Fresh Mind1UR
Sorcery
Target player discards three cards, then draws three cards. (If that player has fewer than three cards in hand, he or she discards his or her hand, then draws.)
This was originally a mono-red spell designed for a UR draft archetype that involved casting as many spells in one turn as possible, as a solution for going into top-deck mode. I realized that mono red really shouldn't get a card that potentially says "Draw three," so I added blue as blue gets unconditional card-draw.
I also allowed it to target any player to allow it to aid a mill strategy.
Blue Red Mill Spell AlternateUR Instant
Target player reveals cards from the top of his or her library until he or she reveals a basic land card or ten cards, then puts all cards revealed this way into his or her graveyard.
Against decks with few basics, it's essentially a strictly better Glimpse The Unthinkable. Instant speed mill spell supports draw go control.
This is an interesting idea, although it would need to be worded differently. Your current version would let me choose which mode (ten cards or a basic land), rather than specifying whichever comes first. Honestly, I don't know how modern templating would handle the "whichever comes first" clause. Maybe with bullet points?
"Target opponent reveals cards from the top of his or her library until whichever of the following is revealed first, then puts the revealed cards into his or her graveyard.
- A basic land card
- Ten cards"
Bellamus, Boros Reckoner2RW
Planeswalker -Bellamus
Loyalty 4
+1: Until your next turn, whenever ~ is dealt damage, it deals that much damage to target creature or player.
-2: Until end of turn, ~ gains "T: Destroy target blocking creature. Creatures that were blocked by that creature this combat gain trample until end of turn."
-8: You get an emblem with "During combat on your turn, you choose how each creature blocks. (It's controller still chooses whether that creature blocks)"
Yall have a point. My thought process was using that wording to avoid having the target removed to counter the whole spell, but it doesn't quite work that way, does it.
An interesting design but you have over estimated how aggressively you can or should cost this. It is a harder to use flashback, so your cards should start at what it would cost if your spell had flash back and then cut 1 or 2 at most.
Draw Craft needs to cost quite a bit more. Think Twice is a good card, Draw Craft is leaps and bounds better.
Scare Craft doesn't really seem worth it on either end. I'm not sure how to scale this effect so its worth using.
You have a point here. Basically the costing needs more balancing, which can be done during playtesting.
Aside from that, though, you don't see any issue with the mechanic itself?
"Spellcraft {cost} (As you cast an instant or sorcery spell, you may exile this card from your graveyard and pay this cost. If you do, add this card's effect to that spell.)"
So this is basically Splice onto Arcane, but tweaked to be a one-time use from your graveyard. It can also be applied to any spell, not just a specific subtype. This fixes a few major problems with Splice, mainly the parasitism and the repetitive gameplay that comes with mechanics like Splice and Forecast. It also involves more decision-making, as one-time effects make for more compelling decisions. Finally, it encourages more player action by making the player cast the spell with Spellcraft to get it into the graveyard, rather than waiting with a bunch of Splice cards in-hand till they find the right combo.
In a vacuum, Spellcraft is a little weaker than Splice, with all of the added restrictions. However, that allows us to cost it more aggressively, making for much more attractive cards.
I designed this for a spell-themed set (instants and sorceries), so given that I would want it to be in all five colors in some volume, weighing most heavily in UR. Here are some common examples I can think of off the top of my head:
Lifegain CraftW
Sorcery C
You gain 5 life.
Spellcraft W
Pump Craft1G
Instant C
Put two +1/+1 counters on target creature.
Spellcraft G
Draw CraftU
Instant C
Draw a card.
Spellcraft 0
Discard CraftB
Sorcery C
Target player discards a card.
Spellcraft-Discard a card
Scare CraftR
Sorcery C
Target creature can't block this turn.
Spellcraft R
This card is likely too strong. In Modern, depending on the match up, you expect it to mill on the order of 20 cards. Some decks would lose on the spot. Some decks wouldn't care about it all. The more troubling application is as a self mill spell. If you build your deck around it, you can make this card equivalent to "UR : Mill your deck" which may not seem powerful, but seems likely to break a format like legacy and would need to be insta-banned. Consider that it is harder to interact with, cheaper, and faster than an already banned card, hermit druid.
I hear your concerns about modern and legacy, though that same level of concern didn't stop WotC from printing Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time. Their policy is "balance for limited and standard; ban for modern and legacy," and I'm perfectly happy following that policy.
That said, I do agree that the self-mill option seems overly dangerous. Do you think it would be better if it was changed to "Target opponent...?"
UR
Sorcery
Target player reveals cards from the top of his or her library until he or she reveals a basic land card, then puts all cards revealed this way into his or her graveyard.
