Advocate of Lightness 1W
Creature - Human Wizard C W: Target creature gains first strike until end of turn WW: Tap target creature WWW: Creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn
1/1
Misery of the Meak 2BB
Sorcery C
Destroy up to two target creatures with power 2 or less.
Inebrimancer 2R
Creature - Goblin Shaman C
When Inebrimancer enters the battlefield each player draws three cards, then discards three cards at random.
2/1
Advocate of Lightness seems not common, with three activated abilities and one of them being repeatable tapdown. At uncommon, even, it would be very very strong in Limited.
Misery of the Meak (Meek?) is pretty reasonable - usually double removal would not be common but it's small in its scope and a sorcery, and if the conceptually similar Dual Shot can be common so can this.
Inebrimancer has nothing inherently preventing it from being common but the random discard seems like it might raise an unofficial red flag.
advocated -- complex for a common, too powerful for a common. Only the first ability really fits as common; the second and third are uncommon on their own (the second makes for a powerful uncommon, because it doesn't tap and can tie up as many creatures as you have mana for). All three is an absolute no go.
Advocate of Lightness is a cool rare, though could probably be a 1/2 or 2/2. To make it common it can only keep one of its three abilities. Keeping only the first ability and its a strong common. The second is a no go without a T then it can lower the cost to just W, nothing new here as there are multiple interpretations of this exact card. With the third ability Cliffside Lookout shows that pumping is costly but being triple W might be enough.
Misery of the Meak is flying in on the edge of what is made at common. In sets where 2 power creatures play a large role, such as a set with morph, this would be too good for common as it shuts down too much play to show up multiple times a draft. In most sets its a very strong common but reasonably acceptable.
Inebrimancer, this simply isn't how red does things any more. Also random discard is highly frowned upon. Fixing it so its proper red discard makes these numbers hard to swallow as its reasonably possible to get significant card advantage which pushes this out of red and way out of common. A simple each player discards their hand and draws 3 would make this a neat rare if it had a slightly larger body.
As others have said, Advocate of Lightness does too much at common. Any one of these abilities with a tap symbol would be fine at common, but the kind of repeatable board interaction is just too much. As it stands, this card is probably too game-swinging for even uncommon.
Misery of the Meek could probably skirt by. There's a decent number of cards in the Modern era that can remove two or more creatures, though they're usually limited to killing 1-toughness things like Splendid Agony or Dual Shot. Or it's a high-cost ability like Fire Shrine Keeper. Being sorcery speed, 4 mana, and fairly restrictive on what it can hit means this is probably fine, though I wouldn't want to see multiple of this kind of effect in a set for fear of making games too swingy.
Inebrimancer is probably fine given Burning Inquiry was a common.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Moderator Helpdesk
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
Two out Three! As for Advocate of Lightness I wanted to offer a bunch of choices - so what about the below instead taking it a different route and non-repeatable. Essentially - it is a "Sacrifice this creature - one effect from Hope Charm, one from Piety Charm, and one from Ivory Charm".
Charmer of Lightness W
Creature - Human Wizard C
Sacrifice Charmer of Lightness: Choose one —
• Creatures you control gain vigilance until end of turn.
• Target player gains 2 life.
• Tap target creature.
1/1
1 mana - since now its essentially a charm on legs so a sorcery instead of instant, but can attack? Should it still be 1W?
Advocate having three repeatable abilities, one of which affects combat math at instant speed (which is a hard red-flag for common) and the others being very potent at controlling how combat plays out, pushes it to rare, easily. If you remove the pump ability and add T to the first two, it should be fine.
Misery is a two-for-one hard spot removal, which is normally too impactful for common. Yeah, you see small direct damage or -N/-N effects that can hit multiple creatures every once in a while, but pretty much never outright "destroy" effects, especially when they can target creatures bigger than the typical 1-drop. Uncommon is a better spot for this.
Inebrimancer is also just too impactful for common. This is usually universally true of draw effects and discard effects of three or more cards as well as random discard, especially if any of this affects opponents. Uncommon, again, is the best spot for this.
