I would assume if you're willing to cut "good spells that are not must-have" in Selesnya, you'd be trying to replace them with great spells that *are* must-have, not with pure utility spells that are relatively narrow. I'm not even sure this is main-deckable when things like Indrik Stomphowler exist, and that's not even a must-have these days.
All said, this looks like a great card, but not on par with the power level of what you could play in its place.
That's the trouble with these kinds of cards. Once you have two or three of them, they are all kind of same-y. The stock 'terse' card effects in each color offer enough uniqueness, and everything else is either too wordy or overlaps too much.
Despite that, they are fun to think about...
Stained Glass Totem 4
Artifact
Chroma? -- T, discard a card: Do the following based on the discarded card's mana cost:
Create a 1/1 white soldier token for each white mana symbol;
Scry X where X is the number of blue mana symbols;
Target player loses one life for each black mana symbol;
Stained Glass Totem deals damage divided as you choose among any number of target creatures and/or players equal to the number of red mana symbols;
Untap target creature or land for each green mana symbol.
I'm not sure I've solved any of those problems, and I'm pretty sure this would need some new kind of template text or ability word to fit on a card. It could probably be made much stronger by looking at devotion instead of the discarded card.
Not to sound overly critical, but I'm not sure it's all that interesting. It's basically a modal charm implemented as a creature (A hydra pretending to by an elf, no less.)
If you could find a better way to interact counters with mana and/or artifact and enchantment removal, it might be more cohesive. It is also pretty inefficient at everything it does, even if it is very flexible.
I, for one, would very seriously enjoy playing a cube with balanced packs that are the same every time. That seems like a fantastic environment to analyze. It also seems like a lot of work.
This would probably be pretty fun, but I personally wouldn't want to do it. If the cards aren't draftable by themselves, and so you use a get-two-for-one-pick rule, then I'd think you could make a whole bunch of cards Cubable if you tacked free picks onto them. Which is to say, if you're doing this, you're doing it to support a draft gimmick to make pet cards playable, and I'm not sure these are the pet cards I'd want to make playable.
Would it have been so broken to just give you the mindslaver effect without giving the opponent and extra turn after? I guess it's pretty backbreaking anyway, but if you successfully case a 9-10 drop you SHOULD win the game.
Yeah, you should, but it doesn't have to be easy for you or unfair to your opponent.
This one is costed right and not too back-breaking. I like that it provides more reasons to play sorcery-speed removal, since there's so little reason to play it already. Other than that it's not too flashy, just like a bigger Simic Sky Swallower.
3 Opal Monolith
Artifact
As ~ enters the battlefield, choose a color. T: Choose one --
* Add one mana of the chosen color to your mana pool.
* Creatures you control of the chosen color get +1/+0 until end of turn.
* Creatures you control of the chosen color get +0/+1 until end of turn.
That seems strong. You'd have to say "cast a card with the same name", because you can't prove that the cast card is identical to the drawn one, though. It might just be safer to exile it and cast it from there, unless you're trying to enable some desperate discards.
There's no such thing as "win-more" cards. That's a thought-terminating cliche for people who can't imagine a sufficient variety of different roles and situations cards can be played in. There is value in protecting a winning position.
Overload doesn't require a "you don't control" clause:
702.95a Overload is a keyword that represents two static abilities that function while the spell with overload is on the stack. Overload [cost] means “You may choose to pay [cost] rather than pay this spell’s mana cost” and “If you chose to pay this spell’s overload cost, change its text by replacing all instances of the word ‘target’ with the word ‘each.’” Using the overload ability follows the rules for paying alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2f–h.
It's done like that on the printed cards for flavor reasons; "overload" implies you're putting a lot of extra power into the spell, which means the overload cost must be high. They make them one-sided to make the spells enticing at that cost.
Kindling Flame's overloaded effect is then "Deal the damage to each creature or each player," which is perfectly fine. It's just not all that flavorful as an overload.
This card is not scary. 0/1s are not a threat, and if Gaea's Anthem were a threat, you've already got threats, and better options in both situations. Curse of Predation scales far better. You don't have to protect it. Awakening Zone makes better tokens and can actually ramp you. You don't have to protect it. What deck wants worse versions of both of these cards at the same time? And it's harder to cast than either?
Best case scenario, you can drop her on turn 2, power out a mean 0/1 and attack for 2-4 extra damage on turn 4 with your multiple elf dorks.
Curse of Predation would have done the same thing, but with a single elf.
I guess this is supposed to be a wonky defensive filler card, where you pump out 0/1s to block while you cast removal spells all game, wait 'til they run out of spells, then start pumping and attacking. That's not how cube games tend to go, in my experience.
All said, this looks like a great card, but not on par with the power level of what you could play in its place.
Despite that, they are fun to think about...
Stained Glass Totem 4
Artifact
Chroma? -- T, discard a card: Do the following based on the discarded card's mana cost:
Create a 1/1 white soldier token for each white mana symbol;
Scry X where X is the number of blue mana symbols;
Target player loses one life for each black mana symbol;
Stained Glass Totem deals damage divided as you choose among any number of target creatures and/or players equal to the number of red mana symbols;
Untap target creature or land for each green mana symbol.
I'm not sure I've solved any of those problems, and I'm pretty sure this would need some new kind of template text or ability word to fit on a card. It could probably be made much stronger by looking at devotion instead of the discarded card.
Shimmering Mox 0
Artifact Enchantment
T: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool. Spend this mana only on enchantment spells and abilities.
If you could find a better way to interact counters with mana and/or artifact and enchantment removal, it might be more cohesive. It is also pretty inefficient at everything it does, even if it is very flexible.
Warrior's Wisdom1WR
Enchantment
Creatures you control have prowess.
1U: Return target spell you control to its owners hand.
Yeah, you should, but it doesn't have to be easy for you or unfair to your opponent.
This one is costed right and not too back-breaking. I like that it provides more reasons to play sorcery-speed removal, since there's so little reason to play it already. Other than that it's not too flashy, just like a bigger Simic Sky Swallower.
Artifact
As ~ enters the battlefield, choose a color.
T: Choose one --
* Add one mana of the chosen color to your mana pool.
* Creatures you control of the chosen color get +1/+0 until end of turn.
* Creatures you control of the chosen color get +0/+1 until end of turn.
But if anything, this card is a "lose-less" card.
It's done like that on the printed cards for flavor reasons; "overload" implies you're putting a lot of extra power into the spell, which means the overload cost must be high. They make them one-sided to make the spells enticing at that cost.
Kindling Flame's overloaded effect is then "Deal the damage to each creature or each player," which is perfectly fine. It's just not all that flavorful as an overload.
Best case scenario, you can drop her on turn 2, power out a mean 0/1 and attack for 2-4 extra damage on turn 4 with your multiple elf dorks.
Curse of Predation would have done the same thing, but with a single elf.
I guess this is supposed to be a wonky defensive filler card, where you pump out 0/1s to block while you cast removal spells all game, wait 'til they run out of spells, then start pumping and attacking. That's not how cube games tend to go, in my experience.