/ccg/ Custom Card General /cct/

File: Miscast.jpg (43KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 375x523px

Edition chosen due to grumpy's discussion on the ability of exiling spells. He posted an image here >>53117041 which I think is pretty interesting in terms of how Wizards deals with abilities and complexity. Though at the same time, I think it's pretty useless in debate with people who aren't bound by the same restrictions WotC has.

And an old card I have to fit the edition.

File: Appropriate.jpg (43KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 375x523px

>>53120202
Counterspell edition huh? Here's one, and a legendary creature I wouldn't mind some critque on after it.

File: Aleksar Mitchal.jpg (43KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 375x523px

>>53120644
Wording on 2nd ability is funky but should work I think. Unfortunately doesn't stop stuff like future sight+sensei's divining top, but trying to word the ability to stop that was just madness.
"Player's can't activate abilities of permanents that share a name of a permanent that has already activated an ability this turn." was the best I could come up with. I think this one is better overall. Stops you from infinite Prodigal Pyromancer-ing your opponents and has some of that white tax/denial flavor too

File: Richard Swift the Shade16.jpg (47KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 375x523px

First go at tribal Shade. Wondering if I should just make the token creation an activated ability so you can use it multiple times a turn.

>>53120644
I think it'd be easier to just copy the spell and return it to its owner's hand than take control of it. Going by Supplant Form
>Return target instant or sorcery spell to its owner's hand. Copy that spell. You may choose new targets for the copy.
Anyway, it seems cool, though I'm not entirely certain of the cost. And the art is in use, Voidwielder. A shame, really, that art deserves a better card.

>>53120703
I don't get the card. The last ability is OK I guess, but the first just makes me go "Have you heard of Vigilance?" Sorry.

File: Backlash Hex.png (292KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 375x523px

Bit of a spin on Parallectric Feedback here. It's basically the same spell, but with a slightly different cost and niche utility.

>>53120799
Black creatures granting indestructible to cards other than themselves feels strange to me, now that I look at it. Though, I guess in a meta way he is, kind of, even when he's not. Feels a bit mana intensive anyway. Maybe drop the cost of the token gen to BB then make him a 1/1? He might even be able to be BBB at that rate.

>>53120703
The first ability is kind of interesting in that I can't recall seeing something reduce the cost of an activated ability by the tap cost, and I can't think of a reason you couldn't do that. Seems reasonably fitting for a RW Legend to do. Also secret tech against your opponent with that second ability. I think he'd have a home in EDH.

>>53120644
I pretty much agree with COanon regarding this. Though I'd like to add that I do like it.

>>53120254
Seems fine to me.

File: 1 Multicolored Uncommons First Draft.jpg (1MB, 1125x2615px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1125x2615px

>>53120254
>Spell exile
From the image: "That's why it would be a bad idea to have cards like Mindbreak Trap and Commandeer as evergreen staples." Which is not at all what I was proposing. I proposed a single card at rare which was reliant on exiling the spell to function. Had I suggested spell exile at common, I could see the concern as having more merit.
>Miscast
Seems overcosted, honestly. The effect is solid, but UURR is an oppressive cost for what is essentially a revamped Essence Backlash.
>>53120644
I agree with the Supplant Form suggestion.
>>53120703
Assuming the design works (I'm no judge, and it's an odd one), I think it's solid as you've shored up potential gamebreaking issues with the first ability by including the second. It's definitely interesting.
>>53120799
Why is the indestructibility an activated ability now? Not saying that's some egregious change; just curious.
>>53121123
Seems appropriately costed, given its variability /unreliability. Very red. Not sure what niche relevance the changes from Parallectric Feedback have.

Nothing new, so here are some uncommons while I hack away at the rares.

>>53121268
The main difference between Backlash Hex and Parallectric Feedback is that the latter deals the damage, while the former doesn't, so it gets around things like player hexproof and stuff. Since the player casting Backlash Hex doesn't control the target spell, the opponent does, the damage would ignore the opponent having hexproof. I thought it was a fun way of doing that, and red could use more toys.

Speaking of; pic related. I love Sleeper Agent and decided that a red one with Grenzo's ability would be too fun not to make.

>uncommons
I think I've given you feedback on all the RW and
GU ones already.
>UM07
Oh, yeah I recall this guy too. He's a strange critter but I don't think there's any issue with him.
>UM08
This dude is cool. Flavor is there too.
>UM09
This combos really well with UM07 and is pretty dangerous. I might advocate this at rare.
>UM10
Good flavor. Otherwise, fairly unremarkable beater.
>UM11
Indestructible when tapped sort of violates expectations, since most abilities like this are when the creature is untapped. It also makes the off chance you play that anthem you posted a while back in WB that gave things vigilance and then a tap ability feel pretty shitty. Not sure I like that.
>UM12
Already commented on this.
>UM13
Beater/10.
>UM14
Flavor text kinda clashes with the ability; mill doesn't strike me as death. I'd make it exile a creature card from the yard for that buff maybe? Something like that instead. Or just fix the flavor text if you need to keep the self mill for set purposes.
>UM15
I think the Unearth here can cost the same as the base casting cost. It's only going to be around for a turn.

File: Traitorous Courtesan.png (287KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 375x523px

>>53121434
>forgot my card
Fug.

Dark Souls cards please

File: Seigmeyer of Catarina.jpg (35KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 375x523px

>>53121526

>>53121123
>Shade
Eh, I'll think about it.

>Miscast
Thanks. I honestly made it so long ago I didn't even remember what it said when I posted it, just that it was a counterspell.

>card
Seems OK. Though I think it reads better if it were
>deals damage equal to its converted mana cost to its controller
But that could just be me.

>>53121268
>Spell exile
Yeah, I really didn't understand his argument there, it seemed to be "Wizards wouldn't print this ability on a common card, so you shouldn't do it at all." If it were me I think I would've just told him that that sucks for Wizards, but I'm not Wizards. Like, I get what he means, and as I said, the pic he posts is interesting, but it's just not that relevant to us. Especially in your case, on a one-off rare.

>Miscast
I'll reduce to 2UR then.

>Shade
Activated Indie because grumpy mentioned it. Though looking at it some more, it seems kinda pointless to use it on temporary tokens. Probably going to move that back to permanently on Shade.

>UM03
I still think this wording should be changed. Every time I look at it I can't remember if it's supposed to give you just a lot of one color, or lets you have them in combination. Use X, seriously.

File: Lunar Descent.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

>>53121526

:^)

File: High Priestess of Rot.jpg (44KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 375x523px

Wondering if the ultimate is too underwhelming. But they are only three mana. The minus ability's funkier wording is based on mercy killing. Should it be a -2?

>>53121563
Oddly Parallectric Feedback has it worded the same way I have it, so I'll probably just rock it the same way WotC rocks it.

>>53121574
Interesting turncoat card. I can dig it.

>>53121604
Planeswalker type has to match the name. The +1 ability is pretty neat dual utility in the right deck. It's worth playing for that alone. The -3 is neat and the ult is meh but dat +1 man.

>>53121563
>I still think this wording should be changed.
I copied the wording directly from Battle Hymn. Does "or" not make it clear?

File: 20170505_183916.jpg (4MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5312x2988px

Ill show you a counterspell

Hey dudes, !notKaladesh guy here

My drive with the set file went rogue (couldn't open any files because the drive said they didn't exist to begin with) so I lost the 10 cards I've made so far.

On the bright side, I think I have a solid new mechanic, Reject.

To reject, you target a spell or nonland permanent. Return it to its owner's hand, and they can't cast spells of the same name until their next turn. Reject in a flavor sense is nice because artificers can often be cutthroat to make the best designs and only put forth flawless work. Reject is a good form of "soft" removal since it doesn't completely ruin a gameplan but stalls an opponent briefly.

>>53121750
These cards are so fucking ugly. After the Kaladesh masterpieces... Jesus WotC, what were you thinking?

File: Tamaraneans.jpg (164KB, 750x523px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 750x523px

No difference from last time, still just trying to nail these designs down. Meant to be mirrors of each other, obviously.

>>53121735
Yeah, since the Hymn doesn't deal in multiple colors. If it were me, I'd make it say
>Add X mana in any combination of R and/or W to your mana pool, where X is the number of creatures you control.
or
>Add an amount of R or W equal to the number of creatures you control to your mana pool.
Depending on which is appropriate.

>>53121750
Nice. The idea of opening a pack and getting a cool Masterpiece card, especially in foil, is tempting, but I know too much about statistics to start gambling. I don't own any cardboard Magic because of this.

>>53121801
>Jesus WotC, what were you thinking?
That there are more people who like the product than there are people who don't like it. I almost always find "Why did you make this thing I don't like?" questions amusing because most of them have no substance and just boil down to "Muh feels!" As for me, I'd really like to have Diabolic Intent. I'm in love with that art.

>>53121869
Well since our opinions both share the same weight, I'm sorry for your terrible taste in visual design.

>>53121815
Well since I haven't seen these in a while, I'm guessing they're probably different than I last saw them. Does Blackfire not fly in the comics? Because she could easily have it instead of menace. As it is, the benefit of her being able to get rid of indestructible creatures is kinda outweighed by Kori's better evasion, though were your cards actually going to be a draftable set, Koma is better due to all the indestructible flying pun intended around.

>>53121721
>Planeswalker type has to match the name.

Her name is Najaka tho. "High Priestess of Rot" is a title.

>>53122112
So make the card name Najaka, High Priestess of Rot. It's just standard convention.

File: Garfield Lynns Firefly6.jpg (49KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 375x523px

Firefly, flying pryomaniac. Only difference from the last version is lacking Haste.

>>53122000
So, is it just the actual art of the cards you don't like, or the frames? Because I'm not a big fan of the frames either.

>Does Blackfire not fly in the comics?
No, at least not before New 52. She couldn't fly, which made her an outcast among her people. This lead them to make Starfire their queen instead of Blackfire, despite Blackfire being the older and therefore first in line of succession.

Anyway, as for balance, I was kinda worried about that, but I can't really think of another way to balance them that doesn't mean fiddling with their keywords or making Starfire hit players, which I'm pretty hesitant to include.

>>53122112
Not him, but it's standard to include the name, or at least part of it, in the name of the card.

File: Entropy Change.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

The counterspells from my set.

File: Oozeform.jpg (41KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 375x523px

Another old one. Damn, I really never update my one-off cards.

>>53122204
Seems odd to me that the token has that ability. Why not just let the opponent have the choice after the spell is countered?

>>53122218
>counter target multicolored or colorless spell
Since you have the choice over when to exile the card, why not just
>If you do, counter that spell
Not really a fan of a mana-less counter.

File: Entropy Change.jpg (38KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 375x523px

>>53122239
I agree that it is way more complex than it should be. Is this fine, then?

>>53122255
Fix'd. Also, I agree that it may be a little too pushed. Maybe it could tax (2) instead of plain counter it?

>>53122186
>Not him, but it's standard to include the name, or at least part of it, in the name of the card.

I mean is it a particular rule or anything? I think it's just a pattern. I like the possibility of a planeswalker typeline giving you their name.

Garfield is pretty scary. But they come on an easy to kill legendary body and cost 5 so any toning down I can think of seems overly harsh. I kind of don't like how quickly the pump happens though, so that most anything they can destroy relatively easily. It might be more interesting if they start with 3 power but have a more expensive pump. That makes the card a bit more interesting, to me, because then there's reason to run them with things that boost power since they aren't so crazily efficient at it themselves.

>>53122186
I don't think you need the two color cost on the firebreathing. Black gives flying, red gives the buff, and they both do the last ability equally.

>Kaladesh cashgrab cards
I hate the entire design. Text, border, etc. The art is fine, they are just a travesty of font and layout/border design.

>Blackfire
I see. Well then, I suppose she's fine. In a vacuum, Starfire is better, and in your set, Blackfire. It's not a bad paradigm.

>>53122239
Oof, this is a tough pill. I'm guessing the precedent you're going to lean on for this is green's noncreature permanent destruction and the fact that green hates blue? I'm still not sure it should get flat countermagic.

>>53122218
>0 mana counter spell for a lot of things
Haha no.

>>53120799
>"Have you heard of Vigilance?"
You can still use it with vigilance. Example: Stoneforge mystic, go to attack, activate with mana (ignoring the tap thanks to the legend). Opponents turn they attack, you block with stoneforge then activate. Lets you get 2 activations with vigilance instead of just attacking then blocking and using

File: Ios Masterwork.jpg (44KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 375x523px

>>53122307
>I agree that it is way more complex than it should be. Is this fine, then?
Seems better, yeah. But "its" not "it's"

>Fix'd. Also, I agree that it may be a little too pushed. Maybe it could tax (2) instead of plain counter it?
Sounds better. Still hard to judge though. It's so odd, what made you come up with it?

