/ccg/ Custom Card General /cct/

>>53643307
Should probably be CMC 6 or more. Compare to Part the Waterveil.

>>53643520
Extra turn effects are 3UU. Part the Waterveil got a cost hike since it had the Awaken option which would have made it strictly better at equal CMC.

>>53643614
True, but while Only Time is 3WU with cost-reduction built-in, I don't feel that the dual mana cost is enough of a downside to make it not strictly better in practice.

>>53642471
Bad.

>>53642498
Magical Realm bullshit

>>53643307
* 5 or less life. Use proper formatting.

>>53644117
Left is bad, right is good.

>>53644117
I'm thinking that Belly should either
A. Add two colorless for abilities and enter untapped.
or
B. Only add two mana of any one color for abilities but enter tapped.

File: ccg primer v3.png (2MB, 1400x1660px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1400x1660px

>>53644656
Comparing this to Flame Lash and Lightning Blast... hm. It's in an odd place. It's probably okay though. Electrify was just recently printed at 3R and that is worse than either of the former cards so you can probably get away with this.\

>>53644673
This'd probably get brewed with Coalition Victory pretty readily. A few shock lands, some creatures that can become more than one color... Scrapbasket comes to mind.

Okay, so I made most of the changes suggested to the new primer. I left Menace primary in both red and black since it's supposed to be replacing Intimidate, but if design trends don't steer that way it can be changed. As of the last 5 sets, there have been 14 black creatures with menace, or that interact with it, and 12 red along the same lines. Seems like they are trying to make it an even split, so it's primary on the list in both for now. I realize that historically there are way more red cards that have it, but I think recent design trends are more relevant for categorizing the keywords. Any other suggested changes are welcome and encouraged.

>>53645995
Making this exile your hand face-down (since you know what's there it's no big deal) makes this more of a choice for the opponent, and a more fun bluff card overall.

>>53644656
I'd make it 1R and able to target a creature or player. That'd make it roughly in line with Boros Charm.

File: Mercenary Cabalist.png (260KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 375x523px

>>53644117
>>53642498
I see what you did there.
>Hooked
Overcosted I think, but not too much. I feel like this would either be 1RR or 3R, depending on the set.
>Belly
I agree this would be more interesting if it didn't have the base colorless tap, and instead just concentrated on the mana gen for abilities. I like the idea of it making <><> and the ability can't be countered. Name doesn't really fit what it does, though.
>Cliffs
I agree this is really quite good. I'd draft the hell out of it.

I feel like this needs a little extra something, though Madness decks would probably love it as it is. 2/4 felt a bit much. Maybe 3/2 instead?

>>53646617
Why X though? 4G would be fine. Otherwise, printable/10. Not much else to say except stop posting cards right before I make a post so I miss it and have to post separately.

>>53646644
Wither feels tacked on, and it's not big enough to warrant discarding a card each time. Perhaps if you only needed to discard once on cast.

>>53646673
>>53646617
Nevermind, I see it. Tired. Still, for the return on Plant tokens being able to drop this for G feels a bit too good.

File: Mercenary Cabalist.png (263KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 375x523px

>>53646713
Hm. I have an idea.

File: Pale Socialite.png (273KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 375x523px

Intended for Grandeur support.

>>53646979
It does a lot more than that. Nice that it's useful even if you're not running Grandeur. I think it might be more expensive than this though if it saw print, considering things like Archaeomancer. I realize this technically isn't the same level of card advantage since you're not getting the same exact card back, but it also thinks your deck a bit in compensation. 2B?

>>53647107
>thinks
Thins. Jesus Tapdancing Christ I'm tired. Can't sleep though. Shitsux.

>>53647107
Archeomancer is common & costed as such. This is rare, & costed to be rare.

2B might not be too bad, but it's intended to be impactful in constructed. I compare it to Snapcaster Mage more than anything else, & it is a bit more versatile at the cost of speed.

>>53646979
It should at least cost 3 like eternal witness. In fact, why not just reprint eternal witness.

File: download.jpg (237KB, 1125x523px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1125x523px

& here are the current versions of rare Insight cards.

As usual, still fiddling with these slots.

>>53647195
(I know whiteout is already a card but couldn't think of a name so it's a placeholder)

File: download.jpg (139KB, 750x523px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 750x523px

>>53647195
& finally a few common Guide ideas. Someone mentioned it would be cool on auras so I made some basic ones.

These are probably WAY too beefy / value for common so they will probably be toned down. Maybe. Or moved up to uncommon.

>>53647160
Something being rare isn't an excuse to make it straight cheaper for a similar effect as another card. Rarity is for complexity and draft concerns, not cost pushing.

>>53647195
>Whiteout
Flexible, but expensive. I realize it needs to be as such for Insight. I'm curious, how do you come up with your costing? The way I'm looking at it is that since most draft decks are multicolor, it's going to depend heavily on how many gold cards you're running (your set is wedges, right?) So early game, the chances you can get 2 copies out of Insight are lower, but late-game, the chance goes up. I figure for CMC 1 and 2 spells, you're looking a single copy, and for 3+ you're looking at 2 reliably. So this will probably copy twice. Exiling three things for 4WW is reasonably fair at sorcery speed, but I think the lifegain is unnecessary honestly. It's trinket text. Then again, hopefully you playtest so you can see for sure.
>Forgery
This one feels like it's harder to balance than Whiteout, because again, it's a late-game spell so you'll probably get two copies of this. So do you think 4U for three copies is fair? I feel like it's less so. Maybe 5U? Take a gander at Rite of Replication for reference. It's 7UU for five copies of a creature.
>Theory flare
Keep in mind that Reverberate and Twincast both cost the same as this, and you're looking at very probably getting two copies off Insight if you use this right. Still, it's not a guarantee, but you will always get one copy, so it's always at least as good. Something to consider.

>>53647394
Insight is hard to cost, for sure. Forgery floats between 5 & 6 CMC, "Whiteout" is the same.

Reverb & Twincast are 2cmc, not 3. I wanted Theory to still be playable, but not so cheap it overpowered the classics. Considered making it a Sorcery, too.

>>53647375
These read really clunky. Though they do make me think you should consider Auras with Guide on them that do different things based on what it's doing. Like +2/+2 and vigilance if it's enchanting a creature and -2/-2 and defender if it's guiding a creature. Something like that. Anyway, they never made any Auras with Haunt on them so I can't tell you if this works or not. I feel like it should be "or" not "and" though. As a final thought, compare Drains to Crippling Fatigue.

>>53647422
>reverb+ twincast
Ha, you're absolutely right. I wish I could fucking sleep, goddamn. Anyway, yeah it's likely that Flare is fine. I dunno where my head was. I wouldn't make it a sorcery though, it loses too much in the process. Well, unless you wanted it to ACTUALLY be the same cost as Twincast and Reverberate.

File: The Pale River Flows.png (280KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 375x523px

>>53647440
I combined them.

Turns out, it's a perfect idea.

-2/-2 kills the thing, dropping the enchantment into the yard so you can guide a friend.

It's so... Melvin.

>>53647601
Yeah this looks way cooler, cleaner, and more interesting.

>>53644673

Cut the second part out. It's extraneous information.

>>53644673
>turn 7
>play this
>play out reaper king for free
>play out coalition victory for 3
>win

>>53650102

I don't know if this was the intention but this card will normally shuffle itself back into the library with its ETB effect.

>>53651062
That Kinda was the idea so it can't be abuse by graveyard re

>>53647107
>>53646979

Change it to nonland, or it will read "exile a fetchland, get another one from your deck"

File: Firestorm Matrix2.jpg (55KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 375x523px

>>53642471
Looks like trash to me. Are you a fan of Epic?

>>53642498
I've seen Red takes on Mind Unbound before, but I think this is the worst of them for denying draws.

>>53644117
>Belly
Seen this before too. Still not convinced by it.

>Cliffs
Seems interesting.

>>53644656
Tri-color for 6 damage seems fair.

>>53644673
Probably broken, but I really like the idea.

>>53650177
You don't know how mana reduction works, do you? If he cut out the restriction to only reduce colored costs, then it could also reduce generic costs.

>>53645995
Cool idea, but I agree with the other guy. Oh, and it should be
>Exile all cards from your hand

>>53646158
Seems good. I'll try to remember to start using it.

>>53646617
I think a better design would be to cut out Domain and make a token for each counter on it. And replace Sunburst with Converge. But that's just me.

>>53646979
Kinda with the other guy, might as well just be Eternal Witness. I guess you could make it something like Secret Salvage, but then you'd have to up the cost a lot.

>>53647195
>Whiteout
Eh, not too much of a fan of White exiling creatures unconditionally. But at that cost and rarity it seems in-line with cards Wizards has already made. Have to ask though, why 1 life? Seems rather paltry.

>Forgery
Jeez, Spitting Image was 6, right? This... I feel like this should cost more. It would be a lot easier to cost though if it only targets a creature you control though.

>Theory Flare
You probably need to up the cost. Though I'm just wondering why you don't make it
>Insight
>When you cast your next instant or sorcery spell this turn, copy that spell. You may choose new targets for the copy.
Functionally the same, but I think it's cleaner.

>>53647375
Cool, you used my suggestion. Or at least I think it was my suggestion. I think these are fine by themselves, but I like the other guy's idea. Reminds me of the Nyx auras from JOU.

>>53647601
Nice.

>>53650946
I like it. A fine uncommon.

>>53650965
Eh... unsure.

>>53657007

So it draws a card for playing itself at end of turn?

What would you cost the following at?

Lead Into Oblivion
Instant
Exile a permanent you control and all permanents that share a subtype with it.

>>53658294
I think I'd make it rare.

>>53658385
Subtype? Seems really narrow. No idea, sorry.

File: um02.png (200KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 375x523px

Inspired by roborosewater.

roborosewater came up with "whenever a player taps... that player adds G, add CC to your mana pool."

>>53642498
>>53644117
>>53642471
>>53645995
>>53655862
>>53656330
Interesting and unique

>>53650102
>>53643307
Broken.

>>53646644
What's your explanation for wither?
btw the 1st version is better. 2nd one has too much text for an uncommon and the additional text doesn't really add too much.

>>53657007
"if you casted an artifact spell this turn" --> "if you cast an artifact spell this turn"

Question since I'm not too sure. What would be the main colors for stealing stuff like counters and mana?

>>53661346
stealing is blue and black. Potentially red.

mana I'd say blue, counters I'd say u or b

>>53661652
Alright, I had a creature that can sort of take counters from other creatures as B/R but maybe red wasn't right

>>53661726
I'd say if it hits a dude it can take counters would be black with a side of red

>>53661881
Na, it's more like it get counters that you remove for other counters

>>53661945
close enough to vampirism to be BR

>>53662024
Fair enough then. Thanks.

>>53661346
Stealing counters isn't seen much, and seems to get split between G, B, and U. Stealing mana I've only seen on one card, and that was U.

Don't listen to what the other guy said about R, AFAIK, he's dead wrong there.

