/ccg/ Custom Card General /cct/

File: Silver Golem Prototype.jpg (37KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 375x523px

Since Legendary Planeswalkers are a thing in three months, I figured I'd play around with non-legendary, non-mythic, and/or artificial PWs.

File: Tibalt Back from Vacation.jpg (43KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 375x523px

Also, have a Tibalt.

>>53842846
I dunno if we'll ever see uncommon PWs, but I'm not up on this change where they're adding Legendary to the PW supertype. Yet more Ixalan crap I have to play catch-up on.

>>53842888
I think the ult should be fewer coins flipped, but other than that, it's not bad. Better than the Tibalt we got at any rate.

Okay, so this Augur thing I've been messing with. I don't want to repost the card AGAIN since I've posted it in the last two threads (even though the one just died with 7 posts), but someone mentioned the level of self-mill that you'd be doing with larger Augur numbers, and while red is reckless like that, it still needs to be fun, so what if I just made Augur N into Augur and had it always just peek two, exile one yard the other? Does the fact that it doesn't scale make it too boring at that point? I feel like that might be the case. I will link the card but I don't want to waste an image post on it >>53838708

File: CommanderStuffWB.jpg (283KB, 1500x523px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 1500x523px

Made some Orzhov commanders and a janky land that people will probably want to run as a commander. These may or may not be balanced, worded correctly, or any good, but hopefully it's enough to inject some life into the thread before it dies... again.

>>53842846
>Since Legendary Planeswalkers are a thing in three months
Shit, what did I miss this time? Source?

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

40KB, 375x523px

Tinkered with this a bit. Basically, a twist on Ovalchase Daredevil. I'm hoping that the specific-ness of needing Treasure, instead of triggering on any artifact, justifies the mana cost and P/T as compared to Ovalchase. Oh yeah, and included some art.

>>53844976
>Sarecarn
???

>Ravga
???

>Mourdin
Wording should probably be
>Each creature card in your graveyard has embalm XWB, where X is that card's converted mana cost.
Though Wizards would likely say something like
>Each creature card in your graveyard has embalm. The embalm cost is equal to its mana cost.

>Worldshaper's Plane
Unsure about this, especially when just having P/T equal to the number of lands you control clocks in at about 6 CMC.

File: Pyretic Prophesy.png (302KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 375x523px

>>53844976
>Sarecarn
WB Bitterblossom/10/ At least it's easier to remove. Also it's "his or her".
>Ravga
Eh. I wouldn't use it. I suppose you can pitch lands to it late game but otherwise the cost seems too high for it to interest me. That's just me though.
>Mourdin
>2/5 first strike
Why? The embalm anthem is cool though.
>Plane
so.. a free turn 3 mega land? I'm not sure this is okay. Also can you even make lands into commanders unless they say they can be your commander? I think noncreatures have to specify that.

>>53845297
I'd honestly prefer it if you kept it going from the yard to the field, but re-jiggered the costing or something. It's fine though if you like it better this way.

Okay, I know nobody cares but me, but I'm having fun with Augur. Pitching 5 cards just to get one seems like it sucks, but when you can keep cards cheap, it might just be what you need, and red never cared about cards it didn't need at the moment anyway. I originally costed this at RR but that felt way too good considering on average you're probably peeking at 3-5 cards and getting to pick one, as well as wiping the board of weenie blockers. Maybe I'm going too conservative; I haven't figured out yet how powerful Augur really can be.

Also, I thought I would respond to the comments last thread.
>>53838976
Yeah I figured you were the one that didn't care for it the last time when in your initial response you didn't comment or critique. I guess my only real counter is that I really like red being reckless as all hell, and that's why I went with it. I mean, I'm not so stupid as to keep pushing it if people say it's bad or nobody but me likes it. But I'm not seeing that it's broken or too bad to live yet, so... I guess we'll see.

(cont)

>>53845599
Sarecarn originally had a tap ability that could only work as a sorcery, but I felt like neither ability was so good that it needed that and instead went for a design that "teaches" tapping during other player's turns, and/or a commander that can bluff with open mana a little easier. There's a "plays with exile" subtheme on all the cards, and Sarecarn is a token-making gy hatebear, kind of.

Ravga's a bit uninspired, I was going for a voltron/swingy option in WB. Not having any upside for "getting in" is a bit of a mistake, I'm not sure. Combat-oriented WB commander to contrast the other two, one of which doesn't want to tap anywhere near your turn and the other of which doesn't really care one way or another.

Mourdin's a bit difficult because I want that intentional increase in mana cost. I get that making players pay the printed cost tends to stop things from breaking (ala Flash Hulk), but I think appending that extra WB might still be a good idea. Still, the wording probably isn't perfect.

>Worldshaper's Plane
Eh, for WUBRG, I think I can get away with one mana "below" the standard cost. I mean, I could make it 1WUBRG,but eh. Feels like it's still more a Timmy thing than anything else.

>>53845297
I kinda wish this was just a 2/2 for 2 with the upside, although maybe that's too good for uncommon. Most of my stuff is rare or higher, so my ideas tend to be a little skewed.

>>53845926
Admittedly Sarecarn comes out to be a little more powerful than I wanted. I actually forgot I took out the Ophiomancer condition (as in, you can only ever have one spirit), sometime before removing the sorcery speed restriction on the tap. Whoops.

>Mourdin
The art feels "tanky", knights tend to get relevant combat keywords, and he does give himself vigilance. Mostly so he's a little better as a blocker.

>Plane
It's true that the restriction on usage might be too weak. I really don't know where to balance lands, I just really didn't want to do something that entered tapped because everything enters tapped.

>>53845926
(cont)

>>53839324
>bouncing lands
I can see that, especially after Kamigawa made it a Moonfolk thing, but I think green's being the primary land color, especially basic lands, means it should be able to get away with it I think. That is, if you decide to go that route; it's your card after all.
>augur
Yeah the reminder text would change like it does with Scry depending on the quantity of cards. As far as card advantage goes, yeah I saw Explore... was I wrong when I thought I saw it on a black card? That seems out of color to me. But then again, doing set-wide mechanics seems to give things a bit of a pass when it's thematic, at least when WotC does it anyway. I I agree it feels like a mostly red mechanic, but we've had sets where each color got its own mechanic, so I guess depending on the set it could be okay. I also see it potentially bleeding over into black and blue, since blue originally had impulse draw and black seems to be able to crib a lot of things regarding card advantage that red and blue get, so... potential bleed, but I don't do sets anymore so I guess we'll probably never know.
>Presence
The nontoken rider is strange. How do you spin this to your advantage in that case?

File: oasisritualist.jpg (38KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 265x370px

Anyone else immediately think of the anon who made tap abilities with Exert? Granted, this is a bit different, and better in my opinion, but still.

>>53846014
>I kinda wish this was just a 2/2 for 2 with the upside, although maybe that's too good for uncommon. Most of my stuff is rare or higher, so my ideas tend to be a little skewed.
It would probably need a downside in that case. I actually think I might change it to recur to the battlefield, but change the rest to be more balanced.

>>53846015
>Explore... was I wrong when I thought I saw it on a black card? That seems out of color to me. But then again, doing set-wide mechanics seems to give things a bit of a pass when it's thematic
Personally, I feel like Explore is basically like Landfall, so I don't see any problem with it. Everything needs lands, so everything can benefit from lands.

>>53846145
Oh hey, they did it after all. Nice. They did it better than me, and so did the other anon that was messing with it, but I'm glad they branched out with Exert.
>Explore
I mean I'm fine with it too; ultimately because it's WotC's game and they can do what they want, but that also means ramp in white and blue; colors that should never have it, and I'm not sure it should be in either of those colors. Probably just me though.

File: Treasure Seeker2.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

New version. Another idea is to sac a Treasure and pay some mana to recur it.

>>53846259
Is it really ramp though? I mean, the land goes to the hand, not onto the battlefield. So it can't really ramp by itself. Unless I misunderstand the idea of ramp.

>>53846298
>ramp
Well, what would you call it? I mean it does net you extra land, even if it's delayed. I don't even know what you'd call it; that's what I get when I don't play competitively I guess.
>Seeker
I think you can keep it recurring when you gain a Treasure, and adding the "can't block" bit brought it in line. I think it just might be okay considering Bloodghast, but when one considers how goddamn strong Bloodghast was... I dunno, I think it'd need playtesting to be sure. A 3/2 is a lot less fragile than a 2/1, but Treasures aren't something that would be happening as often as Landfall, at least I would think.

>>53846489
We probably have enough Curses now to make this viable. I'm not sure I like it tutoring for the Curse though; I like the idea of being limited to what's in your hand, even if that makes the Witchblade cheaper. Course it's your card, you do you.

File: 1497674736800045[1].png (314KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 375x523px

What would be a draw spell be like based on Delver of Secrets?

File: Thanasis Akros Blacksmith.jpg (47KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 375x523px

Blegh. Trying to get across the idea of, well, a blacksmith. Wondering if I should just ditch the tokens and have it do something with actual Equipment cards though.

>>53846489
Very odd wording on the tutor. Seems OK otherwise.

>>53846627
Check out Flamewright and see if you can't get any ideas off that effect. Alternately, give all equipment an additional global buff, or give equipped creatures a buff, or search up equipment or something.

File: Tits.png (239KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 375x523px

It's a Friday night and I'm at home, making fake, joke MtG cards with cartoon tits on them.

I regret nothing.

File: 1494651520633.png (88KB, 568x548px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 568x548px

>>53848335
>tits! doesn't give a character breasts
wasted opportunity

>>53848364
I guess not everyone can understand and appreciate my subtle, nuanced humor. Such a shame.

>>53848411
Oh, I understood it, and your sarcasm, I just think your attempt was SHIT.
>card not:
>Enchant Creature
>All other creatures enchanted creature's owner controls do not untap during it's controller's uptap step.
>Forecast WW, Reveal Tits!: Each opponent discards a card.
>"Sproing."

WASTED
OPPORTUNITY

>>53848446
>discard
>costs white mana
Wat. Nah bro, that's shit.

Wasted opportunity AND color pie violation. Typical frogposter.

File: Mynea-Frian-Dark-Apostle.jpg (20KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 265x370px

>>53848470
Don't you know?? Nothing makes sense anymore!

>>53848487
It must have blown your mind when we got white Zombies in Amonkhet.

File: 1367885073458.jpg (11KB, 212x200px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 212x200px

>>53848566
It did! Check out this pic snapped of me at that very moment!

File: Insightful Forcemage.png (285KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 375x523px

Goodnight, ded thred. I'm sure we'll re-create you in the morning.