>>53122334
Well, no, it's not really a rule, just a convention.

>Firefly
That sounds like a good idea. I'll play around with it.

>>53122373
>Firefly
Hmm, sounds interesting, I'll experiment with that. And BR for firebreathing simply to make it harder to activate, I realize it doesn't absolutely require both colors. But activated abilities are a bit odd like that. Sometime they include all the colors of the card they're on even if the effect doesn't require all of them, just because.

>Masterpiece
You don't mention the Zendikar cards? Does that mean you approve of them?. Also, you mention "the entire design" but refer explicitly to the Kaladesh cards. So do you dislike both the Amonkhet and Kaladesh cards and for all the same reasons? Kaladesh and Zendikar I both like, Amonkhet I'm not a big fan of. Though really, the part I just hate about them is how Wizards tried to be cute with hieroglyphics, and it just makes the name and types a pain to read.

>Blackfire
Thanks for the feedback. I'm guessing from your comments that they're pretty balanced and in and themselves?

>Oozeform
Oh, I realize it's a complete break. I just wanted to have fun. Imagine it as a Time Spiral card.

>>53122451
The point I was trying to make is that you could attack with Vigilance, then tap them afterwards, which was all I saw when I looked at the ability, wanting to attack and then tap without really tapping.

>>53122580
It's the Amonkhet cards I hate, not the Kaladesh ones. Sorry. I don't know why I even said that. The Kaladesh ones were how you DO that kind of thing. They looked great.

>Masterwork
So you put the last ability on there so you can "equip" Auras, I take it?

>>53121790
Sorry to hear you lost all your work man. I know how that feels. Though honestly I'm also kind of glad all my past work is gone; I can reuse all that art and nobody cared about any of it except me anyway so... what was the real loss?
>Reject
What colors would this show up in? Because bounce is pretty much strictly blue.

File: Delete.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

>>53122580
>Seems better, yeah. But "its" not "it's"
Fix'd.

>Sounds better. Still hard to judge though. It's so odd, what made you come up with it?
Yugioh cards, believe me or not. Shining "C" to be more precise.

File: Jimmy Olsen5.jpg (60KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 375x523px

No changes. Going for Silver Age Jimmy Olsen, who got different powers every other week.

>>53122791
>So you put the last ability on there so you can "equip" Auras, I take it?
Basically. It also helps if you copy an Equipment with a high equip cost. Plus it's instant speed.

>>53122865
Dude, do us all a favor and toss up some feedback for the cards of the people bothering to give yours feedback. We have enough trouble keeping the threads chugging along; nobody is going to want to talk shop when their stuff gets ignored when they're helping you out.

>>53122910
Fair enough.
>Jimmy
Oh Silver Age, you so crazy. I feel like this should be purely random if his power set was all over the place, so not fond of the last ability. I'd suggest not doing the top card thing either and just exiling a random card until end of turn for him to copy, but that's way too complex to bother.

>>53122977
Shuffle then? Eh, seems like too much. I had another idea where he was affected by more than just creature cards, so I may go to that. Thanks for the feedback.

>>53123027
It'd be wordy, but you could add Auras to that and have it where if you have an Aura up, he acts like he's enchanted by it or something.

>>53123062
I could see it, but only as a triggered ability at upkeep, which would be fine. I'm starting to wonder now if he could transform into whatever the card is, but then you have trouble with powerful cards ending up on top. OK, going to bed.

>>53123129
G'night. I'll keep the thread afloat with a few bumps before I hit the hay too if it drops too far in the page count.

>>53121442
So the exile only happens on your opponent's turn? You'd only ever be able to cast instants, is that intended?

>>53123264
I'm not actually sure. I dunno if adding a Flash caveat on that is too much or not. You think it's fine to do it that way? I just put it out into the wild with the converted Grenzo ability to gauge what people thought of the concept because I wasn't sure it'd even take. I like these threads, but people are fickle.

>>53123264
>>53123346
Or do you think I should make the exile just happen on the Courtesan's owner's turn? Which would be the better way to arrange it? I am starting to think doing it this way (owner's turn) is the better option. Good catch at any rate.

>>53122791
>>Reject
>What colors would this show up in? Because bounce is pretty much strictly blue.

I think blue and perhaps white would fit, although it is a pretty blue ability. Maybe stretch to black in some cases?

>>53123648
I think it depends on what you reject with it. Black rejecting a creature is going to be better received than black rejecting an artifact, for example, since it can remove creatures already. Though, how it's doing so mechanically is still very blue so I'm not sure what would really be allowed as far as bending the pie. I'm apparently not the best judge of that as per last thread.

>>53122218
i am kind of ok with it... the opp is going to know about it and it's a 1/1 for 1. i don't think the price is wrong.
you could force the counter on the first thing an opponent would play, so that opponenet could play around it, it would be much safer design, but you it would suck to have 2 of those in your graveyard trigger on the same spell.

>>53121869
>That there are more people who like the product than there are people who don't like it.

the fact there are people who like it is irrelevant for the bad judgement we should give to the invocations.
they are a premium card that was supposed to be eye candy chased by 90% of the playerbase, but instead 40% of people don't like it-> they fucked up.

File: rz01 Sliver Emperor.jpg (45KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 375x523px

Playing around with ability words.
(All other cards in the set have normal Grandeur at this point, wanna know what do ya'll think)

>>53124953
>the fact there are people who like something i don't like is irrelevant
That sounds completely, objective, reasonable, and totally unbiased.

>>53120254
Reminds me of Essence Backlash. I'm not sure if the mana cost is needed. I think the mana cost is a bit too restrictive. I'd go back to 3UR again.
>people who aren't bound by the same restrictions WotC has.
Well, we still are by the nature of designing Magic cards bound by Wizards' design rules.
>>53120644
That card is too swingy for my tastes. It's also probably a bit undercosted, bouncing a spell seems to be costed at around 1.5 mana and copying one is 2.
>>53120703
To paraphrase a flavor text - choke on your cleverness and die. The card's too cute. That's not a compliment.
>>53120799
The card was perfect as is at
Indestructible
B: Each Shade gets +1/+1
Beginning of each combat phase (or when ~ attacks, whatever floats your boat), get a 2/2 Shade with haste. Exile it at end of combat.
2/2
Like, that's perfect.Maybe on the strong side, but who cares. No need to fiddle with it. That nails the flavor with minimal complexity.
>>53121123
It's not basically the same spell, it IS the same spell. Seems redundant.

>>53121442
That card is pretty garbage desu. Even if it worked as intended, a 3/3 is way too squishy. Also it missing on lands is just a huge drawback.
>>53121547
Cute, but not a rare.
>>53121574
Humm. Interesting. I can dig it. A bit undercosted, as threaten effects already are costed at 3.
>>53121604
No offense, but I'm so god damn tired of badly designed custom planeswalker #637 it's actually tilting me.
>>53121801
As a contrarian, I think both look fucking terrible, but at least the AKH ones are bold-looking, so I like them more.
>>53121815
Nice clean safe designs. Not much to say about them.
>>53122186
I think it should trigger when connecting. The statline/activated ability seem off as well.
>>53122204
Just remove the clutter. Jesus christ, why does it have to be this complicated. Just give them a 3/3 elephant or something. Christ.
>>53122218
Jesus christ I think this is the most unprintable card I've seen since I joined this thread. Ho-ly fuck is this card broken. Dredge really needs a way to hose all the artifact gy hosers, right? Even disregarding that, this card is absolutely dumb.
>>53122239
Green does not get to do that.
>>53122307
YOU DO NOT REDUCE THE COMPLEXITY OF YOUR CARD BY GIVING YOUR OPPONENT CHOICES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE RESOLUTION SADSSFD
>>53122580
I'd remove the 3: ability to be completely honest. It's already a pretty strong card.
>>53122865
This card is super-off. Again, why does this do the Snake-Oracle-Land effect? Why red, white or black? Isn't this undercosted to all hell?
>>53122910
I'm convinced there's stuff that breaks this. It's a pretty common design though. Also the ability to filter your draws is deceptively strong.

>>53122934
To chime in, I don't mind just people posting cards.
>>53125361
>+x/+y
Eww
Also shouldn't it be "All slivers have all..."?

>>53121790
>Reject
Reflector Mage is one of the most table-breakingly frustrating, pure tilt cards even for competitive-oriented stoic players and you want to KEYWORD it? Oh god please no. Imagine being stuck with like 3 Siege Rhinos stuck in your hand for 8 turns in a row because yoiur opponent has 12 Reject cards in their deck.

>>53125851
>All Slivers have all
First off, Queen and Overlord prove this is not needed.
Second off, this would be a little too much with Slivers that grant ETB triggers and stat bonuses, because those things would stack per sliver on the battlefield.

>>53125937
>All Slivers have all
Not that guy, but he didn't put this on the card. He just made it so the card has all the activated abilities of all the Sliver cards in all graveyards.

>>53125361
I'd make the pump look at the P/T of the creature, not the card. Especially since the creature will likely be buffed a few times already, making the ability more powerful. Though I think most people would prefer just +X/+X, I can go either way, so it's up to you.

>>53126060
>He just made it so the card has all the activated abilities of all the Sliver cards in all graveyards.
How do I word it so that it has all the passive and triggered abilities as well? Asking for a friend.

>>53125707
>Like, that's perfect.Maybe on the strong side, but who cares. No need to fiddle with it. That nails the flavor with minimal complexity.
Good point. I really liked the idea of a scaling token, and I wanted to make it work, but I'll go with your suggestion. Might try a scaling token effect on another card. Maybe Negative Man or Mindwarp.

>>53126138
Oh, I thought you were trying to say activated abilities. Guess I read your card wrong too. As for your question, it's something Wizards hasn't ever really touched on. I don't know how to do precisely what you want, but you could approximate that by doing something like making token copies of Sliver cards in graveyards then exile them later, or have the card itself become a copy of the Sliver card in a graveyard, but still legendary and it retains its 7/7 P/T and name. Or you could just come up with some way to recur Slivers. That'd be the easiest option, and I think fitting for a big legendary.

>>53125937
Yep, I'm retarded.

>>53126138
>>53126189
I mean, I suppose from a purely mechanical stand point, "~ has all abilities" should work, but again, Wizards just hasn't ever done it. They're probably afraid of complexity issues.

File: indeks.jpg (433KB, 2250x523px) Image search: [Google]

433KB, 2250x523px

>>53126245
I guess I'll stick with what I have for now. Still thanks mate, changed to +x/+x based on power only.

In the meantime, have some references and me having fun with ideas. Open for ideas on how to call the red hound, bonus point for references.

Also, how slim is my chance of somebody in the drawthread actually taking up my requests for Sliver art?

>>53125707
>Miscast
OK.

>Wizards' design rules
True, for the most part. I still think you were a bit too strict on Time anon's one-off card. I'd get it if he started making commons with "Exile target spell." But a single card, at rare?

>Shade
Doing it now.

>Starfire and Blackfire
Thanks. Most of my cards aren't as crazy as Mother Box, which I'm still experimenting with but probably won't post for a while.

>Firefly
Trigger on hit does sound like a better option. Also, taking other anons' advice into account, the latest version gets Flying for 1B and pumps for +1/+0 at 1R.

>Oozeform
I know, it was just a one-off I had fun with. Might make it a UG counter.

>Io's Masterwork
Really? Hmm, OK.

>Jimmy Olsen
It's basically just a twist on Skill Borrower. I think I'll actually change it to change with every permanent card. I'd been worried about planeswalkers, but I might just make it say nonplaneswalker. Oh, and I already removed the filter ability.

>>53126527
I've never really liked Grandeur on nonlegendaries, to be honest. I feel like it kinda defeats the purpose of the ability. Anyway, you're making some of the common mistakes here.

For ability words, you need to put a space both before and after the hyphen.

You capitalize all substypes like Bird, Aura, and Equipment, but card types like creature, enchantment, and artifact aren't, as well as supertypes like basic, legendary, and snow.

Cards on the battlefield can be referred to by just their card types. If they're on the stack, they're spells. If they're anywhere else, they're cards. So uw04 should say "Return target creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield."

>>53126146
Make it non-token, at least.

File: bc07g befoul common.png (271KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 375x523px

I think I have this at a state I like.

File: Rikakos Converter.jpg (45KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 375x523px

>Counterspell edition
Ok then. I realize this is just >>53122239 with different colorus, but I swear I made it on my own. I also think I have the right colours. Name is from 2hu.

>>53125361
As an addendum to what others have mentioned, I think making the discard "All Slivers get +1/+1 until EOT" would be fine, too.

>>53126146
See >>53126642
I have to say I like how perfectly this fits its colours.

