The ideal 1 drop in a brutality deck

Broken in play. Even at rare, this would be nearly impossible to stop if you get it in your starter hand

1 damage on turn 1, then 2 on turn 2, and 3 on turn 3, that is 6 damage before it can be blocked, maybe less, but still is bad. Also the body makes it a great blocker on turn 2&3

oof

yeah, maybe a wee bit broken? fair enough. I will remove brutality, and tinker w/ power and toughness.

dont like a 2/1 cerberus w/ three heads :(

This is on curve now, albeit still quite powerful agains decks without ramp

, you could make it a 3/2 for

i think i like it this way, flavorfully too i renmoved a head LOL

I thought you said you wanted it to have three heads? Oh well, this works for a two-headed guy

I still don't know if this is overpowered, it's not as BROKEN at least.. might still be to god. But i think for rare it's okay. A new Isamaru, Hound of Konda

Nice flavor text :D Also it's a significant bit stronger than Isamaru, and in red... I guess it is a more red version, but also maybe too good for red? Well, not at rare i suppose

one mana 2/1 are tricky when given extra text, but I think this works, and i like it too much to change anymore. :)

Even better flavor text

You could say

One of it's head was removed in battle...

I think it adds mystery to who/what removed it

then again cut off has an aura of viciousness, whichever

I think i liked yours more. Had more feeling, less thinking

Maybe i'm just on this too long LOL

I don't know what this was originally, but a 2/1 menacer for a single is pretty nuts. Essentially a powercreeped Deranged Whelp.

also rarity upped, but i suppose you noted that.

I only take rarity into account when talking about the effect the card would have on limited and about red-flagging. "Higher rarity == More power" is a false equivalence. Rarity has technically no effect on constructed formats at all (well, excluding pauper). It also doesn't affect whether the card would be considered 'strictly better' than another card.

I understand, that makes sense. My misunderstanding

Yeah. That was almost true for a while.

Oh wait, Gray Ogre, Uthden Troll, Granite Gargoyle.

I agree that it really should be true. But it also really really isn't true. Which makes me sad.

Still; this is a bit too much of an upgrade for my tastes. This is quite pushed.

Flavour is, however, wonderful.

could be a Deranged Whelp reprint. which is already odd to have a small creature get menace, but i guess that is still flavorful, just mechanically more sneaky-strat than bigbaddi-strat. Not super red, a bit more black i'd say, but im no expert.

It's weird that I've been told red cannot get bears with evergreens, or bears with anything really, but here we have a 2/1 for 2 that is literally 2x more powerful early game. I guess design doesn't have enough general rules for me. I blame wizards, it shouldn't be this hard to learn such basic design ideas.. I mean like, it should all be intuitive? And if not, there should be obvious reasons. Maybe im thinking like a newb who shouldnt be making cards/cardsets and should go be talking to my welcome decks

A 2/1 with evasion isn't always better than a 2/2. "Deal 1 damage" is a thing :)

And yes, costing is tricky. There's precedents, and there's "Huh, this really should cost about 2 and a hald mana; damnit." and then there's the fact that sets are deliberately changing power relative to one another in various ways...

But a 2/1 for 1 with lots of upside is very strong. I'd be surprised to see it, but not shocked. Not since Isamaru, Hound of Konda appeared. (Which is a thought actually - legendary is a downside mechanic; so adding it is permitted to make a card slightly better than the same card without it)

perhaps i make it a simple 1/1 with Brutality 1

for flavor i could write it like: "It lost two heads in battle, now only one remains..."

I just wanted to make an agressive 1 drop, idealy at the rare slot

­Soldier of The Pantheon is a real life example of something similar. The card is crazy sometimes, but most the time just good. This one is strong always and broken against no creatur decks. well , to some extent. Anyways I will do another edit.

That seems to make it a hydra, rather than a cerberus. Since it's now got one head, but can grow more.

As a 2-power creature, the flavour of having lost one head was lovely.

The flavor was better before, you could have made it a 2-drop with brutality & menace, but i don't know if Vitenka meant the flavor was less ideal if it had brutality, or just how it is now. He's the expert

I mean the flavour was: Cerberus, lost one head - so now it has two power. Nice!

Now it's named cerberus; but has one power - and the ability to grow an infinite number of extra heads. Which seems like the flavour of a baby hydra, rather than of a cerberus.

I understand. It could have just chalked on an additional 1/2 generic mana... Maybe making a Monastery Swiftspear-esque card at rare. for a 1/2 Brutality, Menace? It's a bit more powerful, but also higher rarity... So it wouldn't destroy limited as i assume the swiftspear must have done, or at least had an effect on...

Prowess isn't too bad in limited; since you won't typically be able to run too many non-creature spells. So it'll often be only a 1/2. Which isn't too bad.

This card as it now is; is fine; as it your proposed replacement. I just mourn the loss of the really quite lovely flavour match up it previously had.

I wish there were a way to do both. But I think Wurms might be a little burned-out with this card, which is understandable.

I do also suppose brutality is LESS frequent, but more POWERFUL (ie permanent buff not just UEOT)

This is now a strictly worse Stromkirk Noble btw ('strictly better' status is not dependent on creature types).

I will revert back to old p/t and flavor, remove brutality and add menace.

this is okay right? it doesnt seem too strong. It seems like a good creature above curve, which is what i want for the card to act as. also, menace is a nice flavor touch. Sort of like one of my favorite cards: Underworld Cerberus. Tell me if its too good or too bad, it looks fine to me, but I'm not a designer. :)

It's the same card it was before. This was my comment at the time:

> I don't know what this was originally, but a 2/1 menacer for a single is pretty nuts. Essentially a powercreeped Deranged Whelp.

Nothing has changed regarding that. I guess you could note Falkenrath Gorger as a precedent, but I don't really feel it's that comparable since there the bonus is restricted to a tribal and asks you to play that tribal deck in a specific way. Menace on the other hand, is just generally good.

Other cards to cite could be Flameblade Adept, Monastery Swiftspear, and Soul-Scar Mage. Looking it at that way, maybe it isn't so far out there really.

If the CMC had been put to 2, you could have kept it a 2/1 with menace and brutality, it would be flavorful and cost-appropriate

But i suppose rather than wanting an efficient creature, you wanted a 1-drop

I also think it's not too far out, just a little bit more than is comfortable for everyone. It could stay this way, just a bit good.

Also remember, rarity isn't good for justifying efficiency (though nobody brought that up, i'm just reminding myself :D)

­Monastery Swiftspear is an uncommon and you could go as far as say it's one of the better creatures ever printed. It's also more complex than this so I see rarity here only really mattering as a way to control the frequency with which this appears in limited.

Good point. I think it's fine.