Crippling Doubts2UU Sorcery
Shuffle each creature into their owner's library. "One by one they fell off. Two by two they returned to the sea. Lieges and masses broke apart, and they turned away for the sake of their feeble lives."
Ætherclasm1U Sorcery
Return each creature with power or toughness 2 or less to their owner's hand. "There was no light or sound, but lightning cracked in the mind following a vision a darkness. The silent omen that one's existence was about to dramatically change—or come to an end."
Relentless VoidU Instant
Shuffle target creature into its owner's library. That player may draw a card if it's not you. "I know you thought you had this. We all had thoughts once, only to have realized they were just a figment of our imagination."
Compare to Pyroclasm. It's a softer lock. Definitely doesn't need to cost more.
Part of the criteria for the second was to make a single mana removal for blue, something along the lines of various from other colors, Path to Exile and Innocent Blood for example.
Compare to Pyroclasm. It's a softer lock. Definitely doesn't need to cost more.
Part of the criteria for the second was to make a single mana removal for blue, something along the lines of various from other colors, Path to Exile and Innocent Blood for example.
Saying compared to a card deemed too powerful its fine is possibly the worst argument you've ever made. Though it is one of the most coherent. A note for the future. If your goal is cards beyond the power level of standard. Then you should preface your designs with a comment on the power level you're shooting for; such as commander precon or modern horizons. Otherwise it will be judged as the default.
So you wanted pongify? Its a fine goal but its already been done. If you meant something more in line with blue then again its been done and called Unsummon or Force Spike. If your goal was an actual hard removal spell in blue then thats bad. Blue doesn't get that in the same way green doesn't get lightning bolt.
I've decided to return one of the designs to an initial concept for it. I have to agree with the notion I had to myself, that something that's obviously a throwback to such an iconic card, wants to remain true to reference of its roots.
Another I've decided to turn into a blue Wrath of God. I would have to cite Evacuation as the contemporary here, which wasn't ever really bad, but not exactly great either. Evacuation has double utility in that it can be used to spare your own creatures from the alike-effects. For that reason, I don't see any disturbance in the force here between the two effects and their costs.
After looking it over this morning, I had an unsettling feeling over the flavor of the last design. It wasn't wrong, but it certainly felt like the context forced too much of a stretch of the imagination before it was realized. The new concept represents something like a blackhole loop. That which goes in, is theorized to be warped out of another side (via forces of gravity and centrifugal force). I like it a lot more. I don't think anything about the flavor text has to change. It in-fact seems even deeper and more evocative—of say voids in people's logic—that they try to fabricate the elements of knowledge/wisdom/understanding, but fail to do so successfully.
Since I didn't see the earlier iterations of these cards, I can't comment on how accurate user's analysis was.
The current versions seem workable, no major wording issues. (Void needs a tweak to be inline with templating, but it wouldn't change functionality)
Crippling Doubts 2UU
Sorcery
Shuffle each creature into their owner's library.
Only issue here is that it should be 3UU. The last ten years of gameplay has shown that being able to wipe the board for four mana with no drawback makes control decks too strong and pushes aggro out of the format. This would be fine in Legacy/Vintage, but it needs to cost 5 to be balanced for newer formats.
Ætherclasm 1U
Sorcery
Return each creature with power or toughness 2 or less to their owner's hand.
Again, this would need to cost 1 more for Standard. Pyroclasm is a fair comparison, even though this can hit cards with high toughness and 2 power, and Pyroclasm has similar issues to 4 mana wraths in being overly oppressive to aggressive strategies. Additionally, being in blue instead of red make control decks very strong.
Also, Magic doesn't use the Æ anymore and errattaed them all to AE because it made it hard for people to internet search/type those card names.
Relentless Void U
Instant
Shuffle target creature into its owner's library. If an opponent returned a card to their hand in this way, that player may draw a card or return a card from their graveyard to their hand.
This one is reasonable as is. I updated the phrasing above so its in line with normal card text, but it doesn't change how the card works.
Power levels aside, I think these are all good designs.
Only issue here is that it should be 3UU. The last ten years of gameplay has shown that being able to wipe the board for four mana with no drawback makes control decks too strong and pushes aggro out of the format. This would be fine in Legacy/Vintage, but it needs to cost 5 to be balanced for newer formats.
Again, this would need to cost 1 more for Standard. Pyroclasm is a fair comparison, even though this can hit cards with high toughness and 2 power, and Pyroclasm has similar issues to 4 mana wraths in being overly oppressive to aggressive strategies. Additionally, being in blue instead of red make control decks very strong.
This one is reasonable as is. I updated the phrasing above so its in line with normal card text, but it doesn't change how the card works.
Power levels aside, I think these are all good designs.
I don't agree. It has shown that player's can typically powerplay to even greater measures of control by utilizing masses of cheap removal spells instead.
