The deal with being in public and somewhat called "harassment" (and i clearly distinquish between a from a court defined harassment and a person just feeling they are harassed) , is that its really different pieces.
As a private person you have no impact on public that even remotely justifies that anyone attacks you directly.
However, as a public person, like a politician or as we have here, a cosplayer that actively presents their body in public on public events to players, its in your right to criticizes exactly that, which is the body, its presented in a sexualized manner, so commenting in that way is not even inappropriate (might not be your personal taste, but thats a different deal).
If a private person gets mails from random persons theres zero reason or justification, so thats an entirely different matter compared to someone that publicly pushes themselves into public opinion.
Its a really important part of projecting this matter to the context its presented in.
If i see a women feeding a baby and i tell her "You are a 6/10, i wouldnt even rape you" , it would be an unbelieavable inappropriate thing to say , but to someone that in public makes money by presenting their body ? If i tell that to a stripper ? Inapprioriate for sure, but still an entirely different deal, as context matters, the environment matters and if you do not want to expose to that, you are not forced, you can simply not do that job.
If you go to the extreme and outlaw any potenially rude comment, you restrict language by a great deal, so much that people cannot express anything without fear somebody will feel hurt or insulted, and if that justifies that your social media gets permanently flagged and you suffer for it, its a way more extreme response than the "rude comment" started out as.
The adult option would be to point the rude comments out and keep it on a apprioriate level of response, you can talk stuff out and discuss it to proof a point without going to war directly , and still keep in mind, that no person is outright evil, for such things.
And yes, the real sick people are the ones that perform the threats, thats just downright cruelty and has no other reason than pleasing a sadistic pleasure, and that is absolutely nothing a society has to, or should accept, but its a completely different animal to a critic from an public figure.
I am on the side to promote that individuals are responsible for what they are doing.
Jeremy didnt incite harassment, he did poorly phrased comments sure, but thats hardly crazy evil, its just rude and if you talk to him about that, yes ofcourse he knows himself its rude, and thats about it, you can stand above it and realize that something thats already enough, realize you gone a bit to far and the moment you are told so, you can better yourself, problem solved ; the sick people that continue to threaten , thats what remains, but thats adults, responsible for their actions, and any adult that isnt insane should have enough intelligence to not even do that to begin with.
Racist comments are a special kind of deal, just as gay-topics etc. etc.
Its highly controversial to many people and especially your work place is a context with special meaning here.
If i make a racial comment in private, thats it, nobody cares. If someone is insulted they can sue me, i get appropriate punishment, and/or we settle the topic before it escalates, thats the potential for discussion and understanding that is much more valuable than taking every little comment and blow it up like its a death threat right away ; its clearly not.
In your context part you clearly see context matters so much.
Context is key for this here.
All the screenshots are mostly out of context and look entirely different if you get the big picture.
Yes people are offended a lot, but its undeniably a thing you have to be able to deal with if you have any kind of public job, or open yourself up to that (and if you cannot deal with it, its simply the wrong job for you, as theirs issues with lots of jobs and you cannot just blame others for that, self-responsility is a thing, its not that others are always to blame for anything you do and anything you do will have an effect on others, if your job is in public, thats a given).
I think america in special a lot of people are highly influenced by what some special individuals say , so they build up some form of responsibility for what they say, simply because of that.
And i think, it again depends on context and what group you talk to.
In the case here the group of people is the magic community, people that watch Jeremys Channel, thats already a very small subsection again and people that enjoy trollish comments, so they are already open to that and have their own problems why they cannot control what they are doing (as no sane person would write a death threat email to anybody, but lots of people do, especially in heated discusions and extreme topics).
But here Jeremy cannot be at fault for what individuals end up doing, the targeted audience are adults, and should totally be able to control themselves.
----
Your last part.
I also think he could be much less rude in his comments and from his latest comments he acknowledges this, as often you have to be told you are going over the edge, and if its good to think about it (but again, its about critic and staying on a non-extreme course, you want discussion and not open war).
Lots of stuff i can relate to and the topic is simply overblown by extreme margins.
In the end, people said some mean things and others reacted to them ; thats actually all that happened, thats rude at best, but its not downright evil.
This topic would much easier and smoother be solved in a much smaller circle, or in private between these two.
Pulling it to public just makes things worse, by a lot and it doesnt serve anybody, be they right or wrong, in the end, this open warfare just damages the community and people will bunker themselves into even more extreme sides and become even more unable to discuss anything without directly insulting each other.
