Colossal Ramidreju4GG
Creature — Snake Weasel [C]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
[6/6]
Bearded Hippogriff2UU
Creature — Hippogriff [C]
Flying
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
[3/3]
Dancing Cyclops3RR
Creature — Cyclops [U]
Trample
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
[5/3]
Beachcomber1GU
Creature — Merfolk Druid [U]
Flash
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
When Beachcomber enters the battlefield, draw a card.
[2/2]
Judge of Competitions5WW
Creature — Archon [R]
Flying, vigilance
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.) WW, T: Prevent all damage that would be dealt to target creature this turn.
[5/7]
Angry Cabritu2R
Creature — Dwarf Shaman [R]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
When Angry Cabritu enters the battlefield, it deals damage equal to its power to target creature or player.
[3/2]
Sabbat Keeper3G
Creature — Human Rebel Druid [R]
Hexproof
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
Creature spells you cast have shrink.
[3/4]
Dubra Leviathan7UUU
Creature — Leviathan [R]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
When Dubra Leviathan enters the battlefield, tap any number of target creatures with total power less than or equal to Dubra Leviathan's power. Those creatures don't untap during their controllers' next untap steps.
[10/10]
Katus Rextugenos3RGWU
Legendary Creature — Elder Dragon [M]
Flying, first strike
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.) 1: Move a counter from target creature you control onto a second target creature you control.
[7/7]
Dancing Cyclops could have an extra toughness point, couldn't it? And would it be TOO Cantabrian to call it Dancing Ojancanu?
Beachcomber is probably the MVP of the mechanic, but I'm sure you figured that.
Angry Cabritu's also strong, and Sabbat Keeper is so ripe for shenanigans I can taste it. Again, on naming: Akelarre Keeper? Is that TOO regional?
Dubra Leviathan feels like it oughta be a Kraken, for, well, obvious reasons. (It's the very tentacle-associated flavor. A Leviathan would cause a flood in terms of tapdown flavor, and why would that discriminate as to targets?)
Katus needs... something more? Mechanically he's sound, but at the same time could feel just a touch more green.
I don't like the creatures that can be cast and immediately die. A few might be fine but they feel bad, it's an illogical feeling but a strong one. Creatures that can enter with 0 power feel better than ones with 0 toughness. Overall they seem well balanced. It's good you avoided creatures that would enter with negative power, those would confuse too many players.
They're good designs, buuuuuuut... Several of them should be much bigger. Timmy doesn't like these. He thinks he does, at first, but then he plays them only to be disappointed when he realizes they're Spike creatures. Katus is excellent. Though his counter-moving ability could be able to move a counter from a creature you control to any other creature. (Maybe cost it at 2 though.)
I tried a number of different approaches with these, so I won't be surprised if some of those approaches are more popular than others. I'm willing to go back and scrap some designs but I want to get some different opinions, first.
Dancing Cyclops could have an extra toughness point, couldn't it?
Different approach #1: all the red shrinkers (and only the red shrinkers) have the potential to shrink themselves to 0 toughness. I figured this could be a fun puzzle for Johnny to figure out, a la Force of Savagery.
So, short answer: sure, I could add a point of toughness. But, is there a treat I could give Johnny, instead?
And would it be TOO Cantabrian to call it Dancing Ojancanu?
...
Again, on naming: Akelarre Keeper? Is that TOO regional?
My approach to the question of "What gets a Cantabrian / Asturian / Celtiberian / Basque / etc. name?" was that familiar fantasy tropes (i.e. Dwarves) and setting-specific creatures (i.e. Ramidrejus) get a name, whereas less-common fantasy races (i.e. Cyclopes, Leviathans, Hippogriffs) just get named after the creature type. In the case of Sabbat Keeper, I just liked how it sounded. But I have also been perusing various terminology for alternatives, so I'm still open to change. I gotta say I still like "Sabbat Keeper" better than "Akelarre Keeper".