I honestly feel like wording composure is not subjective. However, I also don't agree with all the standards in use. I feel that the composure I've used is more coherent, and provides a better sequence.
I don't agree. It has shown that player's can typically powerplay to even greater measures of control by utilizing masses of cheap removal spells instead.
I honestly feel like wording composure is not subjective. However, I also don't agree with all the standards in use. I feel that the composure I've used is more coherent, and provides a better sequence.
Again, you have completely missed the point of why your cards are unbalanced or how control decks play due to your lack of experience, but you do have every right to ignore facts and be wrong all you want. However, if you don't want constructive feedback on how to improve as a designer, you are wasting your time in this forum.
I don't agree. It has shown that player's can typically powerplay to even greater measures of control by utilizing masses of cheap removal spells instead.
I honestly feel like wording composure is not subjective. However, I also don't agree with all the standards in use. I feel that the composure I've used is more coherent, and provides a better sequence.
Again, you have completely missed the point of why your cards are unbalanced or how control decks play due to your lack of experience, but you do have every right to ignore facts and be wrong all you want. However, if you don't want constructive feedback on how to improve as a designer, you are wasting your time in this forum.
lol at this again
Who is the one ignoring that control in very competitive decks is ruled by masses of cheap or free spells?
Its interesting how, when I said your card was too strong for Standard you countered by showing a bunch of cards that haven't been legal in Standard in eleven years or more (and Force of Negation never was). Its almost like you don't know how current Standard formats play.
Everything but aetherclasm is still in the wrong color. White is struggling as is don't take away its best tools and give them to blue. On the power front these all need an increase of 1. If you are insistent that these be legacy viable and skip weaker formats then other than fixing the colors they fall within reason.
Everything but aetherclasm is still in the wrong color. White is struggling as is don't take away its best tools and give them to blue. On the power front these all need an increase of 1. If you are insistent that these be legacy viable and skip weaker formats then other than fixing the colors they fall within reason.
This argument I truly understand. Green is the most devoid of removal. We definitely need some priority removals there.
I didn't set out to control color selection here, so it was out of my hands.
Everything but aetherclasm is still in the wrong color. White is struggling as is don't take away its best tools and give them to blue. On the power front these all need an increase of 1. If you are insistent that these be legacy viable and skip weaker formats then other than fixing the colors they fall within reason.
I disagree about stuff being in the wrong color. Blue can already put stuff into and on the bottom of its owner's library (Commit // Memory,Run Ashore), so shuffling in isn't even a stretch.
Further note, that removal in blue like this enables blue to ease up on desperation towards "counterspells" as removal, and allow blue to take up other strategies and play styles.
By the same dynamics, removal in green doesn't have to take the definite form, but can be composed around "counter-style" effects that ace other removals/domain influence.
Everything but aetherclasm is still in the wrong color. White is struggling as is don't take away its best tools and give them to blue. On the power front these all need an increase of 1. If you are insistent that these be legacy viable and skip weaker formats then other than fixing the colors they fall within reason.
I disagree about stuff being in the wrong color. Blue can already put stuff into and on the bottom of its owner's library (Commit // Memory,Run Ashore), so shuffling in isn't even a stretch.
In most games shiffling a card into the library is effectively exiling it. It simply won't show up in that game again. Obviously their are functional differences in specific cases especially when tutors are involved which is why you don't consider them exactly the same but to compare it to putting something on top of the library is disingenuous.
In most games shiffling a card into the library is effectively exiling it. It simply won't show up in that game again. Obviously their are functional differences in specific cases especially when tutors are involved which is why you don't consider them exactly the same but to compare it to putting something on top of the library is disingenuous.
You're right, that's why I specifically called out Run Ashore (Aether Gust also) as something that can put cards on bottom of library.
I've decided to run another update, and removed the 'return a card from the graveyard to the hand' from Relenteless Void.
That effect pushes the utility too far under-par with additional copy of spells it can provide players. The domain influence simply isn't balanced then. However, a chance to draw into another copy of, or another copy of the creature, is a pretty fair exchange.
In most games shiffling a card into the library is effectively exiling it. It simply won't show up in that game again. Obviously their are functional differences in specific cases especially when tutors are involved which is why you don't consider them exactly the same but to compare it to putting something on top of the library is disingenuous.
You're right, that's why I specifically called out Run Ashore (Aether Gust also) as something that can put cards on bottom of library.
Neither of those cards allow you to put an opponent's card on the bottom. They both allow your opponent the choice to keep their threat or ditch a bad card. By giving this choice to the opponent rather than the caster it makes it so it is not hard removal. If you wanted to mimic the effect on these cards you would put the card on top then allow them to shuffle.