----
But one thing is guaranteed, this will be a hot topic for the rest of the week and probably the next one, and at some point, nobody will care anymore and just play Magic again.
- TheOnlyOne652089
- Registered User
-
Member for 15 years, 1 month, and 16 days
Last active Thu, Feb, 29 2024 17:12:05
- 2 Followers
- 5,792 Total Posts
- 1070 Thanks
-
Nov 30, 2017TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemPosted in: Articles
-
Nov 30, 2017TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemThe fact that a comment makes someone feel harassed doesnt mean it is harassment.Posted in: Articles
Just because someone feels insulted, its not automatic evil in nature.
Most important, he never told to her directly, you literally have to seek out his channel to see the comments, so you actively have to search yourself to see negative comments about yourself.
The indisputable issue are the sick minded individuals that go over the top and do exactly that, email directly, twitter to her directly etc. They do the harassment, they are 100% guilty for it, and they qualify for it, as they indeed take a sadistic pleasure in doing that, its among the most harmful type of troll.
Then theres a difference between private people and people in public.
As a private person nobody has any public interest in what i do and so comments about my person would be out of context.
The moment what you are doing is part of a community, like cosplay at a grand prix and doing pictures of that etc. You present yourself in public and so comments about exactly that are clearly presented.
That alone is no harassment and its just as important to clearly draw a line between what people truly say and what is casually said, simply put, if you are talking to a group of people for hours, chances are you will say something stupid and someone will feel insulted ; so it has to be viewed in context and not just "oh god, look what he said" , and finger point exactly that and ignore anything else.
And especially for Jeremys channel, its clearly a form of topics and talking that you might easily find offending, others do not, some think hes right about a bunch of stuff, and i believe you can easily see he has a bunch of points.
All the so called harassment can be put down to context that gives it a background, so that is what makes the topic a lot more slippery than just believing its all crystal clear.
The idea of thinking its downright crystal clear and theres only black/white in it, is already short sighted, as you have to see more of the picture to get a real glimpse of the actual truth.
-
Nov 30, 2017TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemYea, if people truly think theres just 1 problem at hand, and that others, but ofcourse never themselves are a part of it, thats just ridiculous, as it is the kind of finger pointing that just wants to make someone else responsible for what you think is bad.Posted in: Articles
If someone truly feels harassed, seek the police, file a claim, prevent the harassment, thats what you can do as an adult, theres a little bit of responsibility for your own too.
Its not your job to defend your wife, if you truly want fairness, she can do that on her own and she should be absolutely able and willing to do so (and if she isnt, that is a problem you have to start working on).
Its always a big question mark, if you have to drag your personal issues into public.
That just makes everything worse, much worse, as you are suddenly exposed to people that choose sides and over dramatic defend it, no matter if it effects them at all.
The adult way to solve the issue would simply be if she started out to simply ask to stop exactly what she thinks is bothering her. Any responsible adult will accept that and change behavior if its reasonable, and if they dont, you file a claim against them, so they get judged by a neutral court (or you are proven wrong on your feeling of being harassed, thats also an option and as an adult your have to live with it). -
Nov 30, 2017TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemTheres critic and just phrasing opinions and as a form of entertainer and content provider he has a form of talking that a lot of people find offensive, but there is plenty of comedians i find offensive, but that doesnt make them in any way problematic.Posted in: Articles
Comments can easily be in bad taste and thats undeniable the case for Jeremy, but the real core of the issue to discuss is the small amount of truly idiotic people that take it to a true harassment and violent form of threats ; and the question to discuss would be if you as a content provider are truly responsible for what some sick individuals do , given they are adults, these people are the actual problem, and thats not Jeremy.
The same kind of sick individuals exist on the other spectrum too, some of them Social Justice Warriors that somehow feel Jeremy has to be "utterly destroyed" and death threats against him are "totally fine".
Seriously, its the same kind of sick individuals and its the CORE of a true problem which puts every little issue into full on overdrive roadkill.
It serves nobody and its a form of discussion that is very prevalent in the internet.
Its a culture of trolls and social justice warriors that simply cannot keep their actions behind a healthy line that keeps a minimum of civilized discourse alive.
If people get famous they undeniable have to have a tougher hide. The more people you know and the more people respond to you, the more bad comments you will accumulate.
Thats natural, and people will either like what you do or they will not.
