand sum of all numbers and modifiers. The usage should be obvious there, you're being either too literal or just nitpicking if you didn't grasp that.
>>47983788
Seems like a strange, overly specific variant of investigate. What problems are you having with your current set, anon?
>>47983788
>Inscribe
Not a fan. At all. This seems like one of the most bland keywords I've ever seen in my entire life. Seriously, Flash? That's it?
>>47983809
Show me where the rules talk about base P/T and doesn't mention effects that set it. Oh wait, you can't.
>>47983795
>>47983709
Screaming about it doesn't do any more to contribute to the conversation than people posting trolly cards. That said, I do think generosity is a legitimately interesting design, in the vein of Zedruu. Adjusted it a bit, and added a second ability for more shenanigans.
As to the existence of "base P/T", I don't think its terribly egregious to push forward with designs that explicitly refer to base power or toughness. Even if the rules as explicitly written don't allow for them right now, its not a terrible stretch to consider modifications to the rules that state that "base power and toughness is an attribute that a creature has, as defined by its printed power and toughness, a CDA, or other effect."
But then, this thread had this same argument over Multichampion and something else. I swear to god there are only like ten people who post in these threads.
>>47983809
>>47983888
>Can black border care about a creature's power/toughness changing (that is, "if <cardname's> power and/or toughness are not the same as its base power/toughness, <effect>")?
>Maybe. It’s messy. Ask Tabak.
Both of you shut up about it, because neither one of you is going to convince the other and neither one of you are 100% correct.
You're just going in circles with fingers in your ears, convinced you're right when it's already been admitted BY THE DEVELOPERS that there IS NOT A CLEAR AND DEFINITE ANSWER. It is messy, and you are making that mess by bickering about it.
>>47983934
I feel like Hivemind does this in a less abusable fashion
>>47983868
Maker's block, mostly. I created Inscribe to make it so you could enable Enchantment-matters stuff AND mix up the play a bit by throwing in instant-speed combat tricks and creatures that wouldn't normally be a thought. Just trying to spice things up a little. I suppose it doesn't mean much outside of a set context.
>Selif
The token gen might get a little out of hand, since every time he swings he's casting the front half of Nomad's Assembly.
>>47983888
>most bland in your entire life
Well at least you're honest, I guess. Maybe think about it when you're less pissed off though? I can't imagine arguing with that other anon is making you care too much about anything else anyway. Or maybe it is that boring, Iunno.
>>47983934
>Genorosity
Demonic Pact, or any of the Future Sight pacts.
>I swear to god there are only like ten people who post in these threads.
4chan says we have 25 posters, and I'm two of them (PC and phone). But yeah, these threads don't really have a whole lot of people in them. It's sad, but it's the truth. They certainly have gone downhill in the past few years.
>>47983937
>it's already been admitted BY THE DEVELOPERS that there IS NOT A CLEAR AND DEFINITE ANSWER.
Is this what Tabak said?
>>47983996
>They certainly have gone downhill in the past few years.
They seem to spike in quality now and again. It used to be massive upswings and massive downswings, where the good times were good and the bad were awful, but now each thread is a different beast it seems, so in general things don't seem that great overall since you aren't getting long strings of quality posts and don't know if things going to shit means stepping away equates to not missing much for a few weeks.
Sometimes I get really self-conscious of the iteration numbers. Yeah, here's this again.
>>47983995
Well, first-off, cards that give things Flash (or let them be cast as though they had Flash) are already cheap as fuck. Hell, Vedalken Orrery enables all your shit, and it costs only as much as two Runes. Look, I think making Runes has merit, but I think the effect just needs to be changed to something else. Definitely not sure on what though, and they certainly should not just be copies of Clues.
>>47983996
>Demonic Pact, or any of the Future Sight pacts.
Oh, of course. It would only be run in some absurd stupid combo, but that's half the point. Nobody plays Zedruu, Hive Mind, or Shared Fate because they're legitimately greathearted; they just want to shove garbage onto other peoples plates. They're wacky cards that are fun to build around but always on the fringe of competitiveness due to cost or cumbersomeness.
>>47978120
>>47978456
>it's basically a 1 mana recollect stapled onto a Bayou
1. It has no land types so cant be fetched like a Bayou.
2. It's not an etb effect.
>>47984029
It's been my experience that the threads are better when they have more of the "regular" posters in them.
>>47983996
>Is this what Tabak said?
