/ccg/ Custom Card Thread /cct/

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

46KB, 375x523px

Designing sphinxes is fun but difficult.

>>46487748
This should have the triple draw be conditional on the opponent choosing a card.

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

42KB, 375x523px

New version. Now with more inspiration from Clues.

>>46487888
Not sure what you mean, trips. The draw three does occur after you put the chosen card on the bottom of your library. Am I missing something?

File: Body and Mind Elemental.jpg (56KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 375x523px

Of course I made the full cycle.

>>46488060
If you're hellbent and can't put a card on the bottom, you still draw three.

>>46488271
Doesn't need the and/or, just or will do and is missing card on the discard part

File: no-name.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

I can't think in a good name for this qt3.14.

>>46488336
I fixed it. Thanks!

>>46488320
Huh, I figured it was still stored with the choosing of a card. Would it require another "if" in there? That might be really awkward to word.

>>46488172
Keywords are not automatically capitalized edition.

>>46488044
Everything interesting about the card is on the downside, and the upside is just a spiky 2 mana counterspell.

>>46488269
Neither are card types edition. (Though Subtypes are always capitalized.)

>>46488342
Exile what from your graveyard?

>>46488433
Exile >>46488172
apparently...
He's going for a "Spirit of the Night" flavour I guess!

>>46488381

>Activate this ability only if you own three or more cards in exile.

>>46487748
I really like this. The opponent should be able to choose whether or not they discard, and it should probably be a 4/4 but yeah other than that it is very well done.

File: Forgotten Lurker.jpg (39KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 375x523px

>>46488426
>Everything interesting about the card is on the downside, and the upside is just a spiky 2 mana counterspell.
So...? It's a low mana counter, after all.

>Keywords are not automatically capitalized edition.
Be clear if you want me to fix it, anon.

>>46488433
>>46488469
I just fucked up the wording. Calm your tits.

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

41KB, 375x523px

I should stop forgetting the damn ~.

>>46488503
Thanks. Fix'd.

>>46488381
You should pick either exiling from grave or battlefield for ritualism.

>>46488563
Should just be Muraganda Valley Griffin.

>>46487753
forgot to add a cost to trigger the effect. It might be a little OP to just be (0), since that's essentially a much better version of Relic of Progenitus for creatures.
Also Skulk isn't evergreen so I would leave it off unless you intend this card to be part of the SOI block.
As for flavour, I'm guessing a stone from the grave that grants the wearer affinity with the spirits of the dead. Not bad.

File: no-name.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

>>46488570
Oops.

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

41KB, 375x523px

>>46488597
Yes, it should.

>>46488172
Interesting. Seems more like it would be a changeling than a treefolk, but the design makes sense. I also love abilities that reward the player for running multiple legendaries. Since it is dependent on the field, I could see a buff to 2/2 or even 3/3 depending on the synergies within the hypothetical set.

>>46488513
You got me at the pinger effect.
I love pingers.

File: Apprentice Explorer.jpg (49KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 375x523px

>>46488692
Well, I'm planning a lots of Simic creatures with activated abilities, but I can't think in any game breaking interactions right now.

I wanted to play safe with the P/T, but it could be a 2/2.

>>46488793
Me too. My first magic deck was full of them.

>>46488513
Haste?
love the copy effect though.

>>46488513
>Be clear if you want me to fix it, anon.
He means its "Hexproof, indestructible" not "Hexproof, Indestructible". Sequential keywords aren't capitalized.

>>46488874
I fear that Haste would make it pretty irritating since the copies would have it too. Also, you can make the copy at the end of your opponent turn anyway.

>>46488898
Oh, ok. Fix'd.

>>46488854
I made a blue/green deck around the prodigal sorcerer as a joke back in middle school. It wasn't a joke.
I made it into a blue/red/green EDH now. Though I should probably drop the green now the prophet is banned.

File: cycle.png (2MB, 1875x1046px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1875x1046px

Alright guise, rip this cycle to shreds.

>>46489108
Considering sudden inspiration is a sorcery, getting flash on the card you get with sudden Inspiration is a little limited I think.

>>46488513
This guy could just be red to cast, since the activated ability is already supplying the blue requirement.

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

41KB, 375x523px

>>46489497
Done. I'm thinking about buffing him a little now.

>>46489596
I'd be wary about buffing it, it's expensive to get going but once it does it's very difficult to get rid of. The only thing I can think of would be lowering its base cost and increasing the activated.

File: Hit me.jpg (47KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 375x523px

>>46489060
Since we're talking about pinger, here's a poorly thought pinger commander voltron that need a name.

File: Bullet Kin.jpg (33KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 375x523px

Guess what I've been playing.

>>46488956
If kiki/twin is a thing, I don't think 3 mana for a 1/1 with haste after turn 4 is that unreasonable. Reminds me a bit of pack rat, but probably a lot more balanced.

>>46489885
Uschlar, Temur Gladiator

>>46490707
Gundead

lost

does anyone know a good place to get high-quality fake cards printed?

>>46490912
I don't know what that means, but it's Enter the Gungeon.

>>46490918
>high-quality fake cards
China.

File: Bloodfire Caster.jpg (49KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 375x523px

>>46489596
> Art of pic related wasn't a pinger.

>>46491000
Perhaps I wasn't specific enough. A webpage that performs such services?

>>46491000
Topkek

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

40KB, 375x523px

>>46491073
No idea. I was just fucking with you.

>>46491073
Google card game printing and have a look through what services pop up.

>>46491205
I'm talking about card counterfeiters, sir

>>46491401
No idea then, it's unlikely you'll find a nice easy webpage for it.

>>46491038
Shit, now I want a cycle of them.

WU: Flash? (W already has flying)
UB: Skulk
BR: Menace?
RG: ? (G already has trample)
GW: Vigilance?
WB: Lifelink?
UR: Prowess?
BG: Deathtouch?
RW: First strike?
GU: Hexproof?

>>46491359
the problem with a card like this is that the cycling ability so overshadows the actual printed card, it's like the super cycling decrees

>>46491477
Mostly correct, though Flash isn't really White, it's more of a Blue/Green thing. The problem is that some of the keywords, like Flying, which is the WU keyword, have already been taken by other Sliths.

>>46491477
UG is more flash than WU. Not sure
BR is menace or haste
RG is trampe or it gets 2 counters instead of one
GW is vigilance
WB is obviously lifelink
UR is prowess
BG is deathtouch or regen
RW is first strike or double strike if it's a rare
GU is hexpoof or flash

File: flash isn't white.png (2MB, 936x890px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 936x890px

Why do people keep saying flash isn't white

>>46491723
Flash is five color but it's more GU than WU

>>46491723
Because it's a lot easier to say than "Flash is mainly Blue and Green, but shows up in lower numbers in the other colors as well, mostly as a sort of bug-fix," and we assume that people who actually pay attention to what's going on know this without us saying that. But obviously, we sometimes get people like you who don't know this. But now you do, so don't ask again.

>>46491723
This >>46491783

Flash can show up in any color, but W/R/B typically get it more sparingly, usually when there's another effect on the card that would be an Instant spell otherwise.

