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, 2 months, and 7 days
Last active Thu, Mar, 28 2024 22:25:06
- 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.
Just a wording thing, i prefer the one on the "Shards" in Mirrodin if they have 2 different costs for the same effect:
Zombie Ingester 1B
Creature - Zombie (C)
T, Discard a creature card OR T, exile a creature card in your graveyard: Add B to your mana pool.
2/1
Reduces the text.
Artifact (U)
: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool. Spend this mana only to cast creature spells.
Pretty good card actual for "Limited" to splash creatures or simply ramp mana.
Sure you can not play your splashed non creatures, but thats a fair deal for a cc 2 mana artifact.
Seems totally fine.
Boltdodge Pegasus -
Creature - Pegasus (C)
Flying
:2mana::symw:: Boltdodge Pegasus gets +0/+3 until end of turn.
1/1
Sure, its a Suntail Hawk and at least gets another ability to matter lategame as a "super defender" that can block pretty much anything, be it a bomb dragon (5/5 flyer) or a giant green beast / wurm.
A core set would most likely not use this, as its overkill to give a 1 drop such an ability combined with flying, it becomes a "fortress" that just stalls the game.
Might work better if its a one-shot activation instead of an activated by mana.
Something like this:
Boltdodge Pegasus -
Creature - Pegasus (C)
Flying
Tap an untapped Pegasus you control: ~ gets +0/+3 until end of turn.
1/1
Randomly throw in tribal (does not have to be ofcourse, can easily be just tap itself).
This way its at least just a 1/4 flying blocker, not a total fortress.
All Out War - :1mana::symr::symr:
Enchantment (R)
Creatures attack each turn if able.
Well we have plenty of this cards at uncommon, which more or less suck.
Forcing attacks in a constructed view simply sucks so hard, no card ever made it worth it (as they were horrible over costed all the time, so hard overcosted that you simply play removal and get immediatly what you would just get with much more work).
Most the time your opponent will attack anyway, and creatures with tap abilities can still "not attack" if they simply tap themself.
In addition your opponent will see it comming, and as its worded it will effect you aswell (unlike the curse version, which just costs 2R).
I think it can easily cost just a singel red and maybe even get something extra to have any "possible" reason to be a constructed card that justifies a rare slot.
All Out War -
Enchantment (R)
Creatures attack and block each turn if able.
The "block" addition makes it worthy and pseudo removal, as long as you have the bigger creatures.
They still choose what blocks what, but at least they have to block.
Could be quite usefull with reds super aggressive creatures, or as a splash for some decks.
Most will still play Lightning Bolt over it all day, as its better to kill creatures or players for the mana.
But if this type of card wants a chance, it has to be as cheap as possible, and pushing this effect has pretty much no "danger value", it will not break formats or be banned for any reason.
Thoughtcap -
Artifact (U)
If another player looks at your hand, you may look at his or her hand.
: Scry 1.
The tap ability is pretty good, while the "peek me i peek you" is really random, as it matters pretty much never (unless they use discard).
Maybe it makes sence if you add something extra on it to the peek thing, as your card is, the card feels like its ment to have the tap ability, and uses random amounts of text to fill it up.
Thoughtcap -
Artifact (U)
Whenever another player looks at your hand, you may look at his or her hand.
Whenever you look at an opponents hand, draw a card.
Something along that line, which allows you to use discard on your own to draw cards (which most the time let you look at your opponents hand, if they do not reveal, which might need to be covered aswell).
It also fights discard, as it will trigger and let you draw a card.
This might justify 2 mana as a anti-discard and build around me artifact.
At least it gives the little effect a meaning thats beyound "0" mana.
I would say this card could easily be at Mana Leak level and cost 1U ; as you have a lot less controll over it compared ot Oppressive Will.
LateGame your opponent might simply have 1-2 cards in hand and the card is more or less worthless if they know that counter has a meaning.
Early game anything like ManaLeak is a hard counter, so +3 is enough to stop pretty much anything.
So compared to Oppressive Will, we have a card we have less controll over, it "can" cost 1U, as its comparable to Mana Leak ; but any conditional counter at 1U is something constructed takes a deeper look at, while the 2U counters pretty much suck right from the start, unless they offer some "cantrip" option or something else "extra".
And i so loved the design of the "wishes" ; they added so much to magic its incredible.
All the formats changed with the possibility of a wish ; they gave the game a new dimension in the sideboard and even gave you an option if your key combo card got exiled.
