Void Angel
Artifact Creature - Angel
If a player would win the game, that player loses the game instead. In it's heart lies the despair of mortality.
4/4
I realised it would make no sense in my block. I don't have any ways to win the game! So I decided to make a cycle. They all cost 1 mana. They're all 1/1. They all have a a trigger or condition that makes you "win the game". And finally, they all have a drawback that will prevent will make it more difficult to fulfil their conditions. I only have two set in stone, here they be:
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
Whenever the tenth spell of a turn is played, you win the game.
1/1
I feel like the blue guy should make you put cards from your hand on top of your library, then require loads of cards in hand, the white something todo with life, and the green with lands? Any help greatly appreciated!
Now, after making this guy,
Masochistic Horror :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature - Horror
Trample
Creatures and spells your opponents control have deathtouch.
5/6
I thought there should be a guy that gives them protection! Then i realise that this, too, could be a cycle.
Compassionate Saviour :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature - Spirit
Lifelink
Creatures your opponents control have protection from Compassionate Saviour.
5/5
The red guy could give them haste? Please tell me your thoughts!
Paroxystic seeker -- Storm decks will typically cast 9 spells before finishing the game with tendrils of agony. Reducing tendrils to a 1cc spell might be a bit much. It doesn't even have to be the last spell.
Does void angel prevent losing the game?
For example, Player A has the angel in play, then casts Pact of Negation (or any other similar spell that will cause instant loss). Does Player B now lose (since he would win the game) or is it a draw? If B loses, void angel blows platinum angel out of the water.
Void Angel
Artifact Creature - Angel
If a player would win the game, that player loses the game instead. In it's heart lies the despair of mortality.
4/4
Game wise i would say its considered winning if all opponents lose, so you might be able to force a draw with Pacts.
However the card is in itself pretty strange as the Replacement only happens in very rare cases and most "you win" cards tend to be very boring simply because they are "All or nothing".
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
This is for sure broken, simply because its not "that" hard to get 4 of this in play, especially as its cheap enough to search.
And allways consider "clones" in this case, theirs Mirror Weave if you want to win the game immediatly with 4 creatures and such cards.
So all in all the card has a bunch of problems and its overall boring because it is horrible bad if it doesnt "win" and if it wins the game is over.
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
Whenever the tenth spell of a turn is played, you win the game.
1/1
A problem with this guy is pretty simpel, you play it as the 9th spell and than win, but here again its either "you win" or a hell boring card like most "you win the game" cards are.
The only real "funny" card so far are Enchantments as they create some szenarios which are "hard" to get and are not in "normal" decks, having 200 cards is special, having 20+ creatures cards in the grave is special (at least was without heavy Dredge), having a massive amount of lifegain is normally no win Option (unless infinited in formats without solutions for that), the new one wants a creature with power 20, all in all they want you to build decks that are not the "normal" plan.
Masochistic Horror :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature - Horror
Trample
Creatures and spells your opponents control have deathtouch.
5/6
Working, but Horrobi does the job better and with more fun.
Compassionate Saviour :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature - Spirit
Lifelink
Creatures your opponents control have protection from Compassionate Saviour.
5/5
Problem with this guy is that it is really useless if they have a creature, and you must give this guy some kind of evasion.
The idea has something, but i would not make the drawbacks "one sided" peops dont like cards that just give a drawback, most the time its a lot better if its an effect for both players, Horrobi for example.
For example, Player A has the angel in play, then casts Pact of Negation (or any other similar spell that will cause instant loss). Does Player B now lose (since he would win the game) or is it a draw? If B loses, void angel blows platinum angel out of the water.
Umm, I'm not exactly sure about the rules here. I think when someone loses the game, they lose and the opponent wins simply because they haven't lost. Now the way I understand it, B would actually win in this circumstance. The only way Void Angel's ability has any relevance, is if a player "wins the game", hence designing a cycle of guys that allow you to win.
@TheOnlyOne: Hahahaha. Thanks for all your positivity!
It's nice to know someone can come on the forums and disregard all the time spent evaluating and designing some cards with a quick 5-minutes-to-write criticism that just tears into creative work and focuses purely on the negative.
So you're saying the acolyte is broken, because if they don't have a way to deal with a 1/1 by your upkeep then you win? haha. Oh and it's not "that" hard to put Swans of Bryn Argoll and Seismic Assault into play either. Just because o combo is possible to pull of, that doesn't make it broken. Competetive, maybe. The acolyte is most definitely not competetive.
As the Seeker, if you play him as the 9th spell of the game, they respond by playing the 10th, and you miss the trigger. He's no more broken that Tendrils of Agony, even though he's cheaper, as he's far less resilient to disruption, and Tendrils was only good because of the cards supporting it.
As for winning the game being boring, I'm not sure that there's a universal definition for what constitutes as fun.
Masochistic Horror has similarities to, but not simply "doing a worse job" than Horobi, Death's Wail. Horobi doesn't die to damage, he dies to being targeted. Horobi allows you to kill their creatures too, the Horror doesn't. Horobi is a 4/4 for 4, the Horror is a 5/6 for 3. I'm glad you really thought about that comparison, instead of just making a quick judgement (and probably biased to assume it's bad, based on the rest of your post), and then moving on. Maybe I thought about horobi? Maybe this guy is far more similar to Phyrexian Negator?
Here you are talking about 1/1s with drawbacks being broken, and you want a 5/5 lifelink for 3 with evasion? Hahahaha. The whole idea is that you can only gain the life if they don't have a creature. Yes the card is bad. Yes the card is interesting!
Some people don't like drawbacks, some people do. These cards definitely don't "just have a drawback". They both have 5 power for 3 mana, AND a keyword ability.
Anyway, thanks for brutally ripping apart the work I spent time on, and disregarding my plea for assistance designing new cards.
Void Angel
Artifact Creature - Angel
If a player would win the game, that player loses the game instead. In it's heart lies the despair of mortality.
4/4
Hrm. This certainly raises some rules questions. Maybe if you made it a cheap activated ability? (I think that would avoid some of the wonkier problems.)
Lead Angel
Artifact Creature โ Angel (R)
4/4
Flying
:1mana:: The next time a player would win the game this turn, instead that player loses the game. "Well that'll go over like a..." โ Odran Scythos, journeyman artificer, last words
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
Hmmm. The main problem with this is that black has absolutely no qualms about finding permanents to sacrifice, especially a little later in the game when you have a few lands or 'thopters to spare. I can see some nasty combos with this thingโnot bad in itself, but perhaps a little too easy.
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
Whenever the tenth spell of a turn is played, you win the game.
1/1
Obvious combo with storm, but otherwise I don't see too many problems with it. I think every color has some sort of answer to this guy, and the condition isn't easy to achieve.
Thought Police
Creature โ Vedalken Wizard (R)
1/1
At end of turn, if no other player has cards in hand and you have ten or more cards in hand, you win the game.
Smug Ascetic
Creature โ Human Monk (R)
1/1
If a source would deal damage to a player, prevent that damage. That player gains life equal to the damage prevented this way.
At end of turn, if you have at least 20 life more than any opponent, you win the game.
Egotistical Grub
Creature โ Worm (R)
1/1
At end of turn, if CARDNAME's combined power and toughness is 30 or more, you win the game. "I wanna be the very best, like no one ever was..."
Just my own quick ideas. You should probably spread them out as a meta-cycle or something, though, because too many "you win" effects can make the game a little skewed.
Masochistic Horror :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature - Horror
Trample
Creatures and spells your opponents control have deathtouch.
5/6
Masochistic Horror :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature โ Horror (R)
5/6
Trample
Whenever a source an opponent controls deals damage to a creature, destroy that creature.
I stand by my suggestion from the previous thread, mostly because I realized that the CompRules agree with me:
Quote from 502.63a »
502.63a Deathtouch is a triggered ability. "Deathtouch" means "Whenever this permanent deals damage to a creature, destroy that creature."
That, and triggered abilities on spells are bad, IMO, unless it's impossible to achieve the desired effect any other way.
Oh, and changing to "sources" unifies things, so artifacts and enchantments and abilities are in. That just makes things easier, I think.
Compassionate Saviour :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature - Spirit
Lifelink
Creatures your opponents control have protection from Compassionate Saviour.
5/5
I think maybe protection is too much of a drawback. How about this, to keep lifelink's effectiveness?
Compassionate Savior :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature โ Spirit
5/5
Lifelink
Whenever CARDNAME deals damage to a creature, regenerate that creature.
or,
Compassionate Savior :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature โ Spirit
5/5
Lifelink
Whenever a creature dealt damage by CARDNAME this turn would be destroyed, regenerate that creature.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do I Contradict Myself? Very Well Then I Contradict Myself.