White is probably third in Flash behind Blue and Green, and that's mainly because it has a defensive playstyle.

>>46491693
Should be one generic mana. As of now it has psuedo hexproof against certain decks

>>46492040
>As of now it has psuedo hexproof against certain decks
I think that was the point.

>>46492099
You could just use (You may have this enter the battlefield attached to a creature you control.)

>>46491803
I think it would be nice if you could remove a counter to attach the card at instant speed.

I'm thinking about pack wars.
What would be good (existing) mechanics for a pack wars cube/custom set?

I feel like a lot of the original zendikar mechanics would work very well for it.

Kicker, landfall, rebound. All get you extra value out of your limited cards and excess lands.


I was also thinking morph could help offset the issue of mana screw when you have such a wonky and irrelevant mana base. And just making cards in the set have a high CMC but low color intensity.
Would Domain be a good thing to include in pack wars or would it just be too automatic/easy?

I'm also thinking flashback would work well. May not want both flashback and rebound in the same set though?

I was originally thinking retrace might work well in a pack wars set but I think I'd rather reward the player for playing lands and bigger spells than discarding lands and casting the same spell over and over.

>>46487736
This only functions to counter a single effect, as any additional ones would be done in response to the activation, and it can't per-emptively be used either.

>>46494879
Things that key off of lands or otherwise let you sink excess mana would be nice. Hybrid might actually shine there, as it increases the likelihood that you'll be able to play a card.

Domain seems a bit bland, since everyone is going to be running 5 lands regardless, so that's just relying too much on luck.

Flashback would be a nice inclusion, especially Innistrad style with different colors. Helps keep the game moving forward and lets you use spells multiple times.

You could also make it so different colors have a different focus for how to use lands. Green would be good with landfall to pump themselves up and build a board presence, while Blue might work better with Retrace in order to be casting spells more often.

>>46489885
>attack
>no blockers
>ping this guy
>ability triggers on taking damage, gets +1/+1, deals 1 damage
>target himself
>ability triggers again
>etc
>infinite damage: The card

at work so no MSE but

3GG
Creature - Elemental
At the beginning of combat on your turn, you may put 2 +1/+1 counters on target land you control. If you do, it becomes a 0/0 Elemental creature with haste until end of turn and must attack this turn if able. It's still a land.
3/3

File: Full Contact Magic.jpg (55KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 375x523px

This is surely a rules nightmare. Could it be made to work? I want to let red bolt other people's spells.

>>46496944
Enchantment
Whenever a red instant or sorcery spell you control would deal damage to a player, you may prevent that damage. If you do, counter target spell that player controls with converted mana cost less than or equal to the damage prevented this way.

>>46496973
Replacement effects can't target like that.

>>46496973
*... equal to the amount of damage...
sorry

File: Alyssa Knight Instructor.jpg (44KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 375x523px

The P/T is likely a tad high.

>>46496994
The targetting is done by a triggered effect, triggered by you preventing your own damage

>>46497009
Except you can't trigger to prevent damage, as the damage will have already happened

>>46497021
Cast a spell that would deal damage
Enchantment triggers, asking if you want to prevent damage
You prevent damage
Enchantment triggers, asking you to target a spell to counter
Counter trigger resolves
Original spell resolves, dealing no damage

>>46497033
Yeah that's not how magic works.

>>46497035
Okay, thanks Wizards and your 6 word post with no back-up

>>46497048
R: Prevent all damage target spell or ability you control would deal this turn. Counter target spell if its converted mana cost is equal to or less than the damage prevented this way.

Would be how you'd word something like that. Triggers work off something that actually happens not the potential for it.

>>46488172
It doesn't need the 'as long as ~ is on the battlefield' clause, since unless otherwise specified, the abilities of permanents only function on the battlefield anyhow.

>>46497081

...I did not spell Familiar correctly.

>>46497081
See pyromancer's swath for the wording.

>>46497113

Thanks. I'd found a lot of 'Double damage' ones but I'd missed Pyromancer's Swath so the wording wasn't perfect.

>>46497140
Replace creature with permanent if you want it to hit planeswalkers and source with spell if you only want it working from the stack.

>>46495410
> Addition of "another" somewhere
I knew I missed the obvious somehow.

>>46497357
I'd have it so the tutored land was put onto the battlefield tapped.

File: Yishug the Wise One.jpg (43KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 375x523px

>>46496449
I can dig it

>>46488692
>>46488854

It has hexproof and indestructible, that thing needs to be a 1/1. Or, even better, lose one of those abilities.

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

44KB, 375x523px

>>46487888
Does this fix it? I do want to avoid it working especially well with hellbent.

>>46488505
Thanks. I'm keeping the initial choice in the hand of the player because otherwise it seems less like a clever card and more like a card that's going to own you most of the time. As is, you can choose if what you think your opponent perceives as your best card is worth three cards. I could see lowering the p/t though. Although, these days, things like serra angel are uncommon, so I'm not sure it could justify 4/4 at six mana and one combat keyword.

>>46489596

I agree with the person who said to make it cheaper to cast but more expensive to activate. I could seem them as a 1RR 1/1 whose ability costs 3U to activate.
Honestly, mana isn't the issue here. I think the true power in this card is that the ability can activate as normal, rather than being restricted to sorcery speed. That sends this card waaaaay up in power level. I might even suggest making it rare, as it is the kinda thing that'd dominate a draft match.

>>46491038
I adore this design.

>>46496411
There's no reason for this not adding mana.

>>46497270

Isn't this ability really fucked up with combat? Since, say, if it gets double blocked, it receives damage twice but simultaneously. "Second time" is throwing me off in what that means. Second source or second instance?

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

51KB, 375x523px

>>46497357
Four mana and only one green requirement is too little.

>>46501113
This ain't blue.

>>46501162
what color would it be?

File: angel's grace.jpg (31KB, 223x310px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 223x310px

>>46501169
It's a very white effect.

>>46501243

Well do you think the card would work if U was changed to W? I'm not sure about the price for something that gives this effect.

>>46501301
I'm not sure either, it's really weird. Why don't you make it an instant with "until the beginning of your next end step" ?

>>46501320
Because I'm not sure how instants would interact with future turns desu.

>>46500827
Show me another two cost creature that converts one generic mana into three colored.

File: Damian Wayne Robin10.jpg (45KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 375x523px

Still working on this one. And because I'm retarded, I just recently realized that, as Robin, Damian should do something to support other creatures. Trying for a legendary theme with this one.

>>46501828
New keyword

Sidekick (Whenever a legendary creature you control attacks, you may put this card from your hand onto the battlefield tapped and attacking)

>>46502051
How many cards would I even be able to use that on? Sidekicks aren't exactly popular now. But thanks for trying.

>>46496411
>>46500827
Rewarding you for playing multicolored creatures and not being a ridiculously OP 3-color, 2-profit dork. I'd say those are good reasons.

>>46496449
Traditionally, Treefolk G/B/W, not G/B/U, but if the flavor calls for it it can work. I also like the idea of conditional mana fixing; when you need creatures you get green, when you need instants you get blue and black. Cool stuff.

