[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.28567801 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Mtg: Custom Card Thread.

Post your creations, post art, critique and balance cards and etc.

>> No.28567896

this seems like it's broken somehow

>> No.28568111

It's more or less halfway between Shifting Sky (which makes all nonland permanents a color, and is quite bad) and Painter's Servant (which makes all CARDS a color regardless of zone, and is a viable combo piece).

It's missing most of what makes Painter's Servant strong (doesn't win the game with Grindstone or Iona, for example), but still has most of the more "fair" combo applications intact, which means it's probably fine in a vacuum.

>> No.28569478

Probably much, much too powerful.

>> No.28570882

Need help balancing this... is it OP to drop it to 2ccm?

>> No.28571213

It's about as okay as it gets.

At 2 it's like a one sided flame rift, that can be blocked by creatures.
A one sided flame rift would be kind of OP but no game breaking (since the non targeting is possibly the best part).
It's probably fine

>> No.28571345

Question how would you balance GW version of "Gift of the estates" that fetched for three of any lands?

>> No.28571597

>> No.28571616

whoops forgot to get rid of the f in the name

>> No.28571794

I don't see why it's gold and not hybrid.

>> No.28571814

I am working on a new mechanic for my set, it's called incarnation. Think of it as shape shifting into a powerful creature in order to gain it's perks.

>> No.28571864

>Play this card
>Begin mauling the shit out of the person across from you
>"But I was only following the card!"

>> No.28572513

Behold! Also, bump.

>> No.28572706

Look at his expansion symbol. Then don't feed the troll.

>> No.28572944

Wasn't D-Tutor a uncommon? Both of them?

>> No.28573079

In my ongoing effort to make him better, I must. Thank you for warning the others.

For game effect purposes, it works better if you make a substitute for the player, rather than have him act directly, like:
Put a X/X White Tiger creature token into play where X is your life total, with haste and "whenever this creature would take damage, you lose that much life." Exile that token at end of turn.

That ability works within the framework of Magic rules.

I'd like to have another discussion about Hex. My last set of notes was that this card was over costed, so I dropped the inital cost (deeply) and cut one out of the Hex cost. Is it now too good?

And is Hex an understandable mechanic?

>> No.28573105

And, having gone full retard, I upload the wrong card for analysis.

THIS is the card I was told was overcosted. As it stands, I knocked 3 off of the initial price, and one off the hex. I'm debating increasing the hex cost to 3 again.

>> No.28573133

>> No.28573180

There should be an additional cost to casting shit form the grave, otherwise it could get out of control

>> No.28573205

Cool set symbol! I think this card might need to cost one or two more. Compare it to Deathbridge Chant. It's more expensive, dual color, and only gets one card a turn. On the other hand, it gets one creature to the battlefield for free, or one card to your hand, while you still have to pay with this card. Or compare it to Haakon.

>> No.28573271

Stab wound gives -2/-2 also, but being able to recur the hex means it is more powerful. I'd say make it cost initially 1B.

>> No.28573553

Not by today's standards.

>> No.28573571

Diabolic tutor's an uncommon though

>> No.28573605

Yeah, but Diabolic can't potentially be cast for 2.

>> No.28573922

Diabolic's also a core set card, so it's also a bit lower in power level than block cards

>> No.28574080

I'm aware that gorgons are pretty much black - BG but I was going with her philosophy here. Hope you like.

>> No.28574089


>> No.28574098


>> No.28574104

>> No.28574113


>> No.28574126


and that will be all for now.
Feedbacks are appreciated.

>> No.28574188

this is a permanent ball lightning for cheaper and the hexproof does nothing as you can respond to trigger

>> No.28574220

I think these would make more sense as Enchant Player cards.

>> No.28574273

>Enchanted player is a white Cat creature with power and toughness each equal to his or her life total.

I can see the lols now.

>> No.28574645

It makes some combat tricks impossible.
Not saying it's needed, just saying it's not totally useless.

BEHOLD! One of my many, many, pretty boring commons for the set I'm designing.

Man, I need to come up with some cooler shit at common.

>> No.28574735

Here! A hopefully more interesting common!

Though it feels too green to me at present. hmmph.

>> No.28574785



I can supply some ideas. Maybe.

>> No.28574797


>> No.28574811

I think commons are supposed to be boring. If every common is as complex as the flying dude newbies won't understand what the fuck is going on.

>> No.28574821


Ignore this if you don't have a Beast tribal or subtribal theme at all. I just like it as either a tribal hate card or the sort of thing that randomly ends up in a Core set as a filler common.

>> No.28574833


I agree that they should be simple or used to fill out curves in colors or as fluff vehicles, but making them fun is also nice. And they aren't mutually exclusive either.

>> No.28574867

I was actually part of the discussion when you first popped this guy out. Still a neat card.

True, they are. I'm just getting a little sick of "vanilla/french vanilla creature #3." I do need to start working my keywords and themes into them as well.

...I actually have a beast subtribal going, AND an opposing (partly) Green weenie faction. I may steal this, and maybe just tweak the flavor text. Thanks!

I agree. I guess it's partly that I haven't done a lot of work on it recently, so I'm kind of pushing myself to work on the set, so I'm not getting the fun ideas.

I was really proud of this guy when I made him, for instance.

>> No.28574871


>> No.28574886


They say the truest test of your new keywords is whether they can be used on commons or not.

I like that card by the way. It feels somewhat red, but it's not completely out of place in green I don't think.

Also glad you like the stuff I've posted so far. Thanks.

>> No.28574905


I sort of like this.

>> No.28574914

>As long as ~ is attacking, it gets +1/-1 and has trample.

>> No.28574929


And now for something on the complete opposite end of the complexity spectrum.

>> No.28575058

Yeah, one of my irritants is that so far, only two of my five factions actually have keywords, while the others just have themes, thought I'm debating adding a modification to an old keyword on one of the groups.