Note that you don't always need follow WotC's example in your set designs, but a good rule of thumb when designing commons is that they should represent the norm of gameplay for the set. The flow and power level should be at its most stable and relaxed at common, while the uncommons, rares, and mythic rares should be the cards that create the more exciting moments and shake things up. There are, of course, exceptions to every rule, but three commons that are all as splashy as these is not a great idea, unless you're designing a very high-powered, high variance set.
Hmm, Watchwolf how about the following reworkings:
Misery of the Meek 3BB
Sorcery C
Place two -1/-1 counters on up to two target creatures.
Based on all the examples, the increased cost and the -1/-1 counters instead of outright destroy, can this be common? Is there any way to keep the concept and keep it common
Inebrimancer 2R
Creature - Goblin Shaman C
When Inebrimancer enters the battlefield each player draws a card, then discards a card at random.
2/1
Original was based on burning inquiry. Now nerfed to only draw discard 1 card. Is it less impactful now and can be considered a common?
Three is a bit much these days, but perhaps the Goblin could still have someone draw and discard more than one if it was a death trigger instead of an etbt. So each combat, you’re playing mind games with an opponent that doesn’t want to risk losing any cards in their hand. But it could backfire if they don’t like their hand.
Gobgoblin (Common) 1R
Creature - Goblin
2/1
When Gobgoblin dies, target player draws two cards, then discards two cards at random.
Misery could probably just say "Up to two target creatures each get -2/-2 until end of turn." That's sorta pushing the limits, but I think it would probably be fine.
Inebrimancer seems fine, though its cost and stats might need to be adjusted. It seems a bit small for 3 mana to me, but it's so ambiguous that only playtesting will get you where you want to be.
Also - I feel like it would be annoying to post new threads of Commons practice so instead here are 3 new cards. I feel commons are really hard to be interesting and remain common so I'm sort of fascinated by their design.
High Peak Faller 3R
Creature - Giant (C)
When High Peak Faller enters the battlefield High Peak Faller deals 7 damage to target creature that was dealt damage this turn.
3/3
Secrets of the Sky 2U
Enchantment - Aura (C)
Enchant Creature
Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 and has flying and "When this creature dies, draw a card".
Espionage Papers 1
Artifact (C)
Espionage Papers enters the battlefield tapped. 2, T, Sacrifice Espionage Papers: Target player reveals cards from the top of their library until they reveal a land card, then puts those cards into their graveyard.
Also - I feel like it would be annoying to post new threads of Commons practice so instead here are 3 new cards. I feel commons are really hard to be interesting and remain common so I'm sort of fascinated by their design.
High Peak Faller 3R
Creature - Giant (C)
When High Peak Faller enters the battlefield High Peak Faller deals 7 damage to target creature that was dealt damage this turn.
3/3
Secrets of the Sky 2U
Enchantment - Aura (C)
Enchant Creature
Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 and has flying and "When this creature dies, draw a card".
Espionage Papers 1
Artifact (C)
Espionage Papers enters the battlefield tapped. 2, T, Sacrifice Espionage Papers: Target player reveals cards from the top of their library until they reveal a land card, then puts those cards into their graveyard.
Espionage Papers would likely be uncommon.
High Peak Faller is cool but should just dealt 3 damage.
If Balustrade Spy is common, why can't Espionage Papers be common? unlike Spy it can do its effect a turn earlier and one mana cheaper, but it also takes two turns instead of ETB.
High Peak Faller is an ETB that approximates a 2 CMC common instant effect which I thought should've been fine? At 7 DMG it's obviously a kill card, but I would've thought the dmg to a creature dealt damage was a weak enough effect.
I think they're all good at common, though the red one is a bit of a pie bend. 7 damage is essentially a Murder, which makes that a black effect. Usually you only see large amounts of damage on red effects if they're scaled versions of smaller effects or if they're costed really high. With the design you have, I would lower the damage or change it to a black card that just says "destroy target creature that was dealt damage this turn" instead. If you have any ability word in the set that upgrades spells by meeting a certain condition (like Addendum), that could also be used to turn the 7 damage into a scaled effect. For example: "~ deals 3 damage to target creature that was dealt damage this turn. If you did (insert condition here) this turn, ~ deals 7 damage to that creature instead."
Hmm - I was using Crushing Pain as my example card, but running a search, it does seem like crushing pain itself was the color pie bleed. Good to know.
