I think this is fine as Red Blue. its space that hasnt been explored on other cards really, so its fine for RU to carve it out, and to me it makes sense.
Cool card, only minor concerns with people interpreting it wrong like other posters have said so it could do stupid things. not "broken" though. Cool and strong and fun, not busted. so all in all, very nice work
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The true mind can weather all the lies and illusions without being lost. The true heart can tough the poison of hatred without being harmed. Since beginning-less time, darkness thrives in the void but always yields to purifying light.
I invision a future where one is not mighty when he can silence a crowd with brutality,
but when he leaves them speechless with wisdom.
Most of the comments in this thread seems to assume kicker counts as an "additional cost", but that phrase is not in kicker's reminder text
Close enough though, Sadistic Sacrament says you can pay an "additional :7mana:". As for the number of times the ability can be used, I like Shinny Shinny's wording, otherwise it is a tad unclear.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Latest proof this forum is a trashfire:
Your authoritarianism will be the reason the company suffers another 60M in losses.
Agreed, lots of potential for confusion for such a simply worded card. Most of the comments in this thread seems to assume kicker counts as an "additional cost", but that phrase is not in kicker's reminder text. And I think we all know how Wizards likes the literal interpretations of things to apply whenever possible.
Quote from Comprehensive Rules »
702.30a Kicker is a static ability that functions while the spell with kicker is on the stack. “Kicker [cost]” means “You may pay an additional [cost] as you cast this spell.” Paying a spell’s kicker cost(s) follows the rules for paying additional costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2e–g.
Comprehensive rules > Reminder text.
What does this do for Taste of Paradise or other multi-kicker type cards? Can you pay for it multiple times for one cost or only pay 1 per additional kick?
Does that mean instead of paying 1 or 2 for Trinisphere I can just pay 1? Does this count as additional cost for the purpose of this card?
How does it affect cards with additional costs that are x such as Vengeful Dreams? Do you pay X mana instead, or declare what X is and pay 1, or are you only allowed to pay 1 and have X be 1?
What does this do for Taste of Paradise or other multi-kicker type cards? Can you pay for it multiple times for one cost or only pay 1 per additional kick?
Does that mean instead of paying 1 or 2 for Trinisphere I can just pay 1? Does this count as additional cost for the purpose of this card?
How does it affect cards with additional costs that are x such as Vengeful Dreams? Do you pay X mana instead, or declare what X is and pay 1, or are you only allowed to pay 1 and have X be 1?
Everflowing chalice would be cool, but think about this: You play Minimal Effort, presumably on at least turn 3. On the next turn, you play Everflowing Chalice. Finally, on the turn after that, you can use the Chalice's mana. Now you finally have a bunch (but not an insane amount) of mana on at least turn 5 after not being able to do anything else on turns 3 and 4. That is not a broken situation. This is not a broken card. And that's a good thing, broken cards don't advance the game well. This is a card that can help make interesting combo with other little-used cards. That advances the game. Good job, guys.
Yeah at 4 CMC and an enchantment and two coloured, the brokenness of the mechanic is blunted quite significantly.
The very name of the card still doesn't seem red to me no matter what it does mechanically. Red is about zeal, overkill, explosiveness. From hordes of barbarians to goblins blowing themselves up and all kinds of hasty briefly-lived elementals.
Card should probably have been 2UU as is, blue being dismissive and arrogant.
Alright, we have a bit of a snafu here. Let me try to explain this to the best of my abilities.
This card does one of two things. The first option is that it creates an alternate additional cost of 1. This means that the alternate additoinal cost of 1 exists completely separate from other additional costs. (V1)
The second option is that this card allows you to pay 1instead of paying the cost on an existing additional cost. Let me give some examples. (V2)
Let's say I'm trying to cast Flesh Allergy. V1 of the card would let me replace the existing cost with a new cost of 1, allowing me to pay 1 instead of sacrificing a creature. V2 lets me do the same thing, so there's no difference here.
Now look at Burst Lightning. V2 replaces the cost of 4 with 1, which means I can now kick my burst lightning by paying 1, rather than 4. V1, on the other hand, replaces the kicker cost with another cost of 1. This cost is not a kicker cost, so paying it will not trigger the "kicked" ability.
Now look at Everflowing Chalice. When I cast my chalice, I can decide how many times I want to kick it. V2 of this card allows me to replace the multikicker cost of 2 with 1. V1 would let me pay 1, but since its not a kicker cost, it will not kick the chalice.