Both of my keywords are in the thread, actually:
Though Oppress is actually just an ability word.

So it is, ha. Sorry. I played starting back in Mercadian Masques, and took a break after Time Spiral, so sometimes I use old wordings.

I love puns! And this is a nice card to boot.

You know what sucks? the reminder text on cascade. You know what else sucks? How Cascade is the only RUG-centered mechanic.

>> No.28575082

Oh, hey, I accidentally double posted the reminder text. That's why it's so impossibly long.

This should look better.

>> No.28575098

Just came up with this. This is the first time I think I ever made the flavor text on a card before anything else.

>> No.28575118

Okay, maybe posting cards at 2 AM is a bad idea.

Third time's the charm.

>> No.28575149


The last part of Cascade's rule text always bothered me. Why is it 'at random' and not 'in a random order' like on every other card that does this?

>> No.28575175

Probably to save space, Jesus. I literally can't put anything else on there to avoid Text for Ants Syndrome.

Now I'm just trying to figure out if, by using other keywords, I can eventually make Land Cascade. Which would be potentially mindbreaking, given that normal cascade only ignores lands.

>> No.28575261


>Land Cascade

Challenge accepted.

>> No.28575403

My braaaaaaain

>> No.28575524



Hey I made a card with the same name. Bit different function though.

And now that I look at it, I'm kinda thinking it might be OP. It's older, so that'd be par for the course.

>> No.28575572

Huh. I supposed I might have subconsciously copied the name, but I don't remember seeing yours. I like it though. Might need to be 2UU or 3UU.

>> No.28575699


Nah, you probably did the same thing I did: Thesaurus looking for synonyms for words WotC has already used as card names.

>> No.28575713

Ah, the miracle of the thesaurus.

>> No.28575779

Quintus, the Bargainer
Planeswalker - Quintus
+1: Sacrifice a creature, up to one target creature gets -x/-x until end of turn, where X is the sacrificed creature's power
-3: Search your library for a card and put it into your hand, then shuffle a card from your hand into your library
7: You get an emblem with "Pay 1 life:Draw a card"
Starting Loyalty: 4

>> No.28575827

Aaaaaaand the end of the cycle.

>> No.28575835 [DELETED] 


I'll admit at first glance my brain processed that cardname as Fuckyougeist.

A hearty chuckle was had.

>> No.28575856


I'll admit at first glance my brain processed that cardname as Fuckyougeist.

A hearty chuckle was had.

>> No.28575879


Also yeah, it kinda is the "fuck you geist".

>> No.28575957

I'm pretty sure this card would see play in Standard the entire time it was in rotation. It might be just a teensy bit pushed. But I like it anyway.

>> No.28575968



Guilty as charged. Right wording, wrong card type. Derpus Maximus.

>> No.28576001

It's certainly very RUG.

And what are you doing in /tg/? Your templating is correct.

>> No.28576026


Overpowered, I think. It would be more reasonable if that ability was: "RUG: CARDNAME gains either first strike, hexproof, or reach until end of turn".

>> No.28576041


Lots of trial, error, practice, and luck is what has lead to me wording at least 50% of my cards correctly. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my custom car-

Wait a minute.

>> No.28576063

Man, wizards should probably keyword the vampire/slith ability already.

If they did it would be easier to notice cards that break the pattern, powering up on any damage etc.

>> No.28576079


Well I was considering Glissa as a stepping-off point for the card. 3/3, same as her. 3 colors instead of two, with three evergreens that aren't as strong together as her two. She's a legend, so that's another thing to consider. She lets you GY sift, and this one demands you pay the casting cost again to give it one really good evergreen, one very good one, and one useful but not overwhelming one. It's pretty pushed, as I said, but I think the way you have it is a bit too costly for what you get. I'd rather it be 1G for reach, 1R for first strike, and 1U for hexproof if that's the case. Kind of like a RUG "-ling" type creature.

>> No.28576097

I like those.
Soulbond is such a good mechanic.

>> No.28576102


I agree. There are several actions that are common enough to be keyworded these days:

"Whenever ~ deals combat damage to a creature or player, blah blah +1/+1 counter"

"Put the top X cards from his or her library into his or her graveyard"

"Shuffles his or her library"

Just to name a few.

>> No.28576113


Agreed. I loved several Soulbond cards from Innistrad. I hope it comes back.

>> No.28576129

3 mana 3/3 with flash, haste, trample, first strike, hexproof and reach

Perfectly balanced

>> No.28576236


>paying the mana to activate it doesn't count

Okay. Nice critique.

>> No.28576349

Thanks. I'm still a little upset that black got shafted in AVR.

>> No.28576357

>> No.28576363

Speaking of which...

>> No.28576394

Land tax really is more fair as a sorcery. Kudos.

>> No.28576424


I was going to say it's a bit strong, but it doesn't straight remove attacking/blocking from the picture. It might actually be even better if the activated ability clause also include saccing to allow it, since decks like Esper would love to make their opponent sac just to bounce the critter and avoid the ability anyway.


Go Second: the Card.


This is a difficult card to gauge rarity on. I agree black deserved a miracle card, but I think they didn't get one because Griselbrand's supposed to lose, and so giving them miracles kind of makes that seem less apparent.

>> No.28576506

That's what I originally wanted to do with Troubled Conscience, but I couldn't figure out how to word it beyond "Enchanted creature's activated abilities cost an additional "sacrifice another creature" to activate".

As for Vengeful Edict, I think it's fine; every other color got an uncommon miracle.

>> No.28576533


>Vengeful Edict

Wait a minute...

Okay, you need to stop that, haha.

>> No.28576551

I swear I'm not reading your thoughts with stolen CIA equipment.

>> No.28576608



I'm curious what you think about >>28575957. If you'd rather not weigh in, that's fine. I ask because you seem decent at balance and second opinions from people I know can into design are nice to have.

