All Seeing Eye of Truth3 Artifact
Whenever you shuffle your library, you may scry 2 afterwards.
Cycling 0(0, Discard this card: Draw a card.) Who is one that doubts the truth—but never doubts themselves?
"There are two sides to every coin—like every tale. One side always wins you the flip—one tale always lands you on your head."
—Sijaque the Gambler
All Seeing Eye of Justice0 Artifact
Whenever an opponent shuffles his or her library, you may sacrifice All Seeing Eye of Justice. If you do, fateseal 2 afterwards. Who is one that seeks justice for themselves—but at the expense of others?
I was originally going to make these Planewalker effects. And I had contemplated them for use on Dracian the Night King reprise.
I ultimately decided they would make better gem artifacts instead.
First of all, both of these cards seem to meet the syntax and semantics of real cards. Kudos.
The eye of justice isn’t bad, either, forming a mean turn 2 combo with surgical extraction or punishing fetches effectively in colorless, which a lot of people would support.
The eye of truth, however, is broken. Scrying 2 after popping each fetch land makes it too easy to grab combo pieces. Cycling of 0 also makes combo decks too powerful as it similarly enables combos.
I know that you have spoken about the unlikely odds of getting 2-card combos and you have specifically spoken out against the current mulligan system because it makes those far more likely. When you add cards like this, you basically have to recalculate the hypergeometric calculations to treat your library as having 56 cards... except you have to lower that to 52 because street wraith exists... and down to 48 because gitaxian probe exists... or down to 44 if you count Mishra’a bauble... or 40 if you count Arcum’s astrolabe... or 36 if you count manamorphose... or less if you count fetchlands.
while there are lots of cards with this type of design, making more is highly discouraged as each new card makes it that much easier to get the two card combos within 2 turns.
Functional and mostly reasonable; big improvements for you. The only stand out problem are the use of the word afterwards which is pointless but leads me to believe you want these to be replacement effects. As standard triggers the word afterwards is just a confusing add on because it is quite a bit after the shuffle that the ability will resolve. The other standout problem Rosy pointed out. Cycling for 0 while not broken isn't good design. The fact that Wizard's have done this effect multiple times has underminded the basic foundation of the game in a few decks. Even then none of their 0 mana cycles actually straight up cycle for 0. They either cost life or wait a turn to draw.
I don't agree with Rosy that scry 2 on all fetches is broken. As a two mana artifact that doesn't do anything else it is powerful but I wouldn't say broken.
I do think the All Seeing Eye of Truth could cost 3, without pushing the design into the pennies bin. At three, the potential of the effect, and to be able to play into the effect like a draw effect makes it worth while.
As for the word 'afterwards', you do need to put that there for coherence, so that people easily understand that after the library is shuffled, you will do the effect, and people don't have a choice of the matter.
.
As for the word 'afterwards', you do need to put that there for coherence, so that people easily understand that after the library is shuffled, you will do the effect, and people don't have a choice of the matter.
This is why a good understanding of the game or a healthy level of humility is needed when designing cards. You have designed a triggered ability. It waits for the triggering event to occur then goes on the stack then resolves. Just look at where the word afterwards is currently used in magic, no where. It isn’t needed.
No competent person and I doubt even incompetent individuals would believe that such cards make you scry or fateseal during or before the shuffle occurs.
I have enough home-play experience to know and understand the importance of explicit instruction.
I've also come to a point where I think that All Seeing Eye of Justice should be a free play.
At 2 mana, even despite the combo potential, it struggles to be worth the 2 mana otherwise. This can't and shouldn't be a thing. After your opponent hits a fetch land or something, it's hard to say that you can actually disrupt them severely enough to warrant the cost. It's likely to be a minor disruption at the start and mid-game, while their hand is fresh and fully loaded. The spot it takes up in the deck warrants the cost of the effect by itself.
I definitely appreciate that you are bringing cards that are straight forward, mostly balanced and correctly templated. These are too strong for Standard, but I could easily see them in a Modern Horizons type set. However its disheartening that your response to accurate analysis of rules and power levels is to decide to do the exact opposite.
1) Rosy and User are correct that "afterwards" is superfluous, as the scry trigger does not go onto the stack until after the shuffle has already been completed. If it is so important to you, it needs to be part of italicized reminder text, not the rules text.
2) Cycle 0 is broken. Putting that on a card insures that it will be in every deck as a 4-of and will never get cast because the utility of effectively reducing your deck size by 4 cards is too strong. Street Wraith, Gitaxian Probe and Urza's and Mishra's Baubles all are played for this reason and those either cost life or don't give you the card immediately. Cycling 2 would be fine, 1 would be pushing it but okay in eternal formats.