Three more practice commons!
Unrolling Scenery
Land (C)
Unrolling Scenery enters the battlefield tapped.
When Unrolling Scenery enters the battlefield, add one mana of any color. T, Sacrifice Unrolling Scenery: Search your library for a basic land card and put it onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle your library.
Lone Wolf's Tooth 2
Artifact — Equipment (C)
Equipped creature has +2/+1 and has intimidate as long as you control no other creatures. (This creature can't be blocked except by artifact creatures and/or creatures that share a color with it.)
Equip 2(2: Attach to target creature you control. Equip only as a sorcery.)
Sentient World-Tree Vine 5G
Creature - Plant Wurm (C)
Trample
When Sentient World-Tree Vine dies, you may put a +1/+1 counter on target creature you control or create a 1/1 green saproling creature token.
5/5
Re: Advocate - I echo others, this is too complex for common. All 3 abilities are ridiculously strong, so the "drawback" of being a 1/1 isn't enough for this.
Re: Misery - Sure? This feels uncommon though. I'd also like it to be an instant and/or cost 1BB.
Re; Discard guy - On turn 3 there's far less chance this will be disruptive than on turn 1, but I don't think WOTC would print this effect at (C). If they do print the effect (they should, but probably won't), it should be (U). While we're at it, make it a 3/1 or a 2/2; the effect is fun and interesting but shouldn't come at the cost of playing a 3 mana 2/1.
Unrolling Scenery - This is a combination of two common cards with no drawback. Not cool. And probably not common. I'd be interested to hear what design role you think this plays...
Lone Wolf's Tooth - Players generally hate intimidate, as it's flavor and function is tenuous at best. If you want a card that reward you for only having 1 creature, make it actually reward you. If you want an incidental reward to justify doubling the cost of Bonesplitter, a casual favorite that saw no constructed play, pick a keyword. Vigilance, Haste, Menace, First Strike, Lifelink, Trample, etc. and call it a day.
Sentient World-Tree Vine - Why the choice? Let's say this put 2 +1/+1 counters on target creature and created a 2/2 beear. It'd still be a card that wouldn't see play outside of limited. 5/5 Trample for 3GG + a very small added benefit would be interesting. A 5/5 w/o trample for 3GG with a death's trigger that gives you something would be interesting. Both would be fair commons.
I had no clue intimidate was retired? Why was it? Regardless if it was I would replace it with Menace
Lone Wolf's Tooth 2
Artifact — Equipment (C)
Equipped creature has +2/+1 and has menance as long as you control no other creatures. (It can't be blocked except by two or more creatures.)
Equip 2 (2: Attach to target creature you control. Equip only as a sorcery.)
It seems there is some division on Unrolling Scenery. My thinking was that Crumbling Vestige provides that ETBT and ETB=Any Color allows you "T:C". Evolving Wilds generally provides that Fetch=Basic ETBT is about equal to "T:C". I simply thought about replacing the two. So unlike Crumbling Vestige Unrolling Scenery can't tap for mana and can only sac. That actually leads to the interesting scenario where Unrolling Scenery provides color fixing turn 1 & 3, and does nothing turn 2, unlike Crumbling Vestige with provides for color fixing turn 1 and colorless turn 2, and Evolving Wilds which provides for nothing turn 1 and color fixing 2. I would think it's okay for a common and plays much differently than those two other cards.
For the Vine - I sort of worked backward from what was allowed by Accomplished Automaton. Death trigger instead of ETB, and 5/5 trample for 5G instead of 5/7 for 7. I thought it would be weak, but sort of still interesting. Generally, you're right, I don't want to make useless cards, but I'm sort of exploring common design in general - not everything can be pushed?
Intimidate is retired because too much color-hate can feel like entire decks get arbitrarily hated on just for not playing a certain color. It's non-interactive and unfun when used in the amounts that warrent having a keyword. Menace is a healthier option and was just designated as the black-red evergreen creature keyword.
Two cards feature only one ability with no drawback. The last features two abilities with a drawback. It follows, then, that one abikity is free, while two abilities needs to be balanced out with a drawback.
That means that, in theory, there should be nothing to worry about when we take Crumbling Vestige and swap out its tap ability for the tutor ability, as both of those abilities can appear on a card alone without a drawback, making them theoretically equal.
