The flavour of this is pretty weird.

I think the flavor makes sense - kill them to get their Canister. The problem is the textiness.

This is probably a stupid idea you already considered some time ago but, spitball idea: what if Canister was a card? A card that pretty much no one ever played, but got referred to by other cards a lot?

­Bogbrew Witch or Sift through sands would cost a lot more text if they had to put tokens on the field, instead of referring to other cards.

But then you have to start using cunning wish's tournament technology, or other thing-you-own-from-outside-game wordings.

Also why must canisters tap, if they're going to be sacrificed anyways?

Well, if we follow through with Aether Animist They could be creatures fairly easily, which makes just saccing weird.

Artifacts often have a history of tapping to be "used" like Expedition Map and what not

So they can be tapped by an opponent, thus creating interesting decisions? I admit, that's a rare scenario.

NymphadoraTonks' idea is an astute one. In theory, a canister could replace the land slot of every pack, just like the Snow-Covered Lands in Coldsnap do. The problem is, if you were in a draft, you'd have to draft them, prioritizing them more than another card you could have taken... and there's a max cap to the amount of canisters you could have. Maybe if they designed the set around that, it wouldn't be such a big problem; but that's a pretty big overhaul right now.

On this card: Even considering the textiness, the flavor is pretty weird. I blame the title of the card. It's too oblique, and not on the nose. I'm guessing part of the reason why that's the case is because this card is in the wrong color for its flavor. It should be red. That's the color of punching someone in the nose to take their stuff, isn't it?

Oh, also, "When that creature dies this turn" is unnecessary, even from a flavor perspective. You don't need a creature to die to take their stuff when you mug them. That should let you move the canister line to the bottom of the text where it's less in the way.

"It's mine because I'm bigger" flavor can be green? see also ferocious, garruk's packleader

Card name idk. Green is usually assigned emotionally-neutral card names, simple nouns, or action words without feelings. "Mine Because I'm Bigger" isn't very pithy, and because it refers to an actor with a will, feels red as you say

You ninja! Yes I like removing the when it dies clause. Punch, take, walk away tall. Not that you're likely to waste a card on taking a can without killing them, but it works flavor-wise and saves good text. ­yasova dragonclaw

This still reads super weird

What do people think of this as green's non-creature canister common?

Way too wordy.

Second Inanimate

Really?

Without flavor text

At first it looks definitely red-flag-worthy, but then you realise that the canister boilerplate is just boilerplate and it's only 2 non-canister lines. Which is about as short as a common canister spell can get.

Compare this to all the scion makers in BFZ block. You don't want flavor text, but the rules text is fine.

I guess it looks a lot wordier in Multiverse. It seems fine without flavor text.

Inanimate its worth noting that all cards look wordier on Magicmultiverse. Thus why I don't start wordiness red flagging until later.

Yeah, this is true. I've occasionally tried to make it a better reflection of how cards will look when properly mocked up in MSE, but it's basically a limitation of my HTML/CSS approach. I've settled for expanding the text box relative to the art (since the art box is empty on most Multiverse cards).

Anyway, people seem to be fine with this as a common now.

And erring on the side of being too concise is not necessarily bad. But it's true, if I'm trying to decide if something is too wordy, it can be confusing. Do people know, is MSE generally fairly representative of actual magic cards?

Is multiverse consistently too short, or varies in both directions? Is there not a font size which matches? Or alternatively, have a cardset option for "correct ratio" vs "ratio designed to fit the exactly expected number of words?"

MSE is roughly representative. Wizards has a bit more control over templating, so some effects such as Naturalize appears on one line on paper but I believe "enchantment" will appear on the second line on MSE.

CasualR, thank you, that makes sense.

Nice flavor.