2. Add in an extra newline character, essentially add a blank line at the bottom of the rules text. It will make the text smaller but at least it wont go behind the P/T box.
3. See if there is a way to refine the wording of the rules text so as to save enough space that you avoid the P/T box and rules text collision.
Perhaps you have already thought of these ideas but if not they might help or inspire another idea that will solve your problem.
I have a query about how to get the color transformation in the rules text box background for cards like the fetchlands. For example:
This: Wooded Foothills
Notice the color gradient going from Red to Green behind the rules text.
Versus this:
I would like to get the two tone color gradient without having to add the T: Add R or G to your mana pool ability.
No, it's much better. Things like sol ring, grim monolith, mana crypt are not lands and are just examples off the top of my head that this guy can untap.
does taking 5 turns really sound fun to people? I always feel like more than one extra turn is redundant and kinda boring. five would just be like, ok, the game was over three of my turns ago, but lets untap again anyway just for giggles. Seriously. it sounds boring to me. Reads cool I guess though
305.7. If an effect sets a land’s subtype ... snip ....
If a land gains one or more land types in addition to its own, it keeps its land types and rules text,and it gains the new land types and mana abilities.
Seems pretty obvious that the lands will either be a swamp or not a swamp and that a land can't even be a Swamp - Swamp...
Solutions that come from a single thought process are often flawed and thus its more beneficial to put a problem before a group to find a satisfactory solution.
Solutions that come from a group are often flawed as well. The large user base of MTGS leads to network effects. The difficulty is finding that voice of leadership prepared to state a vision and make it happen. Maro, love him or hate him is a classic example. He has a strong vision and he works hard to make his visions a reality. One of the more difficult parts of his job are selling his vision and getting those around him to buy into that vision. Having that ultra thick hide that can take a wealth of criticism is also a requisite for being an effective leader.
It is well known in politics that many in the voting public want strong leaders that will make the hard and difficult dicisions but will jump at the opportunity to criticise the big decisions.
It seems to me that the miracle mechanic is a reasonable 'build around me' mechanic. I thins with a fair amount of library manipulation you can get a little more consistency out of the miracle mechanic.
I don't mind being beaten by a much less skilled player becuase they hit a miracle card at just the right moment. As a skilled player it just makes me want to plan to take a possible miracle into account in those matches where I know the other player has them in their deck.
I hated DFCs with a passionate vengence, but miracle seems ok to me.
This format seems to be self monitoring. I like the idea. Your deck becomes illegal once it gets too expensive.
For example: today I am running 4x Sleeper rare - no worries its a $2 card at present.
Once the cards true value is discovered and it becomes a $12 rare I can still play the card but I can only have one and might have to take some other power out of the deck to compensate.
The format doesn't really need to stick to any kind of banned restricted list, the value of the cards themselves are that mechanism.
I would suggest another tweak, 40 card minimum deck size, as it would give you a bit more flexibility in card choice and makes milling a more attractive strategy.
I would also further suggest a common pricing souce to prevent someone from finding some shady online site and claiming it is 'widely accepted'.
I think the price guide at MOTL would make for a pretty decent common ground.
I don't think the format would degenerate into a race to drop your bomb or get your combo out. The format would be wildly diverse and generate its own evolving meta in both small and large play groups.
Sangromancer Looks good. Elixer of Imortality is nice, but as you pointed out not really much in the way of milling defence. Also Dread seems like a nice sideboard option for multiplayer to keep attackers away.
I also forgot to mention that I run 1x Souls of the Faultless in multiplayer to keep attackers away. But like Dread it doesn't fly and can easily be evaded.
Obvious notes:
1. The play group doesn't care about the "4 of" rule so long as the deck is fun.
2. Decks must be 40 cards minimum.
3. Money is no option, just a pain in the neck. (I don't currently have any Knight of Meadowgrain, having just traded them away)
4. IT would be nice it the sideboard could stay below about 20 cards.
How I play:
When dualing (two players) I tend to use the Zuran Orb and generally side it out in multiplayer games.
I prefer a slower controlling style of play to fast agressive strategies as they tend to blow my opponents out of the water simply due to the fact that my cards are super powerful and they are playing with as a general rule cards from the Lorwyn up. But I don't mind fas agressive strategies in multiplayer where a couple of players can gang up on me to even things out a bit.
I quite often don't bother siding in the Moxen and the Lotus as the deck is pretty good without them.