If exiled means its gone, it simply sucks to be a combo deck, you should at least have a way to get it back, at least a little bit of "hope".
Exile as it stands has so much interaction its fine, many mechanics use the exile allready, suspend for example is a good example, cards really come from another "existence" back in our world.
An exile mechanic could easily use "spirits" and other worldy beings like Elements that pop out of the Aether, why not ?
From a design point that could easily make sence if a set has "delve" and other mechanics that give an easy way to exile cards.
Whats correct is the question if thats necessary ; do you really need the exile for that mechanics ? Can you do it with graveyard ?
If the exile is just used as "another" graveyard, i totally agree, than avoid it, use the graveyard if its just a graveyard mechanic.
BUT cards that interact with the exile are important, just for the feeling i had when they printed the wishes, it gives you at least a little bit of options to interact with the exile, and if their is something magic needs, its "possiblities" to do allmost anything (at least somehow with some special cards).
No rule should say "This CANT be done." it should simply be "It can be done, just not often and/or not easily."
Well, i am one that drives to give cards a kick for constructed, rather than making the design in a way its totally out of question.
The scalability is something that touches my inner "Jonny", i want to abuse it, and i want to find a way to make it worth it bucks.
If the design restricts me on exactly 1 creature, it loses all this appeal, it becomes a Timmy card, no jonny appeal.
Sure, some dredge deck might "consider" it to go all out and pull giant amounts of mana for a singel spell, but its not that dredge does not work without it, and what kind of card do you fuel with all the mana in a dredge deck ?
Dredge as it stands does not need mana at all, or just 1 a max of 2 to work, adding this card gives it a new dimension, the dimension of a lot of mana, something it did not have before.
And thats a good thing, in my Jonny view.
Normal constructed will not be able to make it broken, as you said, activating it turn 2 is allmost impossible (at least very unlikely), and if you draw it very late, it might be a one shot super mana fuel to fire your black Drain Life ; feels a lot better for me than a Mana Elf (which sucks so hard late game it allmost hurts).
Were i give you credit is the thing to make it more expensive.
As a 1B 2/1 it might work better in Limited, maybe even makes it too good, for a classic 2 drop (as black has not really strong 2 drops "normally" that have a nice ability in limited).
For example, i had a Innistrad mechanic in mind similiar to the blue zombies, it simply was way stronger:
Patchwork Zombie 3B
Creature - Zombie
Patchwork - You may exile two creature cards in your graveyard instead of paying this cards manacost.
4/2
So if you can mill yourself you cast this card by exiling stuff, more or less a thing Ichorid did, as a mechanic for more cards.
Delve is more or less similiar, but a weaker form, using the graveyard as an actual mana resource.
So final comment:
Zombie Ingester :1mana::symb:
Creature- Zombie (C)
, exile a Zombie card in your graveyard: Add to your mana pool.
1/1
As a 1/1 it seems like a card i could easily see in allmost every set, black can get this mana creature.
Make it 2/1 and it becomes a pretty good 2 drop in Limited, as with or without the mana ability, its s 2/1 for 2, allready playable.
Focus on this card is the mana ability, and as black is not really the "mana color" anymore (for rituals its red, for permanent its green), it should not have a very efficient mana guy (at least at common).
Make it uncommon and the possibility to further upgrade the effect exists.
My guy with "any number" could even be a rare as its somehow camparable to Crypt of Agadeem.
Counter Singularity U
Instant
Counter target legendary oder planeswalker spell.
Seems a lot more likely than the original card.
The point is to evaluate how likely a restriction is.
If its a very hard restriction, the spell can easily cost a singel blue and becomes a "metaGame" counterspell.
Spellsnare is a very good example, it has a very hard restriction to only hit converted 2 cost cards, but if the metagame has a lot of them, it becomes a extremly good counter.
Spellpierce and Flusterstorm show similiar stuff to give very good 1 mana counters ; but have an extrem MetaGame character.
They either work very good, or they fail epical.
A 3 mana counter rarely matters, unless its a hard counter, and even that makes it pretty bad in nearly every constructed format.
Stupid restrictions like this:
Animal Counter 2U
Instant
Counter target non-tribal spell.
Is pointless, especially as they decided to not print tribal anymore, so the amount of cards this does not hit is so small, its not a real restriction at all and totally makes the design stupid.
Something similiar is that:
BigCounter 2U
Instant
Counter target spell with converted manacost 10 or less.
