Based on Decree of Kuri and wanting to unmalign my thought process.

Kuri is.. hmm, my webserver is offline. Well, she was a gun-bunny in command of a pack of mercenaries. Introduced as a semi-stereotypical drill sergant (after all, she's petite and female, but she shouts a lot.) Spent most of her time bemoaning their actions (they were PCs after all) and then had one shining moment of "Ok, now we CAN break out the big guns" and exploded a helicopter with.. I don't remember, I made up a load of technobabble. I'm not a gun bunny, so I faked it. Players had round eyes, so I guess it worked. Aaanyway.

I should say that USUALLY I have some idea of a starting point for a card; and for this set it's usually mechanical. (For community mash set it's the two satrting cards) - here it's justifying my stream of consciensness, Alex's source card and his comment:

Alex also says: "It's odd how green and white are the colours that both love enchantments and are best at destroying them."

So - we destroy what we love, and vice versa. And mocking my own "What the heck; the rules just are."

And since I'm being nice, I'll even make it rules test this time, not reminder text. Card ended up flyspeck because of it though, so it's your fault.

Colour, we'll use both white and green... no, no we won't. Just white I think. And really, it should go on a creature body ('cause the enchant world is done)

Sadly, can't be cheap - this is "Drop four win conditions into play" if played 'right'. Even though the creature is small (and should be, for flavour, and for "Um, let's kill that shall we?" reasons). Rarity is "Um, uh, oops" Legendary creature.

And yes, I know I didn't specify who got to choose the enchantments. It wouldn't be me, if I caught everything.

So there we go. Flavour isn't particularly relevant, she probably ought to be the gatekeeper of equipment in some fashion; but it'll do nicely. Dayamn I need to write that game up into a form other people can play.

Flavour text was:
What... did you not hear me? Must I repeat myself, maggots? Or is it that you failed remedial kindergarten... AGAIN and that you cannot identify a number?
That is not four, is it? If I come back in two minutes time, it will be. WON'T it?

Looking at this in comparison to Alex: I make more typo's. And pull in references that sprang to MY mind, but probably no one else's and don't really explain what they are or why. (Though this time, it's fair, I was gonna hyperlink but the server is down.)

And I jump tracks a bit - focussing on one small part of an idea.

Not quite a 'five words of doom' card (it's six)

I could just make "There are enchantments in play" but that would be both silly and useless; and so doesn't fit the flavour. And probably wouldn't trigger anything anyway. "Enchantments are in play" would be.. terrifying. And possibly something I should have made; but I already hit submit and I need to stop and do work people pay me for SOMEtime today.

Gah; ok, I probably DO need to specify. Choice of enchantment to put into play alternates; as otherwise player who plays this plays three win conditions, then something to kill her - and that's just too abusive. Yet another "Oh come on, I promise not to do this, we'll do the silly and fun thing" card fails :(

­