Last example: Devastating Summons. As part of casting the spell, I can decide what X will be. V2 allows me to replace the cost of sacrificing X lands with paying 1. V1 lets me pay 1 instead of sacrificing lands, which means I wouldn't set X as I cast the spell. Since X is not set, it defaults to 0, and I get two 0/0.
So here's how things pan out: If V1 is the real version, than the only thing it really does is allow you to circumvent "bad" additional costs. It does not let you kick spells infinite times or anything like that.
If V2 is the real version, then you can both replace bad costs as well as paying 1 for costs such as kicker and multikicker. However, the cost of 1 must be payed for each instance of the cost, since it replaces only the payment, but not the cost itself.
...i think
Source:
Quote from Magic Comp. Rules »
702.30e Objects with kicker or multikicker have additional abilities that specify what happens if they are kicked. These abilities are linked to the kicker or multikicker abilities printed on that object: they can refer only to those specific kicker or multikicker abilities. See rule 607, “Linked Abilities.”
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
I can only speak for the intention of the card as I read it, but it would be the second version in MOON-E's post. I don't have time to search through the rules to support myself here, but logically I would say that if you replace the kicker cost with another cost, it would still count as kicking it. It is supposed to let you kick things for 1, multikick for 1 each, and circumvent costs like sacrifice a creature (unless the spell depends on the sacrificed creature, like Fling). Retrace was an interesting find if that works. If any judges/rules gurus have concrete issues with the wording, please go ahead and post.
If the spell has a variable cost that
will be paid as it’s being cast (such as an {X} in its mana cost; see rule 107.3), the player
announces the value of that variable.
This card takes away the X and replaces it with 1. As this is not an X cost it is not a variable and wouldn't affect the spell in any way other than making your spell do zero of what X could have done. Devastating summons would summon 0/0 tokens and not be very devastating.
With kicker and buyback this replaces those as well with a payment method that is not linked to either of those keywords so the spell can't be kicked or bought back if you pay 1 for those additional costs.
702.30e Objects with kicker or multikicker have additional abilities that specify what happens if
they are kicked. These abilities are linked to the kicker or multikicker abilities printed on that
object: they can refer only to those specific kicker or multikicker abilities.
"Some of the other guys dared me to go out, but I knew it weren't no ordinary giant giga-blasting blaze of unending flames that would scorch the whole world."
—Norin the Wary
If the spell has a variable cost that
will be paid as it’s being cast (such as an {X} in its mana cost; see rule 107.3), the player
announces the value of that variable.
This card takes away the X and replaces it with 1. As this is not an X cost it is not a variable and wouldn't affect the spell in any way other than making your spell do zero of what X could have done. Devastating summons would summon 0/0 tokens and not be very devastating.
With kicker and buyback this replaces those as well with a payment method that is not linked to either of those keywords so the spell can't be kicked or bought back if you pay 1 for those additional costs.
702.30e Objects with kicker or multikicker have additional abilities that specify what happens if
they are kicked. These abilities are linked to the kicker or multikicker abilities printed on that
object: they can refer only to those specific kicker or multikicker abilities.
Isn't devastating summons an additional cost instead of a variable one? Or is it both?
This card takes away the X and replaces it with 1. As this is not an X cost it is not a variable and wouldn't affect the spell in any way other than making your spell do zero of what X could have done. Devastating summons would summon 0/0 tokens and not be very devastating.
With kicker and buyback this replaces those as well with a payment method that is not linked to either of those keywords so the spell can't be kicked or bought back if you pay 1 for those additional costs.
Again, this all depends on what this card actually does. Assuming that this card is V2 (see my post above) like Gerrard's Mom said, I could say X is anything, and it would be that number.
Here's how it works: During 601.2b, I get to choose the value for variables such as the X in devastating summons. Let's say I choose 1,000,000.
Then, during 601.2e, I determine the total cost of the spell. Minimal Effort now gives me the option. Instead of paying "Sacrifice 1,000,000 lands", I can pay "1" instead. If I do so, I can pay 1 with X still being 1,000,000.
This would also work with kicker costs. The reason is that Minimal Effort is replacing the form of payment, not the actual cost. It changes the Kicker cost from 4 to 1, instead of replacing the kicker cost itself.
Your rules interpretations are correct if using V1 of the card, but we're going to assume that this is actually V2, which works as I stated above, mostly because its how we actually intended it to work (and is more fun).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Never forget that "Planar Chaos" doesnt really qualify as a color reference set.
