The final area of design for The Dutch, rules is definitley not least in creation of the set. Any brave soul who signs on as a member of the crew will be taxed with finding, fixing, and editing existing and new mechanichs, as well as redefining the very definition of certain spells. As the task is daunting, so the reward shall be great. Besides being aknowledged at the end of the set, a single contributor to the redefinitions and revisions above will have a card designed about them for the final set. In order to be recognized for this award, private pms will be sent to name the candidate I feel contributed the most toward the completion of the set. If you don't feel like making a prolonged commitment and just want to post whether something works or not (and preferably how to fix it), feel free to do so.
With that out of the way, there is much to do:
1. First and foremost, a revising of spell information is needed on a wide scale. A new "level" must be applied to spellcasting. Spells with additional costs (whether they are optional or not) are now considered one type of spell. Spells with alternate costs (Pitch spells, suspend spells, split cards, alternate mana cost cards, seperate alternate cost cards, and hybrid cards) are another. Spells with both values are considered to have both values upon casting as well. Spells that do not fit any of these categories are considered to not have any values and are ignored by cards that check for such a distinction of a spell that has been cast.
2. Equally important, mechanics and singular cards must be worded correctly and also be able to operate under the new distinctions listed in #1.
I hope to resolve these issues soon, hopefully with a little help from you.
In the Custom Card Rulings subforum, don't make people go searching around trying to figure out what you are asking for help on. Just say:
I have some questions for a set I am making. It is here if you wish to see it.
I am having problems with [problem]
Since this is the closest thing to a card with a question:
I will say this:
Ransom could be worded a little bit differently to be cleaner. Looking at just the keyword, I think either adjusting it to be like Kicker or like Replicate would work better.
Ransom [Cost] (You may pay an additional [cost] as you play this spell. If you don't each opponent may copy it and may choose new targets for that copy.)
Ransom [Cost] (When you play this spell, unless you paid its Ransom cost, each opponent may copy it and may choose new targets for that copy.)
However, on the card you supplied, copies of the spell seem a mite pointless, since the original will always resolve last, the original player will always retain control of all creatures he or she targets. It might be worth it to change it be like Chain of Acid and its friends:
Ransom [Cost] (Unless the ransom cost was paid, each opponent may copy this spell, except for this ability, and may choose new targets for that copy.)
Actually, it is worth asking: How many cards do you plan on having Ransom? It could just be:
Status QuoXUU
Sorcery (R)
Kicker 2U
Gain control of X target creatures until end of turn. Then, unless the kicker cost was paid, each opponent may copy this spell, except for this ability, and may choose new targets for that copy.
Thanks for the reply, Silvercut. I should've worded the ability better so that each opponent could copy it. The two examples you provided are good; the second one works best flavor-wise ("If you didn't" sounds like something was actually ransomed). As for the card itself, the effect of the spell may not be so simple. Depending on board position, you may want to grab a different creature than the one you just lost to further your goal, e.g. a combo or sac outlet.
The reason that it doesn't work like a chain spell is because you have to pay the cost when you play it. Putting a copy onto the stack doesn't allow additional costs to be payed.
As for how many are in the set, there are 26, as with each other mechanic (except for disperse).
The final area of design for The Dutch, rules is definitley not least in creation of the set. Any brave soul who signs on as a member of the crew will be taxed with finding, fixing, and editing existing and new mechanichs, as well as redefining the very definition of certain spells. As the task is daunting, so the reward shall be great. Besides being aknowledged at the end of the set, a single contributor to the redefinitions and revisions above will have a card designed about them for the final set. In order to be recognized for this award, private pms will be sent to name the candidate I feel contributed the most toward the completion of the set. If you don't feel like making a prolonged commitment and just want to post whether something works or not (and preferably how to fix it), feel free to do so.
With that out of the way, there is much to do:
1. First and foremost, a revising of spell information is needed on a wide scale. A new "level" must be applied to spellcasting. Spells with additional costs (whether they are optional or not) are now considered one type of spell. Spells with alternate costs (Pitch spells, suspend spells, split cards, alternate mana cost cards, seperate alternate cost cards, and hybrid cards) are another. Spells with both values are considered to have both values upon casting as well. Spells that do not fit any of these categories are considered to not have any values and are ignored by cards that check for such a distinction of a spell that has been cast.
2. Equally important, mechanics and singular cards must be worded correctly and also be able to operate under the new distinctions listed in #1.
I hope to resolve these issues soon, hopefully with a little help from you.
Thanks, have fun, and ooooooh....shiny!
[img=http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/5879/statusquody3.th.jpg]
One of Maro's secret fetishes
No, but seriously, this is the actual fetish. I really mean it this time.
"John first, Spike second."
Rules Advisor-capable since 2010.
In the Custom Card Rulings subforum, don't make people go searching around trying to figure out what you are asking for help on. Just say:
Since this is the closest thing to a card with a question:
I will say this:
Ransom could be worded a little bit differently to be cleaner. Looking at just the keyword, I think either adjusting it to be like Kicker or like Replicate would work better.
Ransom [Cost] (You may pay an additional [cost] as you play this spell. If you don't each opponent may copy it and may choose new targets for that copy.)
Ransom [Cost] (When you play this spell, unless you paid its Ransom cost, each opponent may copy it and may choose new targets for that copy.)
However, on the card you supplied, copies of the spell seem a mite pointless, since the original will always resolve last, the original player will always retain control of all creatures he or she targets. It might be worth it to change it be like Chain of Acid and its friends:
Ransom [Cost] (Unless the ransom cost was paid, each opponent may copy this spell, except for this ability, and may choose new targets for that copy.)
Actually, it is worth asking: How many cards do you plan on having Ransom? It could just be:
Status Quo XUU
Sorcery (R)
Kicker 2U
Gain control of X target creatures until end of turn. Then, unless the kicker cost was paid, each opponent may copy this spell, except for this ability, and may choose new targets for that copy.
The reason that it doesn't work like a chain spell is because you have to pay the cost when you play it. Putting a copy onto the stack doesn't allow additional costs to be payed.
As for how many are in the set, there are 26, as with each other mechanic (except for disperse).
One of Maro's secret fetishes
No, but seriously, this is the actual fetish. I really mean it this time.
"John first, Spike second."
Rules Advisor-capable since 2010.