Notes: If you're on the play, you will always be able to steal your opponents card before they have a chance to get it back unless they have turn 1 ramp.

Just because you have the card in your hand, doesn't mean you have the mana colours to cast it.

This is a turn 1 discard effect that can force an opponent to discard a land. This kind of effect is unbalanced since the resulting mana screw can stop them cold from playing anything that game and disrupt the game plan longterm.

I suggest "nonland" restriction.

Putting cards owned by one player into another player's hand is strictly Un-territory - i. e. silver-bordered. A black-bordered variant could read

> : For as long as the exiled card remains exiled, you may play that card. Any player may activate this ability.

This ability is functionally different since multiple players can "take control" of the card eventually, so I'd go further and change it to

> : Destroy ~. If it is destroyed this way, for as long as the exiled card remains exiled, you may play that card. Any player may activate this ability.

unless keeping the enchantment on the battlefield is important to you.

Alternatively

> : If the exiled card has no claim counter on it, put a claim counter on it and for as long as the card has a claim counter on it, you may play that card. Any player may activate this ability.

Oh yeah, forgot non-land clause.

I wanted the 3 mana payment to be a one time thing to reclaim the card, so claim counters would work but seem fiddly. I think this seems better.

I like this card. That said, It reads in part like this:

­
Sorcery
Look at target player's hand. You may cast any one card in it for free as if it was in your hand.

Not only is that overtly strong for a card that only costs more than Coercion, it's also not-strictly mono-black.

I'd suggest increasing the cost to and the activation to . It still seems like a really strong variant on Distress. You can still yoink any spell and cast it from your opponent's hand for (Bolas help them if they were packing a spell with a converted mana cost of 7+.) But there's still a reasonable argument for using Thought Erasure instead.

If they have enchantment removal, they get the card back though. Once coercion or distress resolves, that's it it's gone.

Right. Your opponent both needs instant speed enchantment removal, and has to have mana up the turn you cast this in order to respond to the spell. They need to use their Naturalize or what have you like its a Counterspell in case you drop Confiscation on round four.

Most green players would prefer to play their fatties on round four. If you're playing control, and your opponent is keeping mana up to one-for-one counter your discard spells, you pretty much already won.

Ah, one more thing. You can't even bluff that you have enchantment removal in your hand when your opponent plays this. Confiscation player pays one mana, then looks at your hand.

And, of course, all of this presumes you're playing this spell like it's a four casting cost sorcery. But you don't need to. You can still play this on round one, then cast your opponent's dragon on round 3, presuming they don't have any enchantment removal in their hand that costs two or less.

Nowhere does it say "without paying its mana cost," so you still have to pay full price for the card you steal. That's a big downside. The normal template for that these days also includes "You may spend mana as though it were mana of any color."

The other question I have is about the "loses this ability" clause. It's totally irrelevant and shouldn't be there.

I'm also confused by the case where you play this card where both players have plenty of mana: the active player gets the first opportunity to activate the activated ability, but then the other player can activate it in response. I wonder if the best template would be "Any player may activate this ability, but then it can't be activated again" or similar. Or if a more usual ability would do, like "do blah unless the opponent pays 3"

Unless it's an instant, you don't need to worry about your opponent sniping it. You still follow all timing restrictions. Probably the best way to avoid confusion is "any player may activate this ability, but only on their turn."

I think I'm fine with the "I pay 3 mana in response to you paying 3 mana" since that's not something I expect to happen often.

And yeah, the lose ability thing still doesn't stop the card being retrieved if the enchantment is destroyed, which is what I wanted when you would put the card in hand. Ideally, you could theoretically pay a black, take a card, pay 3, then bounce this enchantment and steal another card without giving up the ability to play the first.

Having to pay the mana cost and not getting rainbow mana to do so is absolutely intentional. If you can play the card then it's a good rate but it's not a horrible rate for permanently exiling the card, even if you'll never use it.

Maybe this should have the old templating like oblivion ring with a seperate leave trigger. This means that when you pay 3 mana, you could have the card lose all abilities and the card is permanently exiled with no way for the non-paying player to get it back (as intended)