Exotic orchard and reflecting pool are safe - colorless is not a color (also you can't tap either if all your opponents are playing colorless.)
Reflecting pool taps for any "type" so it could tap for colorless. But you are correct about Orchard. And yeah, Pool only cares about its controller anyway so you can't force it to tap for colorless without a few hoops.
I think it is still likely too powerful. Griselbrand wins right away with Goryo's Vengeance because it has too thanks to the Sacrifice clause. The opponent already needs spot removal to stop it. I think giving the player an extra turn to get to that removal but also letting you keep Griselbrand for more than a turn is a fair trade off and opens up some deckbuilding options. At the very least, this eliminates the potential of "fizzling" since you have more than a turn to go off.
I wonder how good this will actually be against Urzatron. I'm not super up-to-date on lists, but don't most have ability to generate colored mana?
I think you are right which means this basically reads as "pay 1 more for Karn". So, sure, it slows Karn down by a turn but doesn't really slow down Ugin. Maybe it slows the deck down because they have to find colored mana? It still seems like it has the real potential to be a bust just like all the other Tron hate they have tried to print in the past.
I do find your threads fascinating. I mean, basically every single one of them reads as though you are simply a troll. Hardly anything you ever say makes sense, and the way you present your designs and thoughts are so ridiculously convoluted that there is basically no way anyone could ever engage with the community with this much ignorance coupled with the amount of confidence you exude in perpetuating and displaying your ignorance to be anything other than a troll with a carefully thought out "plan of attack".
And yet, you are so convincing in your online persona of just being this absolutely terrible Magic designer with absolutely no weakness to, or desire for, suggestions that it really is tough to just cast you aside as a simple troll. You have done extraordinarily well as presenting yourself as this dunce, this unintelligent, overconfident poster, that it is almost impossible to just walk away.
In fact, while I rarely look forward to your responses in your threads since they are drivel, I do find "contributing" to your designs, and arguing with you, to be a form of catharsis. Your designs can only be met with ridicule but you have such thick skin that the ridicule is like water on a duck's back: you are completely unfazed by it. And being able to go over why your cards won't work is honestly quite enjoyable. It is like a persistent puzzle. "What has Reap done today and what about this design doesn't work?" It is why your design for Realm of the Ancients has basically been ignored. It is so banal, so unremarkable, as to be inconsequential to the discussion because it does work. It is like a Zelda puzzle where the solution is "walk through the door". It is boring and uninteresting. Your designs spark these long threads because you insist on designing things that absolutely do not work and thus it becomes a challenge for the rest of us to determine exactly what doesn't work and, I admit, try to convince of that fact.
It is also why your Deus Ex Machina is particularly frustrating. We already know why it doesn't work. You already know why it doesn't work. It isn't a challenge to explain or discuss anymore so your threads with it feel derivative. In fact, contrary to what you believe, the designs with Deus Ex Machina have also become banal and uninteresting because there isn't anything new. Granted, this latest discussion offered a few more points against your interpretation so it was still entertaining to discuss; but the ability itself is now overdone.
And how do you reconcile that with how Gargaroth functions? That has no zone change associated with its "or" functionality?
Also, your wording introduces *two* zone changes.... I don't know why you think not changing zones matters but even if it did, your spell changes zones twice. First from hand (presumably) to the stack and the second is a change from the stack to (presumably) the graveyard (or battlefield). Even if your argument was that the reason the Titans work the way they do is because one condition is accompanied with a zone change, you have only further bolstered the arguments that your card triggers twice as well because you have 2 zone changes thus there are two reasons this matches the Titan's "or" functionality and even takes it further.
Those both give you a choice between two options during the spell's resolution. They are offering you the opportunity to choose one or the other so no, it absolutely does not allow you to choose both and no one in this thread is saying they do.
The problem with your "Deus Ex Machina" ability is that neither thing happens during the spell's resolution. The effects happen at times that have nothing to do with the spell resolving so does not fall into the same situation. As mentioned, it is more akin to things like the Titans that allow an effect at different times or something like Gargaroth that does the same. That is, it can trigger when the card enters or when it attacks (for the titans; two different conditions) or when it attacks or blocks (for the Gargaroth; again two different conditions).
