Actually, that isn't quite dewfinitive. Lorwyn could generate 3/1s with haste but thetokens didn't have haste on them.
I wil ladmit that being different keywords where the haste only matters that turn, and the flying is a permanent memory issue makes it not quite a perfect example but nonetheless.
The owl is a 1/1 based on every other that isn't rimewind, so he's either a kicker or has some other condition, unless the happily is somehow a hint at something. Of course he flies as well.
As for the counterspell, the only things I can see getting tacked on are the mana drain or draw. Straight draw seems a little ridiculous though, so what about: 2UU
Instant
Counter target creature spell. You may draw cards equal to it's power. If you do, discard [that many cards / cards equal to it's toughness].
Or however that last bit should be worded.
Disfigure seems pretty awesome though, it probably never got made before because it would have been 'too good'.
Just because every colour can get Intimidate doesn't mean that every colour will. I reckon green will do without, because green just doesn't care about evading it's enemies: if you don't get out of it's way into go through or over you, pounding you into the mud on the way.
Black will get a lot of it, white and blue will get a bit, and maybe we'll see the occasional red example.
Nah, I think it'll be dominantly in black to replace fear, then secondary/tertiary in red and green because they need evasion on their smaller creatures and extremely rare in white and blue.
Since the text hasn't been posted yet,
Inferno Elemental 4RR [U]
Creature - Elemental
Whenever ~ blocks or becomes blocked by a creature, ~ deals 3 damage to that creature.
4/4 (Illus. Boros & Szikszai)
I don't like how the burn isn't 4 damage like his power, just feels wrong.
I wish I had better words for what I believe are elegant mathematical statements. In fact I'm almost disgusted how putrid the following attempt to prove something looks. I blame it on my computer fan.
There are so many posts of yours that make me think we must be twins or something, I hate trying to explain stuff over IM because there isn't even rich text and the only special characters are emoticons. Waving hands a drawing stuff as I see it is exactly what I love to do to explain things to people.
The only thing is that I slightly disagree in your analysis. It is accurate and makes perfect sense, it only holds up on purely logical grounds. I see where you're coming from, but Magic is partially designed to evoke emotion. As such, I think that the methodology of each colour to reach an end result is important. Red doesn't kill creatures, it burns the creature to death. So I think that Damnation is an abnormality in the how the result is reached, but the end result is appropriate.
Seeing as it hasn't been done yet, images attached to this post.
They're meant to be spaced, don't know if it worked.
EDIT: I don't know about other people, I thought that somehow the entire set had been spoiled from the title. Any chance of putting partial in the name?
Raven's Crime is a common. It can't be that hard to pick up a few, nor do they have value to lose. I think you could accommodate that one lorwyn card. I wouldn't be surprised if Thoughtseize held a decent amount of its value, on the assumption that it gets played in eternals (correct me if I'm wrong).
If her ultimate is a deed based ability, why not just "-X: Deed for X"?
They'd likely reword it to be nonland instead of listing those 3, so that if you wanted to get rid of really big stuff you have to take her out as well, limiting her power.
The mandlands are 5.
Acording with the number of the land we know, there are only 3 spaces free at the end but we dont know the spaces at the begining.
Only 2 manlands have names that go after the land we know, so there is a big chance for them to appear.
That was what i was trying to say in my first post.
Seeing as Glacial Fortress starts with a 'G' and there are 4 other duals (or maybe 9) I'd wager that there are multiple duals after the fortress. At the moment the spoiler only has guessed names for the other duals, so they could easily be wrong (unless I missed something). If there are just 2 duals after the fortress, they can't fit all the manlands in.
I do agree with the people suggesting that mutavault may potentially be in though, it would be the manland if there is one.
While blocking banding is easy to template now, you'll have to come up with a reminder text that fits in the text box for attacking situatins as well. Otherwise you could just have creatures that gain banding when it isn't your turn (so they never have it while attacking).
I'm not sure if anyone's done this yet, but here's a MSE mockup: (It looks like MSE did a bad job with the set symbol this time around, but that's not that big of a problem)
Slight nitpick: you have the wrong border: it should have the colouration that the tri-taps have, because it makes more than 2 colours of mana. Other than that, thank you for fighting the battlefield! (seriously, battlefield is one of the worst names they could have come up with as far as I'm concerned)
So on the subject of brainstorming rules changes, I had one other thing come to mind:
Planeswalker loyalty becomes a static value like a player's life total.
[snip]
It's a trivial thing, but I always wondered. It wouldn't require any errata, either!
While you do make a good point, I think that they would have just gone with the static number from the start. The interaction with clockspinning and friends is also a clever way for them to print planeswalker removal, with out explicitly saying 'pwn target planeswalker' on a card.They've stated that that is something they don't really want to do, they'd rather keep the planeswalker solutions applicable even when there are no planeswalkers. (Maelstrom pulse)
Needs to not work if you use something like Dream Halls to play it...
If you paid ~'s mana cost, win the game.
or something like that... not even sure how to word it.
Even then, infinite mana combos would love it. Maybe if you had a (basic?) land only sort of rider, a la imperiosaur so that you can reduce the cost with delve but you have to pat the left overs with land mana.