>> No.28576693

Not that poster, but man, 3 cmc 3/3 with flash, haste and trample is pretty pushed in itself.

Granted, it's three colors, so that can cover the keywordspam.

I think I agree with previous anons that the ability should let you choose one of the three.

It needs playtesting.

>> No.28576701

Hmmm. It is quite a lot of keywords, not that that's a bad thing in and of itself.

Mostly I'd be concerned about the hexproof-at-will getting annoying. I'd suggest raising the activation cost to 1URG maybe, but I also realize that ruins the symmetry.

So yeah, playtesting.

>> No.28576736

Really neat. I would cost it 1 more, but I realize it's probably fairly good as is. Multicolor and the tokens balance out the early game removal. Lategame the cost of removal usually isn't the issue, rather actually drawing the removal and what it can kill.

>> No.28576815


Well like I said, I was using Glissa as a base for comparison. I figured since it was going to be three colors, three keywords would be okay especially since they aren't as synergistic as hers are. If you're Flashing it, Trample is pretty wasted on that. For that matter, so is Haste. So they don't play that well together, but they do offer quite a bit of flexibility which was the point of that bit.

I agree the activated ability might be a touch over the top, but I don't think it's too bad. If shroud were still a thing I would have done that instead of hexproof to make it more of a choice. I'd prefer it actually. But it's a dead keyword so no go on that I guess.

I tried mocking it up with the Cromat/-ling template, and it is text for ants. So that's a no-go. And there are no blue keywords that make sense to trade hexproof out for either. Flying is silly, and "can't be blocked" is also. So is Intimidate. And Deathtouch is out of flavor.

>> No.28576873

Not entirely satisfied with this green miracle, but I'm not really sure what to do.

I have a few choice words to say about Wizard's attitude towards shroud and hexproof.

>> No.28576899


I dunno why but I kinda think the creature and land should ETB tapped for balance and flavor purposes. Mostly for flavor though, since they are being 'birthed' and I guess I envision it being a slow process (hence sorcery-speed)

Maybe I'm too damn Vorthos for my own good.

>> No.28576909

If I cascade into another one of these, what would happen? Do I keep going? Or do I stop? Lands don't use the stack, so is this an ETB effect, right?

>> No.28576920

Well the first thing that would happen is your opponent would tell you to read your fucking cards.

>...until you exile a land card with a different name.

>> No.28576935

You keep ...
Okay, no it breaks the normal Cascade writing that specifies you play the card.

And then there's what >>28576920 said.

>> No.28576945

Oh, didn't see that.

>> No.28576956

I appreciate the Vorthosness, but Chord of Calling doesn't put them into play tapped.

I could make them come in tapped and lower the cost, though.

>> No.28576957

The problem with the card is that it's a miracle card.
Miracle is a terrible mechanic.

>> No.28576987


Personally, regarding hexproof/shroud, what I think they could have done was made Hexproof W/G and Shroud U/B. Why? Well Hexproof is all about preventing bad magic and allowing good magic, to simplify. Green and white have every reason to trust themselves to be beneficial. Blue and black on the other had have no reason to believe that backstabbing is out of the question so Shroud makes more sense for them because paranoia.

At least, that's my headcannon regarding the two.

>> No.28576990

Milling 2-6 cards probably doesn't make counterspell balanced. Any blue deck with graveyard play would go nuts.

>> No.28577001


You could probably make it XGGG normally then XG Miracle if they ETB tapped?

Otherwise ignore my inner Vorthos. He is sort of an aspie.

>> No.28577013


Have to agree with him. You could make it "Counter target spell unless that spell's controller yadda yadda mill" but I think there's already a card that does that, isn't there?

>> No.28577015

Oh yeah, miracle's p. bad. But I like completing patterns, and they left one incomplete.

Personally I think hexproof shouldn't even exist because it removes choice and promotes lazy playing. But that's me.

RTFC, it's not milling. Someone already yelled at me for that.

>> No.28577035

Wow, this is the first time I've actually been a victim of the pic-swap bug.

>> No.28577051

Exiling the cards is of course better, but it's still pretty cheap, as any "milling does not lose you cards" poster will probably scream at you.

>> No.28577088


Woah. This is pretty nuts. The 'no mana' thing is mind-blowingly good. This would never be used as a Cloudshift outside of Limited or Standard if it doesn't have Cloudshift. It's a cool idea, but I think "tap 2 white creatures to permavanish a creature" is kinda way too good.

>> No.28577105


Yeah exiling is better, but still technically falls under 'mill = no lost cards' logic since I think that logic doesn't assume GY play at all, just draw chance and all that probability math.

I'd still make it a 'counter or mill the opponent' choice. But I'm not you.

>> No.28577140

Except a counter or mill opponent card will never, ever, counter.

>> No.28577151

I was trying to explore UU-hard-counter-with-a-slight-drawback instead of Wizard's current M.O. of 1UU-hard-counter-with-a-slight-bonus. Also what >>28577140 says.

I could make it sorcery speed so the convoke matters more, actually.

>> No.28577156

Something new. Not sure if it's at the right rarity considering the complexity but at the same time, it doesn't seem like powerful enough to warrant uncommon status.

>> No.28577311


This is also probably true. It's why I tend not to muck about with Counterspells too much.

>> No.28577330


It's really really strong. This thing in Modern with Lightning Greaves and some other cheap equip that gives a nominal power boos would be very very good.

It should be unco I think.

>> No.28577445

I suppose it depends on the equips used in conjunction with it. Possible changes for it are as follow:
>Make it uncommon.
>Make double strike require three or more equipment instead of two.
>Remove the +1/+0 mechanic.

Then again, I feel like the last one would drop it from being really strong to being almost worthless.