>>53662072
Well thanks too.

Might as well just explain it to make it easier. Basically dude comes in and gets however many do nothing counters. Then once per turn one of these counters can be removed to move a counter from another creature on to it.

I asked about the mana stealing because I was thinking of making it so you could also take mana from someone when they tap using the counters but I've decided that might be too silly and just taking counters seemed simple enough

>>53662167
that's purely U / B. Exchanging things where you're guaranteed to benefit is U as hell.

>>53662167
I recommend getting rid of the do-nothing counters. Actively mixing up multiple counters on the same card screams memory issues. Just say something like
>[cost]: Move a counter from another target creature onto ~.
If I understand you right.

Oh, and for wording help, I got some pretty good results with this query:
http://magiccards.info/query?q=o%3Amove+o%3Acounter+-o%3Aremove+-o%3Agraft&v=card&s=issue

And for one other avenue you can go down, you could just remove a counter entirely, then put a predetermined counter on the card. It's not precisely the same, but has more or less the same favor. For that, I refer you to Thief of Blood.

And as for R, the only cards I can think of that are mR and manipulate counters only manipulate time counters. Oh, and while R does get some stealing, B and U do it far, far, FAR more often. It's one of the few things that B and U share, actually.

>>53662316
Ah, I thought'd be more black since I'm taking shit but I guess that makes sense. Thanks my dude

File: Jimmy Olsen4.jpg (53KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 375x523px

Older design, obviously. I'm just not feeling the newer design with him turning into stuff. Idea is to capitalize on his job as a reporter. Creatures appearing or leaving = news = card draw. I hope that makes sense.

>>53662316
I don't think he plans on exchanging the do-nothing counters, it seems he's using them as a sort of cap on the creature, so it can't steal counters indefinitely. If I'm right, I think it would be a lot more fitting in Black.

>>53662369
I hope I don't sound rude, but could you please spend a minute getting a mockup of your card so we can all see it? It's like the blind leading the blind without a concrete idea of what the hell you're actually making.

>>53662335
Hmm, I get where you're coming from about the multiple counters causing issues, I had thought about it myself. I kinda just wanted to use counters though as I wanted to have this ability as a limited use thing.

Of course the real trouble starts to come in if you start taking different counters like, for example, a +1/+1 counter and an energy counter.

>>53662416
Ah yeah, sorry, I would have but I'm travelling right now so I can't actually get to the card. I'd probably have it in a couple hours at most

>>53662482
Well, permanents can't get energy counters, but yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. +1/+1 counters, brick counters, charge counters, etc. And you can't even make an argument that it would only be +1/+1 counters if that card's a creature, since you might want to use the ability just to get counters away from your opponent.

>>53662519
Ah. Well, could you at least give us some rules text so we have an idea of how it works? Like, is it a triggered ability or a replacement ability, how many counters, how much does it cost, etc. The rules text doesn't have to be perfect, just so we have an idea of how the entire card functions.

Oh wait, I just remembered we have this
https://mtg.design/
You can use it to design cards even from your phone or tablet. You have to sign up, but it's pretty easy.

>>53662608
I like the idea, but how often do you really need more lands once you're at 6 mana?

>>53662590
I think this is pretty much what I wrote. Forgive any of my shitty formatting especially as far as explaining the part about taking counters and the once per turn bit as I'm not quite sure if that's how it should be done:

Coin purse # (As this creature enters the battlefield, put # coin counters on it. You may remove a coin counter from this creature and move one counter of any kind on any permanent to this creature. You may only remove a coin counter from this creature once per turn.)

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

47KB, 375x523px

>>53662608
Maybe if you're playing a weird Stax deck? Or in EDH?

>>53662747
That was meant to >>53662647

File: 1399311961522.png (253KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 375x523px

>>53662684
The picture looks like Don Quixote came back from the dead. He's excited, Sancho Panza is not.

Anyway, card seems interesting, but I feel like it's a bit too easy to just recur to make yourself the Monarch whenever you want.

>>53662740
Holy god, a keyword? Now, you shouldn't jump to conclusions, and you should definitely wait until you get feedback on this from people other than me before making any decisions but... I don't think I'd ever consider keywording something like this in a million years. Simply, it's way too complex.

Oh wait, this reminds me of something Pirate anon did. Hopefully this helps you a bit.

>>53662836
>remove counters to make +1/+1
Ok yeah, that's way better, thanks.

Yeah, now that I think about it didn't need to be a keyword, I could just have the description of the keyword as the actual effect.

I'll think about it more, thanks again for your help.

File: Lonnie Machin Anarky6.jpg (54KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 375x523px

Don't think there's been any change to this. Idea is to get across a tinkerer. He makes his own stuff, even from scrap, and turns them into weapons.

>>53662979
I did point you to Thief of Blood. Did you miss that?

Sure, no problem. That's what we're all here for, right?

>>53663048
I saw it, I just sort of glossed over it though when it removed everything that I was too stupid to notice the conversion to +1/+1s

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

51KB, 375x523px

Based on another card I saw that I really liked. I just added cantrip. Plus I thought it would be cool to do something similar to Acrobatic Maneuver since Nightwing was raised as an acrobat in a circus.

>>53663109
Eh, that's fine. Pirate anon actually made a few cards with that mechanic. Let me know if you want me to post them for ideas.

>>53663178
Thanks for the offer but it should be good. It should be a simple enough ability

File: 34.jpg (63KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 312x445px

>>53662451
Should cost way more. Compare to The Abyss, which was a staple in its day.

File: Once and Futa Queen.png (307KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 375x523px

I couldn't help myself.

>>53662747
Oh cool, a color-shifted Mana Vortex.

>>53664569
Was it your intent to give the card all the keywords, no matter which one's in the grave?

>>53665222
yes?

File: Blackheart Reaver.png (268KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 375x523px

>>53667556
Functional common/10. I really like the flavor. I'd be happy to see it show up in a set. It could ALMOST be U because Hydrosurge, but blue likes holding onto cards so much that it's safer at 1U.

>>53666154
I realize the UUBB in the cost is something of a conventional necessity, but damn if it doesn't make this hard to use. I suppose that stands to reason though since it's really powerful. This card wins games.

>>53665875
One would expect a token creature out of the +1 on a CMC5 PW, so the Clue token is a bit odd. Of course, the fact that it doubles up means that may be for the best. A simplistic card that works. Not terribly impressive but kind of charming. Not really a fan of the name though. It invokes Populate to me, so I want to see GW not GU.

>>53665165
Whew. I'm not sure about the cost on this but it's got to be close. Pretty good idea overall.

>>53664569
Kinda clunky since it defies expectations a little by looking for one keyword but granting three. Most cards that fish for keywords like this just grant whatever's there and that's it, so it could be jarring to some players. Also so easy to set up that it might as well just have those keywords. A black one-drop activates this no sweat.

>>53664140
Kinda like the decision making here. Would have loved to see this in Tarkir somewhere.

>>53656330
>seems good
Good to hear. No pressure, I just felt like finally updating it. Maybe I'll do the challenge sometime too, but i'm not sure I can change it without making it more complex.
>Matrix
Can't this be worded with the "until ~ leaves the battlefield" Banisher Priest wording?

>>53660262
>explain wither
I... like it? It felt like it needed something. I actually prefer the second version; the first is too obviously pushed for Madness decks and stuff. The 2nd one is more usable overall and needs less justification for the Disfigure effect.

Not sure black should interact with Equipment like this, but I'm tired, I'll toss some shit at the wall.

>>53668575
>Firestorm Matrix
I'd have to think of a way to apply it to your own stuff. I'll see if it looks cleaner than this version. But I'm guessing the core mechanic is good and fairly costed?

>>53668575
>>53670193
Ugh, forgot to give feedback.

>card
I don't get the -X bit. What does it represent exactly? I realize the idea is that the Equipment somehow weakens the other creatures. I feel like it's just asking for FStrike.

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

44KB, 375x523px

If this card were legitimately spoiled on the latest set, how would you and /tg/ in general react??

File: ca01 Eevee.jpg (43KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 375x523px

Have a bad idea for a mechanic.

>>53663742
That's just patently false, planeswalkers and enchantments have very different knobs to balance. The fact you lose life when they sac a creature is a big downside, as well as the fact it can be attacked to be destroyed. The Abyss does neither of that.

File: Eylis, Champion of Dusk.jpg (205KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 744x1039px

I haven't posted or lurked here a long while. it's good to be back, mainly just to lurk though. figured I'll post something for critique.

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

1MB, 750x1046px

Something I'd like to repost for the reactions.

>>53658294
This needs to either be a sorcery or have another drawback like 3 damage, otherwise it's too good. And printing removal at mythic is not acceptable.
>>53662394
This is great. Makes for interesting decision-making with cards like Venser and Mysitc Snake.
>>53662684
Great flavour. At 5 mana it's probably fine.
>>53662747
This is insane with Loam / Crucible, but so are Wasteland effects. I like it.
>>53665165
Tribal is also a card type. And the name seems weird. Unless Sakura refers to some fictional country/region, I guess. I realise you want it to mirror Seasons Past, but unfortunately it doesn't sound nearly as good.
>>53665875
Why not "another target permanent" for the -3?
>>53666154
"mana of any kind" is the more up-to-date version of that, see e.g. Gonti. Also, it should be "any number of cards with the same name as that spell"; this doesn't affect the library search in any way since it's not public, but allows you to leave stuff in their 'yard if you want (so you can surgical remaining copies from their hand, for example).
>>53667556
Good stuff. I'm a little sad you can't cast it on an empty board, but that goes well with the flavour text.
>>53668575
Isn't this a little weak? If you have several out the opponent is going to focus on removing your equipment, making them useless. I'd prefer this as a 2/1 without downside. And shrinking attacking creatures seems useless since anything with some half-decent equipment is going to eat small stuff anyway, and with the 3/1 base body + equipment it's going to trade with ~5/5s almost always anyway.
>>53670667
So rebels but worse? Meh. You could have it search for certain creature types instead to make it less parasitic, but then it'll just turn into silverbullets.dec.

File: Eylis, Champion of Dusk (1).jpg (209KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 744x1039px

>>53671243
oops, didn't mean to have the color indicator and such. fixed version.

File: Wind God Girl.jpg (86KB, 752x523px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 752x523px

>>53662451
>>53671204
The other anon is right in saying it's aggressively costed, and remember that black has plenty of lifelink to go around. Personally I dislike planeswalkers replacing enchantments, so while I can't say I like the card, the fact that it's bad at catching you up from behind means the current costing might be acceptable.
>>53671778
A self-sufficient token engine in UB? With haste? No sir, I don't like it. And you don't need a comma after "Then".
>>53671540
I disagree on the colours; artifact recycling is more R and B, and while 1/1 artifact tokens are colourless, C feels more like an Eldrazi thing. So yeah, I think this should be 1BR.