That restriction is so meaningless, the card is just cancel with way too much text.
Sure, they might cast a super expensive card in 1 game out of 1000 that you can not hit, but the restriction feels wasted and pointless.
Like most designers tell you as a tip:
"Just because it CAN be done, does not mean it has to be done."
Theres a lot combos with Grave Crawler that are easier to pull off and still suck.
Zombie Ingester
Creature - Zombie
:symtap:, Sacrifice a Zombie: Add to your mana pool.
1/1
Pretty much allways the mana comes with a brutal cost, its a one shot effect ala Blood Pet in nearly all the time ; just worse with the tap addition.
Maybe it works better if it generates mana for zombies and requires a sacrifice for universal black mana.
Ala this:
Zombie Ingester
Creature - Zombie
:symtap:: Add to your manapool. Use this mana only to cast Zombies spells.
Sacrifice a Zombie: Add to your mana pool.
1/1
Upgraded Blood Pet for zombie tribal and actual a card that "might" be viable to produce constructed worthy Grave Crawler combos (still requires 3+ cards to work, but at least thats something to do with it).
Taking the blue idea of zombies, to remove them from the grave and build zombies from that parts it could also be:
Zombie Ingester
Creature - Zombie
:symtap:: Exile any number of creature cards from your graveyard and add that much black mana to your manapool.
1/1
Might help to quickly get the mana for expensive (or multiple) zombies, and works outside of zombie tribal for limited (so its not just Blood Pet).
Planeswalker - Sarkhan
+2: Draw two cards and discard two cards at random from your hand.
0: Exile any number of cards from your graveyard. ~ deals X damage to target creature, where X is the number of cards exiled this way.
-8: Put a red 5/5 dragon onto the battlefield for each card you have less in your hand than an opponent.
<2>
Especially a cheap planeswalker should not be too crazy, and its a good idea to "reference" existing cards with the planeswalkers abilities, it gives them a feeling that the planeswalker actual "casts" a spell.
Draw 2 and random discard 2 is allready a potent ability, as you can cycle your late game lands for fresh card, and early, you simply fuel your graveyard and get some interactions ala flashback, unearth and all that.
The first ability alone even with +2/-2 will be very strong for any red deck, be it burn, ramp or a combo deck.
The 0 ability references Harvest Pyre, a nice card that works good with the +2 ability, as it uses the "graveyard fuel" and works pretty good on this planeswalker and red in general. To get a cross compare, Liliana has Cruel Edict as 1B, and this is Harvest Pyre at 1R, which nicely maps the 1CC cost of the two planeswalkers.
The random discard and deal that much damage might be "fair" most the time, with most decks, but it has a very evil potential to be a totally blowout with expensive stuff, and that is something a 1RR card should not do, it adds to much to a "random effect" , and if a game is simply won because a little random card was 10+ converted mana, that just sucks and makes for very annoying magic stories.
For the ultimate its prefered to make it cost enough that it represents a "goal", something very awesome to work for. Rarely its a good idea to have the ultimate ready right from the start.
Also its questionable to use X/X dragons, as dragons are pretty much at a standard size of 4/4 and 5/5, especially the tokens.
To fix all that ultimate stuff, i would aim for a more expensive more "awesome" ability, it should just feel crazy and let you work for it (the nice extra here is that your opponent can work against it, and has time to prepare for it, even if you do not use it, it will effect how your opponent plays, just because you "could" use it).
In the end planeswalkers are difficult to make, they are "deep" cards with many pitholes in design.
Extinguishing Dreams :symr::symr:
Instant
Deal 3 damage to target creature. When that creature dies this turn, it deals damage to its controllers equal to its thoughness.
"Searching his entire life for a dragon worthy of his devotion, his quest ended earlier than he could ever dream."
Should fix the timing problem.
Dragonwisp
Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep put a Wisp counter on ~.
Dragons cost one mana of any color less to cast for each Wisp counter on ~.
:symr::symr:: Put a Wisp counter on ~.
Well, its pretty slow and the "double" kinda makes it worse, as you can not use the ability right away (it has 0), using it a turn later uses up your mana, which just feels bad.
The cost reduction should be more awesome, simply because we have a lot of multicolored dragons, if a red deck is able to play them (casual anyway), then why not.
Overall much stronger than your initial card, but i think a extrem casual deck, like the "dragon tribal" could easily get such a fuel card, especially as an effect on constructed is quite unlikely (unless theres some Dragonstorm one).