I can't find anywhere that someone has asked him. I'm referring to the "Maybe" from Rosewater. That's an admission of uncertainty.
>>47984065
Well I don't see it as really much more boring than Investigate (card advantage is arguably better, but it's also a pretty boring utility mechanic), since it's not parasitic at all and doesn't require a Limited environment to thrive like say, Splice onto Arcane, but I'll admit it's a utility keyword action. The main attraction was it doesn't cost you card, and gives more flexibility while not being tied to a rare artifact, so you can see it at common and get the benefits from it. Is 2 too much? I thought it might be, since every color gets Flash "as necessary" so overcosting it to compensate for colors that don't normally have it isn't a thing. I could adjust it to 1 without a problem. I'm not opposed to changing it, I'm just stating my thoughts on the matter. I'll have to see what I can cook up for it to do, but the options are pretty limited if I am trying to keep NWO common complexity in mind.
>>47983563
>It's super first strike.
It's not though, since it can ping creatures that have no intentions of blocking. Or simply burn away their blockers and swing in unblocked. It really should be a "when blocked" trigger and only hit the blocking creature.
>>47981412
the Master should just trigger when he attacks and choose a creature defending player controls. otherwise you just target itself and it goes unblocked. The burn ability should refer to the "last chosen" creature.
>>47984093
I dunno, I'm here all the time and they still vary wildly. When they are like this it really doesn't help motivate me to make cards though, I'll admit. And my stuff doesn't typically wow anyone, so... I can't say I'm one of the people that really improve thread quality, but at least I try not to detract from it.
Eh, it's whatever. There comes a point where all I can do is shrug and go "lol, 4chan" at the lack of decorum and social graces, and just either keep on keepin' on or toddle off to do something else.
>>47984164
You're getting too hung up on the flavor, man. The point of the ability IS to burn away blockers.
>>47984183
You're only one poster though, anon. Maybe sometimes, you're the only regular here. I come and go, sometimes for pretty long periods of time, depending on what I have going on.
>>47984183
At least you're not looking at anime art for card ideas like I am, and then posting most likely terribad designs. Pic related.
More or less what I was attempting, but the template looks off.
>>47984322
Man, I am so glad I ditched weebshit. Well, most of it. As for the card... Oh fuck, you want it to tutor for each CMC spot lower? Fucking hell, I have no idea how to word that. The easiest way to do it would be to use counters. Like, the start of the ability has you remove a counter, search for a creature card with equal CMC as to the number of counters, then repeat the process. Holy fuck, I have no idea how to balance this. Good luck man.
>>47984335
>Cardsmith
Aw, what the fuck? Come on, man...
>Functional emblems.
Aw, what the fuck? Come on, man... But seriously, this is a fucking terrible idea. It's almost completely non-interactive and lasts for the entire game. And in an environment made with this in mind, you'd probably have a number of cards that could give out salvation counters.
>>47984335
It seems incredibly wordy and prone to memory issues for an effect that is better suited to instants. The swapping in and out of exile thing is just way too clunky.
>>47984322
Search your library for any number of creature cards with different converted mana costs each less than the chosen creature's converted mana cost.
>>47984404
The name alone wants me to see you make Exalted Onslaught, Ferocious Onslaught, Morbid Onslaught, etc.
As for the card itself... Probably make uncommon and up by 1.
>>47984322
Ignore what I said, listen to >>47984477
>>47984477
Ah, the addition of 'each' makes it read much clearer. Thanks.
>>47984551
This looks fun. Good job. Part of me wants to put a mana-tax ability on it involving removing the counters or saccing it or something. But that's just my complexity addiction talking. Best to ignore it.
>>47984551
I'd prefer this if it was smaller and cheaper, to fit more of a tempo playstyle.
>>47984671
This seems crazy overcosted. 3 turns and 15 mana to tutor a single card? I think I'd rather just take Rune-Scarred Demon.
>>47984725
>>47984671
15 life, not mana. But yeah, it is excessive. Even 9 life and 3 turns for a 6/6 flyer is a bit much.
>>47984029
Does this have anything to do with a certain custom card maker known for one of his more well known abilities?
>>47984751
>>47984725
Right, duh, 15 life. Man, it really reminds me of that one brilliant card an anon made though that was a callback to Mahamoti Djinn. I'll see if I can find it.
>>47984784
?
>>47984804
Yes, that one! Simple, but one of my favorites. God I wish I could reference old cards the way this does.
