The deal with being in public and somewhat called "harassment" (and i clearly distinquish between a from a court defined harassment and a person just feeling they are harassed) , is that its really different pieces.
As a private person you have no impact on public that even remotely justifies that anyone attacks you directly.
However, as a public person, like a politician or as we have here, a cosplayer that actively presents their body in public on public events to players, its in your right to criticizes exactly that, which is the body, its presented in a sexualized manner, so commenting in that way is not even inappropriate (might not be your personal taste, but thats a different deal).
If a private person gets mails from random persons theres zero reason or justification, so thats an entirely different matter compared to someone that publicly pushes themselves into public opinion.
Its a really important part of projecting this matter to the context its presented in.
If i see a women feeding a baby and i tell her "You are a 6/10, i wouldnt even rape you" , it would be an unbelieavable inappropriate thing to say , but to someone that in public makes money by presenting their body ? If i tell that to a stripper ? Inapprioriate for sure, but still an entirely different deal, as context matters, the environment matters and if you do not want to expose to that, you are not forced, you can simply not do that job.
If you go to the extreme and outlaw any potenially rude comment, you restrict language by a great deal, so much that people cannot express anything without fear somebody will feel hurt or insulted, and if that justifies that your social media gets permanently flagged and you suffer for it, its a way more extreme response than the "rude comment" started out as.
The adult option would be to point the rude comments out and keep it on a apprioriate level of response, you can talk stuff out and discuss it to proof a point without going to war directly , and still keep in mind, that no person is outright evil, for such things.
And yes, the real sick people are the ones that perform the threats, thats just downright cruelty and has no other reason than pleasing a sadistic pleasure, and that is absolutely nothing a society has to, or should accept, but its a completely different animal to a critic from an public figure.
I am on the side to promote that individuals are responsible for what they are doing.
Jeremy didnt incite harassment, he did poorly phrased comments sure, but thats hardly crazy evil, its just rude and if you talk to him about that, yes ofcourse he knows himself its rude, and thats about it, you can stand above it and realize that something thats already enough, realize you gone a bit to far and the moment you are told so, you can better yourself, problem solved ; the sick people that continue to threaten , thats what remains, but thats adults, responsible for their actions, and any adult that isnt insane should have enough intelligence to not even do that to begin with.
Racist comments are a special kind of deal, just as gay-topics etc. etc.
Its highly controversial to many people and especially your work place is a context with special meaning here.
If i make a racial comment in private, thats it, nobody cares. If someone is insulted they can sue me, i get appropriate punishment, and/or we settle the topic before it escalates, thats the potential for discussion and understanding that is much more valuable than taking every little comment and blow it up like its a death threat right away ; its clearly not.
In your context part you clearly see context matters so much.
Context is key for this here.
All the screenshots are mostly out of context and look entirely different if you get the big picture.
Yes people are offended a lot, but its undeniably a thing you have to be able to deal with if you have any kind of public job, or open yourself up to that (and if you cannot deal with it, its simply the wrong job for you, as theirs issues with lots of jobs and you cannot just blame others for that, self-responsility is a thing, its not that others are always to blame for anything you do and anything you do will have an effect on others, if your job is in public, thats a given).
I think america in special a lot of people are highly influenced by what some special individuals say , so they build up some form of responsibility for what they say, simply because of that.
And i think, it again depends on context and what group you talk to.
In the case here the group of people is the magic community, people that watch Jeremys Channel, thats already a very small subsection again and people that enjoy trollish comments, so they are already open to that and have their own problems why they cannot control what they are doing (as no sane person would write a death threat email to anybody, but lots of people do, especially in heated discusions and extreme topics).
But here Jeremy cannot be at fault for what individuals end up doing, the targeted audience are adults, and should totally be able to control themselves.
----
Your last part.
I also think he could be much less rude in his comments and from his latest comments he acknowledges this, as often you have to be told you are going over the edge, and if its good to think about it (but again, its about critic and staying on a non-extreme course, you want discussion and not open war).
Lots of stuff i can relate to and the topic is simply overblown by extreme margins.
In the end, people said some mean things and others reacted to them ; thats actually all that happened, thats rude at best, but its not downright evil.
This topic would much easier and smoother be solved in a much smaller circle, or in private between these two.
Pulling it to public just makes things worse, by a lot and it doesnt serve anybody, be they right or wrong, in the end, this open warfare just damages the community and people will bunker themselves into even more extreme sides and become even more unable to discuss anything without directly insulting each other.
----
But one thing is guaranteed, this will be a hot topic for the rest of the week and probably the next one, and at some point, nobody will care anymore and just play Magic again.
-
- TheOnlyOne652089
- Registered User
-
Member for 15 years, 2 months, and 13 days
Last active Wed, Apr, 24 2024 18:13:01
- 2 Followers
- 5,792 Total Posts
- 1070 Thanks
-
Nov 30, 2017
TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemPosted in: Articles -
Nov 30, 2017
TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemThe fact that a comment makes someone feel harassed doesnt mean it is harassment.Posted in: Articles
Just because someone feels insulted, its not automatic evil in nature.
Most important, he never told to her directly, you literally have to seek out his channel to see the comments, so you actively have to search yourself to see negative comments about yourself.
The indisputable issue are the sick minded individuals that go over the top and do exactly that, email directly, twitter to her directly etc. They do the harassment, they are 100% guilty for it, and they qualify for it, as they indeed take a sadistic pleasure in doing that, its among the most harmful type of troll.
Then theres a difference between private people and people in public.
As a private person nobody has any public interest in what i do and so comments about my person would be out of context.
The moment what you are doing is part of a community, like cosplay at a grand prix and doing pictures of that etc. You present yourself in public and so comments about exactly that are clearly presented.