As for the way the card plays, it trades the moderate speed of Evolving Wilds being able to activate straight away for some short term fixing with an extra turn of waiting before the long-term fixing. It's just more instant-gratification at the cost of delaying a better effect, which I think is an interesting change of pace.
As for the Vine, nobody likes designing useless cards, but they're important in that they allow the more exciting cards to stand out. It's a tool for draft to push players toward picking some cards over others, which can speed up drafting rounds. I've played enough power cubes where every card is first-pickable to know that that leads to very long, painful, drawn-out decision-making. Bad cards make the choice a bit easier and double as determining the baseline power level of that draft environment.
It seems there is some division on Unrolling Scenery. My thinking was that Crumbling Vestige provides that ETBT and ETB=Any Color allows you "T:C". Evolving Wilds generally provides that Fetch=Basic ETBT is about equal to "T:C". I simply thought about replacing the two. So unlike Crumbling Vestige Unrolling Scenery can't tap for mana and can only sac. That actually leads to the interesting scenario where Unrolling Scenery provides color fixing turn 1 & 3, and does nothing turn 2, unlike Crumbling Vestige with provides for color fixing turn 1 and colorless turn 2, and Evolving Wilds which provides for nothing turn 1 and color fixing 2. I would think it's okay for a common and plays much differently than those two other cards.
The fact that is adds mana the turn it enters and two turns after is a rather complex bit of strategy that seems ideal for an uncommon not a common. Your commons should never confuse people or encourage them to make sub-optimal plays. This card can do that, if you are curving out do you play this on 2 and have 2 turns of only 2 mana or hold till the curve top. While more experienced players can easily see the 'right' line of play a new player can be stumped about when is the correct time to play this which makes it a bad common even if the effects could be allowed.
As for the Vine, nobody likes designing useless cards, but they're important in that they allow the more exciting cards to stand out. It's a tool for draft to push players toward picking some cards over others, which can speed up drafting rounds. I've played enough power cubes where every card is first-pickable to know that that leads to very long, painful, drawn-out decision-making. Bad cards make the choice a bit easier and double as determining the baseline power level of that draft environment.
I think this mindset is a mistake. Many people enjoy trying to "break" weird or seemingly useless cards. Many people like tribal decks that are comprised of (U) or (R) tribal synergies and (C) creatures that wouldn't be good enough on their own. Many people enjoy Commander, a format where you can only run 1 card with each name.
Even if you agree that some cards are primarily designed for limited, designing a "useless" card is tantamount to giving up. Designing such cards for (C) can be especially difficult, as (C) cards should be easy to read and relatively not complex, if only to help with draft and deck building. That said, I see no reason why you can't make a fair green (C) card that plays the role of "good enough limited big body" but also has some constructed application. Myr Enforcer played that role too well in Mirrodin standard, being a 4/4 for like 4 or 5 in limited most of the time, but being a 4/4 for like 1-2 in standard constructed. Keep in mind that's a vanilla (C) card.
If cost reduction is not on the table, one can always add rewards for deck construction, or even Spirit of the Night-style ingredient potential.
Finally, the "fills a limited role ONLY" cards you propose really are something to make at the end of a set; you can't tell on day 1 that you need a sorcery speed removal spell that costs 6 mana at common. (In fact, I'd argue, you can tell on day 1 that you don't *need* that.) But there was a time in the RIX card design where they said "We're looking for something like Colossal Dreadmaw"... at which point they should have done Imposing Sailback4GG Flash, This spell cannot be countered. 6/6 just to say "It's different, but fulfills much the same role."
I think this mindset is a mistake. Many people enjoy trying to "break" weird or seemingly useless cards. Many people like tribal decks that are comprised of (U) or (R) tribal synergies and (C) creatures that wouldn't be good enough on their own. Many people enjoy Commander, a format where you can only run 1 card with each name.
Even if you agree that some cards are primarily designed for limited, designing a "useless" card is tantamount to giving up. Designing such cards for (C) can be especially difficult, as (C) cards should be easy to read and relatively not complex, if only to help with draft and deck building. That said, I see no reason why you can't make a fair green (C) card that plays the role of "good enough limited big body" but also has some constructed application. Myr Enforcer played that role too well in Mirrodin standard, being a 4/4 for like 4 or 5 in limited most of the time, but being a 4/4 for like 1-2 in standard constructed. Keep in mind that's a vanilla (C) card.
