Ouija Board1 Artifact 5, : Evoke a creature card from your hand. You lose life equal to its converted mana cost. Exile a card at random from your hand. Ouija Board doesn't untap during your next untap step. (Put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield, then sacrifice it.) Be warned. It might cost you even more later.
Alt. Flavor Text
You wouldn't even lay eyes upon it if you knew what it could cost you later.
Alt. Flavor Text II
You would run for your life if you knew what it could cost you later.
I wanted to do something Innistrad-like. Something Core-esque, with that overworld occult domain and feel.
Divination Card0 Artifact
Clairvoyant (As you cast this spell, you may put a card from your hand on the bottom of your library. If you do, scry 2.)
Sacrifice Divination Card: Each player shuffles a card from their graveyard into their library. "It says, you've failed enough times by now to have other families whack you off because it unsettles them. I'm going to have to ask you to leave my shop now."
Wanted to showcase this to present the new form of Deus Ex Machina that I've decided on. After long deliberation, I decided to remove the option clause. In addition to making it simpler to understand, and saving text space, this form makes it more challenging, and invites challenge for both players (instead of disinviting challenge). I just personally think that the desire to flex like that was greed. And thus, something desperate, we're all better off without.
Otherwise, I know, I know; Conjurer's Bauble; or maybe just, what Conjurer's Bauble truly wanted to be.
I have to say, that new DEM triggered ability is much better than the nonsense that it was before. Glad you finally get it should only trigger on cast. (It does needs to be a trigger, though. WHEN you cast this spell. That's how this ability is written in the game.) I don't get the point of it, since it's strict card disadvantage, and the card it's on it basically useless, but still. Good job on that one thing.
Ouija Board is broken. It's basically a repeatable Flash on an artifact. The life loss and not untapping is nowhere near enough reason not to Evoke Lord Xander turn 2, or Protean Hulk out a win condition.
I'm afraid it still needs to exist outside of trigger.
These are effects that do not want to be interacted with. They need to remain that way. Otherwise, you're disrupting the balance and the nature of the development. It's to provide acceleration, unadulterated, across the board. It allows designers to do less. Smaller effects, that gain significance as a spell with the addition of Deus Ex Machina.
Protean Hulk should be restricted. Even that I wouldn't ban. Xander could easily be in that camp as well.
I do agree that it's undercosted. The example that first came to mind for me was Erayo, Soratami Ascendant. And it makes even less sense that you could use this to flip Eryao instantly, and invoke her essence without paying for it; but have to pay for others; Homura, Human Ascendant.
I think it's undercosted by 3; and the life loss should stay even; but be universal.
"Evoke a creature card" is meaningless written in an ability like that. That is player slang for "cast a creature by paying its evoke cost" but if you aren't casting a creature specifically by paying its evoke cost then nothing is actually happening.
Here is how you would have to write the ability you seem to want it to be.
T: Put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield. When you do, sacrifice it. etc. etc.
As to you Deus Ex Machina thing - while I am glad you finally dropped the modal ridiculousness you've tried to justify forever - making it a trigger has nothing to do with whether it "wants" to be interacted with. It has to do with how the game processes casting a spell. You cannot scry during process of announcing the spell, choosing modes, declaring targets, paying costs, and putting it on the stack. The process does not have a step for such effects to be resolved, which is why the only time a card says "As you cast" it is specifically in reference to either paying a cost or chosing a mode of that spell in some fashion.
Evoke being a keyword ability with a specified function makes amending the full-form functionality of what it means to "evoke" a creature card an effortless endeavor, certainly.
It is not a fact of "how you have to write it".
It is simply a fact of how one needs to "amend the comprehensive rulings" to define the function of evoking a card into a full form factor.
It is simply a fact of how one needs to "amend the comprehensive rulings" to define the function of evoking a card into a full form factor.
Why do you only create rules that create a need to "amend the comprehensive rulings"? Are you against the idea of cards that fit within current rulings?
The mark of talent is ingenuity and improvisation.
The fact that you can't make the card without resorting to "just rewrite the comp rules" in fact shows your lack of ingenuity and innovation. If you actually had any talent, your card would work without the need to change the underlying structure of the game, especially since I gave you a wording that does work within the rules in less than a minute.
Creating (or in this case expanding upon) a game function blooms from that seed.
This is what keeps those fires burning, towering; fun and interesting; brand new, everytime.
Just doing my job, please forgive me.