I played this card and still kicked your ass 3
Artifact
If ~ is in play when you win the game, you also win the next game against the same player.
Meaning, game one I play that card AND win, then I won 2-0 In casual it means you just upped the ass kicking count. If you've multiples in play, then they stack...
Jon Finkel can't be the only man who gets to say "I won 5 times by winning 1 game"
It makes you lose tempo and win less consistently, so it's not really worth playing (except for bragging rights)!
I played this card and still kicked your ass 3
Artifact
If ~ is in play when you win the game, you also win the next game against the same player.
Meaning, game one I play that card AND win, then I won 2-0 In casual it means you just upped the ass kicking count. If you've multiples in play, then they stack...
Jon Finkel can't be the only man who gets to say "I won 5 times by winning 1 game"
It makes you lose tempo and win less consistently, so it's not really worth playing (except for bragging rights)!
Only in Un- land will you see "the next game" on a card, I'm afraid. So you might as well go all out:
Chuck Norris' Bauble
Artifact (M)
:symtap:, Sacrifice CARDNAME: Choose target player. If you win the game this turn, you win the game at the beginning of the next game with the player. What goes a-roundhouse, comes a-roundhouse.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do I Contradict Myself? Very Well Then I Contradict Myself.
@TheOnlyOne: Hahahaha. Thanks for all your positivity!
It's nice to know someone can come on the forums and disregard all the time spent evaluating and designing some cards with a quick 5-minutes-to-write criticism that just tears into creative work and focuses purely on the negative.
Theirs nothing that forces peops to say something positive.
I look at the cards and see points that are bad, especially compared to allready existing cards.
Beside that i cant put the same effort in every post, depends simply on time i spend, daytime and simply if i can see something has a real flavour that works out.
So you're saying the acolyte is broken, because if they don't have a way to deal with a 1/1 by your upkeep then you win? haha.
To be true, every card that says "You Win" is broken per definition, its just a matter how you can get to the needed situation, if its too easy you have the worst case you can ever get to, you simply dont want that as it takes all the fun out of the game when someone simply wins because the card says so, and its allways bad to see someone play a "you win" card, if the card just wants to give a "big" effect its ok, it adds variables to the game, sometimes Overrun reads "You win the game", but it might do nothing and the opponent can react to it.
Funny things are that i know that someone played Battle of the Wits in "Limited" just added Basic Lands and Mulliganed to it, if its in your hand you have a nice way to win the game especially as most opponents cant kill you before turn 6 anyway.
Something that comes near your idea is the Onslaught Akolyte to search for Scion of Darkness, it was quite fun to get it running turn 2, and the important part was that you could play it with other Clerics in the set.
A similiar design point are the searcher in Alara to get the Mythic Rares in the Shard, but they play out a lot worser simply because they dont play out like the Akolyte did and they have a harder to use activation.
Combos are something magic needs, but its a very bad MetaGame when Combo decks are the Ruling Force, so if something gets Banned its pretty much allways a Combo Deck that takes the fun out of the format and Dominates it way too much.
Today WotC trys to compensate some "brutal" decks with cards in the upcomming Sets, for example Ichorid was very hard to hate, until they reprinted Tormods Crypt and the like, Faeries for example get a lot of Hate too in the latest time.
So all in all its a point that can create a big discussion if its good to print more and more "hate" cards or just "survive" the time till a deck rotates out, others are bannings.
Oh and it's not "that" hard to put Swans of Bryn Argoll and Seismic Assault into play either. Just because o combo is possible to pull of, that doesn't make it broken. Competetive, maybe. The acolyte is most definitely not competetive.
Its pretty much impossible to predict what is "competetive" and what not, it matters to much what you have to run the combo, some cards exist for years and become broken because the needed cards are printed, and cards that read "you win" are allways something you can abuse a lot, it just depends what you have to reach the goal the card wants you to get to.
Another big point is the speed of a combo. In most cases combos that go off turn 7+ dont matter in any format, they are nice for casual just because they are possible, but its nothing that breaks any format.
If a combo starts to be ready turn 3 and earlier, than you have a pretty likely Tier1 deck and opponents must pack a track load of Hate to stop you, and even than you can simply win randomly just because of the speed, they dont allways have the right solution and if they dont have it they lose, thats a bad point about combo decks.
A problem with your 1mana creatures is simply that they have a common problem:
You will never ever play them if you cant get the "you win".
Why should someone play one of them? They are 1/1 so the body sucks, i wont play them later on, i just play them when i can win with them, and in that case it doesnt matter what drawback they have, i just win.
I dont really get why you want small creatures to get such an advantage, a "You win" is a very very powerfull effect which makes a lot more sence on a allready strong card to show its omnipotent power.
You win cards have the problem that "You win" is something the opponent cant answer, if it goes of the game is over, nothing else.
If i run a Overrun it might be equally powerfull, but my opponent can simply play Removal, Fog effects, what ever they want, theirs interaction and the game might still continue after i played the card.
Especially in Multiplayer the "You win" shows its evil part. Normally you will smash player by player, but "You win" just ends the game, its over.
A solution for this problem is that you dont win, you let a player lose instead, Door To Nothingness for example shows how this concept works out.
To get you some ideas what i talk (might be hard to understand i know) some examples:
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep if their are 20 or more creature cards in any number of graveyards, you may remove ~ from the game. If you do, return each creature card in each graveyard to play under your control.
1/1
*Here you get a powerfull Living Death from Liliana, its a goal you might not get to all the time and it avoids the "You win" with an effect that is powerfull enough to get you the win, but doesnt use the problematic phrase.
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (U)
Sacrifice ten creatures: Target player loses 10 life.
1/1
Here the idea is something that will give you a bad 1/1 for 1 mana, but the ability is something that will win you games in Limited, and even in constructed, it just tepends what you do and how you can abuse the ability, if you get 20 creatures "somehow" its done, and most the time the singel hit will be enough, and the important is that the card is overall more playable and players can at least give it a shot in Limited and win games with it.
It should never be a goal to get each card to Tier1 power level, this makes Magic just boring and powers up till you reach the "unfun" level when everything is broken.
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, discard a card.
Hellbent - Pay 5 life, sacrifice ~: Each player discards seven cards.
1/1
Other basic, you get the drawback with discard, this allows more interactions with blacks mechanics, some Madness, Unearth, Delve and the like, sacrificing permanents is more or less just bad for you, theirs not much cards that give you an advantage like Academy Rector and the like.
Here again the "You win" parts are avoided with an powerfull effect, but its still nothing that just ends the game.
As the Seeker, if you play him as the 9th spell of the game, they respond by playing the 10th, and you miss the trigger. He's no more broken that Tendrils of Agony, even though he's cheaper, as he's far less resilient to disruption, and Tendrils was only good because of the cards supporting it.
A problem is that your card is "only" playable as the 9th spell, theirs simply no reason to play it early and the drawback is nothing you want to get, nor is the body something you want.
And you should never take Storm cards as a goal, as Storm is a mechanic that is highly broken and pretty much every Storm card is abused allready.
In the end i would go and say that your Seeker is clearly better than any other Storm card, simply because "You win" is something your opponent cant avoid, against Tendrils they can shield with something, have more life than you drain, theirs room, but it still plays out very bad as Tendrils is just the "you win" card in most cases, which doesnt make it a good card to design with.
As for winning the game being boring, I'm not sure that there's a universal definition for what constitutes as fun.
Sure not, but their are some basics:
-Players want interaction.
-Players want flavour (if possible, as much as possible).
-Players want "fairness"
Their might be even more, but this 3 are something everyone should agree to.
If i have 0 interaction with my opponent it makes no difference against what i play and what my opponent does, this eliminates the biggest reason of a card game to play with others, this is most the time true for combo decks, today we get at least an enormous amount of cards that "hate" combo decks so everyone can play cards to force interaction, even if its just minimal (like i kill Gaddog Teak and combo you out).
Its allways a goal for a designer that the card has "flavour", if you make a random Mutant Crocodile with 20/20 power haste and double strike you might have a random design, but theirs no reason in the card.
The best cards in the flavour point are what explain themself just by the Picture, the name, or because the flavourtext works out perfect.
some examples might be Bird of Paradise, they are Birds so they simply should "fly", they make all mana as "Paradise" is something you expect that, and they are cheap little 0/1 creatures, again i expect a "bird" to be weak.
Bigger examples are Legends, most the time you give a Legend a big flavour, and abilities that work with that and get into the character.
