Due to server errors, two of this card accidentally got published, but I don't have authority to delete it.

A bit heavy on the top end, but we've been playing around with the rewards on the sacrifice. I want there to be at least one common that gives you an obvious reward.

I've been avoiding saying "sacrifice a minion" because I didn't want black to be too linear, but we could definitely go that way.

Partially, I want black to be a little more linear, but also, sacrificing creatures isn't exactly new, and needs a twist. The fortifications are new, true, but using a Future Sight mechanic and saying it is new won't pick us up too many style points.

My first thought was to try a completely different architecture theme than you, to contrast it and see which one we liked better. It doesn't seem worth it, though. Fortifications are past due, and I'd like to work with them, so in the end I'd probably just end up scrapping whatever other idea I came up with.

Anyhow, if we make this "Minions matter" instead of "Sacrificing Matters" we can use these Minions for other things and it will fit into our play. Cards that say "Tap three untapped Minions you control: Do X" will fit right in.

Quite true.

The problem with "Sacrifice a Minion" or "Tap three untapped Minions" is that it's far, far more parasitic than "Sacrifice a creature". It virtually dooms the cards to only be played with other cards from the same set, rather than getting lots of juicy interactions with cards from throughout Magic's history.

That's kind of what I've been saying, but I feel like I've been too argumentative at times.

I also agree that "sacrifice a creature" is probably a better default: I think interesting black and rewards-for-mono-black can probably be made without being too specific abhout minion tokens: minion-makers and creature-sacrificers will naturally go together anyway. (Though more ideas on how to make the theme unique are definitely good)

Hmm... I'm not sure how something like "All Enchantments get +1/+1" would be seen as acceptable, but "Sacrifice a Minion" is too in set parasitic. But, I digress. It looks like I'm fighting an uphill battle with this one.

Though, I'm not sure where this leaves us. Do we want things like "Tap a Minion" or "Tap a creature" as cost in this set? How about other forms of persecution towards your own creatures? And, if you can sacrifice any creature, do we make Gorgons that have some sort of problem with being sacrificed, so that the common deck isn't the ruling class enslaving the ruling class? Or do we just make sure that Gorgons are expensive creatures and/or tricky creatures that you only want to play a few of?

Unless I missed some, there's only one card in the file that gives enchantments P/T bonus, Master of Enchantments, which probably won't end up in the set. I just made it as a shift of Master of Etherium.

Anyway, I'd be fine with making Gorgons expensive and/or things you wouldn't want to get rid of. It's black, though, so I don't think it would have a problem enslaving its own. I like the idea of having one or a few Gorgons that get made when they're made to serve, though.

Sorry, Link. That wasn't intended to call out your design. I'd explain further, but I don't want to be accidentally arguing something that we are trying to move past. I just want to make sure that we can still see the master/slave relation in our mechanics, but I'm sure we can do this without Minion tribal.

Edited to sacrifice a creature, which is considerably better. I'd cut a point of toughness as well, but it might be best to let this card be for now. Especially if some of the cheaper Gorgons have backlash qualities to being sacrificed, the difference won't be very stark.

Increased cc, but that's just me playing with the numbers.

The important bit here is that I added a "Sacrifice a creature" cost to turn on deathtouch (then added lifelink, because 5 power deathtouch isn't very inspiring). This card, even at 6 and requiring the sacrifice of two creatures to turn on may be too much at common, but, again, I'd rather push the envelope on the sacrifice theme.

At first my reaction to the new version was "Blech", but on second thoughts it might be okay. It'll be something that makes you shudder when it hits the table on a ground stall, but not much use if you've only got one or two other creatures that are good, and no use at all with no other creatures at all.

I like the idea that it can gain deathtouch and lifelink by channelling someone else's life energy.

The "Blech" is definitely held in consideration. It's tough to make a card like this apealling on any level, even in this case where the creature looks like its saying "sacrifice another creature: gain 5 life".

I guess we're just going to have to bust these out and play them. If sacrifice is to work as a concept, it has to demand a lot out of the few mono-black cards its on. Devour-style sacrificing just doesn't go far enough. If it's still fun, then great... we pulled a tough stunt. Otherwise, there's quite a few other ideas waiting in the wings to take its place.

It's possible that at common this should be too separate cards: one fairly strong card with sacrifice in the cost, and another that gains a temporary effect from sacrifice, just for the complexity aspect.

In terms of strength, I tend to agree with both. It looks horrible at first glance: too strong for common, but with too big a drawback. But we should definitely try it, because several colours get giant commons sometimes, and "giant common that requires you to sac" is very black, and if it plays well, we've gone a long way to fleshing out our theme.

Well, that's part of the problem, Jack. Right now we don't have the space for two separate cards. 13 slots isn't a lot to work with.

That being said, the instant speed fortification attacher now sacrifices creatures en-masse and that may be good enough. Still, I think I'd like to play this 'extreme' version before cutting back. It may go back to normal if we like sacrifice however... the more cards that care about sacrificing in black, the less they all have to go all nutso to get the job across.

I never drew this, but I would have been pleased if I did. I think it could probably cost 3BB given that it also needs a creature sacrifice, but then it would feel appropriate black: it hurts to give up a creature, but it's probably worth it, and then you'll have to decide whether you can use the lifelink ability...

"I never drew this, but I would have been pleased if I did."

Well, that's a good reaction, even if it never came up, and you were just thinking about if it did come up. I know a lot of people made stink-eye faces when they first saw this card. We'll have to wait and see what kind of faces they make when they instead play with the card.