>card
So here's a thing. I already know it's stupid in limited. I think it would be fringe playable in legacy if it only required two counters; would that be too pushed?
And I know that I should use a different kind of counter, but it felt appropriate. The best alternative I came up with was knowledge counters, but that's not nearly as fitting. Suggestions welcome.

File: Victor Stone Cyborg8.jpg (47KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 375x523px

>>53670610
Can't speak for anyone else, but I think I'd kill myself from the sheer despair that Wizards would use such awful wording. Seriously, "attack power"? This isn't YGO. Though to be fair, this is a complete bitch to word right.
>Choose target creature you control. That creature gets +0/+1 until end of turn. Whenever a creature dealt combat damage by the chosen creature this combat dies, the chosen creature deals damage equal to its power to that creature's controller.
Honestly not even sure it's worth bothering with.

>>53670667
It's better than other Pokemon cards I've seen, at least this one works.

>>53671243
...Who are you?

>card
Don't know why you decided to use the split mana frame instead of the gold frame. And I think better wording would be
>[...] put a +1/+1 counter on that creature and a +1/+1 counter on ~.
As for the abilities, I'm actually not sure about making tokens like this. I feel like the entire card is more GW than UB just based on pure mechanics, making tokens and pumping up creatures. Not sure where to go with it though, sorry. Combat damage trigger?

>>53671540
Why a C in the cost? I guess it's fine overall. Nice art though. Actually, I think I've seen it before. IIRC, it was on a Blue ritual made by a guy butthurt over discovering that Blue can make mana for use with artifacts.

>>53658294
You should probably make this sorcery-speed so it's more or less on par with Vindicate.

File: indeks.jpg (359KB, 1875x523px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 1875x523px

>>53671930
>>53671702
It's a strictly top-down limited mechanic made to somehow make 3-stage evolutions work. (They search for transform cards- and because I don't have normal mtg set restrains transform cards occupy normal rarity slots).
It is very parasitic, but also flavorfu, and parasitism will not be relevant if they only ever appear in what amounts to one printed set cube.

These all search for uncomons, Eevee has a coule of uncommon and rare targets.

File: indeks.jpg (563KB, 3760x523px) Image search: [Google]

563KB, 3760x523px

>>53672040
Relevant

I am aware that these might be undercosted in comparison to the counterparts from Eldritch moon. I decided to start with them pushed and cost them upwards from here because this is the most important mechanic in the set and it's supposed to be exciting, while the EM Wereldrazi were not exciting in the slightest. I very much see many of these getting +2 to their transform costs, but I wonder how y'all see this.

File: ug01 Ivysaur.jpg (66KB, 752x523px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 752x523px

>>53672184
Whoops, almost forgot the biggest one.

>>53671702
>And printing removal at mythic is not acceptable.
Not my card, but I've seen this opinion from others, and I just have to ask, why do you guys always say this? I mean, I get that Murder and Lightning Bolt shouldn't be mythic (outside of Vault or Masterpiece, obv.), but what about stuff like Descent of the Dragons or Quarantine Field?

>Jimmy Olsen
Cool, thanks.

>Unless Sakura refers to some fictional country/region, I guess.
Sakura means "cherry blossom". He used that art specifically because the tree has cherry blossoms on it, that's what the pink flowers are.

>"mana of any kind" is the more up-to-date version of that, see e.g. Gonti.
Grr... it's "mana of any type". There are six TYPES of mana, which are the five COLORS of mana plus colorless. There are no KINDS of mana.

>>53672040
>>53672184
Make the pokemon names creature types. Then you could make it more like Pokemon and and have multiple versions of the same pokemon.

>>53672205
>Descent of the Dragons or Quarantine Field
Those are not standard removal spells, both are potentially huge effects. Descent can be used as a REALLY bad removal spell but it's more akin to Day of the Dragons that does not give you your toys back, while Quarantine Field is a one-sided sweeper if you pump enough juice into it.

>>53672265
So, what kind of removal shouldn't be mythic? Basically any removal that just takes out a single target and that's it?

>>53672254
Nah. I don't want to do that because I will not make more than one version of each pokemon.

>>53672293
Mythic rarity is by definition about big and flashy effects, or at least ones with potential to be such effects in proper conditions. Removal is not that at all, it's a bread-and-butter effect for black after all. You're not making the effect flashier, you're just making it broader.

>>53672040
>>53672184
If it's a limited mechanic that's all the more reason to use subtypes rather than names.
>>53672205
>why do you guys always say this?
I should have worded it differently; Printing 1-for-1 removal that's sure to be a format staple at mythic is not acceptable. The reasons are 1) it's blatant jewing (not relevant to custom cards, but it still pisses me off) and 2) mythic is a rarity for cards you basically don't want to show up in limited. Removal is definitely a thing you want to have in limited, so making it mythic is stupid. Now I'm of the opinion that mythic rarity shouldn't be a thing to begin with so I could be overreacting, but I hope you see my point.
>Sakura means "cherry blossom"
I know. "Seasons of [plant species]" seems like a strange name, and not evocative of anything in particular (unlike "Seasons Past", which is one of the best card names from Wizards in recent sets, at least in my opinion).
>it's any type
Oops. My bad.

>>53672358
I do not intend to do many searchers, and was moreover inspired byt the alara block searchers. They searched for mythics and were unplayable by themselves, so I just thought it'd be interesting to see if a cycle+1 of commons that search for uncommons would be workable.

File: indeks.jpg (335KB, 1875x523px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 1875x523px

Also, I request help on how to word these.

>>53671871
>>53671930
Green, like White, has the mechanic of "maintaining" card advantage with creatures. Things like drawing a card when you play a creature, or creatures that replace themselves when they die. The colorless cost is basically leading Green to care about something it usually doesn't, but it still cares about it in a Green way.

>>53672337
>Removal is not that at all, it's a bread-and-butter effect for black after all.
You mean "creature removal" specifically, right?

>>53672358
>Now I'm of the opinion that mythic rarity shouldn't be a thing to begin with so I could be overreacting, but I hope you see my point.
I don't understand why you're opposed to it when you make a good point about how it can be useful to weed out cards so they don't fuck limited. But yeah, I get you.

>"Seasons of [plant species]"
It's not a plant species, it's a flower. (Technically cherry blossoms can be produced by a number of tree species under the genus Prunus.) But yeah, I'm not too fond of the name either. I just didn't think you knew what the word meant.

>>53672494
>The colorless cost is basically leading Green to care about something it usually doesn't, but it still cares about it in a Green way.
You don't need a colorless cost. If a set revolves around artifacts, you can bend the pie slightly to make more cards that interact with artifacts. People understand this.

>>53672476
>T: Transform target [color] creature.
You can't transform things that can't be transformed. Also, just so you know, Transform isn't the same as turning something face up or face down. Morph cards, for example, can't Transform.

>>53671871
thanks for you thoughts on Eylis. That's something I still struggle with occasionally, the color pie. I have another card I'm gonna post soon that I know is in its own colors, but I'm unsure if it's too powerful or not.

>>53671930
>>53671243
oh I'm not anybody known or anything like that, I just used to lurk a lot and I started posting at one point for a very small amount of time.

File: rr01 Jolteon.jpg (49KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 375x523px

>>53670667
Can a non-sacking ball lightning just cost RRR these days?

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

46KB, 375x523px

>>53672502
>I don't understand why you're opposed to it when you make a good point about how it can be useful to weed out cards so they don't fuck limited.
If the power gap between commons and rares/mythics wasn't as huge as it is mythic rarity would not be necessary. At least that's what I like to think.
>I just didn't think you knew what the word meant.
I'm posting (mostly) touhou cards.

>card
So after all that complaining about mythic rarity, here's a mythic. I think the rarity is justified as it alters the rules of the game.

>>53672864
Owner's control? Eh... unsure about this. And why sac on damage as well? Also, the sac ability should say "when" rather than "whenever" since the ability's only ever going to resolve once.

>>53672801
Vanilla 5/2's are 4 CMC, so I doubt it.

Also this:
http://magiccards.info/query?q=pow%3E%3D5+tou%3C%3D2+%28o%3Ahaste+or+o%3Atrample%29+-o%3Asacrifice&v=card&s=cmc

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

49KB, 375x523px

>>53672979
>why sac on damage as well?
Felt more natural for things that are kind of already dead.
>should say "when"
Good catch, thanks.

File: Aagaresh, Teller of Time (1).jpg (189KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 744x1039px

here's another. unsure about this one's power level, I think it might be too good.

I've always felt like Planeswalkers feel wrong. They aren't really integrated into the game in the same way that other cardtypes are, because there are so few cards that directly interact with them specifically (aside from removal). Wizards is slowly making improvements in this regard. But I don't really think that is enough to really integrate them into the rest of the game in an organic way yet. I would want to see more things like Desiccated Naga, Ajani's Comrade, Companion of the Trials, Guardian of the Great Conduit, and the other planeswalker specific cards they have been putting out in those character specific decks. But that apply to planeswalkers in general rather than a specific walker.

To that end, I have been considering designing a set around the idea of interacting with planeswalkers. But I'm struggling with designing good keyworded abilities that go along with that theme, and would really like some input and feedback on the ideas I have.

On creature abilities:
1. Unnamed BR aggro creature drawback (This creature can only attack players.)
2. Unnamed walker nerf X (Whenever this creature deals combat damage to a player, that player removes X loyalty counters from among planeswalkers they control.)
3. Unnamed planeswalker buff V1 (Whenever this creature deals combat damage to a player, you may put a loyalty counter on a planeswalker you control.)
4. Unnamed planeswalker buff V2 (Whenever this creature deals combat damage to a player, you may activate a loyalty ability of a planeswalker you control as though none of its loyalty abilities had been activated this turn.)

On planeswalker abilities:
1. Unnamed activation buff V1 (You may activate up to two of this planeswalkers abilities on each of your turns.)
2. Unnamed activation buff V2 (You may activate this planeswalkers abilities at any time you could cast an instant including on your opponents turns, but only once before your next untap step.)

>>53673620
You realize that players are planeswalkers, right? If you had, for example, a creature that only did things if you controlled a planeswalker, there would be a bit of a disconnect there, since you're a planeswalker. Creatures that only do things with certain walkers though can certainly make sense.

Also, that BR idea is the weakest drawback I've ever seen, even moreso considering that B gets walker destruction and R gets burn.

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

61KB, 375x523px

Wait, mG made Clues. Does this need U in it?

>>53673444
Costs seem OK, I think, though I have to ask why you don't just make the token its own card.

>>53673444
>>53674027
Actually, a few more things. Why isn't the token legendary? Flash should go on a separate line above Flying. And the timing restriction should be "Activate this ability only during your turn."

>>53673444
>Flash
>Flying
>When ~ enters the battlefield, create a colorless artifact token named Aagaresh's Eye with "(8), Sacrifice this artifact: Take an extra turn after this one. Activate this ability only on your turn."
If anything, it's underpowered. Sure extra turns are nice, but when you have to pay 8 it's basically an Explore. So what we really have here is an instant 4/6 flier for 4UUU, which is anywhere between playable and good in limited (depending on the speed of the format) and likely not playable in constructed because control want their win condition to have protection (hexproof, indestructible, etc.).