Most of the cards in Planar Chaos really use something that would otherwise not be in the color in "normal" sets.
Am I missing something here? Neither of the quoted cards were in the Planar Chaos set.
Provided the card works the way it generally seems it ought, I really like it. If the rules don't support MOON-E's second version, the card could possibly be changed to allow it the correct functionality.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
UUUEntia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatemRRR
WRG Uril the EDHstalker GRW RG Warp World GR BUW Rescue WUB WUBRG Alara's Children EDH GRBUW WUBRG Prismatic Oh-**** GRBUW UR Firemind EDH RU GW Token Legacy WG GRBUW Elementals! WUBRG WUB Esper Vaults BUW WWW Haterade WWW RRG Valakut Ramp GRR BR Shadow Sligh RB GB A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Graveyard BG UR Counterclasm Swans RU
Flavorwise, I find this quite red. I'm pretty sure anyone who's ever put off a 20 page paper due in a week would agree. Laziness is a very red attribute, much more than with any other color. It's a purely emotional thing, it fights logic and often wins, and most of all, it's often triggered by passion (or at least fervor) for another/any activity other than the one in which you are engaged.
Ruleswise, I think that were wizards to print this, they'd probably errata cards like Devastating Summons to have a procedure-wise implementation. I mean, the only reason Devastating Summons didn't have Multikicker was to try to differentiate between ZenWake and ROE.
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Laziness is a shortcut, and red looking for the easy way, shortcut (short term) -- no matter the (long term) cost -- is unquestionable.
Laziness isn't terribly black. While it does fit the "what's best for me?" aspect of it, black is more often defined by ambition: the opposite of laziness.
At first glance, this card in underwhelming, for 4 CMC it really doesn't seem to do much. However, noting cards that have lower costs but high kicker for example, allow you to get a very powerful effect on turn 5. This card could be extremely stupid or broken depending on the set it's in. Tread lightly with the card; it's a sleeping giant.
Dahammer4
Artifact - Equipment (R)
Choose one - Equipped creature gets +4/+0; or Double Strike; or "When this creature deals combat damage to a creature, exile that creature"; or t, unattach ~ from this creature: ~ deals 5 damage to target creature." t: Equipped creature gains flying until end of turn.
Equip 3
Your rules interpretations are correct if using V1 of the card, but we're going to assume that this is actually V2, which works as I stated above, mostly because its how we actually intended it to work (and is more fun).
Really, making an absurd amount of high powered elementals for 2 mana is fun? I would prefer that it not be V2 because this card is actually good in combination with the cards that V1 is meant to help out. Cards like Flesh Allergy and others. Taking this card and interpreting it into a way that completely breaks it is not fun sir.
"Some of the other guys dared me to go out, but I knew it weren't no ordinary giant giga-blasting blaze of unending flames that would scorch the whole world."
—Norin the Wary
Really, making an absurd amount of high powered elementals for 2 mana is fun? I would prefer that it not be V2 because this card is actually good in combination with the cards that V1 is meant to help out. Cards like Flesh Allergy and others. Taking this card and interpreting it into a way that completely breaks it is not fun sir.
If by "absurd amount" you mean "2" then yes, it is fun. (Unless you're not talking about Devastating Summons, in which case, it would probably be even more fun.)
The fact of the matter is that V2 is what the card is supposed to do. It was designed and balanced for that specific use. If this card was V1, then it could probably cost less. (I would make an argument for it to be black at that point, since black has the most "downside" effects.)
I'm not taking the card and implementing it in a way that breaks it, I'm clarifying what it was intended to do. If that card feels broken to you, then by all means, you're entitled to your opinion. IMO, this card is a lot more enjoyable when it has more combo potential, rather than a fraction of it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
This card infinite combos with well over 25 cards, and literally every card with multikicker.
Actually, it would interact with Devastating Summons, as I mentioned above. Devouring greed, on the other hand, specifically says its effect is based on the number of spirits sacrificed, which would be 0 if you paid 1 instead.
Also, you would still have to pay 1 for each time you kick the card. Not sure if that's "infinite combo"-ing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Cool card, only minor concerns with people interpreting it wrong like other posters have said so it could do stupid things. not "broken" though. Cool and strong and fun, not busted. so all in all, very nice work
I invision a future where one is not mighty when he can silence a crowd with brutality,
but when he leaves them speechless with wisdom.