>> No.28578069

I'm considering using this sort of mechanic as a general subtheme for this faction's spells.

>> No.28578087


This is very much the graveyard faction of the set - as BG so often is.

>> No.28578100


So there are lots of ways for things to end up in your graveyard.

>> No.28578116


Of all different kinds.

>> No.28578127


And lots of ways to take advantage of that, too.

>> No.28578137


Again, of all different kinds.

>> No.28578152


Though that's not all that happens in the faction, just some major themes.

>> No.28578658

Very okay card. I like it enough for what it does. I kinda wish it did more.

>> No.28578867

>> No.28578919

What's a good common-to-uncommon-to-rare ratio for a set?

>> No.28578979

Take out the "discard it, but" part
>If an effect causes you to discard a card, you may instead put it at the bottom of your library

>> No.28578999


I was going be the Oracle text for Library of Leng. Leaving it as 'discard, but' makes it clear that the card is still discarded for things like Jace's Archivist.

>> No.28579019


A 6/6 with hexproof and haste that drops on turn two is BONKERS. I do like the idea though of an aggressive early game critter that eats your cards though.

Maybe change it to a 0/1 with "when Nyctomare enters the battlefield, exile a card from your hand. At the beginning of your upkeep, exile a card from your hand. Whenever you exile a card from your hand, Nyctomare gets +3/+2 and gains haste."

That way you still get to apply early pressure, but at the cost of card advantage.

>> No.28579075

This is for a tabletop-MTG hybrid thing I'm doing, Adversary cards being basically the same thing as Vanguards.

>> No.28579160

ok. I myself was using Loxodon Smiter as a template, but i see your point

Let's look up some numbers:
>RTR, set of 249 nonlands
>101 commons
>80 uncommons
>53 rares (including shocks)
>15 mythic rares
6.73 : 5.33 : 3.53 : 1

>DKA, 168 nonlands
>68 commons
>48 uncommons
>41 rares
>14 mythic
4.86 : 3.43 : 2.73 : 1

without mythics (since it looks like there's always 14 or 15), the ratios for both are
>1.91 : 1.5 : 1
>1.65 : 1.17 : 1
So I'm guessing around 2 : 1.5 : 1 for big sets, and 1.6 : 1.1 : 1 for small sets? that's just purely off of DKA and RTR, so i'm not sure what kinds of ratios they try to go for

>> No.28579220

>being able to read

>> No.28579245

>/tg/ reading cards

>> No.28579326

Well, I'm an idiot. the numbers DO include lands. all of them, too

also RTR has 274 cards

>> No.28579707

I like the idea but it just doesn't do enough on it's own.
And you can't really make it a cantrip because there's already so much text.

So staple it onto a body? I dunno.

>> No.28579793

>I am working on a new mechanic for my set, it's called Hearthstone.

>> No.28580340

>> No.28580392

>> No.28580444

Wow, did you make that card terrible on purpose?
Because everything is wrong with it. It's way too strong, it stalls out the game, it's unfun to play against, flavor text is lame, and you fucked up the text formating.

This is pretty good.
I would make it a 1/2 though.

>> No.28580483

>> No.28580516

it becomes a 4/4, doesnt get +4/+4

>> No.28580523

The regeneration there is 99% useless, I suggest you replace it with another ability. Regeneration really needs to be reliable, although the fact that your opponent doesn't know until too late that your guy will regenerate does mean something.

>> No.28580531

I want the nice god, miracle, etc. font but the link is broken on their site. How did you guys get them?

>> No.28580535

I think P/T is the wrong way round here; Green is more likely to buff power and black is more likely to buff toughness.

>> No.28580636

I think this card is unplayable at 1U and probably too good at U. Have you considered making it something like 2U Draw 3 discard 2 or something?

>> No.28580695

>> No.28580703


Is the wording correct?

>> No.28580710

>> No.28580722

>> No.28580731

Very good common. Kudos

>> No.28580744

>> No.28580773

>> No.28580781


>> No.28580784

/r/equesting the sauce of the image

>> No.28580793

Rolled 6, 5 = 11


>> No.28580794

The last line is wrong, it should be something along the lines of "during your next turn" or "until the end of your next turn".

It seems pretty strong. Mostly because you draw a card during the extra turn.

>> No.28580814

> whenever I'm in a thread, I see this card.
> I'm always pleased to see this card

That organ trading theme match so well with delve

>> No.28580825

Here ya go.

>> No.28580826

Careful cropping is a custom MTG card maker's best friend. Anyway, I wasn't able to find a source, but I have the original image and it has the artist's name on it.

>> No.28580846

Rolled 9, 5 + 2 = 16


>> No.28580848

Thank you! I am pretty pleased with the flavor on that card.

Yeah, I post the same cards a lot, but I really enjoy getting feedback on this stuff, so I figure there are always people who haven't seen 'em.

>> No.28580883

It's part of a cycle that counts copies in graveyards, sooooo... you've kinda broken the cycle.

>> No.28580892

>> No.28580911


That's alright, I also love to repost and get different ideas.

Here's one of my own delve card.
A little less clean than yours

>> No.28580938


It lets you draw a card, untap everything, and play a land. Unless I'm missing something.
I like it.

>> No.28580948

Compare to Gaze of Justice (common, Sorcery, W, tap 3 white creatures: exile a guy. Flashback 5W) and Weight of Conscience (common, 1W, aura, enchanted creature can't attack, at any time tap two creatures with the same type to exile it.)

I'd imagine that this card is probably just fine if it's sorcery speed.

It's tolerable, but assuming you want the combat phase skip to take effect during the second turn, it should probably be worded closer to Savor the Moment (e.g. Take an extra turn after this one. Skip all combat phases of that turn.)

As it's worded now, you can cast it during your precombat main phase, skip your current turn's combat, and still attack on the extra turn. Not sure that's working as intended.

