My RWU instant yesterday was meant to hit non-land permanents rather than non-creature ones (which I think would have been RGU). That's what I get for making cards at 4 AM.
Just an FYI to RukiMotomiya... Fungal Horror doesn't work.
Simple fix, but tokens don't count as cards... and even if they did, I don't think cards themselves "die".
I don't really know MTG wording, heh. Would it be removed from the battlefield? The idea is basically just that it makes spores whenever it does stuff, then you can use the spores against it by bursting the spores open.
Alright, though it's too late to change it for voting, heh. I'll keep that in mind for the future.
I knew what you meant, but CryoZenith is right, it should be "this creature".
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
I can't decide on the wording of my card. I've gone through a few, I feel like all of them work, but I'm just looking to make it as clear as possible. Here's the 2 latest wordings I'm fluxuating between:
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You may choose a nonland card from it. If you do, that player discards that card. If that player discards a card this way, he or she draws a card. If that player has no cards in his or her hand to discard, you draw a card and lose 1 life.
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You may choose a nonland card from it. If you do, that player discards that card, then draws a card. If that player has no cards in his or her hand to discard, you draw a card and lose 1 life instead.
A third option would be Wording 1, with the word "instead" at the end. I've had a few different wordings that included the word "instead". I'm not sure I like any of them, as I feel like the word just causes confusion. I'm not sure it's a good sign that I'm starting to question the wording of my card. It's usually means it'll get no votes.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You choose a nonland card from it. If you do, that player discards that card, then draws a card. Otherwise, you draw a card and lose 1 life.
There are fringe cases like Loxodon Smiter where this would be worse, but that's just how it is sometimes.
If you're insistent about using "may" for fringe cases, I think tossing one into maxbutts's wording would work nice:
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You may choose a nonland card from it. If you do, that player discards that card, then draws a card. Otherwise, you draw a card and lose 1 life.
Your versions simply had unnecessary wording... If the opponent doesn't have any nonlands, you can't choose one, thus the otherwise effect kicks in without any extra wording being needed, and in fact your extra wording could've made the card not work if taken super-literally: You can't choose a nonland card and have them discard it if they don't have one, but if they have a land card then they technically have a card available to be discarded (albeit not by your card's effect), so the other case never happens unless they have an empty hand when you cast it.
When I first posted the card, it lacked the "you may" option. I feel like there are more than fringe cases where this could be bad. Ex: You look at their hand, they have nothing you care about, but you have to make them discard a card, then they draw into something you do care about, and are unaware that he/she has it to boot. To be honest, until yesterday, this card was just "Target player reveals his or her hand. You may choose a card from it. If you do, that player discards that card, then draws a card.", but after Ogonomany's 1 drop counter anything spell that had the same draw back got 4 votes the other day (Forget About It), I figured I could add the clause about drawing a card if they had none in hand without going overboard. Counter > Discard. Right? Anyway, point is, I feel like forcing you to let them draw a card is big drawback. Allowing them to draw a card is a pretty big drawback even if you yank something that's awful for you.
Edit: @ Lustlain - Wouldn't the way you worded it allow me to just not choose a nonland card and then draw card? Thus making it into a blue card, Peek? If I wanted to do that, I'd just add cycle , pay 1 life. Or am I missing something here? That certainly has been known to happen. I'm just trying to make the card not be dead if the opponent is out of cards in hand.
Edit2: Also, I've chosen not to make a player tuck a card with Vendilion Clique a bunch of times, I'm pretty sure I would want to with this card too. You may not want to risk your opponent discarding a dead Thoughseize for an active Goyf.
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. If it is empty, draw a card and lose 1 life. Otherwise, you may choose a nonland card from it. That player discards that card and draws a card.
Or if you want it not to whiff when they turn out only to have land cards:
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. If it contains no nonland cards, draw a card and lose 1 life. Otherwise, you may choose a nonland card from it. That player discards that card and draws a card.
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. If it is empty, draw a card and lose 1 life. Otherwise, you may choose a nonland card from it. That player discards that card and draws a card.
That is actually very similar to another wording I thought of earlier. It seems weird to me that way for some reason. I'll have to keep thinking about it. Also, thanks for the input, I like talking about the cards that are posted. Especially mine. @ Max Butt - I intend to post something regarding the ability you asked for opinions about as soon as I get a chance.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
As CryoZenith said earlier, I would like to see a template for this. The mechanic seems to be a little bit all over the place. The one thing all the cards share is the revealing the top card of your library clause. I think trying to put the mechanic into a templatable format would be a good exercise. It reminds me a little bit of Kinship but sharing types instead (Typeship), although the red one just wants it to be a creature. Perhaps the mechanic would be better off focusing on the gamble of the top card being the correct one. The cards could be slightly overcosted if the wrong card is revealed, then correctly costed if the top card is correct, or, correctly costed if top is wrong, undercosted if it's correct. The red one is the closest to what I'm talking about. I'm sure that's at least a bit of what you're doing here. If that's the case, I would change the name of the ability to something like "Gamble", as "Omen" reminds me of something more like this:
Infesting Omen
Sorcery
Creature gets -2/-2 until end of turn.