Some of the sick people will downright hate you for whatever you do and this leads to the exact problem of people that think they have to act themselves , right now and fight what they think is the evil, everyone thinks they are in the right to do so and so nobody is able to self-reflect and see they are going over the top.
If matters settle down you could easily see Jeremy seeing himself that a bunch of stuff crosses the line , but bad taste comments and actual harassment should be dealt with in court and absolutely not in public for people to just judge and start their little lynch mobs in every corner burning whatever victim they just found.
----
So there is more than just one problem.
A lot of problems and everyone is part of some problem, if they see it, know it, or still deny it. -
Nov 30, 2017TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemTheres plenty of "good" men that started wars and killed people in the name of what they thought to be somehow the right thing.Posted in: Articles
The reality is, there are no "evil" and no "good" men, just opinions and people that push these ideology with violence over the other, who ever wins will be in the right, the other side clearly must have been wrong.
Its not the job of people to start a lynch mob and "destroy" other human beings and its downright pedantic to think that is in any way what "good men" should do.
Any problem has to be discussed and solved on the appropriate level.
Pushing topics in public only serves the trolls and media hype , people calling out for a single entity to be blamed for everything they think is bad.
The reality is, theres not a single bad person and everyone is usually to some degree responsible for what they do or do not do.
People really like to give small problems horrific names so they sound like much bigger problems, that leads only to despair and misery, it has no positive benefit for anybody, just pampers the ideology of people that really think they are the only legit form of judgment call, self-administered justice isnt the way to go and if you ever get in the situation to think someone is the personified evil, you are guaranteed wrong and simply ignore the other standpoint (so you become evil yourself, just to pretend to defend against evil, thats in no way a solution and only leads to a conflict in which everyone can blame anyone to be in the right and suddenly there are no good men left anymore).
-
Nov 30, 2017TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemA very big issue is that different topics are brought together, while they simply do not fit.Posted in: Articles
Nazi and troll posters are two very different things and should never be put together, just to fuel a cause, thats selling your own arguments cheap and makes them one-dimensional black/white thinking again, which is good for nobody.
Also, there will be critic and negative critic as well, that has to be acceptable.
Nobody is forced to be overly positive about anything.
If you truly dislike something you can say so, and its value to the discussion that this is expressed and not just ignored, or even outlawed as something terrible wrong.
At the same time its very valid to criticize something and not come up with a solution on your own right away. I can critic a cook and not be able to make it better, thats totally fine and it must be legit to do so. The point of critic is that you should never need to justify for it, the receiver can take the critic and see it as an issue, or they dont, thats their cup of tea and its what an adult has to learn to deal with.
But here again, this changes a lot if someone is in private or its brought up in public and presented to a mob of people.
If you just honestly dislike cosplay and say so, thats fair, nobody forces you to like anything.
The "locker-room-talk" is a topic entirely for its own. Its something that is widely accepted and always was. Women to the same about men, they even do it among each other, it might just be more subtle than the direct approach of actually saying it out loud, even if its just in the "locker-room" (or in this case a youtube channel, or a bunch of twitter posts).
Its fine on its own.
What really pushes the topic to become a real issue is how stuff completely gets lost and out of control incited to be way bigger than what it really is (and yes, thats a terrible huge deal with the amount of media and the very real interest of media to promote topics into "highlights" and further push the mob to generate more horrific events to report about, its almost a self proclaiming prophecy, so its very difficult to truly say what amount of discussion is healthy and what is just talking it to bits and pieces, as many if not all topics will be seemingly super hot for the moment and meaningless the next week, as there is no real issue beside the illusion of talk at all).
----
How would an adult deal with bad talk about them in private ?
You confront the person and actually tell them to stop as its not ok for you.
Solves the issue, unless the person is actively not recognizing your problem.
In public it changes a lot.
Theres either somewhat anonymous people that jump on a topic train and pick sides, which very often leads to extreme reactions, way over the top (any threats via mail or any form of actual harm is absolutely no-go, no matter what the topic is, theres never a reason to choose violence to solve anything.
So if you talk in public, it will have an effect on people and it will polarize the people more and more. Thankfully lots of people can distinguish between a topic that truly effects them and just a rat catcher lynch mob , but some cant, and the poster shouldnt be responsible for these individuals, as almost anything could be seen as an incentive for violence, if the individual has some sick mind, theres an entirely different problem of its own (and yes, you have to ask yourselves why so many "troll" people exist and no matter the topic, they are harmful and actively ignore any productive discussion).