File: 1497631407945753.png (347KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 375x523px

>>53842773

>>53844976
The land is a bit too good. Should probably make it only tap for mana if you control three different basic lands, and animate at a slightly higher cost.
>>53848968
The Scry 2 clause is orphaned. Make sure it relates to the ETB clause (e.g. "blah blah effect, *then* Scry 2"), as it's a creature, not an instant/sorcery.

>>53848968
Would you spend two mana for "target creature gets +2/+2 until end of turn. Scry 2.?"

Honestly this should be a 3/3 or grant a bigger turn bonus, like +4/+2.

File: 1495141898772.jpg (45KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 375x523px

>>53848335
>I regret nothing.
Me neither. Anyway, not untapping seems OK, but the Forecast feels tacked on.

File: Lusty Wench (1).jpg (297KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 744x1039px

Red version of Courtly Provocateur basically. Thinking of making it interact with or generate Treasure. Or maybe Pirate tribal.

File: Dissociate.png (261KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 375x523px

It's an odd idea.

>>53856792
the other version didn't let them choose, but it was hellishly wordy... also felt a bit too R with the chaos.

File: Dissociate.png (270KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 375x523px

>>53856853
er, this version

>>53856792
This card basically already exists in the form of Moonring Mirror.

Change the wording on the ability to say something like "At the beginning of each upkeep you may exile your hand. If you do then put all other cards exiled with [CARDNAME] into your hand."

>>53856894
I like the mirror wording better. This is for all players though.

File: Familiar Finder.png (282KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 375x523px

>>53849825
Fixed, thanks.

>>53851212
I was working off Yeva's Forcemage, so it's only G more for the scry 2, which sounded appropriate. Given what Primal Forcemage can do though, +3/+3 might be possible.

>>53853413
God dammit the Forecast bit is my favorite part of that card. It figures that I'm the only one that likes is and that nobody gets it except a troll.
>that filename
Wait so you're not /CO/anon? Eh, either way card seems the same as the last time I saw it.

>>53853841
I like it. If you wanted to re-jigger it to use Treasure or generate it somehow, you could put a mana cost on the second ability and flavor it like she stole some of that guy's shit after whatever it is she did to prevent him from blocking. Since red gets rituals, that should be fine, since it technically translates as mana filtering. I'd avoid tribal, but that's a personal thing.

>>53856924
Not him, but it can't be that hard to modify the wording to suit your needs, if you like it that way. Aside from that, I like the first one better because it's simpler. Ease of groking is a good thing.

Also what is it with people using "their" as a replacement for "his or her"? Magic is programming language, and you can't change it to suit your fancy until WotC changes how the source code works. Gotta toe the line with the rest of us, anon.

>top-down
>art-based
Yeah this hits all the bases of being probably lame.

Page 10 bump. Not even sure it's worth keeping the thread alive at this point.

>>53856870
You don't need rules text to allow a player to play cards from their hand, since that's something you can usually do.

Also, what happens if there's more than one copy in play? As I understand it you'd need to win every flip to play from your hand, but I'm not sure if that's how it's intended to work.

Maybe have a look at Duplicity, and then do something like that but with a coin flip in charge of whether you swap hands.

File: Vitality Hoarder.png (244KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 375x523px

>>53860438
I'm around if anyone else is. But it doesn't really seem like anyone else is. Might as well give some folks that got glossed over some feedback.

>>53849001
We'll see this or something like it when they have the Jacetice League finally give Bolas his comeuppance. I wonder if they'll be ballsy enough to kill him off and bring in a new foe or if they'll have him escape and hide so he can plot once more.

>>53846627
I should have given this feedback earlier. I question why a blacksmith has double strike, but I guess he's one of those "heroes who also has a degree in arts and crafts" kinds of dudes. Greece was full of them, so too should Theros be. I mean, I have to admit; I don't like Partner because I feel like most Partner cards are forced to be underwhelming due to the nature of the keyword. Honestly, if this got printed, the Equipment token would probably cost 2 to attach since it's colorless and basically a permanent +1/+1 counter that can get passed around. Plus artifact synergy. Now, having said that, I just think that's what WotC would do. I've made cards that create Equipment tokens too, and I had them the same way you have this one, so I'm not saying it's wrong. It's balanced, I think.

>>53846591
>>53846606
Okay so what's going on here? What's up with Codex? I don't think this is balanced, since you can build up a pretty significant pool of cards before you sac it, but I could be wrong. Also how does this relate to Delver? I assume you mean the second version, because it cares about instants and sorceries. It's probably the more balanced of the two.

Aaand that's it for stuff that's not mine.

>>53848487
What the fuck does that fucking say. I can... roughly get that it's a legendary white 3/2 for 3, a vamp cleric, and it makes tokens... but just... how?

>>53848487
>>53861666
Whenever one or more nontoken Vampires you control attack, create a 1/1 white Vampire creature with lifelink.

>>53861666
Mufufuf Fufuf, Dark Apostle?
?W
Legendary Creature - Vampire Cleric
Whenever one or more nontoken Vampires you control attack, create a 1/1 white Vampire creature token with lifelink.
2/2

>>53861838
I sure hope that's not in a set with 3-5 color cards. Otherwise, it's a pretty cool fixer for Temur decks. Maybe consider a cycle?

>>53857815
>Wait so you're not /CO/anon?
Nah, that was me. I phone/tablet-post a lot, which means there are many times I want to post one of my cards that I don't have on my device, so I just download something I've already uploaded from 4plebs. Honestly kinda surprised nobody's ever called me out on this before. I only posted it to show my take on boobpower, the card is sitting in my finished folder now.

> you could put a mana cost on the second ability and flavor it like she stole some of that guy's shit after whatever it is she did to prevent him from blocking
Interesting idea. Though I think I'll go in my own direction with it, this did inspire me, so thanks.

>card
Eh... just feels kinda... janky? Is that the right word? Just doesn't feel like a very elegant design. Honestly, I think I'd just like it more like tap to make a standard token, than tap and Exert to make a better token.

>>53861496
>I should have given this feedback earlier.
And I thank you for your feedback. This guy is actually another card I'm making based on a pre-existing Magic character. The Partner here is so he works with another card I'm making, and together they make the main characters of Emonberry Red, a Magic story I liked a lot. It's basically Romeo and Juliet: Gay Edition. Unfortunately, the characters don't give me a whole lot to go on. There's a guy studying magic, and another guy who's a blacksmith, but ultimately wants to be a soldier. Guess which one this is. I think I'll try to make their abilities synergize with each other, maybe in some way that lets one focus on artifacts and the other focus on enchantments, I dunno.

>card
...I dunno, I'm just trying to see how that last ability could possibly be better than Lifelink.

File: Psychemancer.png (270KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 375x523px

>>53861838
>>53862064
I think it'd be a fine card or cycle of cards for a cube or /ccg/ set but if balance with the game as a whole is a concern this thing genuinely appears to me to be OP. If it only did two colors it might be alright, since it'd just be a conditional filter land that doesn't ETB tapped, and can also make colorless.

>>53862104
>boobpower
Gotcha. I can't even post from my phone; reCaptcha doesn't work on my browser for some reason.
>Wench
That's fair, I just toss out ideas. I don't like trying to change cards from what the creator is trying to do with them initially, and/or try to preserve the spirit of what they do as best I can if it does need changing.
>finder
It's top-down garbage I farted out to make a post, since unless the thread is hopping I don't like posting without a card. Your suggestion would make it a better card.
>Theros dudes
Oh yeah, those guys. I don't read the novels or anything for MtG but I know a bit about the lore of each set from articles and such, and I heard about this pair. I think it was definitely handled better than Narset or Alesha in terms of "diversity". Makes sense to make them as a Partner pair then.
>Hoarder
It's not better or as good on purpose. It's already a reasonably efficient card; black getting a 3/3 for 4 is pretty good, and it being 3B and not 2BB is even better, which is what most black 3/3s with upsides are on a cursory look. I had Bloodbond Vampire in mind when I was making it.

>>53862654
I don't really see anything out of order here. It's just going to be a 4/5 beater most of the time, and Flying and Trample are a bit redundant, but it's draftable.

Okay so, apparently this is a thing I just made. I have no idea how to approach balancing this, so I figured I'd toss it up and see if I missed too hard or if anyone has any ideas. I'm also not sure about the wording of the exile ability, or if I should break it up into two.

>>53862777
It forgets X once it has entered the battlefield.

>>53862858
So I have to make it an additional cost to cast? Fug. I ran out of room in my post but I was going to ask about that specifically, but had to settle for what I typed, which kinda included that.

>>53862887
>So I have to make it an additional cost to cast?
Still forgets it.
>When ~ enters the battlefield, pay X. Exile X...

File: Treasure Seeker3.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

Bleh, sorry for posting this thing again. Decided to change it so it has at least some use outside of needing Treasure.

>>53862777
>reCaptcha doesn't work on my browser for some reason.
Yeah, you told me that before. Phoneposting still works for me, but it's becomes an absolute pain recently, since for some reason my phone lags to high heaven. I m a g i n e h a v i n g t h e t e x t s l o o o o o o w d o w n l i k e t h i s a l l t h e t i m e .

>I don't read the novels or anything for MtG
I haven't either, but as far as I can tell, everything after the end of the Weatherlight series is utter shit. Special mention goes to the Zendikar and Scars books written by Wintermute, who honestly seems like a college freshman who just finished his first writing course. But beyond shit writers, you have the obvious problem where the official canon gives the middle finger to the spinoff novels all the time because nobody gives a fuck about continuity (Injustice 2, I'm looking at you). Besides, they don't even really make novels anymore. Probably because they realized what a fucking waste of money they are.

>I think it was definitely handled better than Narset or Alesha in terms of "diversity".
Agreed. Alesha makes me shrug. I'll never understand why transgender stuff would ever be a big deal in a setting where fucking magic exists. Like, just polymorph yourself or whatever. And Narset made me want to shoot myself. Just the laziest stereotypes associated with autism ever. I hope she never shows up again.

>card
What the other guy said. I'd say just make it cost UR and change the ability to
>When ~ enters the battlefield, you may pay X. If you do, exile the top X cards of your library.
Oh yeah, and I didn't notice how the pump worked the first time, but it should be a separate ability.
>~ gets +1/+0 for each card exiled with it.
And for the last ability, you only get to cast a single card?

>>53862962
Making it work outside a Treasure set is a pretty good idea. I'm on the fence about balance, but mechanically it seems in a good place.
>Psychemancer
Okay, re-tooling time, as per you and >>53862944. And yeah, just one card. I was worried about balance since you get a lot to choose from, potentially. Do you think it can be more?