>>47984623
>>47984551
Well, that's spooky. Hiveminding Guile-esque triggers, I guess.
>>47984573
Makes me think of a counterspell that's like
>As an additional cost to cast ~, remove X +1/+1 counters from creatures you control.
>Counter target spell unless it's controller pays X.
I want it to be green and blue, but at CMC 2 or more it'd be garbage, probably. Argh.
>>47984644
Like a 2/2 for 3? I'm inexperienced at playing tempo, so I'm not sure where it'd fit best.
>>47984322
>anime-related art
The only thing that turns me off about cards that have it are the waifu ones. The ones that just have animu art but are functional cards (like yours) in all other regards are fine. I have some art made by eastern artists; none of it is moeblob stuff but a lot of it looks like KMMO art and whatnot.
As for the card... hm. I think the other anons are on-track with the wording better than I could be.
>>47984335
This at once seems too complex and not very worth it, since it's expensive. I realize it hits all creatures with salvation counters, but honestly you're better off using a Haunt-like I think and limiting it as such.
>>47984404
Pretty good.
>>47984426
Hm. Feels okay as a sort of passive noncreature spell hate. Also helps rebound from a creature spell getting countered.
>>47984428
Detain, the Detaining Detainer.
>>47984453
Probably fine. I dunno why Flashback as opposed to just making the pair up front though. Easier to dodge counters and make it more likely to get at least one?
>>47984551
Counter-Prowess? Hm. Not bad. I could see this effect repeating itself a few times in a set, non-keyworded. I agree that seeing it on a cheaper body is way more enticing.
>>47984573
That's some serious token gen there. Pretty good, I think. I don't like the purely Plant focus though; her poison kiss is her real trademark. Would like to see deathtouch on her somewhere.
>>47984671
I agree, this seems expensive.
>>47984769
He was one reason, but we eventually got good at ignoring him. It's why he disappeared for so long. We have another copycat though it seems.
>>47984854
I've tried this a few times; nobody likes them. Story of most of my cards, really.
>>47984804
I like it. Would be fun in Limited.
>>47984859
This seems needlessly niche.
I'm starting to wonder if this should work like the Shoals or not.
>>47985127
>Detain, the Detaining Detainer.
Yeah, Moonstone is a character I like, but I do find it hard to represent her mechanically. I think I'll try to focus on her psychology background in the future.
>Poison Ivy
I'll consider it. For now, I was thinking of moving the kiss ability to a separate card, since I sometimes do that with these characters, I make a card for the character, and another card for something associated with them (pic related, for example). I haven't actually made it yet, but I'm imagining it would be something like Spinal Embrace.
>I've tried this a few times; nobody likes them. Story of most of my cards, really.
Aw, sorry to hear that. Do you have any examples you'd like to post?
>>47985224
>since I sometimes do that with these characters, I make a card for the character, and another card for something associated with them
I have noticed this, yeah.
>Aw, sorry to hear that. Do you have any examples you'd like to post?
Nah, I quit doing it for the most part except for the odd callback if I can manage one in a set. I don't have 90% of my old cards anymore. Don't think I'm fishing for pity here; if I really thought posting wasn't worth it I wouldn't do it. I'm just calling it like it is. I have some stuff in this current project people like; that's good enough.
>>47985272
>I don't have 90% of my old cards anymore.
Did you lose them, or did you deliberately get rid of them?
>current project
...Which one's that? Hard to tell with no trips. I'm also forgetful as fuck, so I probably won't remember unless I see the set symbol. I'll just go ahead and guess that you're "Cracked Egg" anon. If you are, I'm sorry for calling it a cracked egg again. I know it isn't, I just forget what it really is.
>>47985127
>This seems needlessly niche.
Really? It burns on non-damage lifeloss, which happens a fair amount, due to the ton of "they lose 1 life, you gain 1 life" style effects, not to mention any time a player pays life.
>>47985358
Whoops, needs an "Enchant creature" on there.
>>47985358
I think the art would be better if it were shifted to show the lack of a head, as I don't think a lot of people are familiar with the dullahan.
>>47985334
>Did you lose them, or did you deliberately get rid of them?
Column A and B. I kept stuff I really liked, got rid of a lot, and lost the rest in a reformat.
>cracked egg
That's me. I never told anyone what it was, so it's whatever it looks like to you. Don't worry about it. It's funny.
>Kris
>essentially "super trample+" on a repeatable source you can move around
It's probably fine, but it's scary, that's for sure.