This is meaningless gobbledygook and whenever you type stuff like this people take you even less seriously than they already did - and they already didn't take you seriously in the first place.
Evoke being a keyword ability with a specified function makes amending the full-form functionality of what it means to "evoke" a creature card an effortless endeavor, certainly.
It is not a fact of "how you have to write it".
It is simply a fact of how one needs to "amend the comprehensive rulings" to define the function of evoking a card into a full form factor.
Evoke is not a Keyword ability, it is an Ability Word:
A keyword ability is a word or words that substitutes for a piece of rules text. Many keywords are summarized in reminder text, especially in core sets. They can be referenced mechanically.
An ability word is a word that thematically groups cards with a common functionality, but has no special meaning in the Comprehensive Rules.
Yeah, but it still worded wrongly, what the card should do is:
5,T: Target creature card in your hand gets "Evoke--Discard a card at random" and "When this creature dies, you lose life equal to its mana value." until the end of turn. Then you may cast that creature. Ouija Board doesn't untap during your next untap step.
Written that way (And maybe restricting it to only be activated on your turn), I REALLY LIKE THIS CARD.
The mark of talent is ingenuity and improvisation.
Creating (or in this case expanding upon) a game function blooms from that seed.
This is what keeps those fires burning, towering; fun and interesting; brand new, everytime.
Just doing my job, please forgive me.
So, uh... Do you have the ability to implement new ideas in a way that does not require the amendment of new rulings?
You may claim that creating ideas is more vital or more difficult than being able to "color within the lines" but one should logically be able to do the simpler task if one can do the harder task. Otherwise, you might as well say "I am incapable of walking because I can only dance" or "I am incapable of drawing circles because all of my art depicts complex fractals".
The fact that you do not demonstrate the ability to "color within the lines" without need for rulings raises skepticism.
Yeah, I think in print it could require reminder text. I don't always expect that should be necessary here, because I (for some crazy reason) still expect to be talking to professionals; or at least, what to set the stage for (treat the environment like) I am addressing and talking with professionals (in a professional environment).
These types of trivialities would be dismissed, as they are aesthetic, and not significant points of interest towards form or functionality.
Yeah, I think in print it could require reminder text. I don't always expect that should be necessary here, because I (for some crazy reason) still expect to be talking to professionals; or at least, what to set the stage for (treat the environment like) I am addressing and talking with professionals (in a professional environment).
These types of trivialities would be dismissed, as they are aesthetic, and not significant points of interest towards form or functionality.
All kind of people plays the game, not all of them are "Profesionals", so when desining a card you have to think that A LOT of different players will interact with it, mostly new players. If you make the card too complex or too ambiguous, or let too much to be already known, then you are not making a good design.
Now that we've got a bit of reminder text, I'm gonna come to reap's defense on this one I like these cards.
Honestly I don't think Ouija board needs the clunky extra drawbacks."you lose life equal to its converted mana cost" is sufficient. It's a neat little Quicksilver Amulet variant. And the flavor of "you shouldn't do this" is already there.
I think Divination Card is a pretty decent design too. But there's no reason in the world Clairvoyant should be keyworded. It's not an ability that needs to be any kind of mechanical theme. But it's fine on this card.
I'm not crazy about the flavor: Ouija Board is pretty real-worldy and Divination Card is a bit on the nose. Being a literal card and all.
Yeah, I think in print it could require reminder text. I don't always expect that should be necessary here, because I (for some crazy reason) still expect to be talking to professionals; or at least, what to set the stage for (treat the environment like) I am addressing and talking with professionals (in a professional environment).
He meant that you need to put in reminder text because you MADE UP A RULE and no one knows what you want “Evoke a creature” to mean if you don’t explain it.
Now that we've got a bit of reminder text, I'm gonna come to reap's defense on this one I like these cards.
Honestly I don't think Ouija board needs the clunky extra drawbacks."you lose life equal to its converted mana cost" is sufficient. It's a neat little Quicksilver Amulet variant. And the flavor of "you shouldn't do this" is already there.
Reap likes to edit his cards so posters who comment on them look foolish. When I commented, Ouija Board cost 2 to activate and only cost life / didn't untap if the creature you evoked had mana value 6 or more. I stand by the fact that that was broken. As it's written now it's too clunky to even play.
The point of these threads is to generate interesting and balanced cards that don't exist in Magic but could. So from broken to clunky, we're finally getting to that. That was always the point of this. The fact that the OP has been modified in response to commentary is a good thing. Let's all dispense with the internet-brand negativity and be jolly pals. Ain't no mods 'round these parts no more. So let's be civil-like.