>>46500886
I like this.

File: Some Generic Angel.png (183KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 375x523px

>>46497003
Oh hey, this looks familiar. I wasn't quite sure how to word it, either.

>>46502924
That's actually really cool. By giving all creatures flying, it's more akin to giving all of your creatures reach.

Plus it has the neat bonus of making all those Green flying-hate spells universal.

>>46502924
that's blue

>>46502924
This is clever, though I'm now imagining the under costed fatty with "creatures you opponents control have flying."

>>46503041
Seems like something a Djinn would do.

What rarity should multi-color lands typically be at? Is there a big difference between having them be Rare and Uncommon? Are common duals a bad move?

>>46505016
Dual-Color lands at common is acceptable for a heavily multicolor set.

>>46506463
Base p/t is for setting a creatures p/t its not equivalent to its printed p/t.

File: Doctrine of Flame.png (310KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 375x523px

Parasitic AF, but hopefully more balanced than cascade.

>>46506774
I don't see why it doesn't work as written, though. Continuous effects based off of power or toughness are prone to wacky shenanigans in general, so referring to base P/T is a nice way to get around it. The base P/T is determined in Layer 7b, and the modification is applied in Layer 7c.

Although because of dependency rules, a 1/1, a Glorious Anthem, and Jacqueline would always end up as a 2/2, because Jacqueline's continuous effect is dependent on all other P/T modifiers. Counters come after, so a green 1/1 with a +1/+1 counter on it would be a 4/4, not a 2/2.

>>46507446
Because base p/t only applies if a p/t is being set, its not something inherent to a card.

>>46488044
Its, not it's

>>46507538
I'd argue that the P/T printed on the card is its "base power and toughness" and that the term "base" is only needed where there's otherwise ambiguity, but the rules are unclear on that aspect.

>>46507549

Wouldn't "As an additional cost to play ~, sacrifice six untapped lands." be a lot more straightforward and do the exact same thing?

>>46507802
The only mention of base p/t is when setting it as a value.

>>46507825
He's basing it off the template of Lotus Vale

>>46507825
Lands don't have costs.

>>46507836
Because there's never been an effect that cares about non-modified P/T. You can't apply non-layer 7 effects off of regular P/T because its not calculated until then (that includes type, color, control, and abilities), and layer 7c (anthems) and 7e (flips) effects are confusing to players because timestamps and dependencies.

That's why you need a reference to "base" P/T to make it grok. It may be a rules bend, to define a property that a creature honestly should have at all times (after all, what is its base P/T when its not being Turned to Frog?), but I don't think its an egregious one, particularly when these threads are full of new keywords that require their own rules baggage.

>>46507549
Interesting concept but too powerful and too slow. Have it sacrifice four lands and generate five mana of any combination of colors. Also, make it a mythic rare.

>>46507197
Powerful as hell. But probably balanced if Elesh Norn is anything to base power level off. Adds dual color and a less universal buff for your team in exchange for -3/-3 to everything else and 1 cheaper? I like it.

>>46508483
Would be fine at 2 if it either didn't tap for mana or didn't make a fine bruiser.

>>46508899
Should I lower his stats or drop trample?

File: 1400184158095.jpg (648KB, 819x1157px) Image search: [Google]

648KB, 819x1157px

>>46507990

Well fuck me, stupid, you're right. Why didn't I think of that.

>>46510582
I understand that seal of RB is in color pie kinda but it feels so... Un-RB, flavor wise. I feel like you should swap RB and RG, and maybe make the new BR +3/+0 and some other more relevant bonuses. Seal of UW should be "up to two". Other than that, I see no problem with these (but I'm not very good at balance, just color pie stuff)

>>46488486
Kinda I like it

Can some of you anons make cards for me? I can't use MSE, and in return I'll help you on your ideas.

File: Oracles Watchtower3.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

Is this any good by itself? It's meant to combo with another card, but I want to make sure it at least has some purpose when used separately.

>>46512279
I'm feeling bored and generous, hit me. Though I have to ask why you can't use MSE. Mac?

>>46512279
Shouldn't be too much trouble, depending on how many cards you want. Is there any particular reason you can't get it to work on your end?

On a side-note, does this seem alright for a common? I'm worried it might be a bit too much.

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

45KB, 375x523px

>>46512381
And of course I forgot the pic.

>>46512380
Seems like it's fine. I'm sure there's some crazy combo that could be pulled off with it, but otherwise it seems like a decent way to circumvent discard costs and get more value out of looting effects.

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

45KB, 375x523px

>>46512404
>>46512381
Ah, I wanted to fuck with you and say your card was totally OP.

>card
Eh... Really unsure of this one. Maybe drop the cantrip and make it G cheaper. Or just up the rarity to uncommon, I guess? Again, really unsure.

>>46512503
Ah, thanks. Well, here's another one. I'm unsure of how to cost this, for obvious reasons, and I'm wondering now if I should just go back to the drawing board. I'm looking for something RB that benefits a creature that can ping, basically.

>>46512613
I think an RB card that benefits a ping effect works better with Lifelink. Pinging with Lifelink is much easier to cost and balance than pinging with deathtouch, since pinging with deathtouch just gives you destroy effects.

First strike and Deathtouch alone are a fairly nasty combo, especially since that's an equipment that can easily be re-used. I'd probably suggest bumping up the equip cost, possibly dropping the CMC a bit to compensate. That helps limit its re-usability somewhat.

>>46512613
Yeah, I had a feeling it had a bit too much going on. I think I'll probably end up dropping the cantrip and the casting cost.

I usually get a bit carried away when designing commons and end up making them more complex than they probably should be.

>>46512380
>>46512381
No, PC actually, but it's too heavy. So far, I only want a few cards. I try not to push generosity.

>Bloodthirsty Champion 1RB

Whenever this creature attacks, the creature with the highest power must block it.

Sacrifice a creature, Regenerate Bloodthirsty Champion

4/1

>Sword Breaker 2

Whenever equipped creature deals combat damage to a creature with an attached equipment, you may pay 3 and sacrifice Sword Breaker. That equipment is destroyed.

Equip 1

I know that the wording is clunky, but how can I make it more elegant?

>>46512404
Art in use, Borderlands Ranger.

>>46512613
Feels a little too underwhelming with its effects. Maybe "When this deals combat damage to a creature, destroy it."

File: Selina Kyle Catwoman5.jpg (52KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 375x523px

>>46512772
>I think an RB card that benefits a ping effect works better with Lifelink.
Lifelink...? Hadn't really thought of that. I mean, it's not exactly a BR effect, is it? But they do have that dog, so we can't really say that the effect simply can't exist in BR. I'll think on it.

>pinging with deathtouch just gives you destroy effects.
Well yeah, that was my train of thought.

>I'd probably suggest bumping up the equip cost, possibly dropping the CMC a bit to compensate.
Not sure if I'll stick with this design, but that sounds like a good idea.

>>46512850
Don't sweat it, good commons and uncommons are actually more difficult that one would think.

>>46512887
>but it's too heavy.
Could you please elucidate me as to what exactly you mean by this?