The meta environment for the deck is very diverse. Typical decks encounderd are:
A. Green elf ramp decks
B. While soldier/exalted decks
C. Steel Overseer using Urzatron lands to pump out lots of creatuer and non-creatuer artifact threats.
D. Zombies.
E. ZEN/WWK Allies
F. Mono black vampires
G. Infect based poison decks (U/B and B/G generally)
H. Blue/White counterspell control/milling strategies.
I. Red/Blue Pyromancers Ascention (creatuerless infinite turns deck)
J. Hedron Crab milling
Play Notes:
Lands
Mana base is open for discussion, no real preference here, I generally never get mana screwed. Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth is used to turn the fetch lands or Cabal Coffers into swamps in a pinch when I am low on life (which is not often.
The Power cards are often a dead draw.
Creatures
Ulamog is obviously used for milling defence, but I often draw it and struggle to use it for this purpose. It is often a dead draw unless it can combo with the Cabal Coffers in a long game.
I often find it difficult to get the Academy rector into the graveyard since I want to use my removal on my the other guys creatures. Or they play with evasive creatures I can't use it to block.
Tend to find there are not enough little creatures to make Ajani's minus 1 ability worth playing.
What I am looking for are ideas to keep the deck interesting, so that it plays with good variety rather than exactly the same each time becasue I have 4x every card in the deck.
I would prefer not to splash into blue as I play blue all the time, my guys get tired of watching me have turn after turn while I recurse my Time Walk and other blue power. But moving into green and/or red might be interesting as I might find some fun gold gards to run with.
Comments and ideas appreciated.... and thanks in advance.
I agree with the sentiment that the rav duals will see reprints with new ~ less cool ~ names. I know that it makes no sense. But just because WoTC gave them 'generic' names in Ravnica doesn't mean they wont rename them anyhow.
Disentomb ~ Raise Dead
Essence Scatter ~ Remove soul
I am sure there are others the original names seem much cooler but it seems those that make the cards think that new names will be better even though they clearly are not. Probably a case of - you will like the new name once you get used to it...
I can't stand DFCs. In my casual play group guys just stick them right into their deck. Hold their hands below the table and generally do all kinds of stupid things. NO ONE like to see the checklist card ever!
1. Don't ever want to seee DFCs ever again unless they can fix very poorly designed mechanic. Even the sorcery option that puts a super special kind of token onto the battle field would be preferred.
2. DFCs should never be in a core set - EVER!
3. I think the willingness of R&D to push boundaries is good for the game. However, DFCs in my opinion are poorly designed. They do not suit me or my play group.
1. Check if there is a different template that might suit your card better. For example the Library of congress template here:
http://msetemps.sourceforge.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=144&sid=ead2ecd45f30a17f7cd6b6f9c881af2c&start=30#p686
2. Add in an extra newline character, essentially add a blank line at the bottom of the rules text. It will make the text smaller but at least it wont go behind the P/T box.
3. See if there is a way to refine the wording of the rules text so as to save enough space that you avoid the P/T box and rules text collision.
Perhaps you have already thought of these ideas but if not they might help or inspire another idea that will solve your problem.
This: Wooded Foothills
Notice the color gradient going from Red to Green behind the rules text.
Versus this:
I would like to get the two tone color gradient without having to add the T: Add R or G to your mana pool ability.
Time Vault Yeah baby!
Although it gets boring quickly
Unless you are playing Multiplayer and perhaps "Tonight, I just had to kill a lot of people."
Seems pretty obvious that the lands will either be a swamp or not a swamp and that a land can't even be a Swamp - Swamp...
As below. ~parinoid
Guess I am just wishing that Aaron Forsythe wants to see the old icons in a core set one more time.
Are we going to see Counterspell return in M14?
Doesn't M14 come around close to the time of the 20th aniversiary of the game?
Solutions that come from a group are often flawed as well. The large user base of MTGS leads to network effects. The difficulty is finding that voice of leadership prepared to state a vision and make it happen. Maro, love him or hate him is a classic example. He has a strong vision and he works hard to make his visions a reality. One of the more difficult parts of his job are selling his vision and getting those around him to buy into that vision. Having that ultra thick hide that can take a wealth of criticism is also a requisite for being an effective leader.
It is well known in politics that many in the voting public want strong leaders that will make the hard and difficult dicisions but will jump at the opportunity to criticise the big decisions.
I don't mind being beaten by a much less skilled player becuase they hit a miracle card at just the right moment. As a skilled player it just makes me want to plan to take a possible miracle into account in those matches where I know the other player has them in their deck.
I hated DFCs with a passionate vengence, but miracle seems ok to me.
My budget is $200K
I'm coming up on 1200 Hurloon Minotaur
For example: today I am running 4x Sleeper rare - no worries its a $2 card at present.
Once the cards true value is discovered and it becomes a $12 rare I can still play the card but I can only have one and might have to take some other power out of the deck to compensate.
The format doesn't really need to stick to any kind of banned restricted list, the value of the cards themselves are that mechanism.
