Blackhole Cultist Creature — Faerie Rogue
Blackhole Cultist enters the battlefield with your choice of a flying, first strike, haste, or deathtouch counter on it. If any player controls a creature that can't attack and/or block, Blackhole Cultist enters the battlefield with an additional one of those counters on it of your choice. They worship the void—mind, heart, and soul.
2/2
Lecturer of Orzhov EthicsBW Creature — Giant Horror
Phasing
If you would draw a card outside the first card you draw each turn, you may put a creature card from your graveyard into your hand instead. This ability triggers only once each turn. Never once will you see the Orzhov practice anything he preaches.
4/4
Gargantuan Cretin4B Creature — Giant Imp
You may cast Gargantuan Cretin face down as a 2/2 creature by paying B instead. If you do, it gains, "If an opponent lost 3 or more life this turn, you may turn this card face up at any time."
When Gargantuan Cretin enters the battlefield or is turned face up, target player gets traumatized four, then you draw a card and lose 2 life.
4/2
Blackhole cultists slightly misses as a hybrid card as neither red nor blue get deathtouch. Other than that it's an interesting design.
Lecturer, this ability isn't a trigger. So the triggers only once a turn is pointless. Instead you need to say you may choose to do this only once each turn.
Was the ability on the cretin meant to only allow you to turn it face up the turn you play it face down? Regardless it needs to be templated as an actual ability, either a trigger or activated.
Red blue doesn't have any good two mana, two color aggro/knights.
This creatively fills that gap. The deathtouch is permissible imo. It's something that should be in red+blue really.
No part of this justifies the above design. And going against established design needs justification. Something not existing doesn't justify creating it. Simply stating something should be doesn't justify it. If you have actual reasons beyond "there wasn't one already" and "I wanted to" Then we could have a conversation. Otherwise, let's agree you're obstinate and move on.
Blackhole Cultist
User is right that it breaks color pie if it can be cast for UR without spending any B and get deathtouch, but the fix is easy: add another black-only pip to the card, making its mana symbols the same as Evelyn, the Covetous. Haste and first strike in mono-black are also a stretch, but not without precedent, and that flexible a 2/2 does need to cost more that 2 mana value anyway.
I'm not sure how the rules would check that "creature that cannot attack or block condition" because creatures only can attack or block at specific steps of the turn anyway, so arguably this would always get the extra counter since no creature can attack or block during the times that this would be getting cast. The game can check for creatures with defender, but there is no equivalent keyword for "cannot block"
Lecturer of Orzhov Ethics
This would feel more like a WB card if it could only grab creature cards, as neither white nor black can recur instant or sorceries from the graveyard. Otherwise the card seems fine, though the use of phasing is clunky and out dated and having Giant on a 1/3 is odd.
Gargantuan Cretin
This needs to be reworded to work because you'd have to reveal the card to demonstrate that you can pay that specific alternate cost to then cast it face down and that it would gain the ability listed(unlike morph where the alternate cost is consistent across all cards with the ability).
Gargantuan Cretin 3BB
Creature — Giant Imp
You may cast Gargantuan Cretin paying B instead of its casting cost. If you do, it enters the battlefield face down as a 2/2 colorless creature and gains, "If an opponent lost 3 or more life this turn, you may turn this card face up at any time."
When Gargantuan Cretin enters the battlefield or is turned face up, target player gets traumatized four mills four cards, then you draw a card and lose 2 life.
4/2
As a reminder, a baseline expectation of this forum is the following of conventional Magic design principles including the color pie and standard terminology. While you are welcome to offer designs that go beyond those principles, its reasonable to expect that to be a source of critique and - if you are posting in good faith - you should be able to provide reason and justification to your choices based on those principles.
Similarly, if you want to make up ability words, add reminder text for them so that people who aren't familiar with you terms understand your intention without having to have a conversation to figure out that traumatize is just how you like to say "mill"
Other people have said stuff I agree with. Going to add a couple of points:
Blackhole Cultist - paying UB for a 2/2 with haste or first strike would feel weird to me. Even more so than BB. But I do think this is interesting design space, even if I'm not sold on this specific execution.
