Pyrulea: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics | More Detail on The Set | Skeleton | Color Archetypes | Creative/World Building | Cycles |
CardName: Remnants of Power Cost: u Type: Enchantment Pow/Tgh: / Rules Text: Whenever you discard a card, tap target creature. {3}{U}: Transform Remnants of Power. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery. Flavour Text: Back side: CardName: Coalesced Djinn Cost: Type: Enchantment Creature - Djinn Pow/Tgh: 2/2 Rules Text: When this permanent transforms into Coalesced Djinn, put a +1/+1 counter on it for each tapped creature your opponents control. Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: Pyrulea Common |
Code: Active?: false History: [-] Add your comments: |
Wording correction based on Huntmaster of the Fells
Corrected wording for sorcery speed limitation- source ( http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&text=+[this]+[ability]+[only]+[sorcery]+[activate] )
Corrected wording 'when you discard a card'->'whenever you discard a card'
I think I'd like to have this as the
enchantment, it supports cycling in
and I prefer it to Thought Tax
I have to say I like neither of the current common enchantment DFCs in Blue. They are just too complex and loaded with abilities, triggered and activated, on top of being an enchantment creature DFC. That's just way too much for a common card
My main objection to taking away the DFC enchantments altogether as that if we do, we have no non-aura enchantments at all at common. So they do fill the space of having at least one enchantment in each color at common. Otherwise, it would seem like we're suppressing enchantments a little too much by completely scrapping all of them.
Why would it be "Suppressing enchantments"? Many sets have next to no non-Aura enchantments at common, that's pretty standard nowadays. Unless we want to elevate enchantments to a main theme overall, which I don't think we need, the set would have more non-Aura enchantments at common than most sets with 2 in White and Black each.
I wouldn't want to elevate enchantments to a main theme, I just don't see a problem with having just 1 singular common slot for a non-aura enchantment. And it would help make room for at least some of these DFC enchantments that have been created. Most can probably be scrapped anyway but a few have good ideas. The other alternative would be to make space for a few of them at uncommon. Though there are a few non-DFC uncommon enchantments that are Discovery based that I wouldn't want to scrap to make space for them.
Having enchantments in the other colors was more of a flavour thing, it can be cut if people aren't happy with it. Most of the time enchantments aren't done at common unless they're auras so we could just do the

enchantment creatures at uncommon instead.
If the issue is forced we'll have to put a slot for them in each color at uncommon.
The problems with enchantments at common in every colour is that it forces the theme pretty hard, since it is so unusual for any set. Also, unless it is supported somehow, many of these colours would not want to play an enchantment anyway. It has nearly no direct impact on the board, can neither attack nor block and therefore almost always set you back. Even if some of them are quite complex and strong for a common I still wouldn't want to play them since the risk that you timewalk yourself is just so high.
I can understand the desire not to have them at common.
My only main concern, once some of these are moved into uncommon's design space, is that green and red in particular each already have one Discovery based enchantment at uncommon.
For example, I really wouldn't want to be forced to have to get rid of Vengeance of the Sun and Planar Conciousness just to save some of the common DFC enchantments from being scrapped. Those are examples of enchantments that kind of matter as far as playing a useful role in the Discovery theme at least.
Just scrap the DFC enchantments then. They could also easily be converted to non-enchantment DFC, as being an enchantment is not that important anyway. Personally I wouldn't mind to scrap them in

altogether, right now it looks like we want to include them come what may, and I really don't get why.
That's cool with me. I actually wasn't hellbent on including them, but I wanted to provide a compromise for those who designed them. I was one of the original people who complained about too much of an enchantment theme :P
So maybe we can safely take them off the skeleton but maybe a few can be reworked into some uncommon slots, possibly as non-enchantment DFC.
Yeah, I'm okay with moving most or all of the enchantment DFCs away from common outside of
.
We should make sure to work on the other DFCs having clear identity though. Do we want to try my idea of DFCs that alternate and not upgrade, with not generally better but situationally better backsides?
If by alternate and not upgrade, you mean that both sides have a transform trigger, such that they can theoretically switch back and forth multiple times, that notion has been in the back of my head as a diff way to do DFC.
"If by alternate and not upgrade, you mean that both sides have a transform trigger, such that they can theoretically switch back and forth multiple times, that notion has been in the back of my head as a diff way to do DFC."
Yes, that's what I mean. I mean such that the use of transform would be more modular like with charms and not more like a threshold mechanic such as ferocious or kicker style mechanic.
Took off skeleton. Cards like this can still maybe be reworked into non-enchantment DFC at uncommon.