See Challenge # 154.

I presume this isn't supposed to die until your next end step. Otherwise, Resilient encourages leaving this untapped to block... so it can 'die' on your opponent's turn while blocking, and attack on your. As opposed to 'die' when attacking on your turn, and stick around in a tapped state during your opponent's attack step.

As written, this doesn't do much. It still dies the same turn it takes damage, since the next end step is the one immediately following combat. "Your next end step" actually encourages the "block and counterattack" jmg mentioned. I think the best way to encourage attacking is "end of your next combat phase." You can still block and counterattack, but it also has the option to attack and bonus attack.

I'm sorry, I couldn't follow what you meant.

I intended it to "die" during combat, and then actually die at the end of that turn. So it's mostly anti-first-strike and anti-instant-burn-spells, but might occasionally matter in other ways. But it sounds like you had something else in mind, or I didn't understand what problem you foresaw?

I think they just want it to do more than it currently does. Seems like a good answer to first strike. Good implementation of ;last strike; in fact.

Oops, I wrote my comment at the same time as dude; I was replying to jmg and didn't see dude's comment until just now.

"It doesn't do enough" is a reasonable question. But I really don't like making it last another turn: that raises a lot of memory issues (even if you remember to put it into the graveyard, it's easy for either player to screw up an attack or block by not remembering the creature is doomed), and I don't like the flavour either (you survive, sit through a lot of end-of-turn and start-up-turn bureaucracy, and then fall over dead?).

I also considered making it any destruction, not just damage. That's a bit like "protection from instants", is that so worthless?

I assumed the intent was to have it last through one more turn, being resilient and all. Now that you've stated your intent, it seems to match that fine as written, and I just don't think it's worth it.

Humm. I think the way to think about that would be:

Sacrifice ~ at end of turn: Regenerate ~

So yeah; ok; slightly more powerful, but still worse than regenerate.

Pretty sure you can't have a triggered ability as a cost. So it would be "0: Regenerate ~. Sacrifice it at the beginning of the next end step."

Ah, yes, I misunderstood intent. I guess the application in combat was so narrow that I didn't quite get what you were getting at. I suppose this would be clearer if it died 'at the end of combat, or beginning of the end step, whichever comes first.' Pretty sure that would be a new one.

Hm. If it applied destruction from spells and abilities, not combat damage, would people read it correctly?

It may well just not be worth it, I liked the idea of "doesn't fall over immediately", but to me, "this would work if you add a bunch of memory issues" is the same as "this doesn't work".