Kiora was introduced to the public way before we even knew of Ral through hacking the game files. Kiora consists of enemy colors.
Either way, planeswalkers defy the major themes of the set. Venser was the only multicolor card of Scars and had nothing to do with artifacts. Koth emphasized mono-color decks against the main theme of the set. Tezzeret was the only multicolor card of Besieged. Karn was colorless. Four of the Lorwynwalkers were human in a set containing no humans.
The whole point of planeswalkers is that they are allowed to be alien to the plane.
All your arguments towards Ral can be applied to Kiora.
"I also think that Kiora will eventually be printed, just not in this block" is not a strong argument.
If a planeswalker is attacked, the "defending player" is the controller of the planeswalker.
Here is the relevant portion of the rules:
Quote from Comprehensive Rules »
508.5. If an ability of an attacking creature refers to a defending player, or a spell or ability refers to both an attacking creature and a defending player, then unless otherwise specified, the defending player it's referring to is the player that creature was attacking at the time it became an attacking creature that combat, or the controller of the planeswalker that creature was attacking at the time it became an attacking creature that combat.
Flavorfully, the player is a planeswalker. A landwalker that 'walk-hits a player can also hit that player's planeswalkers in the same manner.
Mana abilities do not use the stack and cannot be responded to. So no, you cannot respond to a player tapping a land for mana with any card (such as Rishadan Port)
However, you can respond to a player tapping a Wasteland for its ability, but this will not affect anything. The tap+sacrifice of Wasteland is a cost. Once the cost has been paid, the ability is on the stack. No amount of tapping or untapping the source will affect the fact that the ability is on the stack.
Essentially, you need a Stifle or Trickbind and the like to stop the ability.
Cultural Exchange's targets are only players. You choose creatures, but you do not target them.
1. Protection prevents targeting, but Cultural Exchange does not target. These are valid choices.
2. Phantasmal X triggers upon targeting, but Cultural Exchange does not target. Phantasmal Dragon will not be sacrificed (nor will it be destroyed; note that sacrifice =/= destroy).
3. Shroud prevents targeting, but Cultural Exchange does not target. This is a valid choice.
4. Considering the exchange choices occur after the spell resolves, no exchange can happen if one of the targeted players is dead/conceded.
5. Considering the exchange choices occur after the spell resolves, dead creatures cannot even be considered for the exchange because they're in the graveyard by the time the spell resolves.
As an aside, this rule is worthy of consideration for spells that do target creatures to be exchanged (Spawnbroker, etc)
701.8a A spell or ability may instruct players to exchange something (for example, life totals or control of two permanents) as part of its resolution. When such a spell or ability resolves, if the entire exchange can't be completed, no part of the exchange occurs.
Example: If a spell attempts to exchange control of two target creatures but one of those creatures is destroyed before the spell resolves, the spell does nothing to the other creature.
For example, all creatures can be done (with the same accuracy as your card) as sorceries/instants that put tokens into play. :/
Yes they can. However, there are more creatures in the entire game than there are any other card type; if not the majority, creatures clearly have the plurality. This justifies them having their own card type.
Unless you want your idea relegated to non-serious 'casual' formats (Planechase, Archenemy, etc) there is no need to dynamically change the game so much for such a limited and niche concept as "Rifts".
OT: Volcano Slug should just say "each player sacrifices two lands". It really doesn't do anything except be a corner case when you get a boost from choosing your two Inkmoth Nexus' which can still attack
Destroy the Volcano Slug and your opponent can use their lands again.
That being said, I think the card should say:
"When Volcano Slug enters the battlefield, each player chooses two lands they control without lava counters and puts a lava counter on them."
Works better with multiples and makes the counters actually meaningful when the slug leaves play.
Your card is functionally the same as the following:
Pugilist Colosseum - :2mana::symg:
World Enchantment Planeswalker
At the beginning of each player's end phase, that player chooses a creature he or she controls and a creature his or her opponent controls. Those creatures fight.