3) I don't necessarily think the Eye of Truth if broken, but it is quite strong, especially in formats where fetches are prevalent (which is currently all of them since Fabled Passage exists). This is fine at 3 and any cycling is unnecessary for this to be a playable card and probably pushes it over the top.
4) The eye of justice should at least cost 1, as the effect is too strong for a 0 cost artifact. It does have the downside of depending on your opponent doing something, but it would be an auto-sideboard in any format where fetch lands are prevalent.
The specific combo concern of Surgical Extraction with Eye of Justice is an easy fix. Also note with Fateseal, per the reminder text, you can choose to look at any opponent's library, not just the one who shuffled. That needs to be written out to affect the shuffling player specifically.
All Seeing Eye of Justice 0
Artifact Whenever spell or ability an opponent controls causes them to shuffle their library, you may sacrifice All Seeing Eye of Justice. If you do, look at the top two cards of that player's library, then put any number of them on the bottom of that player's library and the rest on top in any order.(This effect happens after the shuffling is completed.)
Some decks, such as ones that thrive on consistency, will not need or use All Seeing Eye of Truth.
Simply because, copies of actual control spells make a far greater placement than copies of 'a potential extension' to those cards few and far between whose place it's taking.
Some decks, such as ones that thrive on consistency, will not need or use All Seeing Eye of Truth.
Simply because, copies of actual control spells make a far greater placement than copies of 'a potential extension' to those cards few and far between whose place it's taking.
You have it exactly opposite.
Cycling 0 means the card is just a free draw. This INCREASES consistency. Decks that want consistency will absolutely play this card as a free draw, just like they play Bauble and Probe and Wraith right now.
You have it exactly opposite.
Cycling 0 means the card is just a free draw. This INCREASES consistency. Decks that want consistency will absolutely play this card as a free draw, just like they play Bauble and Probe and Wraith right now.
A card has to provide direct access to another card in order to explicitly increase consistency.
Imagine drawing into an actual control spell instead of drawing into this (for only a chance of drawing into an actual control spell).
The usages you're talking about are primarily bad strategic application, unless they provide another resource (such as mana), or they provide direct access by some means.
The same principal in Pokemon TCG is used, where cards such as Trainers' Mail only provide 'extension capabilities' (consistency assistance) for decks relying on one specific card to do something (such as Battle Compressor); and in mtg you typically have an array of cards that do something in a competitive scene. You can secure consistency by simply adding more solid spells. Whereas, you typically need various 'extension pieces' to secure a percentile clench and favorable mathematical proportion for success. Something like this helps more creative decks that one to do something special with a specific card, but it moreso holds back Uber-powered control strategies, that are better off simply running more copies of actual control spells.
You have no idea how to design for this game and your buzzwords are functionally meaningless.
Can we all just accept that this is a troll account and move on? The point of this forum is constructive criticism which Reap has repeatedly shown themselves to be incapable of accepting.
I tried googling those pokemon references to figure out what you were talking about, but the card you referenced has nothing to do with the one you are proposing. Since there are plenty of Magic cards that anyone who plays Magic would know and can point to for reference, you should really be using those for clarity of conversation.
Moving on.
Since you like statistics, which situation are you more likely to draw the card you need in? When your deck has 60 cards or 56 cards?
Cycling 0 is effectively a cardslot in the deck that doesn't exist because there is literally no cost to draw the next card. A control deck will find its answers more quickly, an aggro deck finds its threats more quickly and combo finds its pieces more quickly because the odds of drawing the card you need is 1-in-56 instead of 1-in-60. That is why this card makes decks more consistent. Its also why Gitaxian Probe is banned in every format and that card costs 2 life to use.
I tried googling those pokemon references to figure out what you were talking about, but the card you referenced has nothing to do with the one you are proposing. Since there are plenty of Magic cards that anyone who plays Magic would know and can point to for reference, you should really be using those for clarity of conversation.
Moving on.
Since you like statistics, which situation are you more likely to draw the card you need in? When your deck has 60 cards or 56 cards?
Cycling 0 is effectively a cardslot in the deck that doesn't exist because there is literally no cost to draw the next card. A control deck will find its answers more quickly, an aggro deck finds its threats more quickly and combo finds its pieces more quickly because the odds of drawing the card you need is 1-in-56 instead of 1-in-60. That is why this card makes decks more consistent. Its also why Gitaxian Probe is banned in every format and that card costs 2 life to use.
It does have to do with the example given, because Trainer's Mail for example provides a 'tech extension' to other specific cards, there are no replacements for, and no other cards you can add to surplus the specific effect (such as Battle Compressor). A blind draw is essentially the same dynamic, it provides a 'tech extension' possibly.