----
For the topic at hand, the first problem that ignited this into a public *****-fest was that it was brought to public at all.
Solving these kinds of issues should have been a thing between Jeremy and Sprinkle , in private or by her actively telling what bothers her, its just fair to do so, as it solves most issues and avoids outside people to intervene.
If that doesnt work out and somebody is not taking your arguments, you can take it to the police and to court to actively stop what bothers you with something like a protective injunction suit, which again should solve the issue at hand, instead of putting it up for debate to a lynch mob that just wants blood, no matter from who.
Its a very clear picture if a topic is just instantly brought to public, avoiding any legal options (or doing so later, in hopes the public opinion boosts your side).
See, if a topic is discussed in public, it will never be fair.
People pick side right away and defend it for whatever the cost, even if it doesnt effect them personally at all ; which brings the Social Justice Warrior term to fruits.
Yes thats a problem just as trolls.
Its good to have empathy, but its bad to jam ideals and ideology into a topic and mix topics entirely, just to proof a point that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
----
Believe it or not, neither Jeremy nor Sprinkle are somehow "evil incarnate" , they arent and they arent "toxic" to the community.
The kind of topic and how much its media-hyped and exaggerated , thats an entire issue of its own and overshadows the problem they personally had to solve between each other and makes it like a community issue , which it isnt, the community is fine, theres very rare cases and problems to deal with and they shouldnt be ignored, but also not exaggerated into spheres they arent fit for.
And this is, about a game, a hobby, people enjoy playing the game and enjoy being part of a community, if this is taken to a level of social criticism it doesnt serve a purpose for the game it just harms the experience for everyone, as it puts a stigma to the game, that it neither deserves or justifies at all. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The Captain is actual what white gets as a wall, its just fair for a wall to be able to block Nacatle etc.
A wall should really have 4+ thoughness right now as anything else is just too less if it can't even block most aggressive cards (as 3 is among so much right now).
We also have Shield Sphere, which is 0 mana 0/6 , and thats pretty solid actual for controllish decks to stall the game out.
In the end the card gets pretty stupid with the "ultra" high thoughness , so maybe it could be a lot simpler as this:
Immortal Defender W
Creature - Spirit, Soldier
Defender
Indestructible
0/1
Seems to be a lot easier, as it just blocks and survives anything (except blacks -X/-X effects, which should be a fair deal as they are fairly unplayed most the time).
If Indestructible feels too good, it could be:
Recovering Defender W
Creature - Spirit, Soldier
Defender
If ~ would be destroyed, regenerate it.
0/1
So its more like Dredge Skeletons (while they can attack) just that we have still answers to regenerate.
But this should all work better than a ultra high thoughness just to survive burn and power level just goes up anyway.
Well as it is you still have chances to get around the drawbacks and end with a 1 mana 5/5.
Grizzly of the Plains
Creature - Bear
When this creature attacks, your opponent gains 4 life. Creatures with a power of 4 or less don't take combat damage from this creature.
5/5
Common
Its still a big wall as a 1 mana 0/5 it would allready be good as it simply blocks pretty much everything (except in Rise of Eldrazi like sets, which are "rare" anyway).
Wording wise it would be that you "prevent" the damage, or you use a "if" clause.
Grizzly of the Plains
Creature - Bear
Whenever ~ attacks, defending players gain 4 life.
Creatures with a power of 4 or less don't take combat damage from this creature.
5/5
So how could you abuse it ?
Well first is obvisious that you need to cancel the life gain.
Take Sulfuric Vortex (Flames of the Blood hand) or something like this, and we have a pretty strong beater.
Or we use it to get a Punishing Fire back over and over, still pretty decent, Kavu Predator likes it aswell.
So we can get a decent attacker and we still have a pretty strong "wall".
This card could actual be included in "zoo" decks if they include the "anti lifegain" cards as it does a decent job actual.
And ofcourse we can also give it "double strike" to get around the problem, as 5 power x2 are 10 - 4 is still 6.
Nothing is impossible if you actual have a totally oversized creature, most drawbacks can turn into advantages.
And putting this card on "common" is just nuts, this type of card should at least be "uncommon" as its so annoying.
Firebranch Shaman
Creature - Elf Druid Shaman
T: Add or to your mana pool. Firebranch Shaman deals 1 damage to you.
