MDenham: Soooo many Xs. This card is a headache to read.
Yeah, and it's just intended as a gimmick card for the most part anyway. It'd be fun to play with in the right deck, but that deck would make you a huge target as well.
Hey! Thanks for the responses. Ya, I admit I like the more complicated cards in magic, myself. I had the craving recently to build a deck based around custom token creation only to realize that there is literally no way to copy abilities. The best someone could do is either run Quicksilver Elemental or Necrotic Ooze, use Cackling Counterpart, followed by lots of populate.
My hope is that "Transplant" will be able to fill a (I feel) missing copy-ability niche. I'll use the rest of this month to try to hone it.
@doombringer: I'll try to condense the wording a bit to lessen the complexity.
@Rush_Clasic: Are you talking about Memory Jar or something else? I'm not sure what you mean by "memories going suicidal."
SecretInfiltrator: My first instinct was that this is undercosted, but that's really not the case at all and just my guts having crap for brains. It's a neat little removal spell with that whole Path to Exile use it on my own guy benefit slapped on. Is "golden" a reference to the "golden rule?"
The exact response to the effect I intended.
"Gold" refers to the flavor concept: Card drawing occasionally is shown to translate to the flavor of wealth (Greed, Treasure Trove).
The edict is for execution by being turned into a golden statue (the two illustration/flavor text concepts I envision suggest either by "being exposed to the gaze of a species of Gorgon that turns to gold rather than to stone" or more mundane "being coated in molten gold while (initially) alive and conscious".
Either way the former controller can at least sell the new statue for a card.
So no intentional relation to the "golden rule" in the name - though it originally was created for a cycle that revolved around the concept that you might want to use them on yourself as well as on others. Just a happy coincidence.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Planar Chaos was not a mistake neither was it random. You might want to look at it again.
[thread=239793][Game] Level Up - Creature[/thread]
Genocide - 2WB
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast ~, sacrifice a creature.
Destroy each creature that shares a type with the sacrificed creature.
@Rush_Clasic: Are you talking about Memory Jar or something else? I'm not sure what you mean by "memories going suicidal."
He is saying it has memory issues.
This. Also, the way you're using "copy" is misleading. You want wording like Havengul Lich. Individual abilities, unless they're triggered or activated abilities on the stack, aren't objects, and thus aren't copiable in this nature. Your wording makes the card seem more like Illusionist's Bracers, and since it doesn't have flash, that simply won't work.
The Unknowable1GG Legendary Creature - Spirit (R)
Intimidate
When The Unknowable enters the battlefield, target opponent shuffles his or her sideboard into his or her library, then puts that many cards from the top of his or her library into his or her sideboard. "I looked into the eyes of the behemoth long and with great strain until, having stared far past my physical limits, I realized they weren't eyes at all."
—Tales of the Outer World, Ko Rolani
3/3
Upon further consideration, this ability is potentially more debilitating than I figured it to be. I still don't think it's interesting enough to put on a sorcery. (Though I'm open to opinions on that.) I am interested to know what color people feel it should be in. It felt too uncalculated for blue. Maybe white makes more sense since it deals more with the outer realms and enjoys equivalent exchange. Anyway, I don't ask for comments often, but I'm more interested in hearing opinions on this one than most.
Upon further consideration, this ability is potentially more debilitating than I figured it to be. I still don't think it's interesting enough to put on a sorcery. (Though I'm open to opinions on that.) I am interested to know what color people feel it should be in. It felt too uncalculated for blue. Maybe white makes more sense since it deals more with the outer realms and enjoys equivalent exchange. Anyway, I don't ask for comments often, but I'm more interested in hearing opinions on this one than most.
I think this does make sense in green. Is it all that oppressive? Ehh, depends on the situation; depends on the sideboard.
I think this does make sense in green. Is it all that oppressive? Ehh, depends on the situation; depends on the sideboard.
I meant that it was too swingy. Sometimes you screw yourself against a deck that has 10+ pieces against you, sometimes you nail 15 land against a deck that only drew 2. The extremes are a bit too extreme for a 3 cmc card.
I meant that it was too swingy. Sometimes you screw yourself against a deck that has 10+ pieces against you, sometimes you nail 15 land against a deck that only drew 2. The extremes are a bit too extreme for a 3 cmc card.
Then make it something like a 5/3 for 3GG? You come to expect swings from a 5CMC rare.
I like the design. I like it a lot. The flavor, too, is quite savory.