The way the third ability is worded doesn't set an end state for that effect, so I'm pretty sure it ends up giving you sort of a stealth emblem a la Stigma Lasher that nerfs all of your future extra turns. If that's intended, cool. If not, you'd want to tether it to the specific extra turn, wording it something like "During that turn, you can't cast spells or activate abilities."

Also, "or activate abilities" includes mana abilities. Like on lands. Not like there's anything it lets use the mana for, but it's worth mentioning.

Compare most nerfed variant Time Walks to Explore, and you'll realize most of them aren't quite as close to broken as they seem on reflex.

>> No.28580966

Cool card, but way too powerful.
Considering it gets at least +1/+1 just from every draw step it should be a 1/1 (de facto a 2/2).

>> No.28580981

A 1/3 common is acceptable.
You know a guaranteed 2/4 on defense is pretty fucking not common for 2 mana.

>> No.28580989

Hm... I get rewarding use of Delve, but given that using Delve is already its own reward, it is a bit of a strange card.

>> No.28581015

Oh neat, new faces. No one has ever said that about that card. I'll make it a 1/2 then.

A bit undercosted on defense as a 2/3, but it isn't great during your turn unless you get creative.

>> No.28581059

But actually, I was comparing it to Seacoast Drake, is this ability really better than flying? 'Cause flying is pretty powerful.

>> No.28581105

Drake is a 20 turn clock. or blocks a flyer. The other guy can block a lot of early creatures in limited and survive and kill em.

>> No.28581133

Okay. Fair. 1/2, it is.

>> No.28581264

Those are two neat commons as well.
Goblin could use some flavour text.
And Skygazer could also trigger off opponents discarding, but that depends on the rest of the set I guess.

>> No.28581279

Any suggestions for the goblin? I wouldn't mind different art either, to be honest.

>> No.28581280

>skip your current turn's combat, and still attack on the extra turn.

Nope. Didn't think about that. But I like it.

>Stigma Lasher

You got the right idea.

>> No.28581291

You know that you have to remove both counters in one turn or never remove the second counter, right?

Because if it only has one left and you remove it, it dies before it gets the +2/+2.

>> No.28581358

the wording on Smiter is purposeful different.

Instead is a necessary wording with certain things, the card in >>28578867

Cards like Megrim will trigger with he wording in >>28578867, and are also vulnerable to cards like Surgical Extraction.

This is an important wording issue when protection from mill for multiple ways, for instance a card like Dread, or Kozilek, Butcher will hit the grave and THEN be moved to the library, giving your opponent a chance to remove it with Extraction or something else like Extirpate or Leyline of the Void.

However if you run a deck with something like Legacy Weapon, or Darksteel Colossus the wording makes it impossible to ever touch the grave.

>> No.28581444

I get the feeling that this is another "too good to be common" card.

>> No.28581462


Naw, he's fine.

>> No.28581507


Maybe. If he enabled himself.

>> No.28581518

seems adjusted to common pretty well, you can combo it off decently enough with something like Words of Waste/Geth's Grimoir however its power level is appropriate because that's a pretty limited ability that still requires a lot built around it.

And the adjusted cost around its trigger seems properly balanced.

>> No.28581588


>> No.28581610

>Discarding ~ forgetting

>> No.28581632

I think you should make a pseudo-keyword for "Whenever you discard a card, [do X]."

>> No.28581657

Considering the name of the card is "rage augur," that makes a shocking amount of sense.

>> No.28581711

The main mechanic for red in the set I'm making is self-harming and dealing damage to your own creatures in exchange for advantages. I'm including a few discard mechanics because it's still important to red but it's not the primary focus on the colour in this set.

>> No.28581862

Too much? I kind of gave him vigilance without changing anything else.

>> No.28581973

What is this I don't even

>> No.28582877

dumping some toggle lands

>> No.28582941

>When ~ enters the battlefield, you may put a toggle counter on it.
>You may have ~ enter the battlefield with a toggle counter on it.

>> No.28583025

How about
>Destroy target creature. Then destroy target non-creature permanent that shares a card type with it.

Still not entirely clear.

Not really liking it.
Too much text for a land.
And they are an upgrade (even if not a strict one) to basic lands, so they'd need some sort of downside.

>> No.28583137

Thanks. I lowered the cost a bit since you must have two targets for it now.

>> No.28583483

I just realized it's still not right.
Black doesn't destroy non-creature permanents. That's a green thing.

>> No.28583974

In red, 4/3 creatures that are CMC 4 either cost 2RR with no rules text at all or cost 3R with a minor disadvantage.

Yet I get the feeling that this card is a bit feeble.

>> No.28584081

Thanks again, I was concentrating too much on getting the ability worded correctly.

>> No.28584327


If I were you, I'd make it so it were a 3/3 that gets +1/+0 UEOT and loses defender if you discard a card. Makes it feel more like a past-his-prime warrior being stoked into a rage and showing he's still got it. Or something like that.

>> No.28584356

I agree. It also gets you some weird combo/finisher duty if you have lots of cards lategame. Would probably be very good in limited.

>> No.28584450

It's good for fluff but it's not good in terms of value, I think. Not to mention it takes up some space that I could use for fluff.

If I drop it down to a 3/3, should I drop the cost as well and maybe increase the rarity? A 3/3 defender for 4 CMC feels pretty shoddy, even keeping in mind the ability.

>> No.28584475


1RR might be okay at unco, but I personally don't think it's terrible at 3R since the majority of 3R critters with 4 power are 1 or 2 toughness and yours is 3.

>> No.28584569

How about just doing it similar to the skygazer?
When a player discards a card it loses defender until EoT.

Paying a card just to swing in for three or four damage with a creature that already cost you mana and a card seems really bad.

>> No.28584584

>> No.28584619

If we go with the +1/+0 UEOT thing, then it's only a 4 power creature if you discard a card.