Sacrifice Firebranch Shaman: Creatures you control gain haste until end of turn. Activate this ability only if you control a Mountain.
1/1
For a singel green getting the haste for all seems to be just "too much" for Elf Ball.
A good idea would be to actual make it not an elf, and the ability just needs a manacost.
Firebranch Shaman
Creature - Elf Shaman
Sacrifice a forest, T: Add :symg::symr: to your mana pool.
Sacrifice a mountain, T: Creatures you control gain haste until end of turn.
1/1
Just getting around so its more explosive mana generator, not just another Llanowar Elf , and the haste ability can be strong enough, it should at least have a real cost to get it (Its even like Need for Speed).
Creature type wise i would focus on either Druid OR Shaman, not both, as thats two different things flavourwise.
A important thing is "how much" elfs are pushed with the 1 drops, it gets so ugly allready with the pseudo haste mana from the Heritage (which seems to be the biggest problem).
Communal Guide
Creature - Elf Druid
When another creature enters the battlefield under your control, you may add one mana of any color to your mana pool.
1/1
Here we have a card that really should not be a "1 drop" as that obvisious too dangerous.
Lotus Cobra is allready pretty bad ass as it walks the line of critical mana acceleration.
Your card actual says that every creature costs 1 less, that is dangerous, especially as cards can simply give more creatures than they cost, with plenty of tokens.
I could even see this card in multiple combo decks, even if its with Empty the Warrens, Elf ball or "Alluren" , maybe even Affinity would use it for the potential mana, and its even nuts to get mana from a Thopter Foundry, its just plain unfair and unbalanced.
A good fix for this is allready posted:
:1mana::symg:
Creature -- Elf Druid (U)
Whenever you cast a creature spell, add to your mana pool.
1/2
Seems fair as it fixes the problems with tokens, and limits to green mana.
Keep in mind that this card is still decent, a bad point is just that you can't use it to ramp, so it could simply read:
~ 2
Creature -- Elf Druid (U)
Creature spells you cast cost or less to cast.
1/2
Which could still be abused with the Elf Ball, but thats the nature of the card.
If it wants to avoid the problem with multiple elfs it could be:
~ 2
Creature -- Elf Druid (U)
The first creature spell you cast each turn, costs :symg::symg::symg: less to cast.
1/3
Just something for "mono green" decks, or a way to work around heavy green costs if you want to play them in non-mono green decks.
this card also inspires me for this:
~ 2
Creature -- Elf Druid (U)
Every becomes :1mana:.
1/3
This might turn your green cards into "colorless" cards (if that works as it is ment to) and you can play cards with heavy green costs for colorless mana.
Could be even a cycle for every color to allow a set that has "chroma" and still give you multi color decks that have extrem manacosts.
That makes it a quite strong "lockdown" the removal abilities should simply never be + abilities, as they are just to strong right now for that (unless its a freaking expensive thing like Nicol Bolas).
Just make "text" version of your card, which is also better to discuss than a Render.
Maybe it is "fairer" if the walls have a fixed size, to make them more usefull early and not totally giant later (as i just see the card "unplayable" with all the damage based removal).
Wall of Walls :1mana::symw::symu:
Creature - Wall
Defender
:1mana::symw::symu:: Put a creature token onto the battlefield that is a copy of Wall of Walls.
0/4
As 0/4 is pretty much the basic size of Walls right now (out of reach of the most early stuff and burn).
With Wall of Blossom now in white, and all that */4 blue walls, it fits the colors and the flavour is great of a wall of walls that keeps building itself.
Anything else seems perfect.
Creature -- Zombie Warrior (C)
Whenever Mindless Warrior deals combat damage to a player, discard a card.
2/2
Looks like a common in a set with graveyard / discard / hellbent matters.
Not even "that" bad in this case.
AEther Glistening - :symb::symb:
Enchantment (U)
Creatures you control that you didn't cast have haste.
Thats strange, black just doesnt have enough controll magic spells to make this card matter.
Could make a lot more sence in blue, even more if you have some kind of mechanic that has controll magic elements.
Incessant Horror - :3mana::symb::symr:
Creature -- Horror (U)
Haste
Persist
4/4
Well we have the RB scarecrow with haste and persist, 5/3 for 6 colorless and it was not really good, and "common".
This card just doesnt look very "uncommon" for me, as its just too simpel and not something over the top as Thoctar or something.