Fairness means that the card should be balanced and play out that it works as you want it to work. Ancestral Recall for example is absolutly not fair, it is a powerlevel that simply drives players to play it, no matter what, if the card is colored you can easy detect this problem as players try what they can to play it, Magic is ok as long as the number of "unfair" cards is low, if you have to much you have a high risk that players will combine them and create broken decks.
Fairness means that a color should get what the Colorwheel wants it to have. Peops scream out if black gets enchantment or artifact hate, ofcourse it can get it, but not in the same way as Green, in the end its not a problem as you can easy go for Multicolor cards like Putrefy that fill this holes.
If all cards are "fair" you have a very balanced game, but in the end magic is a Trading card game, so you never "will" archieve this goal, as some cards should be "a little" better than others.
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever the third spell of a turn is played, ~ deals 1 damage to target creature or player.
Whenever the tenth spell of a turn is played, ~ deals 10 damage to creature and player.
1/1
So the question here is if you "need" the "you win" part. Isnt it enough if you just get something "big" instead of the bad "You win" with has pretty much 0 flavour for a small random goblin.
I simply scale the card down and give it something "red" that makes the card good for everyone "somehow" and you can run it in Limited.
Its not hard to get the 3rd spell a turn, especially with some Instants and more burn, if you ever get the 10th you can blast pretty much everything, so it might be a reason to put it in Storm decks, but you might still play it in your normal Beatdown deck or in your Burn deck, it gives players the choice and doesnt force them to follow the card mindless.
You can give each color a design that makes the card "playable" for them and a potentially powerfull effect that might be pretty much impossible to archive unprepared, in the end they play out a lot better.
NONE of te cards are functionally similar to what he created.. you have this way of cutting down his ideas without directly saying it, and it doesn't help. That and reformatting his card completely has nothing to do with the topic. Get a grip on your ADHD and try to focus here.
Egotistical Grub
Creature — Worm (R)
1/1
At end of turn, if CARDNAME's combined power and toughness is 30 or more, you win the game. "I wanna be the very best, like no one ever was..."
^ awesome idea. I would actually se it to 20 and set the win to upkeep, because a forced thirty would be a little too far out of range to be possible, and if somewhat possible its an unreasonable intsa-win. While set at 20, upkeep leaves it loads of time to be terminated, path'd, swapped, ok anything else that works. Much moe, this is a "build around me" card. the whole deck would require permanent pumping.
Masochistic Horror :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature - Horror
Trample
Creatures and spells your opponents control have deathtouch.
5/6
About ▒▒▒▒ing time, spells get deathouch. Although,I I'd figure its come on an actualy spell tohugh, that had a soul's grace/might/fire effect with deathtough tacked on.
Compassionate Saviour :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature - Spirit
Lifelink
Creatures your opponents control have protection from Compassionate Saviour.
5/5
Unfortunately, i have to agree with the essay man on this one. While 5/5 with lifelink and evasion is still broken, it should have a built in method for getting through things. I was thinknig...
Compassionate Saviour :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature - Spirit
Lifelink
Creatures your opponents control have protection from Compassionate Saviour.
Compassionate Saviour has Flying as long each opponent has more creatures than you, and ~ is the only creature you control.
5/5
Loads of text, but it should be something wordy like that.
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
^Your an idiot if you lose to this, but perfectly balanced.
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
Whenever the tenth spell of a turn is played, you win the game.
1/1
Could be pushed to 2/2 or 2/3 for the serious back draft effect. That can/will kill you a lot faster than you think it would, and the only way the effect would win you the game is if you were storming, which would have won the game anyway.
It's understandable blue control players would be shocked and in denial at the notion of this card, since their decks have been dominating multiple formats for an eternity yet they've curiously never once had to deal with any counter-hosers that weren't ineffectual, narrow CRAP.
Theirs nothing that forces peops to say something positive.
I look at the cards and see points that are bad, especially compared to allready existing cards.
Beside that i cant put the same effort in every post, depends simply on time i spend, daytime and simply if i can see something has a real flavour that works out.
Ok, so I can understand where you're coming from, but I feel like you might have missed a point. That point is this:
Void Angel
Artifact Creature - Angel
If a player would win the game, that player loses the game instead. In it's heart lies the despair of mortality.
4/4
As I said in my first post, this cycle was designed when I realised Void Angel was useless in this set, as it lacked a way to "win". So changing the win effect to powerful effects is pointless.
Another big point is the speed of a combo. In most cases combos that go off turn 7+ dont matter in any format, they are nice for casual just because they are possible, but its nothing that breaks any format.
If a combo starts to be ready turn 3 and earlier, than you have a pretty likely Tier1 deck and opponents must pack a track load of Hate to stop you, and even than you can simply win randomly just because of the speed, they dont allways have the right solution and if they dont have it they lose, thats a bad point about combo decks.
I challenge you to make a combo deck around this guy that wins turn 3, or even 4 or 5 consistently without losing horribly to just 1 removal spell.
Combos are something magic needs, but its a very bad MetaGame when Combo decks are the Ruling Force, so if something gets Banned its pretty much allways a Combo Deck that takes the fun out of the format and Dominates it way too much.
Today WotC trys to compensate some "brutal" decks with cards in the upcomming Sets, for example Ichorid was very hard to hate, until they reprinted Tormods Crypt and the like, Faeries for example get a lot of Hate too in the latest time.
The last bannings in extended were against control decks (Sensei's Divining Top), and the last ones in standard were against aggro (50% of the Raffinity deck).
Its allways a goal for a designer that the card has "flavour", if you make a random Mutant Crocodile with 20/20 power haste and double strike you might have a random design, but theirs no reason in the card.
The best cards in the flavour point are what explain themself just by the Picture, the name, or because the flavourtext works out perfect.
some examples might be Bird of Paradise, they are Birds so they simply should "fly", they make all mana as "Paradise" is something you expect that, and they are cheap little 0/1 creatures, again i expect a "bird" to be weak.
Bigger examples are Legends, most the time you give a Legend a big flavour, and abilities that work with that and get into the character.
If you can't see the flavour of my guy, I'll spell it out. He's a ritual caster that requires frequent sacrifices so that he can cast his ritual. He himself is weak, but he wields strong and dangerous potential. When enough of these cultists gather together, and they all make a sacrifice together (because if you have 4 in play, you sacrifice 4 permanents), They can bring the end of the world. Now, what part of the design doesn't fit this flavour, and what part looks like "random 20/20 doublestrike"?
@Felecorr: Thanks for the encouragement and for your thoughts.
I agree with Egotistical Grub (thanks to valros for this suggestion), I'm not sure how I'll execute it yet, but it will definitely be along this line. It needs a drawback though. Maybe he removes all +1/+! counters from your permanents every turn? We'll see.
Glad to see you like Masochistic Horror the way he is. I can see where Valros i coming from, that the ruling is awkward, but I feel it does a lot for the card's elegance to be worded the way it is. Abou Compassionate Saviour: like the 1 mana guys that win the game, this cycle is not intended to be competetive as such (although I feel the Horror would certainly be), but more johnny and just 3 mana 5 power with some awkward drawback. I'm fine with the card sucking.
Again, glad you like my Acolyte. I can see that he's a problem because you can put his ability on the stack, the flash a bunch into play or mirrorweave him or something. I know that's awful for constructed, but it's not really how I intended him to be used, and it would make some casual players sad (although others would cheer).
I know exactly how fast the Seeker would kill you. Again, these are johnny cards above all else. He is supposed to be a storm win condition, but I still don't like the way (flavourwise) he can be played near the end of the storm chain.
I think I'll change him to look like this:
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
At end of turn, if Paroxystic seeker has dealt 10 or more damage to players this turn, you win the game.
1/1
Might of Oaks and Soul's Fire anyone?
This means he still has the storm path up his sleeve, but he has other options too.
Ok, so for the green guy, I want a trigger much like the Grubs, any ideas on his downside? For the white guy I was thinking something like "If it's enchanted by 5 or more auras...", but I need him made in such a way that Replenish doesn't instant win (like it doesn't anyway). Finally, not sure on the blue guy's win condition, but i like the drawback "Whenever you draw a card, put a card from your hand on the bottom of your library."
Any more ideas for the drawback fatties? Greengives indestructible? Red gives haste? Blue unblockable? All help appreciated!
Ok, so for the green guy, I want a trigger much like the Grubs, any ideas on his downside?
I think that a sufficiently high trigger would be enough of a downside, since it forces you to pump him with a lot of effects, so your opponent pretty much knows exactly what you'll be doing with them so he can ready up some removal.