That alone is no harassment and its just as important to clearly draw a line between what people truly say and what is casually said, simply put, if you are talking to a group of people for hours, chances are you will say something stupid and someone will feel insulted ; so it has to be viewed in context and not just "oh god, look what he said" , and finger point exactly that and ignore anything else.
And especially for Jeremys channel, its clearly a form of topics and talking that you might easily find offending, others do not, some think hes right about a bunch of stuff, and i believe you can easily see he has a bunch of points.
All the so called harassment can be put down to context that gives it a background, so that is what makes the topic a lot more slippery than just believing its all crystal clear.
The idea of thinking its downright crystal clear and theres only black/white in it, is already short sighted, as you have to see more of the picture to get a real glimpse of the actual truth.
-
Nov 30, 2017
TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemYea, if people truly think theres just 1 problem at hand, and that others, but ofcourse never themselves are a part of it, thats just ridiculous, as it is the kind of finger pointing that just wants to make someone else responsible for what you think is bad.Posted in: Articles
If someone truly feels harassed, seek the police, file a claim, prevent the harassment, thats what you can do as an adult, theres a little bit of responsibility for your own too.
Its not your job to defend your wife, if you truly want fairness, she can do that on her own and she should be absolutely able and willing to do so (and if she isnt, that is a problem you have to start working on).
Its always a big question mark, if you have to drag your personal issues into public.
That just makes everything worse, much worse, as you are suddenly exposed to people that choose sides and over dramatic defend it, no matter if it effects them at all.
The adult way to solve the issue would simply be if she started out to simply ask to stop exactly what she thinks is bothering her. Any responsible adult will accept that and change behavior if its reasonable, and if they dont, you file a claim against them, so they get judged by a neutral court (or you are proven wrong on your feeling of being harassed, thats also an option and as an adult your have to live with it). -
Nov 30, 2017
TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemTheres critic and just phrasing opinions and as a form of entertainer and content provider he has a form of talking that a lot of people find offensive, but there is plenty of comedians i find offensive, but that doesnt make them in any way problematic.Posted in: Articles
Comments can easily be in bad taste and thats undeniable the case for Jeremy, but the real core of the issue to discuss is the small amount of truly idiotic people that take it to a true harassment and violent form of threats ; and the question to discuss would be if you as a content provider are truly responsible for what some sick individuals do , given they are adults, these people are the actual problem, and thats not Jeremy.
The same kind of sick individuals exist on the other spectrum too, some of them Social Justice Warriors that somehow feel Jeremy has to be "utterly destroyed" and death threats against him are "totally fine".
Seriously, its the same kind of sick individuals and its the CORE of a true problem which puts every little issue into full on overdrive roadkill.
It serves nobody and its a form of discussion that is very prevalent in the internet.
Its a culture of trolls and social justice warriors that simply cannot keep their actions behind a healthy line that keeps a minimum of civilized discourse alive.
If people get famous they undeniable have to have a tougher hide. The more people you know and the more people respond to you, the more bad comments you will accumulate.
Thats natural, and people will either like what you do or they will not.
Some of the sick people will downright hate you for whatever you do and this leads to the exact problem of people that think they have to act themselves , right now and fight what they think is the evil, everyone thinks they are in the right to do so and so nobody is able to self-reflect and see they are going over the top.
If matters settle down you could easily see Jeremy seeing himself that a bunch of stuff crosses the line , but bad taste comments and actual harassment should be dealt with in court and absolutely not in public for people to just judge and start their little lynch mobs in every corner burning whatever victim they just found.
----
So there is more than just one problem.
A lot of problems and everyone is part of some problem, if they see it, know it, or still deny it. -
Nov 30, 2017
TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemTheres plenty of "good" men that started wars and killed people in the name of what they thought to be somehow the right thing.Posted in: Articles
The reality is, there are no "evil" and no "good" men, just opinions and people that push these ideology with violence over the other, who ever wins will be in the right, the other side clearly must have been wrong.
Its not the job of people to start a lynch mob and "destroy" other human beings and its downright pedantic to think that is in any way what "good men" should do.
Any problem has to be discussed and solved on the appropriate level.
Pushing topics in public only serves the trolls and media hype , people calling out for a single entity to be blamed for everything they think is bad.
The reality is, theres not a single bad person and everyone is usually to some degree responsible for what they do or do not do.
People really like to give small problems horrific names so they sound like much bigger problems, that leads only to despair and misery, it has no positive benefit for anybody, just pampers the ideology of people that really think they are the only legit form of judgment call, self-administered justice isnt the way to go and if you ever get in the situation to think someone is the personified evil, you are guaranteed wrong and simply ignore the other standpoint (so you become evil yourself, just to pretend to defend against evil, thats in no way a solution and only leads to a conflict in which everyone can blame anyone to be in the right and suddenly there are no good men left anymore).
-
Nov 30, 2017
TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemA very big issue is that different topics are brought together, while they simply do not fit.Posted in: Articles
Nazi and troll posters are two very different things and should never be put together, just to fuel a cause, thats selling your own arguments cheap and makes them one-dimensional black/white thinking again, which is good for nobody.
Also, there will be critic and negative critic as well, that has to be acceptable.
Nobody is forced to be overly positive about anything.
If you truly dislike something you can say so, and its value to the discussion that this is expressed and not just ignored, or even outlawed as something terrible wrong.
At the same time its very valid to criticize something and not come up with a solution on your own right away. I can critic a cook and not be able to make it better, thats totally fine and it must be legit to do so. The point of critic is that you should never need to justify for it, the receiver can take the critic and see it as an issue, or they dont, thats their cup of tea and its what an adult has to learn to deal with.
But here again, this changes a lot if someone is in private or its brought up in public and presented to a mob of people.