These and the next handful of cards are all coming from a brainstorming session where some friends and I tried to think of ways to abuse subgames. It turned into a spiderweb of awesome (and quite possibly unfeasible) tangents like these last two cards.
I thought Demand was a decent ability for 1 CMC, but I wasn't sure just how much field use it would see. There are few instances where I would rather have a card protect a spell from being countered than just having a different card more pertinent to my deck's strategies in my hand instead. However, if I did need that protection, this Demand would excel at it.
What did you guys think of my Dryad? Useless? Overpowered? Too complicated?
Original Post: Chorellius, the Cantankerous DryadG
Creature - Dryad
1: Place one color counter (white, blue, black, red, green, or colorless) on Chorellius, the Cantankerous Dryad that is the same color as the mana used to activate this ability. This creature gains +0/+1 for each color counter.
:symq:: Add mana to your mana pool that is equivalent to the quantity and colors of color counters on Chorellius, the Cantakerous Dryad.
I looked into it's "eyes" and saw relentless anger, the pass of eons, and the eternal elements.
What did you guys think of my Dryad? Useless? Overpowered? Too complicated?
Original Post: Chorellius, the Cantankerous DryadG
Creature - Dryad
1: Place one color counter (white, blue, black, red, green, or colorless) on Chorellius, the Cantankerous Dryad that is the same color as the mana used to activate this ability. This creature gains +0/+1 for each color counter.
:symq:: Add mana to your mana pool that is equivalent to the quantity and colors of color counters on Chorellius, the Cantakerous Dryad.
I looked into it's "eyes" and saw relentless anger, the pass of eons, and the eternal elements.
1/1+*
Let's compare it to other small green creatures that provide multiple mana. I think the best examples we're gonna find are Joraga Treespeaker, Bloom Tender, and Harabaz Druid. What your card is essentially doing is taking small investments and turning them into big gains. If we compare it to Treespeaker in a two-color deck, the result is basically the same. But even just one more color catapults this to a much crazier level. To get that sort of production from Tender or Harabaz, you need four other specific nonland permanents. (Though you can admittedly cheat with Tender.) My point is that the investment for your card to have incredible potential is much smaller than that of these other cards.
The counter system feels awkward, though it's probably the cleanest way to do it. Although I don't really like the concept of the card, I'd write it out something like this:
Cantankerous DryadG Creature - Dryad 1, t: Put a color counter on Cantankerous Dryad of the color spent to activate this ability. t: For each different color counter on Cantankerous Dryad, add one mana of that color to your mana pool.
1/1
As for an untap ability, those are really dangerous when providing mana. Consider that Pili-Pala in it's unassuming state has plenty of infinite combos to go with it.
MDenham - I can just imagine have 5 different markers and a tally-pad as I work my way to activating Door to Nothingness. I don't think there's a lot to be gained from the memory issue. Making it similar to the storage lands makes it a little more powerful and a lot more manageable.
void_nothing - At first, I missed "nonland" and thought "that's too good." Now I think it's too weak. It is debilitating, so too weak might be a fine route to take. But I feel like this could eat all but two permanents. Or at least be reduced to 4WW. I reserve the right to be VERY WRONG about this since the card is rather unique and game-changing. I wouldn't be surprised if the right move was to increase the cost, either.
CryoZenith - Nothing about this really feels white. Even the life gain feels more black than white. The card is interesting; The activated ability has a unique flare once considering the the triggered ability, and the p/t makes more sense when you're just piling counters on itself. The card looks awkward at first glance, which is unfortunate considering the depth to it.
EzraEliot - "Copy target instant or sorcery card..." If it becomes a copy in mid-resolution, weird things happen. (You can't counter it, no one is sure if it actually can resolve, order choices my get screwy, etc.) Otherwise, I like how it filters with itself to make future castings better. Neat card overall. A Twincast at a low cost with this sort of minimum range seems like a neat card all its own. Maybe 3 CMC for U?
arbitraryarmor - Most days, this will just be "... deals X damage to all creatures." There are plenty of times otherwise, so that's not really a good argument against it. But I'd want the environment it exists in to support such a card as much as possible.
aftermarketradio - "Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You choose a card from it and exile that card. Return that card to its owner's hand at the beginning of the next end step unless ~ was kicked." Just seems cleaner to gather it all up, even if that loses to the neat new wording. I really like the card. Sort of like a bad Silence into a good Coercion.