For the white guy I was thinking something like "If it's enchanted by 5 or more auras...", but I need him made in such a way that Replenish doesn't instant win (like it doesn't anyway).
Methodical Boddhisatva
Creature โ Human Monk (R)
1/1
At the beginning of your upkeep, if five or more Auras are attached to CARDNAME, you win the game.
Whenever an Aura becomes attached to CARDNAME beyond the first each turn, destroy that Aura.
That way you can't lump 'em all on at once. You might be able to tone down the magic number, too, since 5 Auras at 1 per turn and a 1/1 guy is total jank. But Johnny jank.
Finally, not sure on the blue guy's win condition, but i like the drawback "Whenever you draw a card, put a card from your hand on the bottom of your library."
That definitely makes for an annoying-as-@#$% restriction to a hand-size win condition. But without a reset effect, you could just play it and win without drawing cards, and I dunno if that would all fit nicely on a single card. But it would make a really interesting thing...
Recursive Engine :1mana::symu:
Artifact (R)
When CARDNAME comes into play, put the cards in your hand on the bottom of your library, then put that many cards from the top of your library into your hand.
If you would draw a card, instead put a card from your hand on the bottom of your library, then put the top card of your library into your hand.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do I Contradict Myself? Very Well Then I Contradict Myself.
I tryd to explain why "you win the game" effects tend to be overall not fun, and why cards tend to have just "big" effects instead of "you win the game".
Flavourwise "you wint he game" is very Omnipotent, so its allready pretty strange that a 1/1 is capable of that, thats what i mean with "flavour" of the cards, its like a Llanowar Elf thats says something like:
Omni Elf G
Legendary Creature - Elf, Wizard T: Add G to your manapool. If you have twenty or more green mana in your manapool, you win the game.
1/1
Its an allready strong card, but the effect plays very strange flavourwise, as its a 1/1 Llanowar Elf that is capable of getting into God and win a Game just because it says so.
To get this idea better i would go away form the "you win the game" and translate it into something that might work equal but less Omnipotent:
V2 Omni Elf G
Legendary Creature - Elf, Wizard T: Add G to your manapool. Than if you have twenty or more mana in your manapool, put ten +1/+1 counters on each creature you control.
1/1
Here its an very powerfull effect, it doesnt win instantly and it still gives you a "green" way to win the game, overall more interaction and your opponent can really do something against you winning the game with it.
As I said in my first post, this cycle was designed when I realised Void Angel was useless in this set, as it lacked a way to "win". So changing the win effect to powerful effects is pointless.
I didnt say thats bad, but i commented the cards for themself, and how they play out in Magic.
To be true, it doesnt really help to get a card out of "useless" if you print other "rares" that give it "somehow" interaction, if you see that your Angel has no effect in your set than "thats" a problem to start, it should not be the goal to print a bunch of cards that give it interaction but for themself are very bad again.
A basic point what i "tryd" to get to:
- A 1/1 for 1 mana is bad allready and you wont play it for its body.
- A 1/1 for 1 mana with a "drawback" is even worser and you will never ever play it.
- If the "you win" is to easy to get its boring because its overpowered,
on the other side, if its to hard to get, it ends as a unplayable card that might give a handfull of casual players a fun moment (like pretty much every card in magic) and thats it. If thats the goal, ok, but than its a card like One with Nothing which get played, but players dont overall like the card and the real use is very small.
A problem in the design of your black guy is simply that its drawback will never matter, as theirs no reason to play it turn 1 or play it at all unless you know you will trigger its "you win" part.
The card has to be fun somehow, and if it fails to be a card players want to "play out" theirs a small reason to play the card at all.
So lets start with something:
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
1) Its completly useless in Limited as you will never have 4 in your Pool anyway.
2) you will not play it as theirs absolutly nothing it does if it cant trigger the you win.
3) If you "can" trigger the you win it will end the game immediatly, theirs no more game involved.
If the interaction you want with this card is just the question:
Do you have removal? No, than you are dead. Yes, than i fail.
This is not a good start for a design if you want it on a 1/1 for 1 mana, cards that do the job are Door to Nothingness and the cycle, but they give hard to reach Goals of Magic, some that "will" occur somehow anyway with a possible state or states you must build the deck around.
The existing exampels for "you win the game" are:
Helix Pinnacle : Forces you to have a giant amount of mana /and/or Time.
Darksteel Reactor : Forces you to have either a lot of "time" or ways to increase or double the counters, especially as Mirrodin had a Theme for Charge counters.
Test of Endurance : Makes Lifegain into a source of victory.
Mortal Combat : Idea is that blacks "removal" will get you the victory (however doesnt work out that great as creatures can go to the grave in multiple ways).
Change Encounter : Makes red "coin flips" a way of victory.
Epic Struggle : Makes greens "tokens" and mass creatures into a way of victory (bad because that will win the game anyway in normal cases).
The new WRG enchantment wants a singel 20 power creature to win, which works flavourwise with the Naya Theme, where the Giants are like Gods and bigger is better.
Battle of the Wits : Makes the "library" into a way of victory.
Barren Glory : Like Cheese Stands Alone, makes a "singel card" a way of victory.
Coalition Victory : Makes the Domain a way of Victory
Door to Nothingness : Like Coalition, just double domain mana.
Theirs not much "you win the game" cards in Magic, and that has a reason i wanted to explain.
Creatures dont have the Omnipotent ability, it doesnt work in flavour if a singel creature can "win" just because it says so.
For creatures it works out a lot better if they just cast something "big", thats allready powerfull enough for a normal creature.
Another important part is that each of this cards wants the player to explore a way to victory they normally would not.
In Magic you aim to get your opponent to 0 life, or 0 library cards, theirs not much more in "normal" Magic, so this cards are good for exactly this reason:
They give you "new" goals.
With this knowledge i can go to explain why your cards dont fullfill this parts:
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
1) The drawback of the sacrifice, it just a drawback and has no interaction at all with the complete card.
2) having 4 of this card isnt really a "black" theme, and refering to "names" is most the time very static and doesnt allow flexible decks.
3) If i randomly get this card out a "rat" will simply "win" the game, how does it do that? It simply goes out and says "Hey guys, im the rat god, plz die", it makes no sence.
/ If you want this card to "summon" a devil, than do so, let it summon a mighty creature like Scion of Darkness or Spirit of the Night, thats better flavour.
/ If you want it to cast a Deadly spell, make that, let it cast a Plague Wind or something, thats all better than the "you win".
Hopefully it gets clear now, if not i give up.
Some of the suggestions of peops go in exactly the way i talk about, they want to give the card a "self interaction" and focus the goal of the card, so its drawback is a part of the card and not just a random "drawback".
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
At end of turn, if Paroxystic seeker has dealt 10 or more damage to players this turn, you win the game.
1/1
This for example is a good idea, but still has some bad parts.
its drawback is now an important part of the card, but its still a card you dont want to play out unless you can win with it, and in that case its not really the great card for this job.
So slighty change the card to:
V2 Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Protection from Red
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
Whenever you are dealt damage, put a Blood counter on ~.
At end of turn, if Paroxystic seeker has 10 or more blood counters on it, it deals 10 damage to each opponent and each creature.
1/1
The start is to get a goal what the card "should" do. I want that the card is for players that damage themself with their red spells like a lot of them do (Earthquake, Flamebreak, Volcanic Fallout, Char and the like).
The card must survive this cards, so Prot red is a important part.
You want to play this card on turn 1, it will fuel itself with counters and finally explode, dealing 10 damage should be enough if you damage each player with your spells anyway.
The card is something players will play with an explore a new way, normally it was just bad to hurt yourself, this way its something good.
Red allready has so much "storm" cards it doesnt make sence to make more especially "worser" that will kill yourself (in Storm theirs Empty the Warrens and Grapeshot, they are allready enough, theirs no need for a "you win the game" random goblin).
Other card idea:
Methodical Boddhisatva
Creature โ Human Monk (R)
At the beginning of your upkeep, if five or more Auras are attached to CARDNAME, you win the game.
Whenever an Aura becomes attached to CARDNAME beyond the first each turn, return that Aura to its owners hand.
1/1
Here its a good start. The card wants players to play a lot of Auras and tunr them into a win option, thats something that works out, it doesnt need to be competitive or broken, it does its job allready (never try to force cards to be Constructed cards, that just makes the set boring or overpowered which is unfun again as Magic tends to trump it over and over, each set has to give something better to stay Constructed worthy).