Omen - As you draw this card you may reveal it and pay . If you do, creatures get -1/-1 until end of turn.
First the rats came. Then the disease.
Basically, when I think of an Omen, I think of the foretelling of something that is to come. Your ability feels more like the caster is taking a risk (that the top card will be the correct one) to try to gain a reward (you get to loot). I hope this makes sense, and bear in mind, I generally I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Edit: Here's a couple of quickly thought up examples of what I'm talking about. Sorry if I'm way off base here....
Bightning Lolt
Instant
~ deals 2 damage to target creature or player.
Gamble - As you cast ~, you may reveal the top card of your library, if it shares a type with ~, it deals 3 damage to that creature or player instead.
Lumbering Dufus
Creature - Warrior Dufus
Gamble - Whenever ~ attacks, you may reveal the top card of your library, if it shares a type with ~, it gets +2/+2 and gains trample until end of turn.
2/2
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
Bear in mind, I'm not the greatest when it comes to wording, but I would word your card like this....
When Melanin, Angel of Judgement enters the battlefield, exile each non-white creature. Return each creature exiled this way to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.
Whenever a monocolored white creature you control enters the field, you may pay . If you do, exile target creature. If a creature is exiled this way, return it to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.
I think the second ability should probably start "Whenever another monocolored...". The way it is worded above would allow you tap WW every time it entered the battlefield, thus allowing it to potentially trigger its own ability each turn. But perhaps that is your intention.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
Bear in mind, I'm not the greatest when it comes to wording, but I would word your card like this....
When Melanin, Angel of Judgement enters the battlefield, exile each non-white creature. Return each creature exiled this way to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.
Whenever a monocolored white creature you control enters the field, you may pay . If you do, exile target creature. If a creature is exiled this way, return it to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.
I think the second ability should probably start "Whenever another monocolored...". The way it is worded above would allow you tap WW every time it entered the battlefield, thus allowing it to potentially trigger its own ability each turn. But perhaps that is your intention.
Oh, no, that wasn't my intention, so I'll make sure to edit that out. This wording does seem better, yeah, so I'll edit that in soon.
Actually, I just noticed I still have the first sentence of the second ability worded incorrectly myself. It should read..."Whenever another monocolored white creature enters the battlefield under your control, you may pay WW. If you do...." Sorry about that. As I said earlier, I'm not always the best with wording myself. I makes me little nervous having someone word a card based off my suggestion, but I like to try to help my fellow card creators where I can. I'm pretty sure that, if you change the second ability to how I have it worded in this post (and the rest worded as I have it in my previous post), it should be correct. I would feel better if someone else confirmed this though. I don't want to lead a fellow CCCer astray.
Edit: As long as I'm talking about helping fellow CCCers, I was hoping to get some myself. I'm looking for people's opinions on a card I posted last month,
Sydzis, Recycled Recycler
Legendary Creature - Zombie Wizard
Whenever you discard a card, draw a card, then put a +1/+1 counter on Sydzis, Recycled Recycler.
, pay 1 life, discard a card: Regenerate Sydzis, Recycled Recycler.
2/2
That which seems useless, may often be repurposed.
I spent more time on this card that I have on almost all the other cards I've posted combined. I even discussed it with other people before I posted it, which I never do, and yet it still received 0 votes. Please don't take this as complaining, I am just looking to make myself a better designer. To be honest, I have no idea which cards of mine will be well received, and which will not. Every time I post a card that I feel is "can't miss", I get 0 - 1 vote. Yesterday's card, "Piercing Vision" is another example of this, I really thought people would like my Thrun-hatin' removal, but clearly I'm missing something. Conversely, cards I post that do well I'm very often surprised by. Anyway, any opinions on the Sydzis card would be greatly appreciated. It underwent a million changes before I posted and I'm curious if anybody comes back with a suggestion similar to an earlier version of the card.
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
Sydzis comes across as an odd cross of overpowered and underpowered, without being "flashy" enough to grab people's attention and make them ignore that.
Well since overpowered + underpowered = properly powered, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that I think that the card's just overpowered... only slightly, however. Maybe changing the costing from 3BB to 2BBB would be sufficient to offset this.
The main thing that sticks out to me is the card name though... "Recycled Recylcer"? I think you can do better than that.
But then again, with my whopping 2 votes I've recieved since I started participating in the DCC, I may not be the best person to take advice from.