Beachcomber is probably the MVP of the mechanic, but I'm sure you figured that.
Angry Cabritu's also strong, and Sabbat Keeper is so ripe for shenanigans I can taste it.
Yeeeeeeaaah... I don't know if Beachcomber is da MVP. I'm expecting somebody to come forward with an preposterous combo for Sabbat Keeper that will force me to scrap it or at least modify it heavily. And Angry Cabritu is a cheaper FTK that scales and can hit players, so...
Different approach #2: in any case, Beachcomber doesn't sit super well with me since it's the only card with a binary casting option. I wanted to do one card that could only shrink by 1, but it rubs me the wrong way a bit.
Dubra Leviathan feels like it oughta be a Kraken, for, well, obvious reasons. (It's the very tentacle-associated flavor. A Leviathan would cause a flood in terms of tapdown flavor, and why would that discriminate as to targets?)
I mean, I don't really disagree with you... but I wanted a Leviathan.
Katus needs... something more? Mechanically he's sound, but at the same time could feel just a touch more green.
Hmm. I thought I had loaded him up on goodies pretty well. I disagree with "needs more green" because I've tried to position shrink as primarily in green. But I guess if it isn't coming through then I need to consider that.
They're good designs, buuuuuuut... Several of them should be much bigger. Timmy doesn't like these. He thinks he does, at first, but then he plays them only to be disappointed when he realizes they're Spike creatures. Katus is excellent. Though his counter-moving ability could be able to move a counter from a creature you control to any other creature. (Maybe cost it at 2 though.)
Yeah, the "bigger" thing is interesting. I looked over this slate and I thought to myself, "I meant to make these much bigger, in general." But I posted it anyways because I've been working on these for like two friggin' days.
Will I go back and redesign them to make them bigger? Hard to say. While I intended for the shrink slate to have more beef, I also noticed an interesting quirk that really, as these get bigger, they all seem to sort of play the same as one another. So, keeping some of them smaller than intended is actually one way I was able to add diversity to the lineup. But if people hate the small guys, well... I'm listening.
re: shrink as a Timmy mechanic. Is it? Timmy sees "cost reduction" and doesn't care at all, then he sees "-1/-1 counters" and he screams and runs. I think it's a Spike mechanic, with maybe a little interest for Johnny, too. I suppose maybe you could call it a Timmy mechanic because it's mostly on creatures Timmy otherwise likes, but the mechanic itself doesn't appeal to Timmy, at all. I think avow and immortalize are our Timmy mechanics. Or at least they have the potential to be.
Angry Cabritu works as a design because it is still doing something even if it immediately dies. Dancing Cyclops has no secondary effect though so playing it as cheap as possible just feels confusing. If the red creatures also all have either an enter or leave trigger, then it would be perfectly fine for them to immediately die similar to evoke.
I agree that they all start to feel the same if they're all big. I didn't mean they ALL have to be big, but most should be bigger than normal and a few should be HUGE. Like a 10/10 for 9G green common or something. If the powers and tougnesses are big enough, it becomes a Timmy mechanic (that Spike and Johnny can still enjoy) because the first thing he's gonna see is huge numbers in the bottom right corner. The negative counters only strike as Spikey if they require too much thought. As long as they're straight forward and advantageous, I think Timmy will have an easier time viewing them in a positive light. Note that I'm not saying you should change the designs except to increase the digits on some of them. I think this is an exceptionally difficult mechanic for which to design so I appreciate these quite a bit. (You may have noticed that I proposed just one flavorless vanilla horizontal cycle of vanillas.) Anyways, that's my take on it.
Angry Cabritu works as a design because it is still doing something even if it immediately dies. Dancing Cyclops has no secondary effect though so playing it as cheap as possible just feels confusing. If the red creatures also all have either an enter or leave trigger, then it would be perfectly fine for them to immediately die similar to evoke.
Basically this!
