Contraptions edition!
>To make cards, download MSE for free from here
http://magicseteditor.sourceforge.net/
>Formatting Guide
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jn1J1Mj-EvxMxca8aSRBDj766rSN8oSQgLMOXs10BUM
>Mechanics doc (For the making of color pie appropriate cards)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgaKCOzyqM48dFdKRXpxTDRJelRGWVZabFhUU0RMcEE
>Q: Can there be a sixth color?
A: http://pastebin.com/kNAgwj7i
>Q: What's the difference between multicolor and hybrid?
A: http://pastebin.com/yBnGki1C
>Q: What is precedence?
A: http://pastebin.com/pGxMLwc7
>Art sources.
http://digital-art-gallery.com/
http://www.artstation.com/
http://drawcrowd.com/
http://fantasygallery.net/
http://grognard.booru.org/
http://fantasy-art-engine.tumblr.com/
>Stitch cards together with
http://old.photojoiner.net/
http://photojoiner.net/
http://www.fotor.com/features/photo-stitch.html
>/ccg/ sets (completed and in development)
http://pastebin.com/hsVAbnMj
OT: >>47239322
>>47300909
Ah, so, the thread isn't going to die just yet.
>card
Why is the mana added like this? Why not just let it add mana on entry?
>>47301024
How the fuck do you determine which damage to prevent with that last ability?
>>47301024
>Why is the mana added like this? Why not just let it add mana on entry?
If it added mana on entry, it would net you -1 mana and a card. As is, it slow-ramps you on your next turn and nets you a card to use your extra mana on.
>>47301108
Sorry, it's supposed to be
>Prevent the next 3 damage that would be dealt to each creature you control this turn.
Hmm, I think I should add a mana cost to these abilities.
>>47301680
OK.
>>47303662
Not bad. I like the Blue spin on it by having you draw no matter what. Red never really gets that, does it? The only thing that comes to mind is the last Chandra.
>>47304113
Oh wow, I just realized that this triggers itself. Better fix that.
>>47305653
>Legendary Creature - Construct Warrior
Why is this not an artifact? Just cut Warrior.
>Borr gains
For how long?
So, is the idea to use Equipment and Auras to power him up? Or do you have something else in mind?
>>47305743
I'm hyped and paid no attention to the card ;_;
Will fix.
And yeah. The idea was a WUR Artifact aggro general, since there's both no WUR artifact oriented card, and no aggro colored artifact oriented card.
And he's basically Voltron, even in flavour.
>>47305743so many obscure superheroes ;-;
I actually quite like that card. But that p/t is extremely offputting, and makes the card a bit too slow to make it playable. I'd go with 1UU and make it 2/1; even when you know I love pushing cards, the card as is is just not playable.
gay cyberpunk shit. Still less annoying than Royal Assassin.
>>47305939
You don't get to hex a monoblack card.
Give it protection from creatures, and that's some major bleed in itself; but flavour might make it okay for some people.
>Fixerino.
>>47305939
Hexproof is not monoblack's department
>>47305897
>And he's basically Voltron, even in flavour.
What is the flavor, exactly?
>so many obscure superheroes ;-;
It's like you're daring me to do all of those guys first. :D But I'm a big JSA (don't know what this is, do you?) fan, so I was probably gonna get around to most/all of them sooner or later. Speaking of...
>But that p/t is extremely offputting
Hmm. I guess I could do 2/1.
>>47305939
>mono-Black
>Hexproof
Ugh, Slyblade was one card. Make it UB. I do like the overall design though.
>>47306011
>>47306014
m15 disagrees
>>47306129
I knew you were going to point that out but that was an outside person that made the card. That's why the flavor says "Designed by Rob Pardo." Those cards are like PLC cards, can't be used to argue in favor of this or that in colorpie arguments.
>>47306155
That's pretty fair. Probably do 2UB then
>>47306321
Corrupting Essence is missing the enlightened clause, aside from that nice designs. Enlightened and more enchant-creatures seems like a good idea for a Return to Theros thing.
>>47306420
Fixed. Making sure that each enchantment creature, fits thematically as an enchantment.
I don't know if this is the right cost for this sort of effect or if this is even a wise sort of effect to make since it could be slow in play but...
Corrupted Ironleaf
Creature - Treefolk 2/2 BG (2)
{T}, Sacrifice ~: Choose one —
• Distribute two +1/+1 counters among one or two target creatures.
• Distribute two -1/-1 counters among one or two target creatures.
>>47306769
It's probably relevant to note that sets with both + and - counters in them generally aren't done for board-state-reading reasons (I don't recall if there have been exceptions) so mixing them on a single card doesn't usually make sense.
>>47306321
It's "diligence", not "diligance".
>>47306683
I like it
>>47307966
Deliciously simple, nice work, Anon
>>47305653
>>47306011
That's Wayne Reynolds' art. I could tell from the thumbnail.
>>47306101
Your multicolor cards are still pushed too hard.
>>47308205
>Your multicolor cards are still pushed too hard.
Which ones exactly?
>>47308266
>>47301024
VIGILANT threat that forces your opponent to take a big swing to the face or get his board wiped.
Vigilance being a big thing here, since if they take the swing out, you can just blow them out on their turn.
Those abilities are way too strong to be free. Those are 4 mana effects on a normal card.
>>47301842
Is *close* but needs to be at least five mana since it's COMPLETELY non-interactive and gets you card advantage and information about your opponent's deck.
>>47304113
This obviously needs to say 'the first instant or sorcery you cast each turn' but pretty much gives it Cascade.
>>47305743
This should be a Wizard.
>>47306101
Is a little pushed too. It's still a 2/4 for 3 with repeatable removal in a color that doesn't get it often.
>>47308266
This feels just a bit too good.
I'd suggest either changing the freeze to just a tap-down or to add (1) to the blink, but removing the freeze makes it mono-white.
Burning Skull Priest {B}{G}
Creature - Satyr Cleric 1/1
Whenever a creature deals combat damage to ~, regenerate it.
{B/G} : Target creature gains deathtouch until end of turn.
{B/G} {B/G} : Target creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
>>47306808
Ok
>>47308735
That second ability isn't remotely black, so a hybrid (or gold, for that matter) cost makes no sense.
Thoughts?