>Bloodthirsty Champion
Creature types? Rarity? (I'm assuming uncommon or rare.)
Text should be more like
>Whenever ~ attacks, defending player chooses a creature he or she controls with the greatest power among creatures he or she controls. That creature blocks ~ this turn if able.
At least, that's what I think. It's a bit tricky.
>Sacrifice a creature: Regenerate ~.

>Sword Breaker
Again, no rarity. Uncommon?
>Whenever equipped creature deals combat damage to a creature, you may pay 3 life. If you do, destroy target Equipment attached to that creature.
Feels super weak. I'd give it a P/T boost and change the payments to just mana. Granted, you'll probably have to increase the mana and equip costs, but I think it'll be a much better card.

>>46513035
Did you not read what I said? I want it to work with a creature that can ping, ie. deal noncombat damage, like Prodigal Pyromancer. Tying the effect to combat damage completely defeats the purpose.

>>46513162
Lifelink is Black. There's no reason it couldn't be on a BR card. The main reason it doesn't is because they love sticking it on WB cards instead.

>>46512887
>>46513162
Wait, let me explain why Sword Breaker feels weak in more detail. The problem with the card is that it does literally nothing besides destroy equipment. Well, what if your opponent isn't running equipment? Adding at least a P/T boost would make sure that the card isn't just dead in your hand because your opponent isn't playing equipment.

>>46513162
I'd assume he's posting from his phone

>>46513162
>Don't sweat it, good commons and uncommons are actually more difficult that one would think.

Yeah, I hear that. I've basically finished all the commons, but now I'm just looking over it to make sure there isn't anything that would be better as uncommon. I've already found quite a few that are too wordy or otherwise feel a bit too strong at common.

>>46513162
Well, I guess I already have a lot of games, so MSE doesn't work properly at all. Sometimes it crashes, don't know why. I've tried making more space for it, but same results.

Bloodthirsty Champion - Uncommon, Orc Warrior

Sword Breaker - Uncommon

I think that Sword Breaker should have a different trigger, really. But at least we've nailed the effect.

>>46513214
Well, it's also a philosophical thing. BR is a very aggressive combination that doesn't really think ahead, and just throws everything at the opponent at once. Look at Unleash for just one example of this. One of the things with color combinations is that they do restrict more of what can be done with the colors. While, for example, White has double strike, it doesn't really come up all that much in White multicolor cards that don't also have Red in them. The same is true for Green with Deathtouch and without Black. But yeah, Lifelink is still a viable option here. Not common, but I'm only going to do it for one card, max.

>>46513243
Oh, that's what he meant. How did I not see that?

>>46513334
Huh, weird. Sorry to hear that.

Again, the problem with Sword Breaker is that the effect is very situational. I mean, I like the idea... but, yeah. It's just not very useful most of the time. Honestly, I recommend designing it so that it's a decent P/T boosting equipment by itself, then treating the equipment destruction as trinket text. Maybe something like a 1 mana 1 equip for +1/+0? Eh, I'll leave that up to you for now.

File: Mind Spike.png (254KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 375x523px

>>46513334
Have you tried not installing in in Program Files?

>>46513457
I understand, but equipment destruction doesn't come cheap. I will add +1/+0 to it, but its main shtick is destroying equipment, and doing it well. Here's some ideas I've thought out.

>Whenever equipped creature is blocked or blocks a creature, you may remove it from combat. If you do, destroy target Equipment on that creature.

>>46513520
Not yet. Why?

What are some good alternatives to MSE?

>>46513634
>Not yet. Why?
MSE has known issues when installed in Program Files. Install it your My Documents or something.

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

42KB, 375x523px

>>46513520
>>46513539
Chinese menu, but very fun nonetheless. Good job.

>>46513634
>equipment destruction doesn't come cheap.
I'm going to sound like a dick, but you don't know what you're talking about. Have you actually looked at cards that remove only equipment? They are lackluster at best. And of the equipment that can destroy other equipment, both are costed at 2, one with equip 2, the other with equip 1. And they both have P/T boosts, and don't need to actually come into contact with an equipped creature to destroy an equipment.

Also, your proposed idea is good, but for a different reason than you think. Your proposed idea is the gustcloak ability, and would be used without equipment destruction about 99% of the time.

>>46513634
Equipment destruction, especially equipment destruction that keys only off of combat, is extremely cheap.

Consider you're looking at 1 Red mana to destroy any artifact, so only destroying equipment is even narrower than that.

Then consider that rather than that as an easily usable spell, you have to cast this equipment, make sure you have something to equip it to, somehow get it to either block you or attack to let you block it, and then deal combat damage despite whatever abilities it might have.

Even being able to use it repeatedly is a small upside, but it's such a specific effect that I can't see it being very expensive at all.

>>46513718
>>46513718
I understand.

>>46513718
Gustcloak ability? What?

File: Gustcloak Skirmisher (2002, Onslaught) by Dan Frazier.jpg (68KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 312x445px

>>46513848
This.

File: Super_Inspirational_Monk_Hero.png (240KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 375x523px

Opinions? I'm getting back into Magic and don't know if this works.

>>46514436
Mostly fine. Name and art suck, and creatures "gain" keywords and "get" P/T boosts.

File: Simh Master of Friendship.png (240KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 375x523px

>>46514505
Yeah, I'm terrible at drawing and using cards to practice.

There we go.

>>46502958
>>46503041
I saw a card quite a while ago that was something like
Syndrome- UR and some colorless
All creatures have flying and first strike
"and when everybody's special... no one will be"

>>46515843
It's not really worth countering a shock in the first place.

>>46496411
Why does the reminder text have black mana in it?

>>46516123
To emphasize that it won't reduce U or B costs

>>46492202
Should read "You may have this enter the battlefield attached to target creature you control." otherwise it inappropriately gets around shroud.

>>46516231
Shroud is defunct so it's not like it matters.

>>46494906
Sounds fine to me, wouldn't want it to be overpowered.

>>46516340
Should probably be "with the greatest power or tied for the greatest power." The case where there's no tie is obvious logically, but the card as written doesn't tell me what to do if I don't tie for the highest.

See Abzan Beastmaster for a related case.

>>46516340
Gave me an idea for a card, too.

>Balancing Enchantment - ?WB
>At the beginning of your upkeep, each player with the most cards in hand or tied for the most cards in hand discards a card. Then, each player with the least cards in hand or tied for the least card in hand draws a card and loses 1 life.

Black for discard/Phyrexian Arena draw, white for balance effects.

>>46516340
Not bad at all, anon. Try to shorten the text if at all possible, though.

File: Akkals.jpg (517KB, 1500x1050px) Image search: [Google]

517KB, 1500x1050px

Playing around with a mechanic, 2 commons, 2 uncommons, 2 rares and a mythic

>>46517985
I would have made the flavour text about how being passionate help you to go through tedious works.
Or maybe the opposite, you need to "discard" your impulsiveness to focus on your work.

>>46517998
Art in use. Also, the effect feels far more WU than GU, though that would require a name change.

>>46517998
>>46518874
Technically, target-changing is in the red slice of color pie these days, while protecting your own permanents is a white thing. I'd go with RW instead.

