[UNKNOWN NAME - Codename: Blue Bitterblossom] 1U
Tribal Enchantment - Faerie
At the beginning of each end step, if you cast more than two spells this turn, create a 1/1 blue Faerie creature token with flying. If it is an opponent's turn, create an additional one of those tokens.
I just REALLY want a "BLUE" version of Bitterblossom
It's too slow on the one end. You can't cast second spells during your turn then wait/reserve for counters on the opponent's. In a creature based theme, this is still not really interactive enough, and will be too slow trying to keep equilibrium with draw/mana/spell casting to get the effect sufficient enough.
It's too accelerated on the other end. It basically ready, "play during your opponent's turn and get two creatures free".
There's no aspect of challenge that this is entirely self-sufficient around control spells that already have way too much domain influence. It's giving you a surplus of something with no expense or cost for it. There's no build up. The interactivity is mute, and doesn't require resources to be expended in any way. This isn't always a bad thing, it can boast vibrancy, but only when the interactivity revolves around other mute things to boost them and make them vibrant.
For example,
whenever a creature enters the battlefield tapped under your control, (bonus effect)
I do agree with Reap on it being too good on your opponent's turn. I would just leave it as "whenever you cast your second spell each turn, create a token". That seems like the right spot to be, especially for a color that can far more easily do that compared to other colors. There might be an argument for it being slightly undercosted just because of the color but Clarion Spirit exists and isn't exactly tearing up the tournament scene.
I like the card and think it has potential in a few different formats. Even keeping it at two tokens for the opponents' turns likely doesn't break it in Commander or Legacy but could be a big problem in Standard or maybe Limited just for gumming up the board too much. It is kind of a tricky card to be honest which is why I might lean towards going with the cleaner template. I think if you want the two tokens on an opponent's turn, I would think increasing the cost is prudent.
Also, if you go that route, a better template might be:
"Whenever you cast your second spell each turn, create a 1/1 blue Faerie creature token with flying. If it is an opponent's turn, create an additional one of those tokens".
Note that if you threw a deus ex machina ability on the card, with just the first effect, and the first cost, it would have the incentive boost it needs to keep pace with the game and needs.
Deus Ex Machina is a draw-type, card-advantage type keyword intended for use on instants, sorceries, enchantments, and artifacts. Each keyword is different, and their effects revolve around the primary types of draw (straight draw, wheel draw, and direct retrieval)—but also include scry effects, ponder, and index effects.
Here's an example from a recent post of mine, using the Deus Ex Machina Omen.
It is important to note that none of Reap's Deus Ex Machina abilities actually work within the rules and should just be ignored. I don't want to discount any suggestions he has for your card based on the card itself, but he never feels like cards by other people are good enough which is why both of his suggestions included significant additions that you didn't ask for.
I like where the card sits as it is. Might still be a little higher on the power scale in Standard, but I do think it is reasonable for most formats including Commander. Probably not Legacy playable but that is a massive hurdle either way. I still think the mana cost is likely a tricky thing to get for something like this but I do believe 3 mana makes it playable without being broken. It might be annoying at times, and it seems pretty much at home in a draw-go type deck (which I am always in favor of) and the 3 mana becomes a real decision that the blue player needs to make as that can be a critical turn to go shields down. At least, it is more of a decision to make than 2 mana.
The nice thing about it is that it counts itself so casting another spell after it can get you a token right away. Which, again, ties into a significant decision tree as to when to try to get use out of it.
There might still be an argument for putting it back to 2 mana but only ever creating a single token as I think that is still reasonable but I think the current version is playable and is in a good spot for the effect you want.
It is important to note that none of Reap's Deus Ex Machina abilities actually work within the rules and should just be ignored.
This isn't fair. Unlike some of his other designs the deus ex abilities usually work. Just not the way Reap thinks or wants them to. They're also usually massivly overpowered as add on effect and would nessecitate being their own 3 mana spell.
They're certainly not, because most of them work on both sides, offering both players advantages.
lol that I would develop something like this (to balance the game), and be able to explain its dynamics (for balance), but have no sense or touch of balance.
two totally opposite worlds?
The most powerful one is Sanctity, which offers a [draw up until you have five cards in hand] for the single user. However, it's intended only for legendary "Holy Grail" content. It's good, but it's still not broken. All the cards I've featured it on have a CMC of 5. It's well within range as I've developed around it.
All the others are universal, work within ranges, or are immensely tactical (surgical) with the advantages that they offer.