If you just honestly dislike cosplay and say so, thats fair, nobody forces you to like anything.
The "locker-room-talk" is a topic entirely for its own. Its something that is widely accepted and always was. Women to the same about men, they even do it among each other, it might just be more subtle than the direct approach of actually saying it out loud, even if its just in the "locker-room" (or in this case a youtube channel, or a bunch of twitter posts).
Its fine on its own.
What really pushes the topic to become a real issue is how stuff completely gets lost and out of control incited to be way bigger than what it really is (and yes, thats a terrible huge deal with the amount of media and the very real interest of media to promote topics into "highlights" and further push the mob to generate more horrific events to report about, its almost a self proclaiming prophecy, so its very difficult to truly say what amount of discussion is healthy and what is just talking it to bits and pieces, as many if not all topics will be seemingly super hot for the moment and meaningless the next week, as there is no real issue beside the illusion of talk at all).
----
How would an adult deal with bad talk about them in private ?
You confront the person and actually tell them to stop as its not ok for you.
Solves the issue, unless the person is actively not recognizing your problem.
In public it changes a lot.
Theres either somewhat anonymous people that jump on a topic train and pick sides, which very often leads to extreme reactions, way over the top (any threats via mail or any form of actual harm is absolutely no-go, no matter what the topic is, theres never a reason to choose violence to solve anything.
So if you talk in public, it will have an effect on people and it will polarize the people more and more. Thankfully lots of people can distinguish between a topic that truly effects them and just a rat catcher lynch mob , but some cant, and the poster shouldnt be responsible for these individuals, as almost anything could be seen as an incentive for violence, if the individual has some sick mind, theres an entirely different problem of its own (and yes, you have to ask yourselves why so many "troll" people exist and no matter the topic, they are harmful and actively ignore any productive discussion).
----
For the topic at hand, the first problem that ignited this into a public *****-fest was that it was brought to public at all.
Solving these kinds of issues should have been a thing between Jeremy and Sprinkle , in private or by her actively telling what bothers her, its just fair to do so, as it solves most issues and avoids outside people to intervene.
If that doesnt work out and somebody is not taking your arguments, you can take it to the police and to court to actively stop what bothers you with something like a protective injunction suit, which again should solve the issue at hand, instead of putting it up for debate to a lynch mob that just wants blood, no matter from who.
Its a very clear picture if a topic is just instantly brought to public, avoiding any legal options (or doing so later, in hopes the public opinion boosts your side).
See, if a topic is discussed in public, it will never be fair.
People pick side right away and defend it for whatever the cost, even if it doesnt effect them personally at all ; which brings the Social Justice Warrior term to fruits.
Yes thats a problem just as trolls.
Its good to have empathy, but its bad to jam ideals and ideology into a topic and mix topics entirely, just to proof a point that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
----
Believe it or not, neither Jeremy nor Sprinkle are somehow "evil incarnate" , they arent and they arent "toxic" to the community.
The kind of topic and how much its media-hyped and exaggerated , thats an entire issue of its own and overshadows the problem they personally had to solve between each other and makes it like a community issue , which it isnt, the community is fine, theres very rare cases and problems to deal with and they shouldnt be ignored, but also not exaggerated into spheres they arent fit for.
And this is, about a game, a hobby, people enjoy playing the game and enjoy being part of a community, if this is taken to a level of social criticism it doesnt serve a purpose for the game it just harms the experience for everyone, as it puts a stigma to the game, that it neither deserves or justifies at all. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Vanguard alone is potential broken, as they can be really annoying overpowered in decks that abuse the effect, this means even just a simpel combo deck can use a Vanguard with a high +card to get in the combo more efficient (an annoying factor that wants to be avoided by a brutal -life or something).
So overall, its a nice thing, but its just a funny thing for some trys and gets annoying in the long run.
The most funny Vanguards are the one that produce games of themself, looking for Momir and friends, this formats offer something special which i highly enjoyed (but again not for a long time, as its just a fun thing for some games).
////
However you could drive your idea a lot further if you make the idea "a lot" more customizable.
This means that a card could real:
Angel => your deck must have at least 20 angels in it.
Something like "generals" in EDH could be used aswell, for something like:
Class Summoner => You may play a "General" from outside the game.
The Class doesnt effect your hand size etc. it will just give you abilities , your values could be set by your "Race" and some randomisation , like in D&D if you create a character , you either get points to disripute or randomize them.
You could even give some classes ingame "Quest" conditions, something along :
- Have 5 or more creatures on the battlfield. => draw three cards , +2 EXP
- Have exactly 1 life => your life total becomes 20. +5 EXP
- Draw five cards during a turn. => Each opponent discards a card. +2 EXP
This Quests are "randomly" given away of pairs in 3 for example, and you can exchange 1 of them at the end of your turn , in case you can't reach it fast enough or at all.
If you fullfill the condition you gain the reward , and for example some "Exp" , you would keep and gain more and more "EXP" this way and some classes requiere more EXP to get, or you even give out some "2nd Tier" classes etc.
This things means Magic becomes slighty like an RPG , you play Magic with special characters, with conditions, quests/rewards and you gain more and more possibilities, rather than just deck building, which is like getting "Items".
I could really see such a thing made in a possible "Online" version of Magic, its an intresting thing, an highly Casual.
All this could easy include "Plane" Cards as the actual Area you play, or even give out some "Szenarios" where you play again 2 opponents, or you have a "King" to protect in an 3vs3 game (Emperor actual) but you play your normal deck and get through all this "adventures".
Examples for that:
Quest:
Protect your King against the enemies "attacking forces".
1 Player = King // King dies, game lost
2 Players = "Generals"
against
3 opponents => attacks
*Simpel Magic in the end, with a lot modifications outside the normal game rulez.