File: maxresdefault[3].jpg (38KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 1280x720px

>>46517998
>magical maladies

File: Fedora Wizard.png (113KB, 442x423px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 442x423px

>>46518986
>think "You know, a wizard version of this would be better."
>google "wizard fedora"
>find this

>>46519040
>Enchantment
>Whenever a female opponent casts an instant or sorcery spell, if you control a white Knight creature, you may tip it. If you do, copy that spell and you may choose new targets for the copy.

>>46517990
I love it

File: Jesse McCree2.jpg (50KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 375x523px

Bump.

File: RW07 Chant of Unknowing.jpg (44KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 375x523px

>>46521314
That last ability should target, anon. "Any number of target creatures." It also feels really disconnected; the first strike + haste make it seem aggressive, but the slow growth of aim counters and the piddly 3/2 body isn't going to have much of an impact on turn five. However, it has to have that heavy mana cost and slow build, or the aim counter ability becomes ridiculous. My advice: Drop the cost, remove first strike and haste, add evasion (menace, probably), make him add a +1/+1 counter to himself on player damage, and finally give him an activated ability to remove counters to shoot stuff. Faster, more aggressive, builds up more organically, and still does most of what I think you were going for there.

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

52KB, 375x523px

Because why not? Though now that I'm thinking about it, maybe something like Hideaway?

>>46522739
Thanks for the advice. Unfortunately, that's not what I'm looking for at all. I'm going to just scrap the card and try again.

>card
I think it's too cheap. A quick look through MagicCards makes me think that this should be 3 CMC at least.

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

44KB, 375x523px

This 'walker was less about unique design and more about trying to come up with a whole package. I'm sure some people out there would have a lot of fun with them.

>>46516340
I love this effect, though I'm not sure if it wants to be on a grey ogre.

>>46513718
>Chinese menu

I really hate this being used as a point when it's TWO things on a gold card. Let alone when they form a coherent whole.
Can't we leave that cliche criticism for when it's a bunch of keywords that don't work together especially well or two unrelated abilities that might as well be on two different cards?

>>46523531
So, just when it's done poorly? I can get behind that.

>>46523456
Good lord this one is boring. All you did was look at various cards and take different effects from them, except you changed "Fact or Fiction" to seven cards instead of five. I say go back and try to come up with something that can represent the character. And I think having at least one ability to modify the board is always a good idea.

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

34KB, 375x523px

>>46523672
>All you did was look at various cards and take different effects from them

Yeah, because unless I don't care about what kinda card I produce, I don't make designing itself into a game. I was thinking about the more important part of, y'know, actually playing with the card. Though you have a good point about not being able to do anything to the board being awkward.

>>46523782
It just seems lazy is what I'm saying. It just seems like you barely even care about making a good card.

>Dancing Lights
Interesting. I think the costs and low toughness prevent it from getting out of hand.

File: Grasping at Sand.jpg (39KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 375x523px

Looking at Chittering Rats and wondering if this can be 1B or BB.

>>46523870
>It just seems like you barely even care about making a good card.

A while ago, I learned that novel doesn't immediately equal good. And things that are fun in design don't translate to being fun in play. Hell, a lot of the time the cards that are most fun to design that other designers will love looking at are the ones that would be miserable to bother with in actual play. Might not be explaining it the best, but I hope that kinda gets the idea across.
Putting these effects all onto one walker seemed like a way to make something that'd be pretty cerebral to play with, and fun for the people who like that.
From a design standpoint, I can get being bored by it though.

Dancing Lights used to be a common that couldn't block, and the activated ability was the green lure that forces someone to block. While I liked that design, someone suggested this way and the flavor was so much more fitting. So, made it uncommon and attached a mana to the cost. I think being an uncommon and, like you said, dying to everything that does any damage puts it in a fine place.

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

52KB, 375x523px

>>46507420
Why not just make it any exiled nonland... Oh, right, duh. Power level.

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

44KB, 375x523px

I'm convinced that formidable is a perfect green and white mechanic. Here's a card meant to highlight the white part of it.
Eight 1/1s are just as formidable as two 4/4s.

>>46517990
Now all we need is a mountain that cares about doing damage to things.

>>46517985
I like this. Even though it wants to be in a UR deck, it still manages to feel like blue shitting on red, again.

>>46524012
True on all points, but I think the abilities could be changed to be more interesting and still be playable. Or at least more different. I mean, the first two are basically both "Don't let your opponent have good cards."

>card
I'm not sure if the opponent would discard a card just to skip a bad draw, especially when the next draw could still be bad.

>>46522857
>3cmc
Limiting it to attacking creatures is enough to justify the 2cmc cost, I feel. Immolating glare is comparable, if almost strictly worse. It's pushed, certainly by the power level of the current standard environment, but I don't believe that it's too pushed.

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

38KB, 375x523px

>>46524154
Yeah, I'm gunna work on her some more. As for grasping at sand, that depends on if they have any cards in hand worth pitching for card quality. Extra land, something too expensive for how long the game seems to be going, etc.
On the subject, here's a worse but more interactive Time Ebb that I like. Probably wants to exist in a limited format where mill exists to be more threatening.

>>46524022

This card reminds me that I had a silver border card that was a (1)(2/G) 2/2, with flavor text about green doing creatures better.
RIP grey ogre

File: Power Creep (Craw or Barbtooth Wurm and Terra Stomper).png (279KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 375x523px

>>46524318
Not that card, but your post reminds me of it.

>>46524249
Why would you ever choose to mill yourself?
If the creature is worth putting on top of the library you won't want to mill it, and if it isn't keeping around an opponent wouldn't likely cast that spell on it.
Is the idea that you can cast it on a really shitty creature and your opponent then has the choice of either keeping that on top, knowing they will draw a shitty card next turn, or get rid of it but have to mill themselves in the process?

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

45KB, 375x523px

>>46487672

This hasn't gotten any comments but I really like it. Syntax fixes

>Enchant creature
>...look at the top four cards of your library. You may reveal an instant or sorcery card from among them and put it into your hand...

>>46487696
Just use charge counters dude.

>>46487717
I hate these kinds of artifacts that are just equipment because people forget that you are a person with hands who can do things. Just make it a straight up artifact that you tap. You don't need some minion to use the shovel FOR you.

File: Firearms ideas.jpg (180KB, 1125x523px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1125x523px

>>46524481
>I hate these kinds of artifacts that are just equipment because people forget that you are a person with hands who can do things.
Man, I've been guilty of this. But I think I'm doing better now.

>>46524409

Sometimes you use common removal on a dude, and the opponent would rather draw something that isn't a generic dude.
In actual play it's not as extreme as "I use this on your 1/1" and "I use this on your indestructible 6/6 trampler."

>>46524553
I'm not him, but if you use the card to remove a big threat, why would the opponent put the big threat into the graveyard instead of drawing it again? And on the other hand, why would you use the card to remove a small thing? It seems like it's made for use against Voltron, or something else with a bunch of auras.

File: Deep-Sixed Dead.jpg (33KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 375x523px

>>46524592
Because there can be medium things that can be bad enough for you while still not being what your opponent thinks they need to draw to win the game.
It's only a minor option on a generic common removal spell though, I'm not going for something huge. It just seems more interesting to play with.