Once again, saying they don't work is like saying Disenchant doesn't work.
Hey, which is it by the way WizardMN? Is it one or both?
Really, the second ability isn't even necessary. If you can simply generate 1 creature token a turn doing what you're already doing then that's amazing. Note that the effect will stack as you play more, which means you can begin to get two tokens or better anyways. The question really becomes when within that time shouldn't you be able to finish off your opponent already by a greater strategy.
Once again, saying they don't work is like saying Disenchant doesn't work.
Hey, which is it by the way WizardMN? Is it one or both?
As has been explained to you multiple times, the "or" when choosing a target (as for Disenchant) is a singular action. Your abilities are triggered abilities and the "or" is part of a list of conditions that trigger that ability, and so it trigger each time any of those conditions are met. You don't have to choose one or the other for the trigger on a Sun Titan, or on a Blind Hunter, or Carth the Lion, or Daxos, Blessed by the Sun. Tell me, how do those cards work based on your "understanding" of the word "or"? When exactly do I choose for my sun titan to use its ability only the time it ETBs or if I get it when I attack instead?
There are 10 year olds at the LGS where I judge who understand this concept with 0 issues, so I'm not sure why its so hard for you to comprehend.
lol that I would develop something like this (to balance the game), and be able to explain its dynamics (for balance), but have no sense or touch of balance.
You already have no sense and no touch of balance, so you've already achieved your goal.
It's not in the comprehensive rulings anywhere that describes the context of "or" as singular when targeted.
There is no set parameter for the context of "or" and its usage in MTG, and its functionality has always been based on interpretation provided by comprehensive rulings of the individual cards. This is further more backed up that additional context is often used to provide coherence in subjective cases (such as the use of "and/or").
I provided you all with this—and you still insisted it wasn't acceptable.
This is the real problem here. You're like telling the company something doesn't work as it's been explained to you to do (without any probable means—such as violating the fundamentals of the English language).
No, the problem is you (a) spend time pontificating about a game you think is beneath you to actually play and (b) you fail to understand the basic grammatical differences in the two situations you argue are the same.
In almost 30 years of playing magic, you are literally the only person I have seen not understand this simple function of reading English.
That's a great cope for having no credible defense for your case.
Meanwhile, I can reference another recent case of the same.
I provided the context of a singular instance, where additional context would typically be added to denote that the effect was not singular; such as adding "this turn" to the ending clause of the animate land ability; also could be "any number of" added before lands to denote it was not a singular instance.
But you insist, using my own words to you against me, that I am the one pretending like I don't understand English.
As for the likeness of this Blueblossom to Clarion Spirit, with a Deus Ex Machina it would be indefinitely better than the spirit being that it's an Enchantment and free from removal by means of damage and kill spells. Way easier to stack, provides card advantage, harder to get rid of, and still perfectly balanced at two mana so long as it uses one of the more subtle Deus Ex Machina (which is really all it should need).
You never made a credible point in the first place, so there wasn't anything to defend. The comp rules are irrelevant and there aren't "comprehensive rulings of the individual cards" about this*, because its the basic grasp of English you seem not to get.
*That's not actually a thing, btw. There are the Comprehensive Rules and there are individual rulings in the FAQs that clarify how cards interact with the Comp Rules, but "Comprehensive Individual Rulings" is an oxymoron.
The "or" in target is a choice - "Go get an apple or an orange."
The "or" in a trigger is a list of conditions that make you do something - "Whenever you go outside or come back in, close the door behind you"
You've still not addressed when you make the "ETB or attacking" choice for the Sun Titan trigger you seem to think this wording requires. What about Syr Konrad, the Grim? That has two "or"s in the triggered ability, when do I choose which choice there?
Well I will say that my main idea for this is that many Faerie creatures have flash so there's instances of Faerie players playing their creatures with flash during their opponent's turn so here's my idea/inspiration for the "Blue Bitterblossom"
The "or" in target is a choice - "Go get an apple or an orange."
The "or" in a trigger is a list of conditions that make you do something - "Whenever you go outside or come back in, close the door behind you"
Those are just favorable examples to your suggested context, but not the sole context of their application.
Furthermore, consider that I have explained that this is referencing a [time frame] of which to interact within. This time frame is singular. In the context usage of [OR] where it has multifaceted context, the [time frame] application is also multifaceted to flex it. When Inferno Titan enters the battlefield or when it attacks—a multifaceted time frame—where the context adapts to cover the dynamics of this application. Attacks or blocks is another example of this.