Whitemage57 - Sacrifice fodder. No idea why you'd give it such a prohibitive cost. It's not nearly special enough to force that. Unless you're trying to force a devotion theme? Even then....
Raziel_X007223 - Awfully efficient for what it's doing. Consider that Ajani's Sunstriker and Child of Night are both weaker straight-across and at more prohibitive costs. I think there's a neat connection between the lifelinker and the little gnat left behind. I'd bump this to :2mana::symwb:. Maybe change the life-loss to a reverse lifelink on the token?
doombringer - Reward mechanics are fun. I think it's generally better to make the reward up-front. That way the timing is more direct and the satisfaction is more immediate. Just have glorious hand out the counter the moment you attack or block. You might want to change the flavor, but I still think it works: the "glory" is in battle, not necessarily in surviving it.
Rudyard - Only thing I'd change here is to have it only affect other creatures. On one hand, there's a neatness to it not loosing any power the turn you use the ability. But really, it just doesn't feel like what should happen intuitively. You're spending the wurms power to make everything else bigger: that's how it reads. I really do like the card, though. Perfect use of a wurm.
FreshMeat - I'd just make the last ability static: "As long as ~ has a -1/-1 counter on it, it loses lifelink and has deathtouch." I really like the juxtaposition of lifelink and deathtouch. The latter is perhaps the only effective keyword on lower powered creatures. It's not strictly better on them, but it just looks so elegant that way! Neat card.
KlassyReborn - Deathtouch and doublestrike don't exactly make a lot of sense together. You kill opposing creatures in the first strike combat damage step... then kill them more in the normal combat damage step? There's also a bit too much difference between it's standard form and it's threshhold form.
SecretInfiltrator - Why not: "Reveal the top card of your library. If it's a creature card, put it into your hand. Otherwise, put it on the bottom of your library and put a 1/1 white Soldier creature token onto the battlefield." I'm not sure about the value of bottoming the card. That could be really frustrating compared to the ability of this card. I'd make that part optional.
Mix Master Mikaeus - The problem with this card is that there's not much influence to block it. 1 damage just isn't that scary. Of course, that makes this quite the target for auras and equipment. Still, I'd adjust it's p/t to be more threatening.
Blydden - It's an okay cycle. The thing about making a cycle of Phyrexian mana cards: it becomes a lot less interesting when you aren't eager to mix them together. I can imagine these working in the right setting, though, so that's not necessarily a strike against them. Just something I considered when thinking about where these would exist.
RukarumelFieldJournal - Why does it get one benefit for free but has to work so hard for the other? That just feels jarring.
Altaurus321 - Why not "control"? If you can give the opponent a creature and then mass copy it, that'd be an extra level of cool for this card. This thing already has to rely on your opponent playing a good creature to copy, playing a bunch of lesser creatures yourself, and hoping there isn't a good way for them to go target-happy. Why do you hate my inner-Johnny?
Sagharri - This is a good concept, but I think it buries the card too deep. Oust always felt like a good measure. 4 deep might even be okay.
@ Rush: Thanks for the wording. I was looking for a version of Suppress that only works for a single card, then I started thinking of the new Banisher Priest wording, and somewhere along the way I got the weird wording I ended up with. At least it wasn't too confusing.
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
My hope is that "Transplant" will be able to fill a (I feel) missing copy-ability niche. I'll use the rest of this month to try to hone it.
@doombringer: I'll try to condense the wording a bit to lessen the complexity.
@Rush_Clasic: Are you talking about Memory Jar or something else? I'm not sure what you mean by "memories going suicidal."
He is saying it has memory issues.
Are you designing commons? Check out my primer on NWO.
Interested in making a custom set? Check out my Set skeleton and archetype primer.
I also write articles about getting started with custom card creation.
Go and PLAYTEST your designs, you will learn more in a single playtests than a dozen discussions.
My custom sets:
Dreamscape
Coins of Mercalis [COMPLETE]
Exodus of Zendikar - ON HOLD
The exact response to the effect I intended.
"Gold" refers to the flavor concept: Card drawing occasionally is shown to translate to the flavor of wealth (Greed, Treasure Trove).
The edict is for execution by being turned into a golden statue (the two illustration/flavor text concepts I envision suggest either by "being exposed to the gaze of a species of Gorgon that turns to gold rather than to stone" or more mundane "being coated in molten gold while (initially) alive and conscious".
Either way the former controller can at least sell the new statue for a card.
So no intentional relation to the "golden rule" in the name - though it originally was created for a cycle that revolved around the concept that you might want to use them on yourself as well as on others. Just a happy coincidence.