>>53863077
>Do you think it can be more?
No. One card is plenty.

>>53863130
That's what I figured, good. At least I did something right with it to start.

>>53863077
One seems OK... but maybe return the card to its owner's hand instead?

>>53863204
Why's that, as opposed to being able to play it? I mean I guess it gives you the flexibility of being able to hold onto it, but that seems like an awful lot of value. Maybe I'm being too conservative, though >>53863130 seems to think it's alright.

>>53863266
Oh hey, I made something similar to that a bit back. Monoblack though, and could grab any card. Just one card though. Someone said it could be red... was that you?

>>53863320
>Why's that, as opposed to being able to play it?
Bomat Courier. Too tired to make sense, sorry.

File: dreamstealer.jpg (41KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 265x370px

Fucking hell, people were saying they were worried that Eternalize would be a Megamorph version of Embalm, and others said it wouldn't be possible since Amonkhet isn't using +1/+1 counters. Yet, here we are, Mega-embalm.

File: WhiteCommonsIblis.jpg (2MB, 1500x1569px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x1569px

Still tinkering around with this. Got some feedback a few weeks ago and thought it over, so here I am to get more feedback.

>>53864579
Wasteland Guide is interesting.
I'm sure there's better wording for Hunting Companions
I don't care too much for 0 power profane creatures.
Or white Devils.
Or cards with memory issues like Wasteland Orphan. Just have it check for Island/Mountains, or blue/red permanents.
Anansi should specify which creature gains wither. You are also going to get a lot of flak for spiders without reach, as well as wither in white.

File: Brand of Bolas.png (337KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 375x523px

Truly the God Pharaoh is our greatest ally and would only see good done to his people.

File: GreenCommons.jpg (2MB, 1500x1569px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x1569px

>>53864702
>I'm sure there's better wording for Hunting Companions
Me too, but I'm not sure what it would be.

>I don't care too much for 0 power profane creatures.
Noted. The -1/-1 counter downside probably isn't enough if the creature has no power to begin with.

>Or white Devils.
You probably won't like that White is generally ran by a white Demon and a religion that worships it either.

Never really understood why Devils and Demons can't be other colors, but Angels and other "mana born" beings can exist outside their colors just fine.

>Or cards with memory issues like Wasteland Orphan. Just have it check for Island/Mountains, or blue/red permanents.
This is a good idea, thanks. I don't know why I didn't think of it.

>Anansi should specify which creature gains wither. You are also going to get a lot of flak for spiders without reach, as well as wither in white.
Every spider having reach makes them boring creatures though. They generally have "Reach" and nothing else or some one-off ability that isn't even all that strong. It seems to limit their design space considerably.

As for the wither, it felt like it's a flavorful way for white to get wither. It should be noted that the set features a large number of Demons.

File: Hafsi Goatherd.png (236KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 375x523px

Wow, leave for an hour and all these posts.

>>53865019
I'm on the fence if you need that "if you control @" bit. It has shroud so how would its owner ever steal it back? I guess if it get Zedruu'd but then the owner is the controller, and I'm pretty sure he'd be willing to reveal his hand to cast something for free every turn. It's a neat idea, but since it's automatic it'd probably have to cost a lot more. A deck running it never has to attack you, more than likely, so getting rid of him is going to be a nightmare unless you can sac it to pay a cost.

>>53864799
This would be a ton more interesting to me personally if it had Vigilance, but as it is, it seems fine. I'm not very good at costing Vehicles, sadly.

>>53864756
"leaves the battlefield". This is pretty powerful. I think it'd be pretty easy to build around with Flashback and Madness.

>>53864579
I've been in most of these threads lately and I don't recognize this symbol. Huh. Anyway...
>01
Seems fine. The mana cost is really necessary here.
>02
"unless the creature it's paired with attacks or blocks" I think.
>03
Seems like a set-centric utility card. Not much to say. Gideon's Lawkeeper says this is fine.
>04
I agree with the other anon that Profane on a 0 power creature is just cheap-feeling. There is no real drawback.
>05
Since you have cards that check for U and R, having this cost W to fly feels off.
>06
I'd go 2/2 here.
>07
I'm not that big of a type nazi, but Demon would make more sense in white. They are less chaotic than Devils and make for a better match, I think. Unless of course there's a reason for this. I assume it'd have something to do with white being soft-paired in Jeskai colors?
>08
I agree with the other anon here.
>09
I'd make this activate only once each turn.
>10
I think separate sentences here for the removal and life gain. It tentatively seems fine but I'm leery of creatures with over 4 toughness at common outside green.
>11
Probably fine.
>12
Change "it" to "~". Wither? eh...

>>53864520
I like the combination of Raid and Morbid here. Proper rarity, mana cost seems fine. I think the only change I would make is making it a sorcery.

>>53864373
I have to say I like Eternalize better than Megamorph, but doing the "previous set's mechanic but BIGGER!" thing twice in the last four sets feels cheap.

>>53864224
>crew 2
>power 1
0/10 not pottery. Amusing though.

>>53864212
It's too easy to kill, I feel. Most players will have two creatures with three power between them by turn 4, even if draft.

>>53863973
I chuckled. That said, the actual effect is pretty awesome.

>>53863857
I feel like this is more like an old school black card along the lines of those pseudo-Lifelink spells like Vicious Hunger.

>>53863522
WotC is so odd with Deathtouch creatures that have other keywords on them. I was going to say this would probably be a 2/3. but actually, nah, they'd print this.

>>53863443
Ahh. I see what you were expecting. I can understand that.

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

253KB, 375x523px

>>53865414
Fug, wrong version. I didn't want to push white Reach.

>>53865260
Cute.

>>53865260
>I've been in most of these threads lately and I don't recognize this symbol. Huh. Anyway...
Symbol was just made today, before it was just the square.

>I'm not that big of a type nazi, but Demon would make more sense in white. They are less chaotic than Devils and make for a better match, I think. Unless of course there's a reason for this. I assume it'd have something to do with white being soft-paired in Jeskai colors?
The plane consists/consisted of a stack of three worlds, a "heavenly" world, a "mortal" earth-like world, and a "hellish" world. Each has/had its own independent 5-color ecosystem. Within the last two-odd centuries, the mortal world collapsed into the hellish world below it.

Since the underworld was a fully functioning 5-mana realm, it has a demonic prince that governs each color, and I thought that since Devils are supposed to be manifested from demonic "desires" I could get away with bleeding them into other colors, as each color has its own demons.

Thanks for the feedback regardless.

>>53865444
I like the flavor, though I feel it should only be a 2/2.

>>53865462
Well in MtG, Devils are red and Demons are black, for the most part. You seem to be freely mixing and matching them. I don't mind personally, but you may find some REEEEing over it. Just fair warning.

>>53865446
Thanks anon.

>>53865109
>01
This is a neat take on ramp. I like it. If we can get Arbor Elf, we should be able to have this. "Land card" though, I think?
>02
Wither is certainly more at home in green than white.
>03
On the fence. I think it's okay, but I have to say, I don't much care for Profane so far. I feel like I'd much prefer a mechanic that reacts to having -1/-1 counters with a bonus to compensate for it instead. But it's your show, and if this is what you prefer regarding how it works, then I'll do my best to just review what you present and not interject my personal quibbles.
>04
Probably fine, but quite good.
>05
Too complex for common, I feel. It toes the line as allowable under NWO. If you don't care about that, then no other complaints. It's so hard to use I can't really see it being much more than a 2/3 for 3.
>06
This can cost 2G if you want it to.
>07
Again, memory issues. Check for Plains and Swamps, as the other anon suggested. Probably should have fixed that before you posted this.
>08
Forgot your ~ to keep the cardname straight. Menace and trample are kinda redundant, but at least much less so than trample and flying. Feels kinda like a diet Monstrosity card.
>09
Trample and reach together create a design conflict. Is it a defensive creature or offensive? Without vigilance, swinging with a Reach creature feels bad because you lose a blocker. Having Reach on a trampler feels bad because you want to swing with it, but it says "I'm a blocker". I'd make it a 4/4, but other than that, I think it's fine. Potentially a 4/5, but that might make it even more confusing.
>10
Eh, it works. Keep an eye on it though; it dropping in the very late game might prove to be too much.
>11
Fatty fat fat. Just fine by me; bit odd at common though.

>>53865620
I was on the fence about that too. If I get more feedback in that direction I'll switch it up.

>>53865741
Oh I like that one. Pumps, cantrips, lifegain, and all on flavor? Excellent.

>>53863857
>Ava's Demon

Thanks, Anon! I totally forgot about that comic. Time to play catch-up.

File: Riven Sentinel.png (271KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 375x523px

>>53865713
Very odd card. So the aim here is to basically turn Outlast into a kicker if you want it? Well, a slightly late Kicker, but still. Also meshes really well with anything that has Outlast and Vigilance.

>>53865741
I like this card, but I feel like the death trigger should be reversed so it reads a bit more clearly. A new player might look at that and go "okay, I gain life equal to the toughness of the card I drew... wait, this is an instant..."

Last one from me tonight, I think. Glad the thread picked up for a bit; that was nice. I'm not as happy with this as would like, but I think I'm just tired and not able to put as much thought into it as I'd like. And no that's not a typo; "riven" means something that's been split. So I decided these barbarians lived in a forested valley nestled in the cleft of a mountain chain called "the Riven". And they don't like outsiders. I don't know WHY I come up with lore for one-off cards, but there you go.

>>53866223
I like it, but those costs need to be increased. This would become a big staple in Planechase EDH. Hell, even in normal EDH that second ability alone is just great on a colorless spell. Breya players would adore this.

>>53865864
Compare to Skarrg/Gruul Guildmage. It's probably fine, but just consider tweaking those ability costs.

>>53865414
>doing the "previous set's mechanic but BIGGER!" thing twice in the last four sets feels cheap.
What were the other times this happened?

>>53866047
Interesting. Needs a few wording changes. And I'm not sure about the last ability. Just feels... uncreative? I just feel like pumping the Clues like this is too easy, I guess. Maybe the Clues get counters when they attack? "Bolster", so maybe grant Indestructible?

File: Haunted Treasure2.jpg (49KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 375x523px

Slight update of a card I did a while ago. Made for Pirate anon's set, repost for Ixalan seemed appropriate. And yeah, I do kinda hope that Treasure appears on some cards and not just on tokens. Dunno why, but I feel like it could make for some interesting flavor to certain cards.

>>53868151
Seems OK. Needs a lot of wording help though.
>1: ~ becomes a copy of target creature with a mimic counter on it, except its name is still ~, it's legendary in addition to its other types, and it gains this ability and "T: Put a mimic counter on target creature."
Cleanest I can make it.