>>47308512
>Soldier
Yeah, kinda figured. I had a bit of creator's block on this one, but I know that these abilities are good, I just need to fine-tune the card.
>Ghost
OK. I'm wondering too if I should decrease his power. The toughness I would like to stay right where it is. Ghost (real name unknown) is VERY frail, on top of being in the 50-70 years old range.
>Strange
Right, I realized that right after I posted it. Just added a "from your hand" clause. So, no Flashback interaction, for example.
>Cyclone
Actually, no, she just dresses like a witch. Canonically, she's a fan of Wicked. She even has striped leggings, like the (dead) Wicked Witch's striped socks.
>Wildcat
Hmm, I was afraid of that. I'll probably just up the cost to 2GG. Oh, and if I change the ability to allow your creatures to Fight each other, would that affect the cost?
>Moonstone
I was just thinking that of upping the blink cost.
Thanks for all the feedback!
>>47308512
>>47309099
I just want to point out that, while most of these cards have balance problems, these designs are all relatively new.
>>47308735
If it get's hit in combat, it won't regenerate in time to save it. You need to word it like a replacement effect: "If ~ would be destroyed, regenerate it." See Cleric of the Holy Nimbus if you want that effect.
>>47308877
>>47309510
How about this then ?
>>47309831
>Whenever ~ blocks or becomes blocked, regenerate it.
>>47310955
Thoughts?
>>47310955
These abilities don't synergize.
>>47311021
In what way do they not? My intent is that you can deal two damage to something when you play an artifact. Does it not work this way?
>>47311041
Oh. For some reason, I thought it triggered on death.
>>47308371
It shouldn't need the "other" clause since it's damage won't happen prior to the ability going off.
![Image[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/WDjLxxf.jpg "Image[1].jpg")
>>47308977
I can't really think of a time i would ever rather see that made than just reprinting Seal of Doom.
>>47311080
I wasn't sure if I wanted to leave open dumb scenarios where the opponent casts Rakdos Charm in response to his ability or something and he performs a summary execution on himself, but I could leave that possibility open if it looks that bad.
>>47311962
Wow. Is is just a coincidence, or was that art made as a tribute to Memory Lapse?
>>47309099
>she just dresses like a witch
It's a 1/2 flyer that taps and unsummons creatures, one of which is an interaction with noncreature spells. None of that is Warrior shtick.
>Canonically, she's a fan of Wicked
And they got away with that?
>>47308979
You should be able to get away with this for five mana, maybe even four.
Also get MSE.
>>47309831
The templating is "gains [keyword]," so 'gains deathtouch.'
This isn't a Satyr or a Cleric, it's more like a Shade at this point. Or a Troll.
>>47310955
It's funny because you can alternately interpret from the mechanics that he's afraid of artifacts and shoots people when he runs away.
>>47310973
Yeah. I can see it.
Pretty nice draft common.
>>47311944
Really really good for a bear. Way too good.
Immediate 2-3of sideboard in tribal decks.
>>47311962
'Fun.'
>>47312451
>None of that is Warrior shtick.
Yeah, but she's not a Wizard. Actually, the creature type thing is kind of a pain for this set. I've yet to find a solution.
>And they got away with that?
I doubt anyone's going to sue a comic book publisher over a few references. It's not like they actually portrayed the play in the comic. And seriously, most people don't even know who the fuck Cyclone is, or what the JSA are. Speaking of...
>Citizen Steel
His gimmick is being part metal, and being tough as shit. Not really sure of how to cost him though.
>>47312630
8 is too steep, drop to at least 7.
>>47312630
I think he'd be better off with Absorb 3 or something.
>>47311962
You can't lose the game from mill this way.
Anna Fortune. Her gimmick was that she was the magic-user, but couldn't actually cast spells. What she did is that she made what are basically magical bullets that she could fire that would cast the spell for her. I know I'm going to want to do something with exiling spells with her for that reason, but I'm not so sure on the details. I'm already thinking of a version that "randomizes" spells. Like, you could exile 4, but then they get shuffled into a face-down pile, and you can cast copies of the revealed top card, but you always have to shuffle after. Not sure how I feel about that right now, but it would certainly be unique. If I did go down that route, I would want to restrict the cmc of the spells, since they're repeatable. Any suggestions as to what the max should be?
>>47312672
OK.
>>47312756
I'll have to think about it.
>>47312833
Seems kinda cheap for such an effect desu senpai.
>>47312934
It was gonna be more expensive/only go for two but I looked at Three Dreams and thought "cards already in your graveyard" was significantly more restrictive than "different auras." Could easily be wrong.
Also realized operating on enchantments you have on the field might simultaneously be more convenient and less exploitable. Probably going with that.
>>47312833
Searching the library seems more complicated than just returning them to hand. Also makes it useable in limited.
>>47313034
That's another reason I'm thinking having it choose enchantments you have in play makes a lot more sense. What do you think of that?
>>47313283
Are you really that concerned about untap abilities?
>>47313283
>>47313408
Yeah, all this really prevents is immediately having access to the mana, which is only very very slightly less broken.
A more balanced approach might be:
x comes in with a y counter. At the beginning of your upkeep, you may remove a y counter from x.
tap, put a y counter on x: add 1 mana of any color to your mana pool. Do this only if x has no y counters on it.
I don't believe I've made a moxen at any point.
Mox Carbuncle 0
Artifact
T: Add one mana of any color not matching a card in your graveyard to your mana pool.
Mox Porphyry 0
Artifact
T: Add one mana of any color to which your devotion is zero to your mana pool.
>>47314057
Both are broken! Wide open!
Translating from the constrained grammar of one card game to the constrained grammar of another interests me, and since I'm learning MtG and am reasonably familiar with Yu-Gi-Oh a friend challenged me to make some Yu-Gi-Oh cards into Magic cards.
I didn't know about MSE at the time and I'm too lazy to go compile it to remake one card, but this is the one I'm least unhappy with in terms of translating the effect of the original.
I also translated Lightning Bolt into Yu-Gi-Oh terms because said friend linked me a thread where Yu-Gi-Oh players who don't know Magic declared it worthless (I think because it seemed akin to Ookazi) and can post that if you'd like.