**The King can't be attacked unless a General has no creatures, more or less like the King is a "Planeswalker" card , the generals can block everything that attacks the King.
***Other Emperor like rulez.
Quest:
Protect a Ship
1 Player = you
1 Opponent = attacking opponent
1 NPC = ship
Here again, you have to protect the NPC player which is considerer the "ship", that player will play islands each turn and move forward, the goal is that the player has 20 islands in play, this means the quest will take 20 turns which it has to survive.
You could even take it further and make it that the player walks outside like in an MMORPG, and the "combat" is just made via Magic, so the possibilities get bigger and bigger with a giant amount of possible "Casual" formats that get supported to allow a big difference between each game.
Could be really really nice, but drives the game away from normal Magic and extends it with RPG elements.
MagicOnline is a thing for itself, making all this in an idea of an MMORPG is incredible but not easy to do, and its something that goes far beyond the normal "card game" that Magic currently is (and will actual be).
*But i like it a lot.
Instant
Target creature gets +2/+2 until the end of your next turn.
If you want an effect that stays longer than a singel turn, allways use counters for that if you can't have something else thats visible.
For your card thats:
Prolonged Growth -
Instant
Put two +1/+1 counters on target creature.
At the end of your next turn, remove two +1/+1 counters from it.
Thats more or less worser than battlegrowth, as its only really good if you can use that counters for 2 hits and have a real gain from that, so mainly to hit for +4 damage, but for that a Giant Growth is mostly better.
The real help would come as the +1/+1 counters give you a lot flexibility with mechanics like Persist, or if you can use them for something else before they get removed by the effect.
With that its actual usefull, not really insane powerfull but good and maybe more usefull than a Giant Growth (which is not good enough for constructed normally and especially not with lightning bolt around).
I could see a card along Unstable Mutation:
Prolonged Growth -
Instant
Put three +1/+1 counters on target creature.
At the end of your next three turns, remove a +1/+1 counter from it.
So it means you get a Giant Growth and than lose a counter each turn, which makes it a more usefull giant growth with a lot flexibility.
For sure a powerhouse trick, but combat tricks have the hardest time to be constructed worthy.
You get a very big discount for a 5/5 if you can manage to stop each player from playing lands, maybe "Limited Ressources" or something along this for hard lock, otherwise you have to make sure with some other things, even if thats just discard.
I could really imagine such an card printed, just without "Landfail" as the ability, simpel trigger.
Its a long history of black creatures with significant drawbacks but potentially big bodies (which are mostly unplayable as theirs too less to fight the drawback, but thats just a matter of time to get a keycard to make it possible).
Some final tuning could be to upgrade it with Trample and such that it really can wreck a board :
Despondent Horror -
Creature -- Horror (R)
Trample
Whenever a land enters the battlefield, sacrifice ~.
7/7
So this means that you can wreck a player if they miss a land drop (which is bad anyway) , you don't have to play this turn 1 as thats pretty stupid anyway, but turn 3+ if you see they don't have land, its a gamble if they topdeck one, but can really be worth it.
With some library manipulation might really be a viable thing.
Just imagine:
Stripmind B
Sorcery
Retrace
Target player puts a card from his or her hand on top of his or her library.
This could help to use your own lands to keep your opponent from drawing them and "lock" the hand down, stronger than Ravens Crime in that meaning, but less good at really discarding the cards in case they simply play them.
Or some cards that punish a player if they play lands for a short time:
Acid Ground 2B
Instant
Until end of turn, whenever a land enters the battlefield, that lands controller discards a card, sacrifices a creature and loses 3 life.
Could be a little abused with effects that push lands in play for an opponent without "may".
So yes i really could see this card printed, even if it only really shines if you can make the game for your opponent as "unfun" as possible (drawing no lands is ugly), but potential a really strong card.
Painfull Choices BR
Sorcery
Target player discards a card. If its a creature card, ~ deals 2 damage to target creature , otherwise it deals 2 damage to that player.
This makes the wording shorter and easier to read.
So what ever the card is you get in for a "mini" blightning.
Whenever your opponent can they won't discard a creature if thats ever bad for them, but with the choice that you have to kill your own creatures it gets an even better flavour, as thats "really" a painfull choice not only for your opponent but for you aswell.
*Just think you have a turn 1 2/2 guy and play this turn 2, so your opponent might discard a creature and you have to kill your own guy.
Overall i would say the artwork is "way" to cruel and realistic to be ever printed on a magic card.
Macabre Waltz is an artwork that nearly got dismissed , just keep in mind that magic is actual 13+ age.
Undying Skeleton 2BBB
Creature - Skeleton
When ~ enters the battlefield, destroy target nonblack creature and you lose 3 life.
At the beginning of your upkeep, if ~ is in your graveyard with three or more other creature cards, you may return ~ to your hand.
3/3
Well its not bad, but it might even deserve some more power up.
"Undying" makes me think it could really withstand punishment and as you have it its more a "recurring" mechanic especially used for Phoenix cards and such.
I would aim to keep the creature in play rather than getting it back:
Undying Skeleton 2BBB
Creature - Skeleton
When ~ enters the battlefield, destroy target nonblack creature and you lose 3 life.
Whenever ~ is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, exile an creature card in a graveyard and return it to the battlfield.
3/3
This way, its more "Undying" and more creepy and combo card with sacrifice outlets.
Ofcourse its not a "may" if you want to keep you skeleton "undying" it will eat your corpses and resist anything that will kill it.
However this resistance will suffer you a 3 life lose from the ability , unless you can't find a target to kill (which saves you).
The real show starts if you can shoot something down , sacrifice it , kill something and repeat for as many life as you can spare (which isnt "that" much without massive lifegain).
