Kal Ido, Surface Antagonist1BG
Legendary Creature - Human Shaman
Whenever Kal attacks, mill four cards.
Rival (You can have two commanders if one has Rival. At the start of the game, your opponents vote for one. Put it on the bottom of your library forcibly.)
4/4
Cassamira, the Other Way1WW
Legendary Creature - Angel
Flying, Vigilance
At the beginning of your end step, if you gained 3 or more life this turn, draw a card.
Rival (You can have two commanders if one has Rival. At the start of the game, your opponents vote for one. Put it on the bottom of your library forcibly.)
3/3
Vrel, the ContrarianU
Legendary Creature - Human Wizard
Whenever Vel attacks, scry 1. 1: Look at the top card of your library. You can cast that card if it targets a spell. It costs 1 less.
Rival (You can have two commanders if one has Rival. At the start of the game, your opponents vote for one. Put it on the bottom of your library forcibly.)
1/2
Some very strong commanders, that become even stronger because you have a second commander! The only problem is, they are a bit jealous, and won't play nice with the other. So it's either them, or the other guy, opponent's choice. Whoever leaves, they are still your second commander, so if you go through hoops, you can get that sweet Partnership going.
I use a new word, 'forcibly' to indicate this card movement can't be replaced. (Otherwise, you'd just ignore the ability via the Commander Zone replacement effect.)
I honestly think the entire Partner gig was a poor implementation. It's tacky, and it looks bad, and it restricts the potential of the entire game abroad. They should have just made an errata ruling that says "You have two commanders, but the lower one is your default, and the higher cmc one costs 2 more to play by default. If they are tied, the first one you cast becomes your default and the other takes this place.
I honestly think the entire Partner gig was a poor implementation. It's tacky, and it looks bad, and it restricts the potential of the entire game abroad. They should have just made an errata ruling that says "You have two commanders, but the lower one is your default, and the higher cmc one costs 2 more to play by default. If they are tied, the first one you cast becomes your default and the other takes this place.
The same would be said for this Rival gig.
I mean, that's your opinion. Although there has been some overpowered partners and people have looked down on it, I do think it is an interesting way to add to the options of playing commander. I would never say that it limits or restricts the game.
As for the ability... I mean... okay. It's fine but I'm not sure I'm in love with it.
"Forcibly" isn't necessary. A start of the game ability isn't going to be interfered unless you intentionally design a separate start of the game ability to do so.
Is your intent with the ability that it must pair with another Rival? Or with any other legendary creature? If the latter, this is going to be a hugely difficult ability to balance cards around, though the former still would be a challenge.
If you have two opponents and one votes for Commander A and the other votes for Rival... do they both go away (AKA Rival is worthless)? Do they have to keep voting until they agree (how would that work)? Do neither go away (AKA whoever votes first chooses which goes away as the alternative choice is giving you two commanders, meaning that it really isn't a "vote")?
A mechanic that only works on dual commander or 4-player commander and not 3-player commander seems a bit odd.
I expected this to be a expanded rule, i.e. something you would look up, since it's not that usual, in most games you'd discuss first and only vote when ready to choose, and in competitive (where it may get split votes) you'd know the expanded rule if it were to matter. But maybe it can fit in the reminder:
Rival (You can have two commanders if one has Rival. At the start of the game, your opponents vote for one. If tied, choose at random. Put it on the bottom of your library forcibly.)
Do you intend Rival to pair with any other legendary creature, or just Rivals?
Also, leave off "forcibly". Its not needed from a rules standpoint, and reads like I'm supposed to punch you deck and call it mean names while I put the commander on the bottom.
Yes, paired any creature. I think it can be balanced, because you only get the worse one (unless you go through hoops, or shuffle and get lucky.)
As for "forcibly", I guess a case could be made for the command-zone replacement effect not applying 'at the start of the game', though on the other hand, I'd expect game rules to apply 'at the start of the game'. But in any case, rule wordings can be expected to 'do something'. No player would expect this drawback to be "unless you don't wanna do it", so it can be relegated to the rules.
Consider it changed.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Legendary Creature - Human Shaman
Whenever Kal attacks, mill four cards.
Rival (You can have two commanders if one has Rival. At the start of the game, your opponents vote for one. Put it on the bottom of your library forcibly.)
4/4
Cassamira, the Other Way 1WW
Legendary Creature - Angel
Flying, Vigilance
At the beginning of your end step, if you gained 3 or more life this turn, draw a card.
Rival (You can have two commanders if one has Rival. At the start of the game, your opponents vote for one. Put it on the bottom of your library forcibly.)
3/3
Vrel, the Contrarian U
Legendary Creature - Human Wizard
Whenever Vel attacks, scry 1.
1: Look at the top card of your library. You can cast that card if it targets a spell. It costs 1 less.
Rival (You can have two commanders if one has Rival. At the start of the game, your opponents vote for one. Put it on the bottom of your library forcibly.)
1/2
Some very strong commanders, that become even stronger because you have a second commander! The only problem is, they are a bit jealous, and won't play nice with the other. So it's either them, or the other guy, opponent's choice. Whoever leaves, they are still your second commander, so if you go through hoops, you can get that sweet Partnership going.
I use a new word, 'forcibly' to indicate this card movement can't be replaced. (Otherwise, you'd just ignore the ability via the Commander Zone replacement effect.)
The same would be said for this Rival gig.
I mean, that's your opinion. Although there has been some overpowered partners and people have looked down on it, I do think it is an interesting way to add to the options of playing commander. I would never say that it limits or restricts the game.
As for the ability... I mean... okay. It's fine but I'm not sure I'm in love with it.
Dunes of Zairo
SHANDALAR
Innistrad - The Darkest Night
~THE RAVNICAN CONSORTIUM~
A Community Set
Commander: Allies & Adversaries
Is your intent with the ability that it must pair with another Rival? Or with any other legendary creature? If the latter, this is going to be a hugely difficult ability to balance cards around, though the former still would be a challenge.
If you have two opponents and one votes for Commander A and the other votes for Rival... do they both go away (AKA Rival is worthless)? Do they have to keep voting until they agree (how would that work)? Do neither go away (AKA whoever votes first chooses which goes away as the alternative choice is giving you two commanders, meaning that it really isn't a "vote")?
A mechanic that only works on dual commander or 4-player commander and not 3-player commander seems a bit odd.
I expected this to be a expanded rule, i.e. something you would look up, since it's not that usual, in most games you'd discuss first and only vote when ready to choose, and in competitive (where it may get split votes) you'd know the expanded rule if it were to matter. But maybe it can fit in the reminder:
Rival (You can have two commanders if one has Rival. At the start of the game, your opponents vote for one. If tied, choose at random. Put it on the bottom of your library forcibly.)
Also, leave off "forcibly". Its not needed from a rules standpoint, and reads like I'm supposed to punch you deck and call it mean names while I put the commander on the bottom.
As for "forcibly", I guess a case could be made for the command-zone replacement effect not applying 'at the start of the game', though on the other hand, I'd expect game rules to apply 'at the start of the game'. But in any case, rule wordings can be expected to 'do something'. No player would expect this drawback to be "unless you don't wanna do it", so it can be relegated to the rules.
Consider it changed.