>>47314260
The issue with converting things in a design-coherent way here is converting things between Magic's mana costs and Yu-Gi-Oh's... tangle of resource management that I can only assume lies under the surface of their shenanigans.
>>47313283
>>47313408
>>47313693
>>47314305
Yeah, if I was putting it forward as a “real” Magic card I'd put a mana cost on it—the general concensus when I asked others for opinions was 4WW, but I didn't write down the reasoning.
The only difference between the card I posted and the Yu-Gi-Oh equivalent is the Yu-Gi-Oh equivalent has to sit on the field facedown for the duration of your opponent's precombat main step, where it can be targeted for destruction, whereas an instant is played from the hand. I thought that wasn't really worth trying to model without looking into the relative prevalence of hand destruction versus counterspelling.
>>47314260
I'm also interested in that kind of exchange
For a trap card, you could make it a creature with defender that can tap and sacrifice itself for the effect of the original card
Summoning sickness would replace the "wait 1 turn before activating" clause
>>47314305
>Yu-Gi-Oh's... tangle of resource management
I still have no idea how the YGO system works. As far as I can tell, everything's either 0, or needs you to sacrifice a number of creatures of varying specificity. And that retarded star system doesn't help either.
>>47314174
This feels blue. Red doesn't really bounce. The only case is the dash mechanic but that wasn't mono red, and it was a kinda cheese ability and the bounce was a downside.
I had an idea for a Legendary Thopter, it has two colorless abilities, one that gives it a +1/+1 counter and another that lets you bounce it back to your hand (this nets you a 1/1 Thopter token for each +1/+1/ counter on it though, so it's not all bad)
No idea what the cost would be though.
>>47317327
So... basically a reusable version of this, right?
>>47317388
Yes, but legendary. and it starts off tiny.
>>47317442
>>47317327
Sounds really slow. It would work in a control deck for value or in drafts I guess, but I feel like it would not see play out of a standard as we have better combos in everything else.
I guess if you could consistantly make 3+ thopters on, maybe 5, or 6 mana it would be playable.
>>47317593
>>47317442
>>47317388
>>47317327
Not what we were talking about, but I thought this design would be better because it can be made much faster.
>Why UR?
Commander. Given all the Thopter-making cards in Origins that are in those colors, and the upcoming Kaladesh block likely to give us more of them, I thought it would be a smart decision.
>>47317593
Maybe you've explained this before, I don't know, but why do you make the player reveal their entire hand? Why not just the black cards and the swamp cards?
I'm new to using MSE, but for some reason when I install a new set of templates it just shuts down and won't let me do things. Does anyone else have this problem?
>>47317796
Don't install MSE in any of the "Program Files" folders, install it somewhere else, then try using the template again.
>>47314352
GJ, you used more words and it's still just as broken.
>>47313283
>>47314352
This is just theorycrafting for a 'balanced mox.'
Nobody would use it over the existing rocks, and it just smacks of "no really guys, ONLY once per turn."
Never mind that untaps usually cost at least one mana.
>>47314125
It's fine, but the name literally means nothing.
>>47314174
>>47317289
The Future Sight border means he's trying to use thelimited amount ofextra design space from that block.
It does feel red because it's punishing that player for blocking.
>>47314260
That'd have to cost like 2WW pr 3WW.
See Angel of the Dire Hour and try to extract the cost, since there isn't actually a card that does this already.
You can just say "destroy all attacking creatures" or if you really want to constrain it "destroy all creatures that are attacking you."
>>47318039
>'balanced mox.'
What about Chrome, Diamond, and Opal?
>>47317289
>Toll
I hate the name.
>Options
You can say 'each player Scrys 1'
>Deterioration
A little boring.
>Chaos
Anti-fun.
>what the fuck is 'abiogenesis'
>Oblivion
This is a white card.
This literally is two white enchantments at the same time.
>>47317327
(2), if it's a 1/1 flying. MAYBE even 1/2 or 1/3 if you want to push it, since on the whole it's not too strong.
Then just have each of the abilities be tap abilities.
>>47317593
I feel like this is in a good place, but maybe a bit too good for a common.
If you're not making a draft format you can ignore this, but Attunement feels like a draft keyword.
>>47317723
This seems OK, but I feel like the triggered ability is just a litttle hard to get consistently without having to use mediocre draft commons.
>>47318110
>sweating man.jpg
Chrome and diamond cost you card advantage. Chrome is a bit more restrictive.
Opal only ever works like a normal moxen in certain decks. It being legendary is actually pretty relevant.
>>47317819
I did that, it works fine but then when I try to add templates it completely stops working. That was how I fix the problem, but when I fix the problem my PW templates break and only have two loyalty options.
>>47318188
>toll
fair. How about Penance?
>Make it scry 1
but then each player won't know what the other got.
>Deterioration
well anything cooler in black would be too big on a leyline.
>Chaos
xD so randumb is most fun tho. I was thinking of making it all creatures have haste and have to attack.
>What is Abiogenesis"
Life coming from nothing, or simply appearing out of no where. It is an old and discarded theory of creation of life.
>Oblivion
Most colorless spells kinda break the color pie. Spacial contortion is a colorless version of a few UB battle tricks like warped physique. The color hate is what makes it colorless. Sense when did white enable you to tap all your lands for colorless?
>Bring below
Fair I'll consider shifting it once I have more of the removal down.
>>47317732
You misread it. You chose how many you reveal. Any number can be 0 or 3. The flexibility is because I used to have a mechanic based around cards getting revealed letting them do a thing, but I scrapped it.
>>47318437
Oh. Still don't understand why it lets you reveal nonblack, nonswamp cards though.
>>47318437
>Penance?
I'd look at the other cards that increase creature cost and try to get a theme out of them.
>but then each player won't know what the other got.
If that's what you're gong for, then it's fine.
>well anything cooler in black would be too big on a leyline.
I think there are already really big effects on leylines.
>xD so randumb is most fun tho
It's really not. Have you ever played a game with one of those effects out? Or Scrambleverse?
>Life coming from nothing, or simply appearing out of no where. It is an old and discarded theory of creation of life.
Oh, they made up a name for spontaneous generation?
>Most colorless spells kinda break the color pie. Spacial contortion is a colorless version of a few UB battle tricks like warped physique. The color hate is what makes it colorless. Sense when did white enable you to tap all your lands for colorless?