Lavabane Serpent 2RR
Creature - Elemental, Serpent
Haste, Provoke
Whenever ~ becomes blocked, it deals 1 damage to target creature or player.
3/2
This is an example for an effect were i would avoid the "may". Is their any situation in which you don't want to shoot at least 1 damage at your opponent ? Ofcourse you could "forget", but thats allways an annoying thing if players forget their own "good" effects (gg Soul Warden).
Overall its not a bad creature, but it really doesnt feel like a Rare, this is what i see at "uncommon" as its really nice in Limited but thats it.
As your artwork makes it a Serpent in flames, go for "elemental" , which means its actual a Serpent of flames, like Lightning Serpent.
Sorcery
Sacrifice any number of creatures.
~ deals damage to each creature and each player equal to the number of creatures sacrificed this way.
Well works, but its more a finisher to blow out 4-5 creatures, wrath the board and deal damage. Its never really awesome as you lose a lot aswell.
For example i see Devastating Dreams, which takes a discard cost, but has a very brutal effect.
It got really abuseable with life from the loam and Terravore, but at least it had a real point to be able to become abused.
Fazit:
The card is not intresting to play as you pretty much allways need to sacrifice 3+ creatures for a reasonable effect, and in that case i would run simply Flamebreak and have a lot better result.
Molten Timber :symgr::symr::symg:
Sorcery
Destroy target land
Its actual just a Stone rain with a much worser manacost.
So i don't really get the point why this is multicolor, uses hybrid mana and still costs like Stone rain.
Nature's Swiftness
Instant
Split Second.
Draw a card.
You can cast your next spell as it would have flash. If that spell is an instant or sorcery it gains split second.
Problem here is that it makes nothing if you give an allready casted spell flash. Flash makes only sence "before" you cast the spell and not after that.
So you need to simply say that your next spell can be played whenever you can cast an instant, or like i "would" have flash, but you can't give the spell flash you see.
Instead of your "can't be countered" i would use Split second, especially as the spell itself becomes more usefull if it has split second aswell.
This means i can cast this one, and than my "protected" spell.
As the effect is weak and comparable to "Overmaster" give it a cantrip to be really fair and make it good to fight reactive spells (otherwise you trade 2:1 allready, which sucks).
Keep in mind that Overmaster and its friends are really really "bad" so the big push for this one might make it actual usefull.
Temple of the Kor
Land
Temple of the Kor enteres the battlefield tapped.
:symw::symw:,
Sounds actual fair for the land.
However for my taste a +1/+1 is more in theme for the "anthemn" effect, as a +1/+2 is not common among white effects.
Enchantment
When ~ enters the battlefield each player draws two cards.
Whenever an player draws a card put the top card of his or her library in his or her graveyard.
Well i think the cost of a heavy mill like Sanity Grinding makes sence, especially as it can mirror a little Underworld Dreams as said.
But it really must be faster than Underworld Dreams, as the Dreams don't win an "Apple" today as the "massive" overpowered card draw is missing.
The card works good if you give it a "card draw" Prosperity , that helps you to play this and not run out of cards. The funny is that you don't even need to mill much with it, it will mill for 1 card every turn, and you can abuse it for your own gain and to mill more.
I see the card mainly as a 3 mana "draw 2 cards" with the added bonus to help you mill on the long run, and slighty help your combo if you can maximize the card draw everyone gets (ala Jace, Howling mine and all that).
And with the manacost you give it more flexibility in Sanity Grinding decks that look for "Chroma" manasymbols.
Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep, pay :2mana::symg::symg: or sacrifice Cultivation.
Play with the top card of your library revealed.
You may play land cards from the top of your library.
You may play green permanent cards from the top of your library as your land drop.
You don't need the "as it would be in your hand" anymore, it was more or less just reminder text anyway, if you are able to play the card, you are able, no matter from "where" , the wording even made some problems with cards like Phage so peops thought they could play her, but in fact its played from the library, no matter if it wants to be like the hand.
For the idea to replace your land drop with a "permanent card" land drop i can't find a proper wording that sounds "right", but mainly because i am unsure for a word "land drop" in the rulez.
However, permanents only exist on the battlefield, otherwise they are "permanent cards".
And for the first part i would use a new keyword i use to use to make the text shorter:
Cultivation :2mana::symg::symg:
Enchantment
Maintain - :2mana::symg::symg:
Play with the top card of your library revealed.
You may play land cards from the top of your library.
You may play green permanent cards from the top of your library as your land drop.
Maintain simply replaces the complete sentence but is actual the same.
At the beginning of the upkeep pay the cost or sacrifice it.
This makes even wordings for Xathrid Demon and Lord of the Pit better:
Xathrid Demon 3BBB
Creature - Demon
Flying, trample
Maintain - Sacrifice a creature other than Xathrid Demon
If you pay the maintain cost, each opponent loses life equal to the sacrificed creature's power, otherwise tap Xathrid Demon and you lose 7 life.
7/7
In my taste it reads better as its more regular language :
To "maintain" my Xathrid demon i have to pay the maintain cost of it.
Blood Funel and Carnival of Souls
Cards that look actual "great" and abusable, but in the end they are just bad and not worth the work around them.
This means its nice to get a discount of 2 colorless, but thats not good as most of your creatures don't have a colorless cost at all.
If you want to make it really worth in "black" decks, go for:
Erroneous Genesis - :symb::symb:
Enchantment
Creature spells you cast cost :symb::symb: less to cast.
Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, put two -1/-1 counters on it.
That makes it really possible to go with it and have a usefull payback with all the black creatures.
You would need to run some cards that can survive the counters and/or use them for an advantage ala Shadowmoor cards (but even bigger push).