Antheming a 2/0 RR Dancing Cyclops gives you a... Goblin Deathraiders. Not exactly an enticing Johnny puzzle, and neither is paying two mana for one death trigger off another card.
If anything I'd be concerned about Eldrazi Titans with it, because then you can get the on-cast triggers for free even without getting the body. The Emrakuls are the obvious issue here...
Hate to say it, but maybe Sabbat Keeper needs to be 3GG or 2GG? The turn one combo potential is possibly too great. Remember when the GlistenProgeniShoal thing had to be banned?
Oh yeah, but those Eldrazi cast triggers... LoL. Crazy. I forgot about that. I just checked for colorless death triggers. Eldrazi breaking real cards and custom cards alike. Haha!
The state-based actions that put the creature into the graveyard and annihilate the +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters happen at the same time. Modular looks back at how many +1/+1 counters the creature had while it was last on the battlefield. If Arcbound Bruiser blocks a Scourge Servant, the modular ability can still put three +1/+1 counters on an artifact creature.
Heh. It's OK. I assumed Sabbat Keeper would prove unprintable, I just liked the sexiness of it in a vacuum and I didn't feel like doing the work to find the combos myself. So, thanks!
I have a second design almost ready to go that can do the "shrink your other creatures" thing without risking a T1 gg. It is, however, not Sabbat Keeper. But I have ideas for how to redesign that card as well.
So, question: how leggy do you feel this mechanic is, both inside and potentially outside L2? Right now my decision tree looks something like this:
Failing --> Reduce the mechanic to 5-6 cards, or scrap it all together and start over with something else.
Very not leggy --> Stay at 9-10 cards, swap in alternative designs as needed, assume this is a one-set-and-done mechanic.
Somewhat not leggy --> Push the L2 shrink contingent up to 14-15 cards and basically try to clear out all the remaining design space for the mechanic right now.
Leggier than that --> Probably stay at 9-10 cards in order to not eat up all the design space and allow the mechanic to return in the future.
Bountiful, fabulous --> Again, push the shrink block up to 14-15 cards and don't worry about design space issues.
I don't believe #1 or #5 to be the case, but I'm not sure which one of #2-4 is the most accurate.
I think it's got enough legs to hold up 15 cards, but I'm also not sure I ever would want to see it outside of L2. Flavorfully it has to be about Segovia in the context of its interactions with other planes, and I don't think that flavor makes sense with any other story.
I'm super impressed with the thoughtfulness behind Shrink and all of the feedback upthread!
Shrink is so clean and the designs you've posted demonstrate the time you already put in before posting! I'll leave critiques for these to the others Great so far though
Moss Treader6GGG
Creature — Elemental [U]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
Whenever Moss Treader attacks, create three 1/1 green Plant creature tokens that are tapped and attacking. Exile the tokens at end of combat.
[6/9]
Dancing Cyclops3RR
Creature — Cyclops [U]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
When Dancing Cyclops dies, draw two cards, then discard two cards.
[5/3]
Sabbat Keeper3G
Creature — Human Rebel Druid [R]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
Hexproof 1: Remove a -1/-1 counter from target creature you control.
[3/4]
Dubra Leviathan9UUU
Creature — Leviathan [R]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
Trample
If Dubra Leviathan would leave the battlefield, put it on the top or bottom its owner's library instead of putting it anywhere else.
[12/12]
Katus Rextugenos3RGWU
Legendary Creature — Elder Dragon [M]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
Flying, first strike
Creature spells you cast have shrink.
[7/7]
Moss Treader is insane for an uncommon. Attacking across four bodies makes it very strong at lower costs. It's comparable to Kari Zev, Skyship Raider, and its power increases exponentially with the number of good sac outlets. By the way, these expensive shrink creatures look like huge hassles to play with. Six or nine(!) counters requires either multiple dice or high-numbered dice, and it's important to realize that not everybody who plays Magic uses dice. More than a few people are content to use scraps of paper or spare cards as counters, which is nigh-impossible when playing with this many counters. Seriously, these big shrink creatures might as well be Atraxa for people without dice!