There isn't an enchantment that hits All nonwhite creatures, but white still does that for all opponent's creatures. I think it can be considered a colorshifted version of the effect.
Celestial Dawn fixes all your mana to white.
>>47318530
As an Atheist, I am appalled by how >>47318437 defines the term "abiogenesis" which is distinct from spontaneous generation. Abiogenesis is the natural process by which life originates from non-living matter. This isn't talking about things just appearing out of the air, it's talking about the beginning of life in a system with no previous living matter. It is also distinct from evolution. Logic dictates that it would have had to occur somewhere down the line, so it's not even speculative. In short, abiogenesis and spontaneous generation are nothing alike.
>>47318039
>It's fine, but the name literally means nothing.
Xom = Mox backwards
Quern = Primitive Millstone
>>47305939
>>47306014
Just add a line: "If Skyline Marksman is tapped, it loses hexproof"
I could see black having hexproof but it loses it when it comes out of the shadows, like >>47306129 has it.
>>47307966
This would be busted in modern.
Shoals are hard and I'm not entirely satisfied with any of them, but here they are. Also only now realized that they're all part blue.
>>47321738
I think this should just pull a card with a lesser cmc.
Any problems with these mechanics?
>>47325524
Shift needs to return the aura from the grave with that wording.
>>47321513
U/G makes legacy infect super good. Probably gets banned in modern.
>>47325569
Sorry, super consistent. At least, if you're playing the combo variety.
>>47325556
better?
How would I word something along the lines of "protection from board wipes?" I want to make a GR creature that gives everything that and Shroud to make everything fight head-to-head. Possibly also with a tap ability to make two creatures fight.
>>47325778
The first thing you need to realize is that, whatever you come up with, it will be imperfect. For every threat, there is always an answer, nothing will ever change that. Nothing that isn't so broken that it makes the Power Nine look underpowered in comparison, that is. But for starters, giving everything Indestructible is obviously something you could use. Or you could flicker your stuff like Norin.
Second, Shroud isn't a thing anymore. Use Hexproof instead.
>>47325524
Is enlightened like metalcraft, or upkeep only?
>>47325702
Could you post the art? It's great.
>>47325778
Pretty much impossible. Also, what you suggest would make many peoplemyself includedwant to shank you in the eye.
Cards that come into mind kinda do what you say.
>Norin, the Wary
>Sigarda, Host of Herons
Or something really loop-hoop-jumpy like:
>If a spell or ability would cause a creature to be destroyed, if it has no targets, counter that spell or ability.
If you want the 'shroud' included.
>If a spell or ability would cause a creature to be destroyed, counter that spell or ability.
But then again. Go play solitaire with poker cards.
>>47314371
So let me get this straight. You don't know magic, even the basics. You don't play. You have done no research. And you didn't even try that hard to see if the mechanics could even support a more accurate copy (they can). But you still thought it'd be cool to post your awful abortion of a card?
>>47325916
It's metalcraft for enchantments. The reason behind the upkeep clause is because I wanted enchantment creatures to feel like enchantments.
>Patty
Steals "speed" from opponents to give to you. Wondering if it should be changed to some sort of "creatures your opponents control ETB tapped" sorta thing.
>>47325916
I don't think I've ever seen you this vicious, Kazy. I like it.
>>47325932
And then you prove to be the same dork we know and love when you forget your image. Never change.
>flip a coin whenever you cast a spell
Blergh, not really a fan. Also, it seems like it would be a bitch to balance.
>>47325916
>>47326091
Oh, and for the record, we don't call the normal cards you see of clubs, diamonds, spades, and hearts "poker cards" we just call them "cards" or "playing cards" when we're being specific. Most people would just play "Go play Solitaire." since you typically don't play Solitaire with other kinds of cards. Unless there's some odd variant of Solitaire you play.
Because why not.To be honest, I have no idea how to represent this guy accurately, this is just my best shot in the dark.
>>47321513
I like Repelling Shoal the most out of all the RU varriations. It is really unique and something not really done in RU yet.
Tapping seems fine, but I'd rather just play rush of ice.
Tutoring is iffy. I don't know how I feel about "free" tutors. Like it makes playing a late game deck much safer as you can always just pitch two late game cards you don't need on turn 0 to fix your hand.
I agree with the other anon, the GU is too strong. You can just play infect like they mentioned, or some kind of token deck and use it as a really consistent finisher.
>>47321738
>play a card with most of its mana in the entry effect
>devolve it
>get some cancer legendary in my deck that is 1 mana less like Brimaz or Thalia or that one GW midget advisor that hates big spells
This would see play everywhere that uses creatures and UB. Hell, I could see fish splashing B for this.
>>47326091
I think having your opponents creatures and artifacts entering tapped (assuming he can steal speed from anything) while your stuff starts with "activate ability" haste. The thing thousand-year elixir enables.
>>47326438
I dunno if I agree with Doom guy being W in any way. Solid R, maybe RB, but that is a personal nit-pick on flavor.
I think that active is too strong. Maybe add a mana cost to it, or only put it into play.
>>47326712
>your stuff starts with "activate ability" haste.
Why activated ability Haste and not just Haste? Oh, because having the "ETB tapped" ability would make it too easy to attack without getting blocked? Hmm, maybe I could do a tweaked version of Amulet of Vigor...
>he
Does "Patty" come across to you as a male name?
>I dunno if I agree with Doom guy being W in any way.
Yeah, wasn't sure on that either. But I thought the last ability needed White. Thinking of replacing it anyway.
>Mount and Meet
What kind of saying is that?It also unfortunately reminded of the "Meet N Fuck" games.
>Mount
I guess this is fine.
>Meet
I don't think this needs a color restriction. Though I'm generally not a fan of "Colors matter" so it might just be me.
>>47326712
>>47327001
I'm hoping the fact that Wizards apparently wants more enchantment stuff in Black justifies this. If not, I'm fine with exchanging it for White.
>Why Auras?
It's my way of implementing the demonic runes he gets in the latest game. Perks, basically.
>>47327001
>why not just haste
Because WU doesn't get haste.
>Patty gender
I mean it doesn't come across as either to me. I just figured it was some odd pet name for someone named Patrick or Patritcha, and they looked flat chested to me.