>>53126527
>Whenever you cycle or discard...
Please don't do this. Other than that, the card just a smaller Drake Haven. I disagree with it being in white.
>Grandeur
I agree with the other anon about sticking this on non-legends. You could make the cards care about types/colours of the discarded cards instead. And again, discarding for profit in white is iffy.
If you do go with the "caring about types" thing, try to include some cards that benefit from discarded lands to mitigate manaflood in limited.
>Revivalist
creature CARD

>>53126706
You want to keyword free reanimation? I urge you to reconsider. Exiling creature cards for up to X 1/1 tokens is still powerful and as such is my suggested alternative.

File: Ritual of Ancient Awakening.jpg (48KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 375x523px

>>53126706
This strikes me as something too complex to keyword as-is.
>>53126977
Might it be simpler to counter the spell and give the spell's controller a Weird creature token?

>>53126625
>>53126977
Well then, I guess I have to think up a different ability name that would work similarly to Grandeur.
Excess, maybe?
Also I'd still keep the common ones wanting you to discard cards named identically, but at bigger rarities their range would differentiate.

>Don't do this
it is the official templating now, sadly.

>>53126977
I probably should have posted more examples. It often won't be free and can have more trigger than on death. When I get back home I'll throw more up to give an idea of where I want to take it.

>>53127046
I also worry about the complexity. However, I am trying my fucking damndest to make tokens out of dead stuff and make it reasonable and simple. What kind of suggestions can you make?

Beyond making tokens I want the bg faction to reanimate in some way that doesn't break things and I've been trying to figure a bg mechankc out for months. I had something like embalm but then that got used

>>53127278
>it is the official templating now, sadly.
Not him, but it's not really "official", it's not like it's going to be used on every discard trigger until the end of time. The wording
>Whenever you discard a card,
and
>Whenever you discard or cycle a card,
are mechanically identical, since Cycling calls for discard. Wizards just worded it this way for Amonkhet since they wanted to make cards that trigger off discard and because the set uses Cycling, and they just wanted to make it very easy to understand for newbies.

File: no-name2.jpg (46KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 375x523px

>>53127292
I had similar difficulties coming up with my last BG mechanic. I ended up going with an on-death trigger, like you have here. Maybe you could add a cost to yours and streamline it? Something like this? Or you could have something like Embalm, but with a number and that creates a generic N/N token.

>>53127278
>>53127392
>discard or cycle a card
Bleh, got the order wrong. But I think you guys know what I meant.

Also, if Wizards did decide to make "discard or cycle" the new wording, then they would've gone back to change the wording of older cards. And yet Necropotence doesn't include "cycle" in its Oracle text.

>>53127415
I also had something along those lines

File: indeks.jpg (123KB, 750x523px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 750x523px

>>53127443
The Explicitly stated that they could not reprint Astral Slide even if they wanted to because it uses an old wording.

Anyway, this is what I'm on now, with the common ones keeping their abilities just witch changed names. Open for better ability word than Excess I guess, the flavor is Dominaria rebuilding after TSP.

File: no-name5.jpg (129KB, 750x523px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 750x523px

>>53127478
>>53127415
How about this: You make the tokens Fungus, but not the regular creatures. Then you have Fungus-matters cards that reward creating the tokens. New template suggestion pic related.

>>53127588
I'd also considered that, but my damned stubbornness of getting tokens with actual abilities kept me from doing it. I suppose I could make a standard fungus token with some minor ability and have the mechanic make 1 or more of them. And yeah, I also have a bit of fungus tribal.

I guess I'm going to have to give up the making dudes into tokens I love so much if I'm also going to try and make it a grave based mechanic for the design elegance and power level.

>>53127549
>The Explicitly stated that they could not reprint Astral Slide even if they wanted to because it uses an old wording.
I'm guessing you're talking about this line
>Also, there will be plenty of cards with cycling rewards in Amonkhet, and while neither Astral Slide nor Lightning Rift make the return (boo old templating . . . among other things)
From this page
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/latest-developments/cycling-duels-2017-03-31

What he's saying here is that neither card will be reprinted *in Amonkhet*. He's not saying they won't be reprinted ever. Also, it's kinda pointless to talk about those cards because they use a fundamentally different trigger than what Wizards was using in Amonkhet, which would trigger off any discard, but Astral Slide and Lightning Rift only trigger off Cycling.

File: Reignition.jpg (46KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 375x523px

>>53127046
>Might be simpler to...
It would be, but then the resulting creature dies to bounce/blink. Except I just realized that blinking a converted instant would just remain in exile if you blink it. A counter and token it is.
>card
Sweet. I think 1B would be enough for the escalate cost, and you may want a "full" newline after the last mode.

>>53127292
I doubt that more examples will change the problems with keyworded reanimation, but I'll try to keep an open mind for now.

>>53127549
>The Explicitly stated that they could not reprint Astral Slide even if they wanted to because it uses an old wording.
I don't have the article on hand, but isn't this the opposite of what they stated? The problem has nothing whatsoever to do with the wording and everything to do with the effect, i.e. it triggering off of both players and presumably because it can stall games out by keeping creatures from attacking.
>Excess
I don't think you need a word for this at all. Having discard as a general theme is fine. As for caring about types/colours, I'd say make the requirements more specific the more powerful the effect. For the kavu, having a requirement of either creature or red seems fine to me; it doesn't need to be both.

>>53127829
I think I found the article that anon was talking about here >>53127752 And I think part of why Astral Slide isn't getting reprinted is because it only triggers off cycling, not all discard effects.

>>53127888
That is the article I was thinking of, and I definitely think that "old templating" refers to the card triggering off both players. Source: Change to Slivers and the "fixed" Lord of Atlantis only buffing your own creatures.
In any case, the reason they didn't reprint is absolutely not because they somehow can't, it's because they don't want to.

File: Tefe Holland Sprout16.jpg (51KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 375x523px

No changes from last time. Pretty sure it's fine as-is, just making sure though. Flavor is supposed to blend plants and animals together, so land animation.

>>53127829
>Reignition
I'd rather it be
>Exile target instant or sorcery card from your graveyard with a time counter on it. If it doesn't have suspend, it gains suspend.

>>53128080
>That is the article I was thinking of, and I definitely think that "old templating" refers to the card triggering off both players.
Ah, glad I got it right. And you're probably right about their reasoning, I just didn't bring it up because I was talking with the other guy about how the "cycle or discard" wording isn't Wizards' new template for all discard triggers, it's just what they decided to use for Amonkhet, and talking about which players it affects just seemed irrelevant. He may have been referring to that, who knows.

>>53128082
Damn, just realized Tefe triggers off creatures regardless of who controls them. It should trigger only off creatures that ETB under your control. Fixing now.

>>53125893
Reject is different than reflector mage. Reflector mage bounces a creature until your next turn, which often means that an opponent has to wait for two turn cycles unless it has flash.

Reject states "until that player's next turn", meaning that if you play a reject card on your turn, they can play it again once their turn starts again, instead of waiting for it to be your turn.

>>53127588
>>53127829
Idea, dudes exiling something from your grave on ETB and gaining all the activated abilities of that card.

>>53128118
He was. He admits he did not remember much besides that quote from the article. He is thankful for clearing it up for him.

File: temptation.jpg (205KB, 558x784px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 558x784px

How has this card not been printed yet?

>>53126977
That horrible. Not only is it overly complicated, but why would anyone play with that ever over Counterspell or Mana Leak or Arcane Denial?

>>53128683
For the same reason there is no good PW removal and yet they get pushed too the moon.

They're the stars of this game now, whether you like it or not. I know I don't.

File: ur01 Constrain.png (209KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 375x523px

>>53128683
In a similar vein, how has this not been printed yet? Power level concerns?

>>53125831
Yo grumpus I love your work. Tell me why the abzan colored planeswalker is poorly designed though.

>>53126527
Grandeur was only on Legendary creatures for a reason.
>>53126706
Too narrow and complex to be keyworded. Also probably breaks some things. I don't like it.
>>53126977
That looks like an UG spell to me desu.
>>53127046
Barter in Blood with massive upside - seems undercosted to all hell.
>>53127415
Embalm is your mechanic but infinitely more interesting. Also Scavenge.
>inb4 "they're not the same mechanic"
You're missing the point.
>>53127549
Excess is buuusteed. Free tempo swings like that keyworded is generally bad times. Also consider learning from the lesson of how unfun Wild Mongrel was to play with.
>>53127588
Still dumb.
>>53127829
Seems pretty dangerous. Maybe twiddle with the suspend and mana costs. Also I'm not sure if it works under the current template as the copy effect probably won't change the exile---->stack transition. Might be wrong. Just make the sorcery suspend a card from your graveyard straight up, seems cleaner and less confusing.
>>53128082
I think I'd like it more if it triggered off playing lands.
>>53128284
That just makes the issue softer. You use it on their upkeep and they're still stuck with extra copies in their hand. It just reads miserable. Do NOT put un-fun mechanics in your set. >>53128683
Too narrow. Planeswalkers are all mythics. Why would you print a card that only interacts with mythics?
>>53128958
That card is pretty neat though. Probably slightly undercosted. 3U sounds about right.
>>53128985
WotC has probably the best Magic designers in the world (simply because they design the most magic cards). And they STILL sometimes fuck up Planeswalker design. It's incoherent, boring and just frankly not worth the effort to deeply look into. If you want to design good planeswalker, I suggest looking into the Lorwyn 5 and really break down every single minute thing about the card.

File: counterspells.jpg (594KB, 1125x1569px) Image search: [Google]

594KB, 1125x1569px

>>53120202
>Counterspell edition!
ah jeez, Iunno about this

>>53129156
Yeah, I'm too attached to the generation of meaningful tokens. Fucking wizards taking embalm out from under me.

I also feel it's slightly undercosted but I am staunchly against printing control magic that doesn't have UU in it. I feel like it's not an effect that should be splashable y'know. Though if any control magic were ever to be able to get just U in its cost it'd be this one.

>>53128985
Start with the mana cost.
Consider what the game looks like when they are cast.
What sorts of deck want this card?
What are the options when you cast them? How much mana worth of value are you getting when you + them the turn they come out?
What about if you - them? What are the most similar spells to them and how do they compare to the planeswalkers?
Are their abilities able to protect themselves? How do the abilities worth together?
What are the relationships between -, + and ultimate abilities? The starting loyalty?
What does the ultimate do? Is it going to win you the game?
How does the planeswalker's abilities reflect the color pie? What about the color's philosophy? What about the planeswalker as a character itself?

I'm sure I'm forgetting some of these, but you get the general gist. Once you're done looking at the Lorwyn 5, go back and do the same thing to your own planeswalker.

>>53129227
Not the maker of that walker but I think the answers to all those questions are pretty clear for it. It belongs in a grindy graveyard loving deck. It protects itself by negating damage or removing a specific threat, it fills the graveyard, and its ultimate gets back your biggest dude. Seems pretty abzan to me.

>>53129227
>Start with the mana cost.

Well I kind of don't believe this at all because starting with mana cost is how you get tibalt and in general artificially narrows designs. You'd wanna put an appropriate mana cost on something after you make the abilities.

The walker is very vanilla as far as plus and minuses go.
Plus protects self (essentially preventing damage done by a creature)
The minus is almost exactly mercy killing.
The ultimate is a smaller effect because they're three mana.

Are you saying they need a more powerful ultimate and/or should cost more? Their + isn't super special and their minus is a kill spell with a pretty real drawback so I don't know if I agree that the cost should be pumped up.

What errors are you seeing in the design?

>>53129156
>I think I'd like it more if it triggered off playing lands.
In addition to creature ETB or in place of it? Also, I just want to make sure you know that this was supposed to trigger off creatures that ETB under your control only. I guess I just forgot to include it earlier.

>WotC has probably the best Magic designers in the world (simply because they design the most magic cards). And they STILL sometimes fuck up Planeswalker design.
So much this. Planeswalkers are incredibly hard to design, yet newbies try it all the time. I get the appeal, but still.

>>53129343
>Well I kind of don't believe this at all because starting with mana cost is how you get tibalt and in general artificially narrows designs.
Not him, obviously, but there are times when you want to make a card with a specific mana cost. And not just gimmick stuff either, like CMC 1 or 2 planeswalkers.