Lecturer of Orzhov Ethics - Along with it being too small to be a giant, horrors and lecturers aren't associated with the Orzhov. Ghosts + priests, sure. Heck, make it a thrull. Thrulls are fun. But not a horror. And why does it need phasing? It's not a strong card as is. EDIT: phasing makes more sense for balance reasons now it's bigger. But I think it would make more sense flavour-wise for a ghost (i.e. a spirit). Also why doesn't the return cards from graveyard ability target? I can't see a good design reason why it wouldn't.
Gargantuan Cretin - B for a 2/2 is too strong for most formats. Flavour-wise, why does it mill things or draw cards or lose life? Also, you know in Magic the giant creature type is those big fee-fi-fo-fum guys who live up beanstalks, right? It's not used for extra big versions of regular creatures. So what the heck does a half-giant, half-imp look like?
"Did you think to kill me? There's no flesh and blood within this cloak to kill. There is only an idea. Ideas are bulletproof." - V, V for Vendetta. Alan Moore
Blackhole Cultist Creature — Faerie Rogue
Blackhole Cultist enters the battlefield with your choice of a flying, first strike, haste, or deathtouch counter on it. If any player controls a creature that can't attack and/or block, Blackhole Cultist enters the battlefield with an additional one of those counters on it of your choice. They worship the void—mind, heart, and soul.
2/2
In addition to the Deathtouch issue, I fundamentally believe that the comprehensive rules would not allow a card to trigger if a card cannot attack or block as doing so essentially requires the card to predict the future, which some games (like Yu-Gi-Oh) do well but MTG is not built to do.
If it was just affecting cards with defender and “this card cannot block”, that would be one thing. You’d probably also count cards with pacifism on them, too (even though the inability is not coming from the creature. If your opponent has mogg flunky and no other creatures, you’d have a good argument that the creature is “currently” unable to attack or block (you’d be able to make a similar argument about any currently tapped creature, though that’s not due to card effects). Imagine the situation where you flash this into play while you control propaganda and I only have one mana untapped (or my creature has brainwash on it and I only have 2 mana if you feel that propaganda limits players rather than creatures). Am I unable to attack? If I have a simian spirit guide in my hand and WOULD indeed be able to attack in that scenario, can I stop you from putting on that second counter? Do I need to prove to you somehow that my card is able to attack even though that relies on hidden information? I mean, it seems pretty obvious that you wouldn’t be getting that second counter if you controlled telepathy and my access to that second mana through the guide was public knowlrdge.
The game doesn’t know how to register this statement the trigger condition even though it makes sense on a surface level (kind of like an Un-card, actually),
Going to agree on one of these points for the lecturer, and up the pot to a 4/4 to boost the drawback on phasing. It was supposed to be a whimpy giant.
The Giant Imp tries to gaslight you. That's the concept behind the design.
I set out to make something like a giant Chimney Imp, but naturally not just going to make the same thing.
I had originally composed the ability like that Rowan, but then remembered that this type of effect needs the specific context that Morph has so that the card isn't face up while it's on the stack.
I had originally composed the ability like that Rowan, but then remembered that this type of effect needs the specific context that Morph has so that the card isn't face up while it's on the stack.
As explained, you have to demonstrate that it has the alternative cost in order to cast it with the alternative cost, meaning you can't cast it without revealing what it is. Morph has a whole slew of rules under the hood to make it work that you can't fit into non-keyworded text on an individual card as you have tried to do here.
That's cute but, the entirety of "rules under the hood" is theoretical. They exist in theory, but in practice (physically) the card would/should be played out no different as you're stating (because the context of morph can't be verified either unless the card was revealed).
The entire basis of morph and its functionality exists on the honor system. Thus, any like ability would/should be able to be implemented and function on the honor system as well.
That's cute but, the entirety of "rules under the hood" is theoretical. They exist in theory, but in practice (physically) the card would/should be played out no different as you're stating (because the context of morph can't be verified either unless the card was revealed).
The entire basis of morph and its functionality exists on the honor system. Thus, any like ability would/should be able to be implemented and function on the honor system as well.
Notably, the rules of morph (702.37) specify that you cannot cast spells face down otherwise.
702.37d You can’t normally cast a card face down. A morph ability allows you to do so.
There's a difference between "makes sense on the table" and "works in the rules", which is basically the difference between silver/acorn Magic and regular Magic. Your card functions in the former but not in the latter.
