Added to the file so that we have 13 cards in White. We have a tendency to design too many creatures, which is a good instinct, but it also means, roughly, that if you design an instant or sorcery that it will automatically be added to the set.

I put Demystify in provisionally, but I want it out of here as soon as we get a replacement. It would seem very odd if white didn't have any way to deal with enchantments, but this seems to blunt and careless for the 'enchantments are creatures' color. Maybe a spell that destroys target non-creature artifact or non-creature enchantment? Or something that penalizes you if the target is a creature?

I'd also argue it seems pretty odd if white doesn't have any way to deal with artifacts, given that black is associated with fortifications and given there'll be a bunch of common fortifications. Perhaps this slot could be a variation on Divine Offering or an artifact version of Erase, and have uncommon be where the anti-enchantment card is in white. (This would mean we need a common anti-enchantment card in green.)

Surely we can make a white card which is sometimes beneficial to play on your own enchantments but sometimes serves as an answer to other enchantments, as a common or uncommon on-theme replacement for demystify or disenchant?

Why not "Put target enchantment on top of its owner's library"?

"If taget enchantment is a creature, it gets +2/+2 until end of turn. Otherwise, destroy it." Is that the sort of effect you were thinking of, Jack? Funny thing is, you could still cost that at .

Link happens to accidently be talking about Disempower, which does seem much friendlier to enchantment-creatures. I've never liked Disempower because it compares terribly to Disenchant, but Disenchant is no longer allowed, and, Disempower would make a lot of sense in this set.

Alex isn't pointing at it, but he's getting very close to talking about Altar's Light, It's funny, because the card looks so damn expensive, but tier 1 decks were using it back in Mirrodin. It could easily be a common.

Besides that... yeah, this slot could be artifact destruction, then double back into enchantment destruction in the uncommon step. The unfortunate thing is that red can't have enchantment destruction. Sure, Green's bound to have a Naturalize effect, but I assume some players will call bs if we don't have two answers for enchantment destruction in common.

The simplest option would appear to be a disempower variant (to library or to hand), so you can add it to your deck defensively, but hopefully still get some use out of it by recurring one of your own creatures if your opponent isn't playing with any interesting enchantments.

A straight up "target enchantment creature gets +2/+2 OR exile target (non-creature?) enchantment" also seems reasonable. At first I wasn't sure if I wanted the alternate uses spelled out like that, but I think it's actually better to make it clear that it has two uses than to let people figure it out.

The question remains, should the player have the choice between pumping and destroying/exiling? It actually makes sense to me that a white card should be able to destroy opposing enchantment creatures (splashing one against white should be dangerous, as white should know all about them; just that white shouldn't have a card which is only good against them). But I think we should probably choose whichever wording is simpler.

Another possibility would be to have a "temporary exile target enchantment" card that can either save your own creature/enchantment and save it from destruction or reuse its ETB effect, or deal semi-permanently with an opponent's.

Alternatively, have a "target creature gains protection frmo enchantments (and enchanted creatures?) UEOT" effect? That helps against white more than it deals with opposing enchantments, but it can destroy enemy auras.

But on balance, I think one of the first two suggestions is probably best.

Changed to Disempower for now. Really, this could be a lot of things... and still can be. As for the +2/+2 or exile/destroy, I think we don't want to give players the choice... but not because of complexity issues. The whole reason we want this to not be Demystify is because we don't want it to kill white creatures. That, and that card would cost , and good non-creature cards that cost are harder to come by.