Also, sometimes it just happens that a lot of the other submissions also happen to be really, really good... so maybe people liked it but liked a couple of other cards just a little bit more.
Well since overpowered + underpowered = properly powered,
...not necessarily.
The problem is (from my point of view, at least) that the card itself is too expensive, but its ability isn't expensive enough because of its results (activating the regeneration ability causes its triggered ability to go off).
I don't know. Something about being able to drop him T5 and then, on T6, cycle six cards for an 8/8... yeah, that's a little bothersome to me. At 2BB + BB for the ability, maybe it's okay, but it's still borderline.
What if a clause was added, making it to where you can only activate that ability once per turn?
Also, I'm curious to know what you thought of my bastion.
That would work but it'd make the card definitely overcosted rather than just "mostly overcosted".
Your bastion was... interesting. It'd probably need a little bit of tweaking (I don't have it up right now, and I'm not really in a position to playtest at this point, which is what I'd need to do to tell you what needs tweaked other than just "it probably needs slightly different numbers") but I'd have no problem with it getting printed in the same hypothetical supplementary product.
Thanks for the insight MDenham & LustLain, it is greatly appreciated. It's funny that LustLain mentions the name as an aspect of the card he didn't like. Honestly, the name just started as a place holder until I could think of another one but, after awhile, it grew on me to the point where I just couldn't change it. As I said before, this is one of the rare cards that I actually thought about for awhile. It would be like renaming one of my kids, it would just seem weird. As far as the analysis goes, I totally hear what you are saying. It took me awhile to get it to the point that it was at. The funny thing is, I was actually more concerned with how this card would react with Wheel effects (Wheel Of Fortune) than I was his regen ability, although I agree, it is quite powerful. Anyway, I'm curious how people feel about posting a revamped (fixed) version of a card that was posted in a previous DCC. Basically, would people reject a different, but similar, version of this card at a later time. I've posted a few cards over the last few months that faired poorly, but I like the idea enough to give it another go. Is that cool? And again, thanks for your time.
Edit: @ LustLain...Actually, the thought crossed my mind to make the ability only usable once per turn, and I actually made a version that did that, but then my inner Timmy came out and squashed that idea.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
I hope my card today is worded correctly. The intention is, if you have a Doomblade in hand, and there is a Lightning Bolt on the stack, you can pay 1 red and cast your Doomblade a Bolt. Here's the card for reference.....
Echocaster Adept
Creature - Human Wizard (R)
You may cast instant and sorcery cards in your hand as a copy of any instant or sorcery spell on the stack. (This includes mana cost)
2/2
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Altered Art Cards! | Commissions currently Closed
Simple fix, but tokens don't count as cards... and even if they did, I don't think cards themselves "die".
I don't really know MTG wording, heh. Would it be removed from the battlefield? The idea is basically just that it makes spores whenever it does stuff, then you can use the spores against it by bursting the spores open.
Alright, though it's too late to change it for voting, heh. I'll keep that in mind for the future.
I knew what you meant, but CryoZenith is right, it should be "this creature".
A third option would be Wording 1, with the word "instead" at the end. I've had a few different wordings that included the word "instead". I'm not sure I like any of them, as I feel like the word just causes confusion. I'm not sure it's a good sign that I'm starting to question the wording of my card. It's usually means it'll get no votes.
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You choose a nonland card from it. If you do, that player discards that card, then draws a card. Otherwise, you draw a card and lose 1 life.
There are fringe cases like Loxodon Smiter where this would be worse, but that's just how it is sometimes.
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You may choose a nonland card from it. If you do, that player discards that card, then draws a card. Otherwise, you draw a card and lose 1 life.
Your versions simply had unnecessary wording... If the opponent doesn't have any nonlands, you can't choose one, thus the otherwise effect kicks in without any extra wording being needed, and in fact your extra wording could've made the card not work if taken super-literally: You can't choose a nonland card and have them discard it if they don't have one, but if they have a land card then they technically have a card available to be discarded (albeit not by your card's effect), so the other case never happens unless they have an empty hand when you cast it.
Thanks. :] I'm just unsure of how absurd a 3 color instant land destruction spell with potential additional upside would be.
Altered Art Cards! | Commissions currently Closed
Edit: @ Lustlain - Wouldn't the way you worded it allow me to just not choose a nonland card and then draw card? Thus making it into a blue card, Peek? If I wanted to do that, I'd just add cycle , pay 1 life. Or am I missing something here? That certainly has been known to happen. I'm just trying to make the card not be dead if the opponent is out of cards in hand.
Edit2: Also, I've chosen not to make a player tuck a card with Vendilion Clique a bunch of times, I'm pretty sure I would want to with this card too. You may not want to risk your opponent discarding a dead Thoughseize for an active Goyf.