Your new version of Dancing Cyclops is also extremely powerful, though not necessarily at its lowest cost. A Goblin Piker with a Faithless Looting strapped to it would be a great card by itself.
Sabbat Keeper is still extremely overpowered, and the hexproof is what pushes it over the top. Even at rare you still want shrink to feel like a tradeoff.
Dubra Leviathan is a strange card, and it isn't the trample. Blue is the worst color at creature recursion, and I don't see how it's justified here.
Katus seems appropriately broken for a 4 color legendary dragon, but maybe he shouldn't have shrink himself.
By the way, are you really sure you want your shrink creatures to be as good as any normal creature at any given point along their respective curves? Most X cost creatures give up a little efficiency in exchange for their versatility, but your approach to designing shrink creatures has given up precisely zero efficiency in exchange for an incredible range of versatility. How can you design an awesome 3 drop uncommon creature without shrink when its competition is also one of the best 3 drops, 4 drops, 5 drops, 6 drops, 7 drops, 8 drops, and 9 drops in the set? Unless you start taking versatility more into account, your non-shrink creatures need something crazy in order to keep up.
Moss Treader is insane for an uncommon. Attacking across four bodies makes it very strong at lower costs. It's comparable to Kari Zev, Skyship Raider, and its power increases exponentially with the number of good sac outlets.
It might be insane, yes. But at its cheapest it's 3 attacking power for GGG as compared to Kari Zev's 3 attacking power + combat abilities for 1R, so the comparison you make is not really exact.
By the way, these expensive shrink creatures look like huge hassles to play with. Six or nine(!) counters requires either multiple dice or high-numbered dice, and it's important to realize that not everybody who plays Magic uses dice. More than a few people are content to use scraps of paper or spare cards as counters, which is nigh-impossible when playing with this many counters. Seriously, these big shrink creatures might as well be Atraxa for people without dice!
A fair enough consideration. What would you consider the acceptable number of counters for this mechanic to produce?
Your new version of Dancing Cyclops is also extremely powerful, though not necessarily at its lowest cost. A Goblin Piker with a Faithless Looting strapped to it would be a great card by itself.
Sabbat Keeper is still extremely overpowered, and the hexproof is what pushes it over the top. Even at rare you still want shrink to feel like a tradeoff.
I do agree that shrink should feel like a tradeoff, so a card that allows you to totally reverse it without restrictions might be a problem, I agree. A higher ability cost or a limitation of some sort on the ability might be all I need.
I don't think I've ever posted a hexproof creature that somebody didn't criticize on account of it having hexproof. It's an annoying ability that some players despise, but it's still in the toolbox, and I'm still going to use it from time to time. I prefer it on utility cards like this rather than on game-ending threats. (Acknowledging that this utility card is still a very flexible and efficient beater by itself, as written.)
Dubra Leviathan is a strange card, and it isn't the trample. Blue is the worst color at creature recursion, and I don't see how it's justified here.
The ability is there to stop Flicker effects. I figured I'd try to turn it into an upside mechanic while I was at it. If it really grinds peoples' gears, I can just send it to the bottom of the library only and try to find another positive ability to give it. It almost had "can't be countered", but I figured I'd see what people thought of the optional recursion thing first.
Katus seems appropriately broken for a 4 color legendary dragon, but maybe he shouldn't have shrink himself.
I don't think I could even get EDH players interested in "creature spells you cast have shrink" if they have to pay 7 mana to get that engine running. I think I've put enough distance in-between this version and the one that allowed for T1 Kozileks that the ability is now suitably answerable. People are going to do crazy stuff with Eldrazi, it is known. It's not my job to completely stop that.