Yours is obviously analogous to these cards and not anywhere close to the way Twiddle is worded or how it works. Your Machina ability works even if the spell is countered to it obviously isn't an effect or choice made during resolution. And as people have already mentioned, since it is two completely separate conditions the effect will happen in both. It is not a choice of which to apply the ability in just like the Titans and Gargaroth don't offer a choice of whether to trigger. They happen regardless (with some other choices being made as part of those triggers). Your ability is the same. It is, frankly, insane that you are trying to design cards for a game with such specific wordings and templating and then getting mad when the current ruleset doesn't support your cards as you have written them.
If you don't want to design Magic cards, then don't. Go somewhere else where your designs can be part of a brand new game. If you find the right audience, there could even be constructive feedback in the context of that game. But don't bring non-Magic designs into a Magic Custom Card forum and then start claiming that it is the *Magic* rules that are wrong. You aren't designing Magic cards so there is literally no reason the rules should be adjusted (and no reason the rest of us should assume the rules would be adjusted) to make your monstrosities of card design and templating actually work when it would require a significant overhaul to the rules which, in turn, breaks actual Magic cards.
I think the card looks pretty good as it is now. One card per attack is fine (Mangara requires 2 creatures to be attacking so this is better in that regard) and I like the idea of buffing all creatures to "suggest" that attacks be made. Being in white means the +2/+0 makes sense for your team and while the Menace granting ability is somewhat weird, it is not without precedent. There is Alms Beast that gives opposing creatures lifelink.
I wonder if it might be better to only affect creatures attacking you? Not "better" in the sense that the card is better, but better in terms of flavor since it really moves opponents to attacking you over the other players putting you in Dire Straits over everyone else along with you. Unless that was the intent of course.
You may ignore the colorless mana in the mana costs of red Beast spells you cast
God damn it.....At some point you need to learn the rules...
If you want to allow the *generic* portion of the cost to be ignored, just word it as "Red Beast spells you cast cost up to {20} less to cast". And then the second clause can be "The first spell you cast that is reduced this way enters as a 1/1. The second spell you cast that is reduced this way enters as a 2/2. Or something like that. And use whatever number you want to use. This gets around weird corner cases with cost additions and reads better.
Wheel of Chaos looks like a big pain in the ass. I am not sure if it is busted but it seems close. After players get to 10 life this just reads "Bolt you; discard your hand". And it isn't too hard for a red deck to ensure that the opponent has less than 10 life pretty early while the Burn player is still at 13+ life. The mana cost is on the border of being too low. I don't think the effect is all that bad, but it should really be 5 or even 6+ mana for this effect.
No for the reason you mentioned. Goggles triggers when the mana is spent (in step 601.2h) and Veyran cares about triggers in step 601.2i. Now, I will admit this seems "weird" (for lack of a better word). It might be worthwhile to ask Jess Dunks (the current rules manager) for clarification. For as exact as Magic tends to be "when you cast a spell" and "when you spend mana" are clearly different trigger conditions and Veyran doesn't interact with the latter.
Let's not oppress the creatives talents of anyone by saying they can't make or suggest changes or adaptations to the rules.
See, the problem is that you never actually suggested any changes or adaptations. Instead, you posted a card that didn't work the way you wanted and *then* declared that it would work when rules were changed after you were informed that it didn't work. Which is a cop-out. You clearly didn't understand the rules enough to begin with to even understand that what you were doing wasn't supported in the rules. And instead of adding "or was cast from a graveyard" (6 words) you want to overhaul the entire rules section to make your card work. Instead of admitting that you just don't know the rules. And then had the ridiculous response that you were somehow being oppressed.
I am not suppressing/oppressing anyone here. I am calling you out on your blatant ignorance of the rules of Magic and, now, your insane claim that what you were doing was suggesting a change to the rules when no suggestion was made. If you want to make a card that ignores, or only operates under a new expansion of, the rules then just say that up front. Just say "I realize the rules don't currently support this card but this is what would be changed to support it". We can debate the reasonability behind such a move on its own merits instead of this stupid back and forth that pervades every thread you make where you make a card that doesn't work, people tell you it doesn't work, and then you respond with "well obviously the rules would change".