>>47985358
>art
Very cool.
>card
Short of the mistake you caught yourself, probably fine. Expensive enough to work as a repeatable, but you can't exploit it on the same creature more than once without help, and that's perfect.
>niche
It just seems like a bit of a needless distinction, especially in BR which likes and does both damage and life loss. Just my opinion though.
>>47985404
>Hoof or Wing
Flavorful, but would probably just be modal in print. I think the Khans/Dragons thing was on purpose as a cycle thing for flavor. Doing in at lower rarities and more often doesn't have as much impact.
>>47985385
Believe me, I totally would if I could, but that's as much as the art shows.
Pixiv (Japanese DeviantArt, more or less) has had this running... thing, called "Pixiv Fantasia," a loosely defined set of worldbuilding things and then people just draw shit for it. I've been trawling that for random ideas and art. The upside is the occasional cool piece. The downside is that any given character may have only one piece of art. Like this dullahan girl has three pieces of art that I could find, the one used, one far too waifu, and pic related.
Flavor is "Here, hold my head." I guess. Throwback to Phylactery Lich.
>>47985404
Use the Khans or Dragons format from the Sieges.
>>47985471
>"super trample+"
Damn, I never thought of it that way before. Hmm... I was worried about the mana cost being too expensive before, but I'm definitely not thinking that now. For the record, it's supposed to work with a 3/3 that gets a free Forked Bolt whenever it attacks. For a while, it triggered off noncombat damage to work with the ping, but I eventually realized how insular that is, so I change it.
>>47985595
Right, I'm somewhat familiar with Pixiv due to Danbooru, and I've seen a lot of Fantasia art. Never really dug into it any further than "cool art" though. But yeah, nothing wrong with using their art. Wow, looking through the dullahan tag at Danbooru, it's mostly Life with Monster Girls or Durarara. ...Not that that's a bad thing.
>card
You forget to say "with no headbearer counters on them" but otherwise... well, even with the dawback, I'm not sure about it being a 4/4. Maybe up to 1WB and add an upside?
>>47985404
>>47985492
On a vaguely related note, is this too much trinketry?
Fable Shaman UG
Creature- Elf Shaman
1G: ~ gets +2/+2 and becomes a Beast until end of turn. Play this ability only once each turn.
U: ~ gets -1/-1 and becomes a Bird until end of turn. Play this ability only once each turn.
2/2
For the usual "Completely stupid effect I'd like to figure the wording for but some minor bit of the comprehensive rules is trolling me", here's a one-sided Warp World designed to fuck someone 99% of the way over.
Osoth's Will 5UUU
Sorcery
Shuffle all permanents target opponent controls into their library, then for each permanent shuffled in this way, search that player's library for a card that shares a type with it and put it onto the battlefield under their control. Then shuffle their library.
>>47985685
Yeah, I know what Red Hood does. It's funny how many times I've commented on your stuff and how unmemorable it apparently was. Titlia al Ghul seems not to have changed since last I saw her, or is there some subtle difference I'm not seeing?
>>47985720
>Shaman
I like it a lot, actually. The idea of a shaman who tells stories and shapeshifts to punctuate is charming.
>Osoth's
I can't get over how much of a pain in the ass this is for everyone involved. Good lord.
>>47985720
Because you can fail to find, its just a board wipe for 5UUU. You could allow them to search, but uh... yeah, that's a little bad.
>>47985685
>You forget to say "with no headbearer counters on them" but otherwise... well, even with the dawback, I'm not sure about it being a 4/4. Maybe up to 1WB and add an upside?
Argh, brain's getting tired from all this card work.
Phylactery Lich is a 5/5 for BBB, and I wanted to avoid 3 CMC and 5/5 because it'd feel too samey. Maybe a 3/3 for WB?
>>47985729
>It's funny how many times I've commented on your stuff and how unmemorable it apparently was.
I'm sorry, but it is kinda hard to recall specific comments when the people commenting aren't using a trip.
>Titlia
Not bad. And yes, she has changed only slightly. It's wording from Nether Traitor, which I just liked more than what I had previously (previous version cared only if it was a creature you controlled, not if it went into your graveyard). And I'm really sorry, but what did you think of her last time? Unless you're the one who said that there should be some sort of connection between the two abilities, and I said thanks, but I think I'll stick it onto a Ghost Rider or something instead.