Close enough though, Sadistic Sacrament says you can pay an "additional :7mana:". As for the number of times the ability can be used, I like Shinny Shinny's wording, otherwise it is a tad unclear.
Comprehensive rules > Reminder text.
What does this do for Taste of Paradise or other multi-kicker type cards? Can you pay for it multiple times for one cost or only pay 1 per additional kick?
Does that mean instead of paying 1 or 2 for Trinisphere I can just pay 1? Does this count as additional cost for the purpose of this card?
How does it affect cards with additional costs that are x such as Vengeful Dreams? Do you pay X mana instead, or declare what X is and pay 1, or are you only allowed to pay 1 and have X be 1?
Also, just the thought of what this does to Blast from the Past makes me laugh, Everflowing Chalice would be amazing, Llanowar Elite would be awesome, and Orim's Touch would have no idea what the fuss is all about.
Thanks to PurpleD from Left Play Designs for the banner:D
Everflowing chalice would be cool, but think about this: You play Minimal Effort, presumably on at least turn 3. On the next turn, you play Everflowing Chalice. Finally, on the turn after that, you can use the Chalice's mana. Now you finally have a bunch (but not an insane amount) of mana on at least turn 5 after not being able to do anything else on turns 3 and 4. That is not a broken situation. This is not a broken card. And that's a good thing, broken cards don't advance the game well. This is a card that can help make interesting combo with other little-used cards. That advances the game. Good job, guys.
The very name of the card still doesn't seem red to me no matter what it does mechanically. Red is about zeal, overkill, explosiveness. From hordes of barbarians to goblins blowing themselves up and all kinds of hasty briefly-lived elementals.
Card should probably have been 2UU as is, blue being dismissive and arrogant.
This card does one of two things. The first option is that it creates an alternate additional cost of 1. This means that the alternate additoinal cost of 1 exists completely separate from other additional costs. (V1)
The second option is that this card allows you to pay 1 instead of paying the cost on an existing additional cost. Let me give some examples. (V2)
Let's say I'm trying to cast Flesh Allergy. V1 of the card would let me replace the existing cost with a new cost of 1, allowing me to pay 1 instead of sacrificing a creature. V2 lets me do the same thing, so there's no difference here.
Now look at Burst Lightning. V2 replaces the cost of 4 with 1, which means I can now kick my burst lightning by paying 1, rather than 4. V1, on the other hand, replaces the kicker cost with another cost of 1. This cost is not a kicker cost, so paying it will not trigger the "kicked" ability.
Now look at Everflowing Chalice. When I cast my chalice, I can decide how many times I want to kick it. V2 of this card allows me to replace the multikicker cost of 2 with 1. V1 would let me pay 1, but since its not a kicker cost, it will not kick the chalice.
Last example: Devastating Summons. As part of casting the spell, I can decide what X will be. V2 allows me to replace the cost of sacrificing X lands with paying 1. V1 lets me pay 1 instead of sacrificing lands, which means I wouldn't set X as I cast the spell. Since X is not set, it defaults to 0, and I get two 0/0.
So here's how things pan out: If V1 is the real version, than the only thing it really does is allow you to circumvent "bad" additional costs. It does not let you kick spells infinite times or anything like that.
If V2 is the real version, then you can both replace bad costs as well as paying 1 for costs such as kicker and multikicker. However, the cost of 1 must be payed for each instance of the cost, since it replaces only the payment, but not the cost itself.
...i think
Source:
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
Also, for anyone wondering about the red, Rumbling Aftershocks and Thick-Skinned Goblin are examples of red interacting with additional costs.
will be paid as it’s being cast (such as an {X} in its mana cost; see rule 107.3), the player
announces the value of that variable.
With kicker and buyback this replaces those as well with a payment method that is not linked to either of those keywords so the spell can't be kicked or bought back if you pay 1 for those additional costs.
they are kicked. These abilities are linked to the kicker or multikicker abilities printed on that
object: they can refer only to those specific kicker or multikicker abilities.
Cockatrice Username: seriph0
Isn't devastating summons an additional cost instead of a variable one? Or is it both?
Never forget that "Planar Chaos" doesnt really qualify as a color reference set.
Most of the cards in Planar Chaos really use something that would otherwise not be in the color in "normal" sets.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Again, this all depends on what this card actually does. Assuming that this card is V2 (see my post above) like Gerrard's Mom said, I could say X is anything, and it would be that number.