>Split name
Hay fuck you it is not easy making split card names that actually make sense.
>>47327286
What about this is black, at all?
>>47325702
You want "When this Aura enters the graveyard from the battlefield, you may pay 2..." Auras can also become unattached when you move them. Aura is also always capitalized.
>>47325524
Having both Enlightened and Affinity is redundant, as both already reward having lots of enchantments. I also don't like having affinity for enchantments with enchantment creatures, as you approach the affinity for artifacts problem where you can run a normal creature deck that also happens to incidentally have a high enchantment count (rather than an enchantress deck that uses a lot of actual enchantments).
>>47326459
>>47326712
You should at least look for effects with different CMCs, to justify using the split template rather than just "choose one"
I'm pretty sure the wording of this works.
>>47327356
>Because WU doesn't get haste.
I can't change the color? I do that all the time!
>What about this is black, at all?
I know I was reaching, but I stated my reasons in that same post.
>card
Nonenchantment? Seems kinda odd, but it's probably something to do with your set. As for the wording, I'd follow Rivals' Duel and say
>that share no creature types
>>47327544
How often is the first ability really going to trigger? All-in-all, it's just a more situational Urabrask.
>>47326459
>>47326712
If we're nitpicking, split cards take the form "X and Y". "Razzle-dazzle" is hyphenated. And I've never heard "mount and meet"outside of the sex club.
>>47327600
Ugh... Yeah, this is the part where I start to get fed-up with a card because I can't come up with a good design for it, so I'm just putting anything I can think of on it (just look at the iteration number). I need to step away from this for a bit.
Jesus, I was going to post something, but so many of my cards are only partly done. It's kinda depressing.
>>47327665
>>47326712
>>47326459
Since Doom's on my mind and we're talking split cards. Unfortunately, all I can keep thinking of is "This is worse than Terminate." Maybe creature buffs instead?
>>47327959
Not worse than terminate, since its easier to cast the individual halves, can go to dome, and can kill two creatures for one card. It's also a way better Lightning Strike/Searing Spear/Last Grasp.
>>47327959
Also, there's no compelling reason for it to have fuse.
>>47328156
Goodbye isn't UR.
>>47328191
I think it's close enough to red burn that it can pass to enable the symmetry.inb4 Vapor Snag
>>47328156
>mixed mono and hybrid
Barf. It wasn't good when Wizards did it, it's not good when you do it.
>>47328284
It's not.
>>47328649
>Reanimator
>No direct copy of Reanimate
Absolutely disgusting.
In all seriousness, I think the card is interesting, but I'm not sure about the effect. Sure, your opponent gets it afterwards, but being repeatable at no virtually 0 cost is pretty huge.
Oh, and as for the wording, I'm pretty sure you only use "return" if it's talking about only your graveyard.
>>47323008
I would make it at least 2GGG, and also a sorcery instead.
>>47329259
Ops . . .
>If Feral Sky Elemental would enter the battlefield, discards two cards at random instead. If you do, put Feral Sky Elemental onto the battlefield. If you don’t, put it into its owner’s graveyard.
What do you call the Red creatures that you have to sac at the end of the turn? Whatever, trying my hand at one.
>>47329420
I'm not aware of there being a particular term for them, but that is an interesting variation.
>>47329420
>What do you call the Red creatures that you have to sac at the end of the turn?
Lightning (?)
>>47329420
Ball lightning I guess
>>47329420
This guy is pretty nuts desu, the 5 toughness and the fact that you can sac a diff creature are what make it unique, but combined they make it a pretty scary aggro creature
Still unsure of this. I like turning things face-down, but I've never been sure about the second ability. Maybe you gain control of one of the face-down creatures and you can turn it face-up?
>>47329937
Well, I actually messed up the wording on that card. The way it is intended, and as it's worded now, is that you have to sac a creature on each of your end steps.
>>47330192
Too much of a lockdown imo.
>>47330259
Ugh, I want something that's repeatable. Jeez, I might have to settle for an ETB trigger.
>>47330279
You could put a duration on it? So it's more like turn to frog than reality shift.
Probably more elegant as UR, but likely less good.
>>47331563
Why do I recognize this set symbol? I feel like I haven't seen it in a long long time.
As for the card, limiting white this way feels a little shitty. White likes to swarm, so Exalted always felt a little off in it to me, but not as off as this. I think it would feel better as a Loyal Pegasus variant.
>>47331563
Make it like Bonded Construct where it "can't attack alone."
>>47331591
Oh yeah I'm some dork who hung around these threads ages ago and then disappeared for no reason. Recently I remembered Magic exists so here I am again for no reason.
I understand your perspective but I still kind of like the idea as a weird middle ground between exalted and the "can't attack (or block) alone" disadvantage that was red for a while but rightfully moved to white.
>>47331625
>for no reason
We're all here for no reason, anon. Ain't none of these cards getting made by anything short of coincidence.
Honestly, to me, doing this way feel black, like some kind of "slavery" mechanic. Or, maybe that'd be "must attack if another creature you control attacks" as a BR thing. I dunno, I'm tired. All I know is that I'm not the hugest fan of how it works right now, but it really doesn't fit in any color besides white as it is either. It's just a bit more complex than it needs to be maybe.
>>47331798
Manifesting this way is more likely to be UB or even mono-U I think. Probably UB though. I know the other cards that are like this are black but stealing the card from the hand really feels like it wants blue in there, since black really only pilfers the yard, don't it?
>>47331818
Adding a rider to Landfall seems a bit odd but it probably works.
>>47331876
Being UB was under consideration, though I expected actually being able to flip creatures you steal from the opponent to be a corner case (a potentially badass one, but yeah), and otherwise it's just "discard spell and you get a 2/2." Still, going UB is totally reasonable.
>>47331876
Why would stealing from hand be blue? Blue has very little hand interaction beyond Peeks, Time Twisters and V-Clique.
>>47305653
>That first ability
Dude. This is pretty OP.
>>47307966
I feel like this might be Storm viable
>>47330724
So a 2 mana UR deal 6 to face sometimes? Or really easy enabler for lethal damage in commander if someone has too much card draw? I don't think this is a good idea. I like the first part but the kicker seems kinda busted.