>>53129223
2UU seems fine too. You're probably right about the mana cost thing.
And just use embalm. There's no shame in stealing good ideas.
>>53129187
Mental Blowback was literally posted at UURR a few posts ago. I think yours is undercosted.
UR command seems iffy. Tutoring artifacts at instant speed for 2UR with added flexibility seems too good. Same goes for drawing and redirecting. 1 damage seems frankly irrelevant. Add 1 more mana to the card and scrap the last ability.
UG command still is neat. Needs testing, looks okay, I think?
I'm 50-50 on spell shatter. It would be cool in the artifact-sacrifice decks running around peasant. Might be fine. Probably is.
c01 is a strictly worse essence scatter?
>>53121268
Supply Line's first ability is just garbage. They can cast the spells in response to the trigger. Just make it Silence them (during combat?). Then you probably ought to make it a start-of-combat trigger to prevent combat tricks.
02 is ridiculously undercosted for an uncommon.
03 is not white. No, caring about lots of creatures in this context is not white. You've just made a worse designed Battle Hymn. I don't care that you have slots to fill.
04 - make it at least 1UG, trigger at start of combat - will make card smoother. Neat card. Cool riff on Battle-Rattle
I object to this creature having vigilance. Also just make it have hexproof. Don't get too fancy.
Cryptolith Rite did it better and was an appropriate power level. Base your card off that.
07 is interesting, but it's very scary to print effects like that. Consider me sceptical.
I wouldn't let UR get enchantments. I realize you try to create this cool thing with prowess, but I also think it's a miss. Also it's already stupidly powerful before Evoke. Power it down a little bit.
Compare 09 to Invoke the Firemind.
10 is neat. I have a lot of power level concerns. Slime Molding was a pretty damn good card.
11 is just clunky as all hell and unfocused. Scrap it and start over.

>>53129525
Crazy thing is, someone in these threads a while back made a 1 cost walker that wasn't too shabby. Even being colorless it probably wouldn't have gone in everything but was still wrothwhile... at least, that's my memory of it

File: Torture Chamber.jpg (45KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 375x523px

>>53128082
>>53129156
>Reignition
Yeah that wording is better. I don't know why I didn't think of that. Thanks.
>looks like a UG spell
Weirds are UR and I thought the flavour fit. Mechanically speaking (and since I have to change it to use a token anyway) you're right, though.

>>53129187
>Mental Blowback
It's alright. You don't need the "up to one" since your opponent having hexproof is extremely rare so you'll always have a target.
>Innov Command
You don't get to skimp on the wording for the first mode.
>Search your library for an artifact card, reveal it, then shuffle your library and put that card on top of it.
You're missing a period after "Draw a card."
Overall I feel the last mode is too versatile. Either creatures or players, not both.
>Adapt Command
I'd say change the last mode to something else. Untap makes it stupid against decks without counterspells. Maybe "You may play X additional lands this turn"?
>Spell Shatter
Sure. I don't know if artifact decks would play this over Met. Rebuke so it should be fine.
>Distort
Almost strictly worse essence scatter. Technically you can use it to bounce your own creatures, but you still need a spell to target. I don't dislike the idea behind it, but I think you need to think of another angle.
>Sequencebreaker
Just copy the wording from Commit.
>Tide's Claim
Additional costs use separate paragraphs. They also can't target. As an unconditional 1cmc counterspell my instinct says it's broken.

>>53129525
Yeah, I guess with like design skeletons and stuff you will need to fill out a reasonable CMC distribution.
But for planeswalkers I'm rarely going to start with mana cost since the more interesting bit there is "now what does this fucker actually do on a card?"

File: Private Business.jpg (29KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 375x523px

>>53129343
>>53129629
Not who you're talking to, but
>the more interesting bit there is "now what does this fucker actually do on a card?"
Do you really think a bog-standard "Plus:token/stall Minus:CA" value engine is in any way interesting?

>>53129574
>Tutoring artifacts at instant speed for 2UR with added flexibility seems too good
I disagree. Compare to fabricate which is 3 mana, and uncommon. While this is 4, an extra color, and rare. Fabricate sees basically 0 play (unless I've somehow completely missed a presence in legacy) so a card that's stronger than it but not strictly better seems totally warranted. Besides, it doesn't get it directly into your hand if you do some of the additional upside.

>>53129605
And this guy is saying the last ability is too powerful. I'm actually more inclined to agree with this which is why I made it so you are guranteed to have to take at least some damage if you use it.

And to both of you, yeah, distort aether was a funky idea that didn't pan out.

>>53121268
I think Trostani's Summoner did what 13 does much better.
14 is busted in half. Putrid Leech with pure upside.
15 is cute. I like it.
>>53129483
Only your land triggers. Would help to mitigate mana flood and IMO actually feels more flavorful.
>>53129605
That card is busted in half. Compare to Stab Wound.
>>53129343
I told you to go look at Lorwyn walkers for a reason. Actually do it. And don't just answer these questions like you're checking off a list. Think about it long and hard. Think how all the things that go into a planeswalker fit together.
>>53129742
Seems dumb and narrow.
>>53129767
Fabricate sees play in a tier 2 deck (U-tron) right now, has seen fringe play elsewhere and is borderline Legacy playable. Having flexibility for it to not be just a tutor AND it being instant speed is worth A LOT.

>>53129742
Yeah because the top ability is a neat self mill thing I like and both + and - can be used on your own creatures as well in some circumstances.

>every design must break the mold and be outright cuh-razy

I used to think like this until I got over designing exclusively for myself and other designers. How something plays is more important than how it mentally stimulates.

>private business
Seems fine as a generic narrow counterspell. I only question why planeswalkers and exile are put together. Something set specific?

>>53129873
I built this command around tutoring artifacts, partially due to its place in the set and for its flavor.

Would putting it second from the top of your library assuage these concerns?

File: Pack-Heart.jpg (48KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 375x523px

>>53129873
>I told you to go look at Lorwyn walkers for a reason. Actually do it. And don't just answer these questions like you're checking off a list. Think about it long and hard. Think how all the things that go into a planeswalker fit together.

Alright so I appreciate what you do for the thread but I redact "I love your work" because this is getting stupid.

>>53129605
Here's my argument on why the last ability is okay. All of its abilities are things that are acceptable at any level of X considering you still have to pay 2 colored mana. So the net result of 2 mana to forcespike a noncreature, or scry 1, or clone something shitty seems reasonable to me as you still do have to actually have 3 mana to do it. Now, if you have suped up your lands to produce multiple mana, you still need a couple of those to break even and then, you've built a dedicated ramp deck and deserve some additional pay off. At least, that's how I see it. A net loss of mana for a relatively minor effect unless used in certain types of decks where it still requires effort to reach "broken" status.

>>53129873
>Only your land triggers. Would help to mitigate mana flood and IMO actually feels more flavorful.
OK. Same cost and number of counters?

>>53129984
I feel it should tap to produce a dude.

>>53129947
Seems like a shitty band-aid solution. Maybe remove the draw a card option? I don't know, honestly.
>>53129984
>little baby doesn't want to put in any effort
lmao
Anyway, here's a short list of planeswalkers I personally find both well designed and interesting in addition to the Lorwyn 5.
Chandra Ablaze
Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver
Gideon Jura
Vraska Unseen
Xenagos, the Reveler
I think it's really telling that I like only about 1/10th of the planeswalkers ever printed. Again, doing the in depth look is an extremely rewarding experience and makes you appreciate how well Wizards hit it out of the park with these cards.
Now, you probably haven't thought about any of those things while designing yours. So I'm just not going to put in the effort to really consider what's wrong with it.
>>53130068
They seemed find? Development is difficult to do quick-and-dirty, but gut feeling says it's fine. Maybe add "another target" if it wasn't already there to make it play more interesting?
>>53129984
Eeh, way too strong and goes off too well with additional +1/+1 counters. Make the dudes splitting off 1/1 oozes, that would be sweet, although I have a feeling that that has been done before.

>>53130149
There's no need to be an asshole man. He's asking for what problems you have with it and you're genuinely only telling him "you figure it out". We're here to get feedback and tangible ways we can improve our designs. Obviously it's helpful to also bring up design philosophy for designing going forward but you also need to get immediate reasons.

And I think most people here consider those aspects when designing a walker, we aren't mtg cardsmith here.

I usually appreciate your very blunt and slightly abrasive attitude even if we don't always agree. But this isn't that, it's just unhelpful and condescending.

>>53130260
To borrow a term from Wagner, a planeswalker needs to be a gesamtkunstwerk. This essentially means the EVERY part of the walker has to be working towards a unified whole. This is so ridiculously hard to pull off. Learning to appreciate the previous design is a key step to designing good Planeswalkers. I could tell her that the +1 really doesn't create interesting gameplay with the - ability and how the ultimate is underwhelming and how the mana cost is just baffling and how blowing up your planeswalker with it's - ability as it hits the table is unfun. But those won't help her design a better planeswalker next time. At best, she'll try to fix the issue while the core card is just broken (in the design sense, not the development sense). But what has she learned? Basically nothing. Doing iterative design as a beginner just doesn't really work with Planeswalkers, as you HAVE to start with a fundamentally solid base.

File: Narcissism.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

>>53129873
>busted in half
It's an O-ring with narrower range and slight upside. Maybe 1 life per turn?

>>53129916
I was thinking of the BG walker from last thread for some reason, sorry about that. Yours isn't that bad.
>>every design must break the mold and be outright cuh-razy
That's not what I said. I think 'walkers are hard to design, and slapping some colours on Wizards' template is not a good way to accomplish that.

>I only question why planeswalkers and exile are put together.
They're both "outside" influences. Presumably the 'walker comes from a different plane, which is similar to coming from exile.

>>53129984
I agree with >>53130113

>>53130034
I usually play cube so I'm not an authority on what's broken. Still I think the untap mode leads to unfun gameplay for any opponent without counters. Reason being that you never need to tap out while either countering their noncreatures or copying their best creatures, so they can't even try to bait out counters that might tap you out. This is coming from someone who likes control decks in general.

>Consider what the game looks like when they are cast.
>What sorts of deck want this card?
Jace Beleren is generally played in control or aggro-control decks. Generally midrange decks want to be casting threats or answers on 3, and not card draw. This usually means that Jace is dropped while a clock is already established and you're time walking your opponent (A'la Lorwyn Faeries) or any time you'd play a Divination in a control deck.
>What are the options when you cast them?
> How much mana worth of value are you getting when you + them the turn they come out?
Generally speaking you almost never want to +2, as that's just flat out card disadvantage. It's one of the weaker sides of Jace, that his abilites lead to very single-track usage. I think this is mitigated by the fact by how protecting your Jace creates an interesting subgame, especially because it's going to be usually ticking down anyway.
>What about if you - them? What are the most similar spells to them and how do they compare to the planeswalkers?
>Are their abilities able to protect themselves?
Well, I think the most apt comparison is Concentrate. - Jace when it comes down leaves you at a negative two mana, as cycling a card is worth one mana. For that, you get a 2 loyalty Jace permanent. That's creates interesting gameplay decisions about when you ought to play Jace.
>How do the abilities worth together?
>What are the relationships between -, + and ultimate abilities? The starting loyalty?
The +2 and -1 have interesting interactions that don't really tend to come up often in competitive play. Essentially giving your opponent more options is generally too greedy. I think this is the second way Jace fails, is that the optimal way to play with it is unfun and unintuitive (just - it three times)

File: Kainwen Autumn.jpg (45KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 375x523px

>>53130387
>and how the ultimate is underwhelming

I literally asked if this was the case and got no reply on it (though others have also said it was meh). I even gave my reasoning in that I went with that because it was a three mana 'walker.

>how the mana cost is just baffling

Do you mean colors or CMC? Those are two different components. I haven't replied to this because I see no issues with the color. Obzedat's Aid is WB, Mercy killing was printed as hybrid GW but honestly is more mono white than anything, or WB, since it's only green in the same way "lol beast within" is. The plus ability is clearly damage prevention which is GW.
And, if you mean CMC, I also literally asked if you think they should be more expensive and got no response.

>I could tell her that the +1 really doesn't create interesting gameplay with the - ability

Literally none of the lorwyn five do that. Some of the cards you were so enigmatically referring to like they would unlock some incredible design philosophy if I just *thought about it hard enough*

On that point, I disagree that it's required. A plus ability working with a minus is fun, but a plus ability working with an ultimate is perfectly fine. A minus ability synergizing with an ultimate will almost never matter because minusing tends to be admitting to yourself that you won't ultimate this game and you're going for a win now.

I think you are getting just a little bit too fixated on your personal preferences of planeswalker cards.

>What does the ultimate do? Is it going to win you the game?
I think it's very telling that I wasn't 100% certain what the ultimate was. Mill 20 is a good win condition for a control deck in a pinch, but it rarely comes up. There's also the interesting tension between upping the Jace to the ultimate - you get to reduce their deck size at the same time!
>How does the planeswalker's abilities reflect the color pie?
Jace is blue as fuuuuck. Drawing cards! Is there anything more blue? Milling them! Bam! Doesn't interact with the board the slightest! Woo! Love it. A+
>What about the color's philosophy?
I think the card ends up reflecting the cliche facets of blue. Obviously learning and knowledge is very blue, and the +2 and -1 abilities are all about that. The fact that Jace deals exclusively with cards in the library also is really blue, it reflects well with blue's inherent passivity. The card's also tidy in a very blue-ish way. It's neat and orderly without much fanfair.
>What about the planeswalker as a character itself?
I don't think Jace was really fleshed out as much as the other. The +2 and -1 are generic enough to really fit on any random blue planeswalker. The ultimate acts as a pretty nice flavor text though. Still, playing Jace and using him doesn't really evoke the feeling of having Jace.