Another thing is that you could use it to boost out creatures just for the effects they offer and know that you lose them right off, just to get them back for more effects.
What ever it is, its really not easy to build a "good" deck around this kind of discount. A lot of peops really tryd for "years" to put Blood Funel and Carnival of Souls to use, but nothing was worth to be mentioned.
Planeswalker -- Azem (M)
+1: You may tap or untap target permanent.
-3: Target player puts the top card of his or her library into his or her graveyard for each tapped permanent that player controls.
-5: Choose one: Tap or untap all permanents target player controls; or put a token copy of target creature in a graveyard onto the battlefield.
1
The +1 seems too much with "untap" simply because its a Mana Acceleration , and blue is not about that, as all the "untap" cards actual use mana to do so (or are spells).
-3 is nice, as its a really usefull way to mill , interacts well with tap cards and Stasis like effects (even if they might be shifted in parts to White right now).
The Ultimate is kinda "boring" mainly because the "or" is so strange as that 2 totally different effects and i can't see whats the idea of it (as blue isnt about reanimator, Body Double is "shifted" reanimation).
It might work better if you fuse the ultimate to the "mill" , something along milling for each card in the graveyard, so you can win if you milled 30 cards, to get another 30 (or simply Traumatize to mill the half and than the other one).
Azem Dreamweaver - :symu::symu:
Planeswalker -- Azem (M)
+1: Tap target permanent. It doesnt untap during its controllers next untap step.
-1: Target permanent becomes a copy of target tapped permanent other than ~.
-3: Each player puts the top card of his or her library into his or her graveyard for each tapped permanent that player controls, or each card in his or her graveyard.
1
So i put both "mill" options as the ultimate as i think thats something along "Jace" that really wins a game if you ever can mill for that much.
The +1 is more focused on tapping and "sleep" a permanent, and removed the untap as i feel its bad to give blue mana acceleration (as thats the last it can do).
The -1 is something i think plays very well with the "tap" matters and it allows some very freaking tricks.
This means you can tap a land you have and than copy it in a creature, so you "cloned" you something, or you copy the opponents tapped creatures in "lands".
Other funny things are that you can "tap" another planeswalker and make it a copy of a third planeswalker and so cheat loyality counters around (for example using Jace to get loyality and than make it into Ajani Vengeant or something), this means the ability works even better if you have some "counters", or you use cards on your own with some kind of drawback.
What ever you do, i think the -1 makes it very intresting just for that, and the +1 makes it more a blue planeswalker to keep cards in controll , the ultimates are finally to give a huge mill option or play together with your other mill spells.
That all for just 2 blue mana is really a lot, so your opponent should really have some options to kill your guy quickly (which isnt "that" hard with only 1 loyality).
Minotaur Visionary - :symg::symu::symr:
Creature -- Minotaur Shaman (U)
When Minotaur Visionary enters the battlfield, shuffle your library, then exile the top card. You may play it without paying its mana cost.
3/3
Well while the idea isnt bad, i say again:
"Without paying its manacost" is among the most dangerous phrases in magic.
This card is so insane random that its not fun anymore.
Just imagine someone plays this, than gets another, and finally Bloodbraith Elf , Cascade blabla , thats so insane.
Another problem are simpel "big" spells, randomly "Progenitus" ? , randomly your "Empty the Warrens" , "Dragonstorm" what ever , if its something big the card is way way way too powerfull.
In worst you "cantrip" with this guy, which is allready pretty strong as a 3/3 with cantrip is good, but getting the cantrip for free is what makes Bloodbraith Elve so good (beside that you most the time "know" what you get, here its random, but thats not fixing the problem).
A idea that comes in my mind:
Minotaur Visionary - :symg::symu::symr:
Creature -- Minotaur Shaman (U)
When ~ enters the battlfield, shuffle your library, then put the top card of your library into play "Morph".
2/3
This will give you a 2/3 minotaur and another 2/2 vanilla Morph, thats good, but it can be even better if that "morph" card actual has an Morph ability to turn face up (whatever you have).
With this idea it becomes a card that needs a set with "Morph" in it.
Another idea could be to use "Suspend" in a similiar way:
Minotaur Visionary - :symg::symu::symr:
Creature -- Minotaur Shaman (U)
When ~ enters the battlfield, shuffle your library, then exile the top card of your library with two time counters on it. If it doesnt have suspend, it gains suspend.
3/3
This will "at least" delay your randomly revealed card, and give your opponent time to react, and avoid the total insane turns when you randomly reveal more copies of it and "cascade" cards, or even storm.
So a lot possible ways, but it really needs to have balance between "random" and "randomly broken".
Vigean Laboratory
Land (R)
Vigean Laboratory has graft X, where X is the number of creatures you control.
I first thought this card might be way to strong, simply because graft X could be a lot. But on second view it will rarely have graft at all in the early turns if you can't make a turn 1 play , so it doesnt pump your creatures, which is good.
As i think its a little bad to use the card and only focus on "+1/+1" counters, it might work better to remove "any" counter , which gives you interactions with "Cumulative Upkeep" , "Suspend" (as card, not permanent), "-1/-1" counters and you can use it with some other counters that might trouble you.
Among the strongest interactions i see the ability to give your opponent a "Smokestack" and keep yourself alive with it, or use it to keep a bunch of Cumulative Upkeep cards around (and pay the other costs with the mana which is even better).
Mutating Python - :4mana::symg::symu:
Creature -- Snake (R)
Imprint -- Whenever a creature dealt damage by Mutating Python this turn is be put into a graveyard from the battlefield, exile it.
Mutating Python has the abilities of all cards imprinted on it.
5/5
I am pretty sure you don't need to say that the "exiled" card is imprinted, Duplicant simply exiles the nontoken creature aswell.