If cost reduction is not on the table, one can always add rewards for deck construction, or even Spirit of the Night-style ingredient potential.
Finally, the "fills a limited role ONLY" cards you propose really are something to make at the end of a set; you can't tell on day 1 that you need a sorcery speed removal spell that costs 6 mana at common. (In fact, I'd argue, you can tell on day 1 that you don't *need* that.) But there was a time in the RIX card design where they said "We're looking for something like Colossal Dreadmaw"... at which point they should have done Imposing Sailback4GG Flash, This spell cannot be countered. 6/6 just to say "It's different, but fulfills much the same role."
I get why you feel that way, but the unfortunate fact is that both "useless" cards and lenticular commons exist and they both serve an important purpose. Yes, everyone likes a common with some hidden depth and potential, and yes, ideally every single card in every single set should have a home somewhere, but when a typical set includes something like 150 commons, making sure each and every design has some practical application outside of being limited fodder is just infeasible, at least for WotC. And for us, who aren't bound by a release schedule or any constructed environment, there's no real point in or way to craft every single common such that it is as dynamic as Myr Enforcer. As designers of sets which only might be drafted one day in some casual playgroup, and nothing more than that, we have to accept that some cards will end up being worse than others. and not every common will have a home.
And your proposed replacement for Colossal Dreadmaw is neither common, nor does it fill the same role as Dreadmaw. It may have been a bit unexpected, but I see no problem with them reprinting a throwaway common from the last set because it accomplished what it needed to.
In the context of 1110mystic's card, it's not as though the card will spend every draft rotting away in the unused pile of peoples' card pools. It has a decent body with evasion and a little extra incentive to participate in combat. I can see plenty of scenarios in which I'd play this card in limited, so it's not actually useless. I just meant to say that if it ends up being limited fodder, like Colossal Dreadmaw, that gets last-picked and then tossed in a bin at the end of draft night, that's okay. We designers need to be okay with that possibility.
A typical set has about a hundred commons. From a design perspective, you want to print staple/core game elements - your cancel, duress, murder, naturalize, lightning bolt, etc, - which can usually be reprints, or simple "with block mechanic" variants. This is, let's say, 20% of the design (5 colors, ~4 each).
One of the next steps is printing creatures - and boy, you need a lot of them. At (C), there is incentive for creatures to be vanilla and french vanilla. The good news is WOTC has lots of experience with these designs and can, if prompted, make a card like Vampire Nighthawk - a casual favorite "fringe" constructed playable card. We could realistically see a (C) 3/2 for 1R in green, and that could conceiveably see tribal goblin play. However, a 2/2 or 3/1 with a simple keyword is often a great choice. mesa unicorn-style cards have lead to some of the more interesting limited choices over the past few years, and while we'd like to say they're not the best 2 drop for any standard deck right now... it's possible a tribal or "highlander" incentive might help them make the cut.
By sheer volume it's difficult to imagine a set having 100% constructed playable commons, but its worth noting that many of the better Masters sets easily reach 50%, as beyond format staples they print causal favorites, tribal staples, and commander staples.
As for Imposing Sailback, I'm pretty sure it fills the role of "giant green common" pretty well. it doesn't have trample, but it snipes an attacker. That's a fair tradeoff that seems comparable. Of course, we could playtest RIX limited to see. Something the RIX team didn't bother to do by their own account.
Creature - Human Wizard C
W: Target creature gains first strike until end of turn
WW: Tap target creature
WWW: Creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn
1/1
Misery of the Meak 2BB
Sorcery C
Destroy up to two target creatures with power 2 or less.
Inebrimancer 2R
Creature - Goblin Shaman C
When Inebrimancer enters the battlefield each player draws three cards, then discards three cards at random.
2/1
Misery of the Meak (Meek?) is pretty reasonable - usually double removal would not be common but it's small in its scope and a sorcery, and if the conceptually similar Dual Shot can be common so can this.