>>53868185
Still not a fan, sorry. Though I never noticed this before, why does it have more G in its cost than R?

>>53868216
No idea if this is good or not, sorry. But I think you could reword to something like
>Choose a card name, then reveal the top three cards of your library. If one or more of those cards has the chosen name, put those cards into your hand and the rest on the bottom of your library in any order. Otherwise, exile those cards.
I think.

File: Gruul Fighting Pits.png (394KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 375x523px

>>53868858
Yeah my wording is usually pretty awful, I just make up the cards when they come to mind and then post them here every now and then. . My sense of power scale is off to since I play mostly casual EDH and most of my cards tend to be for that whether I mean for them to be or not.

Flavor and neat mechanics are the end game for me because making those kinds of cards into working decks is fun

>>53869400
>Whenever a creature you control fights, put a +1/+1 counter on that creature at the beginning of the next end step.
>Tap two untapped creatures you control: Target creature you control fights target creature you don't control.
Though I'd just replace the last ability with something like
>Creatures you control have "[mana cost], T: This creature fights target creature you don't control."

>>53868858
Barrin's Codex?

>>53865019
This is a nice card; clever design and flavor is on point. But it is much too weak. Upkeep trigger means it can only hit instants? or if not after you playing a five mana spell you won't have anything until next upkeep. It might be better if it cost less or triggered during owner's turn.

File: Burrowing Dragon.png (259KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 375x523px

>>53869855
I made that card over a year ago and have posted it a few times and its never dawned on me it only let you cast instants. I should mention this card would be one packaged with a Commander series, not a regular set (like most of my cards). He'd be a lot more interesting in EDH when peoples hands are full of Primal Surge and Time Walks and Eldrazi

>Whenever the owner of Caul, Spymaster of Bolas begins their first main phase, reveal your hand. That player may cast a nonland card
from it without paying its mana cost

Does that sound better? That card becomes a word salad if any more lines get added to it. Seems like i would let you cast anything you wanted to worded like that.

And I feel the effect is strong enough. Having no secrets in your hand and knowing that you can't save the spells you want for when you want. Then being able to use one of them every turn you can't get rid of this entrenched spymaster giving away all your secrets.

>>53869724
Didn't even know about that. Damn. Wanted draw plus lifeloss to get the idea of cursed treasure across. Wait, how viable is
>At the beginning of your upkeep, you lose 1 and create a colorless Treasure artifact token with "T, Sacrifice this artifact: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool."

>>53870393
That's a Lotus Blossom! Am I getting trolled?

>>53870603
No, the design I'm proposing wouldn't use counters at all. But no, I didn't know about Lotus Blossom. I was introduced to Magic in Theros, so I lack much knowledge about cards that haven't been reprinted since then.

>>53869855
>Upkeep trigger means it can only hit instants?
No. Since it tells you to cast the spell, you can cast any spell irregardless of timing during the resolution of the ability.

File: Amulet of the Orzhova.png (360KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

360KB, 375x523px

>>53871029
That's good to know thanks anon, so is the wording fine then? That's the third edit of the card so I'd like to get it down one of these times

>>53871523
Neat.

>>53862962
I think this should cost an additional (1) to activate.
>>53863973
"...to your mana pool."
>>53864212
Game loss might be overkill. Losing 7 life or thereabouts seems painful enough.
>>53864520
This is neat. Image doesn't exactly make me think of a ritual, but good art is hard to find.
>>53864799
I have a feeling this would fuck up limited. A big lifelinker that's immune to sorc removal is insanely difficult to beat.
>>53865019
First of all, >>53871029 is right. The wording is correct as is.
Honestly I don't like it. It's an insane value machine, and since most answers are probably going to be sorc speed, you can get rid of them before they have a chance to use them. Now grixis is low on lifegain effects that aren't lifelink so it still costs 2 life per turn, but I still think it should be a little weaker. Maybe get rid of shroud? A single upkeep trigger makes it card neutral, so having to protect it yourself seems fair.
>>53865109
Bewitched Tangle seems fairly weak as there are plenty of other big creatures going around, making it unlikely it can attack even once. I say scrap it. Rest is fine.
>>53865260
Seeing that clause on an uncommon is weird, but fine in this case.
>>53865444
I agree that it should be a 2/2.
>>53865713
Meh. This is okay in limited, but it wouldn't suddenly make outlast constructed viable.
>>53865741
"When enchanted creature dies, you draw a card and you gain life equal to its toughness." That's the clearest wording I can think of. Slightly redundant, but better that than confusing.
>>53865864
Decent.
>>53866047
"Whenever you sacrifice a clue, draw a card for each +1/+1 counter on it." I think.
The last ability makes getting CA a little too easy here. If you're willing to use non-evergreen keywords, I suggest 1G: Bolster 1.
>>53866223
Good stuff. Can't speak about balance since I only play regular mtg.
>>53868185
Flavour works nicely. And I disagree with >>53868858, I think the colour weights are fine as they are.

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

46KB, 375x523px

Last thread died before I got any feedback on this.

>>53868216
>1WU: Sometimes draw a card.
Probably OP. Exiling cards is not an effective cost, so this is just a draw engine on a land. Ability should cost 2WU+tap at least.
>>53868858
At 3 mana and with life loss on draw adding the counter on end step should still be fine. Sweet card.
>>53870086
I'd prefer a "You may have ~ assign its combat damage as though it weren't blocked" clause over Forestwalk. It's never going to be blocked anyway.
>>53871384
You don't need the "or more". I could be wrong about this, but I think sacrifices are usually the last part of costs like this, so "T, Tap [...], Sacrifice ~:" would be the order.
>>53871411
A 4/4 untapped flying manland that doesn't cost mana to activate? Probably OP.
>>53871481
>You can't lose the game this turn. Your life total can't change this turn. Target opponent may gain 5 life and draw two cards.
With your wording, the draw two is not optional. And also, damage/lifeloss/lifegain are always in numbers (gain 3 etc.), while other stuff (counters, cards etc.) are written out.
While this doesn't do anything against infect, being a repeatable fog is pretty stupid. I suggest the Worship wording for the life total part.
>>53871523
This is cool but way too expensive. You need 9 mana + a worthwhile equipment + a turn where the opponent doesn't kill a 2/2. Keeping in mind that the equipment also costs mana, I think this would be fine at 2W for mana cost and same activation cost.
>>53872459
>When ~ enters the battlefield, if you cast it from your hand, return it to its owner's hand.
Technically it's impossible for this to send it to a hand that isn't the owner's, but safe is safe.
Name and card don't match at all. Could lead to some really stupid CoCos, but it is effectively uncastable otherwise. Probably ok.
>>53872976
Cool card. I actually think this is quite well-balanced so unfortunately I can't say much else.

>>53873090
More white than green

>>53873286
>White
Care to explain? I'd accept monoB, but white doesn't seem fitting at all to me.

>>53871523
This breaks most equipment, since they say things like "equipped creature gets +1/+1". You should add a clause:

>2WW, T: Create a token that's a copy of target Equipment, except it's an Aura enchantment, loses equip, and gains enchant creature. Change its text by replacing all instances of "equipped" with "enchanted". Attach it to target creature you control.

>>53874024
>301.5e An ability of a permanent that refers to the “equipped creature” refers to whatever creature that permanent is attached to, even if the permanent with the ability isn’t an Equipment.

>>53874110
Fair enough. Wizards would probably still change the text just to avoid confusion though.

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

46KB, 375x523px

>>53868151

Couldn't really see a reason for the mimic counters.

>>53875047
Derp, forgot to add the legendary bit in the text box.

Light of the Void 2R
Instant
~ deals X damage to target creature or player, where X is the number of cards exiled from this game.

Eternal Erasure WWW
Instant
Target nonbasic permanent loses all abilities. (This effect doesn't end at end of turn.)

Deific Scourge 2WR
Creature- Avatar
Whenever ~ attacks, put a +1/+1 counter on each attacking creature you control, then put a -1/-1 counter on each creature you control that's not attacking. (+1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters cancel and remove each other. Shit's not that hard, famalam.)
3/3

Grand Defacer 2UBBB
Creature- Demon Horror
2UB: ~ gains all abilities of target attacking or blocking creature until it leaves the battlefield, then put a Fate counter on it.
Creatures with Fate counters on them have no abilities.
6/6

Moribund Memento B
Instant
As an additional cost to play ~, sacrifice a permanent.
Search your library for up to three cards with the same name as the sacrificed permanent and put them into your graveyard. Then shuffle your library.
Draw a card.

>>53875811
Light of the Void shouldn't target players because of how swingy it can be. If you want it to, it should deal a fixed amount that's boosted with a threshold mechanic .

Eternal Erasure should be an Aura.

Moribund is intriguing.

>>53871481
I initially liked it but now it sounds too overpowered. If you have 8 mana, you might as well be using this ability every turn and never lose unless your opponent have a way to destroy artifacts. I would consider having "tap" as cost of the ability as well, just in case.

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

47KB, 375x523px

sup

>>53876213
>sodomex

lel

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

53KB, 375x523px

>>53876213
>>53876372

>>53876017
>Light
Based it on Ire of Kaminari. Can't think of too many ways to exile a shitload of cards without the one helm of whatever.
>Erasure
But that's boring and removable.
>Moribund
Pack Hunt for graveyard shenanigans.

Does Defacer work like I hope it works?

>>53876334
>Aphetto
There's a name I haven't heard in a long time

File: Landmine Squad 2.jpg (50KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 375x523px

>>53876707
how about this flavor text?

>>53876372
>not "Bueno"

File: indeks.jpg (658KB, 750x2092px) Image search: [Google]

658KB, 750x2092px

Another day, another idea on the table.

>>53877998
honest question here, i dont come often to these threads anymore: why the rz01-2-3 on the name?

>>53878375
He's using a strange version of the set skeleton syntax.

First letter for rarity. C for common, U for uncommon, R for rare, M for mythic.

Second letter (IIRC) denotes color. W, U, B, R, and G stand for exactly what you think they would. Artifacts are separate from lands, despite both normally being colorless, and are respectively A and L. Multicolor is supposed to be represented by M, but he used Z here for some reason.

Number is just a number. But it helps you keep track of how many cards you need for a set rarity and color/type.

>>53877998
uz01 is interesting. A lot of these are just really pushed creatures.

File: Momentum.jpg (429KB, 1125x523px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 1125x523px

Had an idea, but I'm not sure if I can get away with writing the mechanic on cards a certain way, or if there's a better way it could be implemented on cards.