The ruling will not be changed. How about you design cards for what the rules are rather than what you want them to be? It is fine to make up new rules to support new keywords and such; but this is existing functionality and you are not Wizards (luckily for the rest of us) so you need to adhere to existing design/rules conventions if you want your card to work right.
I realize what you want the ability to do, but it just doesn't work that way. Flayer of the Hatebound has the wording of "entered from the graveyard" and Gatherer has this to say about it:
If you cast a creature card from your graveyard, that card will be put on the stack before entering the battlefield. Flayer of the Hatebound won’t trigger. [1/22/2011]
So, no, it does not work the way you think it does. If you want it to work that way, you need to add "or was cast from the graveyard".
And yes, I realize what you want your first ability to do; that doesn't change the fact that the wording is nonsense. I am not going to go too much into it though since, as ashrog points out, it is the antithesis of interaction and creating a card that purposely cuts off nearly all forms of legitimate interaction seems like poor card design.
I am going to ignore the first ability since it is nonsense.
The second ability seems weird to have and probably doesn't work the way you want. Though, maybe it does. In any case, it means that Cabal still has protection from creatures cast from a graveyard since they then didn't enter from a graveyard; they entered from the stack.
The last ability is really the one I want to comment on. It isn't even necessarily a bad ability (though just give it indestructible as that basically accomplishes the same thing). If you want this work, you need to sat "when it regenerates this way, untap it". Otherwise, your ability sets up a regeneration shield and then immediately untaps it. Which honestly makes it more powerful than the (presumed) intention of untapping after the regeneration shield is used.
And yet, you are so convincing in your online persona of just being this absolutely terrible Magic designer with absolutely no weakness to, or desire for, suggestions that it really is tough to just cast you aside as a simple troll. You have done extraordinarily well as presenting yourself as this dunce, this unintelligent, overconfident poster, that it is almost impossible to just walk away.
In fact, while I rarely look forward to your responses in your threads since they are drivel, I do find "contributing" to your designs, and arguing with you, to be a form of catharsis. Your designs can only be met with ridicule but you have such thick skin that the ridicule is like water on a duck's back: you are completely unfazed by it. And being able to go over why your cards won't work is honestly quite enjoyable. It is like a persistent puzzle. "What has Reap done today and what about this design doesn't work?" It is why your design for Realm of the Ancients has basically been ignored. It is so banal, so unremarkable, as to be inconsequential to the discussion because it does work. It is like a Zelda puzzle where the solution is "walk through the door". It is boring and uninteresting. Your designs spark these long threads because you insist on designing things that absolutely do not work and thus it becomes a challenge for the rest of us to determine exactly what doesn't work and, I admit, try to convince of that fact.
It is also why your Deus Ex Machina is particularly frustrating. We already know why it doesn't work. You already know why it doesn't work. It isn't a challenge to explain or discuss anymore so your threads with it feel derivative. In fact, contrary to what you believe, the designs with Deus Ex Machina have also become banal and uninteresting because there isn't anything new. Granted, this latest discussion offered a few more points against your interpretation so it was still entertaining to discuss; but the ability itself is now overdone.
Also, your wording introduces *two* zone changes.... I don't know why you think not changing zones matters but even if it did, your spell changes zones twice. First from hand (presumably) to the stack and the second is a change from the stack to (presumably) the graveyard (or battlefield). Even if your argument was that the reason the Titans work the way they do is because one condition is accompanied with a zone change, you have only further bolstered the arguments that your card triggers twice as well because you have 2 zone changes thus there are two reasons this matches the Titan's "or" functionality and even takes it further.
The problem with your "Deus Ex Machina" ability is that neither thing happens during the spell's resolution. The effects happen at times that have nothing to do with the spell resolving so does not fall into the same situation. As mentioned, it is more akin to things like the Titans that allow an effect at different times or something like Gargaroth that does the same. That is, it can trigger when the card enters or when it attacks (for the titans; two different conditions) or when it attacks or blocks (for the Gargaroth; again two different conditions).