>>53130739
>Literally none of the lorwyn five do that
Wrong
>I think you are getting just a little bit too fixated on your personal preferences of planeswalker cards.
No, you're just bad at designing planeswalkers like everyone else here.

>>53130827
lol

>>53130827
>Wrong
I think it would be more helpful for him, and the rest of us here, if you elaborated on this.

>>53130979
At this point IDGAF
Planeswalkers are hard to design, and the guy isn't straight crazy, but they're getting a bit too particular here.

File: 1486354071615.jpg (36KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 375x523px

Hey, remember when we used to post cards? That was fun, let's do more of that.

>>53130739
Whoops, didn't see you. Not a fan of any of this, to be honest. All abilities seem incredibly weak. Ult needing tons of mana on top of 5 loyalty to really hurt just strikes me as bad design. If you want to do "Ramp: The Planeswalker", I'd suggest less making mana, and more enabling things that make mana. Untap effect for lands, rocks, and dorks, land tutor, maybe an emblem thst continually produces mana or multiplies mana you make?

File: wm01 Khera Abatels Bastion.png (106KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 375x523px

>>53131152

>>53131229
You're right, I should change the +. However, I like the minus because giving haste to a fatty in addition to the ramp seems quite strong. Giving haste to wolfir silverheart or kalonian hydra, for example, gets bonkers.
The ultimate doesn't actually spend any of the mana, so I'm slow to call it weak. I might make it cost less though if it's that bad.

I don't think the minus is bad but I will see about changing the + to something else entirely and tweaking the ultimate, thanks.

>>53131152
This guy's neat. I like how they use the zombies. The -X might be too strong as a one sided wipe though.

>>53131264
+1 is basically a temporary Pacifism. OK I guess. -6 seems like it could get nasty, though outside Theros Gods, it's not really threatening by itself which helps. That said, I'm really thinking the -2 should change to accommodate the ult. You don't necessarily have to, but you'll probably want to get out some Auras to pump up your dudes with the ult, so I'd change the -2 to something that helps with that, like say making a creature token. Could be wrong though.

>>53131590
It can also be used on her to make her unable to be attacked into but more easily removed.

I don't feel the - should accomodate the ult very much because the ult as it is will pretty much gurantee win the game through either hard locking or infinite combo.

As for making a token, I feel the + is already her protection ability which can also allow you to attack in unimpeded so her creating a token creature feels like she does everything. A deck that's likely to use her is probably looking for pillow fort and enchantment synergy. So the synergy of her + and - protecting her or something else and gaining you life is more what that deck would want.

File: CU12 From All Angles.jpg (36KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 375x523px

>>53129156
>Barter in Blood with massive upside - seems undercosted to all hell.
Hahaha. But really, undercosted? Both the delirium skeins and the life loss options are overcosted to make up for the card's flexibility, charm-style. Any higher on the base cost and those modes wouldn't be worth using. 2BBBBBB plus two creatures, three cards, and four life to fully utilize the card doesn't strike me as undercosted, either.
>Embalm is your mechanic
Not my mechanic, man. Merely spitballing suggestions to help him refine his mechanic, as I said in the post.
>...but infinitely more interesting.
Doesn't feel too bad, since I designed an Embalm ability before Embalm was a thing.
>You're missing the point.
If your points are that easy to misunderstand, perhaps spend more time articulating them?
>Still dumb.
Thank you for your detailed assessment.
>Supply Line's first ability is just garbage. They can cast the spells in response to the trigger.
Only at instant speed. It either forces or taxes the cast. You can also target yourself with it to johnny-style trigger one of the 5-or-more-mana effects.
>02 is ridiculously undercosted for an uncommon.
Whirler Rogue.
>No, caring about lots of creatures in this context is not white.
Yes, it is.
>04
Fair. I can adjust the costs and timings.
>I object to this creature having vigilance.
No offense, but I don't care about your objections unless you give me a design-related reason for them.
>Also just make it have hexproof. Don't get too fancy.
No. The current ability plays well with my themes and is more interactive than hexproof. Both design upsides.
>Compare 09 to Invoke the Firemind.
I did during its design. Invoke can hit players, which is a huge upside. Mine is more akin to Heat Ray, albeit with the massive upside of drawing you cards.
>I think Trostani's Summoner did what 13 does much better.
They fill different roles. Trostani's Summoner cares a lot more about the tokens; the card's body was insignificant. This is the inverse.

File: NAME TITLE.jpg (35KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 375x523px

>>53131152
Plus is fine but boring. Using the -X to overrun seems green. Ult is nice. Honestly I'd like it way better as a creature with the emblem text.

>>53131264
>>53131644
Plus is weird because it only does something to opp's creatures. Note that this can be used to blow up lands with disenchant effects, though I don't think that's a problem given that stone rain exists. I didn't notice that you could plus itself as protection. All colours can theoretically answer it is likely still ok.
Minus not being an emblem is an improvement, but I have trouble thinking of a situation where you'd actually use it. Against aggro decks, using the plus on a 3/X seems better. This is the one I think you should work on, though I don't have any good suggestions.
Ult should win the game, but only if you build the deck around it and is fine as such.

>>53131692
>Skulk
Just make it unblockable. If you don't want the second mode to be obsoleted by that, there's no problem with making it an instant.
This makes the flavour a little worse, but the upgrade in playability seems worth it.

File: 06.jpg (32KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 375x523px

>>53131819

>>53131819
>03
X cost ramp spells feel pretty conflicted, how are you supposed to dump any meaningful amount into X unless you've already ramped?

>04
Definitely hates on aggo decks well

>05
I'd be worried about that powerlevel but eh, it requires you to have a board for it to be too crazy.

>06
I can dig it.

>01
Rad as fuck.

>02
Seems a bit much being able to use a single creature to ramp enough to slam a 7 drop on turn 4. That's Tron powerlevel. And in multiples this thing is fucked up powerful. Perhaps reduce the cost by 2 instead of 3? And perhaps have it tap to add 2/3 to your mana pool only spendable on green dudes that cost 7 or more.

File: set planeswalkers.jpg (373KB, 1875x523px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 1875x523px

I'll post some planeswalkers as well.
>>53131152
The middle ability feels more GB than WB, but I think it could fit either. Other than that, I like it. The first ability gives you attackers and the middle fuels the graveyard for the ult.
>>53131264
Solace as a subtype? Do you mean a token named Solace, similar to gold tokens? Ult feels disjointed from the rest of the card; there's no buildup from the earlier abilities or self-synergy, which I like to see. It makes the walker feel more cohesive.
>>53131772
Color-based removal feels bad because it's either too good or useless. Also, why is that a plus 3 ability? Middle ability is dull, man, as dull as it gets, and the ult feels disconnected.
>Unblockable instead of skulk
Nah, man. Skulk had a little bit of fun design space, and I used it in that set.

>>53131948
Initially the - was an emblem that gained life when an enchantment entered which would technically have synergized more with the ult. However, this synergizes better with the protection and pillow-forting she's trying to do.

I could have her create an uber enchantment like how nahiri the lithomancer creates an uber equipment. Perhaps something to do with your life total so the - also helps build to the ult.

>>53125361
Grandeur doesn't work that way. It has to be a card with the exact same name. I'd keep the ability but remove the Grandeur rider from it.

File: Source of Arrogance.jpg (37KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 375x523px

>>53131948
>Your card sucks.
Fair enough. I thought I had some "anti-life" flavour going there (GW being "life"). Wasn't that happy with it to begin with so I'll scrap it.
>I used it in that set.
I guess it's fine then. Would that be the Athnar set?
>Thay 1
Good. Not much to say.
>Exor
I think this ults one turn too fast.
>Hareni
I don't even know if this is a legitimate complaint, but the minus "sounds" blue to me, even though the effect is plenty green. Also don't forget to update the token wording.
>Thay 2
RW Ob Nixilis? Kinda boring, although I like how the ultimate works. The minus seems a tad too strong.
>Thay 3
New token wording. Not a fan of 4cmc token spewers, but that's a personal opinion.
Does Thay need to eat her own clothing to survive?

File: SubtleMockery.jpg (40KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 375x523px

>>53132401
Hehehe

>>53133076
I would probably go with something like
>T: Add CC to your mana pool. Spend this mana only to cast or activate the abilities of Kraken, Leviathan, Octopus, Serpent, or Turtle spells and/or permanents.

File: Time Lapse.jpg (38KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 375x523px

Not sure how this would even be used, but I want it to exist.

>>53132974
Glad you like it.
>card
How is that blue? Could just be 2R. Sweet card.

>>53133076
Decent.
>T: Add CC to your mana pool. Spend this mana only to cast Kraken, Leviathan, Octopus Serpent and/or Turtle creature spells.

File: Channeler of Tides.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

>>53133145

File: Prophesize.jpg (41KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 375x523px

Blue common X spell for the set.

File: Buried Spoils.jpg (41KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 375x523px

Think we'll get something like this one day?

>>53133606
I hope so.

File: Postmortem Predation.png (292KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 375x523px

>>53133606
Nice and clever, although in all honesty it could be monoblack. But pushing it multicolored reduces the cost, so I'm okay with it.

File: BleepBlooop.jpg (21KB, 403x280px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 403x280px

>>53133344
Stop stealing my desiiiigns :' )

File: Phraaawwrr.jpg (37KB, 1056x291px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1056x291px

>>53133606
Myyyy deessiiiiigns!

File: CM09 Mercurial Djinni.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

>>53132401
>Hareni
I'll have to go back and update the wording of that whole block someday. Thanks for pointing it out to me, man.
>Thay 2
Yeah, you're right. I might make it a flat amount of damage to tone it down a bit.
>Thay 3
Actually Thay 1; I put the Thays in reverse order in that image, so that card is from my first set. It also needs updating.
>Does Thay need to eat her own clothing to survive?
Haha, not quite. She's actually become more and more dressed in each version. The hourglass-symboled Thay card was from my first set, and is when lorewise she first became a planeswalker and escaped imprisonment. Also finding art of similar-looking female cards for each time I make a new Thay is hard.
>I thought I had some "anti-life" flavour going there
Sorry, man. Flavor's harder to get across without a name or artwork. But the flavor isn't where the issues were. With some mechanical tweaking, you could do something similar and get that same flavor across.
>Source of Arrogance
Why an artifact? Strikes me as more of an enchantment.
>>53132974
Artwork is taken by Goblin Diplomats. Card isn't blue at all, or UR for that matter.
>>53133263
I think you need to separate out the abilities a bit. Like, "Spend this mana only to cast [subtype] spells or activate the abilities of [subtype] permanents."
>>53133344
Smooth and simple. Love that you can cast it for 0, although that goes against the flavor a bit. Solid card, good common.
>>53133606
This is super cool. Not sure about the wording, since you don't really search graveyards, but the concept is excellent.

>>53134252
>>53134277
I think next time you should add a REEEE! for good measure.

>>53125707
>it IS the same spell
Except it isn't. It is functionally the same spell in many circumstances, but it does have uses that Parallectric Feedback does not, even if they are niche. You can't just bandy certainties around like that when they are patently false. It looks silly.

>>53125831
>pretty much garbage desu
Well that's what I get for making cards when tired; I don't finish making them. I'll change it not to miss on lands but I still can't decide if it's more elegant to tack a flash caveat on or to just make it pop on its owner's upkeeps. The former seems like it's a bit better of an idea to ensure value.
>3/3 is too squishy
Disagree, but it's all a matter of opinion. I think it's a fine red Sleeper Agent, but you like what you like. What would you set the P/T to? 2/4 or something?

>>53134252
>>53134277
Never spent time on MTGSalvation, how is it? Also, what's IIW mean and how do you like Persona 5? I've been playing SMT IV, really like it, wonder how Persona matches up.

File: 117.jpg (59KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 312x445px

>>53134330
Wording's correct, based it off Arachnus Spider.

File: OpposeSummoning.png (1MB, 750x1046px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 750x1046px

How about spells with built in weaknesses to their enemy colors?

>>53135011
>Wording's correct
Excellent. I love it even more now. Great card, anon.

File: Enlist.jpg (34KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 375x523px

>>53134252
Oh my bad. I'll put a copyright winterspring™

>>53135335
Jesus, not even 2/2 tokens?

File: Commons U.jpg (1MB, 1500x2092px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x2092px

Okay boys. First time at completing a load of commons. So here's a first pass at the U commons

I'm sure I've made plenty of mistakes in amount of what is needed and probably in some power levels but that's what you guys are for, to kick my ass.

assuming anyone even wants to evaluate a bunch of dumb commons

>>53135555
>scrap mite has salvage's reminder text in the flavor text
I'm an idiot for not double checking that.