Furthermore, if within this singular time frame multifaceted application was intended, then additional context would be provided for coherence of that (such as the use of and/or).
Obviously, the context can also be singular, based on the context of the descriptive application.
When you come home or go to the bank, pick up the kids from school.
When Inferno Titan enters the battlefield or when it attacks—a multifaceted time frame—where the context adapts to cover the dynamics of this application. Attacks or blocks is another example of this.
"When when you cast this card or it leaves the stack" —a multifaceted time frame—where the context adapts to cover the dynamics of this application. Attacks or blocks is another example of this.
It's "As you cast this spell or whenever it leaves the stack"; the wording composure is explicit not to leave so much ambiguity or misdirection.
After experimenting with several ways of composing the wording for this, it was for this exact reason "As you cast" and "whenever it leaves" was chosen for the corresponding clauses.
This is a single time frame of being on the stack (between entering and leaving); the act of entering and leaving are two different events happening within this time frame; bringing us full circle to the fact that the context is adaptive to the application (because it can be so diverse in this case). And thus, relies on additional context to help elaborate the intended application of context. This is exactly what has been done—and explained.
If it wanted to give you an option, and not be singular, it would not only use [OR] but instead would use [AND], then alternatively could use [AND/OR] to be descriptive that the application of context here is multifaceted, and the function provides you with a multifaceted option.
It's "As you cast this spell or whenever it leaves the stack"; the wording composure is explicit not to leave so much ambiguity or misdirection.
After experimenting with several ways of composing the wording for this, it was for this exact reason "As you cast" and "whenever it leaves" was chosen for the corresponding clauses.
This is a single time frame of being on the stack (between entering and leaving); the act of entering and leaving are two different events happening within this time frame; bringing us full circle to the fact that the context is adaptive to the application (because it can be so diverse in this case). And thus, relies on additional context to help elaborate the intended application of context. This is exactly what has been done—and explained.
If it wanted to give you an option, and not be singular, it would not only use [OR] but instead would use [AND], then alternatively could use [AND/OR] to be descriptive that the application of context here is multifaceted, and the function provides you with a multifaceted option.
I don't want to hi-jack this thread more than it has already been hi-jacked so let's go into spoilers.
Reap, I think that I can better illustrate the problem that we are having with Deus Ex Machina abilities.
I can kind of understand what you are saying when you say that Primeval Titan saying "Whenever Primeval Titan enters the battlefield or attacks" is different from "As you cast XYZ or whenever XYZ leaves the stack. "As" is not one of the three terms used to start an triggered ability (At/When/Whenever) and Primeval Titan only uses a single Whenever, which I do not feel to be a meaningful templating difference but that I do acknowledge to be a difference.
I feel that your use of "or" in Deus Ex Machina abilities only makes sense to you as there is only a single "decision point" at which the caster would make a theoretical decision.
Consider the following card design:
Loafing Oaf
Creature- Giant Coward
As Loafing Oaf attacks or whenever it becomes tapped, Loafing oaf deals 1 damage to each player.
3/2
How does loafing oaf function? I borrowed the general rules formatting of Deus Ex Machina so the rules should work the same but I used them in a context where the use of "or" as a choice would refer to a choice that is regularly checked.
By Deus Ex Machina logic, Loafing Oaf would not be triggered twice when you declare it as an attacker and tap it. When is the choice made, however? Is the choice made as you cast Loafing Oaf? When it enters the battlefield? If Loafing Oaf is tapped by twiddle before it can declare an attack, do you have to choose whether it permanently loses the ability to trigger by attacking and deals damage now or if it deals no damage now but will deal damage with future attacks even if it gains vigilance? Do I get to make the choice every time I tap or attack with Loafing Oaf?
If Deus Ex Machina rules truly work, there should be a straightforward and easily discernable answer to when and how often Loafing Oaf triggers that does not require checking specific oracle text and rulings. With that said, what is the answer?
It's "As you cast this spell or whenever it leaves the stack"; the wording composure is explicit not to leave so much ambiguity or misdirection.
Ah, so your defense is that you tried to use wording that doesn't actually work in the rules.
Things cannot happen "As you cast" as spell except for actually casting the spell (paying costs, choosing modes and targets, etc.) If you search for the text "As you cast" in Gatherer, all you will find is conditions that have to be met for casting and additional cost abilities like Kicker and Conspire.
