I'm new to both the forums and custom card creation, so I wanted to start by posting a mechanic idea I've been working on for my set. The mechanic is called Pact, and works like so:
X Pact - if you control a/an/another X, (effect happens).
Here's an example:
Knight of Elandria :1mana::symw:
Creature - Human Knight (U)
Protection from white Knight Pact - If you control another Knight, ~ has vigilance.
2/1
Any advice is welcome and appreciated! And if more examples are needed, just let me know.
This is an ability word, which means it's an identifier and has no rules tied to it. As such, you don't need "X Pact", you can just make it "Pact" and use the creature's class in the ability. (At least, that's what I would do. I suppose you could technically do it your way, but it wouldn't match up with what most of magic does.)
I think this is a fine idea but it probably doesn't need it's own ability word.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Alternately, you could leave it as X Pact but allow it to occasionally work on creatures of other types (possibly as a second-set elaboration)
Knight of Drakes1W
Creature - Human Knight (U)
Protection from blue Drake Pact - Knight of Drakes has flying as long as you control a Drake creature.
2/1
Alternately, you could leave it as X Pact but allow it to occasionally work on creatures of other types (possibly as a second-set elaboration)
You actually still wouldn't need to call it that, you could just say that "Pact" refers to abilities that require a creature of a certain type to be on the battlefield.
It just feels awkward having "X Pact" since unlike a keyword it feels like you created 100+ different ability words to reference these abilities.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Knight of Drakes reminds me of Griffin rider, which didn't need keywording, while when I first saw the word Pact in the cycle my mind went to the old Slaughter Pact cycle (i.e. effect now, pay next mana next upkeep or lose the game).
I'm not trying to deter you but adding Pact simply places more words on the card, especially since you still need all the lines of rules text to tell you how having a knight effects Knight of Elandria works.
This is an ability word, which means it's an identifier and has no rules tied to it. As such, you don't need "X Pact", you can just make it "Pact" and use the creature's class in the ability. (At least, that's what I would do. I suppose you could technically do it your way, but it wouldn't match up with what most of magic does.)
I think this is a fine idea but it probably doesn't need it's own ability word.
When I showed the example with X Pact, it was meant as a way to show the basic skeleton of the concept. Sorry for not making that clear. As for your suggestion, could you possibly show an example of what you mean by using the creature's class in the ability? I just want to make sure I understand what you're saying.
As for the ability in general, the flavor behind it was similar groups working together, getting bonuses for doing so. It was also on a few spells, that make the normal attributes of the spell better.
This ability was a big part of what I had going, so I'm not really sure how to make it better/improve/change it.
As for the ability in general, the flavor behind it was similar groups working together, getting bonuses for doing so. It was also on a few spells, that make the normal attributes of the spell better.
This ability was a big part of what I had going, so I'm not really sure how to make it better/improve/change it.
The ability is fine, it just doesn't need an ability word IMO.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Was protection from white correct? I'm not seeing how that works when you want to haave a white dude. Protection from red or black seems better.
I can't believe I didn't catch that when I posted it. Thanks.
Here's the fixed version, with the wording similar to Griffin Rider:
Knight of Elandria :1mana::symw:
Creature - Human Knight (U)
Protection from black
If you control another Knight, Knight of Elandria has vigilance.
2/1
I do agree that having the Knight Pact wording is nice to see at a glance, but it feels a bit more limiting, to me. Having the wording makes it feel more like it needs to be structured a certain strict way, while just allowing cards to have the Griffin Rider wording makes it less strict, I feel. I'm still up in the air, but leaning towards this version.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
X Pact - if you control a/an/another X, (effect happens).
Here's an example:
Knight of Elandria :1mana::symw:
Creature - Human Knight (U)
Protection from white
Knight Pact - If you control another Knight, ~ has vigilance.
2/1
Any advice is welcome and appreciated! And if more examples are needed, just let me know.
I think this is a fine idea but it probably doesn't need it's own ability word.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
Knight of Drakes 1W
Creature - Human Knight (U)
Protection from blue
Drake Pact - Knight of Drakes has flying as long as you control a Drake creature.
2/1
You actually still wouldn't need to call it that, you could just say that "Pact" refers to abilities that require a creature of a certain type to be on the battlefield.
It just feels awkward having "X Pact" since unlike a keyword it feels like you created 100+ different ability words to reference these abilities.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
I'm not trying to deter you but adding Pact simply places more words on the card, especially since you still need all the lines of rules text to tell you how having a knight effects Knight of Elandria works.
When I showed the example with X Pact, it was meant as a way to show the basic skeleton of the concept. Sorry for not making that clear. As for your suggestion, could you possibly show an example of what you mean by using the creature's class in the ability? I just want to make sure I understand what you're saying.
As for the ability in general, the flavor behind it was similar groups working together, getting bonuses for doing so. It was also on a few spells, that make the normal attributes of the spell better.
This ability was a big part of what I had going, so I'm not really sure how to make it better/improve/change it.
I like this a lot, it's nice and simple.
The ability is fine, it just doesn't need an ability word IMO.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
I can't believe I didn't catch that when I posted it. Thanks.
Here's the fixed version, with the wording similar to Griffin Rider:
Knight of Elandria :1mana::symw:
Creature - Human Knight (U)
Protection from black
If you control another Knight, Knight of Elandria has vigilance.
2/1
I do agree that having the Knight Pact wording is nice to see at a glance, but it feels a bit more limiting, to me. Having the wording makes it feel more like it needs to be structured a certain strict way, while just allowing cards to have the Griffin Rider wording makes it less strict, I feel. I'm still up in the air, but leaning towards this version.