>>53135381
It's common.

>>53135555
Also, tap down artificer is all wrong. That card was totally reworked and put in uncommon. It replaced by a 1/* wall that salvages twice on enter and has toughness equal to your number of artifacts.

Sigh, I hate when joining photos get fucked up by my inattentiveness.

>>53135335
>3 mana get a dude
>5 mana get 2 dudes
This is bad.
XX is also too complicated for common.

>>53135718
It says plus one. So 3 mana gets two 1/1's, 5 mana gets three 1/1's. Still not great.

>>53135335
I agree that this is both a bit too complex at common and overly expensive.

File: Gar Logan Beast Boy6.jpg (52KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 375x523px

Still trying to come up with a core mechanic for this. Idea is, obviously, to focus on Beast Boy becoming a copy of a creature.

File: Futures End5.jpg (53KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 375x523px

Based on an event where a lot of people died and were turned into zombie robots.

File: Glorious Awakening.jpg (55KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 375x523px

I decided that the simplest fix for this was to simply give them back mana abilities manually.
>>53137585
Seems fine, man. I think it's in a solid spot. It captures the flavor you were going for, certainly.
>>53138906
Six mana nets you a wipe and a reanimation, which feels like too much bang for your buck. Maybe double-X? I'm not sure if that's too much cost increase, though.

>>53139109
I'd rather that tap part be replaced with "and all abilities they had before". Or if you can't find a way to make that work (which could be done by, instead of "become copies" you go with "gain all creature types, power and toughness, and abilities of the chosen creature") then at least let them tap for any color of mana.

File: Gifted Scrounger.png (209KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 375x523px

>>53135555
Trying this again, since I had it all typed out and my PC went "THAT'S SOME NICE FEEDBACK YOU HAVE THERE..."

First, a word on Salvage. I don't care for the new, do-nothing version you have. I realize that's just my opinion, and I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it from an objectively mechanical standpoint, but as a player and designer, I hate mechanics like Energy that do nothing except add another resource to manage. This at least interacts with things like Affinity and Metalcraft so it's not a complete dead fish, but it's not exactly thrilling either.

With that out of the way, anything I don't mention is either fine, meh, or a combination of the two in my mind.
>ac06
Could be 0/2 probably, per Phyrexian Walker.
>uc03
Still think this should bury the bounced card two or three down from the top, but I think cards that control your opponent's next draw are strong and should be used carefully. Even ones that give your opponent a card.
>uc05, 06
If mill is going to be a primary thing in blue, and a draftable strategy in your set, good luck. It's hard to balance between Limited and Constructed; what's good in the latter is broken in the former usually. If you don't care about Constructed formats, then it's not a problem.
>uc07
I like this, as someone who actually thinks mill is fun, even if it's hard to do right.
>uc10
I wouldn't do this at common. Repeatable, instant-speed draw in a set where there are artifacts galore is a bad idea, I think.
>uc12
I may not care for Salvage, but I do like this card for it.
>uc14
I think this is too oppressive for a common.

A general note: you seem to have a ton of control cards at common. While that's a very blue thing, be aware that access to so much of it at low rarity as you have it might make blue really irritating to play against. Moreso than normal. Well, actually blue is usually trash in Draft but you get the drift.

Also, commons aren't dumb. They are the hardest cards to make interesting.

File: Leslie Willis Livewire4.jpg (50KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 375x523px

Really unsure if the ping should be 2 damage.

>>53139109
>Beast Boy
Thanks.

>Future's End
Yeah, kinda thought so. Necromantic Selection is wipe and recur one for 4BBB, so I think I will just add another X to the cost.

>card
I think I'd give the lands Haste, and possibly just tapping to make mana of any color. I still like the concept though, it's just kinda hard to judge due to how unique it is.

>>53137585
See now, with how Beast Boy can control his shape and be what he wants, I think you should swap what you had for Jimmy Olsen and this ability around. Give Jimmy this, and give Beast Boy what you had for Jimmy that made him a copy and let him cycle creatures so he could copy what you wanted him to. Makes more sense to me.

>>53138906
Considering that white gets a wipe that gives you a single X/X token based on what was wiped at 4WW I think this is overboard.

>>53139109
I reckon this works. >>53139221 is a decent idea too, and probably what I'd personally prefer to see. I know it's not the copy you want, but it's pretty close and not as wonky. Though what you have also turns all your lands into dual lands and that's pretty goddamn boss.

>>53139221
That sounds like a lot of added complexity and verbiage, though, that's my worry.
>Any color of mana
Why is that? I went for this version because tapping for G and U saves space and keeps the card flavorfully aligned with its set faction.
>>53139322
Shift+enter to get rid of that extra space.
>Module
Are these the clues or gold tokens of your set (assuming you're making one)? Do modules have other sources or uses?
>>53139350
>Haste
Nah, that would effectively make the spell free. I blink them partially so that they have summoning sickness and don't act as a mana reset.
>Leslie Willis
I like that the activated ability is basically cheeky looting. Isn't that first ability green, though?

>>53139350
Yeah Timeanon is right, first ability is green. Why does she draw you cards though? I thought Livewire was just some chick with a leotard and electrical powers.

>>53139403
I always forget the modes don't have standard spacing. Sorry about that. Modules are just... something I thought up as a riff on Modular. Thought they might make a neat artifact token that's not too involved.

>>53139487
>Modules as a riff on Modular
Hah, so that's why they give the +1/+1 counter. That's clever.

File: Stormy Phantom Lady7.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

Last one for tonight. Still playing with the mana costs on this one to get the balance right. Should I move it from a mana cost to something else? Maybe a triggered ability attached to casting a certain type of spell?

>>53139391
>Beast Boy
Interesting idea. I'll play around with it.

>>53139403
>Isn't that first ability green, though?
Technically it's Blue and Green, and I think Niv Mizzet is good enough precedence for it in UR. Not exactly the same I realize, but very close.

>>53139487
>Why does she draw you cards though?
Because I thought it made for an interesting card. At this point, my only real thought for lightning-based abilities is "Has to ping", and from there it's all just what makes a card mechanically interesting.

>>53139556
This definitely needs some more oompf. It's basically an overcosted Mistmeadow Witch as-is

>>53139596
>Mistmeadow Witch
"creature" vs "nonland permanent"

>>53139624
That and the 2/2 body alone are minor improvements and not worth the extra 2 mana across two colors, in my opinion.

>>53139596
What do you suggest?

>>53139556
>>53139596
>>53139624
Could make it "until your next turn".

>>53139539
Chimpanzees, typewriters, etc.

Anyone else having trouble posting?

>>53140000
Yeah, 4chan is being weird.

>>53140000
Heh, 40K get in an MTG thread.

>>53139322
Since 4chan won't let me post anything substantial, I agree for the most part. I'm considering something like "Sac: look at the top card of your library" Or something super minor like that for scrap.

uc10 had already been bumped to uncommon, I fucked up

uc14, would -2/-0 until end of turn be better? Are fogs not common effects?

And putting several from the top actually makes tide's claim stronger by buying you several turns before you have to deal with a guranteed threat again. And you're not really screwing their next draw (you likely wouldn't use TC on something small anyway unless it was really early on to screw their tempo), it's more like you're exchanging their draw, they still get the guaranteed random card from their deck and their moderate - big threat right back.

>>53139322
The mill exists because this set is intended to have a graveyard theme, if limited mill can be a legitimate thing while also synergizing with bombs and mechanics then that's cool. But these cards also could wind up being reworked.

Yeah, I may be a bit myopic with blue. When I think blue archetypes I think control (UB, UW), tempo (UR, UG), and UW midrange flyers. Perhaps include the classic "small unblockable dude" to go with the "Sac _: give creatures buff" cards I intend to include in R and B.

And more on tidal's claim. I'm mostly concerned with it being able to hit spells / permanents. I wonder if it should be limited to one or the other, or a cmc limit, or a "unless they pay _" clause.

>>53139322
Shit, forgot to say thanks what with trying to get these posts in before 4chan explodes more.

File: Rogue Fabricator.png (258KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 375x523px

>>53140156
>Scrap
That might be nice. Just some minor thing so you can use any scrap you have for something useful in case you have to draft a Salvage card to fill your deck out but you aren't building around it. That's my main gripe with those sorts of mechanics.
>uc10
You said you bumped 11 up to uncommon, not 10. Did you do both?
>uc14
Fogs are common, but this is a wall with a fat ass that also makes attacking pointless for a turn. It's just a big slowdown, and I am not a fan of them at common. That's all.
>tide's claim
Eh, roll with it and see how it plays in testing.

Well, now it's a mechanic with a name. Hopefully it's not too similar-reading to investigate. I don't think so. Also, I started thinking about why this would exist, and part of me wonders if something like a reverse-Kaladesh wouldn't be neat where magic is law and machines/artifice are outlawed because wizards don't want non-wizards rivaling their power. Though, maybe "innovate" isn't the best name for the mechanic. It doesn't sound illegal/desperate enough to me for that kind of setting.

File: Smaller A buncha Cards.jpg (362KB, 1005x701px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 1005x701px

Be gentle, please...

>>53140188
You could thank me with some feedback since I took the time. But it's not a right, it's a privilege, so you do you. Not like there's actual rules in these threads. It's just a personal pet peeve of mine when people receive feedback and don't return the favor.

>>53140304
Fighting 4chan, and tiredness but yeah, fair.

I can dig innovate even if it is a bit wordy out of necessity.

scrounger seems totally fine. Protip, shift + enter makes a line break which is what you're supposed to use for modular cards.

>>53140283
first of all, artist credits man, those people deserve recognition for their work. That goes for everyone but especially those masterpieces.

>AIO
lands are colorless. "Is not a color that enchanted land can produce" or something along those lines. He or she who? I know intuitively it's clear but you have to specify the controller. Also, might as well just say "creature spells cost 1 more to cast" for all the real difference it makes.

>BC
Has no casting cost, literally unplayable.

>CF
Powerful as fuck but I think it's costed appropriately.

>CT
I like it,

>SG
I dislike parasitic mechanics like this that care about the card types introduced in the thing BUT, it's such a minor bit of parasitism that it's just added functionality if you have the synergy so it's fine. Just be careful.

>SM
neat design. "...creature, it gains haste until end of turn."

>SS
I think it's neat.

>TC
Potent but cool and appropriately costed.

>>53140283
>Alien Immigration Office
Lands are colorless, so... doesn't work.
>Bustling Cosmopolis
I think you might need to spend more time reading actual card text. Did you research the wording on these before you posted?
>Cascade Failure
Functional reprint of Dismal Failure, but more expensive and harder to cast. I guess it could be common at that rate.
>Communications Tower
I don't think this is a good idea because a library search means revealing the whole thing. Not at common.
>Shadow Government
Shroud is a dead keyword. Not sure about the City interaction.
>Subliminal Messages
I assume you mean this is supposed to be a temporary theft? The wording makes it hard to tell.
>Synthetic Society
Mycosynth Lattice is 6, but does more. Not sure this is okay at 2. Maybe 4?
>Television Company
Heh. This got me to chuckle if nothing else. I actually kind of like it.

Again, work on your wording and do some more research into it, and clean these up, and you'll have you some cards.

>>53140390
I'm not sure what to cost this but I'm tempted to say it's okay.

Also, why has the "Artifact - fortification" type not been explored further yet? Darksteel garrison is cool.

>>53140395
>protip
Yeah I always forget. Timeanon reminded me too. And yeah, it's a shame Innovate has to be wordy but it's not too bad at 4 lines. No worse than say Cascade. I think anything over 4 and you should probably rethink your mechanic. Unless it's really cool I guess.

>>53140428
>Also, why has the "Artifact - fortification" type not been explored further yet? Darksteel garrison is cool.
Because there's not a lot you can do that Auras don't do better.

>>53140428
>fortification
Because they don't offer anything that Auras don't do already. Lands typically aren't the target of many kill spells so the appeal of Equipment being persistent doesn't really matter much for lands. And Fortifications being able to move around is... strange, to say the least.

>>53140390
Hm. Yeah, sure. You're unlikely to have a ton of creatures in any deck that runs blue that's not Fish and this isn't going to break Fish I don't think. I don't really play eternal formats though so I could be wrong.

>>53140395
>>53140406
>AIO
>When Alien Immigration Office enters the battlefield, choose a color that is produced by one of enchanted land’s mana producing abilities.
>Creature spells that are not of the chosen color cost 1 more to cast.

>BC
>Mana produced by enchanted land may spent as though it were of any color.
>changed mana cost to 0
I couldn't find examples for this one. I did look, though, but most color conversion enchantments gave the land an explicit new ability. I actually referenced Mycosynth for the new wording.