File: Aagaresh, Teller of Time (3).jpg (186KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 744x1039px

>>53674092
>>53674027
how about this? boosted power and reduced the cost for the extra turn by 1

File: Image (1).jpg (32KB, 223x310px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 223x310px

>>53674092
>>53675359
>Activate this ability only DURING your turn.
It really pisses me off when people give incorrect advice.

>>53675359
See >>53674092 for the wording on the ETB (and add that the token is legendary), except it's "Activate this ability only during your turn."
As for powerlevel, the reason I don't think it's playable isn't because the card is too weak for its cost, it's because the card is a 7 mana creature in blue. As such it will not be played unless it works as a combo piece (it doesn't) or as a control finisher (it doesn't). That doesn't mean the card is weak or that you should keep pushing it.
>>53675535
I don't usually screw up like this; I even looked up Humble Defector to make sure I got it right and then brainfarted.

>>53673444
This card is fine. The token shouldn't have to be used on your turn only. The additional unnecessary text adds nothing to the card and afaik doesn't prevent anything broken.
Really it's only scary with a repeatable blink source.

File: Kirk Langstrom Man-Bat4.jpg (44KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 375x523px

Decided to simplify the shit out of this. Before you ask, yes, the last trigger is designed so if you use the pump on Kirk, he'll get a counter. Though I have to admit, I am starting to wonder about changing the trigger to maybe end of combat.

File: indeks.jpg (1MB, 1504x2615px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1504x2615px

A cycle of Gold-Card equivalents I'm working on.

>>53672560
Thanks for clearing that up mate.

>>53673033
Seems legit.

File: Arthur Curry Aquaman16.jpg (45KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 375x523px

Hopefully, this will be the last time I post this thing. No changes from last time.

>>53677479
How long has it been since you've played Magic?

Intimidate is dead, replaced by the evergreen keyword Menace. Menace is the old Goblin War Drums ability (This creature can't be blocked except by two or more creatures.), and it's roughly evenly split between Black and Red.

"attacks each turn" has been replaced by "attacks each combat" presumably to make it more intuitive for turns with multiple combat phases.

Indestructible is no longer a property, and is now an evergreen keyword.

All-in-all, none of these really "wow" me. I get they're uncommons, but so many of them are so simple mechanically they could easily be commons.

>>53677700
>Intimidate thing
I know that one. I still prefer Intimidate by a long shot.

>>53677700
Also DFC's by themselves are a very complex mechanic. I know you can do really complex DFC uncommons, but I don't believe you should. These 10 are supposed to be evocative and good in the color combinations.

I thank you for the attack-each-turn and Indestructible advices,


Anyone else with advice? I'm especially interested in costing abilities.

Tell me if this is a viable idea
>Discard your hand, search your library for seven cards and put them into your hand. An opponent names seven cards. Reveal your hand. Exile each card revealed this way that the opponent named.
Not rules text, obviously, but enough to get the basic idea across. Toning down the number from seven is fine with me.

>>53678742
It seems to me like the sort of card that'd always leave somebody irritated.
In low level play, people likely wouldn't know what their opponent would be fetching so it'd piss them off when they got maybe 1 or 2 right.
In high level play or games between people who knew each other's decks, I'd expect a near 100% exile rate which would ruin it for the caster.

>>53673845
You have a point fluffwise, although if I had to I would justify it be having more than one walker contributing power to the creature or something like that.

My main gripe is with how as a card type they aren't very well integrated. There just aren't a lot of cards that deal directly with Planeswalkers without being removal, and doubling down on effects that only jive with specific planeswalkers will end up being very parasitic.

Thanks for the feedback, I was considering that drawback for a set that is VERY planeswalker heavy, but out of context of that specific environment I totally agree. I might consider switching it around to (This creature can only attack planeswalkers), but I don't think that ability is particularly red anymore. Maybe UB though?

File: index.jpg (511KB, 1125x1046px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 1125x1046px

Hey lads, I'm thinking of making a set for fun

I have 3 major mechanics so far, planning on using an older mechanic to fill for a fourth. Commons are shown above as an example of applicability and Rares are shown below as an example of what the mechanics can do when fleshed out.

>Attune
This makes your spells cost 1 less if you cast spells with a matching color before it. I was thinking of a way to make non-broken spell affinity and this is the best solution I came up with. Ideally I can make a few spells with cheap costs and smaller effects to help support these ones.

>Empower
The goal of this mechanic is to increase the power of a particular permanent consistently without resorting to kicker costs or the like. I decided that tapping a permanent of the same type was a good trade-off to help streamline gameplay and make card type themes more important.

>Resonance
Obviously the most complex mechanic. I tried modeling it after "Bounty of the Luxa" from Amonkhet. The idea is that Resonance permanents work on a on/off system and have strong effects because they don't work every turn. Maybe I could use the counters creatively...?

Suggestions welcome.

File: Sanctum Keeper.png (215KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 375x523px

>>53680298
>making a set for fun
You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din.

>Empower
I feel like this could be an ability word instead, built around "<ABILITYNAME> -- Tap an untapped permanent that shares a type with ~: <EFFECT>." That way you don't have a keyword that doesn't do anything on its own, and it saves space on your cards. Just a thought. As to how much I like it... I suppose depending on what you do with it it could turn out to me a more interactive, interesting Exalted, but I'll have to see more than two cards to tell.
>Attune
I don't really care for this caring about color, BUT, it's probably a better way to do it, yeah. I mean when you deckbuild, even in draft, you're going to be using one or two colors. So it naturally falls into place, and doesn't scale off any of the other monocolored stuff you take from your second color choice, so there's a bit more of a power check built into it. I can't really see much degenerate about it except mechanics that can't effectively show up on low-cost cards are annoying to me. I mean you CAN put this on a CMC2 card, and it could be fine, but they are harder to balance because the difference between CMC1 and CMC2 is much more than CMC3 and CMC4 in terms of how swingy they become based on what you're paying for them. Again, I'd need to see more cards before I draw a conclusion.
>Resonance
I don't care for this at all. Too much upkeep. A clean, simple board state is a happy board state, and remembering what turn what Resonance cards get counters and what ones you take counters off of and wrangling them all is not going to lead to a clean board. Also having something that sits there and does nothing every other turn is kinda lame. Consider Phasing, for a moment. I suppose you can toss in stuff that adds counters and removes them, but then you're forcing it, I think, since cadence counters do nothing on their own, and I always advise against mechanics that use such counters (except charge counters).

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

41KB, 375x523px

No idea on balance, sorry.

>>53679085
Damn. Oh well. Guess I'll just have to think of something else. Time to research Fact or Fiction and its variants. Any suggestions?

>>53679795
Well, what would you make to interact with them? There are a few problems with planeswalkers. One being that even now they're not used as often as basically ever other card type. It doesn't help that they basically have a built-in legend rule, only worse. And that they don't have a whole lot in common with each other mechanics-wise, like, the effects that planeswalkers produce can be damn-near anything. The only things you really get are Oaths, cards that hand out loyalty counters, and cards that are designed to interact with a specific planeswalker subtype.

>>53680298
>Hey lads, I'm thinking of making a set for fun
Good luck, you'll need it.

>Empower
Reminds me of Rally. Not much of a fan, seems really broad and vague. Other anon had a good idea, just make it an ability word with no inherent rules.

>Attune
I could see cost-reduction being a thing, but I don't think this is it. Just brainstorming, maybe
>The first spell with attune you cast each turn costs 1 less to cast for each spell cast before it this turn.
Or something, IDK.

>Resonance
>At the beginning of every other upkeep [...]
Blech, no.

>>53681157
Yeah, this is pretty much exactly why I'm not supportive of Exert being put on tap effects.

>>53681157
Meh. The modes are too disparate and there's so much text to chew through that message gets lost along the way.

>>53681157
Pretty sure 99% of the time they'd just write that as two T: abilities and skip the Exert wording entirely.

>>53682175
>>53682186
I think the issue is I picked a particularly wordy effect for it. Something less wordy would be a +1/+1 counter instead of the temporary pump, for example. I just designed it concept-first for whatever reason. It's not really "exert on tap cost's" fault for that. Though you might be right that it'd end up too wordy for commons anyway, which typically means it's a bad idea overall.
>Xanadu
I haven't the foggiest idea either. Daxos and Grenzo are the only two things you can really fall back on for it, but they both require combat damage. This doesn't, so it's much safer. I feel like even though it costs you a draw (at your option, mind you) it's just too safe to be that cheap. 3U might be better, with a slightly better body tacked on. The issue is that it doesn't require you to cast the card right away unlike Daxos and Grenzo, so you can bide your time. That's a big advantage.

>>53682316
Oh you just HAD to come along and do it better, huh? Actually I'm glad someone did a better job at it; at least it shows that it can be done.

>>53682334
Woah. I'd have to do some digging on this.

>>53682400
I suppose if you attached a mana cost to the flicker, yeah. The idea was that exert substituted in for that though.

>>53682400
>>53682446
The rules should support Exerting as a cost.
It'd probably be:
T: Target creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
T, Exert ~: Put a +1/+1 counter on target creature.

File: Buddy Blank GPA Soldier2.jpg (77KB, 752x523px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 752x523px

Combined the two effects on the front, and turned the counters into +1/+1 counters to make it a little better at surviving combat.

>>53682446
One problem that's been noted is that the two effects are so different. Maybe if the two effects were more similar.

>Xanadu
3U? OK. Might give it something else then, dunno.

>>53665875
I like it! Random tweaks...
I tried to keep the original theme but maybe I tried too hard to make it Melvin.

Amir the Populous (3UG)
Planeswalker - Amir
+2: Investigate. You gain 2 life.
-3: Create a token that's a copy of target permanent.
-5: For each token, you may create a token that's a copy of that permanent.
Loyalty 3

>>53683655
This makes more and more sense to me as a 2UG card. I like the biologist theme of the card. I'm imagining an ooze scientist.

>>53682175
I have a few plans to address the weirdness with walkers. For one, my set would also run with a planeswalker Masterpieces set, and I've set aside most of the Mythic and rare slots for walkers. That way at least in the set itself, walkers would at least be sort of commonplace.

In terms of specific interactions, I have a few ideas. Adding loyalty counters to your own walkers and taking counters off your opponents walkers would both be present. Effects that make the distinction between a creature attacking a player and attacking a planeswalker more important. Also effects like Teferi's ult that lets you use abilities on other peoples turn, and like The Chain Veil to get a second activation. Also cards that just benefit from controlling one or more planeswalker, off the top of my head something like 3U Sorcery "Draw 2 cards. Then if you control a Planeswalker, draw a card.", and stuff that has different effects based off if you use it before or after activating a planeswalker ability.
Hell even stuff like Heart of Kiran.

