2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Flummox
    It has to retain Vanishing from the stack to the battlefield. They are different zones, so it will lose whatever it gains there.

    Effects that have named effects, "As this enters" or "As you cast" see those effects happen immediately, or correlate to abilities the card physically has and retains as it moves between the zones (the stack and the battlefield).


    I’m pretty sure that the recent rules change that allowed Henzie to work (granting spells blitz as a spell so you can get the alternate cost and also as permanents so they gain haste and the sac/draw trigger) also lets this work.

    In other words, the rules added an addendum to make the ability work. It very rarely ever happens outside of your head but wizards accidentally made a card that didn’t quite work in the rules and they changed rules so it would function.

    How does it feel to be on the other end of that argument?


    I think like a developer, so it's perfectly normal to me.

    And it's not odd for any of you? With the zero exceptions claimed all the time.


    It paradoxically isn’t odd specifically because this change is really rare, meaning that this change was widely publicized for its uniqueness and everyone had awareness of it.

    Also, this change was validated on a mechanical level without referring to vague matters like “domain influence” or “force Majeure”. Blitz is one of the first mechanics (after dash) that impacts both how a creature is cast as a spell (what costs are paid) and how it acts as a permanent. Henzie is the first card trying to grant such an ability to cards without it. The rule that prevented it from working was fairly obscure (to the point where most people assumed that it worked as intended) and fuxi g the rules to allow such abilities to be granted would allow for future abilities to grant similar keywords.

    If you were better able to articulate the actual rule changes (rather than saying “I would change the rules”) and what sort of design space your changes would open up, you might be able to win support for your abilities.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Argent Ring
    Should probably be legendary to stop colorless decks from launching more than one in a turn (much as recent Mox cards like tantalize, Opal, and Amber are now legendary).

    Otherwise, I could imagine this appearing somewhere.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Flummox
    It has to retain Vanishing from the stack to the battlefield. They are different zones, so it will lose whatever it gains there.

    Effects that have named effects, "As this enters" or "As you cast" see those effects happen immediately, or correlate to abilities the card physically has and retains as it moves between the zones (the stack and the battlefield).


    I’m pretty sure that the recent rules change that allowed Henzie to work (granting spells blitz as a spell so you can get the alternate cost and also as permanents so they gain haste and the sac/draw trigger) also lets this work.

    In other words, the rules added an addendum to make the ability work. It very rarely ever happens outside of your head but wizards accidentally made a card that didn’t quite work in the rules and they changed rules so it would function.

    How does it feel to be on the other end of that argument?
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Kakureta Trap Box & Charm Jack
    I actually do like to fix things that aren't broken, because not broken doesn't mean perfect.

    I am a perfectionist at heart.

    I also do think the term Mill is broken, as it's so bland, and monotone, and uncreative. Nothing wrong for players to use it to themselves, or have developed the terminology, but when you get behind the counter, the desk, the workshop; you're looking as so many more tools and expectations accord to professionalism. Now you have responsibility to not just take a thing and run with it, but ensure that it's implemented capturing the utmost sense of fantasy, and flare, and excitement. The term Mill just doesn't do that—especially compared to Traumatize.


    Reap: "I don't care if people like what exists and don't like my fix. My fix is better. If they like the worse version, the critics should learn to fix themselves. I make the best things and it doesn't matter whether people don't like it because not liking it is subjective and biased. Even if everyone hates it, that just means that there's a lot of bias and my design is still objectively better"

    Whatever skill with designing you think you have, take a moment to consider your communication skill. If you had come here and made a post saying "I think that the keyword mill is a holdover from artifacts that are no longer relevant. The flavor of mill is now almost exclusively related to mental degradation and madness and I feel that the equally iconic card Traumatize would be a better keyword", you may have had some supporters. If you regularly posted links back to previous mechanics and arguments you have made so that people seeing your material for the first time could understand your rationale without trying to force you through the same arguments in every thread (such as if you put those links in your signature), people would be able to have conversations that go beyond the tiny merry-go-round of conversation topics so many of your threads get mired in. If you displayed up-front awareness of when a new card would require specific changes to the comprehensive rules and were able to articulate the specifics of what those rule changes are and what their benefit it rather than specifying "I would make the card work" to benefit the game by "making this one card work" after someone points out that your card doesn't gel with the rules, fewer people would be calling you incompetent.

