The problem with this is that it's an enchantment... if it were an instant, the template would've been very simple ( yet creative - and monstruosly undercosted, but that's another story ). The problem is - X in play is 0, therefore the card currently says that your stuff will cost 0 less, as long as never lasts ( would you say that in English? )
Redington, the "to" makes all the sense of the world - it's part of "[SOMETHING] costs [COST] less ( /more ) toplay", therefore, for the purpose of the game, I'll revert the card back to Ixias's last version.
Let's try something like this ( to make it work like it should )
Simultaneous Growth :xmana::symbg:
Enchantment
Simultaneous Growth comes into play with X growth counters and X time counters on it.
Vanishing
Spells you play cost X less to play, were X is equal to the number of growth counters on Simultaneous Growth.
This will never happen - two types of counters, too wordy, confusing - and broken.
It would've been much easier like this:
Simultaneous Growth :xmana::symbg: ( + :symbg::symbg: )
Instant.
During your next X turns, spells you play cost X less to play.
I'll be probably taking a break from the for a while, see you around jstar, Ixias, Roja, Howler and LM
Grindmill
Artifact
, Sacrifice a Planeswalker or a creature: Target player puts the top X cards of his or her library into his or her graveyard, where X is the number of permanents you
Semantic Control :symu::symu:
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The chosen player may draw a card whenever a spell or ability controlled by enchanted player targets a nonland card with converted mana cost X or less, where X is the number of times you mulliganed
Semantic Control :symu::symu:
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The chosen player may draw a card whenever a spell or ability controlled by enchanted player targets a nonland card with converted mana cost X or less, where X is the number of
As much as we all want to see this finished, we still have to define X.
I would want to be a smarty-pants and add X in the mana cost, but fundamentalists like Zaph would kill me for doing something like that
Semantic Control :symu::symu:
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The chosen player may draw a card whenever a spell or ability controlled by enchanted player targets a nonland card with converted mana cost X or less, where X is
LM, it's better if you leave commas to the one after you; in most case you could go on - why spoil the other of the opportunity? If he or she renounces to this right, then he or she'll add the comma before adding the new word
Semantic Control :symu::symu:
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The chosen player may draw a card whenever a spell or ability controlled by enchanted player targets a nonland card with converted mana cost X or [ ... ],
This might get very confusing. The aura already enchants a player, therefore it will refer to him. If you choose the enchanted player, it's superfluos; if you choose the other, why enchant the first one in the first place?
Semantic Control :symu::symu:
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The
Why would you want to read that far into this thread? If you missed a card, who cares? As long as you have an idea of what's going on with the current card.
I used to do that. Now I won't. I don't see why such a statement bothers you.
Why did you add mana when we were already at the rules text? For once I want to make an original card, and you have to come and make it lame!
Colorless noncreature cards are not original. We do them all the time here, and believe me, those are lame.
They never have any flavorful reason to be colorless, and we also have to waste time to state their color.
Zaph's Familiar :1mana::symg: Legendary Creature - Goat Wolf
:1mana::symg:, :symtap:: Target creature loses all nonmana abilities.
When Zaph's Familiar becomes the target of an instant, target player skips his or her next untap step.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Redington, the "to" makes all the sense of the world - it's part of "[SOMETHING] costs [COST] less ( /more ) to play", therefore, for the purpose of the game, I'll revert the card back to Ixias's last version.
Let's try something like this ( to make it work like it should )
Simultaneous Growth :xmana::symbg:
Enchantment
Simultaneous Growth comes into play with X growth counters and X time counters on it.
Vanishing
Spells you play cost X less to play, were X is equal to the number of growth counters on Simultaneous Growth.
This will never happen - two types of counters, too wordy, confusing - and broken.
It would've been much easier like this:
Simultaneous Growth :xmana::symbg: ( + :symbg::symbg: )
Instant.
During your next X turns, spells you play cost X less to play.
I'll be probably taking a break from the for a while, see you around jstar, Ixias, Roja, Howler and LM
Next: Goodbye
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant permanent
Enchanted permanent doesn't untap during its controller's untap step.
Whenever enchanted permanent becomes untapped
Instant
Put a 3/
//
Little
Instant
Artifact
, Sacrifice a Planeswalker or a creature: Target player puts the top X cards of his or her library into his or her graveyard, where X is the number of permanents you
You see why everyone hates blue?
Semantic Control :symu::symu:
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The chosen player may draw a card whenever a spell or ability controlled by enchanted player targets a nonland card with converted mana cost X or less, where X is the number of times you mulliganed
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The chosen player may draw a card whenever a spell or ability controlled by enchanted player targets a nonland card with converted mana cost X or less, where X is the number of
I would want to be a smarty-pants and add X in the mana cost, but fundamentalists like Zaph would kill me for doing something like that
Semantic Control :symu::symu:
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The chosen player may draw a card whenever a spell or ability controlled by enchanted player targets a nonland card with converted mana cost X or less, where X is
LM, it's better if you leave commas to the one after you; in most case you could go on - why spoil the other of the opportunity? If he or she renounces to this right, then he or she'll add the comma before adding the new word
Semantic Control :symu::symu:
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The chosen player may draw a card whenever a spell or ability controlled by enchanted player targets a nonland card with converted mana cost X or [ ... ],
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The chosen player
This might get very confusing. The aura already enchants a player, therefore it will refer to him. If you choose the enchanted player, it's superfluos; if you choose the other, why enchant the first one in the first place?
Semantic Control :symu::symu:
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose a player.
The
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant player
As Semantic Control comes into play, choose ( a word? )
Instant
As you play Duplicate Strategy, choose a player.
The
They never have any flavorful reason to be colorless, and we also have to waste time to state their color.
Last Strategy :4mana::symr:
Sorcery
Discard a
On and Off U
Instant
Tap
Legendary Creature - Goat Wolf
:1mana::symg:, :symtap:: Target creature loses all nonmana abilities.
When Zaph's Familiar becomes the target of an instant, target player skips his or her next untap step.