Here's how it works: During 601.2b, I get to choose the value for variables such as the X in devastating summons. Let's say I choose 1,000,000.
Then, during 601.2e, I determine the total cost of the spell. Minimal Effort now gives me the option. Instead of paying "Sacrifice 1,000,000 lands", I can pay "1" instead. If I do so, I can pay 1 with X still being 1,000,000.
This would also work with kicker costs. The reason is that Minimal Effort is replacing the form of payment, not the actual cost. It changes the Kicker cost from 4 to 1, instead of replacing the kicker cost itself.
Your rules interpretations are correct if using V1 of the card, but we're going to assume that this is actually V2, which works as I stated above, mostly because its how we actually intended it to work (and is more fun).
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
Am I missing something here? Neither of the quoted cards were in the Planar Chaos set.
Provided the card works the way it generally seems it ought, I really like it. If the rules don't support MOON-E's second version, the card could possibly be changed to allow it the correct functionality.
RG Warp World GR
BUW Rescue WUB
WUBRG Alara's Children EDH GRBUW
WUBRG Prismatic Oh-**** GRBUW
UR Firemind EDH RU
GW Token Legacy WG
GRBUW Elementals! WUBRG
WUB Esper Vaults BUW
WWW Haterade WWW
RRG Valakut Ramp GRR
BR Shadow Sligh RB
GB A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Graveyard BG
UR Counterclasm Swans RU
Ruleswise, I think that were wizards to print this, they'd probably errata cards like Devastating Summons to have a procedure-wise implementation. I mean, the only reason Devastating Summons didn't have Multikicker was to try to differentiate between ZenWake and ROE.
(Treat all variables as the number of additional costs paid)
Reminder text can't change the rules. As of now, this card doesn't actually do that, so we would need to add this as another line of rules text.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
(for many of these, read the flavor text)
* "Can't attack unless another is..." mechanic (ie, Mogg Flunkies)
* Goblin Piker
* Goblin Shortcutter
* Mogg Conscripts
* Mogg Sentry
* Norin the Wary
Laziness is a shortcut, and red looking for the easy way, shortcut (short term) -- no matter the (long term) cost -- is unquestionable.
Laziness isn't terribly black. While it does fit the "what's best for me?" aspect of it, black is more often defined by ambition: the opposite of laziness.
Sigpic by Rivenor
Artifact - Equipment (R)
Choose one - Equipped creature gets +4/+0; or Double Strike; or "When this creature deals combat damage to a creature, exile that creature"; or t, unattach ~ from this creature: ~ deals 5 damage to target creature."
t: Equipped creature gains flying until end of turn.
Equip 3
Courtesy of Crepes
[OMC] Omerium's Collapse
Really, making an absurd amount of high powered elementals for 2 mana is fun? I would prefer that it not be V2 because this card is actually good in combination with the cards that V1 is meant to help out. Cards like Flesh Allergy and others. Taking this card and interpreting it into a way that completely breaks it is not fun sir.
Cockatrice Username: seriph0
If by "absurd amount" you mean "2" then yes, it is fun. (Unless you're not talking about Devastating Summons, in which case, it would probably be even more fun.)
The fact of the matter is that V2 is what the card is supposed to do. It was designed and balanced for that specific use. If this card was V1, then it could probably cost less. (I would make an argument for it to be black at that point, since black has the most "downside" effects.)
I'm not taking the card and implementing it in a way that breaks it, I'm clarifying what it was intended to do. If that card feels broken to you, then by all means, you're entitled to your opinion. IMO, this card is a lot more enjoyable when it has more combo potential, rather than a fraction of it.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
it wouldn't.
This card infinite combos with well over 25 cards, and literally every card with multikicker.
Natural Order
3GG. Search your library for progenitus and give your opponent the finger.
new strategy articles every couple days and a bustling forum too!
and follow us on Twitter @02drop
Edit: @poster above: x isn't an additional cost. multicicker is though.
Your cry I hear
I'll catch you
And I'll catch your tears
-
http://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4e0ab040511b7989424707
Actually, it would interact with Devastating Summons, as I mentioned above. Devouring greed, on the other hand, specifically says its effect is based on the number of spirits sacrificed, which would be 0 if you paid 1 instead.
Also, you would still have to pay 1 for each time you kick the card. Not sure if that's "infinite combo"-ing.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
i did like gestalt (sounds sweet -_- )