There's a difference between "makes sense on the table" and "works in the rules", which is basically the difference between silver/acorn Magic and regular Magic. Your card functions in the former but not in the latter.
Whoa woah, discussion of how the rules should work. Lock your own post.
For the record, before you oppressed me and locked my thread on biased conditions, before I had a fair chance to respond.
"It would not, because Dress Down explicitly states a specific time of the step.
We should all know this would override any hotfix of the rules that say all other end of turn effects happen last during the end step."
Considering this, I think you're missing the fundamentals of the honor system and what it is and what it means to the product functionally. Probably because you have ulterior motives and agendas that you are trying to keep up, which suggests you remain stubborn and authoritarian to do so. I can assure you however, you are totally denying the fundamental existence of this game, and the verbal (or unwritten) contract between players to abide by rules under conditions of undisclosed awareness. Like it or not, there is some gray space, and there likely always will be.
Let's just make peace with that since we cannot change it.
By the way, I also agree with the notion about limiting lecturer to creatures only. Not only for that, but also because the repeatable removal plays disinvite challenge too strongly.
Public Mod Note
(rowanalpha):
As this has become publicly arguing with a mod about a completely different thread, this thread is also being locked and formal warning issued.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Creature — Faerie Rogue
Blackhole Cultist enters the battlefield with your choice of a flying, first strike, haste, or deathtouch counter on it. If any player controls a creature that can't attack and/or block, Blackhole Cultist enters the battlefield with an additional one of those counters on it of your choice.
They worship the void—mind, heart, and soul.
2/2
Lecturer of Orzhov Ethics BW
Creature — Giant Horror
Phasing
If you would draw a card outside the first card you draw each turn, you may put a creature card from your graveyard into your hand instead. This ability triggers only once each turn.
Never once will you see the Orzhov practice anything he preaches.
4/4
Gargantuan Cretin 4B
Creature — Giant Imp
You may cast Gargantuan Cretin face down as a 2/2 creature by paying B instead. If you do, it gains, "If an opponent lost 3 or more life this turn, you may turn this card face up at any time."
When Gargantuan Cretin enters the battlefield or is turned face up, target player gets traumatized four, then you draw a card and lose 2 life.
4/2
Lecturer has a fascinating effect which is also extremely powerful, it needs some adjustment.
Good ideas.
Lecturer, this ability isn't a trigger. So the triggers only once a turn is pointless. Instead you need to say you may choose to do this only once each turn.
Was the ability on the cretin meant to only allow you to turn it face up the turn you play it face down? Regardless it needs to be templated as an actual ability, either a trigger or activated.
This creatively fills that gap. The deathtouch is permissible imo. It's something that should be in red+blue really.
User is right that it breaks color pie if it can be cast for UR without spending any B and get deathtouch, but the fix is easy: add another black-only pip to the card, making its mana symbols the same as Evelyn, the Covetous. Haste and first strike in mono-black are also a stretch, but not without precedent, and that flexible a 2/2 does need to cost more that 2 mana value anyway.
I'm not sure how the rules would check that "creature that cannot attack or block condition" because creatures only can attack or block at specific steps of the turn anyway, so arguably this would always get the extra counter since no creature can attack or block during the times that this would be getting cast. The game can check for creatures with defender, but there is no equivalent keyword for "cannot block"
Lecturer of Orzhov Ethics
This would feel more like a WB card if it could only grab creature cards, as neither white nor black can recur instant or sorceries from the graveyard. Otherwise the card seems fine, though the use of phasing is clunky and out dated and having Giant on a 1/3 is odd.
Gargantuan Cretin
This needs to be reworded to work because you'd have to reveal the card to demonstrate that you can pay that specific alternate cost to then cast it face down and that it would gain the ability listed(unlike morph where the alternate cost is consistent across all cards with the ability).
Gargantuan Cretin 3BB
Creature — Giant Imp
You may cast Gargantuan Cretin paying B instead of its casting cost. If you do, it enters the battlefield face down as a 2/2 colorless creature and gains, "If an opponent lost 3 or more life this turn, you may turn this card face up at any time."
When Gargantuan Cretin enters the battlefield or is turned face up, target player
gets traumatized fourmills four cards, then you draw a card and lose 2 life.4/2
As a reminder, a baseline expectation of this forum is the following of conventional Magic design principles including the color pie and standard terminology. While you are welcome to offer designs that go beyond those principles, its reasonable to expect that to be a source of critique and - if you are posting in good faith - you should be able to provide reason and justification to your choices based on those principles.