Neither of those cards allow you to put an opponent's card on the bottom. They both allow your opponent the choice to keep their threat or ditch a bad card. By giving this choice to the opponent rather than the caster it makes it so it is not hard removal. If you wanted to mimic the effect on these cards you would put the card on top then allow them to shuffle.
That's a fair analysis. I still think its not a huge bend for blue since blue can manipulate library location with cards like Chronostutter and Commit // Memory, but I agree it is a stretch at the very least of Blue's current toolbox.
Neither of those cards allow you to put an opponent's card on the bottom. They both allow your opponent the choice to keep their threat or ditch a bad card. By giving this choice to the opponent rather than the caster it makes it so it is not hard removal. If you wanted to mimic the effect on these cards you would put the card on top then allow them to shuffle.
That's a fair analysis. I still think its not a huge bend for blue since blue can manipulate library location with cards like Chronostutter and Commit // Memory, but I agree it is a stretch at the very least of Blue's current toolbox.
Combining in color effects can lead to out of color effects. The same way a green death touch creature that ETBs fights is not in green's pie. The fact that you can Anchor to the Æther then Thought Scour doesn't mean blue can just destory creatures.
Combining in color effects can lead to out of color effects. The same way a green death touch creature that ETBs fights is not in green's pie. The fact that you can Anchor to the Æther then Thought Scour doesn't mean blue can just destory creatures.
I agree about the combining abilities thing to a point. I guess the better question is, if Blue can tuck a card two cards down, then how far down is too far?
Combining in color effects can lead to out of color effects. The same way a green death touch creature that ETBs fights is not in green's pie. The fact that you can Anchor to the Æther then Thought Scour doesn't mean blue can just destory creatures.
I agree about the combining abilities thing to a point. I guess the better question is, if Blue can tuck a card two cards down, then how far down is too far?
Looking at existing cards and remembering how it felt playing against certain ones. I would say monoblue should do no more than two without extra restrictions or costs. Once it takes three or more turns to redraw the threat, it feels far more permanent/dealt with.
Though I would be open to hearing anyone else's argument for a different number. Even lower.
Looking at existing cards and remembering how it felt playing against certain ones. I would say monoblue should do no more than two without extra restrictions or costs. Once it takes three or more turns to redraw the threat, it feels far more permanent/dealt with.
Though I would be open to hearing anyone else's argument for a different number. Even lower.
I could see a stronger card putting something 3-4 down. The other consideration, with the first card above, is that it was putting all permanent into the library which, for gameplay flow, you wouldn't want to be put in order by the players because the time to decide what order to put 3+ cards into the library stalls gameplay (why cards that bottom more that two cards will randomize). If the "Wrath of Bounce" spell above put things on top OR bottom it would need to be in a random order so that the process didn't take too long.
The other consideration, with the first card above, is that it was putting all permanent into the library which, for gameplay flow, you wouldn't want to be put in order by the players because the time to decide what order to put 3+ cards into the library stalls gameplay (why cards that bottom more that two cards will randomize). If the "Wrath of Bounce" spell above put things on top OR bottom it would need to be in a random order so that the process didn't take too long.
Not necessarily. A similar card gave the option to each creature. I could reasonably see something like "For each creature, its owner puts it on top or on bottom of their library." at 2UU for sorcery. Aetherspouts
While normally you want to do this randomly for the purpose of speed the ability to control whether or not you keep the threat is fairly integral to it being a blue spell.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Sorcery
Shuffle each creature into their owner's library.
"One by one they fell off. Two by two they returned to the sea. Lieges and masses broke apart, and they turned away for the sake of their feeble lives."
Ætherclasm 1U
Sorcery
Return each creature with power or toughness 2 or less to their owner's hand.
"There was no light or sound, but lightning cracked in the mind following a vision a darkness. The silent omen that one's existence was about to dramatically change—or come to an end."
Relentless Void U
Instant
Shuffle target creature into its owner's library. That player may draw a card if it's not you.
"I know you thought you had this. We all had thoughts once, only to have realized they were just a figment of our imagination."
Every entity beyond reason is an abomination. But the bigger they are, the more terrifying they become.
Blue doesn't get this effect as its essentially hard removal. White is the color of this type of effect.
Wave could be fine at 3, with a heavy color requirement but it probably needs to be 4.
Crippling could be 2 as a sorcery but as an instant 3+ is the right call.
Part of the criteria for the second was to make a single mana removal for blue, something along the lines of various from other colors, Path to Exile and Innocent Blood for example.
So you wanted pongify? Its a fine goal but its already been done. If you meant something more in line with blue then again its been done and called Unsummon or Force Spike. If your goal was an actual hard removal spell in blue then thats bad. Blue doesn't get that in the same way green doesn't get lightning bolt.