>>53880471
It's a recoil stapled to a creature. I will agree they're mostly boring. And Lord of Change there really needs to not have instant speed discard/draw for UB. I like the clause on the Great Unclean one.

>>53875390
This should probably be sorcery speed.

>>53876213
Very cool. Can't tell if it's under costed, but probably isn't.

>>53876257
Needs to be rewritten:
>Search your library for a blue card, a black card, and a red card. Choose one of them at random, put that card into your hand and the rest into the graveyard. Then shuffle your library.

>>53876302
Should enter the battlefield tapped, and should add colorless mana. Look at the newest version of Sol Ring for what I mean.

>>53876334
This is cool.

>>53876373
~ deals X damage to any number of target creatures, where X is the number of creatures it could target.

>>53876409
Templating needs to be fixed:
>Whenever ~ attacks, you may pay B. If you do, defending play discards a card.

>Whenever ~ attacks, you may pay R. If you do ~ deals 3 damage to defending player.

That said I don't really understand the purpose of the first ability, since the 2nd and 3rd don't care if he's blocked, and he has no power to begin with.

>>53876924
I like this card, but at the same time I feel like it needs to be "You may sacrifice ~" because he's just going to blow you up if your opponent decides not to play a land after you drop him. Then again that seems a little too strong somehow, so I don't know.

>>53877998
>rz01
Seems way too strong. A 9/9 with flying and trample with very little downside. The haste makes him even stronger if you have a card that can ping for free.

>rz02
Ability 1 is way too cheap, way too strong, and should be sorcery speed.

Ability 2 also seems too cheap. It's like a safe dragon breath pump.

>rz03, uz01
Way too pushed. Especially uz01 being at common.

>uz03, uz04, uz05
These are probably fine. Might want to look into removing Regenerate and adding "Cost: ~ Gains indestructible until end of turn."

>>53881124
Probably needs to be reworded? Someone needs to be casting a spell, then there needs to be an artifact and creature on the battlefield or it can't resolve. Makes it incredibly situational.

>>53881201
I will defend RZ01 because Furyborn Hellkite exists, tho it needs to loose the haste.

>>53881674
Seems good, but who knows. Apparently 3 damage is worth 3 mana now.

>>53881880
Generally you'll make a creature fight something it was going to survive from anyway, and at sorcery speed, this is probably fine.

>>53882103
Bats need a defined color:
>create a 1/1 *black Bat creature token with flying

Otherwise it looks good.

>>53882526
Interesting card. Depending on the environment it might either be good or bad.

>>53882572
This is great.

>>53884035
I agree with the other guy. 5 mana for a 9/9 with haste, trample, and flying is too good. Furyborn Hellkite is way slower by comparison, and can be chump blocked all day and never actually hit a player for 12.

File: indeks.jpg (337KB, 750x1046px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 750x1046px

>>53884136
Well, woken up and decided a nerf is indeed in order for 4 cards.

>>53876334
Too weak for a mythic.
Cast for cost and its a 7/7 maximum as lands are colorless.

>>53881201
sup

>>53876213 (You)
> Very cool. Can't tell if it's under costed, but probably isn't.
I have 2cmcphilia. I'm sexually aroused by cards (especially spells) with 2 mana cost, so I'm inclined to keep my ideas around that point in the curve.

>>53876302 (You)
> Should enter the battlefield tapped, and should add colorless mana. Look at the newest version of Sol Ring for what I mean
I think there's a long way from that to a Sol Ring, starting from the fact its a land and it requires that you already mana to use. You could compare it to Temple of the False God, but likely worse because it would make it difficult for you to cast smaller spells (since you would be forced into adding at least 4 colorless mana). I think I created this before the whole colorless mana new thingy.

>>53876334 (You)
> This is cool.
thanks

>>53876373 (You)
> ~ deals X damage to any number of target creatures, where X is the number of creatures it could target.
I was completely clueless on how to write that lol

>>53876409 (You)
> That said I don't really understand the purpose of the first ability
When you attack, your creature can be blocked (and potentially killed in combat) even if it doesn't have power. With the first ability, you are able to trigger the other 2 without worrying that the creature will die.

>>53876924 (You)
> I like this card, but at the same time I feel like it needs to be "You may sacrifice ~
The fact it doesn't give you a choice is intentionally. It can backfire, which basically sums up the equation goblin + explosives. This card is intended on a (probably tribal) aggro deck where you don't really need more than 4 lands.

>>53884227
Rarity is not directly related to the card's power. Yes, it would be usually a 7/7 (which is quite strong for 5 mana, isn't it?). Also, this card belonged on a set that black and white were the more abundant color, and there was even black-colored lands, so it could play for something above 7/7 with considerably ease.

>>53881674
Honestly, I feel this card is too weird. Red is the color most distant from enchantments, having a red spell that gain benefit from multiple enchants doesn't make much sense for me. I think that red is more likely to have things like Aura Barb.

>>53881880
I like the fact you paid attention to details and made it exclusive for your creatures.

>>53882103
Cool. I was about to recommend using random counters instead of +1/+1 counter, but since its a vampire I guess the card's flavor speaks louder. Maybe an interesting variation would be, instead of spawning bats every time, it only spawns them when the card die (based on its current power), so in a way looks like he transformed into a horde of bats instead of dying.

>>53882526
This card is interesting, but I don't like poison mechanic. In addition, I think this card couldn't play much in an environment full of poison cards.

>>53882572
This is cool. Also, dota2 fanart.

>>53884207
I don't want to be a hater, but the whole rz0X thing makes me not want to look at your cards. Just saying.

>>53882526
I think this could be just a 1 mana 1/1 with just that first ability. Then put it into a set with poison mechanic, and create a few other cards that give you poison counters or also use your poison counters in your advantage.

A black sorcery, "Suspicious Antidote", that sets the number of poison counters of a player to 5 (regardless of how many he had before) could be cool. (just an idea).

Something else that I thought that would also play nicely along are spells that give both players poison counters at the same time, as well as something that "consumes" your poison counters as cost to get something in exchange such as mana or +1/+1.

>>53885583
I'm using RZ so that the multicolour cards are always the last one shown of each rarity. It's convienient and I've no idea what's your problem with it is.

>>53886010
Yeah I get you have your reasons, but when I look at a card with that on its name (and consequently on its text box) just turns me off. I'm really not complaining, I'm just pointing out that if you didn't post cards using that more people like me would feel inclined to comment on your ideas.

Again, I'm not complaining about it, just saying how I feel about it :) maybe that is just me and my feedback is not worth the trouble for you to post them without that, I'm OK if that's the case.

I guess I'm a simple guy. When I take part on this hobby, I like card ideas to try to look like real cards could be, and anything that goes too far from it (the rz0X thing, artwork that is just too away from magic style (which is also a bit your case), etc) makes me feel like "nah" about those cards.

But again2, I'm just pointing out all of this in case you never thought of this. I know all of this is more of a personal limitation of mine.

>>53886635
>"Huh, this card is really sweet, but I hate these four letters and numbers on it. Guess I won't give him feedback."
That is fucking retarded. You're a fucking idiot. That guy's just using the set skeleton syntax so he can keep track of what he's doing. I'm fucking glad most people aren't like you, or Time anon would still be looking for feedback on his first set.

>>53880768
Looks like a winmore mechanic to me. I like the name, though.

>>53886688
Wow, such hate lol

>"Huh, this card is really sweet
That is the thing. I didn't really felt like reading his cards because of it.

> That is fucking retarded. You're a fucking idiot.
I explained my logic (I like it when cards look like real cards). If that is not a limitation for you, good for you :D

> That guy's just using the set skeleton syntax so he can keep track of what he's doing.
There's other ways to do that. Also, he could remove the skeleton suffix before posting here, if he thought it was worth the trouble.

> I'm fucking glad most people aren't like you
I don't know how most people are, I don't know how I would like most people to be.

.
Btw, seems like you skipped the part where I make it clear over and over that I don't think he's wrong or silly for doing that. I just don't like it, and I made it clear its just a matter of personal preference. If he wants to carry on doing that, good for him

>>53886744
>Btw, seems like you skipped the part where I make it clear over and over that I don't think he's wrong or silly for doing that. I just don't like it, and I made it clear its just a matter of personal preference. If he wants to carry on doing that, good for him
Fucking duh I skipped it. I wasn't focusing on that, I was focusing on your retardation. Retard.

>>53880768
I think that Momentum ability would make more sense if it reset to 0 instead of removing just 1 counter when the creature don't attack. Also, it could be oriented by TAPPING (or not tapping) instead of attacking, to create room for other sort of effects:

"Whenever you tap this permanent, put a momentum counter on it. At the beginning of your turn, if this permanent is untapped, remove all momentum counters from it."

>>53886796
I'm not retarded. My mom had me checked.

>>53886688
Settle down mate, I get where he's coming from. I do not agree with him, after all the modified empty set skeleton was my starting point, but I get how some people would not like it.

File: Screenshot_146.png (479KB, 466x466px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 466x466px

>>53886688
>>53886796
not sure what your deal is dude lol this guy >>53886635 seems like a fag but at least he knows about it, u on the other hand is the retarded that started cusin and screamin shit just because u got offended by somethin who wasnt even an offense in the 1st place

tldr: anon is a fag, but u are the retarded one

>>53886924
Thanks
>>53886950
Thanks (I guess)

>>53886977
Nothing to thank for.

One more thing, sorry but removing the card identifier every time I want to post the current version just to add it back to prevent confusion would be kind of a pain at this point. When the skeleton's filled (which hopefully happens), I'll probably remove them for playtesting.

>>53887054
Yeah, that is why I said you should weight your convenience. I get it would could be really annoying to remove it for each card each time you want to post them here.

Btw, you are making a whole set then, eh? What is it about (mechanic-wise and flavor-wise)? How many cards? Please tell me more about it, if you have the time

File: Prism Charm3.jpg (39KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 375x523px

Looking for better art. Anyway, only part I think I need to worry about with balance is the B mode. If it's still too strong now, I'm thinking of downgrading the B mode and changing the R mode to
>~ deals 4 damage to up to one target player.
So I still have the 1 2 3 4 5 motif.

>>53887243
I would change the black effect for something like "each opponent discard a card" or "each opponent sacrifice a creature". Mainly because every other color's effect doesn't make target, so I would embrace it and make all effects targetless.

Also, you could consider tuned down the effects but have "For each X spent to cast Prism Charm, _________". I think it would make the card very interesting.

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

36KB, 375x523px

>>53887299
>I would change the black effect for something like "each opponent discard a card" or "each opponent sacrifice a creature".
Eh, I like the numerical theme more than a targetless one, so I don't think I'm going to go with that, sorry.