But otherwise, basic math says that 8 physical counterspells is greater than 4.
But otherwise, basic math says that 8 physical counterspells is greater than 4.
Good old basic math. The reason so many stupid people distrust smart people. The assumption that basic math is the end all be all when advanced math is actually way more accurate and useful.
The problem is to use this basic math you have to make an assumption. Namely that every card in your deck is equally powerful and useful. If this was true then you would be right that you want a full 60 cards rather than the effective 54 you get by using a 0 mana cycler.
However, no deck has this luxury. First, a number of cards in your deck are lands(barring exceptions) and even in the most absurd draw go deck you still have both draw cards and counterspells. So even basic math turns against you at this point. You have three resources. You can't just run more of all of them so you instead decrease the size of your deck.
Further, all cards are not equal in strength. You can only run 4 of the best cards. Then you run 4 more of the second best card. Decreasing the size of your deck is nearly always better than 4 copies of the 10th or 11th best card. This is getting rather complex and for someone who hides behind meaningless words and shields themselves with basic math its understandable that this is lost on you at first glance.
Thankfully many parts of magic delve into advanced math so those who delve deep into magic understand this shallow level of advanced math. We are glad to help you on this journey of understanding. It's the entire point of this community. Don't let shame or fear of your ignorance keep you from learning. No one begrudges those who wish to learn.
First card seems fine and dandy if you make it Cycling 2. Second card is kind of a do-nothing? Fateseal 2 isn't really strong enough to warrant being a card down, is it? And then your opponent might not even trigger the thing.
A card has to provide direct access to another card in order to explicitly increase consistency.
Imagine drawing into an actual control spell instead of drawing into this (for only a chance of drawing into an actual control spell).
You pay 0 and cycle this and draw into that actual control spell. You still have the same amount of cards and it's like you never had to draw into the artifact in the first place, except better because you now have that artifact in your graveyard.
In addition to what user said yeah sure 8 is bigger than 4 but that also doesn't stop you from still putting in 4 of those cyclers to draw easier into one of your 8 copies you need since you know there is no cost in the cycling you can always dig deeper.
Furthermore the consistency gets better due to the fact that and lets use your counterspell example again. 8 counterspells only increase the consistency of drawing counterspells and reduce the consistency of drawing anything else. While a zero mana almost impossible to interact instant speed draw increases the consistency of EVERY card in your deck including said counterspells, hence making a deck more consistent. And your 8 phisical copies thing also falls really Flat in stuff like X-Card combos since there usually aren't multiple cards that do the same thing so you just can't put more than the 4 copies in anyways.
And to show that cards with no cost associated with them are overpowered you can look at how other tcg handle those(as you did but with kind of irellevant cards). Show us a card that has no cost associated with it other than putting it in your deck and then show us tournament results where that card is legal.
One of three things will happen either almost each deck that can play it plays it, it has been banned or the overall powerlevel is ridicilously high that one card more or less doesn't make the difference. There is a reason the Bill card in the PokemonTCG got changed to a supporter card so there is a cost to it (not being able to play another support card that turn) because in the early days of the game every deck had the full playset of bill. Similar thing happened with Pot of Greed (being banned or limited) and remember Jar of Greed has a cost (you need to wait one turn after setting to activate it) and it still saw significant play in most of the decks before the Powercreep of that game have relegated it out of there.
Your card has less cost than The old version bill and the Jar of Greed, or to circle back to Magic less cost than Mishra's Bauble the 16th most played card in Modern or Gitaxian Probe a card banned in Modern,Legacy,Pauper and Restricted in Vintage [8th overall most played card 65% of decks play it] and Legal in Penny Dreadful [6th]. And thats just the cycling part. You can actually use the card itself if you really dont need to dig for something, I mean without the cycling 0 it would be a reasonable card that some decks could play. But the cycling 0 it would be a card that almost every deck would play.
Lot of good conversation. The first one is too cheap for that effect. Scry 2 is nearly as powerful as drawing a card. Even Horn of Greed was too powerful. Won a or several major tournaments. You need to either make it cost more or give it a Mana tax/cost.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Artifact
Whenever you shuffle your library, you may scry 2 afterwards.
Cycling 0 (0, Discard this card: Draw a card.)
Who is one that doubts the truth—but never doubts themselves?
"There are two sides to every coin—like every tale. One side always wins you the flip—one tale always lands you on your head."
—Sijaque the Gambler
All Seeing Eye of Justice 0
Artifact
Whenever an opponent shuffles his or her library, you may sacrifice All Seeing Eye of Justice. If you do, fateseal 2 afterwards.
