Community Set: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity
Mechanics | Skeleton | Common Breakdown Ref | All commons for playtesting

CardName: Bear Fruit Cost: 3G Type: Instant Pow/Tgh: / Rules Text: Put three +1/+1 counters on target creature. Whenever that creature deals combat damage to a player this turn, draw cards equal to the number of +1/+1 counters on that creature. Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: Community Set Rare

Bear Fruit
{3}{g}
 
 R 
Instant
Put three +1/+1 counters on target creature. Whenever that creature deals combat damage to a player this turn, draw cards equal to the number of +1/+1 counters on that creature.
Updated on 06 Jun 2014 by jmgariepy

Code:

Active?: false

History: [-]

2014-06-05 07:38:12: jmgariepy created the card Bear Fruit

I was thinking about what we could with all these counters kicking around, and how, in general, the set's mechanics want you to spread them around, and how it would be nice to see a few cards ask you to pile them all up, for some alternative deck building methods. Rare combat tricks came to mind...

Surely this could do better. As is, it's very nearly worse than either Hunter's Insight or Warriors' Lesson. How about a Soul's Majesty variant? {3}{g} Put a +1/+1 counter on target creature, then draw cards equal to the number of counters on that creature.

... With a name like this, it should clearly allow you to have your forests produce 2/2 tokens.

2014-06-06 10:26:34: jmgariepy edited Bear Fruit

I don't know... I kind of find Soul's Majesty to be boring in comparison, even if it is the stronger safer card.

That said, I can't see why we couldn't put both in the file and argue it out later. I also ramped this up to three counters and added a {1}. Might have tilted a little too far in the other direction, but at least it looks more impressive than the first iteration.

Yeah, this looks pretty nice now. Fine, at least moderately exciting, but not problematic power level for a rare.

Yes, definitely a lot closer to what I'd expect out of such a card. My main issue was about how the card would most of the time draw only one card and wasn't even a guaranteed draw.

Normally, when I look at a card like this, I think that "2 is the average effect, 3 is what happens when it's better". Unfortunately, that thought process sometimes throws me. Draw two cards for 2G sounds about right... but it didn't occur to me how hard it was to tag a player sometimes.

Only signed-in users are permitted to comment on this cardset. Would you like to sign in?