When Spell Martyr enters the battlefield, target opponent reveals their hand. You choose an instant or sorcery card from it. That player casts that card without paying its mana cost if able, and, while that player is choosing targets as part of casting that spell, that player must choose Spell Martyr if able.
2/2
The idea here is a thought experiment as to what a non-black "discard" spell could look like. My main choices here are some combination of white (I'm borrowing from Standard Bearer's oracle wording), blue (Mizzium Meddler and other redirection effects) and red (Possibility Storm and other forms of forced casting). Given that the idea is a non-black version of a normally black effect, that color is unlikely, and green is right out.
I would say black since it involves the reveal of the hand and the potential sacrifice of a creature. Both very black effects. As you pointed out the fact that the spell is effectively discarded also makes it pretty black.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Drop your knees to the floor
Hands to the sky
Give a round of applause
For the great Miss Y!
The effect falls squarely within black's part of the pie so you've missed to goal of nonblack discard. The effect also seems impossible to cost as its best case scenario is a slightly better Duress and its worst case is allowing the opponent a free Chemister's Insight or similar. At B a 2/2 is too much value when it works but at any other cost even its good mode is underwhelming.
If the goal is nonblack discard you should try effects found in other colors to emulate discard. Blue can reasonably get the ability to skip draw steps, but the cost is up for debate. While white's Nevermore can accomplish a similar feat as discard by 'turning off' cards. A 4cmc version that checks the hand before you choose could be good, or a 2 mana version that eats a card in graveyard to stop future copies.
Thanks for the replies. I forgot about Word of Command, but I'm not 100% certain that alone makes this mechanic black. Word is a unique effect that predates the modern color pie, so I would not consider it indicative of anything.
More compelling is the argument that this card behaves like Duress and plays the same role as Duress, so therefore it must be in the same color as Duress, to which I concede. That black is getting more spell theft nowadays enforces this. I do like void_nothing's haste idea, though.
So as for the effect itself in terms of costing, it has to be between Duress and Reversal of Fortune, leaning more towards Reversal, and you also have to factor in a body. 2UBR, 4/4 haste, Giant Wizard? That's a great body to carry a pump spell, enough toughness to eat a burn spell, and not something you'd feel that bad about giving up to a Murder (although you'd probably feel kinda bad, it's still a good creature).
So as for the effect itself in terms of costing, it has to be between Duress and Reversal of Fortune, leaning more towards Reversal, and you also have to factor in a body. 2UBR, 4/4 haste, Giant Wizard? That's a great body to carry a pump spell, enough toughness to eat a burn spell, and not something you'd feel that bad about giving up to a Murder (although you'd probably feel kinda bad, it's still a good creature).
Word of Command and Standard Bearer (especially Word of Command) are both very old cards. Ideally you would draw from something more recent, like the Mizzium Meddler you'd listed.
Mindclaw Shaman and a few other similar cards suggest that forcing opponents to cast instants/sorceries is mostly red, although cards like Talent of the Telepath come close in blue. Captured by the Consulate suggests that target-martyrdom as per Standard Bearer is still within white's colors, though Mizzium Meddler suggests blue can also do it. It's probably not monoblue though, since you don't outright steal the spell most of the time. Red can also change targets of spells as of reasonably recent cards.
So I would say any two of white, red, or blue. I would lean towards red being one of the colors so that you can include haste and benefit from combat tricks as previously suggested. Flash could also let you do so, but that'd effectively amount to instant-speed discard which tends to be a no-go.
Word of Command and Standard Bearer (especially Word of Command) are both very old cards. Ideally you would draw from something more recent, like the Mizzium Meddler you'd listed.
Mindclaw Shaman and a few other similar cards suggest that forcing opponents to cast instants/sorceries is mostly red, although cards like Talent of the Telepath come close in blue. Captured by the Consulate suggests that target-martyrdom as per Standard Bearer is still within white's colors, though Mizzium Meddler suggests blue can also do it. Red can also change targets of spells as of reasonably recent cards.
So I would say any two of white, red, or blue.
You stealing the opponents cards is indeed blue and red, but controlling the opponent is firmly in black. Worst Fears
You stealing the opponents cards is indeed blue and red, but controlling the opponent is firmly in black. Worst Fears
Worst Fears goes a lot farther than just controlling a single instant or sorcery from their hand. To me that seems like saying "Counter target blue instant spell." couldn't be red because countering spells is firmly blue.
EDIT: Or rather, I guess you're saying blue could counter target blue instant spell. Which seems appropriate. I guess the spell martyr effect could be black, but it definitely doesn't need to be, and seems less likely than it being other colors. At the least I would raise an eyebrow if I saw it in monoblack, as opposed to UB or RB
You stealing the opponents cards is indeed blue and red, but controlling the opponent is firmly in black. Worst Fears
Worst Fears goes a lot farther than just controlling a single instant or sorcery from their hand. To me that seems like saying "Counter target blue instant spell." couldn't be red because countering spells is firmly blue.