>>47331005
Feel like it should be a 3/3. This can wipe a lot of guys in draft so giving her a softer body would be more fair. Also that flavor text is weak sause. how about, "Justice works slowly. Vengeance on the other hand..." Or replace vengeance with wrath if you prefer.
>>47331563
Feels Red. White doesn't really like to cripple its bears for a bonus, usually just just kinda get it for some bonkers reason.
>>47332997
Lacks the synergy fuse cards usually have.
>>47333017
Good feed back. How about this?
>>47333195
Much better.
OP af, how do i print this / make this to trick my friends
>>47333291
What the fuck is that wording even supposed to mean? Also, enchantments don't typically tap, and the art is already in use.
>>47333354
i was gonna go with land but i thought it didn't really fit the art
is the flavor too edgelord?
>>47333291
changed the art and flavor, i think it looks a lot better now
>>47333558
>artifact land
>tapping for more than just [C]
>land with a mana cost
>fucked up wording
Dude what
Trying to fix the splits so they are more synergistic. How does this feel?
>>47333558
>>47333291
Stop. Google MtG cards that do similar stuff, (generate mana, have X costing, ect.) and use them as references on how to design a card. Both of these are beyond awful.
Also lands can't have a mana cost. They are not cast like spells, they are played.
>>47330328
Just make the 2/2 have manifest and it's okay I think.
>>47330724
A: Needs to be "Counter target spell or ability that would make you reveal your hand." or "Until end of turn, if a spell or ability would make you reveal your hand, counter it instead."
B: "Look forwards" is generally considered shitty design, so don't use the first option in A.
>>47331948
Because black doesn't steal shit from someone's hand by itself that often. See all those UB spells that let you extract things then cast them yourself. This plays more like that than Duress.
>>47334608
I'd rather not use Manifest if I can help it. I've been toying around with the idea of countering spells or destroying creatures, but leaving behind a token in exchange, but I'm having a hard time thinking of a way to implement it that isn't OP. Oh, and here's a similar idea I had for a different character. Since I have two different but similar characters to split up the idea, I was also thinking of maybe having one affect permanents and the other spells, but it doesn't really mean anything now until I have an ability decided.
>>47335345
I though manifest was spot-on in flavor because another magician can reverse Zatanna's magic. Nothing is straight-up definitive in magic therms on the DC Universe, isn't it?
>>47335489
Ugh, the problem with magic in comics is that it's never clearly defined. And even if it were, it would be changed whenever another writer comes in. It's a weakness of the medium. This is actually why I was talking about tokens, because the Zatannas are stage magicians at heart, and I could incorporate with something like turning things into doves or rabbits, kinda like how Dovescape does it.
Turns out you can make a pretty good Shivan Dragon using only green abilities.
>>47333558
This is bait.
>>47333643
How about you lower the cost on Dazzle and make it "each player"? Makes it more interesting.
>>47335683
>Turns out you can make a pretty good Shivan Dragon using only green abilities.
Actually, Green doesn't do self-pump all that often. Just doing some searching on MagicCards shows me that the order of self-pump from most to least is R > B > W > UG. Now, that doesn't account for off-color abilities, but I still think it's indicative of an overall trend. When Green gets self-pump, it likes to limit it to one turn only (pic related)
This is what I used for MagicCards, just plug in the different colors.
http://magiccards.info/query?q=o%3A%22%7D%3A+~+gets+%2B%22+o%3A%2F%2B+o%3A%22until+end+of+turn%22+-o%3A%22only+once%22&v=card&s=issue
Also, your Dragon has no P/T.
>>47335820
>>47335683
Sorry, I meant to say that Green tends to allow you to self-pump only once each turn.
Tear it to pieces ccg.
>>47336200
Gaining protection from your opponents like this is incredibly strong, probably too strong for the card right now. Especially with the Fight ability, since if the creature has protection from an opponent, it has protection from everything that player controls too, so it'll prevent all damage that would be dealt to it by the creature it fights.
>>47336301
I mean at that point it's a very color intensive true name nemesis was my reasoning. I'm thinking that with evasion it is too much though. Maybe reach instead of flying or replacing it with something else entirely?
What do you think?
>>47336200
On one hand, this is significantly less objectionable than TNN since there's the delay between cast and attack in which it can be removed.
On the other hand, TNN was shitty uninteractive design and "protection from player" shouldn't be printed lightly unless it's "Protection from you" which needs to be a thing, seriously.
Also, repeated removal on an uninteractible body is absurdly bullshit.
Rate it, ccg.
Which version of this card would you prefer, the one with "joke" abilities or without?:
Meso Meso-san
3W
Legendary Creature - Spirit
Whenever ~ blocks, she gets +7/+4, Haste, Trample, Intimidate, and Menace until end of turn.
0/3
Meso Meso-san
3W
Legendary Creature - Spirit
Whenever ~ blocks, she gets +7/+4 until end of turn.
0/3
The character is a mostly powerless ghost of a young child. However, there's an incantation she can make behind a door, which makes it so that if you open the door, she'll transform into an ineffable beast and instantly rip you from limb to limb. Hence she's insanely powerful on defense.
I kind of like the idea of her ability also giving "joke" abilities that are useless on blocking, but drive home the flavor of her transforming into an unstoppable monster (with power severely limited by its situationallity). Is it unncesasrirly confusing, though?
>>47336535
It will usually be strictly worse than most other 1cc Instant-speed blue cantrips, though (Opt, Peek, Brainstorm, etc).
It's cute that it's a card just for building Storm, threshold, etc, but there are already other cards that do that plus something else.
Maybe make it also add 1 colorless to your mana pool (or U, but I think 1 colorless is more balanced).
>>47336521
I think those are reasonable objections. However, I would like to go forward with the protection ability as is, if possible. How might you suggest to balance it?
>>47336603
Not him, but make it more conditional. Maybe you have to pay for it to gain the ability every turn, maybe it returns to your hand under a certain condition, etc.
>>47336603
Making it until EOT/EOnextT or creatures only would be good, or resetting it by having it selfbounce.
As is, it's a memory issue if you only smack creatures.
>>47336535
Ad this.
>Return all other spells you control to their owner's hands.
>>47336535
>>47337027
Damn, messed up the apostrophe. It needs to go behind the S.
