@Flatline. Ugh, I forgot the P/T in the text. In the image it has power/toughness. Maybe Indigost can put the 2/1 PT into the post. I was hoping to get some feedback on the mechanic, but now folks might ignore it. Attaching the image again here in case it interests anyone. Ethereal is kinda like Vanishing, except it ticks down based upon usage, not based upon turn.
I'm personally having a hard time evaluating the mechanic. It plays out so differently on every card. On this one it's like a two-turn combat trick on a 2/1 body. On others it can be just an undercosted rental fatty like Calciderm. On others it can be a combo enabler (imagine giving a mythic dragon ethereal, firebreathing, and a remove counter trigger.). While this particular card has a very distinct and obvious mission, some Ethereal cards might be rather ambiguous in how you're supposed to play with them (maybe that's good, maybe that's bad).
Like Vanishing, there's a lot of versatility here -- it can be a "workhorse mechanic". And like Vanishing, it can make a Limited gameplay feel and play different from other sets. I'm trying to figure out why one would choose one over the other.
DiscardUnearth: Putting cards on top of libraries isn't seen in black as far as I know. I suppose allowing your opponent to choose the creature could be a black thing, but it isn't at the moment.
kjsharp: Your creature has no P/T.
netn10: This is the second day in a row your card is of-the-charts busted. I know you card takes some set up, but it can let you play infinite green sources from your graveyard. It might be ok if the lands entered tapped, but even that seems pretty good.
I misread netn10's card as an effect you can play once from the GY and then it gets exiled (like flashback without the "play from hand" mode). Not sure if that was the intent.
For mine, I've been trying to come up with some clever way to use hybrid to basically smush different color's removal methods together (was trying to combine burn and bounce for aw while) and have it feel intuitive and on-color but apparently I still can't get it to work.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How do you feel about websites where people with similar interests exchange ideas?
I'm forum!
@kjsharp...I'm pretty sure I've seen ethereal before. I think it's pretty cool. It's kinda like a mash up of vanishing and the clockwork mechanic. Iprobably would've voted for it if it had a P/T. I didn't see your render until after I voted.
@DiscardUnearth....Don't take my comment the wrong way. What you're doing makes sense. The opponent being able to choose the creature is very reminiscent of sacrifice, which is certainly a black mechanic. My main issue is with the fact that black already has the most forms of removal, destroy, sacrifice, exile, -X/-X, so it doesn't really need any more. Also, putting cards on top of libraries feels uniquely W/U to me, and I'd prefer to keep it that way.
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)
The main thing I don't like about Ethereal is that you can't do a basic upkeep or beginning-of-combat trigger.
Dew DropsW
Enchantment (C)
Ethereal 4
When a counter is removed from Dew Drops, you gain 2 life.
---------
That doesn't work. I'd like for that to work because it helps minimize complexity of non-creature cards with ethereal. I wish there were a way to resolve this conundrum.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Follow me on Twitch if you're interested in watching competitive league drafts.
Play MTGO? Check out my latest MTGO finance articles on Quiet Speculation.
(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)
Goblinprime
Azumet, i get it now, Unstable Mutagen is always the top half, and the creatures are always the bottom half, where the stat differences would be.
Indeed, However Looking back at these three cards they should all be 6/6, just makes stats easier to track.
Also quick edit adding 1 generic and PT of Griffin 1/5 > 2/4 and 3/7 > 4/6
Reclaim the WildRG
Sorcery (R)
Reclaim the Wild can't be countered.
Gain control of all lands target player controls until end of turn. Untap those lands. "The soil is the property of all."
Minor nitpick: You need to say "target opponent" because if you can target yourself with it, it becomes way too good in the right deck as a 2 mana early harvest. And it would get even better if you had two, because one can steal your opponent's lands, then the other lets you untap all of your and your opponent's lands.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How do you feel about websites where people with similar interests exchange ideas?
I'm forum!
YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED THAT AS THE MONTH GOES ON, BOTH VOID AND MYSELF GRADUALLY LOSS OUR FESTIVE SHEEN. AND THOUGH IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A LOT, TO COPY AND PASTE A THREAD AND TRY NOT TO COUNT WRONG, ITS MORE THAT HIM AND I HAVE SO MUCH ELSE GOING ON THAT IT JUST COMPOUNDS THE DIFFICULTIES OF LIFE! SO, WE'RE LOOKING FOR ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO HELP THE TWO OF US CHUCKLENUTS IN KEEPING THIS SHINDIG GOING, EVEN IF ITS JUST GOING FROM EVERY OTHER MONTH TO EVERY THIRD MONTH IT WOULD MEAN A LOT. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY OFFICIAL PAPERWORK TO BE DONE, BUT IF YOU COULD DM ME AND VOIDNOTHING WITH ANY QUESTIONS OR APPLICATIONS THAT HOW WE'LL START.
I could jump back into the DCC hosting rotation every third month if you like. Just let me know when I start. BTW, I've actually made the same mistake you made last night several times over the course of my DCC hosting career. The only difference being that I caught my mistake immediately after making it and corrected it myself. If you go back and look, there's gotta be at least 10 Flatline posted DCCs where the last post for the day is just me saying "oops".
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)
Poison Breath2B
Enchantment- Aura
Enchant creature.
If enchanted creature is attacking or blocking, target attacking or blocking creature gains -1/-1.