So red has had a history of hating on nonbasic lands and blue has a history of milling. I thought this was an interesting marriage of the two. It punishes player who run more nonbasic lands than basic lands by making them mill more. This is also one of those rare cases in which the card is stronger in constructed than it is in limited, due to the generally higher concentration of nonbasic lands in constructed decks.
JaradBBGG
Legendary Creature - Zombie Elf
You may play land cards from your graveyard.
At the beginning of your upkeep, reveal cards from the top of your library until you reveal a land card, then put the revealed cards into your graveyard.
Whenever a creature card is put into your graveyard from anywhere, put a +1/+1 counter on ~.
2/2
Shout out to Creedmoor for some inspiration.
I feel like this is a bit undercosted, but I also feel like I could be wrong.
Designed for a Ravnica draft set. What do yall think?
Olandra looks a lot like an idea that I had for a new Jarad card for RTRTR.
I also really like Javiir, and while I can think of some color combos that seem more fitting for this effect, UR is still well within the color pie, so it works.
Here, MaRo explains that they consciously decided to do a living Egypt rather than the commonly depicted dead Egypt. That is to say that, typically, Egyptian tropes involve treasure hunters plundering tombs, setting off traps, fighting off mummies and evil curses in tombs filled with sand and scorpions, etc. This depiction of Egypt is from a time when it was a thriving civilization rather than the ruins of one.
I read this and immediately thought about what will transpire in Hour of Devastation. Either in flavor text or some story so far, it's been said that when Bolas returns, the Hekma will be taken down, presumably leading to the "devastation" alluded to by the title. This would make sense with the increased Desert theme MaRo has also talked about.
My point is that it seems like the thriving civilization of Amonkhet is about to collapse. Could this mean that they did this knowing that when we eventually return to Amonkhet, it will allow them to explore the "tomb-raiding" tropes they couldn't this time around? I imagine it will be years before we return, so in that time, Amonkhet could eventually become the equivalent of Egypt as it's represented in, say, The Mummy, rather than Gods of Egypt.
What do you think? Was the state of Amonkhet planned to allow for this change?
Time Flies (Mythic) 4UU
Sorcery
Creatures you control gain flying until the end of your next turn.
Take an extra turn after this one.
or
Time Flies (Mythic) 4GU
Sorcery
Create four 1/1 green Insect creature tokens with flying.
Take an extra turn after this one. Time's fun when you're having flies.
I really like the second one, though I feel like it fits better in black rather than green. Insects that fly are black these days.
Technically your version could still work, as blue grants flying, but it still comes off as "The green effect is the flying tokens and the blue effect is the extra turn," which would be wrong.
A cool legend, but the whole Kill=a creature dealt damage by {a creature} this turn dies, is cards like Visara the Dreadful. Visara undoubtedly kills creatures, but with the terminology locked in like that she doesn't. It is a rare ability but it is such a disconnect that it needs to be considered.
That disconnect did come to mind, but honestly, when was the last time we saw that effect see print? I think it would end up just being an unfortunate casualty of progress. And if we want that sort of effect in the future, we could use the wording "Deathtouch | T: Deals 1 damage to target creature." It's functionally the same, but triggers "killing."
Ikra Shidiqi, Matron of Venom3BG
Legendary Creature - Naga Wizard
Deathtouch
Each other creature you control that's a Snake or Naga gets +1/+1 and has deathtouch.
Whenever a Snake or Naga you control kills a creature, you gain life equal to that creature's toughness.
2/3
I made this card to be the answer to everyone who is against Naga as a creature type because it takes away from Snake tribal. No, this isn't a full solution, but it at least lets people make a tribal deck for both.
*Note on the wording of the last ability*
"...kills a creature..."
is something I'm trying in place of
"...a creature dealt damage by {a creature} this turn dies..."
to save some text space. With deathtouch, it's fairly intuitive, but in other cases, I would want to include reminder text at lower rarities, at least until it becomes common knowledge (like how "library" means "deck")
This, admittedly, isn't the most problatic thing in the world when it comes to counterspells and spells that make counters, as the design space almost never overlaps. The idea here is really just minor optimization mixed with a cool new idea.
So, imagine a world where spell tribal was a thing. You could cast Fire spells to burn things, Mind spells to draw cards, etc. And to support that, you could have support cards that do neat things like "Whenever you cast a Mind spell, scry 1."
