We have updated our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Dismiss
 
Treasure Cruisin' with Mayael the Anima
 
The Magic Market Index for July 21st, 2017
 
Theros: Elspeth's Tragedy
  • 0

    posted a message on JULY 26TH, 2017
    netn10, JamBlock

    Hibernating Treefolk 2G
    Creature - Treefolk (U)
    If a spell or effect would have you search your library for a forest, you may search for this card instead.
    2/3
    Posted in: Custom Card Contests and Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Refining Evergreen Keywords
    Quote from Watchwolf »
    And I still see no reason that warrents a higher mana cost. Can you explain why a 1-drop Expendable 1/1 would be too cheap?

    Sure.
    1. Generally speaking, "cantrip" costs 2. You might argue that expendable doesn't draw you a card normally, but sacrifice outlets exist, so you can't discount "draw a card" on demand. You could argue it should cost 1 in blue or black.... and given the precedents I discuss next, that might not be unfair.

    2. Precedents:
    Alchemist's Apprentice
    Elvish Visionary
    Jeskai Sage*
    Palace Familiar/Surveilling Sprite*
    Oculus (functionally worse than previous few)

    So what you want to do is print a functionally better Oculus, reducing the cost by 1. So the question is this: Is flying and/or Prowess worth 1 on a blue creature, or is it the "draw a card when it does" that's adding the 2.

    Flying Men was, sadly, outdated around the time they started power creeping creatures; so the 1/1 flying costs less than U for Palace Familiar and Surveilling Sprite, leaving 1 to cover the card draw upon death.
    There is no 1/1 (or 1/2) prowess for U; maybe you think this is an oversight. But I'd ask you to compare Jeskai Sage with Jeskai Elder; 1/3s with the latter ability often cost 2U, so I can only assume that prowess costs next to nothing on Jeskai Elder. So if Jeskai Elder is a fair card; I think a 1/2 for U prowess is more than fair; and thus - again - we're talking over +1 for "When this dies, draw a card."

    In light of this, I see two avenues of response:

    1. Existing cards are not representative of what is "fair" for the mechanic at present; they're limited filler cards not meant to represent what the color can get in constructed; perhaps in limited for that environment it would have been too powerful... or perhaps someone said "Let's stop testing and have a beer; at 2 mana these are safe."
    2. Existing cards represent what WOTC thinks is fair for the mechanic at present; but (A) with some minor changes to the environment, it's fair to cost this less, or (B) it's fair to cost this less now, Wizards is just wrong on this.

    And two responses to these potential criticisms:
    1R. Elvish Visionary is a pretty great creature. Oculus is not. Perhaps Blue should get a colorshifted Elvish Visionary.... but I don't know. Green is good at creatures and 2nd best at card draw. Blue is worst at creatures and best at card draw. A blue Elvish Visionary is far better than a green one. I could see an argument that the blue one could be printed minus a good creature type... fair enough.
    But what we're talking about is not that; we're talking about taking flying away from Palace Familiar and removing 1 from the cost. Let's be clear here - this is blue getting a 1 drop that can trade with upwards of 50% of the 1 and 2 drops ever printed, and then draw you a card. This strikes me as clearly overpowered.

    Maybe we should be talking a 0/1. Is that okay? I'm inclined to say "no" for combo reasons; but I don't want to look up the combo pieces that would break this. This reply is too long as is; but I suspect making the "draw a card when dies" guys cost 2 is not an accident of design.

    2AR. I can't think of small changes that would allow you to print a 1/1 morbid cantrip. You'd need to negate the harm of giving the worst creature color a way to trade with ~50% of the 1+2 drops in any given format - AND THEN DRAWING A CARD. The only change I could see is a proliferation of Incinerate-variants that would stifle the card draw.

    2BR. I just come back to the thought that this trade with so many creatures. But who cares? You don't care when you wrath it away, you pretty much are happy to just block any old fattie, let alone something you can actually trade with, just to get the card. And in a deck that get bonuses for sacrificing creatures? Yikes!

    I think that you're relying on the difference between "when this ETB, draw" and "when this dies, draw" to explain why you can cost it so little. I urge you to think of them as the same mechanic (let's not even talk about your anti-counter draw... that's adding power to power that I can't deal with right now) and judge how much you'd cost that ability. Precedent says adding "Draw a card" adds 2 to the cost. GU get a discount on this, but not that much of a discount.

    Final thought: I'm not saying all mechanics have to cost the same. But my suggestion would be to make Expendable keyword the Urza's Legacy "In play cycling" activated ability, and treat it like cycling - something people want to come back, and something you can play with every few years. But not evergreen.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on Red Pseudo Tutor
    Convention has your graveyard be one stack.