If enchanted creature deals damage to a player, they discard a card.
lookashiny, I noticed something else with this card. There is a corner case where you put it on an opponent's creature, and you can use the -1/-1 trigger on the enchanted creature or another creature that player is attacking/blocking with. This could be used as a pseudo-pacifism on a 1 toughness or 1 power creature, or to scare your opponent from gang-attacking if they have something like llanowar elves. Not sure if you're intending on this.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How do you feel about websites where people with similar interests exchange ideas?
I'm forum!
Votes: Voidnothing, Indighost Underworld NightmareUB
Enchantment (R)
Whenever an opponent or a spell controlled by an opponent is targeted by a spell or ability, that player or that spell's controller loses 2 life. "In the depths of the maze of dreams, one's soul fades away."
the wording on this is difficult to parse. i had to read it several times to convince myself the trigger wasn't dealing damage to the owner of the targeting agent. i might recommend breaking it up into two triggers.
Whenever an opponent becomes the target of a spell, that player loses 2 life.
Whenever a spell or ability an opponent controls is countered, that player loses 2 life. (Assuming you're not concerned with the few corner cases where a spell is targeted and not being countered.)
Whenever a spell or ability an opponent controls becomes the target of a spell or ability they don't control, that opponent loses 2 life. (definitely more wordy)
Know your Audience2BB
Enchantment - Aura (Rare)
Spectacle 4BR
Enchant creature
You control enchanted creature. If Know your Audience's Spectacle cost was paid, enchanted creature also has trample and haste.
At the end of turn, sacrifice enchanted creature.
Just wondering if this was intended to untap a tapped creature, since it can potentially give haste to a tapped creature? there's no 'untap' in the description.
Also with these short term gain control spells that result in a dead creature, does the Aura add to the design an element that wouldn't be achieved with a sorcery/instant?
I liked both of these, but they were causing me some head scratching to figure out.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Easy Dude. You're being very un-Dude.
____________________________________________
Votes: Voidnothing, Indighost Underworld NightmareUB
Enchantment (R)
Whenever an opponent or a spell controlled by an opponent is targeted by a spell or ability, that player or that spell's controller loses 2 life. "In the depths of the maze of dreams, one's soul fades away."
the wording on this is difficult to parse. i had to read it several times to convince myself the trigger wasn't dealing damage to the owner of the targeting agent. i might recommend breaking it up into two triggers.
Whenever an opponent becomes the target of a spell, that player loses 2 life.
Whenever a spell or ability an opponent controls is countered, that player loses 2 life. (Assuming you're not concerned with the few corner cases where a spell is targeted and not being countered.)
Whenever a spell or ability an opponent controls becomes the target of a spell or ability they don't control, that opponent loses 2 life. (definitely more wordy)
Know your Audience2BB
Enchantment - Aura (Rare)
Spectacle 4BR
Enchant creature
You control enchanted creature. If Know your Audience's Spectacle cost was paid, enchanted creature also has trample and haste.
At the end of turn, sacrifice enchanted creature.
Just wondering if this was intended to untap a tapped creature, since it can potentially give haste to a tapped creature? there's no 'untap' in the description.
Also with these short term gain control spells that result in a dead creature, does the Aura add to the design an element that wouldn't be achieved with a sorcery/instant?
I liked both of these, but they were causing me some head scratching to figure out.
I've tried other wordings for this in the past but this one seemed an improvement and the most concise. The one thing you suggest that I think might both clear things up and put a little bit of a cap on what it does is adding "they don't control", so that it doesn't also mean that your opponent pings themselves whenever they target themselves with a spell or whenever they try to copy one of their own spells.
It's basically intended to be a much more versatile Megrim / Liliana's Caress that not only also applies to counterspells but even applies to blue pseudo-counterspell abilities like "return target spell to its owner's hand". Would fit right into the 8-rack deck archetype, but expand its options to blue control.
Technically, as worded, it also applies to burn spells and literally any spell or ability that targets a player or opponent. So it's a pretty open-ended card that I could see being exploited in Grixis or Esper quite easily. Modern would have a field day.
I saw a lot of great glimmers in today's submissions but had a few take-aways from the designs. A few templating concerns caught my eye along with some balancing. All these suggestions are in the spirit of constructive criticism.
QuellU
Instant (R)
Counter target spell that targets an opponent or a permanent controlled by an opponent.
Cycling 2
This was another one of those cards where i had to make sure i was comprehending the templating correctly. Wizards started using the templating "you or a teammate" when they designed surge, which i find to be good language when working with multiplayer cards. I adopted this templating when i design multiplayer enabled cards. Based on the language you used for Quell:
Quell U
Instant (R)
Counter target spell that targets you or a teammate, or a permanent controlled by you or teammate.
Cycling 2
I'm guessing that this is what your design is doing, just with different wording? I got tripped on who's 'opponent' is being referenced. my opponent, or my opponent's opponent. Then the internet broke when i tried googling that. Anyways, food for thought on templating.
Extract Punishment2WU
Enchantment (Rare)
Whenever an opponent pays mana or life for an effect you control, you may draw a card. "It is not enough for them to pay for their crimes. We must also learn why they commit them in first place."