By the way, are you really sure you want your shrink creatures to be as good as any normal creature at any given point along their respective curves? Most X cost creatures give up a little efficiency in exchange for their versatility, but your approach to designing shrink creatures has given up precisely zero efficiency in exchange for an incredible range of versatility. How can you design an awesome 3 drop uncommon creature without shrink when its competition is also one of the best 3 drops, 4 drops, 5 drops, 6 drops, 7 drops, 8 drops, and 9 drops in the set? Unless you start taking versatility more into account, your non-shrink creatures need something crazy in order to keep up.
Two things. First, you're right, and I think this is really the central criticism that holds with all of the above cards. They're efficient at pretty much every stage of their respective curves. Some of them need to be walked back, I have no problems saying that.
Second thing, you'll notice how this slate of cards is top-heavy towards rare. I know the mechanic is strong and pushing it up the rarity ladder is one of the ways I'm addressing that. I think Colossal Ramidreju is a great card and a potentially 1st-pick common, but I don't think it's oppressive in Limited or that it's going to choke out other designs. If the rare cards are among the stronger cards in the set, I don't see that as a problem.
A fair enough consideration. What would you consider the acceptable number of counters for this mechanic to produce?
Three at common and uncommon, though there is a little wiggle room depending on the other ways you have to put -1/-1 counter on creatures in the set. Rares can be more flexible because they are less impactful on the limited experience, but they still appear frequently enough to take convenience into consideration. Typically, sets with -1/-1 counters actually do have way to stack lots of them because they're limited by the average toughness of creatures, but your creatures have much looser natural limiters. If you load up a creature in Amonkhet with a bunch of counters, it'll die and you won't have to worry about it. If you notice the +1/+1 counter side is typically much more restrained at lower rarities, with the really insane examples up higher.
When I referred to a goblin piker strapped to a faithless looting, I did so in the most literal of senses. 1R+R=1RR
I suppose the logistics of actual play among the diceless peasants should be considered.
I don't think it's really a big deal if we need to shift things around a bit. Sure, I like Colossal Ramidreju right where it is, but if it needs to be a 5/5 for 3GG in order for people to have a good play experience, I'm not gonna cry too hard about the change.
On the other hand, I'm not going to do a ton of development on these without a good picture of what else is in the set. That would be wasted energy. As long as people realize that I'm trying to design the "blue sky" versions of these creatures and I fully expect to hit half of them with the nerf bat before all is said and done, I think we will have an understanding.
Let this act as my reminder that, as per BlazingRagnarok's suggestions, I will contemplate topping out the common shrinkers at 3 generic mana. I am also considering a rarity swap between Sabbat Keeper and Moss Treader to push the higher-cost shrinkers up to rare, and also for a couple other reasons. I'm not 100% happy with Angry Cabritu or Beachcomber as designed, so I may tweak them a bit, too. I'm still curious about what people think of the new Dubra Leviathan. Other than those issues, I see the issues as basically ones of costing, balance, and P/T, i.e., development issues.
The remove-counters version of Sabbat Keeper should be uncommon, so it can be one of those draft linchpin thingies.
Nu-Dubra Leviathan is bretty gud, mang. I like enabling a little bit of blink abuse with shrink (see my earlier combo idea, with Katus replacing old-Sabbat Keeber) but preventing the absolute worst of it.
Colossal Ramidreju 4GG
Creature — Snake Weasel [C]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
[6/6]
Bearded Hippogriff 2UU
Creature — Hippogriff [C]
Flying
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
[3/3]
Dancing Cyclops 3RR
Creature — Cyclops [U]
Trample
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
[5/3]
Beachcomber 1GU
Creature — Merfolk Druid [U]
Flash
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
When Beachcomber enters the battlefield, draw a card.
[2/2]
Judge of Competitions 5WW
Creature — Archon [R]
Flying, vigilance
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
WW, T: Prevent all damage that would be dealt to target creature this turn.
[5/7]
Angry Cabritu 2R
Creature — Dwarf Shaman [R]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
When Angry Cabritu enters the battlefield, it deals damage equal to its power to target creature or player.
