CardName: Dementia Devil
Cost: 1R
Type: Creature - Devil
Pow/Tgh: 2/1
Rules Text: If an opponent would discard a card, they discard a card at
random instead.
Flavour Text:
Set/Rarity: Multiverse Design Challenge None
Dementia Devil
Creature – Devil
If an opponent would discard a card, they discard a card at random instead.
You want randomness? Here's randomness :) Take that Merfolk Looter!
I debated hosing Forbidden Alchemy as well, but decided "if an opponent would put a card into their hand, they put a card at random into their hand instead" was too ambiguous and clunky.
In fact, it feels silly hosing card filtering, when cards like Notion Thief straight-up hose card-draw, but I think this more-narrow effect can go on a much more efficient card.
Wizards normally avoid random-discard because it feels bad, but I think it's ok when that's obviously the point of the card.
I wanted to say "if a player", so the player has to play round the effect, possibly by playing red card-filtering which discards randomly anyway. But wizards are beginning to print this sort of effect as all-upside, unless it's obviously a hoop for jenny/johnny to jump through.
I agree for the most part, Jack. If I was part of the development team, though, I'd probably push this creature to cost four or more, though. It can still have an efficient cost... I just wouldn't want it to be the reason why a player lost in the early game.
For Challenge # 082
You want randomness? Here's randomness :) Take that Merfolk Looter!
I debated hosing Forbidden Alchemy as well, but decided "if an opponent would put a card into their hand, they put a card at random into their hand instead" was too ambiguous and clunky.
In fact, it feels silly hosing card filtering, when cards like Notion Thief straight-up hose card-draw, but I think this more-narrow effect can go on a much more efficient card.
Wizards normally avoid random-discard because it feels bad, but I think it's ok when that's obviously the point of the card.
I wanted to say "if a player", so the player has to play round the effect, possibly by playing red card-filtering which discards randomly anyway. But wizards are beginning to print this sort of effect as all-upside, unless it's obviously a hoop for jenny/johnny to jump through.
I agree for the most part, Jack. If I was part of the development team, though, I'd probably push this creature to cost four or more, though. It can still have an efficient cost... I just wouldn't want it to be the reason why a player lost in the early game.