EDIT: Or rather, I guess you're saying blue could counter target blue instant spell. Which seems appropriate. I guess the spell martyr effect could be black, but it definitely doesn't need to be, and seems less likely than it being other colors. At the least I would raise an eyebrow if I saw it in monoblack, as opposed to UB or RB
I'm glad you saw the reasoning for black on your own. That said, siteing mindclaw and talent as reasons for red and blue is like saying white should get boomerang because it gets Narrow Escape. The effects look similar but are radically different.
I'm glad you saw the reasoning for black on your own. That said, siteing mindclaw and talent as reasons for red and blue is like saying white should get boomerang because it gets Narrow Escape. The effects look similar but are radically different.
That's not a fair comparison. How white and blue use (or don't use, in white's case) bounce is well-established.
Conversely, the Spell Martyr effect doesn't really exist exactly, and the actual closest effect is older than the modern color pie. You're calling it discard and control of a player (clearly black), I'm calling it theft of an instant or sorcery and/or self-sacrifice (instant/sorcery theft being clearly red/blue, self-sacrifice being clearly white). Since no actual discard is happening, and the only choice being made for the player is targeting, from my perspective yours isn't a strong argument for black.
Mindclaw Shaman's existence shows that red can take an instant or sorcery out of someone's hand and cast it, which is the closest existing effect, ignoring very old cards that didn't follow the color pie. Black can't force people to cast spells. The closest existing effect in a recent card that allows black to do so is taking over their whole turn, which is a far greater appeal to superficially similar effects than the relation of Spell Martyr to what Mindclaw Shaman does.
Flavor-wise, this seems like a red-black or white-black card. However, since your card's race is wizard, that would make it red-blue colors. Since this card is a creature whose purpose is to sacrifice, black is a must. In addition, you are forcing an opponent to reveal their hand, which is also black. If you altered this card to simply change the target of the next spell played by target opponent, this could easily be a blue card. Anything that forces your opponent directly to do something is firmly in black. If you created a barrier that prevented an opponent from casting spells until they cast a spell a spell for free targeting the barrier, that could be in blue.
Honestly, I can see this in mono-R. Flavorwise, I don't think the self-sacrifice necessarily implies B; it could be flavored, for instance, as a potion of blind love/rage/whatever, that inspires the target to do their best to reach the Shaman, no matter what. (Or whatever other flavor you want; the whole point of flavor is you can kind of make pretty much anything work.) To me, the self-sacrifice argument is also really undermined by the fact that you might also use it to make them waste pump spells, etc.
Now, my mechanical arguments:
1) I agree that Worst Fears is too far from the effect, and Word of Command too far in the past, to indicate much of relevance.
2) The focus on instants and sorceries, preferably with a target, makes it odd to call this black to me. Yes, black gets Duress, but does it target instants/sorceries specifically? Doing a Gatherer search, I did find Collective Brutality, but that's it (please correct me if you find something else) -- and that specific card is less clear too given its modality, being designed to handle creatures in one mode, I/S in another.
3) In contrast, I don't think it needs to be said that RU are well-known for dealing with instants/sorceries.
4) So, in Ravnica I'd say Izzet and be done. Everywhere else, though, why add extra colors? Between R and U, both can do spell-stealing effects, so you don't need both.
5) In that case, which color fits best to the effect? To me, the randomness in the card's design pushes it to red -- blue is much more methodical (Talent of the Telepath, which is more likely to hit something by giving you lots to choose) or is reactive (counterspells, etc.). This is a proactive option for preemptively removing a card from an opponent's hand and stealing it for yourself. In a case where it could go to either color, I would seize on that distinction (R from opp's hand, U from opp's library) and use it to justify it as mono-R, since little differences like that are how we keep R and U distinct while maintaining fresh mechanical design space (see Control Magic vs Act of Treason dichotomy).
6) Flagbearer effect is interesting and relevant, but I think this card as a whole makes no sense as a white card -- stealing resources, interacting with an opponent's hand outside of Balance effects, neither are remotely white at all. UW and RW could be flavored away pretty well, though, I'll concede that.
So: I'd vote mono-R as best, with RU as second-best and UW/RW/U as additional reasonable options. Honestly, though, B makes no sense to me -- it doesn't frequently interact with instants and sorceries, it doesn't do thievery all that often unless it's paired with U / stealing from graveyard / etc., and even when this functions as discard, it so frequently will do so much more (or do it with such different consequences) that I don't think it's an apt comparison at all.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes... Three generations of imbeciles are enough."
--Buck v Bell, 1927. This case, regarding the compulsory sterilization of inmates at mental institutions, has -- somehow -- never been overturned. Just a wee PSA for ya.
Creature - Human Wizard
When Spell Martyr enters the battlefield, target opponent reveals their hand. You choose an instant or sorcery card from it. That player casts that card without paying its mana cost if able, and, while that player is choosing targets as part of casting that spell, that player must choose Spell Martyr if able.