I've decided to return one of the designs to an initial concept for it. I have to agree with the notion I had to myself, that something that's obviously a throwback to such an iconic card, wants to remain true to reference of its roots.
Another I've decided to turn into a blue Wrath of God. I would have to cite Evacuation as the contemporary here, which wasn't ever really bad, but not exactly great either. Evacuation has double utility in that it can be used to spare your own creatures from the alike-effects. For that reason, I don't see any disturbance in the force here between the two effects and their costs.
After looking it over this morning, I had an unsettling feeling over the flavor of the last design. It wasn't wrong, but it certainly felt like the context forced too much of a stretch of the imagination before it was realized. The new concept represents something like a blackhole loop. That which goes in, is theorized to be warped out of another side (via forces of gravity and centrifugal force). I like it a lot more. I don't think anything about the flavor text has to change. It in-fact seems even deeper and more evocative—of say voids in people's logic—that they try to fabricate the elements of knowledge/wisdom/understanding, but fail to do so successfully.
The current versions seem workable, no major wording issues. (Void needs a tweak to be inline with templating, but it wouldn't change functionality)
Only issue here is that it should be 3UU. The last ten years of gameplay has shown that being able to wipe the board for four mana with no drawback makes control decks too strong and pushes aggro out of the format. This would be fine in Legacy/Vintage, but it needs to cost 5 to be balanced for newer formats.
Again, this would need to cost 1 more for Standard. Pyroclasm is a fair comparison, even though this can hit cards with high toughness and 2 power, and Pyroclasm has similar issues to 4 mana wraths in being overly oppressive to aggressive strategies. Additionally, being in blue instead of red make control decks very strong.
Also, Magic doesn't use the Æ anymore and errattaed them all to AE because it made it hard for people to internet search/type those card names.
This one is reasonable as is. I updated the phrasing above so its in line with normal card text, but it doesn't change how the card works.
Power levels aside, I think these are all good designs.
I don't agree. It has shown that player's can typically powerplay to even greater measures of control by utilizing masses of cheap removal spells instead.
I honestly feel like wording composure is not subjective. However, I also don't agree with all the standards in use. I feel that the composure I've used is more coherent, and provides a better sequence.
Again, you have completely missed the point of why your cards are unbalanced or how control decks play due to your lack of experience, but you do have every right to ignore facts and be wrong all you want. However, if you don't want constructive feedback on how to improve as a designer, you are wasting your time in this forum.
lol at this again
Who is the one ignoring that control in very competitive decks is ruled by masses of cheap or free spells?
Dismember // Slaughter Pact // Force of Negation // Pact of Negation
"The test is endured not only by the will that is strongest—but by the will that is truest."
Its interesting how, when I said your card was too strong for Standard you countered by showing a bunch of cards that haven't been legal in Standard in eleven years or more (and Force of Negation never was). Its almost like you don't know how current Standard formats play.
This argument I truly understand. Green is the most devoid of removal. We definitely need some priority removals there.
I didn't set out to control color selection here, so it was out of my hands.
I disagree about stuff being in the wrong color. Blue can already put stuff into and on the bottom of its owner's library (Commit // Memory,Run Ashore), so shuffling in isn't even a stretch.
By the same dynamics, removal in green doesn't have to take the definite form, but can be composed around "counter-style" effects that ace other removals/domain influence.
In most games shiffling a card into the library is effectively exiling it. It simply won't show up in that game again. Obviously their are functional differences in specific cases especially when tutors are involved which is why you don't consider them exactly the same but to compare it to putting something on top of the library is disingenuous.
You're right, that's why I specifically called out Run Ashore (Aether Gust also) as something that can put cards on bottom of library.
That effect pushes the utility too far under-par with additional copy of spells it can provide players. The domain influence simply isn't balanced then. However, a chance to draw into another copy of, or another copy of the creature, is a pretty fair exchange.
That's a fair analysis. I still think its not a huge bend for blue since blue can manipulate library location with cards like Chronostutter and Commit // Memory, but I agree it is a stretch at the very least of Blue's current toolbox.
Stuff like that, and Searing Flesh, are torture devices in the way they leave you longing for more.
I agree about the combining abilities thing to a point. I guess the better question is, if Blue can tuck a card two cards down, then how far down is too far?
Though I would be open to hearing anyone else's argument for a different number. Even lower.
I could see a stronger card putting something 3-4 down. The other consideration, with the first card above, is that it was putting all permanent into the library which, for gameplay flow, you wouldn't want to be put in order by the players because the time to decide what order to put 3+ cards into the library stalls gameplay (why cards that bottom more that two cards will randomize). If the "Wrath of Bounce" spell above put things on top OR bottom it would need to be in a random order so that the process didn't take too long.
While normally you want to do this randomly for the purpose of speed the ability to control whether or not you keep the threat is fairly integral to it being a blue spell.