In order for your Deus abilities to let you do whatever silliness you want them to, the ability has to go on the stack and priority pass between players before it resolves, along with any other abilities that trigger from the spell being cast. That requires a "When", "Whenever", or "If", like the Eldrazi Titans cast triggers.
If you want them to involve the choice (even though its needlessly complex for no actual gain), it would have to be written as
Deus Ex Pepperoni (When you cast CARDNAME, you may draw 5 cards, put 3 back on top, do the hokey-pokey, etc. If you do not, when CARDNAME leaves the stack draw 5 cards, put 3 back on top, do the hokey-pokey, blah blah blah)
That's how the game works. Since you don't play the game, I understand how you would be confused, but you really shouldn't argue with people more experienced with something than you are. Learning from an honest misunderstanding makes people respect you. Trying to convince people who know better that you're right and they're wrong just makes you look foolish and immature.
There are no rules in MTG that define the usage of English context. There are only common usages of wording composure. The game has always relied on additional context for coherence of wording composure in subjective scenarios.
This debate is over.
If you wanted an alternative function to open up ability to create even more tokens, consider a function like;
Each time you draw cards after your first draw each turn, you may put a 1/1 Blue Faerie creature token onto the battlefield.
Can you imagine if this was how debates worked? Your opponent presents irrefutable evidence against your side and rather than try to confront this you simply declare the debate over.
It reminds me of this previous user who thought themselves well educated and pretended to use real debate tactics until it was pointed out that the key point of a debate was to communicate clearly so double speak and buzz words would be questioned until their point was made in plain English or they conceded that they never had a point. I think the user's name was something about a wind. They vanished for a long while. Presumably to nurse their damaged ego and build a new pseudo intellectual defense.
Tribal Enchantment - Faerie
At the beginning of each end step, if you cast more than two spells this turn, create a 1/1 blue Faerie creature token with flying. If it is an opponent's turn, create an additional one of those tokens.
I just REALLY want a "BLUE" version of Bitterblossom
It's too accelerated on the other end. It basically ready, "play during your opponent's turn and get two creatures free".
There's no aspect of challenge that this is entirely self-sufficient around control spells that already have way too much domain influence. It's giving you a surplus of something with no expense or cost for it. There's no build up. The interactivity is mute, and doesn't require resources to be expended in any way. This isn't always a bad thing, it can boast vibrancy, but only when the interactivity revolves around other mute things to boost them and make them vibrant.
For example,
whenever a creature enters the battlefield tapped under your control, (bonus effect)
I like the card and think it has potential in a few different formats. Even keeping it at two tokens for the opponents' turns likely doesn't break it in Commander or Legacy but could be a big problem in Standard or maybe Limited just for gumming up the board too much. It is kind of a tricky card to be honest which is why I might lean towards going with the cleaner template. I think if you want the two tokens on an opponent's turn, I would think increasing the cost is prudent.
Also, if you go that route, a better template might be:
"Whenever you cast your second spell each turn, create a 1/1 blue Faerie creature token with flying. If it is an opponent's turn, create an additional one of those tokens".
Deus Ex Machina is a draw-type, card-advantage type keyword intended for use on instants, sorceries, enchantments, and artifacts. Each keyword is different, and their effects revolve around the primary types of draw (straight draw, wheel draw, and direct retrieval)—but also include scry effects, ponder, and index effects.
Here's an example from a recent post of mine, using the Deus Ex Machina Omen.
https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/custom-card-creation/824200-trick-or-treat-happy-halloween-custom-card
I like where the card sits as it is. Might still be a little higher on the power scale in Standard, but I do think it is reasonable for most formats including Commander. Probably not Legacy playable but that is a massive hurdle either way. I still think the mana cost is likely a tricky thing to get for something like this but I do believe 3 mana makes it playable without being broken. It might be annoying at times, and it seems pretty much at home in a draw-go type deck (which I am always in favor of) and the 3 mana becomes a real decision that the blue player needs to make as that can be a critical turn to go shields down. At least, it is more of a decision to make than 2 mana.
The nice thing about it is that it counts itself so casting another spell after it can get you a token right away. Which, again, ties into a significant decision tree as to when to try to get use out of it.
There might still be an argument for putting it back to 2 mana but only ever creating a single token as I think that is still reasonable but I think the current version is playable and is in a good spot for the effect you want.
lol that I would develop something like this (to balance the game), and be able to explain its dynamics (for balance), but have no sense or touch of balance.
two totally opposite worlds?