- Tala, Azorius Judge
Just wanted to confirm if this is meant for a build around card in a specific limited set. Its hard to know how to evaluate this without some support cards. Since it is likely supporting an Azorius mechanical strategy in limited, white and blue being built around taxing an opponent with life payments felt out of color. I could see white having that when built in with black for orzhov, but it feels like a stretch to include it on an azorius design. The other issue is that cards such as Forbidding spirit don't actually use the stack to create the payments, simply the payment is conducted upon declaration of the attacks. most game state triggers are based on zone changes or game state changes (being declared as attacker/blocker). I think based on the games rules there's no way for an effect to see or trigger on mana being paid. there are cards that can reference colors of mana that were spend to cast them, but those triggers tend to be based on zone changes (ETB).
To make this card work how i'm guessing you want it to work, you need to have a keyword that this enchantment then can interact with. Here's an example (not necessarily a good one):
Tariff - X (Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under an opponent's control, you may pay this creature's tariff cost. If you do, that creature's controller may pay X, otherwise that creature enters the battlefield tapped.
This ability creatures a triggered event that other cards can see that still result in a potential mana payment, but the event is now tied to a trigger event and/or a keyword. combining this in an environment with an orzhov ability, in example (not necessarily a good one either):
Shake Down - (When this creature attacks, you may pay its shake down cost. If you do, until your next turn, target creature an opponent controls can't attack you or a planewalker you control unless its controller pays 1 life. If they do, you gain 1 life.)
Now that the environment has some specific trigger events, Extract Punishment has some specific events it can look for.
Extract Punishment 2WU
Enchantment (R)
Whenever you tariff or shake down a creature, you may draw a card. "It is not enough for them to pay for their crimes. We must also learn why they commit them in first place."
- Tala, Azorius Judge
Its certainly not as eloquent as the card you probably wanted it to be, but it's one option to solve some mechanical issues, though will be parasitic outside of limited. I think with more time and thought it might be possible to crack the necessary mechanical insight to get this card to react to things such as ghostly prison, but i'm not sure what all that would entail.
Dazzling DefenseU
Instant (U)
Target creature gets +0/+4 until end of turn. Creatures blocking or blocked by that creature lose all activated and triggered abilities. (This loss doens't end at end of turn.)
With a few tweaks this is an absolute winner. These are the sort of combat tricks wizards need to adapt blue into. To balance the card i would expect the defense portion to drop to +2 or +3 for balancing. To keep it clean for memory issues i see it as perfectly valuable for it to only last until end of turn. Most times you cast it, are going to likely strategically lead to an opponent's creature's death. This is personal preference, but it seems perfectly fair to just wipe out all abilities until end of turn. It will turn off first strike, trample, triggers, activations, etc. Keeping it at one mana i can see this design looking like this:
Dazzling Defence U
Instant (U)
Target creature gets +0/+3 until end of turn. Creatures blocking or blocked by that creature lose all abilities until end of turn.
Feverstoker1RR
Creature - Insect Horror (R)
Flying, wither
Creatures with -1/-1 counters on them must attack each turn if able. "If you're bitten, you go see the Doc if you've got any good sense... But, good sense's often the first thing to go after those bloodsuckers get to you." - Verna, Lowdocks Innkeeper
1/4
I like the combination of abilities on this. It's like a boggart ram-gang, that creates a unique downside for creatures that have been weakened. (take that kitchen finks!) my only thought is that Red has never printed a 1/4 flyer. Not that their isn't a first time for everything, but it's not really a downside for your opponent's evasive creatures to attack you every turn unless you have additional air defenses on board. Considering the point of this card is to basically poison their creatures with rage, so that 28 days later they will mindlessly attack you. This feels stronger as a groundpounder that basically trades up because of wither. I could see this being a constructed 4 of if tweaked similar to:
Feverstoker 2RR
Creature - Elemental Horror (R)
Menace, Wither
Creatures with -1/-1 counters on them attack each turn if able. "If you're bitten, you go see the Doc if you've got any good sense... But, good sense's often the first thing to go after those bloodsuckers get to you." - Verna, Lowdocks Innkeeper
3/4
All good stuff everyone. hopefully i can help stir up some critical thinking about these designs, because i like what i was seeing!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Easy Dude. You're being very un-Dude.
____________________________________________
Quell U
Instant (R)
Counter target spell that targets you or a teammate, or a permanent controlled by you or teammate.
Cycling 2
I'm guessing that this is what your design is doing, just with different wording? I got tripped on who's 'opponent' is being referenced. my opponent, or my opponent's opponent. Then the internet broke when i tried googling that. Anyways, food for thought on templating.
Actually the intent was to target a spell your opponent was casting on themselves or their own stuff. Sorry if it was confusing. I gave it cycling because it was so narrow. I actually don't really like really narrow answers like this, but didn't have many other ideas yesterday.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How do you feel about websites where people with similar interests exchange ideas?
I'm forum!
Actually the intent was to target a spell your opponent was casting on themselves or their own stuff. Sorry if it was confusing. I gave it cycling because it was so narrow. I actually don't really like really narrow answers like this, but didn't have many other ideas yesterday.
No worries, so it was meant as an anti-goodstuff that my opponents are trying to use. i know a lot of spells that do good stuff for a player don't target. the just use the language "you (effect)." without target in the language they would get around this spell. there's no really easy way to fix that. you could add a "not" to the you or a teammate template, to change it to opponents or no one at all. But then that one mana spell could counter almost every board sweeper ever. As compensation since it is very narrow you could consider allowing it to see abilities along with spells. Either way, fixing the language on this one is pretty simple. I just added "is...ing" to clear up what this spell is focusing on.