>Also, you could consider tuned down the effects but have "For each X spent to cast Prism Charm, _________". I think it would make the card very interesting.
That is a very interesting idea. But I would make it an entire card by itself. Actually, here's a mockup. First draft, so I realize it may be a bit unbalanced. And I decided to go completely crazy by making it cost X. No idea why, just thought it seemed fun, I guess. Eh, wish I could think of a way to make it more different from Prism Charm though.

>>53887437
> Eh, I like the numerical theme more than a targetless one, so I don't think I'm going to go with that, sorry.
I feel stupid lol. Just now I realized what the "1,2,3,4,5" you said previously meant. But in my defense, I don't think the cards is transmitting that idea, since the numbers are out of order (I understand you are using the correct order, but nevertheless, I don't think its something people would get right away)

> . Actually, here's a mockup. First draft,
W: gain 2 life
B: discard 1 card is way too strong, but I can't think of any suggestion right now
R: seems to strong, I would do "deals 1 damage to each opponent".

> h, wish I could think of a way to make it more different from Prism Charm though.
I don't think you can =( they are just way too similar. What you could do is to make several separated cards that only use 2 colors or 3 (example: a WU card, or a WUB card)

File: indeks.jpg (766KB, 750x2615px) Image search: [Google]

766KB, 750x2615px

>>53887198
Mechanics-wise there is not really that much to talk about yet, because I'm not that far in and I'm prioritizing lore resonance with each card, of course within the confines of the colour wheel. An archaic approach but this very much is a hard top-down set. Bloodthirst fit right in both flavourfully and mechanically to what Chaos wants to do, and I've opted for Regeneration instead of indestructibility because it's more flavorful, other than that still working out stuff.

As for Flavor, I was thinking on how to best do Warhammer lore in MTG for a while already, and finally decided to take the Dominaria approach and show part of the world with each set. This one is very much focused on Norsca as well as the Northern Empire provinces and Kislev, showing mainly Chaos fighting humanity with some showing from orcs and dwarves.

Have some early commons I've made recently.

>>53887607
How you feel about reprints? Using MTG real cards in your set, but with Warhammer pics? For instance, that Eldritch Fire is pretty much MTG's Incinerate for all that counts.

>>53887725
Just as lightning strike is searing spear. I am completely up for reprints, however I believe the issue here is not just calling the card Incinerate, but how to make Eldritch Fire work game-wise.

>>53887607
>CB01
I think with the downside, you could make it a 2/2. Could be wrong though.

>CB02
You know Regen's dead, right? Card seems OK otherwise.

>CR01
Incinerate reprint? Seems OK.

>CR02
Wizards likes to say "attacks each combat if able" now. Anyway, I think I'd like this more if it didn't have Haste. Do note that there are no creatures with both Bloodthirst and Haste.

>CR03
Fine, obviously.

>CR04
Eh, dunno about this one.

>CR05
I think I'd prefer this at 3R.

>CR06
Seems OK.

>CR07
Vulshok Sorcerer is the same but 1/1 and costs 1RR. I think this one should either cost 2RR or 4R. Having a decent body and ping, combined with Haste, is all pretty nice.

>>53887782
I just suggested using Incinerate because I thought it could make your set feel a bit more like MtG :) that is why I like reprints on custom sets

>>53885486
>Rarity is not directly related to the card's power.
Eh, ever since Wizards started pushing draft so hard it pretty much is. Mythics are supposed to "impact" the board pretty hard when they land.

I don't really agree with rarity deciding power, but it's the way the game has been going since Planeswalkers and Baneslayer made the scene.

File: carnagetyrant.jpg (26KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 265x370px

>>53887840
I think this has some relevance to your conversation. It's one of the Ixalan leaks.

>Carnage Tyrant
>4GG
>Creature - Dinosaur
>Mythic
>Carnage Tyrant can't be countered.
>Trample, hexproof
>7/6

>>53887840
I see. Maybe that card should really be rare. But again, its a bit less shit considering it was supposed to be part of a set where black (and white) were predominant colors and even some common lands were black ^^'

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

49KB, 375x523px

>>53887840
>>53887905
that is what happens when I try to make a mythic card lol

>>53887977
>Indestructible
>~ enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters on it.
>Whenever ~ attacks, defending player sacrifices a permanent for each +1/+1 counter on ~.
>~ attacks each combat if able.
Took out Annihilator X since the card already uses an X value.

>>53888053
Then I don't get to use the Annihilator ability. Also, the whole card is supposed to overuse the letter X. ^^'

>>53888173
>^^'

>>53888333
>^^'
^^'

File: Cannoneer2.jpg (49KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 375x523px

Bump. Another Ixalan-themed card. And another one I started a while ago.

File: indeks.jpg (533KB, 750x1569px) Image search: [Google]

533KB, 750x1569px

5 more cards I want to know if they are pushed too much, as well as a color change so that I can fit in Khorne Flesh Hounds into red.

Also I know Haste and Bloodthirst do not play well in theory, but that's the point- making the aggro cards less "boring" by giving more options.

Also I don't have the mythic rarity in my set, with my design skeleton being based on early-2000 sets.

>>53890467
>Also I don't have the mythic rarity in my set, with my design skeleton being based on early-2000 sets.
Why? And is that why you're using Regen?

>>53889776
I like it, but I think its quite too strong. I would go for only 1 Cannon Ball, or/and consider adding T as a cost for the ability.

>>53890467
> rz05 Azhag
I like cards like this.

but my honest feedback is that seems like most cards I saw from you have only standard abilities, so most of them end up looking quite boring =(

>>53890539
I have already mentioned here:
>>53887607
I'm using regen instead of temporary indestructibility because i prefer it flavourfully, it's that simple.

As for mythics, it's complicated. First off, If I have mythics, people would as where are my Planeswalkers- and I hate planeswalkers as a concept. Overall, I just do not really like the concept of mythic rarity, especially as I'm making this set exclusively for limited- instead, I'd rather just make more rares, allowing me instead to possibly push what a rare can do in the abscence of mythics.

>>53890568
So far it was mostly commons so I'm not really surprised that you say that. Plus in some cases being top-down reallly simplifies some cases. Take Bloodthirster for example- the bloodthirst keyword was almost made for it so there's nor really much more there to do but to make him the posterchild.

Again, so far I'm approaching the set from a strictly top-down perspective instead of a mechanic one. This will surely change later in the making as I'll have to fill the skeleton and give stuff to do to non-chaos, so bear with me for a while.

>>53890680
>Overall, I just do not really like the concept of mythic rarity, especially as I'm making this set exclusively for limited
Huh?
>I don't like the concept of mythic rarity, so I'm not going to use it.
>And I'm not going to use it because I'm designing for limited.
>You know, the one format where rarity actually matters, and putting some big limited bomb at mythic would help ease the draft experience.
Well, good luck, let me know how the playtests go.

>>53890779
Not that guy, but mythic rarity makes limited worse, not better.

>>53890779
>You know, the one format where rarity actually matters, and putting some big limited bomb at mythic would help ease the draft experience.
That's the point. Mythic is supposed to hide cards that should not be present in limited. If I'm doing just limited, why not throw out mythics and the increased lucksacking brought with them.

This guy gets it:
>>53890833

>>53890779
>>53890833
haven't played in a while, but mythic rares seems a bit problematic for limited... I mean, you set power level of rares at X then randomly throw some rares that have power level at X+Y just for the sake of doing it, seems like a problematic thing

>>53890863
But you even said you're going to push rares, possibly up to mythic territory. So, you're still going to have mythic, in all but name, except they're going to show up even more often than they would otherwise.

>>53890893
Not rares as individuals, rares as a whole, and not only in powerlevel, but also in complexity. Mythics are in most sets either unbeatable or unplayable, no middle ground. I intend to make rares more equal.

File: Follower of the Fallen2.jpg (53KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 375x523px

Returning to the retro cards. This one based on The Fallen. Gotten feedback for this already, pretty sure it's going into the finished pile soon.

>>53891099
>The Fallen
that sounds like overcomplicating things. wouldn't it be easy to put a counter on the player, then have a effect that deals 1 damage?

"Whenever @ deals combat damage to a player, put a Curse counter on it.

At the beginning of your upkeep, deals 1 damage to target player for each Curse counter on it."

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

38KB, 375x523px

A reversal of Phyrexian Tribute. Costing probably beyond fucked up.

>>53891461
Eh, I'd rather keep it closer to the spirit of the original. I will try to simplify it though.

>>53891829
If you want it to be like the original, why not use the same wording?

"At the beginning of your upkeep, The Fallen deals 1 damage to each opponent it has dealt damage to this game."

Creating enchantment tokens seems really weird, especially for black and red. In addition, it works differently than the Fallen, since it deals 1 damage per turn for each time the creature dealt damage, while I understand that the Fallen deals only 1 no matter how many times it hit.

File: Phantom Fighter2.jpg (39KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 375x523px

>>53891913
These cards aren't supposed to be exact recreations, they're basically just callbacks to other cards. I don't want to use the counters because then it could pretty easily deal damage to a player it didn't hit in combat. Technically the tokens could do that too, but it's a lot harder. And it's cumulative here just for playability. As for making enchantments, it's supposed to represent a curse. What other kind of token gets that idea across?

Here's another card. This one's based on Dream Fighter. Note that Dream Fighter uses Phasing, which has been dead for a very long time now. So this uses slow flicker. Not precisely mechanically the same, but I think it's close enough.

>>53892079
Yeah, I get that, but I just thought it was so different from the original one that stops being a reference. For instance:

1) its not the same color
2) cost is not the same
3) effect is a lot different
4) use enchantments
5) is a Cleric

its different from phantom fighter which has an effect that quite reminds the original card you are referencing

File: Narwhal Horn.jpg (37KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 375x523px

>>53892205
>1) its not the same color
>2) cost is not the same
Tried that. Changed it on an anon's suggestion. Besides, I'm not a big fan of pinging in Black. I will update colors if they don't fall under the modern color pie.

>3) effect is a lot different
I can add a check. Makes it more complex than I wanted it to be though.

>4) use enchantments
Why mention the type? It uses tokens, which Fallen doesn't, but that's to keep track of who was dealt damage. Once again, I ask you, what other kind of token gets the idea of a curse across?

>5) is a Cleric
Fair enough.