    Either you are a terrible communicator or you have utter contempt for everyone who is seeing your work and don't bother putting effort in because you feel that people are only worthy of seeing your work if they put the effort in for you.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Kakureta Trap Box & Charm Jack
    But certainly, the nature of talent ensures that republic officials are necessary as pioneers, innovators, and advisors. Simply not everyone is going to have that keen sense and ability. It would be ideal, but it's never been reality and may never be so ever.


    In every single situation I can think of, the way that things work for pioneers/innovators/advisors goes like.

    Step 1: Person thinks of new idea or paradigm shift that has not previously been considered.
    Step 2: Because idea is good, people express their support for the idea.
    Step 3: Because people support the idea, it is widely adopted and becomes the norm.

    What you are doing is:
    Step 1: Person thinks of new idea or paradigm shift that has not previously been considered.
    Step 1.25: People do not express their support for the idea.
    Step 1.5: Because the idea is built on common sense, I do not need support at this time to show that I am a good designer. Instead, I can claim to be a visionary who is ahead of the times and assume that step 2 and 3 will come later if people are rational and maintain my self-perception of myself as a visionary. I can even claim that a lot of people DO support me but simply do not express their views on this board. Nobody can prove that a silent majority doesn't support me so I am a genius.

    Most of us only consider people to be good designers if they can at least reach step 2. If you believe you have reached step 2, you are delusional.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Kakureta Trap Box & Charm Jack
    I also think that there is a fundamental disconnect regarding your understanding of game design.

    You seem to believe in "principle-based game design". In your mind, as long as you follow certain game design philosophies properly, you are creating a good game. Having a good game with this philosophy has no direct relation to how many people like or understand the end result, though the general underlying assumption is that your game will be understandable and well-liked if you follow the game design philosophies.

    We believe in "player-based game design". MTG, like most games, uses a lot of focus group (or A-B testing) before it makes big changes in the game. They gather a lot of feedback from a wide array of people regarding the possible options to see which is more liked and which is most understood. Then, they typically go with what the people want more.

    You propose ideas and all of your feedback has been negative. In your philosophy, you did your job properly so the critics must therefore be in the wrong. In our philosophy, a good idea is defined by one that attracts positive feedback and your lack of positive feedback means that your idea is not good.

    If you feel that an idea that would (by reports from a large groups of players) increase legibility and accessibility (or increased the perceived fun of play) while actively going against your design principles would be a bad thing, that just looks like you care about the "sanctity of the game" more than you care about the players.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Immortal Fire
    Being her own woman I hope. Putting her foot down.

    Yeah, that was a convoluted way to write it though.

    I don't really think 'lethal' is needed to be honest. Lethal damage is the end of the damage assignment path, and should kind of be an autonomous function here that doesn't need to be referenced, because it's simply the end path. If damage is assigned based on something, then the conditions of lethal damage assignment come naturally. Should be anyways. Lethal damage should only be referenced when it specifically is being modified.


    And that's your opinion.

    I just revealed the official rules. Saying that they are the official rules is objective. That is how rules work.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Immortal Fire
    Is that second ability supposed to be zilortha, strength incarnate? If so, there is already a specific wording for that effect and you are not pioneering a new effect.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Kakureta Trap Box & Charm Jack
    I honestly feel like they should have just bundled up the term mana cost, then used specifics to define the rest.

    When referencing a spell on the stack, active mana cost, or something. When referencing specific color, a mana cost 2 red, or something

    Mana value is the biggest mistake in MTG for a long time, coupled with mill, and changing the context of indestructible and unblockable, removing the force majeur they used to have with the unique descriptive composure that they used.

    Mana value is so bland, and monotone, and polarizing it literally makes me sick. We used to have a vivid fantasy game at one time.