Oh, and since you do seem to have commented a lot on my cards, I have to ask if there's any specific /co/-related thing you want me to try my hand at. Doesn't have to be DC or Marvel, but I would like it to be something that obviously has potential, not just some random guy from Dark Horse Presents or something.
>>47985770
Cool. Maybe add Vigilance?
>>47985824
>Ghost Rider
That was me, I'm pretty sure, yes.
>Titlia
I didn't notice the difference this time, I guess it really was subtle. And I've commented with cards attached plenty, but... well it's still the same, innit? She seems fine-ish, but the recursion stuff always demands playtesting. Sadly not possible for you though since you aren't setbuilding. Well, not impossible, just improbable.
>/co/ suggestions
Hm. Branching out and doing some characters from other comics/companies could be cool. BPRD/Hellboy, Red Sonja/Conan, The Crow, Sandman... lots of potential stuff that could be cool. Just try to avoid Vigilance, eh?
>mfw you suggest someone add vigilance to something
My fucking siiiides aaaaaah.You know I'm just teasing I hope.
>Static
I know nothing of this dude. Man he gets a lot of mileage out of noncreature spells though, holy shit. He's really good.
>>47985720
Goddamnit, the U activation on fable shaman also needs to add flying. I'm not even tired, time to sudoku.
>>47985753
Yeah, it is kind of a pain in the ass.
>>47985770
>Fail to find
Yeah, that's the problem. I've been trying to figure this shit out for two days now. "Exile all your shit, pick all your shit, set it on the board" seems like an excellent absurdly costed RUG mythic, though. Even "Both Players Do That" could be an green Warp World mirror.
>>47985824
The Lantern Power Rings, not as equipment, but as artifacts mostly you use?
Possibly just upgrade it to the batteries themselves.
Only doing this incredibly unoriginal idea because paired artwork like this tickles me.
Mostly joking. Mostly. My brain's fried at this point.
>>47985955
Revised Edition/10
>>47985913
Oh, I guess I didn't realize Talia was finalized. I'll have to make a note about that then.
>BPRD/Hellboy, Red Sonja/Conan, The Crow, Sandman
Already did Hellboy, here. Though this was quite a while ago. Red Sonja, sure, I guess, I might need some help with that though. I don't know much about her other than "chainmail bikini" and "rule 63 Conan." Kinda the same with Conan himself, actually. Though is he really a /co/ character? Whatevs. Crow, later. Sandman... You talking Dream of the Endless? Or the guy with the gasmask? Or someone else? And actually, the Sandman series about Dream was published by Vertigo, which is owned by DC. In fact, Lex Luthor actually had a chat with Death of the Endless during The Black Ring (awesome story arc, definitely recommend).
>My fucking siiiides aaaaaah.
Yeah yeah yeah, laugh it up. I was thinking First Strike at first, but then I realized there wasn't much point to it with Indestructible. I guess you could try Lifelink?
>Static
Actually, this is another favor I'm doing. Glad to know it's good, but I don't think it'd done just yet.
>>47985929
Yeah, probably just the batteries, which I've already done for Black (free reanimation) and I'm developing one for Orange (kinda hard, but it's basically exiling creatures as they die, and you can get copies of them later). Yeah, the power rings and really just the entire lantern concept is hard as fuck to do because of how varied the rings are in what they can do. They can do almost anything, how do I represent that in a card? Probably the only Green Lantern I'll ever do is Alan Scott.
>>47985955
Agreed with >>47985966 though you could use the colorshifted frames.
>>47986000
honestly, this is really boring.
>>47972315
So, we're...Gonna be rich?
>>47986000
Hate to agree with >>47986018
Too much on the gun, not enough on getting the crap beaten out of him.
It was always one of my favorite bits in heroclix that he started with roughly even melee and ranged stats, but after a certain point of damage he turned into a melee tank and lost the ranged.
Make the Good Samaritan equipment and give him bonuses for getting the crap beaten out of him (because I'm pretty sure that's every hellboy fight)
>>47986018
Again, it was from a long time ago. Well, am I heading in the right direction now? ...OK, yeah, this isn't that great. Inspiration seem to either just come to me immediately or never.
>>47972591
Perhaps make it so he can use a loyalty ability immediately, or even make that a +1 or something?
>>47986000
>Talia is finalized
That's up to you, man. I dunno where you got that judgement call from what I said. I just am not sure given what her recursion can do in Sac Engine.dec that it's fine, but I'm not sure if it's broken either. It needs to be tried out in-game, I feel. That's all.