>>46524404

I think this would make a lot more sense if the creature got +X/+X for each nonland permanent from a NEWER expansion on the battlefield. That way, you are casting Power Creep on your craw wurm to turn them into a power creep'd 9/7 or whatever. It'd also be more fun as revenge for the forgotten old creatures you use it on.

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

51KB, 375x523px

>>46524409
You've clearly never played against a time ebb.

>>46524249
Also, this is a worse Time Ebb. Don't be silly.

>>46524318
I still design fucktons of grey ogres.

>>46525092
>Also, this is a worse Time Ebb.

Ye, I said that in the post. If it's really a huge deal that it's worse, I could make it instant or something maybe.

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

50KB, 375x523px

>>46525532
It is just pointless. It is more interactive the same way Blazing Salvo is more interactive than Bolt, but without the rock and a hard place feeling. It really needs to mill more if you want it to be a proper Browbeat style card.

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

60KB, 375x523px

>>46526211
... From where? If you want it to be a token, make it a token, but right now, it is nonsense.

>>46524739
Deep sixed? What?

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

60KB, 375x523px

>>46526875
Probably something in his lore, like Angel of Flight Alabaster. Doesn't make sense unless you know the fluff.

>>46526875
The body drowned before being reanimated. To "deep-six" something is an idiom meaning you got rid of something. It comes from nautical slang since anything dropped overboard in waters six fathoms deep was usually unrecoverable.

File: Mindsear.png (255KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 375x523px

>>46526875
>>46527003
Not that guy, but "deep six" means to dispose of something. It originates from tossing things off ships, I believe. So the flavor I get is that the corpse was disposed of, then reanimated later. Water zombie, essentially.

>Leeches
Seems fine, though could be irritating in large numbers in Limited. I think we don't see many cards like this anymore for that reason, but I don't think it's really a big deal.

>>46526821
Seems fine, though new players will be confused by the Delve/Entwine interaction, I think. Delve cost might need to be a touch higher though, like 8.

>>46526536
I remember this guy. It used to be odd to see red cards that cared about being played in the second main phase, but Raid changed that for me. Uncommon purely for Limited reasons I'd imagine, since that kind of effect would be oppressive at common.

Honestly, anymore I think this card can be BB or even 1B, since black gets 2/2s for 1B now. If you keep it as a Grey Ogre, it could be common easily enough, since I'm pretty sure you can give a 2/2 lifelink permanently at 2B nowadays if you wanted to.

>>46526211
As was said, needs to make an Aura token. Otherwise, seems fine to me. Auras need more love like this to make them stand out from Equipment. Taking advantage of the fact that they are so fragile is some seriously under-tapped design space.

>>46525092
>green artifact creature
I don't hate it or anything, but it always feels weird to make them or see them. Not an ability you see every day, and the kind of color hate you like to see more of.

Don't mind me, just not making a card for the thread edition for a change, I guess. Compares okay to Blightning I think. More damage, less utility.

>>46527448
oops, this
>Honestly, anymore I think this card can be BB or even 1B, since black gets 2/2s for 1B now. If you keep it as a Grey Ogre, it could be common easily enough, since I'm pretty sure you can give a 2/2 lifelink permanently at 2B nowadays if you wanted to.
was meant for >>46526514. I linkfailed.

>>46527448
Both sides feel at odds with each other. It only mills for milling sake, but cares about player damage. I think it needs some other scalable benefit from milling.

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

59KB, 375x523px

>>46527448
Neat, but a little wonky, since you know damage+mill only work in very wonky decks. Jace's Phantasm can at least block, ya know?

And yeah, all my P/Ts are too low now that they keep jacking them up each set. I had a vanilla 4/5 for 6 in red once. Whoooops. It felt like a reasonable common seeing as it had less color requirements and Earth Elemental had been an uncommon.

I will probably make the hag CMC 2. The whole cycle are uncommons, though it might not need to be any more... The only issue is that now I don't have the stupid cute thing of it going {U}, {1}{R}, {2}{B}, {3}{W}, {4}{G}.

As for green artifacts, I know I know, but it is a cycle and there's only gonna be one of them in my set. Phyrexia and Alara did it.

File: Oath of Vengeance.png (268KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 375x523px

>>46527704
No more at odds with each other than Blightning's effects. Sometimes a gravy card is just a gravy card. Not everything needs to have interesting synergy with itself. It would be a more interesting card in a set where that milling matters for other reasons, perhaps. That kind of thing. I know it's hard to judge on its own merits that way, but like I said, not everything needs to be a symphony of cleverness.

Curious though, what kind of other benefit would you want to see on it? It can't do much more than it does at that CMC/rarity to begin with.

So talking about making Auras that do something when they die made me think they could be fun to design, so I made a basic one. I courted the idea of making it a keyword/ability word or something but eh, nah. And I took it one step further and gave them some additional utility that punishes discard (or rewards it, in the case of Madness and Spellshapers), as well as mill. It also gives me some ideas for a set... which is dangerous, because I know I won't finish the damn thing.

>>46527799
Now this one is good. I like it. I'd draft it in UR pretty readily.

>Mindsear
Yeah, it's not a good card in a vacuum. It'd need a set to support it. But I like mill and the idea popped into my head, and I usually just go ahead and make cards out of those ideas so I don't lose them, because you never know when you could use it later.

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

44KB, 375x523px

>>46527852
It would have to be in a set where milling your opponent was at all beneficial other than as an alt win condition. Discard actually does something for almost all MTG, mill really doesn't.

As of now, there are very few effects like that. As for effects you could add, I personally wouldn't. It is one of those cards that you can either have in your set as is with some reasonable support or just cut entirely.

I'd avoid the "from anywhere", personally. It is fun and all, but unless you make your set focussed on it, it is very distracting. You don't want to get people's hopes up for synergy when drafting if you don't use it.

>>46527852
I think I'd actually rather have this at +2/+0. It makes more sense with itself that way. Not gonna repost it though. It could probably be 1R at that rate but eh, whatever.

>>46527937
>slightly weaker Ashen Powder
Works for me.

Yeah, the "from anywhere" would need a set, which is why I mention that it gave me ideas for one, so I did it. So yeah, it would have support.

File: image.jpg (70KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 375x523px

>>46527912
Yeah, that's my cut cards file, which I don't have on imgur, so all the cards I'm posting are from my set. And missing a bunch. I'm on a phone right now.

I really should work on my set, with the skeleton and all, but with WOTC beating me to the punch on like, 3 mechanics and a surprisingly large number of cards, I don't feel I have it in me.

Especially since shit like removing intimidate makes some of these card ideas seem particularly stupid. Not this one, but just on the whole.

>>46528018
I can see delve in red, but only on instants/sorceries like blue. Red is just not a color that uses its graveyard much.

>>46528018
>WotC beating you to the punch
I kinda know this feeling. It doesn't happen much, but it can be disheartening.

>removing intimidate
I personally like the change, and was lucky enough that it didn't bone my completed set too hard. But if you were synergizing with it... yeah, ouch.