I mean if it wants to make sence, the card MUST be uncommon.
Otherwise its the type of rare that is just crap, simply because its rare, nothing else.
The card being uncummon makes it a totally valid "and strong" card in Limited.
Its not busted at all, its just pretty good in combat, which nearly every Knight is.
So unless its a stupid OP card like mirran Crusader, make the Knight uncummon as it deserves to be.
Ability Knight would work aswell:
Traitorous Knight :symw::symw:
Creature - Human Knight {R}
First Strike
:symb:: ~ gains deathtouch until end of turn.
:symb:: ~ gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
2/2
Feels more "Rare" to me, if you need this type of card, to combine a bunch of black abilities on a Knight, has more constructed potential aswell.
The vanilla "first strike + deahttouch" should be made on uncummon if at all, as its something that only really shines in limited, give it a rare and its just a side-kick ability.
Glissa, the Traitor has the ability combination and is 3/3 even with another upside ability. Being Legend is not a giant drawback, more flavour for the set.
Giving a card legend just as a drawback, or reason to make it stronger is a bad thing anyway. In this view, Glissa could easily be a strong card without being a legend.
In constructed its a nice thing, but does matter WAY less than in Limited, simply because we have enough removal and flying will ignore it anyway.
As a color combination deathtouch is present in black/green, really not white.
White is not the color to use "deathtouch", its more lifelink.
So with all that see your cards:
Traitorous Knight :1mana::symw::symb:
Creature - Zombie Human Knight {R}
First Strike, Death Touch
3/3
Seems pretty brutal in Limited, but thats it.
In Constructed its nearly a vanilla 3/3 for 3 mana, not much that makes this card stand out, compared to all the 3 mana "awesome" rares we get currently (Geist of Saint Traft stands out, aswell as the Crusader with the stupid double strike upgrade).
Knight of Ying and Yang (W/B)(W/B)
Creature - Human, Knight
First Strike, Deathtouch
2/2
Could easily work, as its brutal in Limited, but not as crazy as a "protection" against your color.
On attack its more or less "unblockable" most the time, but pretty good on defence.
Traitorous Crusader :1mana::symw::symb:
Creature - Zombie Human Knight {R}
Double Strike, Death Touch
2/2
For Mirran Crusader they might have thought "infect is like 2 times the damage, so give it double strike" , but in fact its way stronger, simply because it triggers Swords 2 times and all that evil interactions that make it busted.
I do not think we will get so strong double strikers soon, the Mirran Crusader is at a level were a format can warp around it, or lose right away as you have no answer (which was true for the Paladin against red/black aswell, it requires very specific answers or it beats you single handily and such cards are not very much fun).
Land (C)
:1mana:, , Sacrifice Chromatic Star Land: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool.
When Chromatic Star Land is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, draw a card.
Biggest problem is that it does not produce mana itself, as a one shot its way better to be chromatic star instead of a land drop.
Easiest thing is to give it at least a colorless mana ability, as said its pretty much a one shot Shimmering Grotto, and so it should be made.
Chromatic Star Land
Land (C)
: Add to your manapool.
:1mana:, , Sacrifice ~: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool.
When ~ is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, draw a card.
As a rare, i could see this getting upgraded a lot, cycling all your lands in the long run:
Chromatic Star Land
Land (R)
: Add to your manapool.
:1mana:, , Sacrifice a land: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool. Draw a card. Activate this ability only any time you could cast an instant.
*Instant speed activation should fix the rare problems with it being a mana ability with draw.
Very strong land thats for sure, even if its just for cycling your late game lands for fresh cards.
Reallocate - :3mana::symu:
Instant (U)
Copy and counter target instant or sorcery spell. You may choose new targets for the copy.
Wording seems kinda strange, i would aim for this:
Reallocate - :3mana::symu:
Instant (U)
Counter target instant or sorcery spell. If you do, copy that spell and you may choose new targets for the copy.
Requires to counter the spell, in the rare cases that matters (can't be countered stuff).
But overall it seems fair, if the set has any reason to make it not simply misdirection.
Venser's Provision - :1mana::symu:
Instant (C)
Return target artifact, enchantment, or spell to its owner's hand.
Fair mix of abilities. Worse than Remand as it does not cantrip but in Limited i could see reasons to play this card and get away with an advantage most the time (especially if the set has some equipments / auras / even with the normal Pacifismn like cards it becomes an awesome little trick).