[3/2]
Sabbat Keeper 3G
Creature — Human Rebel Druid [R]
Hexproof
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
Creature spells you cast have shrink.
[3/4]
Dubra Leviathan 7UUU
Creature — Leviathan [R]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
When Dubra Leviathan enters the battlefield, tap any number of target creatures with total power less than or equal to Dubra Leviathan's power. Those creatures don't untap during their controllers' next untap steps.
[10/10]
Katus Rextugenos 3RGWU
Legendary Creature — Elder Dragon [M]
Flying, first strike
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
1: Move a counter from target creature you control onto a second target creature you control.
[7/7]
Dancing Cyclops could have an extra toughness point, couldn't it? And would it be TOO Cantabrian to call it Dancing Ojancanu?
Beachcomber is probably the MVP of the mechanic, but I'm sure you figured that.
Angry Cabritu's also strong, and Sabbat Keeper is so ripe for shenanigans I can taste it. Again, on naming: Akelarre Keeper? Is that TOO regional?
Dubra Leviathan feels like it oughta be a Kraken, for, well, obvious reasons. (It's the very tentacle-associated flavor. A Leviathan would cause a flood in terms of tapdown flavor, and why would that discriminate as to targets?)
Katus needs... something more? Mechanically he's sound, but at the same time could feel just a touch more green.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Different approach #1: all the red shrinkers (and only the red shrinkers) have the potential to shrink themselves to 0 toughness. I figured this could be a fun puzzle for Johnny to figure out, a la Force of Savagery.
So, short answer: sure, I could add a point of toughness. But, is there a treat I could give Johnny, instead?
My approach to the question of "What gets a Cantabrian / Asturian / Celtiberian / Basque / etc. name?" was that familiar fantasy tropes (i.e. Dwarves) and setting-specific creatures (i.e. Ramidrejus) get a name, whereas less-common fantasy races (i.e. Cyclopes, Leviathans, Hippogriffs) just get named after the creature type. In the case of Sabbat Keeper, I just liked how it sounded. But I have also been perusing various terminology for alternatives, so I'm still open to change. I gotta say I still like "Sabbat Keeper" better than "Akelarre Keeper".
Yeeeeeeaaah... I don't know if Beachcomber is da MVP. I'm expecting somebody to come forward with an preposterous combo for Sabbat Keeper that will force me to scrap it or at least modify it heavily. And Angry Cabritu is a cheaper FTK that scales and can hit players, so...
Different approach #2: in any case, Beachcomber doesn't sit super well with me since it's the only card with a binary casting option. I wanted to do one card that could only shrink by 1, but it rubs me the wrong way a bit.
I mean, I don't really disagree with you... but I wanted a Leviathan.
Hmm. I thought I had loaded him up on goodies pretty well. I disagree with "needs more green" because I've tried to position shrink as primarily in green. But I guess if it isn't coming through then I need to consider that.
EDIT...
Yeah, the "bigger" thing is interesting. I looked over this slate and I thought to myself, "I meant to make these much bigger, in general." But I posted it anyways because I've been working on these for like two friggin' days.
Will I go back and redesign them to make them bigger? Hard to say. While I intended for the shrink slate to have more beef, I also noticed an interesting quirk that really, as these get bigger, they all seem to sort of play the same as one another. So, keeping some of them smaller than intended is actually one way I was able to add diversity to the lineup. But if people hate the small guys, well... I'm listening.
re: shrink as a Timmy mechanic. Is it? Timmy sees "cost reduction" and doesn't care at all, then he sees "-1/-1 counters" and he screams and runs. I think it's a Spike mechanic, with maybe a little interest for Johnny, too. I suppose maybe you could call it a Timmy mechanic because it's mostly on creatures Timmy otherwise likes, but the mechanic itself doesn't appeal to Timmy, at all. I think avow and immortalize are our Timmy mechanics. Or at least they have the potential to be.
Basically this!
Antheming a 2/0 RR Dancing Cyclops gives you a... Goblin Deathraiders. Not exactly an enticing Johnny puzzle, and neither is paying two mana for one death trigger off another card.