    So, moving forwards, are you:
    A. Going to use mana value vs. mana cost, mill, cannot be blocked (instead of unblockable), and the proper usage of indestructible as those are the real rules and real formatting that cards are actually used to create.
    B. Use your own terms and language that you feel comfortable with, never clarify the changes in language that you use and your reasons for making the changes in your opening posts, and generally assume that nobody is reading your designs for the first time.


    Repeating my previous question, as I think an answer would be quite telling.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Kakureta Trap Box & Charm Jack
    I honestly feel like they should have just bundled up the term mana cost, then used specifics to define the rest.

    When referencing a spell on the stack, active mana cost, or something. When referencing specific color, a mana cost 2 red, or something

    Mana value is the biggest mistake in MTG for a long time, coupled with mill, and changing the context of indestructible and unblockable, removing the force majeur they used to have with the unique descriptive composure that they used.

    Mana value is so bland, and monotone, and polarizing it literally makes me sick. We used to have a vivid fantasy game at one time.


    So, moving forwards, are you:
    A. Going to use mana value vs. mana cost, mill, cannot be blocked (instead of unblockable), and the proper usage of indestructible as those are the real rules and real formatting that cards are actually used to create.
    B. Use your own terms and language that you feel comfortable with, never clarify the changes in language that you use and your reasons for making the changes in your opening posts, and generally assume that nobody is reading your designs for the first time.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Custom Myriad Cards
    Quote from Pokerkingdave »
    I think Restoration Angel creates infinite ETB and Leave the battlefield effect with Steelclad Guardian.


    Not that you're wrong but felidar guardian (or the icewind stalwart card it was based on) already does that for less mana. It's just one of those effects that can be broken if the number of such cards in the game is greater than one. As we already have more than one and we in fact have cheaper versions, I don't think that creating a new one causes harm.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Custom Myriad Cards
    One of my bigger disappointments with Commander Legends 2 is that they brought back the myriad mechanic and did next to nothing with it. It synergizes with tokens but no cards interacted with tokens. It synergizes with sacrifice effects but none let you sacrifice the extra copies. It puts cards onto the battlefield but there are no ETB effects to synergize with the blink draft theme. Myriad fit into a bunch of niches but virtually no myriad cards actually fit into any of those niches. I wanted to see what I could do with the Myriad mechanic to show what I mean.

    Steelclad Guardian 3 mana white mana white mana
    Creature- Dragon Warrior
    Myriad
    When Steelclad Guardian enters the battlefield, exile up to one target non-warrior creature you control, then return it to the battlefield under its owner’s control.
    5/4

    Ancestral Summoner 2 mana white mana white mana
    Creature- Human Wizard
    Myriad
    Creature tokens you control get +1/+0.
    2/4

    Mirrorclad Cavalier white mana
    Creature- Elf Knight (R)
    Myriad
    Whenever you create a token copy of Mirrorclad Cavalier, create a copy of each aura and equipment card attached to Mirrorclad Cavalier and attach them to the copy. Exile them at end of turn.
    2/1

    Waterfront Sneak 1 mana blue mana
    Creature- Merfolk Rogue
    Myriad
    Waterfront Sneak cannot be blocked.
    1/1

    Babbling Allip 2 mana blue mana
    Creature- Spirit
    Flying
    Myriad
    Whenever a creature you control deals combat damage to a player, that player mills a card.
    1/1

    Lurking Aboleth 2 mana blue mana blue mana
    Creature- Horror (R)
    Myriad
    When Lurking Aboleth enters the battlefield, put a slime counter on target creature.
    Creatures with one or more slime counters get -1/-0 and lose all abilities.
    2/2

    Ravenous Ghast 1 mana black mana
    Creature- Zombie
    Myriad
    Sacrifice two creatures: Ravenous Ghast gains indestructible and lifelink until end of turn.
    2/1

    Horde of Mohrg 2 mana black mana black mana
    Creature- Zombie
    Menace
    Myriad
    When Horde of Mohrg enters the battlefield, each opponent loses 2 life and you gain 2 life.
    2/2