The idea to "destroy" the auras might be not the best, it might be enough if the aura is just "bounced" back, so it allows some ways for ComesIntoPlay Auras like Galvanic Arc, and with this small change we give the card a nice additional way to get played.
But here again its a question if the card really wants the "you win the game" part, or if it isnt enough to give it a big boost, the card might be strong enough anyway.
So hopefully you get the points i mention, and never think someone will blame you for your cards, i just say what i think about cards and whats good or bad about them, and if my opinion isnt yours, it doesnt mean i try to blame peops.
@TheOnlyOne. Yep, I get where you're coming from. I just don't agree with you.
The only thing I'd like to say (and I feel I shouldn't, as we're probably better off banging our heads against the wall than trin to convince each other) is that there is, in fact, interaction. You're right, if he fails to win, he did nothing. Lame interaction. If he succeeds in winning there (maybe) was no interaction. If, however, you play him and try for the win, but an opponent has a way to stop you, but you have a way to stop them... oh my god, INTERACTION! I mean, combat isn't the only way to interact in magic, and that's pretty much the only way this guy seriously bypasses. If you he gets hit with Thoughtseize, that's interaction. If he gets shocked with his trigger on the stack, that's interaction. If they do nothing, they lose. Boring, huh? But maybe they do nothing to block your Akroma, Angel of Wrath, either. Same result. Anyway, I'm done trying to convince an already-convinced. Thanks for the input, though.
@Valros: Oh I get that it's sufficiently hard to make him that big, but in the interest of the cycle, I think he needs one. "Creatures your opponents control get +1/+1" would be nice, but has very little interaction. I think his win the game trigger will end up looking like this: Whenever CARDNAME attacks, if it's combined power and toughness are X or greater, you win the game. Partially to stop double Righteousness (although, that would be pretty sweet!), but mostly to give Pacifism effects more power against him.
I like the idea for the white guy, but the wording is pretty clunky.
For the blue guy I was thinking some kind of "number of cards in hand", but as you said, it's too easy to get around. Also Evacuate is too broken with these effects. Maybe "When CARDNAME leaves play, you win the game if you have drawn X or more cards this turn."?
Void Angel
Artifact Creature - Angel
If a player would win the game, that player loses the game instead.
In it's heart lies the despair of mortality.
4/4
I realised it would make no sense in my block. I don't have any ways to win the game! So I decided to make a cycle. They all cost 1 mana. They're all 1/1. They all have a a trigger or condition that makes you "win the game". And finally, they all have a drawback that will prevent will make it more difficult to fulfil their conditions. I only have two set in stone, here they be:
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
Whenever the tenth spell of a turn is played, you win the game.
1/1
I feel like the blue guy should make you put cards from your hand on top of your library, then require loads of cards in hand, the white something todo with life, and the green with lands? Any help greatly appreciated!
Now, after making this guy,
Masochistic Horror :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature - Horror
Trample
Creatures and spells your opponents control have deathtouch.
5/6
I thought there should be a guy that gives them protection! Then i realise that this, too, could be a cycle.
Compassionate Saviour :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature - Spirit
Lifelink
Creatures your opponents control have protection from Compassionate Saviour.
5/5
The red guy could give them haste? Please tell me your thoughts!
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=504072
Does void angel prevent losing the game?
For example, Player A has the angel in play, then casts Pact of Negation (or any other similar spell that will cause instant loss). Does Player B now lose (since he would win the game) or is it a draw? If B loses, void angel blows platinum angel out of the water.
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
Artifact Creature - Angel
If a player would win the game, that player loses the game instead.
In it's heart lies the despair of mortality.
4/4
Game wise i would say its considered winning if all opponents lose, so you might be able to force a draw with Pacts.
However the card is in itself pretty strange as the Replacement only happens in very rare cases and most "you win" cards tend to be very boring simply because they are "All or nothing".
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
This is for sure broken, simply because its not "that" hard to get 4 of this in play, especially as its cheap enough to search.
And allways consider "clones" in this case, theirs Mirror Weave if you want to win the game immediatly with 4 creatures and such cards.
So all in all the card has a bunch of problems and its overall boring because it is horrible bad if it doesnt "win" and if it wins the game is over.
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
Whenever the tenth spell of a turn is played, you win the game.
1/1
A problem with this guy is pretty simpel, you play it as the 9th spell and than win, but here again its either "you win" or a hell boring card like most "you win the game" cards are.
The only real "funny" card so far are Enchantments as they create some szenarios which are "hard" to get and are not in "normal" decks, having 200 cards is special, having 20+ creatures cards in the grave is special (at least was without heavy Dredge), having a massive amount of lifegain is normally no win Option (unless infinited in formats without solutions for that), the new one wants a creature with power 20, all in all they want you to build decks that are not the "normal" plan.
Masochistic Horror :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature - Horror
Trample
Creatures and spells your opponents control have deathtouch.
5/6
Working, but Horrobi does the job better and with more fun.
Compassionate Saviour :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature - Spirit
Lifelink
Creatures your opponents control have protection from Compassionate Saviour.
5/5
Problem with this guy is that it is really useless if they have a creature, and you must give this guy some kind of evasion.
The idea has something, but i would not make the drawbacks "one sided" peops dont like cards that just give a drawback, most the time its a lot better if its an effect for both players, Horrobi for example.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ #BlueLivesMatter ๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ
Umm, I'm not exactly sure about the rules here. I think when someone loses the game, they lose and the opponent wins simply because they haven't lost. Now the way I understand it, B would actually win in this circumstance. The only way Void Angel's ability has any relevance, is if a player "wins the game", hence designing a cycle of guys that allow you to win.
@TheOnlyOne: Hahahaha. Thanks for all your positivity!
It's nice to know someone can come on the forums and disregard all the time spent evaluating and designing some cards with a quick 5-minutes-to-write criticism that just tears into creative work and focuses purely on the negative.
So you're saying the acolyte is broken, because if they don't have a way to deal with a 1/1 by your upkeep then you win? haha. Oh and it's not "that" hard to put Swans of Bryn Argoll and Seismic Assault into play either. Just because o combo is possible to pull of, that doesn't make it broken. Competetive, maybe. The acolyte is most definitely not competetive.
As the Seeker, if you play him as the 9th spell of the game, they respond by playing the 10th, and you miss the trigger. He's no more broken that Tendrils of Agony, even though he's cheaper, as he's far less resilient to disruption, and Tendrils was only good because of the cards supporting it.
As for winning the game being boring, I'm not sure that there's a universal definition for what constitutes as fun.
Masochistic Horror has similarities to, but not simply "doing a worse job" than Horobi, Death's Wail. Horobi doesn't die to damage, he dies to being targeted. Horobi allows you to kill their creatures too, the Horror doesn't. Horobi is a 4/4 for 4, the Horror is a 5/6 for 3. I'm glad you really thought about that comparison, instead of just making a quick judgement (and probably biased to assume it's bad, based on the rest of your post), and then moving on. Maybe I thought about horobi? Maybe this guy is far more similar to Phyrexian Negator?
Here you are talking about 1/1s with drawbacks being broken, and you want a 5/5 lifelink for 3 with evasion? Hahahaha. The whole idea is that you can only gain the life if they don't have a creature. Yes the card is bad. Yes the card is interesting!
Some people don't like drawbacks, some people do. These cards definitely don't "just have a drawback". They both have 5 power for 3 mana, AND a keyword ability.
Anyway, thanks for brutally ripping apart the work I spent time on, and disregarding my plea for assistance designing new cards.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=504072
Hrm. This certainly raises some rules questions. Maybe if you made it a cheap activated ability? (I think that would avoid some of the wonkier problems.)
Lead Angel
Artifact Creature โ Angel (R)
4/4
Flying
:1mana:: The next time a player would win the game this turn, instead that player loses the game.
"Well that'll go over like a..."
โ Odran Scythos, journeyman artificer, last words
Hmmm. The main problem with this is that black has absolutely no qualms about finding permanents to sacrifice, especially a little later in the game when you have a few lands or 'thopters to spare. I can see some nasty combos with this thingโnot bad in itself, but perhaps a little too easy.
Obvious combo with storm, but otherwise I don't see too many problems with it. I think every color has some sort of answer to this guy, and the condition isn't easy to achieve.
For the rest of the cycle, I'd suggest looking at the Odyssey block enchantments like Battle of Wits, Test of Endurance, and Epic Struggle. Maybe something along these lines?
Thought Police
Creature โ Vedalken Wizard (R)
1/1
At end of turn, if no other player has cards in hand and you have ten or more cards in hand, you win the game.
Smug Ascetic
Creature โ Human Monk (R)
1/1
If a source would deal damage to a player, prevent that damage. That player gains life equal to the damage prevented this way.