Besides, Johnny already has the answer to these puzzles. T1 Sabbat Keeper, T2 Blightsteel Colossus, T3 Cloudshift and Cartouche of Zeal on Colossus, GG? Four-card combos are still jank but I'd think this was super fun and play it as an unexpected Modern deck. And the combo only costs 2RGW overall, not hard to put together with decent duals!
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Wat
-1/-1 and +1/+1 counters cancel.
If anything I'd be concerned about Eldrazi Titans with it, because then you can get the on-cast triggers for free even without getting the body. The Emrakuls are the obvious issue here...
Hate to say it, but maybe Sabbat Keeper needs to be 3GG or 2GG? The turn one combo potential is possibly too great. Remember when the GlistenProgeniShoal thing had to be banned?
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
I have a second design almost ready to go that can do the "shrink your other creatures" thing without risking a T1 gg. It is, however, not Sabbat Keeper. But I have ideas for how to redesign that card as well.
So, question: how leggy do you feel this mechanic is, both inside and potentially outside L2? Right now my decision tree looks something like this:
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Shrink is so clean and the designs you've posted demonstrate the time you already put in before posting! I'll leave critiques for these to the others Great so far though
Moss Treader 6GGG
Creature — Elemental [U]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
Whenever Moss Treader attacks, create three 1/1 green Plant creature tokens that are tapped and attacking. Exile the tokens at end of combat.
[6/9]
Dancing Cyclops 3RR
Creature — Cyclops [U]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
When Dancing Cyclops dies, draw two cards, then discard two cards.
[5/3]
Sabbat Keeper 3G
Creature — Human Rebel Druid [R]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
Hexproof
1: Remove a -1/-1 counter from target creature you control.
[3/4]
Dubra Leviathan 9UUU
Creature — Leviathan [R]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
Trample
If Dubra Leviathan would leave the battlefield, put it on the top or bottom its owner's library instead of putting it anywhere else.
[12/12]
Katus Rextugenos 3RGWU
Legendary Creature — Elder Dragon [M]
Shrink (You may pay X less to cast this spell. If you do, it enters the battlefield with X -1/-1 counters on it.)
Flying, first strike
Creature spells you cast have shrink.
[7/7]
By the way, these expensive shrink creatures look like huge hassles to play with. Six or nine(!) counters requires either multiple dice or high-numbered dice, and it's important to realize that not everybody who plays Magic uses dice. More than a few people are content to use scraps of paper or spare cards as counters, which is nigh-impossible when playing with this many counters. Seriously, these big shrink creatures might as well be Atraxa for people without dice!
Your new version of Dancing Cyclops is also extremely powerful, though not necessarily at its lowest cost. A Goblin Piker with a Faithless Looting strapped to it would be a great card by itself.
Sabbat Keeper is still extremely overpowered, and the hexproof is what pushes it over the top. Even at rare you still want shrink to feel like a tradeoff.
Dubra Leviathan is a strange card, and it isn't the trample. Blue is the worst color at creature recursion, and I don't see how it's justified here.
Katus seems appropriately broken for a 4 color legendary dragon, but maybe he shouldn't have shrink himself.
By the way, are you really sure you want your shrink creatures to be as good as any normal creature at any given point along their respective curves? Most X cost creatures give up a little efficiency in exchange for their versatility, but your approach to designing shrink creatures has given up precisely zero efficiency in exchange for an incredible range of versatility. How can you design an awesome 3 drop uncommon creature without shrink when its competition is also one of the best 3 drops, 4 drops, 5 drops, 6 drops, 7 drops, 8 drops, and 9 drops in the set? Unless you start taking versatility more into account, your non-shrink creatures need something crazy in order to keep up.
A fair enough consideration. What would you consider the acceptable number of counters for this mechanic to produce?
It's a strong card, now. Though it's never going to be a Goblin Piker with a free Faithless Looting.