I'll go with the suggestion though. It could be interesting. Double-checking to make sure the wording's accurate.

>> No.28584742

This may actually be a terrible idea

>> No.28584791

Skygazer strikes me as a bit too powerful for a common, considering that it's a white bear that can get flying if a very common condition is met.

In a similar fashion, 3R for 4/3 that can frequently disregard its drawback seems a little too much. It's a difficult balancing act.

>> No.28584862

Eh, it really doesn't seem to compare all that favorably to something like Balduvian Rage. As an Enrage variant, I think it is pretty fine.

Red does get hill giants for 4 though. With upsides.

I wonder if people think we are the same guy. Yeah, discarding a card is a pretty steep cost. I mostly put it on cards that would be okay without the ability.

>> No.28584923

Eh. I say given Fledgling Griffin, it is fine. Plus, Leonin Skyhunter was a common in Besieged, sure, way less splashable, but this isn't exactly free.

>> No.28584926

Now that I think about it, it really depends on the set.
If you have a lot of discard triggers you might even want to have a card like this just as a discard outlet.

But if the discard is an actual cost it's really unplayable. Just compare it to Returned Phalanx.

>> No.28584933

Yeah the thing I was worrying about with the Rakdos card was being too annoying for the person playing Hellbent, getting it stuck in their hand.

Having a hard time finding art for this. Damn deviantart and their obsession with sex. I just want that single massive tentacle erupting from the ground, clearly a part of a larger monster. Doesn't seem like so much to ask.

>> No.28584948

>> No.28584952

>I wonder if people think we are the same guy.
LOL, I totally did.

>> No.28584969

Is a creature with both deathtouch and regenerate broken?

>> No.28585018

This is in standard right now and it's seeing some play.

>> No.28585031


Yeah I'm the guy suggesting to make it a 3/3 defender with the discard ability to make it 4/3 and lose defender. That's why i suggested it, since Hill Giant is a standard for CMC4 red commons.

>> No.28585082 [DELETED] 

Might as well contribute this, it could work for you.

>> No.28585151

Might as well contribute this, it could work for you.

Also, not too sure about that card, mostly because it completely ignores the boundaries between colours. You could use it to play practically any creature of any colour.

>> No.28585164

Careful cropping is all ya need to do. Just find a picture of a kraken or something and crop it so you can only see one tentacle.

>> No.28585185

>Also, not too sure about that card, mostly because it completely ignores the boundaries between colours. You could use it to play practically any creature of any colour.
But how else could you use it to summon a big ol' Eldrazi? Decided to increase the cost of the ability to XGG, for what it's worth.

>> No.28585195

Ehhh... I dunno. I made this guy in the past and thought he was a bit too good for an uncommon.

>> No.28585235

You could also use it to summon a big ol' red or blue or black or white creature that doesn't fit the flavour at all.

>> No.28585360

Eh, even if I limit it to green there's still stuff like Primeval Titan that can be the owner of the tentacle as easily as Cloudthresher can. I just thought the flavor would be kinda fun and the card would probably be useful.

>> No.28585561


That's not regenerate and deathtouch. That's deathtouch and hexproof.

>> No.28586104

I came up with this and then realized it's basically just a trimmed-down Unleash creature, but here it is anyway because I feel like it's one of those flavorful commons that I love to see in Draft.

>> No.28586128

>> No.28586401

Usually the "This deals some damage to you" sentence comes last.

>> No.28586524

>> No.28587310

I guess I should mention I want opinions on this card. It is a bit weird.

>> No.28587433

I just reread the card. First I thought that it was way too good, getting both hexproof and regenerate... then I remembered the rootwalla part.
I think it's a really good card, a very satisfyingly tactical card, and a great but not absurd 1-drop.
Really cool.

Playtesting would be needed to see if it's too much.

>> No.28587567

Awesome, I was hoping it would work.

>> No.28588955

Black doesn't get first strike

>> No.28589096

It's tertiary Black.

>> No.28589495

>> No.28589514

I think Deft Duelist is good enough. You don't need to make a strict upgrade to it.

>> No.28589556

Hun, forgot all about that lil' guy.

>> No.28589925


>> No.28589940


>> No.28589954


>> No.28590358

>> No.28590443

Oh, neat. You might want to make it regenerate all skeletons you control though, rather than just all skeletons.

Very clever take on Nested Ghoul. I like that you included the traditional skeletal identity without making complicated tokens.

>> No.28590793

Whos' the artist?

>> No.28591110

>makes all lands colored


>> No.28591583


Here's an idea I had. Pretty sure it can be OP but I wonder if the setting needed for that is enough.

>> No.28591717

>> No.28591843

I really like this one

>> No.28594227




>> No.28594699

What is the feel of this supposed to be?

Unattached the hex is what? just waiting to be thrown at something? Its not a real thing so why would it sit around waiting to what?

If you hex something you tend to just hex it, same as enchanting. I don't make a hex, then pick a target and put the hex on it.

This just feels all kinds of wrong. Most enchantments don't actually do anything themselves, they alter the thing they are enchanting, giving it new attributes, so them staying past it when auras don't is just weird.

FOr what you're aiming for it would make more sense as a cursed item. Equipment that has an extra ability to attach to creatures you do not control and has mostly negative effects.

>> No.28596606

I dunno if you're running dual lands it might be worse than Gift of Estates, and is definitely worse in EDH.

>> No.28596626

Due to the fact that you have to discard a land it would probably be fair to allow this to discard any card.

>> No.28596648


I feel like doing that, I should bump it back to rare, but you may well be on the money.

>> No.28596745


Well, I did that and found myself really wanting to give it Flash, but textforants.jpg

So I gave it an interesting P/T instead.

>> No.28596841

I'll admit I was definitely inspired by the Cult of the Sleeper, although I do want to try and handle things a bit differently.