Inebrimancer has nothing inherently preventing it from being common but the random discard seems like it might raise an unofficial red flag.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
Misery of the Meak is flying in on the edge of what is made at common. In sets where 2 power creatures play a large role, such as a set with morph, this would be too good for common as it shuts down too much play to show up multiple times a draft. In most sets its a very strong common but reasonably acceptable.
Inebrimancer, this simply isn't how red does things any more. Also random discard is highly frowned upon. Fixing it so its proper red discard makes these numbers hard to swallow as its reasonably possible to get significant card advantage which pushes this out of red and way out of common. A simple each player discards their hand and draws 3 would make this a neat rare if it had a slightly larger body.
Misery of the Meek could probably skirt by. There's a decent number of cards in the Modern era that can remove two or more creatures, though they're usually limited to killing 1-toughness things like Splendid Agony or Dual Shot. Or it's a high-cost ability like Fire Shrine Keeper. Being sorcery speed, 4 mana, and fairly restrictive on what it can hit means this is probably fine, though I wouldn't want to see multiple of this kind of effect in a set for fear of making games too swingy.
Inebrimancer is probably fine given Burning Inquiry was a common.
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
Charmer of Lightness W
Creature - Human Wizard C
Sacrifice Charmer of Lightness: Choose one —
• Creatures you control gain vigilance until end of turn.
• Target player gains 2 life.
• Tap target creature.
1/1
1 mana - since now its essentially a charm on legs so a sorcery instead of instant, but can attack? Should it still be 1W?
Advocate having three repeatable abilities, one of which affects combat math at instant speed (which is a hard red-flag for common) and the others being very potent at controlling how combat plays out, pushes it to rare, easily. If you remove the pump ability and add T to the first two, it should be fine.
Misery is a two-for-one hard spot removal, which is normally too impactful for common. Yeah, you see small direct damage or -N/-N effects that can hit multiple creatures every once in a while, but pretty much never outright "destroy" effects, especially when they can target creatures bigger than the typical 1-drop. Uncommon is a better spot for this.
Inebrimancer is also just too impactful for common. This is usually universally true of draw effects and discard effects of three or more cards as well as random discard, especially if any of this affects opponents. Uncommon, again, is the best spot for this.
Note that you don't always need follow WotC's example in your set designs, but a good rule of thumb when designing commons is that they should represent the norm of gameplay for the set. The flow and power level should be at its most stable and relaxed at common, while the uncommons, rares, and mythic rares should be the cards that create the more exciting moments and shake things up. There are, of course, exceptions to every rule, but three commons that are all as splashy as these is not a great idea, unless you're designing a very high-powered, high variance set.
Misery of the Meek 3BB
Sorcery C
Place two -1/-1 counters on up to two target creatures.
Based on all the examples, the increased cost and the -1/-1 counters instead of outright destroy, can this be common? Is there any way to keep the concept and keep it common
Inebrimancer 2R
Creature - Goblin Shaman C
When Inebrimancer enters the battlefield each player draws a card, then discards a card at random.
2/1
Original was based on burning inquiry. Now nerfed to only draw discard 1 card. Is it less impactful now and can be considered a common?
Gobgoblin (Common)
1R
Creature - Goblin
2/1
When Gobgoblin dies, target player draws two cards, then discards two cards at random.
Misery could probably just say "Up to two target creatures each get -2/-2 until end of turn." That's sorta pushing the limits, but I think it would probably be fine.
Inebrimancer seems fine, though its cost and stats might need to be adjusted. It seems a bit small for 3 mana to me, but it's so ambiguous that only playtesting will get you where you want to be.
Also - I feel like it would be annoying to post new threads of Commons practice so instead here are 3 new cards. I feel commons are really hard to be interesting and remain common so I'm sort of fascinated by their design.
High Peak Faller 3R
Creature - Giant (C)
When High Peak Faller enters the battlefield High Peak Faller deals 7 damage to target creature that was dealt damage this turn.
3/3
Secrets of the Sky 2U
Enchantment - Aura (C)
Enchant Creature
Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 and has flying and "When this creature dies, draw a card".
Espionage Papers 1
Artifact (C)
Espionage Papers enters the battlefield tapped.
2, T, Sacrifice Espionage Papers: Target player reveals cards from the top of their library until they reveal a land card, then puts those cards into their graveyard.