At end of turn, if you have at least 20 life more than any opponent, you win the game.
Egotistical Grub
Creature โ Worm (R)
1/1
At end of turn, if CARDNAME's combined power and toughness is 30 or more, you win the game.
"I wanna be the very best, like no one ever was..."
Just my own quick ideas. You should probably spread them out as a meta-cycle or something, though, because too many "you win" effects can make the game a little skewed.
Masochistic Horror :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature โ Horror (R)
5/6
Trample
Whenever a source an opponent controls deals damage to a creature, destroy that creature.
I stand by my suggestion from the previous thread, mostly because I realized that the CompRules agree with me:
That, and triggered abilities on spells are bad, IMO, unless it's impossible to achieve the desired effect any other way.
Oh, and changing to "sources" unifies things, so artifacts and enchantments and abilities are in. That just makes things easier, I think.
I think maybe protection is too much of a drawback. How about this, to keep lifelink's effectiveness?
Compassionate Savior :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature โ Spirit
5/5
Lifelink
Whenever CARDNAME deals damage to a creature, regenerate that creature.
or,
Compassionate Savior :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature โ Spirit
5/5
Lifelink
Whenever a creature dealt damage by CARDNAME this turn would be destroyed, regenerate that creature.
Very Well Then I Contradict Myself.
I played this card and still kicked your ass 3
Artifact
If ~ is in play when you win the game, you also win the next game against the same player.
Meaning, game one I play that card AND win, then I won 2-0 In casual it means you just upped the ass kicking count. If you've multiples in play, then they stack...
Jon Finkel can't be the only man who gets to say "I won 5 times by winning 1 game"
It makes you lose tempo and win less consistently, so it's not really worth playing (except for bragging rights)!
Only in Un- land will you see "the next game" on a card, I'm afraid. So you might as well go all out:
Chuck Norris' Bauble
Artifact (M)
:symtap:, Sacrifice CARDNAME: Choose target player. If you win the game this turn, you win the game at the beginning of the next game with the player.
What goes a-roundhouse, comes a-roundhouse.
Very Well Then I Contradict Myself.
"if you win the game, win the match instead?"
btw, i'd love to see an Un-tourney sometime
Theirs nothing that forces peops to say something positive.
I look at the cards and see points that are bad, especially compared to allready existing cards.
Beside that i cant put the same effort in every post, depends simply on time i spend, daytime and simply if i can see something has a real flavour that works out.
To be true, every card that says "You Win" is broken per definition, its just a matter how you can get to the needed situation, if its too easy you have the worst case you can ever get to, you simply dont want that as it takes all the fun out of the game when someone simply wins because the card says so, and its allways bad to see someone play a "you win" card, if the card just wants to give a "big" effect its ok, it adds variables to the game, sometimes Overrun reads "You win the game", but it might do nothing and the opponent can react to it.
Funny things are that i know that someone played Battle of the Wits in "Limited" just added Basic Lands and Mulliganed to it, if its in your hand you have a nice way to win the game especially as most opponents cant kill you before turn 6 anyway.
Something that comes near your idea is the Onslaught Akolyte to search for Scion of Darkness, it was quite fun to get it running turn 2, and the important part was that you could play it with other Clerics in the set.
A similiar design point are the searcher in Alara to get the Mythic Rares in the Shard, but they play out a lot worser simply because they dont play out like the Akolyte did and they have a harder to use activation.
Combos are something magic needs, but its a very bad MetaGame when Combo decks are the Ruling Force, so if something gets Banned its pretty much allways a Combo Deck that takes the fun out of the format and Dominates it way too much.
Today WotC trys to compensate some "brutal" decks with cards in the upcomming Sets, for example Ichorid was very hard to hate, until they reprinted Tormods Crypt and the like, Faeries for example get a lot of Hate too in the latest time.
So all in all its a point that can create a big discussion if its good to print more and more "hate" cards or just "survive" the time till a deck rotates out, others are bannings.
Its pretty much impossible to predict what is "competetive" and what not, it matters to much what you have to run the combo, some cards exist for years and become broken because the needed cards are printed, and cards that read "you win" are allways something you can abuse a lot, it just depends what you have to reach the goal the card wants you to get to.
Another big point is the speed of a combo. In most cases combos that go off turn 7+ dont matter in any format, they are nice for casual just because they are possible, but its nothing that breaks any format.
If a combo starts to be ready turn 3 and earlier, than you have a pretty likely Tier1 deck and opponents must pack a track load of Hate to stop you, and even than you can simply win randomly just because of the speed, they dont allways have the right solution and if they dont have it they lose, thats a bad point about combo decks.
A problem with your 1mana creatures is simply that they have a common problem:
You will never ever play them if you cant get the "you win".
Why should someone play one of them? They are 1/1 so the body sucks, i wont play them later on, i just play them when i can win with them, and in that case it doesnt matter what drawback they have, i just win.
I dont really get why you want small creatures to get such an advantage, a "You win" is a very very powerfull effect which makes a lot more sence on a allready strong card to show its omnipotent power.
You win cards have the problem that "You win" is something the opponent cant answer, if it goes of the game is over, nothing else.
If i run a Overrun it might be equally powerfull, but my opponent can simply play Removal, Fog effects, what ever they want, theirs interaction and the game might still continue after i played the card.
Especially in Multiplayer the "You win" shows its evil part. Normally you will smash player by player, but "You win" just ends the game, its over.
A solution for this problem is that you dont win, you let a player lose instead, Door To Nothingness for example shows how this concept works out.
To get you some ideas what i talk (might be hard to understand i know) some examples:
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep if their are 20 or more creature cards in any number of graveyards, you may remove ~ from the game. If you do, return each creature card in each graveyard to play under your control.
1/1
*Here you get a powerfull Living Death from Liliana, its a goal you might not get to all the time and it avoids the "You win" with an effect that is powerfull enough to get you the win, but doesnt use the problematic phrase.
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (U)
Sacrifice ten creatures: Target player loses 10 life.
1/1
Here the idea is something that will give you a bad 1/1 for 1 mana, but the ability is something that will win you games in Limited, and even in constructed, it just tepends what you do and how you can abuse the ability, if you get 20 creatures "somehow" its done, and most the time the singel hit will be enough, and the important is that the card is overall more playable and players can at least give it a shot in Limited and win games with it.
It should never be a goal to get each card to Tier1 power level, this makes Magic just boring and powers up till you reach the "unfun" level when everything is broken.
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, discard a card.
Hellbent - Pay 5 life, sacrifice ~: Each player discards seven cards.
1/1
Other basic, you get the drawback with discard, this allows more interactions with blacks mechanics, some Madness, Unearth, Delve and the like, sacrificing permanents is more or less just bad for you, theirs not much cards that give you an advantage like Academy Rector and the like.
Here again the "You win" parts are avoided with an powerfull effect, but its still nothing that just ends the game.
A problem is that your card is "only" playable as the 9th spell, theirs simply no reason to play it early and the drawback is nothing you want to get, nor is the body something you want.
And you should never take Storm cards as a goal, as Storm is a mechanic that is highly broken and pretty much every Storm card is abused allready.
In the end i would go and say that your Seeker is clearly better than any other Storm card, simply because "You win" is something your opponent cant avoid, against Tendrils they can shield with something, have more life than you drain, theirs room, but it still plays out very bad as Tendrils is just the "you win" card in most cases, which doesnt make it a good card to design with.
Sure not, but their are some basics:
-Players want interaction.
-Players want flavour (if possible, as much as possible).
-Players want "fairness"
Their might be even more, but this 3 are something everyone should agree to.
If i have 0 interaction with my opponent it makes no difference against what i play and what my opponent does, this eliminates the biggest reason of a card game to play with others, this is most the time true for combo decks, today we get at least an enormous amount of cards that "hate" combo decks so everyone can play cards to force interaction, even if its just minimal (like i kill Gaddog Teak and combo you out).
Its allways a goal for a designer that the card has "flavour", if you make a random Mutant Crocodile with 20/20 power haste and double strike you might have a random design, but theirs no reason in the card.
The best cards in the flavour point are what explain themself just by the Picture, the name, or because the flavourtext works out perfect.
some examples might be Bird of Paradise, they are Birds so they simply should "fly", they make all mana as "Paradise" is something you expect that, and they are cheap little 0/1 creatures, again i expect a "bird" to be weak.
Bigger examples are Legends, most the time you give a Legend a big flavour, and abilities that work with that and get into the character.