Maybe a little extra could push it to a worthy uncommon:
Incessant Horror - :3mana::symb::symr:
Creature -- Horror (U)
Haste
Persist
Wither
4/4
Just something extra also goes with a 5 mana / 4/4 body / 3 abilities (5,4,3) template.
Zabrek Corpse-Eater - :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature -- Zombie Minion (R)
:1mana::symb::symb:, exile a creature card in a graveyard: Zabrek Corpse-Eater gains the power, toughness, and abilities of the exiled creature until end of turn.
3/2
This was done in blue/black a lot.
Cemetery Puca does it "bad", Dimir Doppelganger worked in some way with the Mill idea of Dimir and was at least usefull in its time.
Your card is very similiar to the doppelganger, while i like the flavour idea of the Dimir more (taking the place of a dead).
And giving it the option to eat multiple cards might be a dangerous combo part aswell (tap / untap cards etc.).
So something that different:
Zabrek Corpse-Eater - :1mana::symb::symb:
Creature -- Zombie Minion (R)
:1mana:: Exile target creature card in a graveyard. If you do, put a +1/+1 counter on ~.
3B, Remove three +1/+1 counters from ~: Put an creature card exiled by ~ onto the battlefield under your control.
3/3
So instead of getting the abilities power/thoughness etc. you just reanimate the creature using the counters might add some more flexiblity with other mechanics etc.
But thats just to seperate it from the UB cards that "clone" dead creatures, into something thats more "mono black" (ala Withering Wretch , Coffin Queen and such).
Cheap as its best ofcourse.
Shrieking Drake jumps in my mind.
Intuition for 3 Vengevine seems pretty decent if they can come back over and over for just UU.
Might be able to spawn a deck in Legacy some kind of blue with Erayo / Vengevine engines.
Common
Instant
Counter the next spell an opponent would cast this turn.
Draw a card.
Well its annoying powerfull.
It plays a lot like "silence" as they don't really cast a spell if they see it is countered anyway, and you just play this card turn 2 no matter what, as you cantrip and they lose a spell.
So taking "abbeyance" this card is too strong with the cantrip as it just counters any spell.
To make it "fair" you either need to make it more expensive (1UU like cancel) or restrict the type of spell.
The last option could be to simply remove the cantrip, which results in a "silence" in blue.
Brigale's Ruse :2mana::symu::symu:
Uncommon
Instant
Counter the next spell an opponent would cast this turn. If no spell is countered this way, draw two cards.
Draw a card.
Similiar, just that the cost is more "fair" and the design more intresting.
This way its not just a "silence" they have a reason to still cast a spell knowing its countered, as you lose 2 cards.
With the cantrip on it, that might be slighty annoying in terms of card advantage, as even if they cast a spell, you are +0 and they -1.
And keep in mind that you can allways play the card at the end of turn, so they have no chance to play a non-instant and you draw 3 cards for 2UU which is too strong aswell for instant card draw.
With this points in mind it could be:
Brigale's Ruse 1:symu::symu:
Instant (R)
Cast ~ only during an opponents upkeep.
Counter the next spell an opponent casts this turn.
At the end of turn, if no spell was countered this turn, draw three cards.
I could see it this way, as a "rare" cancel you cast before they get the chance (and the funny part is it can even counter split second). Most the time you will counter just what they play, however, the main part of the card could be to actual draw the cards, which works good with "silence" or other ways to prevent them from casting stuff.
Saurian Broodback
Creature- Lizard
When Saurian Broodback is put into a graveyard from anywhere,
put two 1/1 green insect tokens into play
0/1
Well a 0/1 that pops into two 1/1 is kinda strange, the idea of a 3/3 into three 1/1's works better.
But its still a valid card for a set with "devour" and such.
A singel reanimation (as you will pretty much "never" get more than 1 creature back) is not really intresting.
The card is pretty strange to play, as a simpel Zombify does a better job all the time.
The "name" thing is allways a problem, as it limits the design space so much, and the flexibility in which it interacts with other cards (beside the problem in limited, as you rarely have anything 2 or 3 times).
Taking the idea to "allys" (which are pretty much "friends") it could easily be an ally itself:
Friends Digger 3B
Creature - Zombie, Ally (U/R)
When ~ or another ally enters the battlefield under your control, return target ally creature card from your graveyard to your hand.
2/2
Pretty powerfull engine in an Ally theme, as you can generate an endless stream of allys (as long as this guy is alive, or you have copies of it).