This is nowhere near finished and it's mostly just a display of concept.

>> No.28596967


>Inspired by the Cult of the Sleeper

Well, that's a flattering.

These are rad - I've seen them a few times before, but only individually. You really get the idea you're going for looking at the group in context to each other.

>> No.28597044

It's difficult to make the Fury mechanic look remotely good when you look at it alone. Looking at them together grants a whole new perspective and actually makes me want to make a few changes.

>Godless Zealot is way too good. Either increase it in cost, make it uncommon or both. It works far too well with fury cards.
>Possibly bring Rage Augur down to RR?
>Bloodbound Templar is way too good for his cost. If you trigger Fury, that's a 6/2 creature for 3 CMC - and if you build a deck with him in it, you're definitely going to include cards that trigger Fury.

>> No.28597117

That is not how hybrid works. Learn togoddamn hybrid or stop using it.

>> No.28597152

Just thinking here

T, place a toggle counter on ~: add [colour 1] to you mana pool. Activate this ability only if ~ has no toggle counters on it

T, Remove a toggle counter for ~: add [colour 2] to your mana pool

That will give less text i think.

>> No.28597191

I was wondering whether it was a good idea to bother with hybrid mana. I guess the answer to that is a 'no.'

>> No.28597511


Basically, multicolour cards let you use elements from multiple colours (A red white multicolour card might have say, vigilance because it is white and firebreathing because it is red.) Because multicolour mana requirements are more restrictive, a multicolour card can be more aggressively costed.

Hybrid mana only allow you to use elements that both colours have access to - potentially the card needs to make sense as either monowhite or monored for your example. First strike and double strike are good examples of abilities a hybrid red white card might have, but they're far from the only option. Because hybrid mana is less restrictive, the cards should be less aggressively costed than their counterparts.

>> No.28597528

Fair point. I'll stick with the original 4WR setup I had planned for that creature.

>> No.28597562

This is a thing I'd love to get feedback on. It's the first mythic I've attempted for my set and my kneejerk is that it is far, far too good.

(As a sidenote, the potential for cards like this to be in the set is why I was so careful in wording this one >>28596745)

>> No.28597701

It doesn't seem too powerful at all, besides being 6/4 for 5 CMC on a UB card. Its draw mechanic is pretty expensive if you're looking to gain any advantage at all.

>> No.28598474

Been a while since I last posted, not sure about this mechanic.

>> No.28598491

btw the enter the battlefield effect is now to your hand. I'm just way to lazy to change it

>> No.28598525

would be fun with morph. also you need to tell us what it does when face down. because currently it does nothing. BTW because of morph all face down cards are viewed as morph cards.

>> No.28598534

>> No.28598555

Good point, tho it's all face down cards are 2/2's not morph cards.

>> No.28598577



>> No.28598615


>> No.28598633

i'm also not really sure about the mechanic. the point of Morph was the mystery and it is you have no idea what card it is. and from playing TSP limited people have played Morph cards that they couldn't flip for their opponents. i would rather see it as a 1BB with ETB doomblade. because the mechanic is boring as of now.

>> No.28598665


Not sure if you're aware of it, but Tresserhorn Skyknight has

>Prevent all damage that would be dealt to ~ by creatures with first strike.

>> No.28598696

Oh cool, tho this functions a little differently and works against double strike.

>> No.28598722

>> No.28598732


Yeah, it's not identical, but similar enough that it was worth you knowing about.

>> No.28598751

Definitely, thanks for pointing it out!

>> No.28598822

Is this too strong?

>> No.28599866


>> No.28602895

From my entirely original wedge set. Thoughts?

>> No.28603703

what needs to be toned back?

>> No.28603746

try and be less generic

>> No.28603829

hmmm... I feel his -2 should be a -3 and his +1 should draw 2 cards instead of 3.

>> No.28605266

>> No.28605603

You made a creature without giving him stats


>> No.28605638

Behold muh planeswalker. Not sure if broken.

>> No.28605778

> You gain life equal to its converted mana cost. If it's a permanent card, each opponent sacrifices a permanent that shares a card type with it.
> ... equal to the total converted mana cost of ...

Judging planeswalker power is hard to do in a vacuum. All I have to say is that it would be really cool if its +1 read "target player," so you could pitch a card to it and then -3 the next turn for a calculated effect.
I think that would add a little more depth to it without being a huge buff, since pitching your own card is card disadvantage and dangerous if they manage to kill Sixiv before you can use him again.

>> No.28606606


Trying some stuff here

>> No.28606671

It's definitely very pushed, but it just looks like you took 6 keyword abilities, 2 from each color, and fit it onto one dude. Kinda boring design. The reach is a bit out there, though. I can see flash, haste, and first strike fitting onto a human warrior, trample can fit too as its been done on pushy humans and all that... hexproof fits with the "runebranded" connotation... but reach? It's just out there. If you're looking for a G ability, why not just +1/+1? Since she doesn't have vigilance but does have haste and trample I doubt reach will be of much use anyway.

>> No.28606792

The tap effect is kinda bonkers since you can regain the cards back. In an aggro matchup, it's useless, but the lifeloss honestly doesn't matter too much when you tap it once and suddenly the enemy control player is sitting on zero cards while you have at least five. I'd put it at paying 2 mana, then do some playtests with it using the rest of your set to see how it goes.

>> No.28606794

>making lands colored
There is no way that could ever be less than 4 cost. Even then, I'd be reluctant to ever see it printed.

>> No.28607120


>> No.28608572


Actually Vigilance might be a good swap for Reach since green gets it secondary and as you said, Reach is a bit out there.

As far as the keywords go, you also have to take into consideration that the three static keywords on it don't play well together. Flash is good on it's own, but if you use it that way you get no benefit from Haste or Trample, and vise versa. So it's flexible sure, but there is a reason I put most of the real "money" abilities on the activation.