Fairness means that the card should be balanced and play out that it works as you want it to work. Ancestral Recall for example is absolutly not fair, it is a powerlevel that simply drives players to play it, no matter what, if the card is colored you can easy detect this problem as players try what they can to play it, Magic is ok as long as the number of "unfair" cards is low, if you have to much you have a high risk that players will combine them and create broken decks.
Fairness means that a color should get what the Colorwheel wants it to have. Peops scream out if black gets enchantment or artifact hate, ofcourse it can get it, but not in the same way as Green, in the end its not a problem as you can easy go for Multicolor cards like Putrefy that fill this holes.
If all cards are "fair" you have a very balanced game, but in the end magic is a Trading card game, so you never "will" archieve this goal, as some cards should be "a little" better than others.
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever the third spell of a turn is played, ~ deals 1 damage to target creature or player.
Whenever the tenth spell of a turn is played, ~ deals 10 damage to creature and player.
1/1
So the question here is if you "need" the "you win" part. Isnt it enough if you just get something "big" instead of the bad "You win" with has pretty much 0 flavour for a small random goblin.
I simply scale the card down and give it something "red" that makes the card good for everyone "somehow" and you can run it in Limited.
Its not hard to get the 3rd spell a turn, especially with some Instants and more burn, if you ever get the 10th you can blast pretty much everything, so it might be a reason to put it in Storm decks, but you might still play it in your normal Beatdown deck or in your Burn deck, it gives players the choice and doesnt force them to follow the card mindless.
You can give each color a design that makes the card "playable" for them and a potentially powerfull effect that might be pretty much impossible to archive unprepared, in the end they play out a lot better.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ #BlueLivesMatter ๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ
NONE of te cards are functionally similar to what he created.. you have this way of cutting down his ideas without directly saying it, and it doesn't help. That and reformatting his card completely has nothing to do with the topic. Get a grip on your ADHD and try to focus here.
Egotistical Grub
Creature — Worm (R)
1/1
At end of turn, if CARDNAME's combined power and toughness is 30 or more, you win the game.
"I wanna be the very best, like no one ever was..."
^ awesome idea. I would actually se it to 20 and set the win to upkeep, because a forced thirty would be a little too far out of range to be possible, and if somewhat possible its an unreasonable intsa-win. While set at 20, upkeep leaves it loads of time to be terminated, path'd, swapped, ok anything else that works. Much moe, this is a "build around me" card. the whole deck would require permanent pumping.
Masochistic Horror :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature - Horror
Trample
Creatures and spells your opponents control have deathtouch.
5/6
About ▒▒▒▒ing time, spells get deathouch. Although,I I'd figure its come on an actualy spell tohugh, that had a soul's grace/might/fire effect with deathtough tacked on.
Compassionate Saviour :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature - Spirit
Lifelink
Creatures your opponents control have protection from Compassionate Saviour.
5/5
Unfortunately, i have to agree with the essay man on this one. While 5/5 with lifelink and evasion is still broken, it should have a built in method for getting through things. I was thinknig...
Compassionate Saviour :1mana::symw::symw:
Creature - Spirit
Lifelink
Creatures your opponents control have protection from Compassionate Saviour.
Compassionate Saviour has Flying as long each opponent has more creatures than you, and ~ is the only creature you control.
5/5
Loads of text, but it should be something wordy like that.
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
^Your an idiot if you lose to this, but perfectly balanced.
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
Whenever the tenth spell of a turn is played, you win the game.
1/1
Could be pushed to 2/2 or 2/3 for the serious back draft effect. That can/will kill you a lot faster than you think it would, and the only way the effect would win you the game is if you were storming, which would have won the game anyway.
Actually, there is. It's the third post here (http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=13768).
Ok, so I can understand where you're coming from, but I feel like you might have missed a point. That point is this:
Void Angel
Artifact Creature - Angel
If a player would win the game, that player loses the game instead.
In it's heart lies the despair of mortality.
4/4
As I said in my first post, this cycle was designed when I realised Void Angel was useless in this set, as it lacked a way to "win". So changing the win effect to powerful effects is pointless.
I challenge you to make a combo deck around this guy that wins turn 3, or even 4 or 5 consistently without losing horribly to just 1 removal spell. The last bannings in extended were against control decks (Sensei's Divining Top), and the last ones in standard were against aggro (50% of the Raffinity deck).
If you can't see the flavour of my guy, I'll spell it out. He's a ritual caster that requires frequent sacrifices so that he can cast his ritual. He himself is weak, but he wields strong and dangerous potential. When enough of these cultists gather together, and they all make a sacrifice together (because if you have 4 in play, you sacrifice 4 permanents), They can bring the end of the world. Now, what part of the design doesn't fit this flavour, and what part looks like "random 20/20 doublestrike"?
@Felecorr: Thanks for the encouragement and for your thoughts.
I agree with Egotistical Grub (thanks to valros for this suggestion), I'm not sure how I'll execute it yet, but it will definitely be along this line. It needs a drawback though. Maybe he removes all +1/+! counters from your permanents every turn? We'll see.
Glad to see you like Masochistic Horror the way he is. I can see where Valros i coming from, that the ruling is awkward, but I feel it does a lot for the card's elegance to be worded the way it is. Abou Compassionate Saviour: like the 1 mana guys that win the game, this cycle is not intended to be competetive as such (although I feel the Horror would certainly be), but more johnny and just 3 mana 5 power with some awkward drawback. I'm fine with the card sucking.
Again, glad you like my Acolyte. I can see that he's a problem because you can put his ability on the stack, the flash a bunch into play or mirrorweave him or something. I know that's awful for constructed, but it's not really how I intended him to be used, and it would make some casual players sad (although others would cheer).
I know exactly how fast the Seeker would kill you. Again, these are johnny cards above all else. He is supposed to be a storm win condition, but I still don't like the way (flavourwise) he can be played near the end of the storm chain.
I think I'll change him to look like this:
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
At end of turn, if Paroxystic seeker has dealt 10 or more damage to players this turn, you win the game.
1/1
Might of Oaks and Soul's Fire anyone?
This means he still has the storm path up his sleeve, but he has other options too.
Ok, so for the green guy, I want a trigger much like the Grubs, any ideas on his downside? For the white guy I was thinking something like "If it's enchanted by 5 or more auras...", but I need him made in such a way that Replenish doesn't instant win (like it doesn't anyway). Finally, not sure on the blue guy's win condition, but i like the drawback "Whenever you draw a card, put a card from your hand on the bottom of your library."
Any more ideas for the drawback fatties? Greengives indestructible? Red gives haste? Blue unblockable? All help appreciated!
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=504072
I think that a sufficiently high trigger would be enough of a downside, since it forces you to pump him with a lot of effects, so your opponent pretty much knows exactly what you'll be doing with them so he can ready up some removal.
Maybe a kind of Rule of Law for Auras? Like,
Methodical Boddhisatva
Creature โ Human Monk (R)
1/1
At the beginning of your upkeep, if five or more Auras are attached to CARDNAME, you win the game.
Whenever an Aura becomes attached to CARDNAME beyond the first each turn, destroy that Aura.
That way you can't lump 'em all on at once. You might be able to tone down the magic number, too, since 5 Auras at 1 per turn and a 1/1 guy is total jank. But Johnny jank.
That definitely makes for an annoying-as-@#$% restriction to a hand-size win condition. But without a reset effect, you could just play it and win without drawing cards, and I dunno if that would all fit nicely on a single card. But it would make a really interesting thing...
Recursive Engine :1mana::symu:
Artifact (R)
When CARDNAME comes into play, put the cards in your hand on the bottom of your library, then put that many cards from the top of your library into your hand.
If you would draw a card, instead put a card from your hand on the bottom of your library, then put the top card of your library into your hand.
Very Well Then I Contradict Myself.
I tryd to explain why "you win the game" effects tend to be overall not fun, and why cards tend to have just "big" effects instead of "you win the game".
Flavourwise "you wint he game" is very Omnipotent, so its allready pretty strange that a 1/1 is capable of that, thats what i mean with "flavour" of the cards, its like a Llanowar Elf thats says something like:
Omni Elf G
Legendary Creature - Elf, Wizard
T: Add G to your manapool. If you have twenty or more green mana in your manapool, you win the game.
1/1
Its an allready strong card, but the effect plays very strange flavourwise, as its a 1/1 Llanowar Elf that is capable of getting into God and win a Game just because it says so.
To get this idea better i would go away form the "you win the game" and translate it into something that might work equal but less Omnipotent:
V2 Omni Elf G
Legendary Creature - Elf, Wizard
T: Add G to your manapool. Than if you have twenty or more mana in your manapool, put ten +1/+1 counters on each creature you control.