>CF
>reduced to 2UB

>CT
Oh shit you're right. I was only thinking about scrying and drawing. That's actually pretty cool, I want to use that better.

>SG
Switch with hexproof? Also reduced the cost down to 1 per city.

>SM
>Whenever you cast the named card, untap and gain control of enchanted creature until end of turn. It gains haste until end of turn.

>SS
>changed to 3 (I-I want it to be cheap)

Thanks btw.

>>53140729

That seems horribly powerful.

>>53140729
The card name makes me think it'd be a Convoke spell. Then I read it and was disappointed. I think there's a card that does something similar but I'll be damned if I can remember what it was. It's ooooold though.

File: Sariel, Angel of Rebirth (1).jpg (203KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 744x1039px

Got a bit bored, started playing around with combining iconic creature types from each color.

>>53141570
I thought Dragons were red's iconic.

Bump before bed to keep the thread alive.

File: Iconic Creatures of Shandalar (2013, M14).jpg (332KB, 1536x445px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 1536x445px

>>53141902
They are. The iconics are
>W: Angels
>U: Sphinxes
>B: Demons
>R: Dragons
>G: Hydras

File: Leonard Snart Captain Cold.jpg (50KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 375x523px

Bump. Trying to play around with freezing abilities.

>>53146471
I think it's neat. Makes attacking a headache for your opponent without being too oppressive.

>>53141570
Waaayy undercosted.

File: Hartley Pied Piper.jpg (47KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 375x523px

Another Rogue. Pied Piper, music, rats, it's all pretty obvious. Though I have to admit that I'm not really sure about mass token gen in Black. I might make it so it removes X tokens to get X Rats, I dunno. Yeah, I think I might do that, especially if I decide to give him Rat lord abilities.

>>53146552
Cool, thanks.

File: ur03r obligatory sphinx.png (260KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 375x523px

>>53146855
To be fair, black does actually get mass token generation, look at pack rat and Endrek Sahr. I think you've got a solid design here. Perhaps a touch powerful, maybe up a cost either on him or the ability.

>>53141570
Yeah, massively undercosted. I'd expect that thing to cost closer to 6 and be a 4/4 and produce 4/4s (since angels are very commonly 4/4s). This also of course means upping the rezzing cost which absolutely needs to be above her casting cost.

File: Garfield Lynns Firefly8.jpg (52KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 375x523px

>>53147121
>Pied Piper
I think I'll make him 2BB then, thanks.

>card
You don't have to put the card name in brackets, pretty much everyone knows you're using prefixes for your set, you're just giving yourself more work to do when you finish the set and get rid of the prefixes. Speaking of, why the r at the end? u should be Blue, and the first r for rare. Also, why not capitalize them? Anyway, onto the abilities. Well, the main ability just seems kinda disjointed. If a random card's CMC isn't greater than the number of artifacts you control, you get a card. Huh? I think this could be easily fixed by just making it look at the top card of your library though. And maybe tuck it if you don't draw it.

File: Stormy Phantom Lady8.jpg (47KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 375x523px

If this doesn't look like a step in the right direction, I'll scrap the activated ability altogether and try to come up with something new. Flavor, for anyone interested, mostly revolves around creative uses of teleportation.

File: uu10g flicker.png (207KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 375x523px

>>53147854
I can dig it, if used to try to keep things locked down it's essentially a taxing effect or if you want to abuse ETBs it's expensive enough to not be too broken. Not sure if it'd see play because it's actually fair but I like it. I want to say you could reduce costs but I think that'd require play testing to really be certain about. She is pretty squishy after all so if they just want to forgo paying to get their stuff back then they can just kill her (because even if she flickers to protect herself they get their stuff back)

File: Volthoom First Lantern.jpg (57KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 375x523px

Removal, the card. Boring, I know, but I felt like it gets across well the character's great power. Plus I had this idea recently about a WUBRG card that used a version of removal matching up to each color. Destruction of artifacts, enchantments, and lands are all kinda fuzzy, so if you think they should be changed around to match different colors, let me know.

>>53147962
>Stormy
OK. Well, I think in the meantime I might experiment with other abilities. I still want to use flicker, but I'm just not sure if having it as an activated ability is the best idea.

>card
It's "end step" not "end phase". Part of me says this should be White, but it's been demonstrated that this ability works in Blue as well. Though I'm also wondering if you could just make it exile any creature, not just one you control. I'm also not sure about having 4 toughness, especially since, let's face it, the ability is the main draw here. I do really like how it can mess with Evoke though, good job.

File: wu04 Peaceful Pilgrimage .png (184KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 375x523px

>>53148469
I made it a 2/4 because if you spend 5 mana on a dude, even in blue, it better have at least a half decent body.

And yeah, I'd say flicker is like 3/4s white and 1/4 blue, this is my only flicker effect among my blue stuff. I feel like U flicker should pretty much only be your own cards. Flicker can used for shenanigans or getting rid of a blocker / problem creature, I don't think U should get the latter as bouncing is supposed to be its temporary solution to creatures.

And thanks mate.

As for that card, not sure how to feel about it. What I would like to see, and this is probably just not really doable due to word count, is to take the most [this color] effect you can think of and put that on one of the modes. As is, it's powerful and cohesive and all that but feels somehow... iunno... basic? Like, I feel there are more interesting ways to design such a character and effect.

Then again, I don't know the character, is he a paragon of all the virtues and emotions of the lanterns/their space god things or is he like some destructive force of nature?

>>53148801
>Volthoom
Right, I have to remind myself to talk a bit about the lore behind the cards. Volthoom used to be a human in a dying universe. He escaped by building a device that took him to the main DC universe around the time the Guardians discovered the Emotional Spectrum (the Lantern Corps draw there powers from this, and it conveniently gives them all different colors). Since Volthoom had already experimented in this on his home universe, he participated in research with the Guardians, even creating a device that would channel the spectrum through himself, thus becoming the First Lantern. But like a lot of villains, the power drove him insane, and the Guardians imprisoned him. Much later, he escapes and basically starts torturing people psychologically by fucking with time in order to build enough emotional power to rewrite the universe until he was killed by Nekron (DC's Devil analogue, with a bit of the Grim Reaper thrown in).

TL;DR: Scientist gets powers, goes insane, then becomes a sadistic, reality-warping monster.

>card
Why different controllers? Also, because of that, I think it should say
>under their owners' control
Minuscule change, I know.

>>53149135
Different controllers because I think that's an interesting design which hasn't been done before.

Could have sworn that because "their" here is referring to them as individuals items rather than as a whole, the singular "owner" is used. As though it said "return each of those".

>>53149135
Also, I feel like if he's going to manipulate people psychologically, he could totally fuck with hands and libraries couldn't he?

File: Soultaker Sword4.jpg (40KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 375x523px

It's a sword that takes the souls of those it kills. The wielder can communicate with the souls trapped inside. That's it. I've tried to do something more lore-accurate, that it can only make copies specifically of the creatures that were killed by creatures equipped with the sword, but it's so wordy and complex I don't think it's worth it.

>>53149271
As far as I'm aware, that's the correct wording when the things you hit have different controllers. But I could be wrong, I honestly think Wizards is sometimes inconsistent with
>owner's
vs
>owners'

>>53149306
Makes sense. Hit a player, steal a nonland card from hand or library? Could work. Exile for free, or cast them yourself? Copy instead? Nah, then you could use the same thing over and over again. Did someone say Panoptic Mirror and Time Warp?

File: Rouse the Rabble.jpg (58KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 375x523px

First attempt at creating a custom card. What do you guys think?

>>53149587

I don't know if this is wordy, I don't have MSE right now but if it isn't this wording should do just fine:

Equipped creature gets +X/+X where X is the cards exiled with cardname.
Whenever a creature damaged by equipped creature dies, exile it instead.
Whenever equipped creature attacks, you may put a card exiled with cardname onto battlefield tapped and attacking, exile that card at the end of combat.
Equip 3

By the way, if I make copies of cards, I name them as "Soultaker Sword, 4" and just put @ as the name in text box. Just a general tip for the thread.

File: smallcats.jpg (120KB, 563x393px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 563x393px

Inspired by a recent thread
Corrected capitalization

File: LittleRobots.jpg (400KB, 1253x701px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 1253x701px

Slightly more serious

>>53151794
>>53151794
Is it the same target player both times? Because I could play that at my opponents end step and get 3 goblins with no real downside.

I mean there's no real downside if I target myself mainphase anyway, as I was planning on swinging out as red beatdown anyway.

...Maybe I'm not understanding Goad.

File: uru02 thopter dude.png (288KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 375x523px

>>53154296
Little rocket bot preventing itself from doing damage to draw a card very much feels like it doesn't belong in red. It's an interesting design but I don't know what color it belongs in, perhaps black, black occasionally get haste... iunno.

>hermit
neato

>surfer
a little weird but okay.

>clown
cute inversion of intimidate? (can never remember which one does what)

>robocide
It really feels like it's pushing it to allow black to kill an artifact, even if it does have to also be a creature. But I think it's probably okay.

>detective
>Whenever an artifact creature you control dies, if it died while blocking or from a spell or ability an opponent controls,...
At least, I'm pretty sure that's closer.

Beyond that I think it's pretty solid. Powerful to be sure, but solid.

>recombinator
I'd be worried about allowing repeatable tutoring, perhaps include a mana cost to the ability.

>Only cast ~ if a noncreature permanent an opponent controlled dies this turn.
I think it's neato.

>Angel
"Is targeted by a black spell"
I can dig it.

>>53153293
Too cheap to create those tokens.

File: Rouse the Rabble.jpg (58KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 375x523px

>>53154971
It's basically intended to incite opponents to start attacking each other by giving target player three tokens and forcing all their creatures to attack someone other than you. It's kind of like Goblin Spymaster but at instant speed. Does this make it clearer?

File: ru02 Crucible Overflow.png (319KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 375x523px

>>53151794
>Only cast ~ before combat.
>Target player creates three 1/1 red Goblin creature tokens.
>Goad all creatures that player controls.
Unless you intend it to be able to goad the other player in which case I'm not sure how to make it super clear outside of having the paragraphs and saying "target player" instead of "that player".

File: ur04r salvage into copies.png (211KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 375x523px

>>53155403
Powerful, maybe too powerful but not by too terribly much.

>>53149587
I could be wrong but Isn't it "among all graveyards"?
Would use all day for disgusting value. I dig it.

>>53155422
I wonder if it should cost just R but 1R seems too much. I like it quite a bit.

File: 2 Blue Rares First Draft.jpg (493KB, 2625x523px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 2625x523px

First draft of my set's blue rares. These were a pain.
>>53153293
Crazy cat lady should probably be white.
>>53154296
>Little Rocket Bot
Should be "attacks and isn't blocked." Should also in no way cost only R. That's crazy.
>Hermit
When you control, not if. "Spend this mana only to cast nonartifact spells."
>Smog Surfer
Seems disjointed and cluttered. What exactly do you want it to do?
>Roboclown
Why Fear? It's dead.
>Detective
Needs significant rewording.
>Recombinator
Tutors at uncommon generally aren't a good idea.
>Elephant
Again, needs significant rewording.
>Altruist
Separate flash from flying and vigilance with a line break or a semicolon. The damage prevention should be damage that would be dealt. As with the others, this needs rewording.

My overall advice: Read oracle text. Look up cards with similar effects to those that you want to make.
>>53155403
Creature-based spell mastery feels like it wouldn't be blue. Blue cares the least about creatures.
>>53155422
Neat. I like it.
>>53155478
I'd double-check the wording on this, especially with the new-ish base power and toughness wordings. Also, definitely feels more like a rare.
>>53155481
Fix the reminder text to reference more than one creature. It's a neat concept; I'm unsure on the cost.
>>53155521
I feel like the second ability should be part of the first. I'm not 100% on that, though.
>>53155565
Why does salvage only give you half a scry? Gold and Clue tokens both had more impactful effects. Also, the effect of the tokens doesn't really tie flavorfully to their name.

>>53155835
artist credits man, I know it's a pain but you really ought to reverse image search for them.

>>53155869
I've made nearly two blocks now, man. I'm not going to reverse image search the almost 1000 pieces of card art I've used. I just don't have that kind of time. It's hard for me to find time to make cards in the first place nowadays.

>>53155835
Ensoul artifact is probably the answer for how to word it.

I noticed they should be one paragraph right after I posted.

I've been trying to find the exact thing for them to do for a while. I could make them cost 1 and sac to scry. Originally you could sac one and two other artifacts to rez an artifact but that was too wordy and clunky. And producing anything that makes mana so easily would feel wrong for and RU mechanic.