>>47336535
Hmm, this brings up an interesting idea: Spells that do their thing on cast, not when they resolve, to dodge counterspells. Which color would that fit in?
>>47337129
None of them, because you should just make it uncounterable.
>>47337129
Oh, please no. This kind of stack fuckery will only serve to confuse people.
>>47337150
Mindbreak Trap/Time Stop eats uncounterable thing tho'.
>>47316636
Yugioh could have been as balanced as magic is (however balanced you would say it is) if they had mulligan rules from the beginning. Because they didn't they had to print faster and more consistent cards, which led to a power arms race rather than a power creep.
In all honesty yugioh is a very skill intensive game at higher levels of play, but there's always 1 or 2 dominant decks so everyone is playing the mirror match. I guess I'm trying to say that it's not a problem with game mechanics (besides lack of mulligan), just shittier and shittier card design and ban list choices.
>>47337484
Well, I think one thing MTG has over YGO is that MTG has the mana system, which restricts what you can do with one color. Do you want to be more flexible, or do you want to have consistency? As far as I know, YGO doesn't have that, so I imagine it would be a lot easier to break the game by using degenerate combos because there's no disadvantage to using various cards together.
But I don't know, I could never get into YGO back when I was a kid and I didn't think the game looked completely fucking insane. Now that I'm older, all I can think of is that YGO looks like a complete mess. Sorta like that Star Wars customizable card game that was needlessly complex.
And yeah, if all you're seeing are the same two decks over and over, the people banning cards are clearly not even trying.
>>47336916
>>47336886
Maybe something like it puts a counter on each creature or player it damages? Then it has an activated ability to give it or maybe another creature protection from things with the counters until EoT. Seems like a lot of text with the fight ability though. How you feel?
>>47337816
Oh it definitely is a mess. Yugioh system of restriction is having certain combinations of attributes and types/Certain attack or defense amounts/certain specific names of cards that have synergy only when used together. They have "archetypes" which work similar to tribal strategies rather than colors, with non archetype cards being printed in smaller amounts.
It could have been different if they had a mulligan system, while also not being a copy of mtg like most card games (which is interesting since it was based very loosely off magic).
>>47337816
>>47338047
Oh I'm sorry. I should say it's not the same deck over and over, but a new deck every ban list. Because they have no idea how to balance cards (also because they want people to buy more) it's usually a new archetype that dominates, while the last one gets banned to oblivion.
It's not the game. It's the cards they print for it.
>>47338047
The heavy pushing of Eldrazi makes me worry about the further YuGiOh-ification of MtG. I don't like pre-packaged deck archetypes, as opposed to just making a bunch of cards and letting players themselves work out the synergies.
>>47338116
Mtg won't become like yugioh. Not unless they make cards that refer to other card names explicitly. The Tribal system of Magic is way different from the archetype system of yugioh and until zero cost spells become the norm it isn't at all like yugioh.
I wouldn't worry for magic, and I'd like to stress once more that the problem with yugioh is not that it's a bad system, just that it's got bad people running it.
>>47338098
Ah, I see. It seems like they're going after the symptoms, and not the cause. I guess this would be like, instead of Wizards banning the artifact lands, they banned a few cards that were powerful because of the artifact lands.
>>47338175
>Not unless they make cards that refer to other card names explicitly.
They already do that, they're just very tame about it, and they don't do it that often. And even then, in most cases, it's for cards with the same card name. Most of the other times, it's just for flavor.
>>47338213
You've hit the nail on the head. It's fine when kept to 2 or 3 cards. In yugioh it's often 15 in an archetype with archetypes being printed all the time.
Take a look at this card from the "kozmo" archetype (basically flavored as a star wars and wizard of Oz mix)
There's a very clear difference since magic is very cautious like you said.
>>47338292
>>47338213
Then look at this other kozmo card. Cards in yugioh enable themselves and members of their archetype in ways that are just too powerful. Cards that search for specific cards or enable themselves way too much are always the first banned.
>>47338292
>>47338367
Right, so it's basically "Archetype or die." I remember looking at some of the archetypes more for flavor curiosity (you can't tell me that a Dark-aligned archetype called "Ally of Justice" doesn't sound like it has an interesting backstory) and I was just blown away by how incredibly specific fucking everything is, especially when I read the wiki that said they're made to counter ANOTHER archetype. It just seems so incestuous and convoluted. Granted, the idea itself is cool (like tribal) but it's just executed so poorly. Tone down the power level and the specifity of the effects, maybe turn the archetype into a subtype next to "Machine" here, and I think it would be good. Or at least, better. Actually, this kinda reminds me a bit of how Maro mentioned in an article that basically was him pointing out what he'd like to change in Magic, and he mentioned having more supertypes like Snow, which I think would be a great idea. Make vampires, skeletons, and zombies "Undead" so you could then have a card that affects all "undead creatures" which I think would be brilliant. Basically, an extension of the tribal concept.
Wow, this formatting is terrible. It's like old Magic cards. It's when I look at this and a few of the Netrunner cards that I become really thankful that Magic has a very ordered, specific syntax.
But man, it always pains me that YGO is so bad, but has some really good art. There's just something about the magic + technology thing that I really like.
Some of these are probably too busted for multiple formats.
>>47338649
Yugioh formatting does have very specific syntax. It's actually overly specific. There's a reason for every character in those text boxes and the difference between "when" and "if" is huge.
Yugioh does have things that benefit machines (and other types of course) only but these are often part of the problem if they're too splashable. And it's not always archetype or die. It's new or die supplemented with cards that will never be bad.
>>47338796
None of these are hybrid
>>47338796
>hybrid walkers
Whelp, this is going to be painful.
>Friggin'
Second ability isn't hybrid, lifegain isn't Blue. Third ability isn't hybrid, Blue doesn't redistribute Equipment.
>Fredrick
Third ability isn't hybrid, lifegain isn't Blue, distributing counters isn't Blue.
>TheOtherDarrin
I doubt the second ability isn't hybrid, but I know the third isn't, Hexproof isn't Red.
>Baldwin
First ability isn't hybrid, White doesn't get -N/-N effects. Second ability isn't hybrid, White doesn't do search-exile without a starting card. Third ability probably isn't hybrid, White doesn't do a lot of straight-up murder.
