Yes to both questions. Note that this will also have interactions with objects that care about permanents with the uber ability.
I must ask: Why not just write "flying, first strike" on the card?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How to use card tags (please use them for everybody's sanity)
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format Minimum deck size: 60 Maximum number of identical cards: 4 Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
You totally caught me! I wasn't trying to make uber a keyword. This question is actually a rules theory idea I am toying with to blend intimidate, fear, shroud, hexproof, and protection.
I don't much see the point of messing like this since protection isn't evergreen anymore. So when protection does occasionally show up, it will need good reminder text, but this makes the reminder text harder to understand.
@silvercut I know what I am trying to do is strange. Look at these other attachments, and you might be able to get what I am trying to do. Make 3 components of protection (shrouded intimidate and shielded) Each of the components could be used independently.
Your Highborn Ghoul is different from the actual Highborn Ghoul. Going strictly by the wording you've used, your Ghoul can't be blocked by multicolored creatures like Shivan Zombie, or colored artifact creatures like Thundering Thanadon.
Correct. Also Artisan of Kozilek can also block a highborn ghoul with my version of intimidating. Do you dislike this change?
I always thought that it was a mistake to "hard code" artifact into intimidate. IIRC when making intimidate to replace fear all colorless creatures, including artifact creatures, couldn't block intimidators, but was deemed too powerful.
Correct. Also Artisan of Kozilek can also block a highborn ghoul with my version of intimidating. Do you dislike this change?
I always thought that it was a mistake to "hard code" artifact into intimidate. IIRC when making intimidate to replace fear all colorless creatures, including artifact creatures, couldn't block intimidators, but was deemed too powerful.
I think the disconnect is that your version of Highborn Ghoul works differently from the actual card, while your first two examples operate identically to their real world counterparts.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
For example:
Uber means "This creature has flying and first strike"
Cool Dude W
Creature - Human
Uber
1/1
Could Plummet destroy cool dude? Would Canopy Claws make him lose flying and keep first strike?
I must ask: Why not just write "flying, first strike" on the card?
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format
Minimum deck size: 60
Maximum number of identical cards: 4
Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
I always thought that it was a mistake to "hard code" artifact into intimidate. IIRC when making intimidate to replace fear all colorless creatures, including artifact creatures, couldn't block intimidators, but was deemed too powerful.
I think the disconnect is that your version of Highborn Ghoul works differently from the actual card, while your first two examples operate identically to their real world counterparts.