I would suggest another tweak, 40 card minimum deck size, as it would give you a bit more flexibility in card choice and makes milling a more attractive strategy.
I would also further suggest a common pricing souce to prevent someone from finding some shady online site and claiming it is 'widely accepted'.
I think the price guide at MOTL would make for a pretty decent common ground.
I don't think the format would degenerate into a race to drop your bomb or get your combo out. The format would be wildly diverse and generate its own evolving meta in both small and large play groups.
I like it.
Because most of those stupid DFCs have next to no room for flavour text.
Sangromancer Looks good. Elixer of Imortality is nice, but as you pointed out not really much in the way of milling defence. Also Dread seems like a nice sideboard option for multiplayer to keep attackers away.
I also forgot to mention that I run 1x Souls of the Faultless in multiplayer to keep attackers away. But like Dread it doesn't fly and can easily be evaded.
Here is the current deck list I run with.
7 Swamp
5 Scrubland
2 Godless Shrine
3 Marsh Flats
2 Verdant Catacombs
1 Cabal Coffers
Creatures
1 Academy Rector
1 Aven Riftwatcher
1 Baneslayer Angel
1 Felidar Sovereign
1 Transcendent Master
2 Wall of Reverence
1 Orzhov Guildmage
2 Vampire Nighthawk
1 Mourning Thrull
1 Sol Ring
1 Dark Ritual
1 Balance
1 Ajani Goldmane
1 Sorin Markov
1 Yawgmoth's Bargain
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Tainted Sigil
1 Pestilence
2 Swords to Plowshares
2 Tendrils of Corruption
2 Sanguine Bond
1 Zuran Orb
1 Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Black Lotus
Obvious notes:
1. The play group doesn't care about the "4 of" rule so long as the deck is fun.
2. Decks must be 40 cards minimum.
3. Money is no option, just a pain in the neck. (I don't currently have any Knight of Meadowgrain, having just traded them away)
4. IT would be nice it the sideboard could stay below about 20 cards.
How I play:
When dualing (two players) I tend to use the Zuran Orb and generally side it out in multiplayer games.
I prefer a slower controlling style of play to fast agressive strategies as they tend to blow my opponents out of the water simply due to the fact that my cards are super powerful and they are playing with as a general rule cards from the Lorwyn up. But I don't mind fas agressive strategies in multiplayer where a couple of players can gang up on me to even things out a bit.
I quite often don't bother siding in the Moxen and the Lotus as the deck is pretty good without them.
The meta environment for the deck is very diverse. Typical decks encounderd are:
A. Green elf ramp decks
B. While soldier/exalted decks
C. Steel Overseer using Urzatron lands to pump out lots of creatuer and non-creatuer artifact threats.
D. Zombies.
E. ZEN/WWK Allies
F. Mono black vampires
G. Infect based poison decks (U/B and B/G generally)
H. Blue/White counterspell control/milling strategies.
I. Red/Blue Pyromancers Ascention (creatuerless infinite turns deck)
J. Hedron Crab milling
Play Notes:
Lands
Mana base is open for discussion, no real preference here, I generally never get mana screwed. Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth is used to turn the fetch lands or Cabal Coffers into swamps in a pinch when I am low on life (which is not often.
The Power cards are often a dead draw.
Creatures
Ulamog is obviously used for milling defence, but I often draw it and struggle to use it for this purpose. It is often a dead draw unless it can combo with the Cabal Coffers in a long game.
I often find it difficult to get the Academy rector into the graveyard since I want to use my removal on my the other guys creatures. Or they play with evasive creatures I can't use it to block.
Tend to find there are not enough little creatures to make Ajani's minus 1 ability worth playing.
What I am looking for are ideas to keep the deck interesting, so that it plays with good variety rather than exactly the same each time becasue I have 4x every card in the deck.
I would prefer not to splash into blue as I play blue all the time, my guys get tired of watching me have turn after turn while I recurse my Time Walk and other blue power. But moving into green and/or red might be interesting as I might find some fun gold gards to run with.
Comments and ideas appreciated.... and thanks in advance.
Disentomb ~ Raise Dead
Essence Scatter ~ Remove soul
I am sure there are others the original names seem much cooler but it seems those that make the cards think that new names will be better even though they clearly are not. Probably a case of - you will like the new name once you get used to it...
Grumble... grumble...
1. Don't ever want to seee DFCs ever again unless they can fix very poorly designed mechanic. Even the sorcery option that puts a super special kind of token onto the battle field would be preferred.
2. DFCs should never be in a core set - EVER!
3. I think the willingness of R&D to push boundaries is good for the game. However, DFCs in my opinion are poorly designed. They do not suit me or my play group.