Mention: Acheron (if there ever was a way to win a round with a Vanilla creature, this is the way to do it. Unfortunately it's a bit too efficiant for it's color. It needs to be white or have "This creature can't block")
You're probably right, though being killable by artifact removal spell slightly de-powers the card (at least that's what I tell myself.) It's one of the few cards that hasn't changed one whit through the design and development of the set it's in, though I could switch it with Tin Soldier (the white card in the cycle; (2/W)(2/W) for a vanilla 3/2.) I should probably reflavor Moggbot anyways, since the world of Beledin probably doesn't have robots nor Moggs.
Hm: archeron XL, sooo close. As much as I love twobrid mana cost, your card is a bit of a fustercluck. Tricedefied got my votes by mere millimeters
If you have any suggestions, I'm all ears. Following up Clash on Beledin (a several months old version is viewable at mtgpile.com!) with a set based on twobrid shard multicolor has been one of the most difficult things I've ever done, so any constructive criticism is welcome.
edit - Since I've seen a small bump in traffic to it, I went and updated mtgpile.com with the current version of the set. Many changes!
Creature — Elephant (R)
Vigilance 1, T: Return target card from your graveyard to your hand. If you do, put a 3/3 green Elephant creature token onto the battlefield. Her memories are what guarantees the survival of her pack.
Am I missing something here? Because this card is certifiably insane. Regrowth and a 3/3 for "1, T" on a creature with vigilance?
Votes: TriceDefied (even if I think it's undercosted, and/or the wrong rarity - those are dev problems, not design), Indighost
Really? Funnily enough, I thought it was a cutesy, underpowered design :)).
My first read says it should be 1WW and/or rare, since I think it could be really potent after perhaps the third turn. Also, if you only control one creature, you'd get the benefit of both abilities. I'm not sure it's a super great constructed card, but it would wreck limited.
@archeron_xl...Isn't your card's copy ability always on when you cast an instant or sorcery? I like the idea, but it's power should be 1, or it shouldn't activate until his power is 4 or greater, otherwise, what's the point of looking at its power?
Heh. You're totally right. He should be a 1/X, or his ability should trigger at power 4. 'Cast one spell to turn it on' was definitely what I was going for.
Hey Indighost, I'm totally going to try out Caller of the Exotic as an uncommon cycle in the set I'm doing now (although green is probably doing something with +1/+1 counters, moving card drawing to blue. And I'm doing them as enchantments with Morph.) It's a nice partner for my Unity mechanic.
That cool? I'll totally give you some credit when I eventually add the set to my site (Same for you, CrazyMatt and that land type triland).
If they have Notecards, they can do something I did back when I wanted to play Yu-Gi-Oh but had no access to cards or YVD: Take out notecards and write the card info down on it, then you just use them as if they were actual cards. Takes some effort from the person on the other side of the world but it can use in a pinch compared to making actual sheets.
I did exactly that for the first playtest of my set, before I caved and just bought a printer. Writing the cards out longhand probably took 18 hours in total. I think making someone familiarize themselves with the custom ruleset I use would be as much as I'd be willing to burden them with.
How do you guys playtest anyway? I'd love to playtest (back when I did Yu-Gi-Oh! CCG we'd put all our cards on YVD and duel a ton), but I don't really know how to find people or put cards, I'd assume you use a program like Cockatrice.
Personally, I print the cards out in Magic Set Editor, cut them off the sheet and stuff them in a sleeve with an old basic land. I have a handful of friends (most of whom, like myself, have been playing Magic for 20 years) that I bounce the set off of. It's been a process for sure. I've printed my 295 card set in it's entirety twice, and probably replaced every card on its own at least once. It's amazing how little of a design will remain intact if you actively polish it for more than a year. I'd probably get more playtests in if I could do it online too, but I'm pretty sure the custom format I'm designing for is impossible to replicate online. I'd also really love an external playtest from some other designer-types, but that would require physically running off a copy of my set and shipping it somewhere.
That's the peril of using the DCC as a focus group, I suppose.
In fact, I'd advise against doing that. There are just too many factors influencing how people vote, and to make it even worse each person has his/her motivations to vote, which are likely different from everybody else's. Also keep in mind that here people see the card in a vacuum, while in your set the same card is in a very specific environment, and that can absolutely make the difference. If you can, the best thing to do would be playtesting your set and using that feedback to iterate.
For what it's worth, I didn't say anything about that card because I think it works. You just need to make "being in a pact" a thing that's referenced in other cards, otherwise it has no real purpose.
For sure about the playtesting. Nothing beats it. I usually don't take not getting votes as too clear a sign, but it's still a good 'resonance check'. There's a ton of cards I'd never try because they'd just be gibberish outside of the context I'm working in.
And the only reason I added 'in a pact' to the reminder text is, because it seemed to want to be there in my brain, and I definitely plan on referencing it. I have a thread going about it, since I want to see if it's all that before running off two dozen cards and playtesting them.
Sometimes I really wish the voting results were more granular. When I post something that's theoretically a major part of a design and it gets nothing, I'm not sure if that's a sign that the mechanic is a dog, or if the card its on just isn't sexy enough or something. I was pleasantly surprised by the reaction to weave, but pact doesn't seem as popular. That's the peril of using the DCC as a focus group, I suppose. Complicating the voting process would likely strip the fun out of it for many people.
Thanks BL. I definitely intended the abilities to more-or-less go onto the stack together and resolve in written order. You could choose separate targets if it's two targeted abilities. Also, the tap was only implicit in the card I posted because the abilities being weaved were tap abilities. I also have designs where there are Ravnica-style guildmages with two repeatable activated abilities, and also weave. Anyway, I plan on running off a few cards and giving them a playtest to see if they work well in practice and are comprehensible to other humans. Since the set I'm working on is this weird twobrid multicolor set (can ya tell?), I'm really excited by the possibilities weave has in that context.