>>53683655
*another target permanent

>>53683380
You have two many colons on each of his abilities; there should only be one cost/effect delineation for each ability.

Quick question: Could Fortune's Favor be improved by reversing the roles so you separate the cards and an opponent choose which pile you get? I actually like the idea of FF, but I understand that most people seem to hate it.

>>53683855
Idea seems pretty cool. Unfortunately I don't entirely know about balance, but it seems OK to me.

>>53683946
>~'s equip ability costs 1 less to activate for each instant and sorcery card in your graveyard.
Cryptic Serpent + Ghostfire Blade

>>53684062
>Could Fortune's Favor be improved by reversing the roles so you separate the cards and an opponent choose which pile you get?
http://magiccards.info/query?q=o%3A%22chooses+one+of+those+piles%22&v=card&s=cname
Still terrible.

>>53684132
Doesn't answer my question.

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

49KB, 375x523px

Anon who made the Nifaltr block thing from a couple threads ago, which is still undergoing revision. I wanted to get some feedback on this Legendary.

File: partners.png (4MB, 1865x1047px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1865x1047px

>>53683946
Cool flavor, but seems unfocused mechanically. Probably has a use in Melek/Mizzix EDH though.

>pic related
I know partner commanders have been done but hopefully it's been enough time. Thoughts on these monocolor ones?

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

40KB, 375x523px

>>53684604
Oh, I made a card like this before. Though I was a lot more strict with mine because I had the feeling that it could be on par with Yawgmoth's Will in the right deck. Could be wrong though.

>>53684635
Ew, why use the gross old frames? Anyway, I know that the art on the Naari and Theleya are taken, though I don't remember the names off the top of my head. And I'm about 80% certain that the art for Hoarder Clique is also taken.

I really should get to bed, so I just skimmed these. None of them really "wow" me, and I feel like I've seen half of them before, just slightly different.

>>53684635
I like Eva and Bayil, and while giving Omnithrax exile messes with the color pie a bit, I like what it's trying to do.

Hoarder Clique is a bit weird though, very situational. Also Zuya can be worded as "At the beginning of your upkeep you may remove a counter from each permanent on the battlefield" I think. Sounds a bit less awkward.

>>53684753
Yep, all 3 are existing mtg art off the booru. Too lazy to find better stuff. I wasn't going for "wow" on most of these, just strongly in-color effects (mostly) that were balanced.

>>53684804
Thanks. I based Omni on the Maro color pie article from this week, which hinted at green getting o-ring creatures soon.

>Clique
Yeah, super build-around, which was not really what I wanted for this batch. Might swap it out with something that messes with colors/subtypes.

>Zuya
Less awkward, but that makes it so you have to remove a counter from all or none, rather than picking and choosing as I intended.

>>53684877
Is this part of a set? Or stand-alone?

File: 48.jpg (60KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 312x445px

>>53684635

>>53684906
You should always assume standalone.

>>53642471
Not sure the Epic rider is necessary.

See also: Wolf-Skull Shaman; Kemba, Kha Regent; Master of the Wild Hunt; Sorin, Solemn Visitor; Archdemon of Unx; Mastery of the Unseen

>>53642498
Feels like a decent finisher for red aggro, or a late-game play for slower red decks. Cost is probably in the right ballpark.

>>53643307
Idunno about costing {3} less. Extra turns are always powerful. Maybe just cost it {1} or {2} less; or you could raise the base cost too.

>>53644117
People will generally find it easier to parse when you tell them what they CAN do instead of what they CAN'T do. (ie, positive rather than negative form of a statement.)

Spend this mana only to (activate abilities / cast the second spell you cast each turn).

>Belly of a Shark
Should probably enter tapped if this is how you want the basic functionality. Getting more than one mana off a single land is always powerful.

>>53644656
Maybe have each colour only add 1 damage, plus 1 or 2 more damage. Red's supposed to be terrible at killing larger creatures, and if you're playing enough colours to turn on Converge, you probably have other kill spells for fatties in your deck. You could also consider changing to Sorcery.

>>53644673
Truly a card for Johnny/Spike.

>>53645995
Interesting way to combine a wheel with a punisher. As >>53646177 points out, runs into problems if you exile a hand of lands or weak cards, the face-down change is a good idea.

>>53646617
I like the tension here. You're encouraged to play dual lands for Sunburst, but you're also looking for basics for the death trigger. Probably needs a set where the duals also have basic land types. (In the vein of Murmuring Bosk probably, rather than shocklands or alpha duals.)

>>53646758
The first ability templating feels off to me. The discard is really an addtional cost, but the secondary trigger wants to be an ETB. I think you should ditch the second ability and double down on the first Maybe one of the following.

>double down on commitement to black
As an additional cost to cast ~, discard a card. If a black card is discarded this way, target creature gets -2/-2 until end of turn.

>simpler template, easier to parse
As an additional cost to cast ~, discard a black card.
When ~ enters the battlefield, target creature gets -2/-2 until end of turn.

>make it an option
When ~ enters the battlefield, you may discard a black card. If you do, target creature gets -2/-2 until end of turn.

>>53646979
As others have noted, very close to Eternal Witness, so probably cost it like an Eternal Witness. Consider also restricting it to searching for creatures; black normally only uses creatures in graveyard as a resource. Making the graveyard card a target also adds potential interaction, however limited.

>>53647195
>Insight mechanic
Your set is going to want cards with at least three colours to make this mechanic exciting.This mechanic will play like Storm with potentially easier set up, and a bounded upper limit. In other words, dangerously powerful and difficult to balance. Limiting your multicolour to two colours may be the only way to balance, but of course that's going to limit how exciting the Insight mechanic can be. Split cards and hybrid are also things you'll need to be cautious with.

See also: any card with the Storm mechanic. Seriously, Insight is basically a psuedo-Storm.

>>53647601
Definitely a cleaner execution. Has minor bookkeeping issues (is this Aura guided?) which can be marked by tapping the Aura. 1B is probably a safe enough cost for the base effect.

>>53650102
Very Johnny card, but difficult to grok. Consider this more elegant solution:

Sorcery
Shuffle your hand and graveyard into your library and draw five cards.
Threshold - Whenever a card is put into your graveyard, if there are seven or more cards in your graveyard, if you may cast ~ from your graveyard.

Probably a broken card either way.

>>53650946
Seems reasonable. See also: Constricting Sliver; Banisher Priest.

>>53650965
Looks like it'd be pretty strong in a control shell. It deals with an early beater, sits around to kill a big beater, and then gives back the early beater when it's no longer relevant. If the WB archetype isn't control, this card will push in that direction.

>>53650980
Seems fair.

>>53655862
>2spoopy4me
Overpowered. Are you aware that this removes creatures from combat before combat damage is dealt? You've combined Fog and No Mercy in a horrible way.

>>53656330
I quite liked Pyxis of Pandemonium because of the suspense/surprise. This thing is more like a Helvault. Probably needs a lower mana cost. Activation cost is probably correct, might need to go to {4} since you get to pick.

See also: Shattergang Brothers.

>>53656677
Huh. Interesting card. This should probably be straight up multicolour for 2UR instead of hybrid.

>>53657007
This spell will trigger itself, so it's already a slow cantrip. I suggest testing at both {1} and {2}. Also a template for second ability.

At the beginning of your end step, if you cast an artifact spell this turn, draw a card.

>>53658294
Premium removal. As others have said, rare and probably sorcery speed.

>>53658385
Needs to target your permanent so opponents know what's going. Should also be a nonland permanent.

>subtype
Very narrow. Only works if you're building a tribal set, creatures are the only subtype that are always there. This might be a place to use the Tribal card type though.

>>53662394
Whenever another creature enters or leaves the battlefield...

>>53685586
>Mercenary Cabalist
I've been making Mercenary cards for a few days now and I've tried to make most of them where they have to be "paid" somehow. This one demands knowledge (a card) but a la typical black has a preference for black cards so you get a bonus if you pay that way. Then starts "stealing" cards from the opponent. Basically an excuse to make a cheap Specter, because I like black cards that function this way. Now, I do want to streamline it though. The reason I didn't do the "as an additional cost to cast" is because you'd automatically get the Disfigure and they can't do anything about it, which felt too good to me. If it's actually fine that way, then I'll swap it in because it makes a ton more sense, I agree. Also, for the record, I want to keep the Specter ability as well.

>>53685269
I'm just going to be lazy and assume this is worded correctly. I like the reference, first off. It's not so cheesy that it needs to be a silver border. That said, I wonder if they wouldn't structure this as a modal card instead, were it to see print. Otherwise, I actually think it's fine, though perhaps it should be restructured to tap and add the counter and be recosted as such?

>>53684877
Eh, I don't think this is a good idea. Sure it is really strong if you manage to keep it going, but it's too fragile to be fun I feel. By that I mean that the bonus is to finicky so it's going to turn on and off a lot and that doesn't feel that great.

>>53684753
Probably fine. It's so pricey that you're going to have to sit on your thumbs before and after you use it anyway.

>>53662451
I suspect you've made this card for a control shell, but it has you dropping life to use him, which is something you don't want in a control deck. But I think the best place for him is actually an aggro deck.

Try it out as is and see how it goes. Then swap the +1 and -2, maybe remove the life loss on creature sacrifice, and see how it goes. Test both versions in aggro and control shells.

>>53662608
Interesting ability. You've got an interesting tension going there.

>>53662684
Monarch for EDH. Sounds like fun.

>>53662747
WotC has moved away from aggressively costed land destruction for decades. It just drags the game to a halt.

>>53662836
Seems like an interesting mechanic. Could lead to massive blowouts depending on how much attention you pay to it. You don't want massive blowouts to happen too often.

>>53663048
This looks like a card that could possibly exist.

>>53663178
I read the name as "Nightwing's ANTICS." Probably still appropriate. I don't think you need the cantrip though, the flicker effect is already giving you an ETB and/or removing a negative effect.

>>53664124
See also: Exava, Rakdos Blood Witch

>>53664140
Interesting decision. Maybe reduce the morph cost to 3B.

>>53664569
What others have said. It should search for and grant each ability separately, or just have them outright.

>>53665165
This is probably a fair cost as its targets put more unusual challenges on deck construction.

See also Creeping Rennaisance.

>>53665875
+1 could be templated "Investigate, then populate."

>>53666154
You're stealing more cards, but you're also not casting them for free. I think six mana is still probably the correct cost since it virtually draws up to four cards, in addition to countering.

See also: Spelljack; Kheru Spellsnatcher, Opportunity

>>53667556
We Melvin now.

>>53668575
Second ability is potentially oppressive. It's like Flanking on steroids. The equipment requirement is probably enough to keep it in check though.

>>53650246
>3 card combo
>turn 7
>win the game

Seems about right desu.

>>53670610
This template is so horrid I can't even.

>>53671540
Could just be 1GG.

>>53671778
Overpowered, even for a Legendary. Token generation is too cheap.