The card in its current form is this:
Ouija Board1
Artifact 5, T: Evoke a creature card from your hand. You lose life equal to its converted mana cost. Exile a card at random from your hand. Ouija Board doesn't untap during your next untap step. (To Evoke a creature, put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield, then sacrifice it.) Be warned. It might cost you even more later.
This (clearly a rare) is too clunky and unusable with the high cost and heavy upsides. But the concept is good, and I think an activaiton cost of 5 is balanced to keep the base cost at one. Having an additional cost obviously makes a big difference, but a big part of it is flavor. It's bad to activate the item. I think a flat cost of three life on top of the five mana would be satisfactory. There are broken cards to get, but you have to build your deck around them, and they hurt you. I like 3 life because it's a rule of threes with odds: 1 cost. 3 life. 5 mana. Balanced, fun, cool card.
Reap likes to edit his cards so posters who comment on them look foolish. When I commented, Ouija Board cost 2 to activate and only cost life / didn't untap if the creature you evoked had mana value 6 or more. I stand by the fact that that was broken. As it's written now it's too clunky to even play.
That's absurd. I agreed that it was undercosted.
Where are you drawing this from? If I edit a card, it's because I felt there was a necessary game.
Sometimes, I do post designs with ulterior concepts (or costs) in mind when I post them, but wish to present them as-is for the experience sharing factor.
Reap likes to edit his cards so posters who comment on them look foolish. When I commented, Ouija Board cost 2 to activate and only cost life / didn't untap if the creature you evoked had mana value 6 or more. I stand by the fact that that was broken. As it's written now it's too clunky to even play.
That's absurd. I agreed that it was undercosted.
Where are you drawing this from? If I edit a card, it's because I felt there was a necessary game.
Sometimes, I do post designs with ulterior concepts (or costs) in mind when I post them, but wish to present them as-is for the experience sharing factor.
Adding a changelog is a good solution in this cases, helps following the card history as well
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Artifact
5, : Evoke a creature card from your hand. You lose life equal to its converted mana cost. Exile a card at random from your hand. Ouija Board doesn't untap during your next untap step. (Put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield, then sacrifice it.)
Be warned. It might cost you even more later.
Alt. Flavor Text
You wouldn't even lay eyes upon it if you knew what it could cost you later.
Alt. Flavor Text II
You would run for your life if you knew what it could cost you later.
I wanted to do something Innistrad-like. Something Core-esque, with that overworld occult domain and feel.
Divination Card 0
Artifact
Clairvoyant (As you cast this spell, you may put a card from your hand on the bottom of your library. If you do, scry 2.)
Sacrifice Divination Card: Each player shuffles a card from their graveyard into their library.
"It says, you've failed enough times by now to have other families whack you off because it unsettles them. I'm going to have to ask you to leave my shop now."
Wanted to showcase this to present the new form of Deus Ex Machina that I've decided on. After long deliberation, I decided to remove the option clause. In addition to making it simpler to understand, and saving text space, this form makes it more challenging, and invites challenge for both players (instead of disinviting challenge). I just personally think that the desire to flex like that was greed. And thus, something desperate, we're all better off without.
Otherwise, I know, I know; Conjurer's Bauble; or maybe just, what Conjurer's Bauble truly wanted to be.
Ouija Board is broken. It's basically a repeatable Flash on an artifact. The life loss and not untapping is nowhere near enough reason not to Evoke Lord Xander turn 2, or Protean Hulk out a win condition.
These are effects that do not want to be interacted with. They need to remain that way. Otherwise, you're disrupting the balance and the nature of the development. It's to provide acceleration, unadulterated, across the board. It allows designers to do less. Smaller effects, that gain significance as a spell with the addition of Deus Ex Machina.
Protean Hulk should be restricted. Even that I wouldn't ban. Xander could easily be in that camp as well.
I do agree that it's undercosted. The example that first came to mind for me was Erayo, Soratami Ascendant. And it makes even less sense that you could use this to flip Eryao instantly, and invoke her essence without paying for it; but have to pay for others; Homura, Human Ascendant.
I think it's undercosted by 3; and the life loss should stay even; but be universal.
Here is how you would have to write the ability you seem to want it to be.
T: Put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield. When you do, sacrifice it. etc. etc.