Quell U
Instant (R)
Counter target spell that is targeting an opponent, or a permanent controlled by an opponent.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Easy Dude. You're being very un-Dude.
____________________________________________
As an aside, Archemediesx, you're doing exactly what I suggested should be done more often with the DCC a few years ago - people giving actual feedback on the cards other people post.
I'm happy to be helpful when i can. I know constructive criticism can be difficult to digest when not used to it, but i wouldn't post anything if i didn't feel it could be of benefit. And in the end its all suggestions anyways. No one needs to actually concern with anything i rattle off.
Light of the Safehold2(G/W)
Enchantment (U)
At the beginning of your upkeep, return a creature you control to its owner's hand. If you do, you gain 3 life.
Strait up liked this one a lot save one caveat: With hybrid, designs have always been about what they share in common. Blink would be a shared a ability between White-Blue, and life gain would be White-Green. Under that logic this would need to be a strait mulitcolor costed spell. 1WG. Multicolor spells are all about disparate abilities that come together. So white brings blink, and green brings life gain.
Tuunbaq, Arctic Scorge3UBB
Legendary Creature- Spirit Bear
Islandwalk
Opponents cannot gain life.
6/8
I think the biggest thing for me about this design is trying to dissect it and understand where it's coming from. There's nothing mechanically wrong with Tunnbaq. Blue has islandwalk, and black shares opponents cant gain life with red. But putting on my Melvin cap, i wonder if all the pieces of this design aren't coming together to make a cohesive whole that fits the flavor. You have type spirit bear. Spirits typically involve some kind of flying, Enter the battlefields or other trickery. Bears don't have a lot of mechanical identity, but they tend to be medium sized and close to green in color. For me the type line isn't syncing up with the abilities of this card. You didn't include a rarity, but based on the abilities i wouldn't see this being mechanically any stronger than a Dominaria uncommon legendary creature. most rare legendary creatures are going to include triggered, activated or enter the battlefield abilities for their game play to really sink their teeth into their power level. it's the reason why you hear the term "bomb rare". Most creatures at rare are expected to dominate the battlefield.
Days of Questioning2W
Enchantment - Aura (Uncommon)
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature can't attack or block.
At the beginning of your upkeep, investigate. (Create a colorless Clue artifact token with "2, Sacrifice this artifact: Draw a card.")
oh my god, i want this in my cube that includes investigate as a sub-theme in white lol. Flavor win, and i like the psudo-arrest with an upside. Winner winner chicken dinner
Blightsteel Invocation1B
Instant (U)
Target creature gains indestructible and infect until end of turn.
Clean. and i do love clean at Common/uncommon. I went back to check on Blightsteel and talk about dropping the ball. They teased blighsteel with blightsteel colossus and never went anywhere with it. Does exactly what a card in mirrodin besieged should have been doing.
Arcane Banishment2WU
Enchantment (U)
Flash
When Arcane Banishment enters the battlefield, exile target spell until Arcane Banishment leaves the battlefield.
Your opponents can't play spells with the same name as the exiled card.
I gave this vote to net10 only because i felt this one had a little too much going on, otherwise this was a clear winner for me. I think if it's going to prevent any further casting of the exiled spell it's very efficient at 4 mana. Since it's unrestricted with what it can banish, 5 mana strikes me as a better balance for fair. Without the casting restriction, 4 mana seems perfect. Also, they haven't explored this space much, but spell queller templating wise indicates that exiling spells works different from permanents, and you would need to adapt that template for this mechanically to work. It's a wordy card, but beautiful in execution. Spell queller without legs, but i like it because it doesn't die to doom blade.
Garrulous Gasconade1RG
Sorcery (U)
Target creature gets +2/+2 until end of turn, then choose one -
Creatures with power 2 or less cannot block it this turn.
Creatures with power 2 or less must block it this turn if able.
Honestly, there is nothing i have to comment on here. I voted differently out of personal preference. Good design, does exact what one would expect in combat. Surprised wizards hasn't done something similar yet. minor thought, but depending on limited environment i could see this needing to be costed 2RG.
Great designs today. this was seriously a tough day to make only two votes.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Easy Dude. You're being very un-Dude.
____________________________________________
So I agree with you on principle, Archemedies. Augury Adept is one of my least favorite designs ever. I think the whole beauty of hybrid is finding effects that work in both colors individually.
Fair enough, and i see that now. The good news is, if the worse we're discussing is mana theory, then i would call your design a win.
To further wax some philosophical, while the astute magic player will seek to make green bounce effects work out positively for them, the design of green self bounce exists as a drawback. Where as white uses it to save creatures. I'm wondering if the hybrid of those two design patterns wouldn't be somewhere at the line between forced bounce, and at-will flicker.
"2 , Return a creature you control to its owner's hand: You gain 3 life. Activate this ability only as a sorcery"
That's where my mind went thinking of where that line might exist. I usually try to balance these kind of effects from being broken with mana cost associations. I definitely think they walked into a corner with hybrid. Half the designs serious bend their own color theory.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Easy Dude. You're being very un-Dude.
____________________________________________
Nim Execution5B
Instant (C)
Affinity for artifacts
Destroy target creature.
I like it a lot. Those who remember affinity know the mechanic is absolutely busted, so make sure you balance the colored mana accordingly. At its current rate, in modern constructed decks this becomes murder for B
Living Catapult2G
Creature- Tree
Defender
Sacrifice creature: Deal X damage to target creature, player, or planeswalker, where X is the sacrificed creature's power.