    In any case, existing cards let you exile cards and play each of those cards UEOT. Your card is too undercosted; search gatherer for precedent.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on Refining Evergreen Keywords
    Quote from Watchwolf »

    Expendable (When this is countered or destroyed, you may draw a card.)

    This adds another dimension to the ability, allowing players go get value from it even around a coutnerspell, which allows the ability to be much more useful on bigger/higher-rarity cards than the previous version. I did change the "dies" to "is destroyed," as that will keep it from being abused by sacrifice effects. This should hopefully bring the cost down a bit. Although, even in my previous suggestion, I think it would be perfectly fine on a 1-mana 1/1. I mean, if a 2-mana 1/1 with a little extra can have this ability (Jeskai Sage, Palace Familiar, Surveilling Sprite, Feral Prowler), I see no reason a Fugitive Wizard couldn't.

    Also, just to add a little support to the idea that this ability can easily be moved to black, I just found out that Infernal Scarring exists. Just in case there was any doubt.

    You might as well just say:
    Expendable V3 (When this is countered, discarded or destroyed, you may draw a card.)

    Again, this simply costs too much for the ability.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on Does Ahn-Crop Crasher mean Hill Giant should cost 2R now? [Vanilla Power Rankings reconsidered]
    I don't think it'd be creature creep, though, but merely giving us what one can get for the cost.

    And we've had red (and black) 3/3s for 2C with drawbacks for a while.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on Red Pseudo Tutor
    How am I keeping track of these sets of 5 in my graveyard? In any case, this is broken if you get your pick of 5 cards; let alone 2 picks of 10.

    I like your "repeat this for each opponent" as a mechanic though.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on Evergreen Bingo : The Thread about filling in evergreen creature keywords like some kind of madman.
    Update:
    Inspired by Watchwolf's thread
    http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/creativity/custom-card-creation/780473-refining-evergreen-keywords

    Here are a few new UB keywords:

    [b]Mislead[/b] v 1 (Whenever this creature attacks, another target attacking creature cannot be blocked this turn[b] unless this creature has been blocked.[/b])

    [b]Mislead[/b] v 2 (Whenever this creature attacks, another target attacking creature cannot be blocked this turn.[/b])
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on Refining Evergreen Keywords
    I made a thread about this a little while ago:
    http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/creativity/custom-card-creation/779331-evergreen-bingo-the-thread-about-filling-in

    Notably, here's a list of keywords we talked about adding:
    Quote from entombedhydra »

    My favorites, as of now:
    UB [b]Blackmail[/b] (Whenever this creature deals damage to an opponent, that player reveals that many cards from his or her hand. Choose one of those cards. That player discards that card.)
    UB [b]Ransom[/b] (Whenever this creature deals damage to an opponent, that player may discard a card at random. If he or she doesn't, uou draw a card.)
    UG [b]Curiosity[/b] (Whenever this creature deals damage to an opponent, you may draw a card.)
    UR [b]About Face[/b] (When this creature blocks or is blocked, you may switch its power and toughness until end of turn. If you do, until end of turn effects that change its power change its toughness instead, and vice versa.) [Note: Adopting this would allow us to move Prowess back to it's enemy wedge).
    [b]WGB (or WB) [/b] (You may play this creature card in your graveyard as though it was in your hand.) [Note: Regeneration-analog/replacement]
    WU ~ Some Blink Mechanic ~; example: [b]Elusive[/b] (Whenever this is the target of a spell or effect,
    you may exile this permanent. If you do, return it to the battlefield at the end of turn.)

    UR ~ Some copy mechanic; example: [b]Fork[/b] (Whenever this permanent becomes the target of a spell, you may copy it. You may choose new targets for the copy.
    G? (One of the enemy wedges?) Stalk (This creature can't be blocked by more than one creature)


    As for your UB options:

    Expendable (When this creature dies, draw a card.) - This is going to need to cost base 2. That makes it cost far more than every other existing evergreen keywords. I've seen variants where it's an activated ability that costs 2 (IE, Keywording Urza's Destiny's in-play-cycling/Brass Secretary-ability), but that works so different from existing keywords it's not going to click.

    Re: Stealth (This creature can't be blocked unless all other attacking creatures you control are also blocked.)

    Interesting. It doesn't feel like "Stealth" though. It encourages you to attack with all your creatures, so it feels RW.

    Re: Misdirect (Whenever this creature attacks, target other attacking creature must be blocked this turn if able.)

    Cool name. But this feels G (and the name doesn't fit what you want).