2/2
The idea here is a thought experiment as to what a non-black "discard" spell could look like. My main choices here are some combination of white (I'm borrowing from Standard Bearer's oracle wording), blue (Mizzium Meddler and other redirection effects) and red (Possibility Storm and other forms of forced casting). Given that the idea is a non-black version of a normally black effect, that color is unlikely, and green is right out.
Hands to the sky
Give a round of applause
For the great Miss Y!
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
perhaps both
If the goal is nonblack discard you should try effects found in other colors to emulate discard. Blue can reasonably get the ability to skip draw steps, but the cost is up for debate. While white's Nevermore can accomplish a similar feat as discard by 'turning off' cards. A 4cmc version that checks the hand before you choose could be good, or a 2 mana version that eats a card in graveyard to stop future copies.
More compelling is the argument that this card behaves like Duress and plays the same role as Duress, so therefore it must be in the same color as Duress, to which I concede. That black is getting more spell theft nowadays enforces this. I do like void_nothing's haste idea, though.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Oh, that's not bad. Works well with Inalla, Archmage Ritualist, too.
Mindclaw Shaman and a few other similar cards suggest that forcing opponents to cast instants/sorceries is mostly red, although cards like Talent of the Telepath come close in blue. Captured by the Consulate suggests that target-martyrdom as per Standard Bearer is still within white's colors, though Mizzium Meddler suggests blue can also do it. It's probably not monoblue though, since you don't outright steal the spell most of the time. Red can also change targets of spells as of reasonably recent cards.
So I would say any two of white, red, or blue. I would lean towards red being one of the colors so that you can include haste and benefit from combat tricks as previously suggested. Flash could also let you do so, but that'd effectively amount to instant-speed discard which tends to be a no-go.
- Rabid Wombat
EDIT: Or rather, I guess you're saying blue could counter target blue instant spell. Which seems appropriate. I guess the spell martyr effect could be black, but it definitely doesn't need to be, and seems less likely than it being other colors. At the least I would raise an eyebrow if I saw it in monoblack, as opposed to UB or RB
- Rabid Wombat
Conversely, the Spell Martyr effect doesn't really exist exactly, and the actual closest effect is older than the modern color pie. You're calling it discard and control of a player (clearly black), I'm calling it theft of an instant or sorcery and/or self-sacrifice (instant/sorcery theft being clearly red/blue, self-sacrifice being clearly white). Since no actual discard is happening, and the only choice being made for the player is targeting, from my perspective yours isn't a strong argument for black.
Mindclaw Shaman's existence shows that red can take an instant or sorcery out of someone's hand and cast it, which is the closest existing effect, ignoring very old cards that didn't follow the color pie. Black can't force people to cast spells. The closest existing effect in a recent card that allows black to do so is taking over their whole turn, which is a far greater appeal to superficially similar effects than the relation of Spell Martyr to what Mindclaw Shaman does.
- Rabid Wombat
Now, my mechanical arguments:
1) I agree that Worst Fears is too far from the effect, and Word of Command too far in the past, to indicate much of relevance.
2) The focus on instants and sorceries, preferably with a target, makes it odd to call this black to me. Yes, black gets Duress, but does it target instants/sorceries specifically? Doing a Gatherer search, I did find Collective Brutality, but that's it (please correct me if you find something else) -- and that specific card is less clear too given its modality, being designed to handle creatures in one mode, I/S in another.
3) In contrast, I don't think it needs to be said that RU are well-known for dealing with instants/sorceries.
4) So, in Ravnica I'd say Izzet and be done. Everywhere else, though, why add extra colors? Between R and U, both can do spell-stealing effects, so you don't need both.
5) In that case, which color fits best to the effect? To me, the randomness in the card's design pushes it to red -- blue is much more methodical (Talent of the Telepath, which is more likely to hit something by giving you lots to choose) or is reactive (counterspells, etc.). This is a proactive option for preemptively removing a card from an opponent's hand and stealing it for yourself. In a case where it could go to either color, I would seize on that distinction (R from opp's hand, U from opp's library) and use it to justify it as mono-R, since little differences like that are how we keep R and U distinct while maintaining fresh mechanical design space (see Control Magic vs Act of Treason dichotomy).
6) Flagbearer effect is interesting and relevant, but I think this card as a whole makes no sense as a white card -- stealing resources, interacting with an opponent's hand outside of Balance effects, neither are remotely white at all. UW and RW could be flavored away pretty well, though, I'll concede that.
So: I'd vote mono-R as best, with RU as second-best and UW/RW/U as additional reasonable options. Honestly, though, B makes no sense to me -- it doesn't frequently interact with instants and sorceries, it doesn't do thievery all that often unless it's paired with U / stealing from graveyard / etc., and even when this functions as discard, it so frequently will do so much more (or do it with such different consequences) that I don't think it's an apt comparison at all.
--Buck v Bell, 1927. This case, regarding the compulsory sterilization of inmates at mental institutions, has -- somehow -- never been overturned. Just a wee PSA for ya.