Otherwise these all seem reasonable.
Espionage Papers would likely be uncommon.
High Peak Faller is cool but should just dealt 3 damage.
Secrets of the Sky is tight.
High Peak Faller is an ETB that approximates a 2 CMC common instant effect which I thought should've been fine? At 7 DMG it's obviously a kill card, but I would've thought the dmg to a creature dealt damage was a weak enough effect.
Thanks for the help!
Three more practice commons!
Unrolling Scenery
Land (C)
Unrolling Scenery enters the battlefield tapped.
When Unrolling Scenery enters the battlefield, add one mana of any color.
T, Sacrifice Unrolling Scenery: Search your library for a basic land card and put it onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle your library.
Lone Wolf's Tooth 2
Artifact — Equipment (C)
Equipped creature has +2/+1 and has intimidate as long as you control no other creatures. (This creature can't be blocked except by artifact creatures and/or creatures that share a color with it.)
Equip 2 (2: Attach to target creature you control. Equip only as a sorcery.)
Sentient World-Tree Vine 5G
Creature - Plant Wurm (C)
Trample
When Sentient World-Tree Vine dies, you may put a +1/+1 counter on target creature you control or create a 1/1 green saproling creature token.
5/5
Intimidate is a retired keyword, but there's no rule preventing its use.
I really like Unrolling Scenery.
The Wurm seems, if anything, a tad weak. This is another case where playtesting will reveal whether it needs changes.
Re: Misery - Sure? This feels uncommon though. I'd also like it to be an instant and/or cost 1BB.
Re; Discard guy - On turn 3 there's far less chance this will be disruptive than on turn 1, but I don't think WOTC would print this effect at (C). If they do print the effect (they should, but probably won't), it should be (U). While we're at it, make it a 3/1 or a 2/2; the effect is fun and interesting but shouldn't come at the cost of playing a 3 mana 2/1.
Unrolling Scenery - This is a combination of two common cards with no drawback. Not cool. And probably not common. I'd be interested to hear what design role you think this plays...
Lone Wolf's Tooth - Players generally hate intimidate, as it's flavor and function is tenuous at best. If you want a card that reward you for only having 1 creature, make it actually reward you. If you want an incidental reward to justify doubling the cost of Bonesplitter, a casual favorite that saw no constructed play, pick a keyword. Vigilance, Haste, Menace, First Strike, Lifelink, Trample, etc. and call it a day.
Sentient World-Tree Vine - Why the choice? Let's say this put 2 +1/+1 counters on target creature and created a 2/2 beear. It'd still be a card that wouldn't see play outside of limited. 5/5 Trample for 3GG + a very small added benefit would be interesting. A 5/5 w/o trample for 3GG with a death's trigger that gives you something would be interesting. Both would be fair commons.
Lone Wolf's Tooth 2
Artifact — Equipment (C)
Equipped creature has +2/+1 and has menance as long as you control no other creatures. (It can't be blocked except by two or more creatures.)
Equip 2 (2: Attach to target creature you control. Equip only as a sorcery.)
It seems there is some division on Unrolling Scenery. My thinking was that Crumbling Vestige provides that ETBT and ETB=Any Color allows you "T:C". Evolving Wilds generally provides that Fetch=Basic ETBT is about equal to "T:C". I simply thought about replacing the two. So unlike Crumbling Vestige Unrolling Scenery can't tap for mana and can only sac. That actually leads to the interesting scenario where Unrolling Scenery provides color fixing turn 1 & 3, and does nothing turn 2, unlike Crumbling Vestige with provides for color fixing turn 1 and colorless turn 2, and Evolving Wilds which provides for nothing turn 1 and color fixing 2. I would think it's okay for a common and plays much differently than those two other cards.
For the Vine - I sort of worked backward from what was allowed by Accomplished Automaton. Death trigger instead of ETB, and 5/5 trample for 5G instead of 5/7 for 7. I thought it would be weak, but sort of still interesting. Generally, you're right, I don't want to make useless cards, but I'm sort of exploring common design in general - not everything can be pushed?
Thank you for your help!
I think Unrolling Scenery is fine. Let's compare three cards: Evolving Wilds, Wastes and Crumbling Vestige.