Finally a good white villain quote: "So, do I ever re-evaluate my life choices? Never, because I know what I'm doing is a righteous cause."
Factions: Sleeping
Remnants: Valheim
Legendary Journey: Heroes & Planeswalkers
Saga: Shards of Rabiah
Legends: The Elder Dragons
Read up on Red Flags & NWO
Endemic Plague, dawg
This. Also, the way you're using "copy" is misleading. You want wording like Havengul Lich. Individual abilities, unless they're triggered or activated abilities on the stack, aren't objects, and thus aren't copiable in this nature. Your wording makes the card seem more like Illusionist's Bracers, and since it doesn't have flash, that simply won't work.
Upon further consideration, this ability is potentially more debilitating than I figured it to be. I still don't think it's interesting enough to put on a sorcery. (Though I'm open to opinions on that.) I am interested to know what color people feel it should be in. It felt too uncalculated for blue. Maybe white makes more sense since it deals more with the outer realms and enjoys equivalent exchange. Anyway, I don't ask for comments often, but I'm more interested in hearing opinions on this one than most.
I think this does make sense in green. Is it all that oppressive? Ehh, depends on the situation; depends on the sideboard.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
I meant that it was too swingy. Sometimes you screw yourself against a deck that has 10+ pieces against you, sometimes you nail 15 land against a deck that only drew 2. The extremes are a bit too extreme for a 3 cmc card.
Then make it something like a 5/3 for 3GG? You come to expect swings from a 5CMC rare.
I like the design. I like it a lot. The flavor, too, is quite savory.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Ya, I had it as a 4/4 for 5. I lowered it because I felt it could easily be a more aggressive creature, but looking at it again, a fattie fits better.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Seems I often get a single vote from MDenham but not much else.
Guess we have similar tastes....
Are you designing commons? Check out my primer on NWO.
Interested in making a custom set? Check out my Set skeleton and archetype primer.
I also write articles about getting started with custom card creation.
Go and PLAYTEST your designs, you will learn more in a single playtests than a dozen discussions.
My custom sets:
Dreamscape
Coins of Mercalis [COMPLETE]
Exodus of Zendikar - ON HOLD
What did you guys think of my Dryad? Useless? Overpowered? Too complicated?
Original Post:
Chorellius, the Cantankerous Dryad G
Creature - Dryad
1: Place one color counter (white, blue, black, red, green, or colorless) on Chorellius, the Cantankerous Dryad that is the same color as the mana used to activate this ability. This creature gains +0/+1 for each color counter.
:symq:: Add mana to your mana pool that is equivalent to the quantity and colors of color counters on Chorellius, the Cantakerous Dryad.
I looked into it's "eyes" and saw relentless anger, the pass of eons, and the eternal elements.
1/1+*
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
I suppose having the untap ability usable only once per turn could solve that. I just wanted the card to be an interesting way to invest one's mana.
Let's compare it to other small green creatures that provide multiple mana. I think the best examples we're gonna find are Joraga Treespeaker, Bloom Tender, and Harabaz Druid. What your card is essentially doing is taking small investments and turning them into big gains. If we compare it to Treespeaker in a two-color deck, the result is basically the same. But even just one more color catapults this to a much crazier level. To get that sort of production from Tender or Harabaz, you need four other specific nonland permanents. (Though you can admittedly cheat with Tender.) My point is that the investment for your card to have incredible potential is much smaller than that of these other cards.
The counter system feels awkward, though it's probably the cleanest way to do it. Although I don't really like the concept of the card, I'd write it out something like this:
Cantankerous Dryad G
Creature - Dryad
1, t: Put a color counter on Cantankerous Dryad of the color spent to activate this ability.
t: For each different color counter on Cantankerous Dryad, add one mana of that color to your mana pool.
1/1
As for an untap ability, those are really dangerous when providing mana. Consider that Pili-Pala in it's unassuming state has plenty of infinite combos to go with it.
Cube talk, design community and much much more!
MDenham - I can just imagine have 5 different markers and a tally-pad as I work my way to activating Door to Nothingness. I don't think there's a lot to be gained from the memory issue. Making it similar to the storage lands makes it a little more powerful and a lot more manageable.
void_nothing - At first, I missed "nonland" and thought "that's too good." Now I think it's too weak. It is debilitating, so too weak might be a fine route to take. But I feel like this could eat all but two permanents. Or at least be reduced to 4WW. I reserve the right to be VERY WRONG about this since the card is rather unique and game-changing. I wouldn't be surprised if the right move was to increase the cost, either.
