flavor later

Cheez. This is the third time when I see this card on this site on a relative short time span: Wingdancer - and at common no less. In a deck with even a little bit dedication, its roughly equivalent to Wind Drake. How has nobody costed this at ?

I mean, it can happen - even at common, but it's really pushed so there should be a reason since it's quite likely to be a key player in limited. If that's something you specifically want, sure, go ahead.

Also, why would one bother with False Guest when this card is here? They surely help to form a "prowess smash" deck though.

In general, I would appreciate it if you restrict comments to design discussion and avoid development commentary. Unless something is particularly egregious, I'm talking ancestral recall levels of absurdity here, then I can fine tune the numbers after a playtest or at least, after I have the commons designed.

Suggestion; if you want to avoid that kind of comment - omit the casting cost?

Absolutely nothing wrong with the combination of abilities. Blue can do both things; they mesh well. So the only thing to comment on is the relative power level.

A few things. First, your suggestion isn't feasible. These cards need costs of some kind in order to tune them and play test with them. Omitting all costs would just mean I'd need to keep a private file with all of the actual cards which would make this website useless. Second, there are always other things to comment on. You could, for example, make recommendations on how the card could be flavored. You could, for example, point out that combining flying and prowess makes each less interesting as you get fewer opportunities for interactive combats where prowess shines.

There is always more to say about the design of cards. Developmental tuning always comes later.

@Nodle:

Oh, so you have separate development and design teams? Especially here, in this free-for-all showcase style of custom set creation, I don't see arbitrary divisions of design/development/devign reasonable. So are you gonna finish "design" and then proclaim to us that we may now proceed to comment on powerlevels? Lel.

If we gonna pick set creation apart, shouldn't "flavor sketching/painting" be its own phase as well?

We have had plenty of creatures with flying + prowess combo so that wouldn't be exactly enlightening: Jeskai Windscout and such. The most notable thing here is that it's really, really pushed for a common at that cost and yes - that isn't really related to the "design" of the card itself, just something to "note" in the case you weren't aware, not something you are "required" to immediately act upon. You could think it was "preemptively commented on" when you enter your "development phase" of set creation.

Making a pushed card is a design decision. "Make blue creatures stronger than in the avarage set" is a design decision.

It's a weird initial design since it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the set's vision as far as I can tell.

Though with deceive in the set I could imagine blue caring about power - weird as that is.

I plan on supporting blue tempo decks in the format. This card is just meant to be a role player and push in that direction. It may be pushing too far. It will really depend on what spells are available, how fast the format is, how easy fliers are to block... and tons of other smaller factors. If the card is too strong in early tests, it will be replaced/modified.