1/1
Here its an very powerfull effect, it doesnt win instantly and it still gives you a "green" way to win the game, overall more interaction and your opponent can really do something against you winning the game with it.
I didnt say thats bad, but i commented the cards for themself, and how they play out in Magic.
To be true, it doesnt really help to get a card out of "useless" if you print other "rares" that give it "somehow" interaction, if you see that your Angel has no effect in your set than "thats" a problem to start, it should not be the goal to print a bunch of cards that give it interaction but for themself are very bad again.
A basic point what i "tryd" to get to:
- A 1/1 for 1 mana is bad allready and you wont play it for its body.
- A 1/1 for 1 mana with a "drawback" is even worser and you will never ever play it.
- If the "you win" is to easy to get its boring because its overpowered,
on the other side, if its to hard to get, it ends as a unplayable card that might give a handfull of casual players a fun moment (like pretty much every card in magic) and thats it. If thats the goal, ok, but than its a card like One with Nothing which get played, but players dont overall like the card and the real use is very small.
A problem in the design of your black guy is simply that its drawback will never matter, as theirs no reason to play it turn 1 or play it at all unless you know you will trigger its "you win" part.
The card has to be fun somehow, and if it fails to be a card players want to "play out" theirs a small reason to play the card at all.
So lets start with something:
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
1) Its completly useless in Limited as you will never have 4 in your Pool anyway.
2) you will not play it as theirs absolutly nothing it does if it cant trigger the you win.
3) If you "can" trigger the you win it will end the game immediatly, theirs no more game involved.
If the interaction you want with this card is just the question:
Do you have removal? No, than you are dead. Yes, than i fail.
This is not a good start for a design if you want it on a 1/1 for 1 mana, cards that do the job are Door to Nothingness and the cycle, but they give hard to reach Goals of Magic, some that "will" occur somehow anyway with a possible state or states you must build the deck around.
The existing exampels for "you win the game" are:
Helix Pinnacle : Forces you to have a giant amount of mana /and/or Time.
Darksteel Reactor : Forces you to have either a lot of "time" or ways to increase or double the counters, especially as Mirrodin had a Theme for Charge counters.
Test of Endurance : Makes Lifegain into a source of victory.
Mortal Combat : Idea is that blacks "removal" will get you the victory (however doesnt work out that great as creatures can go to the grave in multiple ways).
Change Encounter : Makes red "coin flips" a way of victory.
Epic Struggle : Makes greens "tokens" and mass creatures into a way of victory (bad because that will win the game anyway in normal cases).
The new WRG enchantment wants a singel 20 power creature to win, which works flavourwise with the Naya Theme, where the Giants are like Gods and bigger is better.
Battle of the Wits : Makes the "library" into a way of victory.
Barren Glory : Like Cheese Stands Alone, makes a "singel card" a way of victory.
Coalition Victory : Makes the Domain a way of Victory
Door to Nothingness : Like Coalition, just double domain mana.
Theirs not much "you win the game" cards in Magic, and that has a reason i wanted to explain.
Creatures dont have the Omnipotent ability, it doesnt work in flavour if a singel creature can "win" just because it says so.
For creatures it works out a lot better if they just cast something "big", thats allready powerfull enough for a normal creature.
Another important part is that each of this cards wants the player to explore a way to victory they normally would not.
In Magic you aim to get your opponent to 0 life, or 0 library cards, theirs not much more in "normal" Magic, so this cards are good for exactly this reason:
They give you "new" goals.
With this knowledge i can go to explain why your cards dont fullfill this parts:
Acolyte of the Final Ritual
Creature - Rat Shaman (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice a permanent. Then, if you control three other creatures named Acolyte of the Final Ritual, you win the game.
1/1
1) The drawback of the sacrifice, it just a drawback and has no interaction at all with the complete card.
2) having 4 of this card isnt really a "black" theme, and refering to "names" is most the time very static and doesnt allow flexible decks.
3) If i randomly get this card out a "rat" will simply "win" the game, how does it do that? It simply goes out and says "Hey guys, im the rat god, plz die", it makes no sence.
/ If you want this card to "summon" a devil, than do so, let it summon a mighty creature like Scion of Darkness or Spirit of the Night, thats better flavour.
/ If you want it to cast a Deadly spell, make that, let it cast a Plague Wind or something, thats all better than the "you win".
Hopefully it gets clear now, if not i give up.
Some of the suggestions of peops go in exactly the way i talk about, they want to give the card a "self interaction" and focus the goal of the card, so its drawback is a part of the card and not just a random "drawback".
Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
At end of turn, if Paroxystic seeker has dealt 10 or more damage to players this turn, you win the game.
1/1
This for example is a good idea, but still has some bad parts.
its drawback is now an important part of the card, but its still a card you dont want to play out unless you can win with it, and in that case its not really the great card for this job.
So slighty change the card to:
V2 Paroxystic Seeker
Creature - Goblin Shaman (r)
Protection from Red
Whenever you play a spell, Paroxystic Seeker deals 1 damage to you.
Whenever you are dealt damage, put a Blood counter on ~.
At end of turn, if Paroxystic seeker has 10 or more blood counters on it, it deals 10 damage to each opponent and each creature.
1/1
The start is to get a goal what the card "should" do. I want that the card is for players that damage themself with their red spells like a lot of them do (Earthquake, Flamebreak, Volcanic Fallout, Char and the like).
The card must survive this cards, so Prot red is a important part.
You want to play this card on turn 1, it will fuel itself with counters and finally explode, dealing 10 damage should be enough if you damage each player with your spells anyway.
The card is something players will play with an explore a new way, normally it was just bad to hurt yourself, this way its something good.
Red allready has so much "storm" cards it doesnt make sence to make more especially "worser" that will kill yourself (in Storm theirs Empty the Warrens and Grapeshot, they are allready enough, theirs no need for a "you win the game" random goblin).
Other card idea:
Methodical Boddhisatva
Creature โ Human Monk (R)
At the beginning of your upkeep, if five or more Auras are attached to CARDNAME, you win the game.
Whenever an Aura becomes attached to CARDNAME beyond the first each turn, return that Aura to its owners hand.
1/1
Here its a good start. The card wants players to play a lot of Auras and tunr them into a win option, thats something that works out, it doesnt need to be competitive or broken, it does its job allready (never try to force cards to be Constructed cards, that just makes the set boring or overpowered which is unfun again as Magic tends to trump it over and over, each set has to give something better to stay Constructed worthy).
The idea to "destroy" the auras might be not the best, it might be enough if the aura is just "bounced" back, so it allows some ways for ComesIntoPlay Auras like Galvanic Arc, and with this small change we give the card a nice additional way to get played.
But here again its a question if the card really wants the "you win the game" part, or if it isnt enough to give it a big boost, the card might be strong enough anyway.
So hopefully you get the points i mention, and never think someone will blame you for your cards, i just say what i think about cards and whats good or bad about them, and if my opinion isnt yours, it doesnt mean i try to blame peops.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ #BlueLivesMatter ๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ
The only thing I'd like to say (and I feel I shouldn't, as we're probably better off banging our heads against the wall than trin to convince each other) is that there is, in fact, interaction. You're right, if he fails to win, he did nothing. Lame interaction. If he succeeds in winning there (maybe) was no interaction. If, however, you play him and try for the win, but an opponent has a way to stop you, but you have a way to stop them... oh my god, INTERACTION! I mean, combat isn't the only way to interact in magic, and that's pretty much the only way this guy seriously bypasses. If you he gets hit with Thoughtseize, that's interaction. If he gets shocked with his trigger on the stack, that's interaction. If they do nothing, they lose. Boring, huh? But maybe they do nothing to block your Akroma, Angel of Wrath, either. Same result. Anyway, I'm done trying to convince an already-convinced. Thanks for the input, though.
@Valros: Oh I get that it's sufficiently hard to make him that big, but in the interest of the cycle, I think he needs one. "Creatures your opponents control get +1/+1" would be nice, but has very little interaction. I think his win the game trigger will end up looking like this: Whenever CARDNAME attacks, if it's combined power and toughness are X or greater, you win the game. Partially to stop double Righteousness (although, that would be pretty sweet!), but mostly to give Pacifism effects more power against him.
I like the idea for the white guy, but the wording is pretty clunky.
For the blue guy I was thinking some kind of "number of cards in hand", but as you said, it's too easy to get around. Also Evacuate is too broken with these effects. Maybe "When CARDNAME leaves play, you win the game if you have drawn X or more cards this turn."?
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=504072