Yours is obviously analogous to these cards and not anywhere close to the way Twiddle is worded or how it works. Your Machina ability works even if the spell is countered to it obviously isn't an effect or choice made during resolution. And as people have already mentioned, since it is two completely separate conditions the effect will happen in both. It is not a choice of which to apply the ability in just like the Titans and Gargaroth don't offer a choice of whether to trigger. They happen regardless (with some other choices being made as part of those triggers). Your ability is the same. It is, frankly, insane that you are trying to design cards for a game with such specific wordings and templating and then getting mad when the current ruleset doesn't support your cards as you have written them.
If you don't want to design Magic cards, then don't. Go somewhere else where your designs can be part of a brand new game. If you find the right audience, there could even be constructive feedback in the context of that game. But don't bring non-Magic designs into a Magic Custom Card forum and then start claiming that it is the *Magic* rules that are wrong. You aren't designing Magic cards so there is literally no reason the rules should be adjusted (and no reason the rest of us should assume the rules would be adjusted) to make your monstrosities of card design and templating actually work when it would require a significant overhaul to the rules which, in turn, breaks actual Magic cards.
I wonder if it might be better to only affect creatures attacking you? Not "better" in the sense that the card is better, but better in terms of flavor since it really moves opponents to attacking you over the other players putting you in Dire Straits over everyone else along with you. Unless that was the intent of course.
God damn it.....At some point you need to learn the rules...
If you want to allow the *generic* portion of the cost to be ignored, just word it as "Red Beast spells you cast cost up to {20} less to cast". And then the second clause can be "The first spell you cast that is reduced this way enters as a 1/1. The second spell you cast that is reduced this way enters as a 2/2. Or something like that. And use whatever number you want to use. This gets around weird corner cases with cost additions and reads better.
Wheel of Chaos looks like a big pain in the ass. I am not sure if it is busted but it seems close. After players get to 10 life this just reads "Bolt you; discard your hand". And it isn't too hard for a red deck to ensure that the opponent has less than 10 life pretty early while the Burn player is still at 13+ life. The mana cost is on the border of being too low. I don't think the effect is all that bad, but it should really be 5 or even 6+ mana for this effect.
Champion’s Helm
Mirror Shield
Ring of Evos Isle
Alpha Authority
Curator’s Ward
Or, if you want to try to make Shroud work (which turns off attaching new things to the creature):
Lightning Greaves
Neurok Stealthsuit
Whispersilk Cloak
Diplomatic Immunity
Pemmin's Aura
Or just run Strip Mine, Field of Ruin, Wasteland, etc. to blow up the Maze.
I am not suppressing/oppressing anyone here. I am calling you out on your blatant ignorance of the rules of Magic and, now, your insane claim that what you were doing was suggesting a change to the rules when no suggestion was made. If you want to make a card that ignores, or only operates under a new expansion of, the rules then just say that up front. Just say "I realize the rules don't currently support this card but this is what would be changed to support it". We can debate the reasonability behind such a move on its own merits instead of this stupid back and forth that pervades every thread you make where you make a card that doesn't work, people tell you it doesn't work, and then you respond with "well obviously the rules would change".
So, no, it does not work the way you think it does. If you want it to work that way, you need to add "or was cast from the graveyard".
And yes, I realize what you want your first ability to do; that doesn't change the fact that the wording is nonsense. I am not going to go too much into it though since, as ashrog points out, it is the antithesis of interaction and creating a card that purposely cuts off nearly all forms of legitimate interaction seems like poor card design.
The second ability seems weird to have and probably doesn't work the way you want. Though, maybe it does. In any case, it means that Cabal still has protection from creatures cast from a graveyard since they then didn't enter from a graveyard; they entered from the stack.
The last ability is really the one I want to comment on. It isn't even necessarily a bad ability (though just give it indestructible as that basically accomplishes the same thing). If you want this work, you need to sat "when it regenerates this way, untap it". Otherwise, your ability sets up a regeneration shield and then immediately untaps it. Which honestly makes it more powerful than the (presumed) intention of untapping after the regeneration shield is used.