>>53671871
>Peerless Wind God
See also: Archetype of Imagination

>>53671930
This card doesn't need to be a 4/4 base. It could just have P/T equal to the artifacts you control. (ie, use */* for P/T.)

Activated ability is repeatable removal, generally a no-no for any card.

>>53672293
Standard board wipes should be rare, because a Constructed environment needs them. Mythic removal should be something truly special, whether by using a unique combination of effects, or the spell just feels epic. Also, anything that is so warping that it impacts Limited even at regular Rare, is made Mythic.

>>53672476
>Stones
You don't need the "that can be transformed" rider.

>>53672864
>Necrofantasia
Maybe needs to be blue too. Illusions are mechanically in blue.

>>53673389
Equip cost probably needs to be {2} or {3}.

See also: Banshee's Blade.

>>53673444
ETB triggers use "When" because by default they will only happen once. "Whenever" is used for triggers that are expected to happen repeatedly.

>>53674027
>Detective Chimp
Whenever ~ deals combat damage to a player, investigate.

There, simpler template, assuming you're using the investigate keyword.

>>53681157
Repeatable Cloudshift without a mana cost seems dangerous.

>>53682175
>Madame Xanadu
Cards are exiled face up by default, so the "you may look at them" clause isn't necessary. Did you mean to exile them face down?

>>53682316
Nice synergy goin' there.

>>53682334
I feel like there should be something to evoke water.

>>53682523
Can block as a 3/3 the turn you cast it, keep that in mind for balancing. The backside could probably get away with 3/3 or 4/4, since it keeps the +1/+1 counters. Depending on the game, this could transform and be ready to attack on turn 5. I'd suggest 1WW for mana cost.

>>53683168
Interesting mechanic. Maybe make this Legendary.

>>53686628
props for all this critique

>>53670205
Oops, I forgot to respond to the feedback on the Reaver. The -0/-X bit is supposed to be a black version of Ashmouth Hound's ability, but tied into the drawback and the "theme" of the Mercenary cards I've been making that all require they be "paid" somehow besides being cast. I thought about making it straight -X/-X but I that felt too oppressive.
>Firestorm Matrix
I think so, but it's really hard to judge since you can pitch creature tokens to it to remove real threats.

>>53671702
>weak
It may be a little, but it's also good with cheap, heavy-hitting equipment like Bonesplitter. Also, the effect isn't Shrink, it's reducing toughness, not power. Sure a big body will trade with it, but you just traded a 1B creature for a 5/5 that was likely much spendier. And yes, opponents can remove your equipment, but your board isn't going to be more than one of these in a draft, so where will their priorities be? What should they really be removing?

>>53686295
>flanking on steroids
It kinda is, yeah, but it's tied to an outside source, as you say, so there are several points of interaction that can change how threatening it is.

>>53686628
>>53686295
>>53685935
>>53685586

I'm with >>53686709; I appreciate you taking the time. Assuming you're the same anon that pops in now and again and hits the entire thread with feedback, welcome back. Even if you're not, we're glad to have you.

>>53683380
Colons are used to represent activated abilities. Loyalty abilities are already activated; adding a colon within the ability is just nesting them. Don't do this, it's terrible templating.

+1: Draw two cards and add {B} to your mana pool. You lose 2 life.

+1: [You may] sacrifice an artifact. Create a number of Gold artifact tokens with "[ability]" equal to the sacrificed artifact's converted mana cost.

-3: [You may] sacrifice a creature. If you do, destroy target artifact, creature, land, or planeswalker.

>>53683855
Trigger is expected to happen repeatedly, so use "whenever." Keep in mind this card is a lot better than Darksteel Plate if you play with ETB triggers. Consider a secondary requirement to make use of Phylactery, reducing equip cost, and removing the instant/sorcery reduction. (All three in conjunction.)

See also: Scythe of the Wretched; Oathkeeper, Takeno's Daisho. Keep in mind both cards are from the early days of Equipment, before WotC really understood how powerful Equipment were.

>>53684604
>>53684753
This mechanic feels like it should be white or green (Second Sunrise), but I think there's a blue/black card that does this in Amonkhet.


>>53684877
I think you should double (triple?) down on the second ability. Move flying to the conditional.

>>53685269
Nice top-down design.

>>53686186
>Mercenary Cabalist (>>53646758)
>Also, for the record, I want to keep the Specter ability as well.
Could work too. Specters have all had evasion, so the -2/-2 discard could be an alternative for flying. (This does of course disregard the dozens of non-specter creatures with the specter ability, but whatever makes your set I guess.)

>>53686295
>"Investigate, then populate."
Populate only clones creatures, so it wouldn't have the expected synergy with investigate.

>>53686933
Alright, I'll swap it to cast, rewarding pitching a black card. Madness and Flashback still like it, but it's not as crazy as the original. Thanks anon.
>set
Nooooope. Not me. I've failed at that enough, thank you.

File: Arborwytch.png (1MB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 744x1039px

Was messing around with a pair of ability word mechanics called Reap and Sow based around making basic Lands out of other permanents, and then having effects while the permanent is a land or from mana produced by it.

Sow would have a variable cost, and can only make basics for whatever colors the permanent naturally has by default.

>>53686628
>Archetype of Imagination
Strictly speaking the 0 ability is very slightly more flexible, and it being an improvement of the front side ability adds flavour, I think. As for Archetype being a 6 drop, currently mine needs 5 mana total, and you can never get the effect the turn you cast it. I realize it's pushed, but I don't think it's OP. I'll make the front ability cost U though.
>Maybe needs to be blue too.
Making interesting monocolour cards is hard. Oh well, you're probably right.
>Banshee's Blade
That one retains counters over different creatures. Though honestly the main point is the first ability, so I could get rid of the second entirely and add lifelink or deathtouch instead.
Thanks for all the feedback, I appreciate it.
>>53686751
>It may be a little, but it's also good with cheap, heavy-hitting equipment like Bonesplitter.
Most cheap creatures are. Your ability is kind of a first-and-a-half strike that's only online when equipped, so even if my other argument was flawed this is similar to a 2 mana 2/1 first strike. That's not an exciting first pick in limited and so I don't think it should be rare, complexity notwithstanding.
>>53687087
Neat. I don't think the switch ability is that relevant since once you have an equipment on the field, you won't want to risk getting is killed, but it's neat nonetheless.
>>53687114
That's not how ability words are used. Taxing this way is blue, not green. I don't like hexproof here because it denies any kind of interaction your opponent could have (removal and later counters). And it really shouldn't become a basic. I think the wording would be cleaner if you just have the ability turn it into a land with "T: Add G to your mana pool. If that mana is spent on a creature spell, it can't be countered unless an opponent pays (2)."

File: Arborwytch.png (379KB, 372x520px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 372x520px

>>53687227
Yeah, that makes a lot more sense. It looks a lot nicer and concise like that.

>>53687394
Unless you're designing a set that has a bunch of stuff that turns into lands, you shouldn't use sow here. As for text, I think it should be
>1G: ~ becomes a colorless land with "[blah]." (It loses all other types. This effect lasts indefinitely.)
Making it lose other abilities is pointless since it doesn't have any and abilities it gets from other stuff will either be temporary or from equips/auras, and those will fall off.

>>53687450
>Making it lose other abilities is pointless since it doesn't have any and abilities it gets from other stuff will either be temporary or from equips/auras, and those will fall off.
That assumes that no card will ever have Sow and other abilities.

File: Vicar of Radiant Ruin.png (199KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 375x523px

>>53687087
Interesting. I made a card similar to this, except it was blue, had no keywords, and the P/T switch was red. Yours is a much better-executed concept. I like the idea of creatures that have potential of this nature, but that are simplistic enough for new players to grasp. It makes them feel smart, which makes them feel good.

>>53687227
>Reaver
Yeah, it does kinda need to be rare just due to the nature of it. I am not sure how else I can tweak it since I have some people saying it's barely reined in, and others saying it's weak. I feel like that almost tells me it's fine.

>>53687114
>>53687394
>>53687525
I think his point is that if you don't emphasize that something becomes a type in addition to its other types, it loses all its other types. At least, that's how I think it works. So it's redundant, I guess?

I think a cycle of cards like this could be fun. Kind of a simplistic "night/day" sort of thing. Pretty sure they'd be okay at common, assuming they just swap keywords.

>>53687525
Well yeah, I was treating it as a standalone. In that case, I think
>1G: ~ becomes a colorless land with "[blah]" and loses all other abilities." (It loses all other types. This effect lasts indefinitely.)
The loss of other types is automatic, so you don't need rules text for that.

>>53687087
Give it at least 1 power. For three mana, 1/4 is probably the right spot.

>>53687227
>Wind God Girl (>>53671871) and The Empty Throne (>>53673389)
I say "See also" because those cards make useful reference points. In the case of Wind God Girl, the Archetype is a more elegant, and simpler way of doing things with 99% of the functionality. Optimising around edge cases is generally a poor way to do design.

>>53687394
This is not the sort of ability that should ever exist in sufficient numbers to warrant any sort of keywording. The "can't be countered unless <payment" belongs at rare, and is really inelegant. The only colour that directly counters in the first place is blue, and if you really want that bit in there, it should just say "can't be countered."

The ability also has tracking issues. The proper way to do this is to just have it sac and search out a land. If your eally want both parts, a better way would be to make the "can't be countered" a static ability of the creature itself, and the land search a sac ability.

>>53687616
>Vicar of Radiant Ruin
Potentially interesting implications for multiplayer. Try reversing the abilities as well in testing, I suspect it may play better.

>>53687756
>Try reversing the abilities as well in testing, I suspect it may play better.
Hm, it may. Though, I doubt it'd ever get tested unless someone snags the idea for their own set. I'm a one-off anon. I think the way I originally looked at it might have been backwards, as you say though. I suppose it feels a bit more natural to have it "get dangerous" when it isn't your turn.

>>53684635
There are some things to keep in mind if you create cards for such a specific reason as partner-EDH. The card should have a theme to it that is in itself not the most relevant but has potential and value in a multiplayer focused meta.
that being said, Eva and Bayil fit the bill perfectly.
Khagar and Hoarder Clique are wild but also work in tune with the format.
Theleya, Naari and especially Zuya seem pushed, id reconsider the toughness on Naari and the cmc of Zuya.
Do you really want someone to build MLD tribal with Vauska?
Kreren-Dur and Omnithrax are no fitting partner commanders, 6 cmc is too much and their abilities are not relevant enough.
also:
>reused artwork
>Keren-Dur P/T

File: Wind God Girl.jpg (90KB, 752x523px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 752x523px

>>53687756
>Optimising around edge cases is generally a poor way to do design.
Can't really argue against that. I slightly adjusted the wording because that seems to be how they do those effects nowadays. Thanks again for the feedback. Any thoughts on upkeep vs end step transform?

>>53688020
>Any thoughts on upkeep vs end step transform?
Up to you really, depends what you're going for. You could transform on upkeep, before/after combat, at end step, on attack, on taking damage, on activation of an ability, or any number of other possible but common scenarios. (That activation one implies all transformers will have an activation, which does limit your options.)