CryoZenith - Nothing about this really feels white. Even the life gain feels more black than white. The card is interesting; The activated ability has a unique flare once considering the the triggered ability, and the p/t makes more sense when you're just piling counters on itself. The card looks awkward at first glance, which is unfortunate considering the depth to it.
EzraEliot - "Copy target instant or sorcery card..." If it becomes a copy in mid-resolution, weird things happen. (You can't counter it, no one is sure if it actually can resolve, order choices my get screwy, etc.) Otherwise, I like how it filters with itself to make future castings better. Neat card overall. A Twincast at a low cost with this sort of minimum range seems like a neat card all its own. Maybe 3 CMC for U?
arbitraryarmor - Most days, this will just be "... deals X damage to all creatures." There are plenty of times otherwise, so that's not really a good argument against it. But I'd want the environment it exists in to support such a card as much as possible.
aftermarketradio - "Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You choose a card from it and exile that card. Return that card to its owner's hand at the beginning of the next end step unless ~ was kicked." Just seems cleaner to gather it all up, even if that loses to the neat new wording. I really like the card. Sort of like a bad Silence into a good Coercion.
Whitemage57 - Sacrifice fodder. No idea why you'd give it such a prohibitive cost. It's not nearly special enough to force that. Unless you're trying to force a devotion theme? Even then....
Raziel_X007223 - Awfully efficient for what it's doing. Consider that Ajani's Sunstriker and Child of Night are both weaker straight-across and at more prohibitive costs. I think there's a neat connection between the lifelinker and the little gnat left behind. I'd bump this to :2mana::symwb:. Maybe change the life-loss to a reverse lifelink on the token?
doombringer - Reward mechanics are fun. I think it's generally better to make the reward up-front. That way the timing is more direct and the satisfaction is more immediate. Just have glorious hand out the counter the moment you attack or block. You might want to change the flavor, but I still think it works: the "glory" is in battle, not necessarily in surviving it.
Rudyard - Only thing I'd change here is to have it only affect other creatures. On one hand, there's a neatness to it not loosing any power the turn you use the ability. But really, it just doesn't feel like what should happen intuitively. You're spending the wurms power to make everything else bigger: that's how it reads. I really do like the card, though. Perfect use of a wurm.
FreshMeat - I'd just make the last ability static: "As long as ~ has a -1/-1 counter on it, it loses lifelink and has deathtouch." I really like the juxtaposition of lifelink and deathtouch. The latter is perhaps the only effective keyword on lower powered creatures. It's not strictly better on them, but it just looks so elegant that way! Neat card.
KlassyReborn - Deathtouch and doublestrike don't exactly make a lot of sense together. You kill opposing creatures in the first strike combat damage step... then kill them more in the normal combat damage step? There's also a bit too much difference between it's standard form and it's threshhold form.
SecretInfiltrator - Why not: "Reveal the top card of your library. If it's a creature card, put it into your hand. Otherwise, put it on the bottom of your library and put a 1/1 white Soldier creature token onto the battlefield." I'm not sure about the value of bottoming the card. That could be really frustrating compared to the ability of this card. I'd make that part optional.
Mix Master Mikaeus - The problem with this card is that there's not much influence to block it. 1 damage just isn't that scary. Of course, that makes this quite the target for auras and equipment. Still, I'd adjust it's p/t to be more threatening.
Blydden - It's an okay cycle. The thing about making a cycle of Phyrexian mana cards: it becomes a lot less interesting when you aren't eager to mix them together. I can imagine these working in the right setting, though, so that's not necessarily a strike against them. Just something I considered when thinking about where these would exist.
RukarumelFieldJournal - Why does it get one benefit for free but has to work so hard for the other? That just feels jarring.
Altaurus321 - Why not "control"? If you can give the opponent a creature and then mass copy it, that'd be an extra level of cool for this card. This thing already has to rely on your opponent playing a good creature to copy, playing a bunch of lesser creatures yourself, and hoping there isn't a good way for them to go target-happy. Why do you hate my inner-Johnny?
Sagharri - This is a good concept, but I think it buries the card too deep. Oust always felt like a good measure. 4 deep might even be okay.
Memento Mori, if the nineth lion ate the sun.
It was inspired by Ben's dryad, though, as well.
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
Cube talk, design community and much much more!