>Tryhard, the one who seeks to free flesh from all legal, social, and political restrictions. Also does not have access to a dictionary.
First isn't Red, second isn't Black.
>>47338796
>>47338938
Also, Fredrick's art is in use.
>>47338978
It's a promo and I credited the artist on the card, ya autist.
>>47338816
Wow, it just all looks like a crowded jumble to me. Oh yeah, I remember reading about that. How not many people actually invest in YGO because they don't care if they end up completely fucking the secondary market, I think.
>>47339004
>It's a promo
And?
>I credited the artist
And?
>>47339019
Yes and no. They don't care, but this makes it easier to make a profit. The Yugioh secondary market works like a far more predictable stock market.
And yeah they will reprint anything if they feel like it.
>>47338796
I was going to go through these and give specific critiques, but honestly you should just scrap them and look at the OP image.
>Cute challenge
Make a card that represents, or would fit in, your favourite playstyle.
>>47326002
Thanks bae.
>>47326091
<3
>>47327364
How about these revised and remade mechanics then?
>>47339789
No problem bae.
>>47340030
>>47340030
Whoops.
>>47340051
That last one I really like, but it's pretty much pic related.
The reason it gets me so excited though is because ninjutsu is such a flavor fit for Rogues and the synergy with Prowl is sweet.
>>47340137
I made that card intentionally to be functionally identical to NotDH.
>>47340157
I had a feeling but was unsure.
Again, I love NotDH with a rogue subtype, it's amazing that a simple subtype change can fuel some crazy synergies in constructed formats.
You bet your ass I'd build a crazy U/B rogue tempo list.
>>47338796
Ok, assuming you change them all from hybrid to gold...
>Briggin Tor
+1 is too weak at that cost, -4 is too niche. He's mostly going to be a Sphinx Rev for how long you can keep him alive.
>Zevrik Vozz
+1 is stone cold busted. You don't want removal as a +ability, much less one that can also hit lands.
-1 is equally nuts with any token makers. This should cost a lot more loyalty so you can't repeatedly use it turn after turn.
The ultimate is too cheap for how easy it closes out the game.
>Domri
Adding two mana might be a bit much, but I think this is mostly fine.
>Baldy
You generally want "up to one target" for your plus abilities, so a player could activate them and build loyalty if it can't meet targeting requirements. Repeatable removal on a +1 is again, not a good thing.
-2 is neat, and I think you can open it up to graveyards as well.
>Gaatlok
...
>>47340051
You only want Weave to affect instants or sorceries, rather than all noncreature spells.
>>47339789
So... what, it's "Protection from CMC 3 or less" but it doesn't affect combat? Weird, but OK. Actually, wait, is it spells or CMC 3 or less too, or just abilities of CMC 3 or less? I honestly don't know of a way to word this with protection that doesn't sound odd, especially the "with CMC 3 or less" bit. I mean, exactly what are you so afraid of that this guy needs this specific protection anyway?
As for the second ability, I believe it should say "shares a card type".
>challenge
No idea what my playstyle is. Need to play more to find out. Though I actually did win a game once, Kazy, a Commander game with Bruna. It was pretty brutal. Bruna hit the field and that was basically it.
>>47340051
>>47340137
Since we're talking Ninjas, here. Didn't make it, but I love the design.
>>47340847
I think the Ooze should be an 0/0 with X +1/+1 counters and an additional +1/+1 counter for each... to avoid having to use two markers to track it's p/t.
>>47341383
should switch the +1 and the -2 since the +1 is crazy overpowered and the -2 is pretty weak
the ultimate is pretty garbage
>>47341456
The +1 is Charmbreaker Devils, although you can argue its more balanced on a 6-drop that has to survive until your upkeep.
>>47340051
Last Mechanic I'm testing.
It's basically soulshift.
>>47341555
>Eve's Cave
I don't get this one at all.
>Velrav Castle
Trash it, back to the drawing board. This has a very good change of completely fucking your opponents over.
>>47341555
The singular of "dice" is "die".
Revised this one.
Feedback?
>>47342406
Bite by itself is really bad as a sorcery, and it's not adding all that much fused onto Scratch.
>>47341555
The Castle is basically 'Every black player wants this in the pile of planes, no one else does'. A mono-colour screw is not a good idea.
>>47342562
Oh well, back to the drawing board.
>>47342700
Oops, left these on the drawing board.
>>47342718
Shackle seems really redundant with Bolt, since both do nothing much except kill creatures and the latter kills bigger creatures. Maybe make Shackle a bigger, single-target removal?
>>47338796
>+1: Put target permanent on top of its owner's library
this is a joke right
>>47342613
>>47341943
Why not make it a Hall of Gemstone Plane instead? "At the beginning of each player's upkeep, that player chooses a color. Until end of turn, lands tapped for mana produce mana of the chosen color instead of any other color."
That way everyone gets to pick their color screw.
Is this all right at 5cmc?
>>47342912
A cycle of "purity enforcers", either shards or ally/enemy colors would be rather interesting, particularly for an artifact-heavy set.
>>47342920
Also, just go ahead and pretend I didn't repeat the card's name in the end of that second paragraph.
>>47342920
Is "Familiar Sage into RiP/Tormod's Crypt/Relic/Ravenous Trap/ect" the intended use for this card? Because that seems like the way most people would use it.
>>47342957
I tried some other designs with the same concept but caring about what colors of mana were used to cast nonartifact spells felt dumb.
Help me cost/balance this
>>47343022
>Is "Familiar Sage into RiP/Tormod's Crypt/Relic/Ravenous Trap/ect" the intended use for this card? Because that seems like the way most people would use it.
Nah, nothing like that in the set. I can add an "or more" clause to it if you're worried about it being abused.
>>47343128
"Illusions you control have vigilance" seems more in line with what you're trying to do.
>>47343193
I don't think it's so insane that it needs to be changed, just wondering if that's an intended interaction.
>>47343128
Losing hexproof will let you cost it cheaper than what it otherwise would have to cost. As is you're looking at 1WWUU or 4WU.
>>47343216
Not intended, necessarily, but I am aware of it. I will add the one or more clause, though. I think it's cleaner that way, so thanks, anon.
Does the cost look solid?