Sounds neat, huh? Lets switch back over to my original topic for a second. Currently, "counter" is used for two different game concepts:
1. Preventing something from resolving.
2. Putting something on a permanent or player for tracking purposes.
The thought that lead to all of this was "We could have different words for those things. What words would I use?" My first answer was "change 'counter' (on permanents for tracking) to 'marker.'" Currently, "marker" isn't used in the game for anything. It might be used outside of gameplay for the purposes of explaining certain parts of the rules (for example, how to describe what purpose the Devoid keyword serves), but that, I feel, is less important, and I feel that "marker" could be better used as a substitute for "counter" when referring to tracking something on permanent or players.
Basically, "+1/+1 counter" should become "+1/+1 marker."
Now, back to my spell tribal topic. Lets assume that we can actually introduce spell tribal into the game, as if MTG had completely started over. That gave me another idea. Wouldn't be neat to have spell tribal support for "Counter spells?" But how could we do that if "counter" is still already being used for something? Well, there is a similar solution. Turns out, "negate" is a perfectly apt word, if not a better word, for what "counter" (prevent from resolving) is.
So, we use "negate" in place of "counter" to mean "prevent from resolving" and turn "Counter" into a spell type that can now recieve tribal support. Not only that, but that type could be used on any spell that directly interacts with another spell. Redirect, for example, would be a "Counter spell." Heck, subtypes are flexible, so we could put it on whatever feels right.
In short, "Instant | Counter target spell" should become "Instant - Counter | Negate target spell" so that things like "Counter spells you cast cost 1 less to cast" can exist.
Here's a final example card that makes use of all of these changes:
Absorb Aether1GU
Instant - Counter Boon
Negate target spell. Put a +1/+1 marker on target creature you control.
Sorcery
Target player discards three cards, then draws three cards. (If that player has fewer than three cards in hand, he or she discards his or her hand, then draws.)
This was originally a mono-red spell designed for a UR draft archetype that involved casting as many spells in one turn as possible, as a solution for going into top-deck mode. I realized that mono red really shouldn't get a card that potentially says "Draw three," so I added blue as blue gets unconditional card-draw.
I also allowed it to target any player to allow it to aid a mill strategy.
Thoughts?
"Target opponent reveals cards from the top of his or her library until whichever of the following is revealed first, then puts the revealed cards into his or her graveyard.
- A basic land card
- Ten cards"
Or something like that.
Planeswalker -Bellamus
Loyalty 4
+1: Until your next turn, whenever ~ is dealt damage, it deals that much damage to target creature or player.
-2: Until end of turn, ~ gains "T: Destroy target blocking creature. Creatures that were blocked by that creature this combat gain trample until end of turn."
-8: You get an emblem with "During combat on your turn, you choose how each creature blocks. (It's controller still chooses whether that creature blocks)"
I'll change the wording.
Aside from that, though, you don't see any issue with the mechanic itself?
So this is basically Splice onto Arcane, but tweaked to be a one-time use from your graveyard. It can also be applied to any spell, not just a specific subtype. This fixes a few major problems with Splice, mainly the parasitism and the repetitive gameplay that comes with mechanics like Splice and Forecast. It also involves more decision-making, as one-time effects make for more compelling decisions. Finally, it encourages more player action by making the player cast the spell with Spellcraft to get it into the graveyard, rather than waiting with a bunch of Splice cards in-hand till they find the right combo.
In a vacuum, Spellcraft is a little weaker than Splice, with all of the added restrictions. However, that allows us to cost it more aggressively, making for much more attractive cards.
I designed this for a spell-themed set (instants and sorceries), so given that I would want it to be in all five colors in some volume, weighing most heavily in UR. Here are some common examples I can think of off the top of my head:
Lifegain Craft W
Sorcery C
You gain 5 life.
Spellcraft W
Pump Craft 1G
Instant C
Put two +1/+1 counters on target creature.
Spellcraft G
Draw Craft U
Instant C
Draw a card.
Spellcraft 0
Discard Craft B
Sorcery C
Target player discards a card.
Spellcraft-Discard a card
Scare Craft R
Sorcery C
Target creature can't block this turn.
Spellcraft R
That said, I do agree that the self-mill option seems overly dangerous. Do you think it would be better if it was changed to "Target opponent...?"
Sorcery
Target player reveals cards from the top of his or her library until he or she reveals a basic land card, then puts all cards revealed this way into his or her graveyard.
So red has had a history of hating on nonbasic lands and blue has a history of milling. I thought this was an interesting marriage of the two. It punishes player who run more nonbasic lands than basic lands by making them mill more. This is also one of those rare cases in which the card is stronger in constructed than it is in limited, due to the generally higher concentration of nonbasic lands in constructed decks.
Is this too good?
Legendary Creature - Zombie Elf
You may play land cards from your graveyard.
