Sik Zeoi 色罪: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics |
CardName: Censor Anthem Cost: 1ww Type: Instant Pow/Tgh: / Rules Text: Each nonblack creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn. censor "nonblack" - {w} (You may cast this spell for its censor cost. If you do, change its text by removing all instances of "nonblack".) Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: Sik Zeoi 色罪 Uncommon |
Code: Active?: true History: [-] Add your comments: |
The issues with censor right now:
The last point could be fixed here by e. g. going:
> "White creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.
"
Censor "white" -
But that still addresses only one-and-a-half of the points.
Mmm, the "Oh hey, we can have the special cost be the bad mode" is reserved for the second-run of a mechanic, where they're stretching it. It's certainly a thing, though.
I'd personally have thought:
"Creatures you control get +1/+1 UEOT. Censor 'you control'"
But it's a pretty similar point.
It feels fiddly for a space that is already played in by other mechanics. I don't want to mention kicker (because everything is kicker); but this is a classic "kick for better effect" card.
Can you ever censor anything other than a restraining clause? Can censor ever be truly interesting?
most importantly, that's the nature of the mechanic that removes text. that is, the original effect must have the word included before it can be removed.
FYI WotC still makes cards that care about coloredness.
Can censor ever be truly interesting? Yes? Maybe? e.g. tapped-ness; removing keyword; duration.
Eh, worth a try. It just feels like fiddly words where a much simpler card will fill the same niche.
"they are different cards. why should they all work identically?" Because that's the point of using a keyword
Well they do work consistently. It's just not to your personal taste or OCDness.
Do you really have a reason to your argument? Do all flashback cards work 'identically'? Do all mana work identically?