>you could try lifelink
Not my card, I was just pointing it out. I'm glad you're being a good sport about it though.
>Hellboy
Yeah, seconding that he's boring as hell. You did say he was old though. I'd actually make him Jund, give him Fight, and Menace maybe. Also have to represent his soft side too, but not sure how to do it... hrm.
>Sandman
Yeah the Vertigo title. I was just pushing for less capes mostly, that's all.
>>47986091
Damnit, right after I hit post your comment comes up. As for damage bonuses... the first thing that comes to mind is using the Fungusaur ability of getting +1/+1 counters on damage. The second is getting charge counters or something, then Hellboy gets something nice after getting so many charge counters, like Double Strike or a P/T boost.
>>47975220
You might wanna take a bit from Suspend.
"When the last is removed".
>>47986112
>Yeah the Vertigo title. I was just pushing for less capes mostly, that's all.
You do realize I'm mostly doing Marvel and DC, right? And that most of their stuff is capes, right? I mean, I know there's other stuff out there, I've read it, but I've always really enjoyed capes, so that's what comes to mind most easily, and what I tend to make cards from. I mean... I guess I could do... Oh fuck, what could I do? The only non-cape thing I can think of is Prophet, which technically IS cape. Uh... fuck. Wow, I'm just so stumped for something non-cape I think I could adapt. Nowhere Men?
>>47975577
Jesus, remove that reminder text. You can fit that in the gatherer rulings later.
>>47986112
>>47986177
I might be able to do Orc Stain and Skullkickers.
>>47986177
Well if you prefer capes, then... hm. Man I am the worst person to suggest it then, since I don't know many capes outside DC/Marvel. Have you done Ragman yet? I feel like you have, but I'm not sure. I imagine he'll look a lot like a Sengir Vampire all told.
Last shot at Hellboy for tonight. And good night.
>>47986217
Just suggest what you know. Non-cape stuff is fine, though just realize I will probably be relying on you to provide insight into characters.
>Ragman
Yeah, already have a card for him, don't think it's finished though. So, he basically exiles creatures your opponents control when they die, and when he does he gets a +1/+1 counter. And he has a second ability kinda like Soulflayer where he gains the keywords of the exiled cards.
As for capes outside DC/Marvel:
Incognito (technically owned by Marvel but outside the Marvel universe)
Sleeper (same as above but for DC)
Wildcats (same as above)
Supreme (one of the best Superman stories not about Superman you'll ever read)
Bloodstrike (just the reboot)
Wanted (not really recommended)
Irredeemable/Incorruptible
Insufferable
Darkness/Angelus/Witchblade (ooh, might want to do these, though really on the fringe of what makes a cape comic)
Cyberforce
Hunter-Killer
Wait, I remember another non-cape comic I might be able to adapt. Don't remember the name though, but it was basically an American version of Bleach. Pretty cool, a guy summoned a bunch of viking ghosts to kick necromancer ass.
Hmm, 2000AD? Never really picked it up since I don't like the format, but it has some good things, like Judge Dredd.
>>47984086
>1. It has no land types so cant be fetched like a Bayou.
Yeah, I know
>2. It's not an etb effect.
Oh sorry, your version is significantly more OP than I thought it was. You've posted that exact card before, you can read my comment when you first posted the card: it's busted in two.
>>47986125
Based on my old buddy Tahngarth, a little
Big Red 3RRR
Legendary Creature- Demon Soldier
Haste, Vigilance
Whenever ~ is dealt damage, it gets +2/+2 until end of turn.
1R, T: ~ fights target creature.
4/6
And for giggles
The Good Samaritan 2
Legendary Artifact- Equipment
~ can only be equipped to a creature with power 3 or greater.
Equipped creature gets +2/+0 and has "Whenever a creature dealt damage by this creature this turn dies, exile it."
Equip 2
>>47986421
I dig the Samaritan a lot. Hellboy... hmm. Vigilance on monored is kinda sketchy to me. I'm not sure I like how it's structured. Maybe he'd be fun taking damage from creatures as though they had wither, then getting +2/+2 for each -1/-1 counter on him, along with the Fight? And maybe once he gets a certain number of counters, he attacks each turn if able or something?
>>47986324
SCUD, the Disposable Assassin? Probably another phylactery lich-alike.
Heck, Tank Girl?
