Tesla Project: Recent Activity
Tesla Project: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics | Skeleton | Storyline | Limited Archetypes | Creature Types |
Recent updates to Tesla Project: (Generated at 2025-07-13 09:07:27)
Ah, those weren't supposed to be moved yet, Jackal. We were discussing what to do about Develop, but I feel it's a good mechanic with serious potential, and I'm hoping that we can find a way to lessen complexity (I don't agree with Doombringer that it has narrow design space, myself)
While we were discussing unkeywording it, which I think is probably a solid idea (if we do it Startled Awake style), I do want to try to make it work.
Sure.
Isn't this strictly worse than Flame Slash? I mean, assuming that you would always want to deal more damage given the option.
Personally speaking, as a player, I like the option of having a piece of removal that gets better just after I attacked, but before blockers are declared. Maybe this at instant speed isn't warranted in set, though. And maybe you need a strictly worse than Flame Slash... it is, admittedly, a very good piece of removal.
This is super premium removal
now only hits opponent's creatures so it doesn't kill itself
replacing with raid
Currently canisters seems to fit into the UG canister ramp deck and the UR artifacts/thopters deck. I don't think either of those really wants a mill card. Can we change this to tap stuff down or something?
Sorry. I've been discussing with Inanimate that all the Develop cards don't justify its own mechanic in Tesla for a number of reasons including complexity/narrow design space etc.
I'm not against DFC's that are instant/sorceries but we decided not at common and not keyworded. If we really want we can have 1 or 2 Giestblast type cards at common.
Thus I've been removing all cards that are using old mechanics no longer being considered such as Bolster/Develop etc.
Note if any are particularly good feel free to re-add them unkeyworded.
@Doombringer Again, please put in a comment when you are removing cards. You removed part of a cycle, are you saying that you don't think it should be a cycle? Are you saying that part of the cycle should be better? If so can you explain what is not good enough about what you removed? I want to make cards that fit the vision of the set, but that requires a bit of communication.
Templating; Raid was previously a replacement effect
Renamed and decreased cost by 1
An additional cost can always be added to the ability.
Pretty sure that's too strong
Messing about with raid in other colors
1bb target opponent -> 2b each player