>>53892387
>what other kind of token
Don't need to be a token. Could be a Curse counter. I think if you name it "Curse", it would be enough to give the idea of a curse haha

About the effect itself, due the fact it both increases each time the creature hit and it doesn't stop if the creature is removed (neither are true for the original card), makes me thing Follower of the Fallen is stronger than The Fallen. But having a follower being stronger than whoever or whatever he follows is just weird, isn't it? Sorry for carrying on about this, but if the idea was to reference The Fallen, personally I don't think you are currently going to the right direction with that one...

>>53892479
Then make your own version.

>>53892638
I will just giving you/him my feedback. You/him are/is free to ignore it partially or entirely

> Then make your own version.
Its not a card I would make myself

>>53892387
For instance, this one is quite straightforward and is a clear reference of its original card. I would say the Equip cost could be blue, maybe UU, so that the overall cost (drop + equip) would be 2UU, like the original card, but that is just a tiny detail. The way the card current is, it is already a reference to the other card with no shadow of doubt. The card achieves it goal.

I just don't feel that way about Follower of the Fallen. Actually, an artifact of the Fallen would be quite more interesting, considering the fact that the creature using it might be removed but the artifact remains, doing the damage and shit.

"At the beginning of your upkeep, Amulet of the Fallen deals 1 damage to each opponent an creature equipping it has dealt damage to this game."

That would be cool, in my opinion ofc

>>53892865
"When ______ of the Fallen enters the battlefield, deals 1 damage to target player.

In the beginning of your upkeep, _____ of the Fallen deals 1 damage to each player is has dealt damage to this game."

>>53892906
the initial damage could be 2, since the original creature is 2/3

>>53892945
good idea

>>53892970
thanks

>>53892865
>>53892906
>>53892945
>>53892970
>>53892994
you are all the same nerd, why are you talking to yourself?

>>53893024
so are you

>>53892865
>>53892906
>>53892945
>>53892970
>>53892994
>>53893024
>>53893039
gosh, we are so stupid

File: indeks.jpg (248KB, 375x1569px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 375x1569px

Gotta figure out what the Mark of Chaos undivided will do in black. Any ideas?

I'm keeping the Prince of Pleasure out of the set purposefully, becuase I want to use him as the major chaos force in a different set and here he'd just compete for color space with Khorne.

>>53893298
I think these are unbalanced among them. For instance, the blue one gives flying and "T: Tap target nonland permanent." - that is 2 abilities, but they are disconnected and basically can't be of much use together. But then you have the green one which gives deathtouch and regenerate, which not only can be used together, but also is a hell of a combo together. Green one seems to be overpowered comparted to the others.

File: Follower of the Fallen6.jpg (92KB, 752x523px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 752x523px

I so regret starting these retro cards now.

>>53893298
I never really even understood the point of Slaanesh, and I honestly wish GW would retcon him out entirely.

>>53894514
I'm not sure if you're serious. Because they actually squatted him for Age of Sigmar, saying the elves took him prisoner.

>>53894807
Well, I should've said I wish they ditch Slaanesh in 40K as well. But when I say retcon, I mean to completely eradicate Slaanesh so, from the story's point of view, he never existed in the first place. Again, just never understood the purpose of him.

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

35KB, 375x523px

Is something like this even possible under current rules design?

>>53894514
Me again (the guy who was pissing you off about Follower of the Fallen).

I actually like this version of it. Its a lot more clean.

>>53895585
No, because the card will "forget" when it moves from exile to the battlefield.

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

44KB, 375x523px

Based on Choking Sands. But changed the non-Swamp restriction to non-Desert, it just made more sense in my mind. And changed the damage to lifeloss since ping damage isn't really Black anymore, unless it's paired with lifegain.

>>53898754
>[...] destroy target creature if it's tapped.
So your third spell can be a creature spell and still result in destruction. No idea on costing, sorry.

>>53897292
That seems overpowered. Lands with active abilities that are not mana usually have them at high cost, a lot higher than you would pay for a spell (because its a spell within a land). Here a few examples:

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=401821
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=382986
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=121234

File: Bloodthirster.png (294KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 375x523px

>>53890467
>>53890680
>Take Bloodthirster for example- the bloodthirst keyword was almost made for it so there's nor really much more there to do but to make him the posterchild.
Oh ye of little imagination. Aside, I'm kinda disappointed that they gave a specific definition for "bloodthirst X" rather than leave it open to other conditions. I had to kibosh an idea for X = devotion to black and red.

>Again, so far I'm approaching the set from a strictly top-down perspective instead of a mechanic one
Just because it's top-down doesn't mean you should fill your set with the same french vanillas. I already count 4 creatures with bloodthirst, attacks each turn if able, and haste and/or trample. You are doing your flavor a disservice by not crafting more mechanical links.

>>53901793
Trample would be more interesting to see on this rather than Deathtouch.

And as for Bloodthirst X, I think tying it to scale with damage just makes sense. I just don't really see between the damage condition and Devotion.

>>53902236
I hope you realize first strike and haste are both completely irrelevant during a fight.

File: Ludicrous Speed.png (325KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 375x523px

>>53902245
yes and

>>53895585
>+0: Exile ~ until the beginning of your next upkeep. Create a colorless artifact token with "Whenever ~ enters the battlefield from exile, put an additional loyalty counter on it for each turn it was exiled, then exile this token."

>>53901793
cool card, that's an example of a card that has something interesting going on even if it has only standard abilities

> "bloodthirst X" rather than leave it open to other conditions. I had to kibosh an idea for X = devotion to black and red.
That doesn't make sense, since bloodthirst is based on damage taken by the opponent that turn. I don't think there's another way to put it besides the way they do (Bloodthirst X = get +1/+1 for each damage dealt to your opponent that turn)

>Just because it's top-down doesn't mean you should fill your set with the same french vanillas. I already count 4 creatures with bloodthirst, attacks each turn if able, and haste and/or trample. You are doing your flavor a disservice by not crafting more mechanical links.
^ that I agree. Strongly, actually.

>>53901952
Trample would be more interesting to see on this rather than Deathtouch.
not sure about Trample, but I do agree Deathtouch doesn't really give the card much. Also, if you are making gold cards by giving 1 ability from each color, that looks really dull

>>53902236
my thoughts exactly: >>53902245

>>53902362
that card is interesting and nicely done, although the art choice was a turn off for me

>>53907907
Really needs a lot of support, but I guess it could be interesting. Actually, an Eldrazi manland sounds like it could be a fun card. Maybe 6C for a 7/7 or something.

>>53907888
Seems OK.

File: Deepwood Baloth.jpg (257KB, 744x1039px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 744x1039px

VANILLA MYTHIC GO!

>>53909190
Green Sun's Zenith says thank you.

>>53909190
this is the sort of design I like! ++++

File: Zolomar Lord of the Sand6.jpg (41KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 375x523px

>>53909190
I always found the idea of a vanilla mythic just plain boring. This doesn't change my opinion, sorry.

>>53909666
>I always found the idea of a vanilla mythic just plain boring.
I find cards with simple effects, even vanilla ones with no effects, a lot better than some over-complicated card ideas. I like the idea that guy had and the fact its really specific makes being a mythic a good thing.

> Zolomar, Lord of the Sand6
I honestly don't get why the -7 effect is at the beginning of each combat. Effects are usually on the end of turn or beginning of upkeep, and unless there's a clear reason for not being on those times, seems just like a good way to mess up with people's head. So, what's up with that?

For those who use MagicCards (like me), they FINALLY updated their site with hi-res scans for Kaladesh, Aether Revolt, Kaladesh Inventions (both sets), Nissa vs. Ob Nixilis, Commander 2016, Conspiracy 2, the three missing cards from Zendikar Expeditions (Rugged Prairie, Ancient Tomb, and Dust Bowl), Planechase Anthology, and From the Vault: Lore.

>>53909761
Eh, dunno why I made the -7 that way. I guess I didn't want to just make tokens at upkeep, just seems kinda dull I guess. I'll try to think up something else.

>>53909790
> Eh, dunno why I made the -7 that way.
You could also use "at the end of your turn" or "at end of each turn". Like I said, unless there's a solid reason for spawning the worms at a different time, I think its better for everyone if you do it on either the upkeep or end of turn.

Btw, the way it is now ("at the beginning of each combat") makes me understand that it happens on your opponent's turn as well.

If that card is on a set with quite a few cards that give you one additional combat step, that could be a solid reason. Then people could exploit the ability with cards like Seize the Day (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=30573&type=card).

File: Jace Guild Arbiter10.jpg (44KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 375x523px

Repost. Again, idea is Jace actually staying in Ravnica and doing his damn job for once. And he's picked up some White influence, probably from working with the Azorius so much. Or from palling around with Gideon, take your pick.

As for the abilities, part of me thinks the middle ability should be changed, since right now it just feels too close to the first. Maybe an ability like Vendilion Clique?

>>53909897
I guess I just wanted something more unique. Maybe upkeep, spawn three 5/5 Wurms? Too much?

I know it would spawn at opponent's combat too.

Er, no offense, but what makes you think this is going into a set? There's no set skeleton syntax, but that's understandable, not everyone uses it. There's no set symbol, which is weirder, but sometimes people start sets without a symbol. But take a look at the set information at the bottom left. This is card 4 of 6, and this card is iteration 6. Yeah, definitely not starting a set here.

>>53911076
> Er, no offense, but what makes you think this is going into a set?
No offense taken, but that is just another reason why I think it shouldn't be "each combat" (if it was part of a set and that choice synergized with other cards from the set, it would be a reasonable reason).

> I guess I just wanted something more unique.
I don't think being unique for the sake of being unique is a good thing when it comes to card design details =| people get confused on the details, and people assume if anything about something is different, there's a reason for that. That is why most games try to use always the same wording when talking about the same things, and try to keep effects happening in similar ways (a game when everything happens all the time on each random step is just too damn confusing, that is why they usually narrow it down to the beginning of turn or end of turn)

>>53911194
Well, to be more specific, I wanted the token creation to be unique compared to Kiora, who seems to be the queen of making large tokens.

>>53911076
That last ability is complete horseshit, just sayin'

>>53911229
No idea who Kiora is, but spawning tokens on random game steps don't achieve that lol

An easier way to get that unique feeling is, instead of spawning on specific turn steps, you could have a different trigger. For instance, once I made a set that had a recurrent "Whenever you draw a card" theme. Without any abuse, that is looks just like a weird "at the beginning of your turn", but it gives room for exploit since people could use draw cards to trigger it more times. That being said, you could try these triggers:

-> play a land
-> draw a card
-> play a non-token creature
-> a creature attacking (then put the token already attacking, will feel like a true horde of wurms)
-> when i have sex (but should spawn about 31 5/5 worms considering the fact that happens once in never)

>>53911333
Why is it bad? Any advice for improvement?