0/7
So this got my vote today. not because of where it stands but what i see in it. The first place this design went in my mind was wall of roots. To sell the flavor of a living weapon made from a tree, flavorfully it should get weaker with each use. for only three mana the range of toughness should be 3-5 based on rarity. Also, it needs a gate so it can't automatically machine gun an opponent out of nowhere. Tapping and/or mana to ensure it's "fair".
For templating anything that hits a creature, player, or planeswalker simply can be templated as "any target". Also templating wise, since the ability belongs to the living catapult, in the effect line "Living Catapult deals X damage..." because damage always has to have a source. There's a really fun card here that with a a few tweaks and some finessing is hiliarous and awesome. fling is already great. Living Catapult is going to be even better.
Your Move, My Nemesis2WB
Sorcery (Mythic)
Create a 6/6 white Golem artifact creature token and target opponent create a 6/6 black Golem artifact creature token. Choose three: Flying, first strike, vigilance, trample, lifelink and haste. Your token gains those three abilities and the other token gains the rest.
So i looked over the list of abilities on this, and i have to say i don't want to give ANY of those to a titan that my opponent controls lol. I get that this card wants to create tension of diametrically opposed creatures, but as a player i feel bad giving my opponent a 6/6. as an opponent, i would be happy if my opponents cast this because it feels like more of an upside to the opposite player. Even if i don't get to choose my abilities, a 6/6 with any two of those (assuming i get haste, boo) is still destructive. Flying, Haste, Lifelink feels like it will be the optimal configuration in common scenarios. The choices are holistically predetermined and are going to make players who don't see the optimal configurations based on board state feel bad.
Granted this is just one player's take on this design. So take it with a grain of salt. But with card selection, i'm very pragmatic on what i give my opponents as drawback gifts.
Exile target creature with converted mana cost 3 or less. Return it to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.
Counter target noncreature spell with converted mana cost 3 or less. If that spell is countered this way, exile it instead of putting it into its owner's graveyard.
It looks wordy, but i like this a lot. Once you get past the wordiness it's a rather simple card. I feel like there's a cycle of "charms" that can come from this template. not specifically exile, but how the two ally colors find similar ground. It feels like a fresh take on azorius charm. Instead of three small abilities, the cycle could feature two stronger abilities per card.
Clairvoyant Action1U
Instant (R)
If you've scried this turn, counter up to one target spell.
Scry 3.
there's nothing wrong with this design. I will admit that out of personal preference i just didn't feel 'wowed'.
Also, since it has a gate on the counterspell portion specific to scrying, that i feel a little bad that it has scry, but it doesn't trigger itself. (I say that because you have scry at the bottom of the card. if you want it's own scry to trigger the counterspell it would need to scry 3 first, then have the counter ability after.)
I had a thought that this would make a great kicker counterspell. If i were submitting a kicker variant of this card i would go with:
Heavy Contemplation 1U
Instant (R)
Kicker - 1U
Scry 3.
If this spell was kicked counter target spell.
Since its a variant of your design i promise not to submit it for competition.
Surprisingly there are only two kicker counter spells, and only one gets a bonus, spell contortion. still a lot of design space to be explored.
Catacomb CatastrophexxRR
Sorcery (R)
Delve
~ deals X damage to any target.
Like affinity, Delve is also a busted mechanic. *slow clap for wizards*. Hard to say how to balance this one. You already have double red and double X. Go up to triple red and it becomes a mono color card. i could almost see this balanced better as delve earthquake. This one of those cards that needs playtesting galore to find the sweet spot of castability, and power level. I liked it, but just not enough to win the day.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Easy Dude. You're being very un-Dude.
____________________________________________
Actually, after a bit of research on how before-game abilities trigger, I think my card works quite well without any special wording. According to The Gatherer, Leyline-type abilities trigger starting with the player going first, so that player wouldn't be going second when this card triggers. I'm already accounting for multiplayer by restricting it to only players going second. I actually deleted my call for help on the wording, but you're too quick.
I didn't even realize that Power Play existed. I didn't really pay much attention to either of the Conspiracy sets.
Edit: Here's the blurb from The Gatherer that makes me think my card works as is....
"A player’s “opening hand” is the hand of cards the player has after all players have taken mulligans and “scryed” if applicable. If players have any cards in hand that allow actions to be taken with them from a player’s opening hand, the starting player takes all such actions first in any order, followed by each other player in turn order. Then the first turn begins."
Edit2: Huh. Never mind, in multiplayer, my card still has confusion when a third (newly second) player's card triggers.
Edit3: Dang it! Never mind again. My card is still fine in this situation because that third (newly second) player would then steal going first themselves. This would go around the table like this until someone couldn't produce a Scene Stealer, or until it got back to the player that was originally going first. It's actually way less confusing than I'm making it out to be. I'll just quit posting now.
(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)
Regarding your card submission today-- I really like it! But the wording of the 'Good Run' half confuses me-- I think it means to say "for each permanent that entered the battlefield this turn, create a token that is a copy of it"- am I right? Because as written it seems to say to "create *1* token, which is a copy of every permanent that entered the battlefield this turn," which wouldn't be possible.
In which of the two threads for today (June 4th) should I post my card? The one by Flatline or the one by Indighost?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
Thanks void. Sorry for the confusion. I wanted to avoid needing to put the tread up at 2 AM as I did the night before, and I hadn't heard anything from Indighost at the time. It just so happens that we were posting the thread at the same time.