>>47986406
Not him, but why do you think it is? Tapped duals are terribad and usually need a big upside to be playable beyond standard (where lack of choice mean anything is playable). Your original argument meanders and I'm having trouble making sense of it. You compare it to bayou and cite land tribal synergies when it has no subtypes. You compare it to Recollect (which it is not) but also to Reclaim (which it is and is admittedly terrible).
>>47986463
>vigilance on monored
Mostly from tahngarth (I know he's old, but the ability doesn't work nearly as well otherwise) and he's a legend, I feel like I can push the envelope a little. After all, it's mostly so he can have his own Relentless Assault each turn.
>Wither and +2/+2 for counters
Eh. Feels a lot more like complicated fungusaur shenanigans to me. I do have an old one, though...
Decay 2GB
Creature- Incarnation
Wither
~ gets +1/+1 for each -1/-1 counter on a creature on the battlefield.
2/2
I'm making hires M15 and M15 planewalker (since I have photoshop templates for them)
I'll postem when I'm done, but here's the current progress using the low res images (haven't replaced them with high quality yet)
still working out a few bugs
>>47986556
Not bad. the only reason for me to use the hi-rez templates at all is that the base ones have god awful compression on the art. I know the dude behind MSE is worried about counterfeiting but like, come on man, people will do it anyway with or without you.
>>47986566
I quite like it. Needs flavor text, or some other flavor support in the set, though.
>>47986549
This too. Could also see it on a white hatebear.
I admit this is a bad idea, but i felt like it damnit
>>47986658
Not even in addition to their other types or anything? I mean... well, it's a thing, man.
>>47986674
>>47986658
It is better that it overwrites other card types; an instant permanent is a hell of a thing. But the rules are robust enough for it to work. Anything that returns an instant to your hand works. If you try to cast it from your graveyard, then when it moves to the stack it regains its original card types and resolves as it normally would. If you try to flashback it, it exiles without doing anything.
>>47986492
>Tapped duals are terribad
You literally only need them to scry 1 to be playable in modern so no.
>land tribal synergies when it has no subtypes
I thought it was an etb effect so karoo lands/ crop rotation/ expidition map was what I was referring to.
>You compare it to Recollect
I did so because it effectively 'draws' a card by simply being a land: comparing it to reclaim is innacurate as reclaim put you down card advantage where this card does not.
As to why the actual version is even more broken, here are list of legacy decks that would definitely play that card... Reanimator, reanimator plays 4 entombs, playing that card as a one of would allow each entomb to double as a reclaim, if you draw it you can either discard it or play it as a sub-optimal land.
Dredge, every time it is dredged or discarded you can get either a narcomeaba, a draw spell, or an anti hate piece and put it back on top of your library; grafdigger's cage no longer becomes a real sideboard card vs dredge, cage is admittedly bullshit, but it still highlights its power. Lands (any variety, although likely better with GB pox or intuition) you get to dredge an explore back on top of your library; or you can use crop rotation (or even wasteland) which also opens up the possibility of saving a loam from graveyard hate. I'd consider running it in zombardment as well, although that's not guaranteed, and I wouldn't be surprised if there was a version of storm which would play it as well
I'm not fundamentally against a card making big waves in legacy/vintage, but that effect is just fucking broken.
It would see a decent bit of play if the card literally did nothing except have an enter the graveyard trigger, and then it is a tapland on top of that.
I suppose there could be an environment where it isn't insanely good, and people should design for their envoirments, but it is probably OP in every current format.
>>47986720
Quick question since you seem rules competent, since lands don't use the stack, do they become lands or do they break something. If they DO become lands, would they technically count against the played lands count for the turn?
attempt 1
>>47986733
You can't ever cast a land, because Land Creatures or Land Instants still aren't spells, if Dryad Arbor is any indication. Anything with the Land type MUST be played as a land, or otherwise "put onto the battlefield".
>>47986733
The process for casting a spell has a step where you check if the spell can be legally cast. If it can't (say because its a land and lands cant be cast) you rewind till just before you started casting.
If you had say an enchantment with "you may cast instant cards from your graveyard" and Dreamsieve, the same step also stops you from casting cards that were originally noninstants.
>>47986795
inb4 crying red mages
>>47986812
Well that theoretical enchantment wouldn't work because it lacked a mana cost, but my concern was Goblin Dark-Dwellers or other things that could let it be cast despite a lack of mana cost and that answered it, so thanks.
>>47986795
so you can flashback everything in your GY but anything new gets exiled?