The most powerful one is Sanctity, which offers a [draw up until you have five cards in hand] for the single user. However, it's intended only for legendary "Holy Grail" content. It's good, but it's still not broken. All the cards I've featured it on have a CMC of 5. It's well within range as I've developed around it.
All the others are universal, work within ranges, or are immensely tactical (surgical) with the advantages that they offer.
Once again, saying they don't work is like saying Disenchant doesn't work.
Hey, which is it by the way WizardMN? Is it one or both?
Really, the second ability isn't even necessary. If you can simply generate 1 creature token a turn doing what you're already doing then that's amazing. Note that the effect will stack as you play more, which means you can begin to get two tokens or better anyways. The question really becomes when within that time shouldn't you be able to finish off your opponent already by a greater strategy.
As has been explained to you multiple times, the "or" when choosing a target (as for Disenchant) is a singular action. Your abilities are triggered abilities and the "or" is part of a list of conditions that trigger that ability, and so it trigger each time any of those conditions are met. You don't have to choose one or the other for the trigger on a Sun Titan, or on a Blind Hunter, or Carth the Lion, or Daxos, Blessed by the Sun. Tell me, how do those cards work based on your "understanding" of the word "or"? When exactly do I choose for my sun titan to use its ability only the time it ETBs or if I get it when I attack instead?
There are 10 year olds at the LGS where I judge who understand this concept with 0 issues, so I'm not sure why its so hard for you to comprehend.
You already have no sense and no touch of balance, so you've already achieved your goal.
There is no set parameter for the context of "or" and its usage in MTG, and its functionality has always been based on interpretation provided by comprehensive rulings of the individual cards. This is further more backed up that additional context is often used to provide coherence in subjective cases (such as the use of "and/or").
I provided you all with this—and you still insisted it wasn't acceptable.
This is the real problem here. You're like telling the company something doesn't work as it's been explained to you to do (without any probable means—such as violating the fundamentals of the English language).
In almost 30 years of playing magic, you are literally the only person I have seen not understand this simple function of reading English.
Meanwhile, I can reference another recent case of the same.
I provided the context of a singular instance, where additional context would typically be added to denote that the effect was not singular; such as adding "this turn" to the ending clause of the animate land ability; also could be "any number of" added before lands to denote it was not a singular instance.
But you insist, using my own words to you against me, that I am the one pretending like I don't understand English.
As for the likeness of this Blueblossom to Clarion Spirit, with a Deus Ex Machina it would be indefinitely better than the spirit being that it's an Enchantment and free from removal by means of damage and kill spells. Way easier to stack, provides card advantage, harder to get rid of, and still perfectly balanced at two mana so long as it uses one of the more subtle Deus Ex Machina (which is really all it should need).
*That's not actually a thing, btw. There are the Comprehensive Rules and there are individual rulings in the FAQs that clarify how cards interact with the Comp Rules, but "Comprehensive Individual Rulings" is an oxymoron.
The "or" in target is a choice - "Go get an apple or an orange."
The "or" in a trigger is a list of conditions that make you do something - "Whenever you go outside or come back in, close the door behind you"
You've still not addressed when you make the "ETB or attacking" choice for the Sun Titan trigger you seem to think this wording requires. What about Syr Konrad, the Grim? That has two "or"s in the triggered ability, when do I choose which choice there?
In the development process, you would implement other content that makes effect use of what this alots at the curve it's on.
Such as a Faerie creature with flash that allows you to turn tokens into Force Spike.
Or one that allows you to tap down (exhaust) masses of Faerie creatures to Threaten a creature.
Development responsibility wants to see that you can make effective of what you have.
Those are just favorable examples to your suggested context, but not the sole context of their application.
Furthermore, consider that I have explained that this is referencing a [time frame] of which to interact within. This time frame is singular. In the context usage of [OR] where it has multifaceted context, the [time frame] application is also multifaceted to flex it. When Inferno Titan enters the battlefield or when it attacks—a multifaceted time frame—where the context adapts to cover the dynamics of this application. Attacks or blocks is another example of this.
Furthermore, if within this singular time frame multifaceted application was intended, then additional context would be provided for coherence of that (such as the use of and/or).
Obviously, the context can also be singular, based on the context of the descriptive application.
When you come home or go to the bank, pick up the kids from school.
Thanks for playing.