File: image.jpg (61KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 375x523px

>>46527989
Just be careful. Shit might get complicated if you don't pay very close attention and put in a few mill or discard cards.

And yeah, it was originally 3B, because I figured Ashen Powder could use a boost since it is an ancient card. But someone said I was underevaluating cycling and with it being an uncommon, I caved.

>>46528018
Anyway, like, what am I supposed to do with this fucker? I thought I'd be so cool and make a RW pair of Knights. Then one could grant protection for a turn and the other intimidate. And since they work sort of similarly (being a means of getting past blockers), I thought it would be cool. But now both Prot is gone except for very rare cases and intimidate is just completely out.

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

51KB, 375x523px

>>46528058
Harvest Pyre and Lavamancer made me envision Delve as a Grixis mechanic, before I ended up changing it to all five colors.

Honestly though, with the graveyard being such a universal zone, I don't think stretching Delve to five colors is as much of a cop out as stretching Landfall to all five colors.

Honestly, I still don't see how Delve is green. That looks like a square hole, round peg sort of thing.

>>46528074
Eh, I wasn't really, but I did have a number of cards with it.

>>46528110
>Anyway, like, what am I supposed to do with this fucker?
If it's only for a handful of cards, you can always write out the ability.

>>46528186
>Honestly, I still don't see how Delve is green. That looks like a square hole, round peg sort of thing.
Green is the #2 color that uses its graveyard as a resource.

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

58KB, 375x523px

>>46528189
Eh. It would make a wordy card even wordier. It also would make the parallels less obvious.

I'll figure something out.

>>46528074
It happens way more often than it should.

Like, what are the fucking chances?

>>46528110
You can just straight swap Intimidate for Menace here without too much issue. The protection has the interesting side-effect of synergizing better with Menace than it does with Intimidate, since a white creature can't block the Knight to begin with. With Menace, you have to have two nonwhite creatures to even block the damn thing; that's harsh. And giving it as an anthem along its pal the white Knight doing a Prot anthem? You've got some serious hurt on the way, and it's likely unblockable. I dunno, I like the concept. Prot is still doable, it's just not evergreen anymore. They didn't remove it.

>mill and discard
Well like I said, the set would have Madness, Spellshapers, and other effects that put cards in the yard, so it'd just be for additional utility if it were in a set. And the interesting part about it is you could justify slightly stronger mill effects as a result of them existing since it has a higher chance of being punished. It could be the sort of push mill would need to get better cards. The mirror effect of that is that mill would feel extra bad to play, so I'd have to design some cards and see how it feels. If it felt like discard and mill were too oppressed, then I might have to redo the Auras to just be on "dying" instead. Which would be fine.

>>46526514
>Blazing Salvo

Except blazing salvo can be made to be a 0 for 1 and drown can't. That's a huge difference. If you're making that comparison, I can't really trust your judgement.

File: image.jpg (54KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 375x523px

>>46528214
Sure, but before Delve, it was really only counting all of them up like a Lhurgoyf or a Elvish Eulogist, shuffling stuff back in or Regrowth. Golgari did a lot for making it feel more graveyardy, but eh. The fact that delve synergize horribly with Lhurgoyfs and Regrowth effects also adds to that feeling.

Delve always felt sort of like Arc-Slogger to me. Getting rid of chaff and junk for the now, a very red idea.

Ah well, WOTC made a decision, I can't argue. This guy was also made before Khans.

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

50KB, 375x523px

>>46528299
The kind of player who likes cards like Browbeat considers the 5 damage to be important. The kind of player who would play Drown would consider the mill important.

Otherwise, it is just a shitty Time Ebb. It will admittedly always tempo a guy. But it won't have that tempo+card denial.

Anyway, here's another card WOTC beat me to. They pushed the power a good bit more.

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

49KB, 375x523px

>>46528374
Good.

>>46528353
Hard to evaluate. You'd probably have to test it in Pox.

>>46528527
>The kind of player who would play Drown would consider the mill important.

Oh, I see what you're saying. I'd just had limited in mind, where if shitty time ebb is the common removal, it's still shitty time ebb which gets the job done. And, I'd probably want to include it in a format where mill is a somewhat real strat, which can be a thing with 40 card decks.

>Hope Against Hope
>As long as enchanted creature is a Human, it has first strike.
>pushed the power a good bit more

I wouldn't really call it that. In fact, before looking up the card you were talking about, I woulda recommended making this a common and giving it a little something for some more oomph.

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

35KB, 375x523px

>>46528858
*making this an uncommon

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

53KB, 375x523px

>>46528907
Surprisingly difficult to grok.

>>46528858
>>46528907
Well, yeah, in limited, it would definitely be played because as you said bad Time Ebb is still good. But I don't see the harm in bumping it to 7 cards, like a Mind Sculpt, it'll be more satisfying for the people who actively enjoy cards like this.

Ah. I was about to say, mine is a common. The big thing isn't the human trinket text (which admittedly is pretty relevant in limited), it is that it counts the enchanted creature.

>>46528243
May as well post the counterpart. I always found this pair a bit messy anyway. I might rework them.

But I am gonna start saving my old stuff to have documentation of what it was before. I'm still kind of upset I can't find the original mana cost and P/T of my Delve dragon before I edited it to look less exactly the same thing as that new Demon.

>>46529226
>But I am gonna start saving my old stuff to have documentation of what it was before.
If you posted it here, you can probably filename search for it on desustorate. Granted there are some gaps when the archive was down.

File: Recorder Wandering Scribe.jpg (37KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 375x523px

>>46523672
If that is enough to trigger you, what do you think of this?

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

50KB, 375x523px

>>46529299
Oh yeah, that's how I found my first card ever.

It was a 1/1 for G that had Madness 0 and Cycling 1G. I still don't think it was as busted as the reaction warranted. But then someone showed me the existing cycling and madness card, so I gave up on the concept.

Here is another super early card of mine. Different art, but same mechanics.

>>46529466
Aw, but that was one of white's coolest mechanics.

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

59KB, 375x523px

I realized I have never designed an equipment the other day.

>>46529490
The conditions being different makes sense from a power level standpoint, but will definitely be misread.

>>46529846
This seems really slow.

File: Hungering Whale.jpg (39KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 375x523px

>>46530224
Gut reaction is that this is a rare.

File: red.jpg (2MB, 2336x3832px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2336x3832px

I kinda got bored, so I thought I'd make a custom set out of cards plucked from MTGCardsmith. I've tried to do it as randomly as possible, so I thought I'd just post up the starting points here and see if it garnered interest. I know you guys like custom cards, so a set made out of custom cards should be fun to post up.

Anyway, here's the red part of the set. 30 cards for each singular colour, 10 cards for each ally/enemy colour slice, and 10 colourless artifacts and equipments.

>>46530400
Congrats on the pile of trash, anon.

>>46530482

You'd draft it though, right.

>>46530549
Hell yes I would, for the trainwreck of an experience. With literally uncastable cards like All-Powerful Jafar

File: Kiln-Bearer Disciple.jpg (99KB, 917x523px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 917x523px

Would some other combination of numbers that I haven't considered work better?