Who is one that seeks justice for themselves—but at the expense of others?
I was originally going to make these Planewalker effects. And I had contemplated them for use on Dracian the Night King reprise.
I ultimately decided they would make better gem artifacts instead.
The eye of justice isn’t bad, either, forming a mean turn 2 combo with surgical extraction or punishing fetches effectively in colorless, which a lot of people would support.
The eye of truth, however, is broken. Scrying 2 after popping each fetch land makes it too easy to grab combo pieces. Cycling of 0 also makes combo decks too powerful as it similarly enables combos.
I know that you have spoken about the unlikely odds of getting 2-card combos and you have specifically spoken out against the current mulligan system because it makes those far more likely. When you add cards like this, you basically have to recalculate the hypergeometric calculations to treat your library as having 56 cards... except you have to lower that to 52 because street wraith exists... and down to 48 because gitaxian probe exists... or down to 44 if you count Mishra’a bauble... or 40 if you count Arcum’s astrolabe... or 36 if you count manamorphose... or less if you count fetchlands.
while there are lots of cards with this type of design, making more is highly discouraged as each new card makes it that much easier to get the two card combos within 2 turns.
I don't agree with Rosy that scry 2 on all fetches is broken. As a two mana artifact that doesn't do anything else it is powerful but I wouldn't say broken.
As for the word 'afterwards', you do need to put that there for coherence, so that people easily understand that after the library is shuffled, you will do the effect, and people don't have a choice of the matter.
No competent person and I doubt even incompetent individuals would believe that such cards make you scry or fateseal during or before the shuffle occurs.
I've also come to a point where I think that All Seeing Eye of Justice should be a free play.
At 2 mana, even despite the combo potential, it struggles to be worth the 2 mana otherwise. This can't and shouldn't be a thing. After your opponent hits a fetch land or something, it's hard to say that you can actually disrupt them severely enough to warrant the cost. It's likely to be a minor disruption at the start and mid-game, while their hand is fresh and fully loaded. The spot it takes up in the deck warrants the cost of the effect by itself.
1) Rosy and User are correct that "afterwards" is superfluous, as the scry trigger does not go onto the stack until after the shuffle has already been completed. If it is so important to you, it needs to be part of italicized reminder text, not the rules text.
2) Cycle 0 is broken. Putting that on a card insures that it will be in every deck as a 4-of and will never get cast because the utility of effectively reducing your deck size by 4 cards is too strong. Street Wraith, Gitaxian Probe and Urza's and Mishra's Baubles all are played for this reason and those either cost life or don't give you the card immediately. Cycling 2 would be fine, 1 would be pushing it but okay in eternal formats.
3) I don't necessarily think the Eye of Truth if broken, but it is quite strong, especially in formats where fetches are prevalent (which is currently all of them since Fabled Passage exists). This is fine at 3 and any cycling is unnecessary for this to be a playable card and probably pushes it over the top.
4) The eye of justice should at least cost 1, as the effect is too strong for a 0 cost artifact. It does have the downside of depending on your opponent doing something, but it would be an auto-sideboard in any format where fetch lands are prevalent.
The specific combo concern of Surgical Extraction with Eye of Justice is an easy fix. Also note with Fateseal, per the reminder text, you can choose to look at any opponent's library, not just the one who shuffled. That needs to be written out to affect the shuffling player specifically.
All Seeing Eye of Justice 0
Artifact
Whenever spell or ability an opponent controls causes them to shuffle their library, you may sacrifice All Seeing Eye of Justice. If you do, look at the top two cards of that player's library, then put any number of them on the bottom of that player's library and the rest on top in any order. (This effect happens after the shuffling is completed.)
Simply because, copies of actual control spells make a far greater placement than copies of 'a potential extension' to those cards few and far between whose place it's taking.
You have it exactly opposite.
Cycling 0 means the card is just a free draw. This INCREASES consistency. Decks that want consistency will absolutely play this card as a free draw, just like they play Bauble and Probe and Wraith right now.
A card has to provide direct access to another card in order to explicitly increase consistency.
Imagine drawing into an actual control spell instead of drawing into this (for only a chance of drawing into an actual control spell).
The usages you're talking about are primarily bad strategic application, unless they provide another resource (such as mana), or they provide direct access by some means.
The same principal in Pokemon TCG is used, where cards such as Trainers' Mail only provide 'extension capabilities' (consistency assistance) for decks relying on one specific card to do something (such as Battle Compressor); and in mtg you typically have an array of cards that do something in a competitive scene. You can secure consistency by simply adding more solid spells. Whereas, you typically need various 'extension pieces' to secure a percentile clench and favorable mathematical proportion for success. Something like this helps more creative decks that one to do something special with a specific card, but it moreso holds back Uber-powered control strategies, that are better off simply running more copies of actual control spells.