And i would use a trigger for the ability instead of a replacement, simply because that will allow more interactions with graveyard removal and its simpler to handel triggers than replacements (so i would avoid replacements whenever possible to make the cards more enjoyable without rulez problems).
Fazit:
Good cards, might be better to get a view on the "themes" for the possible set.
Sorcery (uncommon)
Fiendfire Deals 3 damage to target creature. If that creature would be put into a graveyard from the battlefield Fiendfire deals damage equal to that creatures power to another target creature.
Fixed just wording, as the card is really fair as it is.
I could even see this card as "rare" and repeat damaging more and more creatures, as than it feels like a "Flamebreak" you can controll what dies.
So i would make it:
Fiendfire :2mana::symr::symr:
Sorcery (Rare)
Fiendfire Deals 3 damage to target creature and it gains:
"When that creature is put into a graveyard from the battlefield it deals damage equal to its power to target creature and this creature gains this ability.".
This gives an even bigger flavour point as you can shoot one creature and they will kill them each other:
In funny view i see : "Did you shoot that arrow ? I will kill you dumbass."
Makes the card an wonderfull powerfull Mass Removal, even if it can have drawbacks (as you can't mass removal creatures with less power than thoughness with it).
Eyreac, the Ever-Dragon :3mana::symu::symg::symr:
Legendary Creature - Elder Dragon (mythic rare)
Flying, Protection White, Protection Black
At the beginning of your upkeep sacrifice Eyreac, the Ever-Dragon unless you pay :symu::symg::symr:.
If Eyreac, the Ever-Dragon would be put into your graveyard from the battlefield instead destroy target creature and shuffle Eyreac into your library.
5/5
I am pretty sure that you should avoid "him" or "her" to refer to the card itself. Either say "it" or name the card by its name, for legends its enough to use the name without the part behind.
Powerwise its slighty over the top to get a 5/5 flyer with double protection that will eat a creature if it dies. Feels like something along "Keiga" and an Elder Dragon, but might be ok if the overall power of your cards is high or the card important for its "theme".
Bleeding Spirit
Creature - Spirit Minion (common)
When Bleeding Spirit enters the battlefield you loose 1 life.
Their wounds still gaping from their mortal end, the spirits of the netherworld fought fiercely for their new master.
2/1
Well here i simply say that the drawback is really not enough.
Black has a lot of 2/2 for B , but they give a lot more "potential" life lose.
Take Sacromancy, Carnophage and the new one in Zendikar, they all use life lose, but drain you more, especially as thats "Suicide black" and 1 life lose is not much Suicide.
Might do a better job to give this card more interaction , if you have more Spirits it might be good to use them:
Bleeding Spirit
Creature - Spirit Minion (common)
When Bleeding Spirit enters the battlefield you lose 3 life. If you control another black spirit creature, each player loses 3 life instead.
2/1
Another might be something along the Zendikar theme with "Opponent with 10 or less life" :
Bleeding Spirit
Creature - Spirit Minion (common)
When Bleeding Spirit enters the battlefield you lose 3 life. If an opponent has 10 or less life, each opponent loses 3 life instead.
2/1
Might give it a push, put its allways more intresting that a meaningless "1 life lose" as a drawback.
I would say you apply the "static" and than you are done to avoid loops like this.
Its like something is white in a special case, and gets +1/+1 from Honor of the Pure, than is no longer white.
Should be "depentent on another" i remember something like this with interactions regarding Bloodmoon and the like.
So i think it works well allready as you don't get in a loop with statics.
If you just want to "randomize" the cards and still give the player the option to look at the cards, just reveal the cards, than "shuffle them" face down, and than allow the player to choose cards from them, that gives you what you want for "secretly" without being cheating.
Fixed wording:
Monk's Bargain :3mana::symu:
Sorcery
Put your hand on top of your library.
Search your library for four cards and reveal them. Put them face down and shuffle them. You may look at them, than put any number of those cards into your hand. Target opponent names a card. Reveal your hand. If the named card is revealed this way, then put your hand on top of your library. Shuffle your library.
Ok, the card gets really complicated if the "secretly" gets explained in real magic terms.
As the card works it actual does your effect similiar.
As the card can't make sure what you "added to your hand" as its randomly and actual not visible to an opponent, you have to put your hand away before, as you would anyway as thats not cards "added" this way to your hand.
Now you search for the 4 cards, and you reveal them, no way to "select" them without searching. After revealing the cards, you put them face down, so your opponent can't see what card is what, the shuffling randomizes them so they can't simply remember which is what even if they are face down, you are allowed to look at them so you can choose them not randomly. Now the opponent "names" a card, not declares anything and you reveal your hand and look for the "named" one that is "revealed" by this action in your hand.
Finally you put the cards back on the library if you lose them or you simply keep them in your hand, what ever happens you must shuffle the library to randomize your "revealed" cards again that you don't have in your hand.
Really a lot of text this way, even if it might be possible to tweak the wording more, its the best i can do right now to have a proper wording.
The text is so long that its for sure a very small font, and uses the complete text box.
*Beside the wording:
I think the effect is not good in blue, even if its something along Gifts Ungiven / Fact or Fiction, searching in this way is pretty strange, as you can tutor up 3 cards with it pretty "randomly" , so i would use red mana in the card to show this "chaos" part as its more or less like "Gamble".
Monkey's Bargain 2R
Instant
Thats what i end with.
//
Your idea of "naming cards" works best for constructed and only if the format is clearly defined. If your opponent can't know what to say or you have 2 possible cards that could be used (or more) it becomes a random effect, that has a minimal amount of "skill" involved.
While thats not bad, it kinda gets stupid if so much cards use this "name a card" phrase to add a random drawback to it just to be cheaper and make magic more of a "luck" game (more than it allready is in its "random" events).