>>46531379

Why is this gold? Make it mono red.
As a 0/2 or 0/3 renown will make it way too tough. Make it a 0/1.
I like the idea of it being one red mana with renown 2. Or, if 2/3s for one is too powerful for what you want, a 0/1 that costs 1R still ends up an above curve creature with prowess.

File: white.jpg (2MB, 3472x3784px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3472x3784px

White was somehow more of a trainwreck than red.

God seems pretty good.

Okay, I think I am going to be a complete retard and take a tentative stab at doing a set. Again. I have a laundry list of potential mechanics, so I thought I would ask you all what seems like a good combo. The basic theme of the set is "stuff from other stuff" with an enchantment subtheme so here's what is on the list:

Madness
Delve
Spellshapers (non-negotiable probably; I love these things)
Bestow/Enchantment Creatures
Flashback
>new mechanics
Urge (Each card you discard while casting this spell pays for 1.)
Volatile — When ~ is put into the graveyard from anywhere, <effect>.

Urge is similar to something I've seen float around a few times; I think maybe it was called Dream when another Anon did it? Part of what I was thinking was that since a card in the hand is worth a lot more than one in the yard, I might make Urge be 2 generic for 1 card. Volatile would end up mostly on Enchantments, with some Artifacts and Creatures. I was thinking a Land as well, maybe, for fun.

Of all this, what sounds the most fun to you as a combination? So far I am looking at:

Spellshapers
Urge
Volatile
Flashback
Bestow/Enchantment Creatures

but of course, I'm curious what you all think as well. Or maybe it's a bad idea because there's too much potential self-synergy floating around.

>>46531650
Flashback and delve in the same set is a no-go according to WotC last I heard. They talked about it when they released Innistrad block.

Volatile is cute but be careful with it.

>>46530395
Islandwalk?
Flash? Flash would be fun.

>>46531698
Yeah it'd be one or the other for Flashback and Delve. I had no plans of putting them together.

>>46528907
If you just give this a temporary ability, like first strike until EoT, it'll permanently have all those abilities.

>>46531650
Sets typically have more original mechanics and fewer returning mechanics.

>>46531816
It's "as long as" so it shouldn't, I don't think. It constants checks itself with that wording, though it still reads awkward as hell.

>>46531379
Personally I think, if you want to keep it RW, do Prowess, Renown 2, 0/2. It has no way of getting through on its own, but if it does, a two mana 2/4 is less a problem than a two mana 2/5. That said, it can't deal combat damage at all unless you cast a noncreature spell first, so it requires a lot of effort in the first place. It's just a tough card to balance.

>>46529799
Pretty decent, honestly. I wish I had made cards that solid when I first started making cards. I think I was worse at wording than balance though, dear god.

>>46529357
The concept behind a PW like this is kind of neat, actually. This particular PW is sort of goofy, but the loyalty ability layout and concept is something worth toying with.

>>46529226
Yeah, I think you should redo the two Knights and see how they feel with Menace. I think you will like it man.

>>46528606
Would be good in Limited, to be sure. Rare is the red card that's worth holding on to till late game like this.

>>46528527
I had something similar in one of my sets, so don't feel too bad.

>>46528378
Honestly I think you could just make this a Craw Wurm and it'd be fine; green gets 4/5s for GGG now. It might need to be uncommon though, if you did that.

>>46531650

Volatile is so easy to get for "free" that I'm worried it couldn't ever do anything interesting. Urge is also in an awkward spot, which I saw with Dream. It's so dangerous and swingy between broken and terrible that it had a surprisingly narrow design space. All the cards had to have built in CA when you dreamed that was really ham fisted most of the time. Just make a card that loots if you wanna do that so badly. But, anyways, that's getting a bit off topic from what you might do. Still, warning that Urge might just be too messed up.

Honestly, I think you should try more direction. Be *focused* on something rather than the set theme being that it's a hodgepodge. You love spellshapers? Build completely off of that.

From the list, I like

Spellshapers
Madness
Flashback

So needs some more to flesh it out probably.

>>46531816
Huh, I didn't realize that until you pointed it out. I'm okay with that, mechanically, but it's probably so weird that it'd be misunderstood a lot. I'll have to figure something out for that. Hopefully something better than (non keyword reminder text)

>>46531942
Well, Spellshapers are a "dead" mechanic, so they pretty much count as "new" for the sake of that kind of thing. Which means, if I want five mechanics, two would be new, one would be "new" and two would be returning mechanics. And that rule only really applies to Expansion sets, but I guess Core sets as an idea are pretty dead anyway, aren't they? So I suppose it stands true for all of them now.

Not getting a whole lot of input on what of any of this sounds fun though, so it seems like I might have to make some cards or something to "sell" it.

Also I am bad at making mechanics so doing more than two original ones is asking a lot.

>>46531942
And, recently, original mechanics in sets have been narrow, shitty, ability words, or a mix of the above.

>>46532146
Volatile is easy to get for free like Morbid is; it's built along the same lines. With things like Madness or Flashback it could be too much, but on its own, it's not too bad. Most of the effects would be cantrip-type stuff, and yeah, that's a bit basic, but I'll never know what I can do with it till I try. It's one of those mechanics that can be broken easily if you aren't careful, like Delve, but so long as you're wary, it can be okay.

Urge... yeah, I figured in a set with discard support it'd work a bit better, since you can get stuff out of it with Madness or Volatile, so it doesn't feel as bad. It's still hard to design around, at least somewhat. It might be better to try something else for an original mechanic, I agree.

>focus
Yeah, I know, but I think from that list it's very possible to make a focused list and a tight set out of it, but I figured putting it all out there would give me some idea of what sounds good to people, as well as potential issues like the Delve/Flashback thing. It's not so much something I was going to use as a guideline for making the set as it was to see how people reacted to seeing that group of mechanics together, and what excited them and what didn't. Focus group type shit.

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

34KB, 375x523px

How would people feel about a set where creatures are kinda crummy and spells are better?
Would limited suck from that?

>>46532320
So... MtG when it was first getting going? It'd feel like 1995, pretty much.

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

35KB, 375x523px

>>46532310
I feel like Morbid is more work than Volatile. Self mill is attached to a lot of effects, while creatures dying requires a lot more interaction to go on, besides the few creatures that can easily sac themselves. That said, I won't knock it till I've seen some example cards, if you wanna try and make it work.

>>46532372

Yeah, something more along those lines, though I wouldn't say quite to that degree. The 2/2s for 3 will at least have abilities, and power nine won't be running around.

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

41KB, 375x523px

Eh?

>>46532978
I'd make the first ability part of the spell resolution, rather than a separate trigger.

>>46532320
You'd have to be careful to not make it too combo-y and uninteractive (where most games are won with instants and sorceries) or make it too long and grindy (where creatures are so bad compared to removal that it's hard to close out games).

Celesialize is a good example of a durdly card. It protects the creature from removal, but neuters the power so much that it becomes a glorified wall.

File: 64.jpg (70KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 312x445px

>>46532978
Looks like a small version of this. For the record, this was reprinted for Commander, then banned from the format.