MTG Salvation

Great, thanks a lot! I was mostly leaning toward Signature I myself too. Glad I have mechanical reasons to back that up.

I imagined mageborn as a spinoff of Imprint, so yeah, exiling it is. Wasn't "imprint" itself an action word that was introduced with Imprint? Or was it done away with when it was reintroduced?

Anyway, do you think Improvised or Mageborn creatures would be more fun to play?

Long time no read, Sallies.

The set I've (re)started working on has a cast-a-ton-of-spells themed set with some mono-colored flavor thrown into mix.

I'm having some trouble nailing the keywords (/ ability words).

I want:

1) one that will fit into blue, red, black, and sometimes red (in that order) that would go mostly one instants/sorceries.

2) one that will fit into green, white, black, and sometimes red that would probably work best on perms.

Here's what I've been kicking around, any critiques or suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Here is an article you might be interested in.

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/stf/177

Vess is after her demon. Perhaps she got rid of her debt to him by taking care of Avacyn?
--

Quote from killem2

They need to come up with a proper conversion from 1,2,3,4,5 so we can go in between the editions.

Looks like this is what they're aiming for.

Quote from Monte »

First and foremost, as Mike said, this isn't another salvo in the so-called edition wars. This isn't an attempt to get you to play Dungeons & Dragons in a new way. This is the game you've already been playing, no matter what edition or version you prefer. The goal here is to embrace all forms of the D&D experience and to not exclude anyone. Imagine a game where the core essence of D&D has been distilled down to a very simple but entirely playable-in-its-right game. Now imagine that the game offered you modular, optional add-ons that allow you to create the character you want to play while letting the Dungeon Master create the game he or she wants to run.

[URL="[url]http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd%2F4ll%2F20120116[/url]"]Source[/URL].

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around how this will be possible in the least.
--

Fair warning: the role-playing, acting stuff is what I like most.

A lot of people I know who liked D&D really liked the game 3:16. It's kind of like Starship Troopers (the movie), but bloodier. It's super cheap and real easy to learn. They use only sixes as I remember though.

If you honestly hate the role-playing element, you should look into the D&D board games. They might set you back a bit, but once you have one you can play it over and over.
--

I figured this would have its own thread already (maybe I'm missing it?), but Wizards announced this week that they have begun working on yet another edition.

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120109

I didn't mind 4th edition as much as most, it was good at what it set out to do. I've mostly moved on to "indie" story game stuff, but this is interesting nonetheless.

What are your thoughts?

Quote from Ratinyourwalls

Pretty close. WotC implemented a bunch of changes that didn't go over well with players. They took a "Well you'll just have to learn to like it, there isn't any other alternative!" approach to the community complaints (sound familiar guys?) and then Pathfinder came out and people flooded into that game. For almost a year now it's outsold 4E and now WotC is busy playing catch up. They tried to make an "Essentials" product which was basically an attempt to get 4E to be as similar to 3.5 as possible to draw back pathfinder fans but it didn't, it just alienated the people who liked 4E. So now they are really in a bind, they've barely released any products in the last six months, and there is a new edition coming down the pipes.

So yeah. As much as MTG has its problems right now, D&D has it worse.

So much inaccurate info here.

First of all, Pathfinder only just pulled ahead of D&D this summer (the CEO announced it at the end of June) and that doesn't take into account the sales of subscriptions to D&D Insider, which supposedly rakes in a ton of money. And by all accounts, the sales of D&D and Pathfinder are pretty close (and have been) no matter how you slice it.

D&D 4th edition was meant to streamline the game so that everyone could play it, not just their previous fans. D&D wasn't doing so well even in 3.5. Compared to WOW, or even Magic, it doesn't pull in much for the amount of work the company puts into it.

Even before Pathfinder pulled ahead though, WotC has been trying to strengthen up D&D. The Essentials were nice (and not at all like Pathfinder, what are you even talking about?) for beginners, which was the point, they brought Monte Cook back into the fold, and now LaPille, the head developer of WotC's best property, is moving over to their team. Looks pretty good for D&D. Or desperate, depending on how you look at it.

Anyway, not trying to start an edition war, just thought I'd set the record straight. Also, thought that might add some insight into why LaPille might be moving.

Quote from Valarin »

d20 really was the final word in RPG game design. That's the reason my playgroup never even glanced at 4.0. d20 works beautifully.

What? You must have never heard of Vincent Baker or Luke Crane.
--

Lightning Musket 1
Artifact--Equipment [u]
~ doesn't uptap during its controller's untap step.
Equipped creature has "t: Untap ~."
t: ~ deals 2 damage to target creature or player. Play this ability only if it is equipped.
Equip 1

Night of the Dark Moon 4BB
Sorcery [r]
Each other player sacrifices a creature for each Swamp you control.

Quote from flappy

On topic: please don't submit obvious rarity or color violators and "leave it to development"
A splashy rare looks nicer in an all-common round.
Don't be that guy.

(I was kidding when I made that comment about development. Maybe my dry wit doesn't come off as well online ;).)
--

Quote from Lorgalis

I'll be changing my card. However, the card that is winning this round (Takaline's) is NO WAY uncommon...A card that can potentially steal 3 permanents (and that will almost always steal 2 permanents) will never be uncommon.

That's what development is for

(I personally think it should have "and" a la Violent Ultimatum.)

Quote from GG Crono

("Choose an opponent. If that player controls more permanents than you, he or she discards a card at random. Otherwise, that player discards a card." I think that's how you'd want it.)

Works for me. I'll just slip in some targeting though.
--

Originally Posted by Metallix87
Spellhide Herbivore
Creature - Dinosaur (C)
Whenever Spellhide Herbivore becomes the target of a spell an opponent controls, you gain 3 life.
3/3

Greed's Burden B
Sorcery [c]
If target player controls more permanents than you, he or she discards a card at random. Otherwise, that player discards a card.

(There has to be a better way to word that, right?)
--

Privileged Rebuttal 1UU
Instant [c]
Counter target spell.
Spoils--If you control more permanents than an opponent, exile the countered card.