Land
CARD comes into play tapped unless an opponent searches his or her library for a basic land card, puts it into his or her hand, then shuffles his or her library.
T: Add U or R to your mana pool.
I think the choice about whether it CIP tapped or not will lie with you rather than the opponent, on tyhe assumption that they are optional CIPT instead of some other drawback.
Land
T: Add U or R to your mana pool.
Whenever you tap CARD for mana, sacrifice it. If you do, search your library for a copy of CARD and put that card into play tapped. Shuffle your library afterward.
Land
T: Add U or R to your mana pool.
Mana produced by CARD cannot be used to cast spells with X in their costs or spells with converted mana cost 4 or greater.
Both of these 2 seem to have a skew towards aggro decks, as the first increases the chance of gas and they don't intend on getting more than 4 uses half the time; while the other just says don't bother to control, not sure how combo likes either of them though.
I do believe that these lands will be as fair to all archetypes (aggro, control, combo) as they can make them, but a slight favouring is inevitable as far as I'm concerned. I just don't think the favouritism will be as severe as I think it may be for these suggestions.
Actually, that isn't quite dewfinitive. Lorwyn could generate 3/1s with haste but thetokens didn't have haste on them.
I wil ladmit that being different keywords where the haste only matters that turn, and the flying is a permanent memory issue makes it not quite a perfect example but nonetheless.
As for the counterspell, the only things I can see getting tacked on are the mana drain or draw. Straight draw seems a little ridiculous though, so what about:
2UU
Instant
Counter target creature spell. You may draw cards equal to it's power. If you do, discard [that many cards / cards equal to it's toughness].
Or however that last bit should be worded.
Disfigure seems pretty awesome though, it probably never got made before because it would have been 'too good'.
EDIT:
Waaay under power, compare to dismiss.
Nah, I think it'll be dominantly in black to replace fear, then secondary/tertiary in red and green because they need evasion on their smaller creatures and extremely rare in white and blue.
Inferno Elemental 4RR [U]
Creature - Elemental
Whenever ~ blocks or becomes blocked by a creature, ~ deals 3 damage to that creature.
4/4 (Illus. Boros & Szikszai)
I don't like how the burn isn't 4 damage like his power, just feels wrong.
There are so many posts of yours that make me think we must be twins or something, I hate trying to explain stuff over IM because there isn't even rich text and the only special characters are emoticons. Waving hands a drawing stuff as I see it is exactly what I love to do to explain things to people.
The only thing is that I slightly disagree in your analysis. It is accurate and makes perfect sense, it only holds up on purely logical grounds. I see where you're coming from, but Magic is partially designed to evoke emotion. As such, I think that the methodology of each colour to reach an end result is important. Red doesn't kill creatures, it burns the creature to death. So I think that Damnation is an abnormality in the how the result is reached, but the end result is appropriate.
They're meant to be spaced, don't know if it worked.
EDIT: I don't know about other people, I thought that somehow the entire set had been spoiled from the title. Any chance of putting partial in the name?
You know someone will photoshop that now.
And at all the exile wrath woo-ers: Final Judgement. Never got played because it costs a bajillion mana, but it exists.
They'd likely reword it to be nonland instead of listing those 3, so that if you wanted to get rid of really big stuff you have to take her out as well, limiting her power.
Seeing as Glacial Fortress starts with a 'G' and there are 4 other duals (or maybe 9) I'd wager that there are multiple duals after the fortress. At the moment the spoiler only has guessed names for the other duals, so they could easily be wrong (unless I missed something). If there are just 2 duals after the fortress, they can't fit all the manlands in.
I do agree with the people suggesting that mutavault may potentially be in though, it would be the manland if there is one.
Slight nitpick: you have the wrong border: it should have the colouration that the tri-taps have, because it makes more than 2 colours of mana. Other than that, thank you for fighting the battlefield! (seriously, battlefield is one of the worst names they could have come up with as far as I'm concerned)
While you do make a good point, I think that they would have just gone with the static number from the start. The interaction with clockspinning and friends is also a clever way for them to print planeswalker removal, with out explicitly saying 'pwn target planeswalker' on a card.They've stated that that is something they don't really want to do, they'd rather keep the planeswalker solutions applicable even when there are no planeswalkers. (Maelstrom pulse)
Even then, infinite mana combos would love it. Maybe if you had a (basic?) land only sort of rider, a la imperiosaur so that you can reduce the cost with delve but you have to pat the left overs with land mana.
These duals are aimed at newer players, how don't want to see their lands getting blown up.
I think the choice about whether it CIP tapped or not will lie with you rather than the opponent, on tyhe assumption that they are optional CIPT instead of some other drawback.
Both of these 2 seem to have a skew towards aggro decks, as the first increases the chance of gas and they don't intend on getting more than 4 uses half the time; while the other just says don't bother to control, not sure how combo likes either of them though.
I do believe that these lands will be as fair to all archetypes (aggro, control, combo) as they can make them, but a slight favouring is inevitable as far as I'm concerned. I just don't think the favouritism will be as severe as I think it may be for these suggestions.