Chorus of BansheesXWU
Instant
Create X 1/1 white and blue Spirit creature tokens with flying and "Sacrifice this creature: Counter target spell unless its controller pays 1."
Currently the flavor is very Innistrad, but the design was actually intended for Ravnica. Suggestions for a more Ravnican name would be great.
I am pretty concerned that it's probably too powerful.
Distracted By Birds (Rare) xWU
Instant
Create X 1/1 white Bird creature tokens with flying.
Until end of turn, creatures with flying you control gain "Sacrifice this creature: Counter target spell unless it's controller pays 1."
Or have it create noncreature artifact tokens with the sac ability.
I think making a bunch of Judge's Familiars makes more sense than giving your fliers the ability to dive-bomb opposing spells.
Instant or sorcery spell just like judge familiar. Countering any spell mkes it like mini on demand mana leaks. You may even go one step further and just counter instants
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MtG is where you can hate white players or black players, and still not be racist.
An infinite mana engine will pretty much lock the game up and be an automatic win. Judge's Familiar doesn't have that problem because, well... it goes without explaining. What would prevent that from happening with this card?
An infinite mana engine will pretty much lock the game up and be an automatic win. Judge's Familiar doesn't have that problem because, well... it goes without explaining. What would prevent that from happening with this card?
I mean, most X spells do stupid things with infinite mana available, so being a win condition for an infinite combo isn't a very reliable benchmark. If X spells that can wipe out an entire EDH game or avoid countermagic in modern exist, then it only leaves standard and limited. If a standard infinite mana combo gets out of control, the mana sink probably isn't the main issue unless it also fills the role of another combo piece. I can only think of one infinite mana combo in a limited format (that I've played), so thinking about it in that format is a moot point.
These kinds of spells are better tuned to what they would do with finite mana and how they should be scaled. This kind of effect certainly isn't strong enough to merit xx, and having 3 colored mana symbols begs comparison with Sphinx's Revelation, so the card is balanced as-is.
An infinite mana engine will pretty much lock the game up and be an automatic win. Judge's Familiar doesn't have that problem because, well... it goes without explaining. What would prevent that from happening with this card?
I mean, most X spells do stupid things with infinite mana available, so being a win condition for an infinite combo isn't a very reliable benchmark. If X spells that can wipe out an entire EDH game or avoid countermagic in modern exist, then it only leaves standard and limited. If a standard infinite mana combo gets out of control, the mana sink probably isn't the main issue unless it also fills the role of another combo piece. I can only think of one infinite mana combo in a limited format (that I've played), so thinking about it in that format is a moot point.
These kinds of spells are better tuned to what they would do with finite mana and how they should be scaled. This kind of effect certainly isn't strong enough to merit xx, and having 3 colored mana symbols begs comparison with Sphinx's Revelation, so the card is balanced as-is.
I probably wasn't clear enough. "Infinite" was probably not the correct choice to use on my part.
A combo like say... Pili-Pala in Modern would require three cards to fire off, counting this one. Not unreasonable. And "fairness" in Legacy or Vintage is irrelevant. I would go for this in EDH though but hold that thought.
But in Standard or Limited, this strikes me as something against WotC apparently arbitrary "fun" formula that gets thrown around. That's why I asked what format this is intended for.
This card generates a chump blocker AND a counterspell. Hypothetically, enough tokens in play generates hard counters that aren't really counterable themselves if the owner controls more tokens than the opponent controls untapped lands. These tokens don't even tap as part of the cost making summoning sickness a non-factor in their use.
In other words, you potentially freeze out your opponent creating an "unfun" environment by whatever definition WotC uses this month.
For an X spell that generates X counterspells, I don't think tacking on "opponent may pay" is enough. There should be something just a tiny bit more. I think Forestguys suggestion to make it narrower might be enough.
Gheistwill InvocationxUW
Instant
Counter target spell with converted mana cost X. Then create X 1/1 white spirit creature tokens with flying. History always repeats. Sometimes with a vengeance.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Instant
Create X 1/1 white and blue Spirit creature tokens with flying and "Sacrifice this creature: Counter target spell unless its controller pays 1."
Currently the flavor is very Innistrad, but the design was actually intended for Ravnica. Suggestions for a more Ravnican name would be great.
I am pretty concerned that it's probably too powerful.
I think making a bunch of Judge's Familiars makes more sense than giving your fliers the ability to dive-bomb opposing spells.
An infinite mana engine will pretty much lock the game up and be an automatic win. Judge's Familiar doesn't have that problem because, well... it goes without explaining. What would prevent that from happening with this card?
I mean, most X spells do stupid things with infinite mana available, so being a win condition for an infinite combo isn't a very reliable benchmark. If X spells that can wipe out an entire EDH game or avoid countermagic in modern exist, then it only leaves standard and limited. If a standard infinite mana combo gets out of control, the mana sink probably isn't the main issue unless it also fills the role of another combo piece. I can only think of one infinite mana combo in a limited format (that I've played), so thinking about it in that format is a moot point.
These kinds of spells are better tuned to what they would do with finite mana and how they should be scaled. This kind of effect certainly isn't strong enough to merit xx, and having 3 colored mana symbols begs comparison with Sphinx's Revelation, so the card is balanced as-is.
I probably wasn't clear enough. "Infinite" was probably not the correct choice to use on my part.
A combo like say... Pili-Pala in Modern would require three cards to fire off, counting this one. Not unreasonable. And "fairness" in Legacy or Vintage is irrelevant. I would go for this in EDH though but hold that thought.
But in Standard or Limited, this strikes me as something against WotC apparently arbitrary "fun" formula that gets thrown around. That's why I asked what format this is intended for.
This card generates a chump blocker AND a counterspell. Hypothetically, enough tokens in play generates hard counters that aren't really counterable themselves if the owner controls more tokens than the opponent controls untapped lands. These tokens don't even tap as part of the cost making summoning sickness a non-factor in their use.
In other words, you potentially freeze out your opponent creating an "unfun" environment by whatever definition WotC uses this month.
For an X spell that generates X counterspells, I don't think tacking on "opponent may pay" is enough. There should be something just a tiny bit more. I think Forestguys suggestion to make it narrower might be enough.
Gheistwill Invocation xUW
Instant
Counter target spell with converted mana cost X. Then create X 1/1 white spirit creature tokens with flying.
History always repeats. Sometimes with a vengeance.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.