"When when you cast this card or it leaves the stack" —a multifaceted time frame—where the context adapts to cover the dynamics of this application. Attacks or blocks is another example of this.
You just proved my point for me.
After experimenting with several ways of composing the wording for this, it was for this exact reason "As you cast" and "whenever it leaves" was chosen for the corresponding clauses.
This is a single time frame of being on the stack (between entering and leaving); the act of entering and leaving are two different events happening within this time frame; bringing us full circle to the fact that the context is adaptive to the application (because it can be so diverse in this case). And thus, relies on additional context to help elaborate the intended application of context. This is exactly what has been done—and explained.
If it wanted to give you an option, and not be singular, it would not only use [OR] but instead would use [AND], then alternatively could use [AND/OR] to be descriptive that the application of context here is multifaceted, and the function provides you with a multifaceted option.
I don't want to hi-jack this thread more than it has already been hi-jacked so let's go into spoilers.
I can kind of understand what you are saying when you say that Primeval Titan saying "Whenever Primeval Titan enters the battlefield or attacks" is different from "As you cast XYZ or whenever XYZ leaves the stack. "As" is not one of the three terms used to start an triggered ability (At/When/Whenever) and Primeval Titan only uses a single Whenever, which I do not feel to be a meaningful templating difference but that I do acknowledge to be a difference.
I feel that your use of "or" in Deus Ex Machina abilities only makes sense to you as there is only a single "decision point" at which the caster would make a theoretical decision.
Consider the following card design:
Loafing Oaf
Creature- Giant Coward
As Loafing Oaf attacks or whenever it becomes tapped, Loafing oaf deals 1 damage to each player.
3/2
How does loafing oaf function? I borrowed the general rules formatting of Deus Ex Machina so the rules should work the same but I used them in a context where the use of "or" as a choice would refer to a choice that is regularly checked.
By Deus Ex Machina logic, Loafing Oaf would not be triggered twice when you declare it as an attacker and tap it. When is the choice made, however? Is the choice made as you cast Loafing Oaf? When it enters the battlefield? If Loafing Oaf is tapped by twiddle before it can declare an attack, do you have to choose whether it permanently loses the ability to trigger by attacking and deals damage now or if it deals no damage now but will deal damage with future attacks even if it gains vigilance? Do I get to make the choice every time I tap or attack with Loafing Oaf?
If Deus Ex Machina rules truly work, there should be a straightforward and easily discernable answer to when and how often Loafing Oaf triggers that does not require checking specific oracle text and rulings. With that said, what is the answer?
Ah, so your defense is that you tried to use wording that doesn't actually work in the rules.
Things cannot happen "As you cast" as spell except for actually casting the spell (paying costs, choosing modes and targets, etc.) If you search for the text "As you cast" in Gatherer, all you will find is conditions that have to be met for casting and additional cost abilities like Kicker and Conspire.
In order for your Deus abilities to let you do whatever silliness you want them to, the ability has to go on the stack and priority pass between players before it resolves, along with any other abilities that trigger from the spell being cast. That requires a "When", "Whenever", or "If", like the Eldrazi Titans cast triggers.
If you want them to involve the choice (even though its needlessly complex for no actual gain), it would have to be written as
Deus Ex Pepperoni (When you cast CARDNAME, you may draw 5 cards, put 3 back on top, do the hokey-pokey, etc. If you do not, when CARDNAME leaves the stack draw 5 cards, put 3 back on top, do the hokey-pokey, blah blah blah)
That's how the game works. Since you don't play the game, I understand how you would be confused, but you really shouldn't argue with people more experienced with something than you are. Learning from an honest misunderstanding makes people respect you. Trying to convince people who know better that you're right and they're wrong just makes you look foolish and immature.
This debate is over.
If you wanted an alternative function to open up ability to create even more tokens, consider a function like;
Each time you draw cards after your first draw each turn, you may put a 1/1 Blue Faerie creature token onto the battlefield.
Adding the Rogue type to that can open it up to Oona's Blackguard.
It reminds me of this previous user who thought themselves well educated and pretended to use real debate tactics until it was pointed out that the key point of a debate was to communicate clearly so double speak and buzz words would be questioned until their point was made in plain English or they conceded that they never had a point. I think the user's name was something about a wind. They vanished for a long while. Presumably to nurse their damaged ego and build a new pseudo intellectual defense.
It's right up there in post #18.
The context of "This debate is over." was intended as, "This will not (no longer) become a childish argument."
Enjoy your dishonest [blep] while you can.