...Senbonzakura!

Jokes aside, I don't get shirk. Is it intended to be Absorb, as on Lymph Sliver? Or is it just a one-time damage prevention effect? If it's the latter, I don't understand why it's a keyword that creatures can gain.

I intend to have creatures abilities triggered when they shirk, which is why I keyworded it. The most basic creatures with shirk would be a vanilla like Thraben Purebloods with shirk 1.

But how often does shirk occur? The wording you've given in the reminder text here is unclear. Does it occur only once? Once per turn?

Are you supposed to pay to prevent the 1 damage?

@Link: It is only supposed to occur once per turn.

@dude: Yes, you'd have to pay in this instance.

Is this supposed to say the following?

UEOT, creatures you control gain ": Shirk 1." (They gain ": Prevent the next 1 damage that would be dealt to this creature this turn.")

If not, I still don't understand you intent behind Shirk. I can't say I get the flavor behind the name, either.

I think Sorrow is using 'shirk' as in the expression "He shirked off the damage". That expression, however, is originally "He shrugged off the damage." Shirked isn't the right word... it's used because it is similar, not because it is right (see also: the difference between a smut film and a snuff film. Lately, I've been encountering a lot of the latter to referring to the former.)

According to Merriam-Webster, to shirk means:

"1. to go stealthily : sneak
2. to evade the performance of an obligation
Transitive Verb: avoid, evade (shirk one's duty)"

It doesn't really seem appropriate here, unless the damage prevented is from the creature leaving its post. ;p

Also, Link, Sorrow indicated that this was supposed to be once per turn. Your example wording doesn't reflect that. I got to admit, that confuses me as well. Are you sure, Sorrow, that you wouldn't prefer to have:

"Shirk 1 (Prevent the first point of damage that would be done to this creature each turn.)"

Seems simpler to me.

I did not confuse "shirk" with "shrug." I named the mechanic based off of the second definition. Perhaps damage may be a bit of a stretch as an obligation goes.

I didn't really think about shirk being static like absorb because I didn't believe there was much availability for the mechanic to appear. Something that prevented 2 or 3 damage automatically sounds very nasty if damage is your way of creature removal. I felt that applying a cost to shirk remedied the situation.

I seem to recall Wizards tried testing absorb as a set mechanic once, and while jmg's suggestion is significantly depowered, absorb was found to be ridiculously OP in practice (so even weak absorb is just OP). Having it cost mana should remedy that.