As to you Deus Ex Machina thing - while I am glad you finally dropped the modal ridiculousness you've tried to justify forever - making it a trigger has nothing to do with whether it "wants" to be interacted with. It has to do with how the game processes casting a spell. You cannot scry during process of announcing the spell, choosing modes, declaring targets, paying costs, and putting it on the stack. The process does not have a step for such effects to be resolved, which is why the only time a card says "As you cast" it is specifically in reference to either paying a cost or chosing a mode of that spell in some fashion.
It is not a fact of "how you have to write it".
It is simply a fact of how one needs to "amend the comprehensive rulings" to define the function of evoking a card into a full form factor.
Why do you only create rules that create a need to "amend the comprehensive rulings"? Are you against the idea of cards that fit within current rulings?
Creating (or in this case expanding upon) a game function blooms from that seed.
This is what keeps those fires burning, towering; fun and interesting; brand new, everytime.
Just doing my job, please forgive me.
This is meaningless gobbledygook and whenever you type stuff like this people take you even less seriously than they already did - and they already didn't take you seriously in the first place.
Evoke is not a Keyword ability, it is an Ability Word:
Yeah, but it still worded wrongly, what the card should do is:
5,T: Target creature card in your hand gets "Evoke--Discard a card at random" and "When this creature dies, you lose life equal to its mana value." until the end of turn. Then you may cast that creature. Ouija Board doesn't untap during your next untap step.
Written that way (And maybe restricting it to only be activated on your turn), I REALLY LIKE THIS CARD.
But there's a very easy solution to "evoke a card" being meaningless in the rules: REMINDER TEXT!!!!!
Write on the card exactly what it means. Then you won't get people saying "but this is meaningless" because it won't be.
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.
So, uh... Do you have the ability to implement new ideas in a way that does not require the amendment of new rulings?
You may claim that creating ideas is more vital or more difficult than being able to "color within the lines" but one should logically be able to do the simpler task if one can do the harder task. Otherwise, you might as well say "I am incapable of walking because I can only dance" or "I am incapable of drawing circles because all of my art depicts complex fractals".
The fact that you do not demonstrate the ability to "color within the lines" without need for rulings raises skepticism.
These types of trivialities would be dismissed, as they are aesthetic, and not significant points of interest towards form or functionality.
All kind of people plays the game, not all of them are "Profesionals", so when desining a card you have to think that A LOT of different players will interact with it, mostly new players. If you make the card too complex or too ambiguous, or let too much to be already known, then you are not making a good design.
Honestly I don't think Ouija board needs the clunky extra drawbacks."you lose life equal to its converted mana cost" is sufficient. It's a neat little Quicksilver Amulet variant. And the flavor of "you shouldn't do this" is already there.
I think Divination Card is a pretty decent design too. But there's no reason in the world Clairvoyant should be keyworded. It's not an ability that needs to be any kind of mechanical theme. But it's fine on this card.
I'm not crazy about the flavor: Ouija Board is pretty real-worldy and Divination Card is a bit on the nose. Being a literal card and all.
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.
He meant that you need to put in reminder text because you MADE UP A RULE and no one knows what you want “Evoke a creature” to mean if you don’t explain it.
Reap likes to edit his cards so posters who comment on them look foolish. When I commented, Ouija Board cost 2 to activate and only cost life / didn't untap if the creature you evoked had mana value 6 or more. I stand by the fact that that was broken. As it's written now it's too clunky to even play.
The card in its current form is this:
Ouija Board 1
Artifact
5, T: Evoke a creature card from your hand. You lose life equal to its converted mana cost. Exile a card at random from your hand. Ouija Board doesn't untap during your next untap step. (To Evoke a creature, put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield, then sacrifice it.)
Be warned. It might cost you even more later.
This (clearly a rare) is too clunky and unusable with the high cost and heavy upsides. But the concept is good, and I think an activaiton cost of 5 is balanced to keep the base cost at one. Having an additional cost obviously makes a big difference, but a big part of it is flavor. It's bad to activate the item. I think a flat cost of three life on top of the five mana would be satisfactory. There are broken cards to get, but you have to build your deck around them, and they hurt you. I like 3 life because it's a rule of threes with odds: 1 cost. 3 life. 5 mana. Balanced, fun, cool card.
That's my suggestion.
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.
That's absurd. I agreed that it was undercosted.
Where are you drawing this from? If I edit a card, it's because I felt there was a necessary game.
Sometimes, I do post designs with ulterior concepts (or costs) in mind when I post them, but wish to present them as-is for the experience sharing factor.
Adding a changelog is a good solution in this cases, helps following the card history as well