>>53155835
Card art in use. Scornful banishment
Also shifting sands needs to self exile

>>53155987
>Card art in use
Changed.
>Needs to self exile
Not necessarily a requirement. I chose not to include a self-exile clause.
>>53155958
>I've been trying to find the exact thing for them to do for a while.
I'd keep looking. Looking at the top card of your library is a pretty boring effect, and is too boring to have an entire token subtype dedicated to it, in my opinion. Scrying isn't much better; then they're just worse clues.

>>53155835
>Seems disjointed and cluttered. What exactly do you want it to do?
Originally I wanted it to tap so that for the rest of the turn it would generate green mana whenever you cast a black spell, but that obviously snowballs because you can use that green mana to cast another black spell. I sorta made up the mechanic it has last minutes.

Maybe if the green mana could only be used to cast mono-green spells?

>Why Fear? It's dead.
Because clowns are spooky. It's also a sort of converse fear and not actual fear.

>Should also in no way cost only R. That's crazy.
Can you explain? Either it attacks, is blocked, probably dies and does 2 damage, it attacks, isn't blocked, disappears (dealing no damage) and you draw a card, or it blocks, probably dies and functions as a regular 2/1 with flying. Where does the overpoweredness lie?

I also cleaned up some of the text but not sure how well.

>>53156592
Also maybe I could up the cost to activate recombinator from discarding two to discarding three?

File: ru09u impulse drawer.png (319KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 375x523px

>>53156211
>Looking at the top card of your library is a pretty boring effect, and is too boring to have an entire token subtype dedicated to it
Thing is, for how my set uses them, the scrap tokens could very well have no card text on them at all. They're more like a resource similar to energy. Perhaps 1, Sac: Add 1 of any color. Though the conversion rate of generic to specific color seems to be 2 mana...

And for looking at the top card of your library, there's actually a surprising amount of play to that, helping you decide if you want to crack a fetch now or later, within my set there's a decent amount of mill to help fill the grave so that info can help there too, with red's impulse drawing and figuring out how to sequence getting value from scrys/draws. I'm just sayin'.

>>53154296
>Little Rocket Bot
This is the most boring fucking mythic I've ever seen, and I've seen Archangel's Light. It's basically just a horribly shitty cantrip. What is even the point of this?

>>53155403
Meh, I think I'd rather just have the 1U that always hard counters.

>>53155422
Not bad. Interesting take on Shock.

>>53155565
>I could be wrong but Isn't it "among all graveyards"?
Not according to Bonehoard.

>Would use all day for disgusting value. I dig it.
Thanks, I think.

>>53155835
Eh, nothing really jumps out at me, good or bad. I guess they're all OK.

>>53156878
>What is even the point of this?
Watching the little guy achieve his dream of going out into space (exile zone). He doesn't want to fight, he only fights when he has to.

It is of purely sentimental value.

>>53155835
1
I dig it, nothing really to say

2
is mystic a substantial tribe in your set? I think mystic as a type has been replaced by things like druid and shaman.

3
neato

4
>drawing on every upkeep
Seems really really powerful but at 6 mana I suppose you can get away with that.

5
I find the 2/Us to be a bit odd, but I mean, I'd probably say the same of spectral procession. And hey, if you're going to use that on permanents to up their costs for pinnacle, might as well utilize elsewhere.

As for it's actual effect, that's almost certainly going to get pretty much everything but the absolute biggest thing. Meaning, at any kind of early point in the game, it's a 4 mana instant speed boardwipe. I guess the same can be said of engulf the shore but that requires your deck to be very heavily blue. I suppose this card is probably okay power level wise but I'd be nervous about it.

6
what the other guy says, needs to exile itself. Beyond that it's cool, untapping your opponent's stuff providing some downside but also of course being usable on your opponent's upkeep/ your end step to allow you an instant speed extra turn.

7
Pretty cute utilizing evoke to allow you to momentarily have the highest CMC. Good card on top of that as well.

Mind yelling at my first batch of commons? There've been some changes but most are still pretty much as is. I'm mostly concerned with what kind of core blue limited effects I need more of.
>>53135555

Can anyone post the patrick chapin planeswalker custom card? The last ability was "bury target player"

>>53121123
>>53121434
>>53122000
Indestructible has replaced Regenerate.

Somebody really needs to update OP, it's over 2 years outdated in most places.

>>53158713
>>53158752
I dig them.

File: Befoul examples.jpg (423KB, 1875x523px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 1875x523px

So NOW I think I finally have this fucking BG mechanic figured out. My only question is whether or not to keep it as is, have it only gain 2 life, or have it only make a dude. I have it gain 1 life and make a dude to synergize with the rest of my set but also because it's such a grindy mechanic that it's the exact kind of thin you're wanting to do... also the flavor of the fungus having the abilities of the corpse it grew from.

>>53161959
Seems pretty boring. I think I'd just get rid of the Befoul triggers on the abilities and just change Befoul to something like
>Create a number of 1/1 green Fungus creature tokens equal to this card's power.
Which I think would just be more interesting interactions by playing with sac outlets and death triggers. Why Fungus anyway? Why not Saproling?

>>53162905
Making tokens based on power seems like a bad idea to me as it means they have to have to have much higher befoul costs or very low power to keep it from getting out of hand. Also keeps me from putting in on things that aren't creatures. I could feasibly make it Befoul # where the # is the number of fungai or perhaps the P/T of a fungus token but I like that less than having it be a baseline ability that can have triggers built onto it like how cycling works.

And fungus because the BG faction is based in a giant bog where everything is interconnected through a cordycep like fungus that takes host in things and makes them fungus zombies. Also I think fungai are cool and deserve some more stuff to make the tribe worth a damn.

File: Recast.jpg (29KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 375x523px

I was thinking just earlier today about cards I've seen people make that say something like, put target spell on top of the stack. This is my version of doing that, using wording I believe is correct going by Ertai's Meddling.

>>53163133
Boy that's unintuitive but neato. At just U though it's probably an immediately legacy staple to fight through counter wars, or I could just be talking out my ass.

File: RG01 Grand Vizier.jpg (59KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 375x523px

>>53135555
>Mind yelling at my first batch of commons?
Sure thing.
>Scrap Mite
It has the Salvage reminder text, as you've noted.
>Distort Aether
Much worse mana leak. Seems fine to me, depending upon the power level you're shooting for with this set.
>Bind
Enchant planeswalker seems odd at common. Why not just enchant permanent? Especially with the artifact focus you've got going on; that would give the card more uses in limited.
>Tide's Claim
The wording is all wonky, and the card is too inexpensive. Why not just a Repel that draws the creature's owner a card? The draw first, though, so that the card doesn't end up being a long-winded return to hand. Or you could Chronostutter it and have them draw a card.
>Bounce Mill
Why did you staple mill to a better Peel from Reality, at the same cost?
>Mill Flyer
It is indeed a mill flyer.
>Mill Freeze
So, I'm guessing that blue is mechanically focused around mill in your set? Why? What's the plan for the color? Is it artifacts? Recursion? What's the focus?
>Salvage Feeze
R in freeze, comma after permanents.
>Tap Down Artificer
Doesn't do much tapping down. I think you noted that as well.
>Untapper
Should probably have a tap cost as well.
>Heap
Pretty sure the wording is off. I think it's "Salvage, then proliferate again."
>Tempest Crow
Undercosted for the body alone, I'd say. Should be more expensive.
>Pseudo Fog
The evoke ability is overcosted compared to Downsize.
>Dies Bounce
Should be "that permanent" rather than "it".

My big questions: Art? Names? Flavor? These feel unfinished and lack polish, which is probably why there were some of those minor wording issues. It feels like you were in a hurry. Secondly, what are your set's themes? What part does blue play in those themes? How are the colors set up in your set? Enemy-pair, ally-pair, multicolor, stand-alone? How does that setup help you reach your goals? How do the mechanics you've chosen to put in blue help you to reach and express those mechanical goals?

File: Collapse.jpg (40KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 375x523px

>>53163161
Well, it could be used as a counterspell by exiling the spell that was going to be countered. That moves that spell to the top of the stack, so it resolves before the counterspell does, which makes that fizzle. Redirect spells, like Shunt, can counter counterspells the same way by making the counterspell target the redirection spell. The redirection spell resolves, making the counterspell lose its target just like in the previous example, so it fizzles again. That's actually why I decided to make this little thing a while ago. Anyway, will up cost on Recast, since that's probably exactly why people made it in the first place. But how expensive should a spell be if all it does is counter counters? UU? 1U?

>>53163133
"Copy target spell, then exile it."

would work much better.

File: BW faction stuff.jpg (631KB, 1125x1569px) Image search: [Google]

631KB, 1125x1569px

>>53163166
yeah, that was kinda funny

Mana leak is considered too good to reprint so hey, why not a worse version with other utility?

Yeah, enchant nonland permanent or permanent but exclude mana abilities from it.

I'm pretty sure the wording on tide's claim is correct even if it does come across as weird. That is probably more elegant. So "Put target spell or nonland permanent into its owner’s library second from the top. That card’s owner draws a card."?

Mill is both an upside and downside. I suppose I could just reprint peel from reality or go with what I originally intended which was to put them ontop of their owners' libraries. But that felt too much like bone splinters in blue which felt wrong.

that it is

Not so much mill as blue being used as a support color for graveyard based mechanics in the set. Being able to mill yourself to help set your shenanigans up.

thanks

Yeah, that was a clusterfuck of wrong card and version and soforth.

I think I made that same change

I based it on how Investigate will say "Investigate twice".

What of a 2/2 for 3? Or 2/1?

The set is an enemy color oriented set with heavy themes of graveyards and sacrificing. The UG faction are evoke, and the UR faction is artifacts. The way blue is meant to feed into the rest of the set is by providing evoke dudes that go into the graveyard easily and sacrifice/graveyard fuel. Blue in this limited environment likely wouldn't be heading any charges but is meant to be a great support color for the other colors, R for artifacts to sacrifice, B for sac fodder, triggers, and dudes in the grave, and G and W for combat trick evoke dudes and more grave fodder, G specifically it supports the evoke mechanic and all these ETB effects and evoke with things like this. >>53147962

Ignore the BW legendary in this image, I've scrapped it and made a couple changes here and there.

File: Entropic Presence.jpg (41KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 375x523px

Would this effect work as cleanly as you can conceptualize it? i.e giant growth becomes +3/+0, +1/+1 counters become +1/+0 counters, and so on.

>>53163447
Are +1/+1 counters an ability? I don't think this stops them unless there's something buried in the rules that makes +1/+1's effect an ability of those counter. I'm sorry, 'm not sure how to word this either.

>>53163250
I can dig that card quite a bit. Probably should add "... spell or ability that targets..." Just so it's a catch all.

>>53163166
And yeah, that batch was very much a first draft to see if I'm on the right track. Art and such will come later after I'm more satisfied with the balance of what is offered at common.

>>53163250
>change the target of target spell that targets a spell to collapse
that wording is disgusting, I like the card

>>53163574
Ah, didn't quite remember how I worded it, so I don't think the +1/+1 counters would be nerfed as of now. Maybe just "Creatures can't gain toughness" would work? I wonder how it would work with transformation effects and the like though, like morphs or dual-faced cards.

>>53163702
Morph makes that creature no longer that creature. As for something like "Target creature becomes a 4/4 dragon", I'm pretty sure it can't gain toughness like that because, if it's anything like life total, when your value is set to that, it actually increased or decreases appropriately rather than just flat setting it to that new value.

>>53163771
The latter case is what I'd imagine happen based on the life total example, but is the morph creature really not the same? What happens to targets on the stack and attached equipment/enchantments? Don't they stick?

And for things with variable P/T like nightmare, would it set the toughness to zero like with cards that have "CARDNAME gets +X/+X where X is the number of *thing*" and zero printed toughness?

>>53163882
I think if a creature gets flipped face down while things are attached to it or it's being targeted, those things still apply as normal. But specifically for this, the creature's original toughness becomes irrelevant as no aspect of that creature itself is carried over to it becoming a face down creature, after all, it's face down, how are you supposed to note the creature's PT if it's face down?

>>53163999
I think this will be one of those things that are undetermined in the rules, so you'll have to make up rules for it. And I say that morphs, flips, dual-faced cards etc don't increase toughness

>>53158713
This is cool but I don't think that Blue by itself would care very much about what attacked this turn. Consider reducing the CMC and maybe adding in an additional color.

File: Cassie Wonder Girl7.jpg (49KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 375x523px

Another go on Wonder Girl. I kinda hate how vague the Amazons can be with their powers sometimes. A lot of the others interact with Auras and Equipment, and I had a previous version of Wonder Girl that had an ability that triggered off attaching an Aura to her, but I wasn't really happy with where it was going.

File: Conflux Command.jpg (43KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 375x523px

Bleh.

>>53167790
bleh indeed.

>>53167579
I can dig it