MTG Salvation

Using "spend" makes intuitive and flavorful sense for this mechanic but I think the confusion is coming from that it already has a different, specific meaning in Magic. I suggest:

Gain a gold counter (If you have a gold counter, you may lose it to add 1 to you mana pool. You can lose a gold counter this way once per turn. A player with ten or more gold counters wins the game.)

I like your implementation of this mechanic, btw.

Quote from Wolf_Cub82

On another note, I have encountered stupid thing on the internet #34556430: gay people taking up arms against Macklemore's Same Love song and writing up convolutions psuedo-arguments against it. Arguments that are so full of self-indulgence and logical fallacies.

I... I just... Ugh. It's not even that I object to criticizing someone who's standing up for our community. I have no problem with criticism that has merit. Because valid criticism serves to ultimately improve how we think and understand things. But there's nothing wrong with the lyrics of the song. The people inventing arguments against the song are just reaching soooo far.

[/endrant]

The silver lining: when gays' behavior is stupid, intolerant, pathetic, ignorant, cringeworthy, [insert string of pejoratives] we can a least hold them up in front of the rest of the world and say, "See? We gays really are just like you."

I can think of a couple different wordings that ought to work. Some of the cleaner wordings read a little ambiguously, so I suggest:

Whenever a player gains control of ~, ~ deals 4 damage to that player unless he or she owns ~.

This is still a little ambiguous in some situations, like Rise from the Grave effects.

Quote from Wolf_Cub82

So go check it out (and take a moment to vote for your favorite alter).

Not while you continue to ignore my pleas for an O-Kami playmat, I shan't.


So something fun I thought I'd share. I have a group who plays every Friday and one of our members, who also happens to be one of my favorite people ever, is moving back to England so we planned something special to send him off...
A bunch of us scrounged up random packs and we had a 10-person, 4-random-pack draft. The actual gameplay turned out to be a bit of a dud because of what we tried to do, but the draft itself was utterly hilarious. I highly recommend trying this if you never have. I'm not sure what everyone opened, but I ended up with Elesh Norn, Lotus Bloom, and Stifle, so I was pretty stoked. Our friend who is moving opened Vindicate. Pack 1 was Dissension and pick 1 was Trygon Predator, so I ended up sticking with UG:



We ended up playing a wacky multiple 2HG group game, so my deck is heavy on tricks and fat creatures while my partners was heavy on evasive weenies.

Quote from jhize

I'm not sure I follow. Mind Spring is a draw card. I think I'm missing something.

My thought process was Mind Spring for a lot of cards and discard the unwanted at end of turn, which mills your opponent, gets back your purge cards, and leaves you with a hand full of stuff. But Gerrard's Mom's get to the heart of abuse much better. (It was early in the day for me )

Quote from jhize

Once the ability is activated, a single discard event is replaced and then it's removed from the graveyard. So discard cards wouldn't necessarily be worthless unless they are causing just a single discard (and if a purge card is actually in the graveyard of course).

Almost. Say your opponent casts Mind Rot. Unless I'm mistaken, you could replace the first discarded card with the Purge effect, then discard the card with Purge since its now in your hand when you go to discard the second card. Just like "Draw two cards" is treated as two distinct events that happen in order, you would not discard all cards simultaneously and then pick one to replace.

Quote from jhize

How would you suggest I add to the comprules to reflect that clarification?

Well... I suppose you could make it only apply to the first card discarded during a turn. That would hose discard without completely shutting it down and seriously impede attempts to abuse it in a combo.

Quote from jhize

Btw, I stole your signature quote.

I noticed. It made me very happy

First, you don't need the otherwise clause in the actual rule text. It's in the reminder text just to be clear what happens if you choose not to replace the discard.

Balance-wise, it's certainly nowhere near as broken as Dredge but I see potential problems. A Mind Spring effect on yourself could let you mill your opponent's deck away at end of turn, which isn't necessarily broken but could be depending on how easy it is to pull off (i.e., how much mana acceleration is in the format, how big the Purge numbers are, etc.).

