@CommanderZ.
You can't judge the archetype profusely from a few cards, you can only judge the basics of the archetype and relevance in set from this info. Individual cards and balancing is not an issue until quite a bit later on that now, based on how the set is progressing, so don't be too concerned.
-
@Doombringer.
On the archetype, I agree with MOON-E in that it seems a little strange here, considering that auras is not a 'background' theme like +1/+1 counters where it fits into individual set mechanics and themes very un-intrusively. Auras as a strategy is more dedicated, is that a theme you want to be a significant part of your set?
Turning Tide is a blowout effect, not typically done today at uncommon. Overrun is not a good reference, instead refer to Icy Blast and such.
About kicker-ness: Firstly, Kicker is NOT a good mechanic, R&D have acknowledged that Kicker was a mistake, as it should have been more specific or been evergreen. Similarity to Kicker is not a good point UNLESS it is really, really similar. For example, Strive and Replicate were printed. Secondly, the inability to cast anything else on the turn is relevant. This is something I am aware of and how much it matters will be something that I will be testing eventually (when I start testing).
What does 'Gadget' do? Also, this seems a lot like Contraptions and Assemble, which may be a good idea. The problem with that would be that Guild mechanics don't have much space and contraptions is something you would want to play up. Also, Izzet should probably not be associated with artifacts considering they are already the 'instant/sorcery guild', even though it makes sense otherwise. On that note, a good way of doing Ravnica again would be to make big changes, so maybe this is actually the right direction?
Devotion + Hybrid could be done, but it would have to be done carefully. You could use devotion and not use hybrid as well. It's really a question of what else is going on in the set. Depending on the environment, different options are more viable than others, it's a big part of set design and development.
Yeah, I agree with clan_iraq. Delve has much more design space and is safer. I get that it is supposed to be similar, but there's not much reason for 'cannibalise' to exist, it seems unlikely that you can find a place for it where it feels different enough.
@Shadowfate.
Balancing based on a card doesn't mean as powerful as it, just relative to, meaning differentiating factors can be considered.
Also, Canopy is only from a single set, which also happens to be Future Sight, which is an expensive set. If it were printed today instead, it would be cheaper.
Also, the whole 'Cannibalise' thing seems a bit much thematically. You could probably tone it down a little bit so it's less disturbing. While the occasional card like Village Cannibals is fine, and that's in the 'horror set', magic isn't supposed to be horror.
The best comparison by far here is Horizon Canopy. Balance them based on that card. I'd say most of the replies here are a little exaggerated on how powerful these are now that they ETB tapped, for example Silvercut's land suggestion is terrible compared to Canopy. About using three colours, it's a question based entirely around the context of these cards, so that's for your to answer.
Should be 'If you control a creature with a +1/+1 counter on it.'
Also, it seems a bit simple, even for a supporting mechanic. +1/+1 counter matters is done a lot. Maybe there's some twist on it you could add here?
There is no 4 mana 2/6 in black.
( I can't get the URL to work because of the brackets )
You can't judge the archetype profusely from a few cards, you can only judge the basics of the archetype and relevance in set from this info. Individual cards and balancing is not an issue until quite a bit later on that now, based on how the set is progressing, so don't be too concerned.
-
@Doombringer.
On the archetype, I agree with MOON-E in that it seems a little strange here, considering that auras is not a 'background' theme like +1/+1 counters where it fits into individual set mechanics and themes very un-intrusively. Auras as a strategy is more dedicated, is that a theme you want to be a significant part of your set?
About kicker-ness: Firstly, Kicker is NOT a good mechanic, R&D have acknowledged that Kicker was a mistake, as it should have been more specific or been evergreen. Similarity to Kicker is not a good point UNLESS it is really, really similar. For example, Strive and Replicate were printed. Secondly, the inability to cast anything else on the turn is relevant. This is something I am aware of and how much it matters will be something that I will be testing eventually (when I start testing).
Bunch of cards added to OP.
Turning Tide tweaked.
Balancing based on a card doesn't mean as powerful as it, just relative to, meaning differentiating factors can be considered.
Also, Canopy is only from a single set, which also happens to be Future Sight, which is an expensive set. If it were printed today instead, it would be cheaper.
Also, it seems a bit simple, even for a supporting mechanic. +1/+1 counter matters is done a lot. Maybe there's some twist on it you could add here?