You'll want to have one condition be the dominant one, and only use other transform conditions sparingly when the design *needs* it.

>>53688137
Aren't these effects usually worded "As ~ ETB, [...]"? And I think it should be "Cards and permanents with the chosen name [...]" and "If ~ or a card with the chosen name [...]" There might be some ambiguity on the last ability; I'm assuming the card that gets exiled is the one that would leave the battlefield. There could be a better way to word that (not that I know it).
As for the actual card, it seems to be a legendary artifact O-ring that's worse against creatures. As always I'm going to object to mythic rarity on a removal spell; otherwise I think it's fine, if pushed.

>>53688137
As >>53688366 notes, wording is "As ~ enters the battlefield, name a card."

It's clear this card is meant to not only nullify cards in hand, but already-cast permanents. However you've done this inelegantly, especially removing rules text where creatures are concerned.

Cards with the chosen name can't be cast.
Creatures with the chosen name can't attack or block, lose all abilities, and become 1/1 creatures.
Noncreature permanents with the chosen name lose all abilities.

The distinction between creatures and non-creatures is important because removing an ability which sets a creature's P/T means it has a null P/T, and the game rules can't handle that. (See also: any creature with an asterisk in the P/T box.) Therefore, if you remove abilities from a creature, you have set a P/T to cover this corner case.

>>53688497
>removing an ability which sets a creature's P/T means it has a null P/T, and the game rules can't handle that.
Doesn't that just result in the creature being a 0/0 (and dying as a result)?

>>53688497
>>53688545
>208.5. If a creature somehow has no value for its power, its power is 0. The same is true for toughness.
From the comprehensive rules.

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

41KB, 375x523px

Dicking about with a planeswalker. Tried to keep it with the general design philosophy around energy 'It should be able to produce and spend on it's own'.

Balance is likely all out of whack as energy's exactly value is hard to estimate.

File: Alyssa Progressions March2.jpg (43KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 375x523px

>>53688599

And a less silly version that's less set-focused in mechanics but still works with Kaladesh's blue/red deckstyle (Since rebounding is actually casting, not a copy it will trigger dynavolt tower a second time etc)

>>53688497
Just remove all the card types.
The rules are fine with a permanent that has no card types.

>>53688599
>>53688629
I'm not a big fan of energy to being with, and it being on a planeswalker (which already has the additional resource of loyalty counters) seems overly convoluted. So I'm going to focus in the second version.
First off, there are currently no 4 mana walkers with a "Draw a card" plus ability, much less with additional upside. For the minus two you want to copy Narset's wording as rebound only works from hand anyway. -8 should be
>You get an emblem with "Each instant and sorcery card in your graveyard has flashback. The flashback cost is equal to its mana cost."
Balance should be ok after you nerf the +1 (maybe loot instead of draw for synergy with the ult?).

>>53688366
My bad, been a while. Should be an "As..." will correct!

And no, I want both either the card, or the Sphere to become exiled.

>>53688497
You've been corrected already, but you've changed the effects, and made it just a chinese menu. Creatures always have P/T. If somehow the permanent stops being a creature, even while printed, it loses the P/T attribute.

Also, I wrote no rules text instead of "can't have or gain abilities" so that it can be slightly clearer; most people don't know what a 'spell ability' is.

File: Alyssa Progressions March3.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

>>53689464

>I'm not a big fan of energy to being with, and it being on a planeswalker (which already has the additional resource of loyalty counters) seems overly convoluted. So I'm going to focus in the second version.

Yeah, as I said 'Dicking about'. It was more about seeing what it would look like than something anyone would reasonably use.

>First off, there are currently no 4 mana walkers with a "Draw a card" plus ability, much less with additional upside.

You are right. For some reason I thought Unraveler of Secrets Jace was 4 (With his Scry 1 then draw). Looting is a good replacement, yeah.

File: Madame Xanadu2.jpg (64KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 375x523px

>>53685935
>Whenever another creature enters or leaves the battlefield...
I can't find any card that supports the exact wording I have, but considering that there are cards like Sundering Titan that say
>When ~ enters the battlefield or leaves the battlefield
plus Sludge Strider, I'm pretty certain my wording is correct.

>>53686295
>This looks like a card that could possibly exist.
Thanks.

>I read the name as "Nightwing's ANTICS." Probably still appropriate. I don't think you need the cantrip though, the flicker effect is already giving you an ETB and/or removing a negative effect.
Sounds good.

>Whenever ~ deals combat damage to a player, investigate.
You realize that this makes a number of tokens equal to the damage he deals, right? It says "create that many". And no, I'm not using Investigate.

>Cards are exiled face up by default, so the "you may look at them" clause isn't necessary. Did you mean to exile them face down?
I did. Here's a new version. Decided to throw in Black since I feel like stealing cards like this shows up more often in B than U.

>Can block as a 3/3 the turn you cast it, keep that in mind for balancing. The backside could probably get away with 3/3 or 4/4, since it keeps the +1/+1 counters. Depending on the game, this could transform and be ready to attack on turn 5. I'd suggest 1WW for mana cost.
I'll keep this all in mind.

>>53686803
>This mechanic feels like it should be white or green (Second Sunrise), but I think there's a blue/black card that does this in Amonkhet.
You're thinking of Shadow of the Grave. And the reason I costed Pull Through Time the way I did was because I realized that it could return to your hand all the cards your cast in a turn. Which is also why I made it exile itself. And since it affects more than just losing your permanents like Second Sunrise, I decided not to make it G or W.

>>53687087
I feel like this should have at least 1 power. I think the other guy had it right at 1/4.

>>53687114
>>53687394
Just make it a mana dork.

>>53688137
>>53688366
>>53688497
Just to let you guys know, Wizards actually changed the wording from
>name a card
to
>choose a card name
I guess to make it more clear that you have to name a legit card and not just make up something. Compare Dispossess to Lost Legacy.

>>53688545
>>53688583
>Voiding Sphere (>>53688137)
Okay, yeah, I make mistakes. I'm only human. But that rule is clearly more of a catch-all for corner cases than intended for actual use, if you consider how cards like Darksteel Mutation are templated.. Either way, the card isn't trying to kill creatures, so you can't just remove abilities on creatures.
>>53689504
>you've changed the effects, and made it just a chinese menu.
What I've done is given it more appropriate templating based on what actual cards do. It does change the details of how it works, but that's what tends to happen with quirky /tg/ cards when they're templated properly with regards to the rules and design principles.

>>53689564
Given this card's similarity to Narset Transcendant, you may be able to give her 5 starting loyalty.

>>53689626
>Jimmy Olsen (>>53662394)
There is Sludge Strider. Your template is correct. I was thinking of the discard/cycling trigger templating from Amonkhet.

>Detective Chimp (>>53674027)
>You realize that this makes a number of tokens equal to the damage he deals, right?
Ah. In that case, "... investigate that many times." (See also Glint-Eye Nephilim for templating example.) Fair call on not wanting to use the keyword though.

>Madame Xanadu v2
I was trying to think of the card before, but now I remember: this reminds me of Shared Fate.

>Buddy Blank (>>53682523)
Forgot to mention multiplayer, but you can figure out where I'm going with that.

>Second Sunrise effect in UB (>>53684604, >>53684753)
Green is actually the primary colour of returning *any type* of card from your graveyard [to hand] so there's nothing weird, mechanically speaking, about making it green. On the white side, Second Sunrise has a protective flavour, which is something it can do.

File: Korro Tribal Hunter5.jpg (44KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 375x523px

Changed middle ability from buff to extra combat.

>>53687087
On second look, 1/4 at three mana might not be right. Right now I'm thinking 1/3 for two mana, or 1/4 for four mana are both pushed costs in an aggro deck, while three mana doesn't have any good way to balance. I'm not entirely sure where the correct balancing would be, but I believe this card will need a lot of attention in playtesting.

The first strike combined with lifelink make the P/T switching very hard to evaluate without actually playing. Removing one of those (probably lifelink) would be the easiest way to make this card easier to balance.

>>53691187
The "critique" in the first ability should be lower case. Second ability should have a comma after "battlefield."

>>53691297
+1 should probably be a single +1/+1 counter. See also: Ajani Steadfast; Arlinn Kord; Ajani, Caller of the Pride;

-3 can be used to give creatures psuedo-vigilance. If you don't want this use case, consider forcing the untapped creatures to attack, or some other way to circumvent the psuedo-vigilance use.

The -3 is also in a weird spot in that it doesn't want to be used before combat. That's not a bad thing per se. If you haven't used the +1 or -7 before combat begins, you're signalling intent to use the -3, which can also be a bluff for a late activation of the +1. I don't think this bluff case would come up very often though. Focusing on this timing decision and associated bluffs may be an interesting direction, but I don't know if there's much design space worth exploring there.

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

49KB, 375x523px

>>53691531
thanks my man

File: Hamza Aeon Searcher.jpg (39KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 375x523px

Another walker, why not?

>>53691531
>+1
OK.

>-3
Good point, never really thought of that before. I could just lift wording from World at War though.

File: spark2.jpg (55KB, 374x523px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 374x523px

Hopefully I didn't fuck up the formatting too badly.

Oh god this seems like a complete nightmare. The biggest problem with something like this is there's almost always going to be a huge disconnect between what a creature does and what a planeswalker does. The only exception I can really think of is Jaya Ballard, which is basically the prototype for planeswalkers anyway. Seriously, take any planeswalker that also has a creature card, like the Origins 5, and see how different they are. I actually think this idea would be better as an aura that boosted planeswalkers. I actually remember seeing someone do this before, wish I had it.

Actually, for the anon who was talking about planeswalker interactivity, that's something you should think about, "Enchant planeswalker" auras.

File: lord.jpg (58KB, 376x525px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 376x525px

Was going for a big game-ending bomb here. Did I hit the right power level, or did I go too far?

>>53691884
>>53691951
>>53692064
Huh, forgot to link, weird.

>>53692074
You know you can get MSE to give you the cards as jpg's right? How do you think we've been doing it? Just go to File -> Export -> Card Image and choose the destination folder.

As for the card, no idea on balance, though I tried something similar before and I was told it was too complex, more or less. And better wording would probably be something like
>[...] creature token. Then search your library for up to X Equipment cards with different names, where X is the number of creatures you control. Put each of those cards onto the battlefield attached to a different one of those creatures. Then shuffle your library.
Or something like that.

>>53692355
Pretty terrible. If your opponent boardwipes, you basically lose on the spot.

>>53692355
It doesn't do anything unless you already have a creature out? Holy shit, I never thought I'd say this, but the actual Epic cards are better than this.

>>53692402
>>53692432
You can walk the path alone. you don't need company with you.

>>53692475
Does that shitty koan magically make your card better? No? Didn't think so. Launch MSE and try again.