Doesn't really feel white to me, but I guess it's a gold card not a hybrid so it's ok. The exile clause doesn't feel like it's a specific color identity.
>>47986795
>>47986886
I guess the white is bringing the psuedo RIP effect? Although I'd honestly rather have it only hit instants and sorceries (a la Dryad Militant), rather than all cards and tokens.
>>47986907
Yea, i was thinking of rest in peace for the white.
This version definitely feels more mono-U, but also weakens its potential as a secondary GY hate card so i lowered the cmc overall.The graveyard hate was probably too late and non-retroactive enough to be relevant anyway, now it just stops it from being fed while in play
>>47986907
With that card though the RIP effect feels tied to the functionality of the flashback stuff, it feels more incidental that it's RIP.
Gave the OP challenge a crack.
In most tribes I think this is too pushed, but with dragons I think it's okay.god forbid red changelings are in rotation with this though
>>47986952
>give blue a slightly different Yawgmoth's will
>extend it's duration from one turn to potentially forever
Broken as fuck. No.
>>47987028
It's a bit different from yawgmoth, you dont get permanents out of it and your opponents can use it too (and they probably get to use it first)
>>47987008
I'm not 100% sure, but I'm pretty sure you only have to say "When you control no Dragons, sacrifice ~"
>>47987008
I wouldn't say that it needed to enter tapped, but you'd have to change the sac clause to preempt generating mana sans dragon
>>47987343
This is gonna be ridiculous to remember.
>>47986952
I like it. The added focus from the previous version is better this way I think.
>>47986566
Flavourful and useful.
>>47986549
I'm imagining this in a detain deck. All the "exile when comes into play, return when leaves battlefield" things just become an "exile target" as long as it's on the battlefield.
>>47985595
>>47985685
Isn't a 4/4 indestructible on turn 2 enough of an upside?
>>47987240
I couldn't find a precedent so I said creature just to make sure. For flavour reasons too, if we somehow get a dragon equipment I don't want that to count.
>>47987309
I think it's already a big boost, keep in mind the mana is unrestricted, you can use it to cast anything, as long as it's red.
>>47987645
>I think it's already a big boost, keep in mind the mana is unrestricted, you can use it to cast anything, as long as it's red.
It really depends on the set its in, Dragon creatures are typically costed as such that the land would rarely actually be of benefit. If the set has too many small red dragons, the land is too good for standard, and potentially even limited. If there aren't enough small red dragons, it does nothing for most of the game.
I actually feel like letting it die for the 2 mana would be very thematic in summoning a dragon early.
>>47987728
My set has a big dragon theme but most of them are 3CMC or up, which is cheaper than normal dragons but not so cheap to enable it to be an aggro strategy. Ideally the land would be useful in a dragon tribal deck, but too risky for a deck not running 10~ dragons.
Dragons being high risk high reward is also a theme of the set, losing a dragon tends to reward your opponent (slaying the dragon)
one more then time for bed.
>>47984322
I don't see a problem with anime art, as long as it isn't just "I am going to make a card of Naruto" or something like that.
>>47985955
Well, they did this kind of thing back in m15 or something. I still think that all colors should get some kind of counter, but only against its opposing colors.
>>47986421
>Big Red
Eh, I'm not really a fan of the temporary pump.
>Good Samaritan
Not usually how I implement firearms, sorry, I'll probably be doing pinging.
>>47986465
Eh... maybe later. Though to be honest, I'm kinda questioning the wisdom of doing cards for characters I'm relying on others for information on. Like, they could make their own cards if they wanted. And if I don't really like the characters, what's the point in me doing it?
>>47986556
Nice, thanks.
>>47987619
>Isn't a 4/4 indestructible on turn 2 enough of an upside?
Yes, but we were saying it was too much of an upside. We were discussing about making it a 3/3 with an extra keyword like Lifelink or Vigilance.
>>47988048
>Well, they did this kind of thing back in m15 or something.
When?
First go.
>>47988590
It was a cycle of each color have a hate for itself. It was in theros, glare of heresy was one of them, a white sorcery that would exile a white creature.
>>47988827
How in the fuck is that the same as colorshifted Hydro/Pyroblast?
>>47988940
By kind of thing I meant color specific hate cycle, not blast reprints.
So, I'm just gonna keep dropping mythics sporadically. Let me know what you all think.
Also, what's the general density of legend to non-legend mythics in an average large set?
