New Era is a test name. I would be willing to lower or raise the number of turns that need to have passed to be in the New Era, but I would like that number to be uniform across cards.

Huh. So a mechanic that turns on if you can stall. I guess what turn it should be (and how big the effects are) will depend on whether it's meant to be constructed-viable. If so, it could be as low as maybe turn 3 :)

The other thing to worry about is that long-term decks usually run for a combo. I'm not sure boosting size helps a combo-deck much. So battleship magic?

So you can activate it any number of times once its your seventh turn?

Turn seven seems like a weird threshold that you don't want to keep attention on. Ascend solved this better, giving players something to work towards other than "stall for time".

A lower turn number might work better, too since there is less chance for miscounting. Extra turns would be frustrating either way, but also would happen less.

Would a spell initiating the new era be better? E. g. "Approach. (At the beginning of the turn after next, enter the new era.)"
Something like that could be flavored quite ominously...

It should be static. I failed to input that correctly (I should have used a dash instead of a colon).

I'm leaning towards turn seven because I don't want the New Era to occur too early. I think five would be the lowest I'd be willing to go.

New Era (maybe will officially b called Epoch) will be turn count because I want the ability to reflect time, as it's inspired by the Hindu cycle of four yugas.

On second thoughts - sorry; but this mechanic is too annoying to live.

If the mechanic exists; then I have to keep count of a thing I don't normally count. Even if nothing currently in play is asking me that question.

Say it's turn 6, and I drop this into play. Are you absolutely certain it's not turn 7? Too too annoying.

The obvious way to figure it out is "Ok, so I have 6 lands in play; but did I miss a land drop/ Or sacrifice one? Or get an extra one?" Too too annoying.

Abetter implementaiton would go directly to the source, I think. "Do I have n lands in play? Turn on."

I guess if n was very large then you could also use "Fewer thn x cards in library" as a proxy for it. Which might be interestingly different.

But as it is, fiddly busywork in every game after this mechanic is introduced? No thanks.

It's like how the act of drawing cards had to change while miracles were in Standard

Well; only a little; and only when you actually drew one.

This one you need to count if there's even a possiility. It'd work fine online; but face to face it'd be annoying.

In competitive play, everyone had to change how they drew cards. If you ran even a single miracle, you had to draw every card without touching it to your hand. And even if you weren't running any, you had to do that too so your opponent didn't know that you weren't running any

In competitive play players put up with what they have to do, because that's what they have to put up with. That doesn't mean they were happy with it. Miracles in particular were called out as problematic - I think so by competitive players more so than casual ones, because in a casual setting there are no high stakes.

Note also that there is an immense difference in responsibility in tracking turns vs. drawing cards. With miracle a player drawing the card directly to hand and then not being able to use the mechanic is screwing themselves and bluffing the use of miracle is - as all bluffing is - entirely optional; both players will need to track the turn number for this mechanic whether they play it or not - and as opposed to miracle, where the player using the mechanic wants to make sure to go out of their way to show the card has just been drawn, the player using New Era but not having shown a card with it yet is actually entirely fine with not reminding the other player that they are on a clock.

Adopting tools e. g. a turn counter in addition to a storm counter also would totally be a solution, but it would be a workaround to the bad design of your card/mechanic, not an argument in favor of the quality of your mechanic.

IIRC testing shows that about past turn three the tracking starts to crumble. With a mechanic actually encouraging taking note of it prominent in the format you might get away with one more turn rather easily, but seven turns can be weird.

Lastly: This seems not like a good mechanic to represent the four yuga cycle. Where is the actual cycle? Where is the decline? Is this just showing the end of the cycle? For such a theme I'd actually rather copy ascend 1-to-1.

I feel the gradual descent though is a much more resonant part of that cycle. Maybe by thinking about both aspects you can find a better way to implement the concept.

Off the top of my head: How about the cards with that mechanic give you a one-time boost worth four divinity counters that degrade over time?

I accept that counting turns is not a feasible mechanic in paper magic.

Fir story concept, I was looking for a shift with analogs of the Kali Yuga to the Satya Yuga.

Divinity counter depletion seems like a one-off cycle, but I could look into removable -1/-1 counters.

I did a similar thing with removing -1/-1 counters in a set of mine, i dont know what yugas are but they sound mythicky... i'd suggest giving them some kind of flavorful counter of their own, since that seems to be the usual...

Edit: also i had the idea to comment about a turn counter , but got lazy... i think it's a super cool idea in general, but agree with the guy who brought it up it's not a reason the mechanic is good

Edit 2: ok i swear i;m done but i'd just like to say that the whole thing about not being able to remember what turn it is would be fixed if you just had a bigger brain exdee. /r/thanksimcured