I do agree that shrink should feel like a tradeoff, so a card that allows you to totally reverse it without restrictions might be a problem, I agree. A higher ability cost or a limitation of some sort on the ability might be all I need.
I don't think I've ever posted a hexproof creature that somebody didn't criticize on account of it having hexproof. It's an annoying ability that some players despise, but it's still in the toolbox, and I'm still going to use it from time to time. I prefer it on utility cards like this rather than on game-ending threats. (Acknowledging that this utility card is still a very flexible and efficient beater by itself, as written.)
The ability is there to stop Flicker effects. I figured I'd try to turn it into an upside mechanic while I was at it. If it really grinds peoples' gears, I can just send it to the bottom of the library only and try to find another positive ability to give it. It almost had "can't be countered", but I figured I'd see what people thought of the optional recursion thing first.
I don't think I could even get EDH players interested in "creature spells you cast have shrink" if they have to pay 7 mana to get that engine running. I think I've put enough distance in-between this version and the one that allowed for T1 Kozileks that the ability is now suitably answerable. People are going to do crazy stuff with Eldrazi, it is known. It's not my job to completely stop that.
Two things. First, you're right, and I think this is really the central criticism that holds with all of the above cards. They're efficient at pretty much every stage of their respective curves. Some of them need to be walked back, I have no problems saying that.
Second thing, you'll notice how this slate of cards is top-heavy towards rare. I know the mechanic is strong and pushing it up the rarity ladder is one of the ways I'm addressing that. I think Colossal Ramidreju is a great card and a potentially 1st-pick common, but I don't think it's oppressive in Limited or that it's going to choke out other designs. If the rare cards are among the stronger cards in the set, I don't see that as a problem.
Three at common and uncommon, though there is a little wiggle room depending on the other ways you have to put -1/-1 counter on creatures in the set. Rares can be more flexible because they are less impactful on the limited experience, but they still appear frequently enough to take convenience into consideration. Typically, sets with -1/-1 counters actually do have way to stack lots of them because they're limited by the average toughness of creatures, but your creatures have much looser natural limiters. If you load up a creature in Amonkhet with a bunch of counters, it'll die and you won't have to worry about it. If you notice the +1/+1 counter side is typically much more restrained at lower rarities, with the really insane examples up higher.
When I referred to a goblin piker strapped to a faithless looting, I did so in the most literal of senses. 1R+R=1RR
No they don't. They look like huge fun to play with. Awesome, big, badass, powerful, versatile fun.
Mechanically, but not physically. I'm not bashing the mechanic, I'm trying to improve it by point out a few flaws.
I don't think it's really a big deal if we need to shift things around a bit. Sure, I like Colossal Ramidreju right where it is, but if it needs to be a 5/5 for 3GG in order for people to have a good play experience, I'm not gonna cry too hard about the change.
On the other hand, I'm not going to do a ton of development on these without a good picture of what else is in the set. That would be wasted energy. As long as people realize that I'm trying to design the "blue sky" versions of these creatures and I fully expect to hit half of them with the nerf bat before all is said and done, I think we will have an understanding.
Let this act as my reminder that, as per BlazingRagnarok's suggestions, I will contemplate topping out the common shrinkers at 3 generic mana. I am also considering a rarity swap between Sabbat Keeper and Moss Treader to push the higher-cost shrinkers up to rare, and also for a couple other reasons. I'm not 100% happy with Angry Cabritu or Beachcomber as designed, so I may tweak them a bit, too. I'm still curious about what people think of the new Dubra Leviathan. Other than those issues, I see the issues as basically ones of costing, balance, and P/T, i.e., development issues.
Nu-Dubra Leviathan is bretty gud, mang. I like enabling a little bit of blink abuse with shrink (see my earlier combo idea, with Katus replacing old-Sabbat Keeber) but preventing the absolute worst of it.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Which is fine. But "needing" dice for a couple of cards is not a flaw.