>>53911404
I don't think he meant "horseshit" as in bad. I think he meant as in broken as fuck.

>>53911450
Broken is bad.

>>53911642
Yes, but "bad" could also mean an effect that is so underpowered that there would be no reason why one would use it. Its relevant for the guy looking for feedback to know whether its bad/horseshit as in broken, or bad/horseshit as in too bad to be used.

>>53909190
That's the best idea for a vanilla mythic I have seen so far

>>53909190
>>53911723
perhaps it could be a bit stronger, considering 4/4 is not that much for a card that requires exclusively some workaround to get to play

>>53912444
The thing is that I feel like it can be pretty broken in older formats. I wouldn't go higher than 5/5 and even that is pushing it imo.

>>53914000
I think on this cases we need to look for real MtG references of doing the same. In my opinion, your card is the type of card that literally can't be of any use at its own, and can only be used in combos or such.

How many real MtG cards you know in that situation? The only one that comes to my mind is this:
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=130713

>>53907888
I really want this to include a "You may spend green and/or blue mana as though it were mana of any color to activate ~'s abilities" clause, but maybe I'm dreaming too big.

>>53907907
This throws me off because it's clearly meant for an awaken deck, but annihilator is from OG zendikar block and was "replaced" with ingest. Still, neat toy.

>>53909190
hyuk hyuk

>>53909666
A non-humanoid planeswalker? Can't have that in NWO.

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

41KB, 375x523px

>>53916518
>A non-humanoid planeswalker? Can't have that in NWO.
Has Wizards gone on record saying non-humanoids can't be planeswalkers anymore?

Quick thought, need feedback:

9G, 6/6, Delve

Broken?

>>53917292
Probably not officially, I just doubt we'll ever see one because the creative team thinks it's impossible for players to empathize with non-humanoid characters.

File: Kazy-Guy Master Tactician2.jpg (42KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 375x523px

A card I started forever ago, I think based on something Kazy made. I don't even remember what his card even looked like, except it was a planeswalker with the same art.

>>53918666
I never understand people who say "The audience can't empathize with X." Like, have these people seen a Pixar movie? I've been able to empathize with toys, fish, and mute robots.

>>53917292
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/145936412493/so-when-will-we-be-getting-an-ooze-planeswalker

>>53919578
Disperse that's harder to cast and has a downside? Eh, not really feeling it. Maybe a downside counterspell?

>>53917292
Just wanted to say that ultimate is like... super fucking Ral.

Maro did a podcast about vanillas matter and that theme has always fascinated me. I have one mechanic that works for that by having vanillas that also offer interesting gameplay decisions (put counters on it and loses all abilities, not sure if that should be an activated ability, a trigger, or something like graft or an etb effect), but I was trying to think of a token mechanic. One I thought of was something like etb summon x tokens with a name, but exile all the tokens with the name when the creature left the battlefield (think Master of Waves but less roundabout), but Im not exactly sure how to balance that. Can you get more p/t than normal if all the tokens leave when it dies? Is that even a very deep mechanic if the tokens need to be vanillas?

>>53921533
>put counters on it and loses all abilities, not sure if that should be an activated ability, a trigger, or something like graft or an etb effect
That just sounds really on the nose, in an ingest/processor kind of way. Tokens are probably the best way to make vanilla matters without flooding your set with actual vanillas. Though in the end, I don't think vanilla-matters has enough design space to be on more than a couple enabler cards.

>>53922083
>Though in the end, I don't think vanilla-matters has enough design space to be on more than a couple enabler cards.
It doesn't. There's only a few ways they could pull a "vanilla matters" theme off and that would have to be something like flooding the set with exalted and really powerful enchantment cards that cause the creature to lose all abilities.

No amount of +1/+1 counters is going to matter on a vanilla creature when it gets blocked by a creature with deathtouch or something. The only thing vanilla can really do well is very cost effective aggro.

>>53848335
>flash
>reveal tits!
Some fucking clever shit right there.

File: Momentum 2.jpg (797KB, 1875x523px) Image search: [Google]

797KB, 1875x523px

>>53880768
Trying to reword and rework the mechanic to be more intuitive, still iterating on it.

>>53886800
>I think that Momentum ability would make more sense if it reset to 0 instead of removing just 1 counter when the creature don't attack.
Yeah, I agree with this, so I changed it.

>Also, it could be oriented by TAPPING (or not tapping) instead of attacking, to create room for other sort of effects
I feel like, generally, tapping should counter momentum as White and Blue's flavor for tapping something is usually related to stopping it outright.

I might have some abilities that do something with momentum though, something like:
>T: ~'s momentum is increased by one, and it doesn't lose momentum this turn. ~ deals damage to target creature equal to its momentum.

Though it's too wordy for common.

File: Blackheart Heretic.png (236KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 375x523px

>>53924118
The way Momentum is worded right now reads really eloquently, but I'm not sure it's valid. I think it needs to specify how you track it. I'm curious why you changed it from counters to this. Maybe I'm wrong; I guess you could use a piece of paper or something. I think it's a very interesting concept, but I am not too sure of the execution at the moment.
>CA01
I realize Momentum basically gives creatures "attacks each combat if able" for all intents and purposes, since you want the rewards for it, but I think double the momentum is a bit much for the cost. I'd either make it cost 2 to cast or 2 to equip; probably the former.
>CW06
This is super efficient. It's a nice effect though. I don't know that I'd make it a common myself.
>CR04
A nice, basic application.
>RM02
I'd reduce the toughness on this to 4, or possibly 3. Value engines that are only 4 mana probably shouldn't be so durable.
>Vok
Power is a bit much. 7/5 maybe, considering he's hard to deal with. I realize he's 7 mana, but I just think he's a bit too punishing. Also, only Planeswalkers use pronouns I think. Creatures, even legends, are just "it". Maybe they changed it with Amonkhet and I didn't notice? I haven't drafted in a long while.

>>53922289
Thanks anon. I don't joke card often.

>>53921497
Seems okay, but I'm on the fence if the Suspend cost would be W or 1W if WotC were to print it.

>>53921395
Curious. I suppose it works but black usually hates on low power, low CMC stuff, so this feels a bit uncharacteristic since that's kind of what it's tooled to do.

So I originally wanted this card here to basically work like Banisher Priest but have it return a creature card from the yard for as long as it's on the battlefield. I wasn't sure it was something that should be done though. Simple solution was to staple Vile Rebirth to it and give it the drawback that it refuses to fight unless it has a minion because that's how I like to Mercenary.

>>53924307
>The way Momentum is worded right now reads really eloquently, but I'm not sure it's valid. I think it needs to specify how you track it.
Yeah I was worried about that too, but was hoping I could skate by using it as a designation, similar to Monstrocity, but that's probably not going to fly. I wanted to move away from counters because they're more wordy and the ability didn't read as nicely, but I'll probably be stuck using them.

Also the set these cards are in makes extensive use of -1/-1 counters, so there's just going to be counters piling up everywhere, which is another thing I have to consider.

>>53864579
is this supposed to be draftable?
i hope there is going to be more flying at uncommon or auras because so far evasion looks a bit underwhelming.

having a pinger, a buffer, a tapper at common sounds a bit insane.historically those are amongst the strongest effects in draft. pair it with the first strikers and white will look insanely strong in draft; i hope other colors will be able to compete.

>>53865019
>shroud
>steals cards before you have a chance to cast them

too oppressive, find a way to do it that leaves some chances to the opponent.

>>53920864
>Disperse that's harder to cast and has a downside?
The card is not mine, but you do realize that the "downside" can be very useful if you cast it on a permanent you own, right?

>>53921395
Weird, and it seems a bit strong really.

>>53921497
Seems fair enough. I like the fact you paid attention to the detail of "creature you don't control".

>>53922083
>>53922219
I thought about making a set having that as a mechanic, the way I was going was to have cards that turn creatures into vanilla, and a bunch of creatures with negative effects (which benefits from turning into vanilla). Even simple abilities like "Defender" already works for this.

>>53924118
> Yeah, I agree with this, so I changed it.
Yeah, I noticed :D nice. In overall, its an interesting mechanic with a lot of design space for it. (although I still think the design space for it would be even bigger if it was triggered by tapping instead of attacking, since you could exploit that). Also, I agree with >>53924307 it would be good to explicit counters on it.

>>53924573
>Also the set these cards are in makes extensive use of -1/-1 counters, so there's just going to be counters piling up everywhere, which is another thing I have to consider.

>>53924685
> Also the set these cards are in makes extensive use of -1/-1 counters, so there's just going to be counters piling up everywhere, which is another thing I have to consider.
Boy, that is a problem. At one hand, I honestly don't think a set should use 2 types of counters that could go on the same card (and I think MaRo might have said something about that), but at the other hand I think the Momentum is an interesting mechanic with a lot of design space. I fear you might need to choose one of them and let the other one go (I would choose Momentum because its original and cool, -1/-1 counters thematic have already been done)

>>53922083
Its actually very natural I think. Etb get a choice on what type of creature you want to play is a really common mechanic. Unleash, Fabricate, etc. The choice here is a bigger creature or one with utility. For example, a 1G mana dork that you can have enter with a counter as a 3/2 in exchange for losing the ability to generate mana, or a WW 2/2 first striker that becomes a 3/3. I think its a very interesting interplay. I feel its a very appealing Spike mechanic.

Also I dont think vanilla matters is something you can build a whole set around. Itd have to just be a subtheme I think as there arent a lot of ways to make vanillas matter. But I do think its a completely practical subtheme. But if it were I think there needs to be a token mechanic.

>>53925144
>Itd have to just be a subtheme
I agree with that. Sounds more like a subtheme, doesn't even need to be explicit one. Something that I personally thing that goes well with vanilla theme is animating lands.

File: Red Commons.jpg (2MB, 1500x1569px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x1569px

>>53924895
>At one hand, I honestly don't think a set should use 2 types of counters that could go on the same card (and I think MaRo might have said something about that), but at the other hand I think the Momentum is an interesting mechanic with a lot of design space. I fear you might need to choose one of them and let the other one go (I would choose Momentum because its original and cool, -1/-1 counters thematic have already been done).
The biggest problem with this is that I'd be remaking the set from the ground up, as a lot of it is already made with -1/-1 counters in mind, and on top of that it fits the setting's flavor better.

Momentum was just some one-off idea I had that made a lot of interesting design space. So far the set's themes are:

>Soulbond
>-1/-1 counters / Wither
>Profane state

I'm probably gonna axe Soulbond, since it's overly wordy and the more I try to build for it, the more wordy the cards get.

>>53924685
I'll do another pass on white's commons and see if I can't add some more evasion.