Thirdly, I'm not entirely fond of the gameplay effect this has on discarding. It's not necessarily too powerful since competitive discard is usually happening on the first couple turns and/or involves choosing which card to discard, and this doesn't stop either approach. My concern is that more casual discard strategy decks are completely gutted in an unfun way. To contrast, Obstinate Baloth is hidden in your hand until the moment when it hoses the discard and creates a fun moment of surprise. Your opponent is never sure whether their discard spell will hinder you or give you 4 life and a 4/4 creature. Purge, on the other hand, creates a game state where once it's in the graveyard it sits there and makes many discard cards completely worthless.

I won't go so far as to say it's a bad or unfun mechanic, but it could be if you're not careful about what you do with it.

Quote from Rhand

Hm, that would remove the "S" shape as well.

Try having the S shapes end with a flat side instead of coming to a point.

Quote from Rhand

I've designed myself a logo to go with my job applications. Can I have some honest opinions on it?

I like the style and overall look, but honestly it kinda looks like a duck to me.

Yup. Getting me one of these if I can

Quote from ValentineX

Dementia (When this spell is cast Target Player loses 1 life and you may have target creature they control deal 1 damage to itself.)

I think it shouldn't be like Bushido where each instantance is a separate trigger.

Then I suggest having only one decision made:

Dementia (When you cast this spell, you may have target creature deal 1 damage to itself. If you do, its controller loses 1 life.)

As a side note, as worded you get this effect before the spell resolves and even if it gets countered (like Cascade). Just making sure that's your intention.

Quote from Carl Miller

Mindmeld (This creature enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters on it, where X is the number of cards you’ve drawn so far this turn.)

Mindchain Psider 1U
Creature -- Spider Rogue Psion {C}
Mindmeld (This creature enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters on it, where X is the number of cards you’ve drawn so far this turn.)
T, Exile Mindchain Psider: Draw a card. If you do, return Mindchain Psider to the battlefield tapped.
0/0

I really like this mechanic and I don't see any issues with your wording or design. My only caution would be to find the right size for common and uncommon creatures. Since you have to do some work to get these creatures to be anything more than +1/+1 you should be rewarded for doing it, but since drawing cards is already a reward you don't want creatures to get too big on top of that. I'm also curious as to how you see this playing out in white, since that's the only color that has no card draw beyond cantrips.

"Pay X and X life, where X is the number of cards you own exiled by ~: "

I believe this works, since "You" in the cost and ability will refer to the activating player, since the ability will be an object on his or her Stack.

Well, you've covered sacrificing but any cost that includes a creature leaving the battlefield, such as Familiar's Ruse, City of Shadows, etc., would also have to be specified, making the reminder text rather inelegant. Weird interactions occur in multiplayer as well. If this creature's owner loses the game, does this creature still stay on the battlefield? I'm sure there are more problematic interactions.

That said I'm not sure this doesn't actually work, it's just not a very good idea. Plus it's rather unfun when the only answers to a creature in the entire game are Pacifism effects.

Quote from ZeDorkSlipeur

We are going to need non-clan-members to join in anyway, unless a new clan appears right now.

If you can't fill the game, why not let two players from the six currently participating clans in?

(While potentially problematic, it would make collaborating within the clan interesting since you can't be sure of your 'partner' alignment)

It might be possible but it's very problematic. For one, aura spells on the stack have a target, and when they resolve they enter the battlefield attached to that target. Your effect doesn't kick in until after that process is complete, so you could end up with Faith's Fetters equipped to a planeswalker. Granted, the rules handle this ok by just having it fall off, but it's sloppy. And the targeting issue means your 'equipment aura' can still be countered by killing the target before it resolves.

Unless Clan rules have changed, Gaymers aren't eligible to participate because we're not a true clan. (i.e., no membership restrictions) If we can participate and nobody else here wants in, I could be persuaded. I got sick of the game a while ago but play now and again.