Keep in mind that the Definition of "card advantage" is that you really have an advantage in the "number" of cards, the quality of that cards has no meaning for "card advantage" as it is, thats really the "quality advantage" , which can have millions and millions of meanings, even more than the points you stated, but for real "card" advantage they are meaningless.
Card Quality even depends on Matchups, situations, or even if you are on the draw or not, so the real "quality" of your cards is never the same and hardly to talk about in perfection.
Something i would refer to as "temporary virtual card advantage" is this example:
I play a Serra Angel and this creature makes your grizzly Bear a "virtual" dead card, as you won't attack with it and you can't block with it, which makes it pretty much dead, but only so long as i have the Serra Angel and you no way to get around it (tricks/removal what ever). So now i gained a virtual temporary card advantage as your card is "totally" nulled in its possible actions.
If you now play a Baneslayer Angel, you make my Serra Angel worser, but not totally worthless, as you can't attack save, i can at least counterattack and block your Baneslayer, even if its not a good move, my cards are not totally useless, so not counting as dead, even while they lost a lot "quality" but actual nothing in the "numbers" of cards changed by this action, not even the virtual card advantage.
This means :
Card quality <> Card Advantage
While Card advantage might actual give you "more" card quality, it doesnt say that you actual gain more quality in the complete view (as 3 lands are pretty much meaningless if you can't use them for something).
Thats a funny thing why "tutors" are considered stronger than pure card draw, ofcourse you would say, but its a simpel fact that i prefer quality about the numbers.
In Magic it doesnt matter if you make a giant amount of card advantage, the quality will win you games, as a singel Baneslayer Angel will win the game , no matter how much cards i draw or i discard you, even if i destroy every other permanent you have, and funny is that even in that case, the "quality" can become irrelevant if you you have 0 cards in the library and i force you to draw cards, you actual "lose" the game because you would be forced to make card advantage (paradox actual) , so at that situation the "quality" of a before meaningless card and the "use" of the card change dramatically (and here again, you would say ofcourse you know that, nobody has to tell you).
So this means a thing you can easy talk about is the "card advantage" in real numbers, the "quality" of a card is extrem abstract and hardly to specify with a number or value.
*Just try to give every card in Standard a Value of its "quality" and give a factor for every possible situation how that value would change by it and the circumstances, ofcourse with all the possible combinations of that card. Its an impossible try to do that, so the "quality" keeps abstract and untouchable to define in the big view.
And this means, trading your lightning bolt for a creature is actual a 1for1 in most cases, if that creature produced tokens (ala Siege Gang) its no longer a 1for1 as the card isnt totally neutralized by your card, but you can still refer to a 1for1 in abstract view, as the tokens are part of the "quality" of the card and have no effect on the number of cards (as tokens <> cards).
Its a funny thing, but this means that you make card advantage if you play Wrath of God and kill mutliple creatures and the like, and ofcourse you gain not a real card advantage if you can counter the opponents Wrath of God, but counting the simpel fact that if it would resolve, you would lose all your creatures, this counterspell "virtual" represents all the card you have that it protects, thats what "virtual" means, something thats not real, but still pretty near to it, it has no meaning of the "quality" , even if it helps to improve the quality of a card if it is capable of producing a big virtual card advantage (but cancel is obvisious worser than Counterspell in quality, so you see theirs an insane amount of factors that define the "quality" but a easy one way to determine the "real" card advantage and a little more abstract for the "virtual" card advantage).
So after all, its a topic everyone actual understands. Everyone knows that countering a Wrath if you have a lot creatures of your own is a good thing, nobody has to tell you that, and while you still trade 1 card against 1 card, you know that you saved your cards, the same as you know that you prevented your opponent from drawing a "virtual" 3 cards by an Ancestral Recall, which makes it a better virtual card advantage for you than countering just a "brainstorm", the "quality" of this action might be a lot different, as even the Brainstorm can be superior to the Ancestral Recall in the given situation and circumstances.
Big topic, maybe someone wants to write an "Articel" Series about it ^^.
A funny thing of this is discussed for the "Artifical Intellgence" used for Magic playing bots (no joke, "Bots" for MTGO exist that draft , build decks, trade cards and play them) and how to make this bots smarter in playing, drafting and building decks.
A very very intresting topic, but a very complicated aswell.
Just make the abilities simpel without kicker , that would make so much more sence.
I would like it a lot more if the discount without kicker would be a lot higher and than change it that "you" have to sacrifice a creature instead, so its reasonable to play it without kicker and not just "allways" kick it.
Something like:
Vampire Guard B
Creature - Vampire, Soldier
Kicker - BBB
When ~ enters the battlfield sacrifice a creature. If ~ is kicked, target opponent sacrifices a creature instead.
3/3
Beside that its a 3/3 for 4 with the kicker, this example wants to show that this way the card really makes sence to use without kicker and later on use the kicker, so a decision is made.
Without something like this, its just annoying as the cards are "allways" better with kicker and pretty bad without it.
However, for your card to remember a color its not simpel enough to use "counters" , so you are forced to use a way to remember that can't be displayed in the game (write it on paper or something) , actual similiar to cards that "name cards" ofcourse you have to remember them.
This means your card can be done as it is, but its not good idea to make a mechanic around this with multiple cards.
*To make this point clear, imagine a mechanic that wants you to "name a card" and than play Limited with 20 cards that use this, and than keep all of them in your mind without a piece of paper, thats no fun really.
So things like this work best if they are "singeltons" around in your set, so they are special enough and peops are able to remember a singel card if its important.
*In worst you can write it down, or use Basic Lands to symbolize the "color" (which means some unsleeved ones ofcourse).