Sienira's Facets

Sienira's Facets by Alex

247 cards in Multiverse

90 commons, 85 uncommons, 61 rares, 11 mythics

39 white, 40 blue, 40 black, 39 red,
40 green, 11 multicolour, 20 artifact, 18 land

481 comments total

A cardset about card types. Flavour is Renaissance Italy - cities, stately homes and forests.

Sienira's Facets: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity
Mechanics | The Facets Of Sienira | Keyword Mechanics | FAQ

Cardset comments (2) | Add a comment on this cardset

The set creator would like to draw your attention to these comments:

On Statue of Eternity (reply):

New Artifact Creature Enchantment Land design, to go in the slot occupied by Tower of Eternity. Drops lots of the fiddly text from Tower of Eternity, which lets it actually fit on a card. It has creatureness (4/4), landness (tap for mana), artifactness (tap-trigger ability, sortof?) and enchantmentness (card-draw). Influences from Tarnished Citadel, Flesh Reaver and Sygg, River Cutthroat.

Suicide Black may love it, but so may control decks. I fear it may feel a bit too black-aligned rather than all-colour; black is the least aligned with any of the permanent types in this set...

On Uprising of the Earth (reply):

However, I'll agree I should re-word the abilities to match. I avoided "Enchanted lands you control" because I thought it would read a bit like "Enchantment lands you control". Do people think there's a danger of those being confused with each other? If not, then I'll make both say "Enchanted lands you control". If that is confusable with "Enchantment lands", I'll reword both to say "Lands you control that are enchanted".

On Soil's Revenge (reply):

I think this needs a better name. Any ideas?

On Mephisto the Adaptable (reply):

This guy is clearly cool, but his abilities really want to be GW. Problem is, the GW rare slot is taken by Erack the Outcast, who has to be GW. Should I just push Mephisto out and save him for another set?

Recently active cards: (all recent activity)

 U 
Creature – Vampire Wizard
{1}{u}, {t}: Target creature loses all abilities until end of turn.
"Many of my kind do drain a victim's life, it's true. But I find it more entertaining to drain their identity, their skills, their very self."
2/2
8 comments
last 2017-05-11 21:51:23 by Tahazzar
 R 
Instant
Until end of turn, target creature gains trample and gets +X/+Y, where X is the total toughness of creatures blocking or blocked by it and Y is the total power of those creatures.
4 comments
last 2016-02-25 11:36:36 by Jack V
 U 
Creature – Elephant Beast
Stubborn Mastodon enters the battlefield with three +1/+1 counters on it.
If Stubborn Mastodon would be destroyed or sacrificed, instead remove a +1/+1 counter from it and remove all damage from it.
0/0
1 comment
2010-11-05 16:48:00 by Eric
 M 
Creature – Elemental
Hooves of the World's power and toughness are each equal to the number of lands on the battlefield.
When Hooves of the World enters the battlefield, you may sacrifice five lands. If you do, put a rage counter on Hooves of the World and it has trample.
*/*
9 comments
last 2011-11-11 15:59:45 by Vitenka
 C 
Creature – Centaur Warrior
When Arrogant Charger enters the battlefield, return a creature you control to your hand.
Reminisce {1}{g} ({1}{g}, Exile this card from your hand: Return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand.)
3/3

Recent comments: (all recent activity)
On Mindblanker:

Well, I think that shifting the discussion from "rules can't handle this" to "editorial rules prohibit" (whatever those are in mtg) and "you don't do this in 'real' magic" shows the truer nature of this idea. One is a fatal error while the other is something more of an opinion.

I for one would like to question as to what exactly does p/t setting serve with these effects. In cases where this might be a problem (ie. new players in standard) it's highly unlikely to occur (how many creatures per set have variable p/t?) + if you know that {x}s are {0} when a spell is cast without paying its mana cost (which might have around the same chance of happening as this), this too should be deduced pretty easily from that. I mean, what else could it be than 0? One might even say that adding "with base power and toughness 1/1" would confuse players more than its exclusion would and add unnecessary text (that uses a noncommon/weird phrase no less) which also is a factor for comprehension complexity.

On Mindblanker:

I'm not quite sure why this card has suddenly received attention, but I would point out it's 7 years old, as is my initial comment on it. (Though yes, 107.2 has been around since before 2010; even back in 2007 the same rule existed, just as part of rule 104.2.)

On Mindblanker:

Editorial rules prohibit removing all abilities without defining new power and toughness. Just because they added a hack in to prevent the game from breaking in case it happens, doesn't mean you're supposed to go out of your way to test it. I'm not even sure if that rule applies here, since there's no ways of making a creature have an undefined P/T in real Magic.

On Mindblanker:

People always keep bringing this "issue" up:

107.2. If anything needs to use a number that can't be determined, either as a result or in a calculation, it uses 0 instead.

On Mindblanker:

You could add something like: X/Y/* then they become 0/1/1 ?

On Mindblanker:

Lose all activated and triggered abilities?

Maybe the rules should define "lose all abilities" to mean "lose all abilities other than characteristic defining abilities", that would often be useful.

On Rise to the Challenge:

I made my own version of this in Card Name Reinterpretations, although it's not very different: Rise to the Challenge #2

On Vent Frustration:

This card was created as an alternative to Magma Rift, because I didn't want to just reprint a card. I said over on the Facets of Sienira page "This set would have really liked Plated Geopede and Magma Rift, and perhaps in development I'll swap them in for the cards that have those slots at the moment."

Design philosophy has shifted a lot in the past 6 years, and this would very likely now just be a reprint of Magma Rift... Either that or perhaps the new Devour in Flames, which further demonstrates how massively underpriced this card was.

On Reality Sculptor:

Hm. Maybe because History Sculptor was blue, and I wanted to differentiate them? I... agree this looks just as blue as white, looking at it now 5 years on.

On Reality Sculptor:

Why did you choose white over blue?

(All recent activity)
See other cardsets