    Here's what I'd suggest along these lines:

    [b]Mislead[/b] v 1 (Whenever this creature attacks, another target attacking creature cannot be blocked this turn[b] unless this creature has been blocked.[/b])

    [b]Mislead[/b] v 2 (Whenever this creature attacks, another target attacking creature cannot be blocked this turn.[/b])

    Either of these would be interesting, but I think they'd play differently from other keywords. So... maybe?

    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on JULY 25TH, 2017
    JamBlock, netn10

    Parallel Natures 3G
    Enchantment (R)
    Whenever you play a non-basic land from your hand, you may reveal the top card of your library until you reveal a basic land card. If you do, put that card onto the battlefield tapped and the rest on the bottom of your library in a random order.
    Posted in: Custom Card Contests and Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Does Ahn-Crop Crasher mean Hill Giant should cost 2R now? [Vanilla Power Rankings reconsidered]
    Yes, we've had 3/3s w/ effects for 1RR for a while.

    I wonder if a red 3/3 for 2R could be printed at common; I think my theoretical red uncommon slot is filling up quite quickly. M2015 has 14 red uncommons; M2014 has 9. I'm going to assume we want about 10, which means:
    1. Lighting Bolt
    2. Red Savannah Lions
    3. Red vampire nighthawk counterpart minotaur
    4. 3/3 for 2R
    5. Vulshock Sorcerer
    6. Shiv's Embrace maybe?
    7. Demolish-variant?
    8. Pyroclasm?
    9. Anarchist
    10. Sudden Impact-variant?
    11. Viashino Sandstalker-variant?
    12. Lightning Axe?
    13. 4/4 for 3R?
    14. Some efficient haste creature?

    When I look at this list, I'd love to move the 3/3 to common, maybe the Viashino Sandstalker-variant, Demolish-variant, and possibly lightning bolt if testing allows it. I could see cutting Shiv's Embrace and Lightning Axe... especially the latter, as it's kind of clunky for a core set.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 1

    posted a message on Does Ahn-Crop Crasher mean Hill Giant should cost 2R now? [Vanilla Power Rankings reconsidered]
    Ahn-Crop Crasher is pretty good. We could talk about it's exert cost, but even a 3/2 haste creature for [cost] feels comparable to a vanilla 3/3 for the same [cost].

    Ahn-Crop Crasher costs 2R; in light of this I think we need to evaluate what colors get what as the "top" of their vanilla:

    R 2/1 (with slight? upside)
    1R 2/2 (with slight upside)
    2R 3/3
    3R 4/4?h4R 5/5

    I think these are quite relevant. With these in mind, I could see a core set printing the following vanilla creatures:

    Firecat Hunter R
    Creature - Elemental Cat (U)
    2/1
    Notes:
    1. See Falkenrath Gorger for baseline; and no - please don't tell me it's rarity allows it to break vanilla->cost casting.
    2. I want this to have a semi-relevant creature type; goblin is too good I think, and vampire would be functionally worse than an existing card. I settled for Elemental Cat here - iconic, fun, flavorful.
    3. Iconic - With good art, this feels like it can be iconic. It's the sort of card that might see some play in constructed, and feels real good in the hands of new players.

    Starstruck Unicorn W
    Creature - Unicorn (U)
    2/2

    Note:
    1. Hound of Konda, oh how power creep has abused you. Dryad Militant obsoletes Elite Vanguard, so we're left with giving the 2nd to worst p/t ratio to mana cost color (red) the best weenie in the format, or printing Elite Vanguard a mirror of it in a color that is far better at creatures. Neither is to my liking, so I'm just going to obsolete here.
    2. However, I don't want to make it a solider for fear it would be ridiculous(er) with soldier lords, of which I think a core set would have. Let someone have to make the same choice we did between Savannah Lion and a good soldier 1 drop w/o 2 power (Pre- Elite Vanguard) for their solider decks.
    3. Iconic - Again, a 2/2 for 1 mana is going to feel somewhat iconic. I've gone with Unicron here, but if we want to make out iconic common unicorn a 2/2 Lifelinker for 1W (or something), we'd need to find another iconic creature type here; something we're not ashamed of when it shows up in high level play on occasion.

    Fledgling Treefolk G
    Creature - Treefolk (C)
    1/3

    Notes:
    1. I think something has to stand in the face of 2/1s and 2/2s for 1, and this serves that role at a good rarity in green.
    2. In limited, it's often not a good idea to run a 1 drop. However, this 1 drop is effectively comparable to a D 2 drop, and that might make it playable on it's own???
    3. I don't know if this feels iconic, but it wouldn't hurt to give it some cute art. Tribal treefolk wouldn't mind a 2nd one drop all else being equal.

