| Community Set: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Skeleton | Common Breakdown Ref | All commons for playtesting |
|
CardName: Mobile Highway Cost: 4 Type: Artifact - Fortification Pow/Tgh: / Rules Text: Fortify {4} Creatures you control get +2/+0 and gain lifelink as long as defending player controls a land with the same name as fortified land. Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: Community Set Uncommon |
Code: Active?: false History: [-] |
Oh, fine. My mind can't stop producing uncommons today, so here's another one. I originally thought to make this landwalk, but realized that "All my creatures are unblockable 65% of the time" was probably a bit much on a non-rare. Now that I look at this card, I suppose that +2/+0 only when attacking might be common. +1/+0 situataionally sure is. Damn good, though... and the fact that this isn't always on might make an annoying rock, paper, scissors game in draft. Okay... better leave this sort of implementation to Uncommon+
Universal lifelink plus any kind of power pump I think should be rare, even if conditional. I do like the decisions that this leads to on defending player's part, but I fear the bonus as suggested here is too strong for uncommon.
I like the highway flavour. I don't see that that has to tie to lifelink? If so, we can easily choose a bonus that suits uncommon, or one better for rare.
(In fact, I think mass lifelink is probably unusual even at rare, because it can really blow up the ability to race. Windbrisk Raptor and a couple of tribal-only examples are almost the only examples.)
I just tacked on lifelink. I'm not sold on that. I suppose any relevant keyword, though, would make this a rare. Odd. Probably a good thing, too, since this won't always work.
By the by, I just realized that this secretly works in mono-blue. Oh, crud! It doesn't! It asks for the name of the land, not the type... and I was proud of that... Oh well, guess this will have to ask for land type so it doesn't confuse "everyone get an island" blue.
Hm, that makes it less relevant in constructed, by avoiding the "Everyone plays Inkmoth Nexus" syndrome. Which is probably a good thing. Unless having this around might encourage people to avoid Inkmoth Nexus, which would be even more of a good thing... hmm.
Well, I guess we could make this say "...defending player controls a land with the same name and/or type..." It's a bit weird to say, but it covers both categories, and I think I like that. Normally, I'd aim for simpler, but penalizing predictable players, shaking up the meta-game while supporting the set's mechanics.... they seem like things to support.