Can we all just accept that this is a troll account and move on? The point of this forum is constructive criticism which Reap has repeatedly shown themselves to be incapable of accepting.
The same is true in Pokemon TCG running VS Seeker instead of copies of physical supporters. It's not explicitly more resourceful.
Moving on.
Since you like statistics, which situation are you more likely to draw the card you need in? When your deck has 60 cards or 56 cards?
Cycling 0 is effectively a cardslot in the deck that doesn't exist because there is literally no cost to draw the next card. A control deck will find its answers more quickly, an aggro deck finds its threats more quickly and combo finds its pieces more quickly because the odds of drawing the card you need is 1-in-56 instead of 1-in-60. That is why this card makes decks more consistent. Its also why Gitaxian Probe is banned in every format and that card costs 2 life to use.
It does have to do with the example given, because Trainer's Mail for example provides a 'tech extension' to other specific cards, there are no replacements for, and no other cards you can add to surplus the specific effect (such as Battle Compressor). A blind draw is essentially the same dynamic, it provides a 'tech extension' possibly.
But otherwise, basic math says that 8 physical counterspells is greater than 4.
The problem is to use this basic math you have to make an assumption. Namely that every card in your deck is equally powerful and useful. If this was true then you would be right that you want a full 60 cards rather than the effective 54 you get by using a 0 mana cycler.
However, no deck has this luxury. First, a number of cards in your deck are lands(barring exceptions) and even in the most absurd draw go deck you still have both draw cards and counterspells. So even basic math turns against you at this point. You have three resources. You can't just run more of all of them so you instead decrease the size of your deck.
Further, all cards are not equal in strength. You can only run 4 of the best cards. Then you run 4 more of the second best card. Decreasing the size of your deck is nearly always better than 4 copies of the 10th or 11th best card. This is getting rather complex and for someone who hides behind meaningless words and shields themselves with basic math its understandable that this is lost on you at first glance.
Thankfully many parts of magic delve into advanced math so those who delve deep into magic understand this shallow level of advanced math. We are glad to help you on this journey of understanding. It's the entire point of this community. Don't let shame or fear of your ignorance keep you from learning. No one begrudges those who wish to learn.
You pay 0 and cycle this and draw into that actual control spell. You still have the same amount of cards and it's like you never had to draw into the artifact in the first place, except better because you now have that artifact in your graveyard.
Furthermore the consistency gets better due to the fact that and lets use your counterspell example again. 8 counterspells only increase the consistency of drawing counterspells and reduce the consistency of drawing anything else. While a zero mana almost impossible to interact instant speed draw increases the consistency of EVERY card in your deck including said counterspells, hence making a deck more consistent. And your 8 phisical copies thing also falls really Flat in stuff like X-Card combos since there usually aren't multiple cards that do the same thing so you just can't put more than the 4 copies in anyways.
And to show that cards with no cost associated with them are overpowered you can look at how other tcg handle those(as you did but with kind of irellevant cards). Show us a card that has no cost associated with it other than putting it in your deck and then show us tournament results where that card is legal.
One of three things will happen either almost each deck that can play it plays it, it has been banned or the overall powerlevel is ridicilously high that one card more or less doesn't make the difference. There is a reason the Bill card in the PokemonTCG got changed to a supporter card so there is a cost to it (not being able to play another support card that turn) because in the early days of the game every deck had the full playset of bill. Similar thing happened with Pot of Greed (being banned or limited) and remember Jar of Greed has a cost (you need to wait one turn after setting to activate it) and it still saw significant play in most of the decks before the Powercreep of that game have relegated it out of there.
Your card has less cost than The old version bill and the Jar of Greed, or to circle back to Magic less cost than Mishra's Bauble the 16th most played card in Modern or Gitaxian Probe a card banned in Modern,Legacy,Pauper and Restricted in Vintage [8th overall most played card 65% of decks play it] and Legal in Penny Dreadful [6th]. And thats just the cycling part. You can actually use the card itself if you really dont need to dig for something, I mean without the cycling 0 it would be a reasonable card that some decks could play. But the cycling 0 it would be a card that almost every deck would play.
With how prominent fetchlands are, All Seeing Eye of Justice has great utility.
It's worth its place in a deck just as it is. In Commander, it's a lovely new gem, that would probably become a staple.
Yes, and its just as simple math that 12/56 is more consistent than 12/60.