That said, I can put the DCC up this month if it makes Indighost's life easier. It sounds like he's having a hard time with his internet-related technology. As it stands now though, I'm assuming he's posting this month unless I hear otherwise.
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)
Is there a set time the new day's thread gets posted? I finished up my post for 6/5 just now, about at midnight my time--not that I was worried because so far every day I'd posted people had been adding to the thread until ~2-3am my time. It seems the thread for 6/6 was posted while I was making my post for 6/5 though, which is a pity.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm personally having a hard time evaluating the mechanic. It plays out so differently on every card. On this one it's like a two-turn combat trick on a 2/1 body. On others it can be just an undercosted rental fatty like Calciderm. On others it can be a combo enabler (imagine giving a mythic dragon ethereal, firebreathing, and a remove counter trigger.). While this particular card has a very distinct and obvious mission, some Ethereal cards might be rather ambiguous in how you're supposed to play with them (maybe that's good, maybe that's bad).
Like Vanishing, there's a lot of versatility here -- it can be a "workhorse mechanic". And like Vanishing, it can make a Limited gameplay feel and play different from other sets. I'm trying to figure out why one would choose one over the other.
I misread netn10's card as an effect you can play once from the GY and then it gets exiled (like flashback without the "play from hand" mode). Not sure if that was the intent.
For mine, I've been trying to come up with some clever way to use hybrid to basically smush different color's removal methods together (was trying to combine burn and bounce for aw while) and have it feel intuitive and on-color but apparently I still can't get it to work.
I'm forum!
@DiscardUnearth....Don't take my comment the wrong way. What you're doing makes sense. The opponent being able to choose the creature is very reminiscent of sacrifice, which is certainly a black mechanic. My main issue is with the fact that black already has the most forms of removal, destroy, sacrifice, exile, -X/-X, so it doesn't really need any more. Also, putting cards on top of libraries feels uniquely W/U to me, and I'd prefer to keep it that way.
Dew Drops W
Enchantment (C)
Ethereal 4
When a counter is removed from Dew Drops, you gain 2 life.
---------
That doesn't work. I'd like for that to work because it helps minimize complexity of non-creature cards with ethereal. I wish there were a way to resolve this conundrum.
Indeed, However Looking back at these three cards they should all be 6/6, just makes stats easier to track.
Also quick edit adding 1 generic and PT of Griffin 1/5 > 2/4 and 3/7 > 4/6
Minor nitpick: You need to say "target opponent" because if you can target yourself with it, it becomes way too good in the right deck as a 2 mana early harvest. And it would get even better if you had two, because one can steal your opponent's lands, then the other lets you untap all of your and your opponent's lands.
I'm forum!
lookashiny, I noticed something else with this card. There is a corner case where you put it on an opponent's creature, and you can use the -1/-1 trigger on the enchanted creature or another creature that player is attacking/blocking with. This could be used as a pseudo-pacifism on a 1 toughness or 1 power creature, or to scare your opponent from gang-attacking if they have something like llanowar elves. Not sure if you're intending on this.
I'm forum!
the wording on this is difficult to parse. i had to read it several times to convince myself the trigger wasn't dealing damage to the owner of the targeting agent. i might recommend breaking it up into two triggers.
Whenever an opponent becomes the target of a spell, that player loses 2 life.
Whenever a spell or ability an opponent controls is countered, that player loses 2 life. (Assuming you're not concerned with the few corner cases where a spell is targeted and not being countered.)
Whenever a spell or ability an opponent controls becomes the target of a spell or ability they don't control, that opponent loses 2 life. (definitely more wordy)
Just wondering if this was intended to untap a tapped creature, since it can potentially give haste to a tapped creature? there's no 'untap' in the description.
Also with these short term gain control spells that result in a dead creature, does the Aura add to the design an element that wouldn't be achieved with a sorcery/instant?
I liked both of these, but they were causing me some head scratching to figure out.
____________________________________________
I've tried other wordings for this in the past but this one seemed an improvement and the most concise. The one thing you suggest that I think might both clear things up and put a little bit of a cap on what it does is adding "they don't control", so that it doesn't also mean that your opponent pings themselves whenever they target themselves with a spell or whenever they try to copy one of their own spells.
It's basically intended to be a much more versatile Megrim / Liliana's Caress that not only also applies to counterspells but even applies to blue pseudo-counterspell abilities like "return target spell to its owner's hand". Would fit right into the 8-rack deck archetype, but expand its options to blue control.
Technically, as worded, it also applies to burn spells and literally any spell or ability that targets a player or opponent. So it's a pretty open-ended card that I could see being exploited in Grixis or Esper quite easily. Modern would have a field day.
This was another one of those cards where i had to make sure i was comprehending the templating correctly. Wizards started using the templating "you or a teammate" when they designed surge, which i find to be good language when working with multiplayer cards. I adopted this templating when i design multiplayer enabled cards. Based on the language you used for Quell:
I'm guessing that this is what your design is doing, just with different wording? I got tripped on who's 'opponent' is being referenced. my opponent, or my opponent's opponent. Then the internet broke when i tried googling that. Anyways, food for thought on templating.