{8}
Planeswalkers have subtypes that destroy others of the same.
A planeswalker doesn't have to have a subtype. Plus, you're essentially having locales act like World Enchantments, there's no reason two locales should be in play anyways.
What's the difference between artifacts and enchantments? Enchantments are just colored artifacts. Or instants and sorcery? Instants are just sorceries with flash.
Artifacts and enchantments exist by different names and the game treats them differently by convention. Red and green destroy artifacts whereas white and green destroy enchantments. Artifacts can be tapped whereas enchantments almost never do. Artifacts are usually colorless whereas enchantments are colored. Artifacts represent physical objects or locations whereas enchantments are immaterial.
These reasons alone are not only flavor differences but have bred a history of mechanical differences.
If you want to make such an oversimplification, you could simply say that Enchantments are just creatures that can't attack and lands are uncounterable artifacts that cost :0mana:.
Make cards that give you emblems and you have most of your "rift" rules-baggage already accommodated.
* Rifts are a new permanent type.
Emblems are not a permanent, but act as a unique type
* Rifts are indestructible.
Emblems are not removable primarily because nothing interacts with them (yet).
* Rifts have no mana cost. Instead, they have a loyalty cost. Loyalty costs are played by removing loyalty counters from a planeswalker you control.
Emblems have no mana cost.
As for the really niche planeswalker-interaction, you can simply make this an additional cost on a card and still leave design space open.
* Rifts can only be played at any time you could play a sorcery.
...make it a Sorcery that gives you an emblem.
* Any player may play a Rift's actived ability.
Simply state this on the card itself.
* Rift abilities are paid for like any activated ability.
Emblems work here.
* All Rift abilities are "creature abilities" list only a type of token, and are understood as "Put a token of this type into play."
Emblems work here.
* If a Rift would be put into any zone except the battlefield or the graveyard, exile it instead.
Cards that give you emblems work here.
---
EXAMPLE: Craw Rift -
Sorcery - Rift
Rift 3 (Put an emblem into play with 3 rift counters on it and the following abilities. Any player may play these abilities as a sorcery.)
:4mana::symg::symg:: Put a 6/4 Wurm token...etc
It may benefit you to remove the "Spamming/Flaming" portion from your public profile. When those two are considered sins on the internet, it is not very advantageous to confess them to the public.
Kiora was introduced to the public way before we even knew of Ral through hacking the game files. Kiora consists of enemy colors.
Either way, planeswalkers defy the major themes of the set. Venser was the only multicolor card of Scars and had nothing to do with artifacts. Koth emphasized mono-color decks against the main theme of the set. Tezzeret was the only multicolor card of Besieged. Karn was colorless. Four of the Lorwynwalkers were human in a set containing no humans.
The whole point of planeswalkers is that they are allowed to be alien to the plane.
All your arguments towards Ral can be applied to Kiora.
"I also think that Kiora will eventually be printed, just not in this block" is not a strong argument.
Here is the relevant portion of the rules:
Flavorfully, the player is a planeswalker. A landwalker that 'walk-hits a player can also hit that player's planeswalkers in the same manner.
Fnord is right. By the time you'll have priority to do anything, Wasteland is already in the graveyard due to its sacrifice cost.
Devour does not target. You can sacrifice creatures with shroud because it does not target.
However, you can respond to a player tapping a Wasteland for its ability, but this will not affect anything. The tap+sacrifice of Wasteland is a cost. Once the cost has been paid, the ability is on the stack. No amount of tapping or untapping the source will affect the fact that the ability is on the stack.
Essentially, you need a Stifle or Trickbind and the like to stop the ability.
I would say I'm "impressed" by this outcome, but I was hopeful for all sides to be reasonable.
Thank you.
Both were pretty much a way to slap an Instant/Sorcery effect on a creature.
It was decent design and it worked.