    Hag Coven 1 mana black mana black mana
    Creature- Warlock (R)
    Myriad
    Pay 3 life: Target creature gains your choice of menace, indestructible, or deathtouch until end of turn. Activate this ability only once per turn.
    3/1

    Kobold Raider 2 mana red mana
    Creature- Kobold
    Haste
    Myriad
    Whenever kobold Raider deals combat damage to a player, create a treasure token.
    1/1

    Bubear Enforcer 2 mana red mana
    Creature- Goblin Warrior
    Myriad
    Whenever a blocked creature you control dies, Bugbear Enforcer deals 1 damage to the defending player.
    3/2

    Territorial Wyrm 4 mana red mana red mana
    Creature- Dragon (M)
    Myriad
    Sacrifice two dragons: Choose one
    • Destroy each artifact with mana value 3 or less
    • Territorial Wyrm deals 3 damage to each creature and player.
    • Create three treasure tokens.
    6/6

    Greenseeker Ranger 1 mana green mana
    Creature- Gnome Ranger
    Myriad
    When Greenseeker Ranger enters the battlefield, reveal the top card of your library. If it’s a land, put it into your hand. Otherwise, put it into your graveyard.
    2/1

    Dryad Grovewarden 2 mana green mana
    Creature- Dryad Druid
    Myriad
    Whenever a nontoken creature you control dies, create a 0/1 green plant creature token.
    1/4

    Dragonborn Huntleader 3 mana green mana
    Creature- Dragon Warrior (R)
    Myriad
    Dragons you control cannot be blocked by creatures with power less than the number of dragons you control.
    4/2
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Kakureta Trap Box & Charm Jack
    Kakureta Trap Box XXX
    Artifact
    Kakureta Trap Box enters the battlefield with X charge counters on it.
    If you or a permanent you control would become the target of a spell your opponent's control, you may remove a charge counter from Kakureta Trap Box. If you do, change all the targets of that spell to Kakureta Trap Box if able. If you can't, exile that spell instead.

    Kakureta Charm Jack XXX
    Artifact
    Kakureta Charm Jack enters the battlefield with X charge counters on it.
    Remove a charge counter from Kakureta Charm Jack, tap symbol : Gain control of target spell or permanent with a converted mana cost 2 or less. You may change the targets of that spell or untap that permanent.

    Was thinking this could also be one of those artifact creature equipment—it would cost U more. Maybe hybrid red/blue.


    So… three mana for a colorless stone rain that gives you their land permanently rather than destroying it… and you can pour more mana into it to repeat for several rounds.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on A masterpiece of design
    Anyone who disagrees with the excellence of this card is clearly expressing cope, opinion, and subjective preference, ignoring the fact that new design space is being pioneered, as should be the goal of any professional designer.

    Of course, we are open to any objective arguments that are not opinions and that do not involve existing rules (we can amend the comprehensive rules as needed), formats (the intended play environment for this card should be readily apparent and other formats aren’t worth considering), or cards (is is oppression to restrict this card’s use based on the mistakes of other designers).
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Grave Tutor
    You know, there seems to be common thread to many of your card designs. You look at power of a card in a vacuum or in one or two specific “ideal” contexts that best support the card and ignore the fact that the card being real would mean it exists in other contexts.

    There are powerful competitive decks that want to shove as many cards in your graveyard but you deny that when your cards are appraised in that light.

    There are powerful competitive decks that try to string together as many card draw and ramp effects together as possible but you deny that when your cards are appraised in that light.

    There are powerful competitive decks that reliably win by getting two specific cards but you deny that is possible when your cards are appraised in that light.

    There are powerful competitive decks that rely on getting specific nonbasic land but you have just recently claimed that the ability to grab those lands is irrelevant in appraising the power of your cards.

    As a “professional”, I imagine you’d want your cards stress-tested appraised in the real meta of the current day where Dredge decks, Storm decks, Combo decks, Tron decks, and other decks: to be judged from the context where anything that makes these hyper efficient decks even better is a terrible idea

    Me judging by the standards of the real game is an objective look at what exists.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.