Two cards feature only one ability with no drawback. The last features two abilities with a drawback. It follows, then, that one abikity is free, while two abilities needs to be balanced out with a drawback.
That means that, in theory, there should be nothing to worry about when we take Crumbling Vestige and swap out its tap ability for the tutor ability, as both of those abilities can appear on a card alone without a drawback, making them theoretically equal.
As for the way the card plays, it trades the moderate speed of Evolving Wilds being able to activate straight away for some short term fixing with an extra turn of waiting before the long-term fixing. It's just more instant-gratification at the cost of delaying a better effect, which I think is an interesting change of pace.
As for the Vine, nobody likes designing useless cards, but they're important in that they allow the more exciting cards to stand out. It's a tool for draft to push players toward picking some cards over others, which can speed up drafting rounds. I've played enough power cubes where every card is first-pickable to know that that leads to very long, painful, drawn-out decision-making. Bad cards make the choice a bit easier and double as determining the baseline power level of that draft environment.
I think this mindset is a mistake. Many people enjoy trying to "break" weird or seemingly useless cards. Many people like tribal decks that are comprised of (U) or (R) tribal synergies and (C) creatures that wouldn't be good enough on their own. Many people enjoy Commander, a format where you can only run 1 card with each name.
Even if you agree that some cards are primarily designed for limited, designing a "useless" card is tantamount to giving up. Designing such cards for (C) can be especially difficult, as (C) cards should be easy to read and relatively not complex, if only to help with draft and deck building. That said, I see no reason why you can't make a fair green (C) card that plays the role of "good enough limited big body" but also has some constructed application. Myr Enforcer played that role too well in Mirrodin standard, being a 4/4 for like 4 or 5 in limited most of the time, but being a 4/4 for like 1-2 in standard constructed. Keep in mind that's a vanilla (C) card.
If cost reduction is not on the table, one can always add rewards for deck construction, or even Spirit of the Night-style ingredient potential.
Finally, the "fills a limited role ONLY" cards you propose really are something to make at the end of a set; you can't tell on day 1 that you need a sorcery speed removal spell that costs 6 mana at common. (In fact, I'd argue, you can tell on day 1 that you don't *need* that.) But there was a time in the RIX card design where they said "We're looking for something like Colossal Dreadmaw"... at which point they should have done Imposing Sailback 4GG Flash, This spell cannot be countered. 6/6 just to say "It's different, but fulfills much the same role."
And your proposed replacement for Colossal Dreadmaw is neither common, nor does it fill the same role as Dreadmaw. It may have been a bit unexpected, but I see no problem with them reprinting a throwaway common from the last set because it accomplished what it needed to.
In the context of 1110mystic's card, it's not as though the card will spend every draft rotting away in the unused pile of peoples' card pools. It has a decent body with evasion and a little extra incentive to participate in combat. I can see plenty of scenarios in which I'd play this card in limited, so it's not actually useless. I just meant to say that if it ends up being limited fodder, like Colossal Dreadmaw, that gets last-picked and then tossed in a bin at the end of draft night, that's okay. We designers need to be okay with that possibility.
One of the next steps is printing creatures - and boy, you need a lot of them. At (C), there is incentive for creatures to be vanilla and french vanilla. The good news is WOTC has lots of experience with these designs and can, if prompted, make a card like Vampire Nighthawk - a casual favorite "fringe" constructed playable card. We could realistically see a (C) 3/2 for 1R in green, and that could conceiveably see tribal goblin play. However, a 2/2 or 3/1 with a simple keyword is often a great choice. mesa unicorn-style cards have lead to some of the more interesting limited choices over the past few years, and while we'd like to say they're not the best 2 drop for any standard deck right now... it's possible a tribal or "highlander" incentive might help them make the cut.
By sheer volume it's difficult to imagine a set having 100% constructed playable commons, but its worth noting that many of the better Masters sets easily reach 50%, as beyond format staples they print causal favorites, tribal staples, and commander staples.
As for Imposing Sailback, I'm pretty sure it fills the role of "giant green common" pretty well. it doesn't have trample, but it snipes an attacker. That's a fair tradeoff that seems comparable. Of course, we could playtest RIX limited to see. Something the RIX team didn't bother to do by their own account.