File: Path to Fuck you.jpg (52KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 375x523px

>>53692402
>>53692432
>>53692495

>>53692583
>Have the most glaring problem of your card get pointed out to you. Twice.
>Proceed to make a new version of the card that doesn't fix that problem.
C'mon, don't make me hold your hand through this.

>>53692064
The issue with PW interactivity is that you're trying to interact with something that's in the MR slots. 99.99% of the time, PW interaction will be dead in limited.

File: Frederick Riot2.jpg (51KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 375x523px

Page 10 bump. Added a cost to the token creation. Hopefully this makes it less broken than the previous version.

>>53695887
Ability doesn't really work as-is. I think a better idea would be
>When ~ enters the battlefield, put a time counter on target creature. If that creature doesn't have vanishing, it gains vanishing.

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

46KB, 375x523px

>>53695985
thank had trouble finding a card with similar wording to use as reference when wording the card

File: Fortress of Solitude4.jpg (52KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 375x523px

Another manland. Idea is that it turns into one of those Superman robots. Not really sure why I made it Bant colors though. I guess I just feel like it fits Superman, even though my card for him is mono-White. Totally fine with changing pretty much anything here, but I would like it to be a manland that turns into a Flying artifact creature at least.

>>53696061
No problem. Eh.. though I should've mentioned this before, but I'm not keen on giving this Deathtouch. It's already almost guaranteed to kill a creature, I don't feel that great about making it 2-for-1, or possibly even more, considering the P/T.

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

43KB, 375x523px

Very unsure about the price.

File: Persistent Skeleton.jpg (182KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 744x1039px

does this need to be a 2/2, or is it fine as is? and yes I know a 2/1 Skeleton token isn't a thing, just something I made

>>53697775
honestly that thing only seems like a rare because its stats are pushed. The design isn't particularly original and it doesn't really recur in the way skeletons usually do in magic.

>>53697899
yeah that was my reasoning in making it rare, the stats combined with the ability. I wasn't trying to be original, I'm just making some skelly cards with flavor for a for fun set

File: Bone Reaver.jpg (189KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 744x1039px

>>53697775
more skellies

File: Champion of Bones.jpg (198KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 744x1039px

>>53698324
>>53697775
even more skeltals, now this is the one I'm most unsure of in terms of power level.

>>53698381
Buff should affect only other skeletons you control.

>>53698639
damn, I meant that but I'm stupid, thanks for pointing that out my guy

File: Marrow Marauder.jpg (194KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 744x1039px

>>53698381
>>53698324
>>53697775

>>53701650
a 1/2 for 5 mana?

>>53698324
considering we have Gravecrawler, you could probably just make it 1 skelly. Or 2 without the ETB tapped...

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

41KB, 375x523px

Decided to have some fun. Based on the bearded vulture, which I find pretty cool. Big bird of prey, nearly its entire diet consists of eating bone. Not just the marrow or the flesh, it ingests entire bones.

>>53697775
Ever heard or Persist?

>>53698324
Kinda disappointed that the Skeletons get a worse Gravecrawler. Oh well.

>>53698381
I still think Persist would be better than doing this. And yeah, the lord ability should only hit other Skeletons you control.

>>53698711
Seems OK to me.

Anyway, with Skeletons, since their previous gimmick was Regen, Wizards will have to revamp them. Either they'll go with Indestructible, or go for more graveyard recursion like Reassembling Skeleton. I think I lean more towards the latter.

>>53702322
This should really be 2/2 or 3/1.

>>53702306
true true, almost forgot about gravecrawler

>>53702473
Damn, I had it at 2BB before. Should've trusted my instincts. I think I'll just make it a 3/1 at 1BB though. Thanks.

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

29KB, 375x523px

>>53702638
Shit, I didn't mean to post that. Actually I should just delete it. Someone already did this idea way better than I did anyway. I'll post that instead.

>>53702668
Electrolyze with a small bonus is the best mode there. Everything else pales in comparison.

>>53691675
What sort of deck is this guy meant to be for? The +1 suggests to me that there should be a graveyard component somewhere. (Nothing wrong with the ability, just a my Melvin side playing up.)

>>53691951
I... you... wat.

-4 may or may not want some sort of marker for the resurrected creature.

On the flavour side... maybe only let it enchant a legendary creature.

>>53692074
What >>53692156 says, you've got a lot of busy work goin' on here for not much gain. Why is the token there to begin with, for example? The simpler, saner solution would be to ditch the token, and focus on the equipment. There are enough handles you can use just on that aloneto make it exciting. You could change the number of equipment searched for, whether they go to hand or battlefield (split options also available), and whether they enter equipped.

See also: Godo, Bandit Warlord; Taj-Nar Swordsmith; Stoneforge Mystic*

* (banned in Modern)

>>53692355
What >>53692432 said is correct. Any time the word "target" appears, the spell/ability needs an actual corresponding target. If you have no creatures when the upkeep comes around, this spell simply fails to go on the stack, and thus is never cast.

>>53695495
Not sure of templating, you may be correct already, but I'm thinking:
The "legend rule" doesn't apply to permanents named ~.

/co/ top-down design aside, this card would have to be mythic rare. It would be extremely oppressive in Limited.

>>53695887
Not sure she needs deathtouch, but it's not particularly out of place either. She's basically a Nekrataal though, because it dies on your opponent's very next upkeep.

>had trouble finding a card with similar wording to use as reference when wording the card
See also: Jhoira of the Ghitu; Delay; Musician; Rapid FIre.

>>53696705
Lore question: Is the Fortress of Solitude itself also indestructible?

>>53697100
Spiders have mostly had higher toughness than power. You could also try 0/2 or 1/2 or 1/3.

>>53697775
Depends partially on the set's balance, but even on the more powerful end of things, this card is probably a little on the powerful side.

See also: Relentless Dead; Dregscape Zombie; Dread Wanderer; Gravecrawler

>>53698324
Skeletons as a whole have a lot less support than Zombies have had. If just one Zombie was good enough for Gravecrawler, then I don't think Skeletons need three partners.

>>53698381
Getting a 3/2 replacement for dead creatures is very strong. Probably keep them at 1/1 tokens.

For an interesting twist, you could instead trigger on non-Skeleton creatures.

>>53698711
Workhorse card. Belongs in common.

>>53701650
Just so you're aware, this does mean that the spider can shrink in size if the largest other creature is smaller than it, to a minimum of 1/2. For this reason, you may want to up its base stats to 0/2, which means it's always worth at least a Giant Spider.

>>53701665
Maybe switch out first strike for haste.

>>53702322
>Bone Eater
In contrast to other anon, I'd suggest 2/1 at 1BB. It's expected to go in a Skeleton tribal deck, so it'll easily get to a size that's very efficient for the initial mana investment.

>>53702668
I suggest making the red ability damage to target PLAYER. As is, even if you don't pay the red cost, you will still have to target a creature, and if that creature disappears before resolution, you've lost the whole spell since it's the only Players gaining hexproof at instant speed is a lot less likely.

>>53702905
Interesting drawback. May or may not mean much depending on the format.

>>53703334
Oh, that's a clever name you've got there. Bravo.

>>53703415
Is a 6/6 double striker or larger on turn 5 too powerful? Probably not, we've already got cards that do that and more with Fabled Hero, Solemn Recruit, Markov Blademaster, and Scrapper Champion.

More pertinently, monstrosity is a mana sink mechanic. You'll want to watch this card in playtesting since you've removed the mana cost.

File: common keyword swap cycle.jpg (406KB, 1875x523px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 1875x523px

>>53703415
I don't really share feedback anon's optimism; I think this is far too good. It replaces the cards you lose, and it's easy to build around with things like Madness and Flashback. Most of the cards he mentioned require outside investments that cost both cards and mana; this only requires cards, so it's quite strong due to that. Yes, it costs you your hand, but you wouldn't NOT build a deck around this. It's not that great in Limited I don't think, but I'm more worried about Constructed myself.

>>53703334
This is really clever. I think it's fine, if a tad pushed. Though, doesn't oobleck and other non-newtonian fluid harden under physical stress? So shouldn't it gain indestructible on combat damage? Either way, it's a fun card.

>>53702905
I'm on the fence about this. It feels like too much of a slowdown on one hand, but on the other it plays nice with lands that already ETB tapped so you lose nothing. It does kind of give me an idea about a land that turns all your other lands into shocklands though, with an otherwise similar effect.

So I failed at this cycle, but I'm going to post it anyway because maybe someone has ideas how to clean it up. The BG one ended up with a non-evergreen keyword much to my shame. also coming up with four more alliterative yet flavorful names was not easy.

File: Nifaltr Godifacts.jpg (368KB, 1875x523px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 1875x523px

>>53684604 Here, posting some more from the WIP set. Considering these are super important to the set and plot, I figure I'd want to get some feedback on them. I'm especially iffy on Andavarun. I want it to be a shapechanger thing kind of like Lazav, but it doesn't look quite right.

>>53706696
The name-changing and downside abilities chew up way too much space. Get rid of them, then focus on making good artifacts that are more than keyword soup. Also, stop using the tarkir watermarks.

>>53707851
Tarkir watermarks are for me to remember what wedges they belong to. The name changing is a giant space chewer, but the point is that they're legendary artifact that makes whoever holds them the god that uses them, kind of like how the Grey Fox hood in Oblivion made everyone think that anyone using it was the same person as anyone else who had used it. I'd rather get rid of the rest of the keywords than those. Problem is I'm not sure how to do it elegantly.

>>53705698
It's not my card, though I actually think I'll work on my own version to improve it. How would you suggest improving it? Or should the modes be changed altogether? Maybe U becomes a sort counter, or restricted hard counter? Maybe make B grant -4/-4 or something to a creature, and R deals 3 damage to each opponent? G makes a 2/2 maybe? I'll be sure to look up actual tri-color charms and see if I can find a good power balance from them.

>>53706176
>What sort of deck is this guy meant to be for?
No idea. If you think it can be improved, please let me know.

>The "legend rule" doesn't apply to permanents named ~.
I've actually been pretty split on this. Thing is, that wording isn't perfect either. As for mythic, apologies, I usually only consider mythic for complexity, not for how it affects limited.

>Lore question: Is the Fortress of Solitude itself also indestructible?
Not entirely sure, honestly. Though I think I'll just remove that part.

>In contrast to other anon, I'd suggest 2/1 at 1BB. It's expected to go in a Skeleton tribal deck, so it'll easily get to a size that's very efficient for the initial mana investment.
Really? I was thinking it would be more of an anti-tribal, thus the exile ability, but I like this idea more. Though now it makes me want to cut out the exile part.

>>53698381
>>53706421
the non skeleton trigger thing is what I originally wanted to do but I was unsure, I'll probably end up doing that, thanks

>>53708153
Art in use, Leonin Scimitar.
>Whenever a Skeleton creature enters the battlefield under your control, you may attach ~ to that creature.
>Equip 3

>>53708226
I just always thought the part in the middle of the blade looks like a spine or something lol so I wanted to use it for this, and thanks for help on the wording