    Goblin Standard 1R
    Creature - Goblin Warrior (C)
    2/2

    Note: I went there; Harsh Mentor really makes vanilla 2/2s for 1R feel bad, but Goblin and Warrior are two iconic creature types that matter for the game. If anything can make a vanilla 2/2 for 1R worth your consideration, it' being a goblin... assuming your lord grants haste that is.

    Magenta Ogre 2R
    Creature - Ogre Berserker (U)
    3/3

    Note:
    1. I'm still not happy with 3/3s for 2R at common.
    2. Giving it a rarely used creature types helps; it can be playable in some ogre tribal decks, and thus it's not complete garbage after a draft. This is why it's worth talking about vanillas - you want them in your game for draft and for teaching new players; but they're rarely going to have a chance in constructed. Small design changes like this can help.
    3. Considered making this a minotaur, but I think that benchmark vanillas and french should be in core sets, and I think the core set needs a Hurloon Minotaur homage in the form of a red vampire nighthawk - some combination of First Strike, Menace, Haste, and Trample would work. Obviously I'd be for leaving off trample, but that feels efficient enough that we need to test it.

    Mountain Giant 3R
    Creature - Giant Warrior (U)
    4/4

    Notes:
    1. And here we get to the point where I'm sure lots of you will say I'm pushing it too far; to which I reply Emberhorn Minotaur. I'm sorry, but a 4/3 that can be a 5/4 evasive creature is pretty darned good (at least for limited).
    2. Made it uncommon,
    3. Now I'm not going to tell you that Mountain Giant will see constructed play... at least not without some muraganda petroglyphs-style support, or some odd tribal synergies. But in terms of showing people the benchmarks, I think this is where it's at.

    With this set of red vanillas, we get 4 iconic fantasy creature types - Elemental, Goblin, Ogre, and Giant. The big problem is that I set 3 of them at uncommon. Given Red's fantastic creature commons in the way of speciality goblins, firebreathing lizards, and the like - I don't see this as a problem.
    Also, I think Red's got a lot to think about for french vanillas; a 3/3 with menace or haste or even trample could make sense at common at 3R, and it wouldn't be a bad idea to have a 2/1 first strike, haste for 2R. Also, maybe Regathan Firecat or a few other asymmetrical p/t vanillas in the color. It's certainly the color for high P, low T vanillas, with blue being the opposite.

    I suspect many of Green, white, and even blue's set of vanilla benchmarks would be at common, which should have the desired effect of making draft play .easier. Red's spells are also notoriously more straightforward than the other colors; what with smelt, lightning bolt, etc. running around.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on One Rare + Three Mythics
    If that's your intent, fair enough. It feels... janky to me; as if the rules and the flavor are disconnected. But that's probably unavoidable with anything that distinguishes between basic lands and basic land types. Hence why I wanted it to grant both (besides, "pastures" are certainly plains, right?), so that it would work with both.

    End of the day, I think Cultivate's probably the measure we need to evaluate this by, not any of the fetchlands. Besides letting you get 2 Urzatron pieces in one go, it could also play a better Hour of Promise combo - Dark Depths + Vesuva/Thespian's Stage on turn 4.

    This is probably why putting it on a creature is better. In addition to making it "not crap" in limited, it also gives your opponent a way to halt the combo by shocking in response.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on One Rare + Three Mythics
    As worded, it works with Evolving Wilds. A fair creature with ability would turn evolving Wilds into a great tutor card. I don't know if I like denying X or Y basic land type fetches from having the same potential.

    Right now, Rampant Growth works, but Farseek doesn't. I don't know if I'm okay with that.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 1

    posted a message on One Rare + Three Mythics
    What if Greener Pastures was on a creature?

    Magus of the Pastures 1G
    Creature - Human Monk (R)
    Land cards you own that aren't on the battlefield are basic plains.
    2/2

    That'd be pretty interesting, no?

    As for costing it; the ability to fetchland (assuming it also gives a basic land type, hint hint) any unbasic land with a fetchland is pretty good. As is, it works with Evolving Wilds, and that's pretty useful. The one worry is that it allows you to get 2-land combos in modern relatively easily, but HOD's land tutor does this, too.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on Salvation's SCCT/OCaaT - Single Card Ideas By YOU!
    1. What is a "Gravespawn"? Is it a zombie?
    2. I'm not sure if I like the gamble of the +1; but it's unique.
    3. -2 seems... good and yet bad? Against aggro, it's a fair removal spell. But I don't know.
    4. Not a fan of the name.

    That said, I don't see any reason why it can't be printed with a few tweaks. Nice job.

    Hibernating Treefolk 2G
    Creature - Treefolk (U)
    If a spell or effect would have you search your library for a forest, you may search for this card instead.
    2/3
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.