At the beginning of your upkeep, reveal cards from the top of your library until you reveal a land card, then put the revealed cards into your graveyard.
Whenever a creature card is put into your graveyard from anywhere, put a +1/+1 counter on ~.
2/2
Shout out to Creedmoor for some inspiration.
I feel like this is a bit undercosted, but I also feel like I could be wrong.
Designed for a Ravnica draft set. What do yall think?
I also really like Javiir, and while I can think of some color combos that seem more fitting for this effect, UR is still well within the color pie, so it works.
Here, MaRo explains that they consciously decided to do a living Egypt rather than the commonly depicted dead Egypt. That is to say that, typically, Egyptian tropes involve treasure hunters plundering tombs, setting off traps, fighting off mummies and evil curses in tombs filled with sand and scorpions, etc. This depiction of Egypt is from a time when it was a thriving civilization rather than the ruins of one.
I read this and immediately thought about what will transpire in Hour of Devastation. Either in flavor text or some story so far, it's been said that when Bolas returns, the Hekma will be taken down, presumably leading to the "devastation" alluded to by the title. This would make sense with the increased Desert theme MaRo has also talked about.
My point is that it seems like the thriving civilization of Amonkhet is about to collapse. Could this mean that they did this knowing that when we eventually return to Amonkhet, it will allow them to explore the "tomb-raiding" tropes they couldn't this time around? I imagine it will be years before we return, so in that time, Amonkhet could eventually become the equivalent of Egypt as it's represented in, say, The Mummy, rather than Gods of Egypt.
What do you think? Was the state of Amonkhet planned to allow for this change?
Technically your version could still work, as blue grants flying, but it still comes off as "The green effect is the flying tokens and the blue effect is the extra turn," which would be wrong.
Legendary Creature - Naga Wizard
Deathtouch
Each other creature you control that's a Snake or Naga gets +1/+1 and has deathtouch.
Whenever a Snake or Naga you control kills a creature, you gain life equal to that creature's toughness.
2/3
I made this card to be the answer to everyone who is against Naga as a creature type because it takes away from Snake tribal. No, this isn't a full solution, but it at least lets people make a tribal deck for both.
*Note on the wording of the last ability*
"...kills a creature..."
is something I'm trying in place of
"...a creature dealt damage by {a creature} this turn dies..."
to save some text space. With deathtouch, it's fairly intuitive, but in other cases, I would want to include reminder text at lower rarities, at least until it becomes common knowledge (like how "library" means "deck")
This, admittedly, isn't the most problatic thing in the world when it comes to counterspells and spells that make counters, as the design space almost never overlaps. The idea here is really just minor optimization mixed with a cool new idea.
So, imagine a world where spell tribal was a thing. You could cast Fire spells to burn things, Mind spells to draw cards, etc. And to support that, you could have support cards that do neat things like "Whenever you cast a Mind spell, scry 1."
Sounds neat, huh? Lets switch back over to my original topic for a second. Currently, "counter" is used for two different game concepts:
1. Preventing something from resolving.
2. Putting something on a permanent or player for tracking purposes.
The thought that lead to all of this was "We could have different words for those things. What words would I use?" My first answer was "change 'counter' (on permanents for tracking) to 'marker.'" Currently, "marker" isn't used in the game for anything. It might be used outside of gameplay for the purposes of explaining certain parts of the rules (for example, how to describe what purpose the Devoid keyword serves), but that, I feel, is less important, and I feel that "marker" could be better used as a substitute for "counter" when referring to tracking something on permanent or players.
Basically, "+1/+1 counter" should become "+1/+1 marker."
Now, back to my spell tribal topic. Lets assume that we can actually introduce spell tribal into the game, as if MTG had completely started over. That gave me another idea. Wouldn't be neat to have spell tribal support for "Counter spells?" But how could we do that if "counter" is still already being used for something? Well, there is a similar solution. Turns out, "negate" is a perfectly apt word, if not a better word, for what "counter" (prevent from resolving) is.
So, we use "negate" in place of "counter" to mean "prevent from resolving" and turn "Counter" into a spell type that can now recieve tribal support. Not only that, but that type could be used on any spell that directly interacts with another spell. Redirect, for example, would be a "Counter spell." Heck, subtypes are flexible, so we could put it on whatever feels right.
In short, "Instant | Counter target spell" should become "Instant - Counter | Negate target spell" so that things like "Counter spells you cast cost 1 less to cast" can exist.
Here's a final example card that makes use of all of these changes:
Absorb Aether 1GU
Instant - Counter Boon
Negate target spell. Put a +1/+1 marker on target creature you control.
Anyway, what do you all think?