Similarly, if you want to make up ability words, add reminder text for them so that people who aren't familiar with you terms understand your intention without having to have a conversation to figure out that traumatize is just how you like to say "mill"
Blackhole Cultist - paying UB for a 2/2 with haste or first strike would feel weird to me. Even more so than BB. But I do think this is interesting design space, even if I'm not sold on this specific execution.
Lecturer of Orzhov Ethics - Along with it being too small to be a giant, horrors and lecturers aren't associated with the Orzhov. Ghosts + priests, sure. Heck, make it a thrull. Thrulls are fun. But not a horror. And why does it need phasing? It's not a strong card as is. EDIT: phasing makes more sense for balance reasons now it's bigger. But I think it would make more sense flavour-wise for a ghost (i.e. a spirit). Also why doesn't the return cards from graveyard ability target? I can't see a good design reason why it wouldn't.
Gargantuan Cretin - B for a 2/2 is too strong for most formats. Flavour-wise, why does it mill things or draw cards or lose life? Also, you know in Magic the giant creature type is those big fee-fi-fo-fum guys who live up beanstalks, right? It's not used for extra big versions of regular creatures. So what the heck does a half-giant, half-imp look like?
In addition to the Deathtouch issue, I fundamentally believe that the comprehensive rules would not allow a card to trigger if a card cannot attack or block as doing so essentially requires the card to predict the future, which some games (like Yu-Gi-Oh) do well but MTG is not built to do.
If it was just affecting cards with defender and “this card cannot block”, that would be one thing. You’d probably also count cards with pacifism on them, too (even though the inability is not coming from the creature. If your opponent has mogg flunky and no other creatures, you’d have a good argument that the creature is “currently” unable to attack or block (you’d be able to make a similar argument about any currently tapped creature, though that’s not due to card effects). Imagine the situation where you flash this into play while you control propaganda and I only have one mana untapped (or my creature has brainwash on it and I only have 2 mana if you feel that propaganda limits players rather than creatures). Am I unable to attack? If I have a simian spirit guide in my hand and WOULD indeed be able to attack in that scenario, can I stop you from putting on that second counter? Do I need to prove to you somehow that my card is able to attack even though that relies on hidden information? I mean, it seems pretty obvious that you wouldn’t be getting that second counter if you controlled telepathy and my access to that second mana through the guide was public knowlrdge.
The game doesn’t know how to register this statement the trigger condition even though it makes sense on a surface level (kind of like an Un-card, actually),
The Giant Imp tries to gaslight you. That's the concept behind the design.
I set out to make something like a giant Chimney Imp, but naturally not just going to make the same thing.
I had originally composed the ability like that Rowan, but then remembered that this type of effect needs the specific context that Morph has so that the card isn't face up while it's on the stack.
As explained, you have to demonstrate that it has the alternative cost in order to cast it with the alternative cost, meaning you can't cast it without revealing what it is. Morph has a whole slew of rules under the hood to make it work that you can't fit into non-keyworded text on an individual card as you have tried to do here.
The entire basis of morph and its functionality exists on the honor system. Thus, any like ability would/should be able to be implemented and function on the honor system as well.
Notably, the rules of morph (702.37) specify that you cannot cast spells face down otherwise.
There's a difference between "makes sense on the table" and "works in the rules", which is basically the difference between silver/acorn Magic and regular Magic. Your card functions in the former but not in the latter.
Whoa woah, discussion of how the rules should work. Lock your own post.
For the record, before you oppressed me and locked my thread on biased conditions, before I had a fair chance to respond.
Considering this, I think you're missing the fundamentals of the honor system and what it is and what it means to the product functionally. Probably because you have ulterior motives and agendas that you are trying to keep up, which suggests you remain stubborn and authoritarian to do so. I can assure you however, you are totally denying the fundamental existence of this game, and the verbal (or unwritten) contract between players to abide by rules under conditions of undisclosed awareness. Like it or not, there is some gray space, and there likely always will be.
Let's just make peace with that since we cannot change it.
By the way, I also agree with the notion about limiting lecturer to creatures only. Not only for that, but also because the repeatable removal plays disinvite challenge too strongly.