Advisors really don't seem like the tribe that should revolve around combat stats - I really liked the super-Archivist you had to get Advisor going as a concept.

Just making them big brutes does not mash well with what those creatures are thematically.

I agree. Will make it better

too op?

When in doubt compare your card to Azami, Lady of Scrolls.

You have same cmc and a comparable ability, but a nonlegendary 3/3 over a legendary 0/2.

will edit it to be a sort of reprint, ish thing

"There may only be one card named ~ on the battlefield at a time"

You mean like an old Legendary card? Not sure if you were playing then, but originally you would play a copy of a legendary card just to get rid of your opponent's, like Umezawa's Jitte or Lin Sivvi, Defiant Hero.

Just make it legendary IMO.

EDIT: Alternatively, you could try something like "Players can't cast Legendary spells." and make it Legendary.

So what happens if someone casts a second one? It just gets stuck on the stack?

I think, by the rules, it just affects anything counting. "How many are there? One. That one, and that one; and together, there's one."

But yes, being sensible, it has to decide whether it prevents casting of others, or causes them to die immediately, or whether the old one dies immediately and you run into problems of people running one in sideboard just to clear out the opponents one and just use the legendary rule, it's there for solving exactly this set of issues.

It's also scary-powerful, still.

Really, "by the rules" this isn't even covered since that's just not how the word "may" is used. "May' is used for optional decisions, i. e. "you may pay " etc., and for some continuous effect that alter how the rules see certain characteristics in combination with "as though", e. g. "you may spend mana as though it was mana of any type" etc.

Ignoring all this stuff the very fact that this ability is inspired by a legendary permanent just means that going ahead and just replacing the ability with the actual legendary supertype is the natural choice.

Replacing legendary with that ability was an inexplicable choice to begin with.

You already commited to "a sort of reprint, ish thing [sic]", so just go ahead and use the mechanical framework of the original you know to work. Reinventing the wheel with every card just wastes time.

It doesnt fit as a Legendary creature, it isnt named, and it doesnt have anything Legendary about it.

I will make it unable to attack.

I am kind of insulted, maybe i read this wrong, but it seemed a little mean D:

Whatever ill make it a damn legendary .

Well, what is the intention of the ability? There are some fairly good reasons why legendary evolved the way it did. But if you really want "Players cannot cast spells named ~" well, that wording would work. But probably wouldn't have a very interesting effect on the gameplay.

The ability is splashy enough that it could be on a named creature. Might be more interesting if it had a name, really.

If it's just intended to be "Advisors are a great way to draw cards" then maybe it needs to be lower rarity. Though wow that would be a scary ability. And would need an activaiton cost or something.

sort of better

No one would ever attack or block with this anyway, so that ability might as well not be there. Given the power of Azami, maybe it would be safer to have it trigger when an advisor (including itself maybe?) enters the battlefield? Makes it feel different, too.

It's almost, but not quite, trinket text to be unable to have combat with this. You might use it in a real pinch, but it's certainly usually the last creature you'll throw into combat.

Actually, it's a nice hint to really new players - don't block that 1/1 with utility creatures like this one!

But sure, it's not very important. It's a very very strong ability though. Unaffected by summoning sickness, turns all the creatures that you put into your deck into an extra card every turn - without the downside of being unable to shut it off.

Huh. If this had some in the mix, I'd be suggesting that in a heartbeat - "During your upkeep, draw a card for each advisor your control". That has the normal downside of giving the opponent a turn in which to try and deal with it; makes the legendary matter; and being unable to shut it off risks decking yourself - which in turn makes the "Cannot attack or block" matter because you have to put some slight effort into killing it. And it's always hilarious when an opponent is putting effort into keeping your creatures alive.

Sadly, of course; this is pure army/knowledge colours; so I can't even slightly justify it going on this card. Here's hoping I roll it for a random-mashup some-time :)

One nice thing about the no-combat rules is that yo've made the stats almost (though not completely) irrelevant. So you can go back to your earlier concept of the 7/7 uber-advisor the size and power of an entire library :)

heh I will remove the combat ability, thanks for all the comments!

You removed the ability without fixing any of the real power level issues people brought up

Eh, it's Azami plus two power for a tribe that's a lot worse. Are their issues?

It's powerful. Some cards get to be. It's the ability that is stonkingly powerful; P/T don't really matter (except when it was a 7/7).

Whether it's too powerful, and maybe needs to cost 6 instead of 5? (or the more likely power reduction; add a small mana cost to the ability) Testing needed for that. My gut feel is this is a powerful card. And now it's a legendary rare. So I'm cool with it. Personally I liked the trinket "no attack or block" text; but I can also see how it distracts from the stark bold "This card does one thing. It does it really well." So this way is fine too.

What a lot of discussion about a card that is doing something its colours are plainly allowed to do - encourage a large army of the same creature type, and draw cards.

yup its fine

should the last ability be -3 instead?

And yea i know you guys don't like me turning stuff to planeswalkers out of nowhere, but i think this will be fine. i can answer any questions

Shouldn't the subtype be Maeon?

Also the cardname is a little cramped.

yes you're right on both accounts

I'll get a new title