Could be strong enough to make a job in constructed Ally decks (while its still not an ideal thing).
If you just want to force the "name" thing, you should give it some point that makes it worth the effort, as Bloodbond March is pretty bad and was made in a set full of "dredge" and mill.
I think having a counter is not a characteristic of a card other than its name, manacost, power/thoughness, types etc.
Protection from cards with counters on it
Is actual what you thought, but protection from "counters" doesnt do anything at all, as counters themself never target, never deal damage or anything.
If it would work, Tatterkite would pretty much have protection from counters right away, but it doesnt seem to work that way.
Well unless you somehow want to change the rule, which is an option all the time.
If you want to give black artifact destruction, you can, but it should be somehow usefull aswell, and making the effect rare, just because you want it to be "rare" makes no sence, for the sake of Limited, uncommon is "rare" enough and doesnt waste the valuable "rare slots" of a set.
Stuff like Greater Harvester etc. force sacrifices, including artifacts.
However, as we see Phyrexian actual "love" artifacts, so it might make sence if you use the dead parts.
In this flavour i could see an edict:
Phyrexian Edict B
Instant
Target player sacrifices an artifact. Target creature gets +X/-X for each artifact in that players graveyard.
Just something in terms of black in Mirrodin, a solution for black against artifacts (which isnt actual a essential thing, as most colors have solution against anything allready, and a Maelstrom Pulse / Vindicate combination isnt far away from a mono colored spell with the current mana bases).
I could easily see this at "uncommon" as its a pretty decent way to kill artifacts in the black color (beside the Duress discard etc., which is still more usefull in general).
:symw::symw:
Creature - Kor Soldier
As long as Kor Armorer is equipped, treat all other Kor creatures you control as though they are equipped by that equipment.
1/1
Well i would remove the drawback, that doesnt fit.
But the ability looks intresting.
Maybe a different wording, as it sounds kinda strange.
Kor Master Outfitter :symw::symw:
Creature - Kor Soldier (R)
As long as ~ is equipped, all other Kor creatures you control are equipped by all equipments equipped to ~.
2/2
Sounds strange aswell, but maybe that works better, as some Kor want to be equipped themself aswell, this would give you a way to "clone" all your equipments for them.
Balance wise i see a WW allways as a 2/2 at least, just to make sure its playable for White in Limited even without the ability.
To simplify it could be:
The Unblemishable -
Legendary Creature -- Elemental (M)
Trample
~ can't have counters placed on it.
Whenever a creature blocks or becomes blocked by ~, remove all counters from it.
7/7
While i dislike this blocks/becomes blocked stuff, mainly because the opponent just doesnt block at all in this case.
Could be easier as a "extrem" card:
The Unblemishable -
Legendary Creature -- Elemental (M)
Trample
Cards can't have counters placed on them.
When ~ enters the battlefield, remove all counters from all cards.
7/7
So eat away all counters and prevent any card from getting counters.
Quite annoying as it can be used as an engine for yourself and/or to hate your opponent's planeswalkers and mechanics (while its pretty combolishes with Persist etc.).
And Legions just had creatures.
However, while it works, you might need a lot more "spell" creatures to compensate the lack of spells.
And a format full of annoying creatures is quite strange aswell.
If you print a card that simply says "4 coloress = destroy target creature" , you create a stupid color pie, as it simply doesnt exist anymore if you give such removal to "colorless" .
Take a look at Rise of Eldrazi, it gives a good idea about colorless spells, all of them are expensive, but everyone is able to cast them.
Existing stuff also gives you a good benchmark for colorless effects.
Blazing Torch is a good card in most decks, as its removal after all, but its still expensive compared to other removal as you lose a lot of speed and it still requieres a creature that throws it.
Leonin Bola for example was so strong in Mirrodin, it can easy win a game for you, as all your small creatures can simply tap down the opponents fat stuff and for a very small cost.
You can print such cards, but they are very powerfull for the colorless reason alone.
In Draft a colorless pick that is soo strong is among the best picks, you just play it, no matter what happens in the draft, you can't be cut out of the color.
The colorpie asks you to print colorless cards "allways" under the limits of colored spells, and i tryd to explain that the colorless cards can be pretty much overcosted, and still would you play them as they are just "allways" playable for you.
And in your starting post you allready see that the colorless removal is strong in Limited, making them uncommon is ofcourse a solution to balance the problem, but that alone is not enough, it depends so much on your set if a cards like that are fair or not.