I actually sort of wish now that I could make the three activated keywords each their own line with their own cost but it just becomes "text for ants" and that's no good. I could also possibly change it to give +1/+1 and one of the three abilities UEOT.

>> No.28608769

Shit, really? Well, crap, how am I to reword it? Or should I simply make it a 1/1 and boost the cost again.

Annnd...another one for harsh critisms

>> No.28609659

MTG doesn't use amongst. Other than that, it looks ok.

>> No.28609704


>> No.28609707


>> No.28610124


>> No.28610177

Nah, seems good.

>> No.28610204

I like this card. A lot. Bravo.

>> No.28610222

>If it's an Island card, you may pay 1U.
>If you do, put that card onto the battlefield under your control

>> No.28610238

Set of Ultimatums for the wedge set I'm working on. Suggestions?

>> No.28610291

>> No.28611354

A colored planeswalker? Are you racist or is that something that you MtG wording really needs the distinction for?

>I honestly don't know if there are non-colored planeswalkers

>> No.28611454

You could, you know, look up the answer to your own question. We have this thing called "the internet" now, it's pretty great.

>> No.28611491


he still has a point.

Why the fuck are you hating on that card is such a manner?

>> No.28611535

No idea, it's not my card. But "colored" is a valid word in MtG.

>> No.28611572


Who is Karn? Just a living Golem Planeswalker that was given his creator's Spark, who was none other than URZA PLANESWALKER. Karn is the creator of the plane of Mirrodin, the creator of Memnarch, who is also THE MIRARI.

Fucking plebs, I swear...

>> No.28611592

I don't play magic enough to care, just passing by.

>> No.28611638

Well you cared enough to ask the question.

>> No.28611658

It's called a joke. Referencing the fact that there are so few (one) colorless planeswalkers.

>> No.28611663

Got him rekt anon.

>> No.28611686


>> No.28611695

Jokes, like sarcasm, have a tendency to not go well through the intertubes

>> No.28611720

maybe for autismos

>> No.28611772

A couple of cards from a set I'm working on in my spare time. [1/5 - Hemofactorum]

>> No.28611791

A couple of cards from a set I'm working on in my spare time. [2/5 - Revenant Watchman]

>> No.28611810

Forgot to include rules text for the custom mechanic.

Masochist - During each player's upkeep step, do not remove damage counters from this creature.

>> No.28611838

A couple of cards from a set I'm working on in my spare time. [3/5 - Hemofloran Saproling (part of the set's "Pain Leveler" cycle)]

>> No.28611842

Okay, now you need to post the reminder text for what the fuck a "damage counter" is.

>> No.28611861

As in a counter you place on a creature to indicate combat damage that it has taken.

>> No.28611882

That... is not a thing that exists. This isn't pokemon.

>> No.28611891

Yeah, that doesn't exist in Magic.
And damage doesn't get taken off during the upkeep, it's done at the end of each turn.

>> No.28611917

You're both right, I simply misquoted the rules text in my post. The correct rules text is below.

Masochist - This creature does not remove damage dealt to it during any player’s cleanup step.

>> No.28611974

Because of this flagrant error on my part, the tap ability on Revenant Watchman (>>28611791) should read "X, T: Remove X damage from Revenant Watchman."

>> No.28611995

Okay, it's time to stop making up rules terms.

>> No.28611998

Damage doesn't reduce toughness

>> No.28612027

You can't "remove" damage.

>> No.28612045

You actually can.
That's part of what Regenerate does.

>> No.28612081

You need to learn the rules better before you start making cards that mess with them.

>> No.28612273


why not just have this take damage in the form of -1/-1 counter.
then, you could have the ability to remove -1/-1 counter from it.
everything would be fixed
>inb4 I do that card

>> No.28612446

I've been trying to work on this rare. Power okay?

Choose two: target player draws two cards and loses two life; target player discards two cards;scry 2;fateseal 2.

>> No.28613016

I personally feel Shattersteel Lancer is a LITTLE too strong at 4/3 double strike for 6 mana. At uncommon. You have 8 damage for 6 mana which is pretty above curve. For uncommon, a 3/3 double strike vigilance is pretty good right there. Plus he's hybrid AND a rebel which is already pushing the envelope a bit.

Brimstone Flagellant is SUPER strong. Red and tap he can ping up TO 3 other creatures. For a repeatable effect like this, it should probably be a MINIMUM of 4 mana and tap.

Volatile Imp should be Creature - Imp

Red kinda has devils now instead of demons, but it's just a nitpick. Sorry.

I know you were talking about Trophyclad Veteran before and it does seem a little too good with Lightning greaves and something like...Grafted Wargear. "Ok so 4 mana, attach wargear and greaves, 8/4 double strike haste". Maybe just put him with first strike instead of double strike.
He's awesome either way. I'd use him.

Sidenote for Greybeard sentry: I kind of feel his ability should be "activate this only once per turn" because you can pitch 5 cards to swing on someone for 13 damage. A lot of creatures that can discard cards to pump themselves have that restriction.

>> No.28614720

Updated based on that criticism.

One of the first things I did was revert Shattersteel Lancer back to being multi-coloured rather than hybrid. It's a much more restrictive cost that way. I'm not so sure about making it 3/3 or putting making the mana cost any higher.
Consider it personal but I feel that four mana is a bit too much for what Brimstone Flagellant does. But after taking some inspiration from Arc Mage, I changed the ability's cost to RR, T, Discard a Card.
Trophyclad Veteran and Greybeard Sentry have been updated exactly to your specifications, though.

I want an opinion on Warborn Reaver however. I'm not comfortable designing high-power cards out of fear of making something ludicrously overpowered. In this case, I feel that a potentially 10 damage indestructible creature for five mana might be a little much, even as a rare.

And we should probably get a new thread soon.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.