Just wanted to confirm if this is meant for a build around card in a specific limited set. Its hard to know how to evaluate this without some support cards. Since it is likely supporting an Azorius mechanical strategy in limited, white and blue being built around taxing an opponent with life payments felt out of color. I could see white having that when built in with black for orzhov, but it feels like a stretch to include it on an azorius design. The other issue is that cards such as Forbidding spirit don't actually use the stack to create the payments, simply the payment is conducted upon declaration of the attacks. most game state triggers are based on zone changes or game state changes (being declared as attacker/blocker). I think based on the games rules there's no way for an effect to see or trigger on mana being paid. there are cards that can reference colors of mana that were spend to cast them, but those triggers tend to be based on zone changes (ETB).
To make this card work how i'm guessing you want it to work, you need to have a keyword that this enchantment then can interact with. Here's an example (not necessarily a good one):
Tariff -
This ability creatures a triggered event that other cards can see that still result in a potential mana payment, but the event is now tied to a trigger event and/or a keyword. combining this in an environment with an orzhov ability, in example (not necessarily a good one either):
Shake Down -
Now that the environment has some specific trigger events, Extract Punishment has some specific events it can look for.
Its certainly not as eloquent as the card you probably wanted it to be, but it's one option to solve some mechanical issues, though will be parasitic outside of limited. I think with more time and thought it might be possible to crack the necessary mechanical insight to get this card to react to things such as ghostly prison, but i'm not sure what all that would entail.
With a few tweaks this is an absolute winner. These are the sort of combat tricks wizards need to adapt blue into. To balance the card i would expect the defense portion to drop to +2 or +3 for balancing. To keep it clean for memory issues i see it as perfectly valuable for it to only last until end of turn. Most times you cast it, are going to likely strategically lead to an opponent's creature's death. This is personal preference, but it seems perfectly fair to just wipe out all abilities until end of turn. It will turn off first strike, trample, triggers, activations, etc. Keeping it at one mana i can see this design looking like this:
I like the combination of abilities on this. It's like a boggart ram-gang, that creates a unique downside for creatures that have been weakened. (take that kitchen finks!) my only thought is that Red has never printed a 1/4 flyer. Not that their isn't a first time for everything, but it's not really a downside for your opponent's evasive creatures to attack you every turn unless you have additional air defenses on board. Considering the point of this card is to basically poison their creatures with rage, so that 28 days later they will mindlessly attack you. This feels stronger as a groundpounder that basically trades up because of wither. I could see this being a constructed 4 of if tweaked similar to:
All good stuff everyone. hopefully i can help stir up some critical thinking about these designs, because i like what i was seeing!
____________________________________________
Actually the intent was to target a spell your opponent was casting on themselves or their own stuff. Sorry if it was confusing. I gave it cycling because it was so narrow. I actually don't really like really narrow answers like this, but didn't have many other ideas yesterday.
I'm forum!
No worries, so it was meant as an anti-goodstuff that my opponents are trying to use. i know a lot of spells that do good stuff for a player don't target. the just use the language "you (effect)." without target in the language they would get around this spell. there's no really easy way to fix that. you could add a "not" to the you or a teammate template, to change it to opponents or no one at all. But then that one mana spell could counter almost every board sweeper ever. As compensation since it is very narrow you could consider allowing it to see abilities along with spells. Either way, fixing the language on this one is pretty simple. I just added "is...ing" to clear up what this spell is focusing on.
____________________________________________
I'm happy to be helpful when i can. I know constructive criticism can be difficult to digest when not used to it, but i wouldn't post anything if i didn't feel it could be of benefit. And in the end its all suggestions anyways. No one needs to actually concern with anything i rattle off.
Strait up liked this one a lot save one caveat: With hybrid, designs have always been about what they share in common. Blink would be a shared a ability between White-Blue, and life gain would be White-Green. Under that logic this would need to be a strait mulitcolor costed spell. 1WG. Multicolor spells are all about disparate abilities that come together. So white brings blink, and green brings life gain.
I think the biggest thing for me about this design is trying to dissect it and understand where it's coming from. There's nothing mechanically wrong with Tunnbaq. Blue has islandwalk, and black shares opponents cant gain life with red. But putting on my Melvin cap, i wonder if all the pieces of this design aren't coming together to make a cohesive whole that fits the flavor. You have type spirit bear. Spirits typically involve some kind of flying, Enter the battlefields or other trickery. Bears don't have a lot of mechanical identity, but they tend to be medium sized and close to green in color. For me the type line isn't syncing up with the abilities of this card. You didn't include a rarity, but based on the abilities i wouldn't see this being mechanically any stronger than a Dominaria uncommon legendary creature. most rare legendary creatures are going to include triggered, activated or enter the battlefield abilities for their game play to really sink their teeth into their power level. it's the reason why you hear the term "bomb rare". Most creatures at rare are expected to dominate the battlefield.
oh my god, i want this in my cube that includes investigate as a sub-theme in white lol. Flavor win, and i like the psudo-arrest with an upside. Winner winner chicken dinner
Clean. and i do love clean at Common/uncommon. I went back to check on Blightsteel and talk about dropping the ball. They teased blighsteel with blightsteel colossus and never went anywhere with it. Does exactly what a card in mirrodin besieged should have been doing.
I gave this vote to net10 only because i felt this one had a little too much going on, otherwise this was a clear winner for me. I think if it's going to prevent any further casting of the exiled spell it's very efficient at 4 mana. Since it's unrestricted with what it can banish, 5 mana strikes me as a better balance for fair. Without the casting restriction, 4 mana seems perfect. Also, they haven't explored this space much, but spell queller templating wise indicates that exiling spells works different from permanents, and you would need to adapt that template for this mechanically to work. It's a wordy card, but beautiful in execution. Spell queller without legs, but i like it because it doesn't die to doom blade.