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. If it is empty, draw a card and lose 1 life. Otherwise, you may choose a nonland card from it. That player discards that card and draws a card.
Or if you want it not to whiff when they turn out only to have land cards:
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. If it contains no nonland cards, draw a card and lose 1 life. Otherwise, you may choose a nonland card from it. That player discards that card and draws a card.
That is actually very similar to another wording I thought of earlier. It seems weird to me that way for some reason. I'll have to keep thinking about it. Also, thanks for the input, I like talking about the cards that are posted. Especially mine. @ Max Butt - I intend to post something regarding the ability you asked for opinions about as soon as I get a chance.
As CryoZenith said earlier, I would like to see a template for this. The mechanic seems to be a little bit all over the place. The one thing all the cards share is the revealing the top card of your library clause. I think trying to put the mechanic into a templatable format would be a good exercise. It reminds me a little bit of Kinship but sharing types instead (Typeship), although the red one just wants it to be a creature. Perhaps the mechanic would be better off focusing on the gamble of the top card being the correct one. The cards could be slightly overcosted if the wrong card is revealed, then correctly costed if the top card is correct, or, correctly costed if top is wrong, undercosted if it's correct. The red one is the closest to what I'm talking about. I'm sure that's at least a bit of what you're doing here. If that's the case, I would change the name of the ability to something like "Gamble", as "Omen" reminds me of something more like this:
Sorcery
Creature gets -2/-2 until end of turn.
Omen - As you draw this card you may reveal it and pay . If you do, creatures get -1/-1 until end of turn.
First the rats came. Then the disease.
Basically, when I think of an Omen, I think of the foretelling of something that is to come. Your ability feels more like the caster is taking a risk (that the top card will be the correct one) to try to gain a reward (you get to loot). I hope this makes sense, and bear in mind, I generally I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Edit: Here's a couple of quickly thought up examples of what I'm talking about. Sorry if I'm way off base here....
Instant
~ deals 2 damage to target creature or player.
Gamble - As you cast ~, you may reveal the top card of your library, if it shares a type with ~, it deals 3 damage to that creature or player instead.
Creature - Warrior Dufus
Gamble - Whenever ~ attacks, you may reveal the top card of your library, if it shares a type with ~, it gets +2/+2 and gains trample until end of turn.
2/2
So, July is over! How'd you guys feel about that month?
When Melanin, Angel of Judgement enters the battlefield, exile each non-white creature. Return each creature exiled this way to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.
Whenever a monocolored white creature you control enters the field, you may pay . If you do, exile target creature. If a creature is exiled this way, return it to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.
I think the second ability should probably start "Whenever another monocolored...". The way it is worded above would allow you tap WW every time it entered the battlefield, thus allowing it to potentially trigger its own ability each turn. But perhaps that is your intention.
Oh, no, that wasn't my intention, so I'll make sure to edit that out. This wording does seem better, yeah, so I'll edit that in soon.
Edit: As long as I'm talking about helping fellow CCCers, I was hoping to get some myself. I'm looking for people's opinions on a card I posted last month,
Legendary Creature - Zombie Wizard
Whenever you discard a card, draw a card, then put a +1/+1 counter on Sydzis, Recycled Recycler.
, pay 1 life, discard a card: Regenerate Sydzis, Recycled Recycler.
2/2
That which seems useless, may often be repurposed.
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
The main thing that sticks out to me is the card name though... "Recycled Recylcer"? I think you can do better than that.
But then again, with my whopping 2 votes I've recieved since I started participating in the DCC, I may not be the best person to take advice from.
Also, sometimes it just happens that a lot of the other submissions also happen to be really, really good... so maybe people liked it but liked a couple of other cards just a little bit more.
The problem is (from my point of view, at least) that the card itself is too expensive, but its ability isn't expensive enough because of its results (activating the regeneration ability causes its triggered ability to go off).
I don't know. Something about being able to drop him T5 and then, on T6, cycle six cards for an 8/8... yeah, that's a little bothersome to me. At 2BB + BB for the ability, maybe it's okay, but it's still borderline.
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
Also, I'm curious to know what you thought of my bastion.
Your bastion was... interesting. It'd probably need a little bit of tweaking (I don't have it up right now, and I'm not really in a position to playtest at this point, which is what I'd need to do to tell you what needs tweaked other than just "it probably needs slightly different numbers") but I'd have no problem with it getting printed in the same hypothetical supplementary product.
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
Edit: @ LustLain...Actually, the thought crossed my mind to make the ability only usable once per turn, and I actually made a version that did that, but then my inner Timmy came out and squashed that idea.
Creature - Human Wizard (R)
You may cast instant and sorcery cards in your hand as a copy of any instant or sorcery spell on the stack. (This includes mana cost)
2/2