1. Protection prevents targeting, but Cultural Exchange does not target. These are valid choices.
2. Phantasmal X triggers upon targeting, but Cultural Exchange does not target. Phantasmal Dragon will not be sacrificed (nor will it be destroyed; note that sacrifice =/= destroy).
3. Shroud prevents targeting, but Cultural Exchange does not target. This is a valid choice.
4. Considering the exchange choices occur after the spell resolves, no exchange can happen if one of the targeted players is dead/conceded.
5. Considering the exchange choices occur after the spell resolves, dead creatures cannot even be considered for the exchange because they're in the graveyard by the time the spell resolves.
As an aside, this rule is worthy of consideration for spells that do target creatures to be exchanged (Spawnbroker, etc)
Example: If a spell attempts to exchange control of two target creatures but one of those creatures is destroyed before the spell resolves, the spell does nothing to the other creature.
Use emblems. There is no need to change the game.
Yes they can. However, there are more creatures in the entire game than there are any other card type; if not the majority, creatures clearly have the plurality. This justifies them having their own card type.
Unless you want your idea relegated to non-serious 'casual' formats (Planechase, Archenemy, etc) there is no need to dynamically change the game so much for such a limited and niche concept as "Rifts".
That being said, I think the card should say:
"When Volcano Slug enters the battlefield, each player chooses two lands they control without lava counters and puts a lava counter on them."
Works better with multiples and makes the counters actually meaningful when the slug leaves play.
Pugilist Colosseum - :2mana::symg:
World Enchantment Planeswalker
At the beginning of each player's end phase, that player chooses a creature he or she controls and a creature his or her opponent controls. Those creatures fight.
{8}
That's just convention, not a rule. Artifacts were pretty much always rare and uncommon until Mirrodin 1 came around.
A planeswalker doesn't have to have a subtype. Plus, you're essentially having locales act like World Enchantments, there's no reason two locales should be in play anyways.
That's Wizards's problem and no a concern for a custom card creator.
Perhaps the only legitimate point, but this doesn't justify a whole new card type.
Garruk Relentless has a triggered ability. There's no reason why planeswalkers must have loyalty abilities at all.
Artifacts and enchantments exist by different names and the game treats them differently by convention. Red and green destroy artifacts whereas white and green destroy enchantments. Artifacts can be tapped whereas enchantments almost never do. Artifacts are usually colorless whereas enchantments are colored. Artifacts represent physical objects or locations whereas enchantments are immaterial.
These reasons alone are not only flavor differences but have bred a history of mechanical differences.
If you want to make such an oversimplification, you could simply say that Enchantments are just creatures that can't attack and lands are uncounterable artifacts that cost :0mana:.
* Rifts are a new permanent type.
Emblems are not a permanent, but act as a unique type
* Rifts are indestructible.
Emblems are not removable primarily because nothing interacts with them (yet).
* Rifts have no mana cost. Instead, they have a loyalty cost. Loyalty costs are played by removing loyalty counters from a planeswalker you control.
Emblems have no mana cost.
As for the really niche planeswalker-interaction, you can simply make this an additional cost on a card and still leave design space open.
* Rifts can only be played at any time you could play a sorcery.
...make it a Sorcery that gives you an emblem.
* Any player may play a Rift's actived ability.
Simply state this on the card itself.
* Rift abilities are paid for like any activated ability.
Emblems work here.
* All Rift abilities are "creature abilities" list only a type of token, and are understood as "Put a token of this type into play."
Emblems work here.
* If a Rift would be put into any zone except the battlefield or the graveyard, exile it instead.
Cards that give you emblems work here.
---
EXAMPLE:
Craw Rift -
Sorcery - Rift
Rift 3 (Put an emblem into play with 3 rift counters on it and the following abilities. Any player may play these abilities as a sorcery.)
:4mana::symg::symg:: Put a 6/4 Wurm token...etc