Honestly, there is nothing i have to comment on here. I voted differently out of personal preference. Good design, does exact what one would expect in combat. Surprised wizards hasn't done something similar yet. minor thought, but depending on limited environment i could see this needing to be costed 2RG.
Great designs today. this was seriously a tough day to make only two votes.
____________________________________________
However, there is precedent for self-bounce in green. I'm not suggesting green get blink. All I'm saying is not only do Whitemane Lion and Blinking Spirit and Alley Evasion still fit under the current color pie, so do Roaring Primadox and Ambush Krotiq and Invasive Species.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Fair enough, and i see that now. The good news is, if the worse we're discussing is mana theory, then i would call your design a win.
To further wax some philosophical, while the astute magic player will seek to make green bounce effects work out positively for them, the design of green self bounce exists as a drawback. Where as white uses it to save creatures. I'm wondering if the hybrid of those two design patterns wouldn't be somewhere at the line between forced bounce, and at-will flicker.
"2
That's where my mind went thinking of where that line might exist. I usually try to balance these kind of effects from being broken with mana cost associations. I definitely think they walked into a corner with hybrid. Half the designs serious bend their own color theory.
____________________________________________
I like it a lot. Those who remember affinity know the mechanic is absolutely busted, so make sure you balance the colored mana accordingly. At its current rate, in modern constructed decks this becomes murder for B
So this got my vote today. not because of where it stands but what i see in it. The first place this design went in my mind was wall of roots. To sell the flavor of a living weapon made from a tree, flavorfully it should get weaker with each use. for only three mana the range of toughness should be 3-5 based on rarity. Also, it needs a gate so it can't automatically machine gun an opponent out of nowhere. Tapping and/or mana to ensure it's "fair".
For templating anything that hits a creature, player, or planeswalker simply can be templated as "any target". Also templating wise, since the ability belongs to the living catapult, in the effect line "Living Catapult deals X damage..." because damage always has to have a source. There's a really fun card here that with a a few tweaks and some finessing is hiliarous and awesome. fling is already great. Living Catapult is going to be even better.
So i looked over the list of abilities on this, and i have to say i don't want to give ANY of those to a titan that my opponent controls lol. I get that this card wants to create tension of diametrically opposed creatures, but as a player i feel bad giving my opponent a 6/6. as an opponent, i would be happy if my opponents cast this because it feels like more of an upside to the opposite player. Even if i don't get to choose my abilities, a 6/6 with any two of those (assuming i get haste, boo) is still destructive. Flying, Haste, Lifelink feels like it will be the optimal configuration in common scenarios. The choices are holistically predetermined and are going to make players who don't see the optimal configurations based on board state feel bad.
Granted this is just one player's take on this design. So take it with a grain of salt. But with card selection, i'm very pragmatic on what i give my opponents as drawback gifts.
It looks wordy, but i like this a lot. Once you get past the wordiness it's a rather simple card. I feel like there's a cycle of "charms" that can come from this template. not specifically exile, but how the two ally colors find similar ground. It feels like a fresh take on azorius charm. Instead of three small abilities, the cycle could feature two stronger abilities per card.
there's nothing wrong with this design. I will admit that out of personal preference i just didn't feel 'wowed'.
Also, since it has a gate on the counterspell portion specific to scrying, that i feel a little bad that it has scry, but it doesn't trigger itself. (I say that because you have scry at the bottom of the card. if you want it's own scry to trigger the counterspell it would need to scry 3 first, then have the counter ability after.)
I had a thought that this would make a great kicker counterspell. If i were submitting a kicker variant of this card i would go with:
Since its a variant of your design i promise not to submit it for competition.
Surprisingly there are only two kicker counter spells, and only one gets a bonus, spell contortion. still a lot of design space to be explored.
Like affinity, Delve is also a busted mechanic. *slow clap for wizards*. Hard to say how to balance this one. You already have double red and double X. Go up to triple red and it becomes a mono color card. i could almost see this balanced better as delve earthquake. This one of those cards that needs playtesting galore to find the sweet spot of castability, and power level. I liked it, but just not enough to win the day.
____________________________________________
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
I didn't even realize that Power Play existed. I didn't really pay much attention to either of the Conspiracy sets.
Edit: Here's the blurb from The Gatherer that makes me think my card works as is....
Edit2: Huh. Never mind, in multiplayer, my card still has confusion when a third (newly second) player's card triggers.
Edit3: Dang it! Never mind again. My card is still fine in this situation because that third (newly second) player would then steal going first themselves. This would go around the table like this until someone couldn't produce a Scene Stealer, or until it got back to the player that was originally going first. It's actually way less confusing than I'm making it out to be. I'll just quit posting now.
Regarding your card submission today-- I really like it! But the wording of the 'Good Run' half confuses me-- I think it means to say "for each permanent that entered the battlefield this turn, create a token that is a copy of it"- am I right? Because as written it seems to say to "create *1* token, which is a copy of every permanent that entered the battlefield this turn," which wouldn't be possible.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
That said, I can put the DCC up this month if it makes Indighost's life easier. It sounds like he's having a hard time with his internet-related technology. As it stands now though, I'm assuming he's posting this month unless I hear otherwise.