Something that made me think about the card is this one:
Venser's Provision - W
Instant (C)
Return target artifact or enchantment card from anywhere to its owner's hand.
This will "counter" artifacts or enchantments, bounce them and even return them from your graveyard or anywhere, even exile, as long as you can target them (so not library, at least i think that does not work, even if you see the card in the library with Future Sight for example).
But the venser like "remand" effect is an ability i could see way more often, at least it is not as annoying as a hard counter, and can be cheaper (could easily be called spellbounce).
Important is that "at least" each player can do it at the same time.
The most horrible red "chaos" effect is one that can require 10+ minutes to resolve, and thats no fun (i look at you Scrambleverse ).
If its somehow possible, choose the option that plays quick, if it takes like 30 seconds, its allready quite long, but at least the game continues before someone leaves bored.
The design would use a "choose one" wording, as its otherwise not easy to track what the "if you don't" means, just the sentence before ? all of it ?
Could be easier like that:
Let me think about it... 2U
Instant (u)
Choose one - Counter target non-instant spell without Flash. Or look at the top 3 cards of your library. scry 2, then draw a card.
This way you can at least play the "non-counter" version without the need of a spell to target for the option you do not choose anyway.
Whats strange is the "top 3, scy 2, draw 1" thing ; while cute, its strange, as scry 2 allready has a look at the cards, playing this card is kinda annoying.
You pick the top 3 cards, put them back, WITHOUT changing them (if you change them, its judge time).
Then you scry 2, which means look at the top 2 again, were you allready have done that, put them back (or bottom) then draw 1, either the one you looked at before, or one of the others.
Kinda strange it feels overly complicated, and the easy version would simply be "scry 3. Draw a card." even if its not the same, its nearly and extremly easier to use.
Let me think about it... 2U
Instant (u)
Choose one - Counter target non-instant spell without Flash. Or scry 3 and draw a card.
Yea, except the color.
Vindicate is also clearly better than most black removal (Dark Banishing and the like).
So multicolor is the "downside" ; even if you hardly can count that in constructed view (with all fetchlands and duals its nearly easier to cast than a CC card).
However, in Limited for example, the cost is a lot "downside" compared to Remove Soul ; UG forces you to play both colors and its a lot more unlikely to have them turn 2.
So while true, 1UG can easily be a "fair bet" cost, while it does not seem unlikely to push it to UG.
Just to get a idea.
Path to exile could easily cost 4W and still be "viable" and totally fair in Limited, white does not have much removal in that direct form, making it just a singel white is a extrem move, but doing that totally changes the view on white removal for the future.
Negate for example is much better than Remove Soul, even if they cost the same, the potential cards you hit with Negate is bigger, especially with Planeswalkers in the mix.
Dispel hits just a singel card type, and costs just "U" , this gets me to the point that i question if Remove Soul could not cost "U" aswell.
*Yes its correct, creatures are a much bigger amount of cards, which is the reason for the initial difference between
- Remove Soul (1 card type)
- Negate (artifact, enchantment, planeswalker, instant, sorcery).
Its just a feeling in the end, with that stuff in mind that makes me think "UG" could be a cost to go (especially with Spellshutter Sprite in mind, which is also a potential 2 mana creature with a conditional counter on it).
Difficult to judge i think.
The drawback can be quite big if your opponent is not playing creatures you won't be able to play it at all (unless your have another creature to counter by your own).
Thats especially something as the Ambush Viper is easy to play in combat, when the opponent attacks, they play creatures after combat anyway (normally, not doing so is bad).
So in worst, you wont play it at all, as its best you get a 2:1 trade out of it.
The card as it stands is more pushed for constructed, as it should be a Mystic Snake version.
And for compare it depends from what direction you come from.
Mystic Snake is 1GUU => Counterspell + Grizzly Bear
Ambush Viper is 1G => 2/1 deathtouch flash
Remove Soul is 1U => counter creature spell
This is UG => counter creature spell + ambush viper
But the in my view important part is that Remove Soul is not just upside, it has parts of a drawback aswell in the way its done on the card.
If it would be a EtB it would be a 100% upside, and the card would need to cost at least 1 colorless more (but less than 1GUU, or its just worse than Mystic Snake, while the snake is not crazy strong aswell).
So yes, its a safe bet to make the card for up to 1UG , but i am not sure if thats required (as i do not see blue splash green just to play this Remove Soul).