Card Name Reinterpretations: Recent Activity
| Card Name Reinterpretations: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Title |
Recent updates to Card Name Reinterpretations: (Generated at 2025-11-17 21:30:46)
Page 1 - Older activity
Page 1 - Older activity
Marsh Gas
Hmm, the original of this already takes the obvious option. "Swamps make gas that makes creatures kinda muddled"
I guess Foxfire is another implementation of the same idea.
I'm thinking we need to go on full on "Men in Black" excuse-generator to find another meaning. "What was that? Uh... reflection from venus? swamp gas. Definitely swamp gas. Not a rampaging dragon."
Make unblockable? Make hexproof? Reverse damage? Damnit, those all feel like the first interpretation. What does "Disguise" mean in mtg?
Make something into an illusion? Now THAT's got potential.
Missed some }
The Rack
Throwing away everything I know about one of the most iconic hand-punishment cards since Black Vise...
Well, the singular implies it's a legend. Instead of the torture bed, what else could a rack be? There's storage rack; rack&pinion; antlers... Antlers could be interesting.
So what are stags famous for? Headbutting things. "Equip, tap, fight?" That doesn't feel particularly legendarily deserving of "THE rack". A feasible starting point, though. (huh, this obvious "I can fight people now" card doesn't seem to have been done yet.
The reason for the antler is to advertise "I'm the biggest bestest baddest out there". So maybe a banner effect? I like that.
But it's symmetric so it's fair. (:
Whoa. EVERYTHING gets Shroud? And it's a shatterstorm and tranquility?
Somewhat overkill scary.
See Sphere of Purity.
See Cyclone Sire.
Jack's final comment is exactly where I'd think this should end up.
Good point. "Vehicles can't attack or block" is a good result of the intimidation. And more effective if it happens after your opponent has crewed them, so you get maximum choice of target.
"Destroy target creature that crewed a vehicle then turn. Vehicles can't attack or block this turn."?
You could probably say "Vehicles cannot attack block or use abilities this turn"? Shame there isn't an "uncrew" analogous to "unequip". I guess you could just write one and assuem the comprules will catch up?
I agree the templating doesn't work, but I don't think the reminder text helps much in seeing that. "Crew" is defined at the entire ability, cost and effect on resolution.
"Crews" as a transitive verb is defined by a separate entry in the comp rules to mean the cost only, which I hadn't read, and hadn't played any games when the edge case of whether a "when ~ crews a vehicle" triggered ability resolves before or after the crew ability matters :)
Hm, maybe it should go the other way, be a bit more expensive and "Destroy target creature. If that creature crewed a vehicle this turn...something"?
Yeah, this doesn't really work at all. Crewing is a cost, so it will only do something if they crew with that creature after you cast this (and they could always crew in response).
--CF
I'm not sure crew does what you think it does. Crew reads:
Crew N (Tap any number of untapped creatures you control with total power N or greater: This permanent becomes an artifact creature until end of turn.)
That means tapping the creatures (i.e., 'crewing') is part of the cost. I suppose the correct way to phrase this would be "Whenever an artifact becomes an artifact creature that target creature is crewing..." but that's just scans awful. Hmm...
How about "Destroy target creature that crewed a vehicle this turn. All vehicles become artifacts until end of turn. (They are no longer creatures.)" It's got memory issues, but it's a heck of a lot cleaner.
See Depala, Pilot Exemplar
My rule for named cards is leave the name off in reinterpretation. So we can ask, does it have to be a good example? :)
Unfortunately, this has issues. You cast it in response to a crew effect, but if your opponent has multiple vehicles, it depends a lot which order they crew them in, but if they don't know it matters they may not make it clear and give you time to intervene with this.
It's supposed to be an anti-angel wall shrug
I don't get it
See Angelic Wall
Reinterpreting the name of Crypt Creeper. See also Grave Bramble.
Ok, well that one was easy :)
It's gonna mostly hit your own stuff; just because you're gonna fill your deck with them if you have it. I guess in some sets it'll be an interesting sort of area denial spell too. I like it.
I envisaged it as a spell you control. But the other way sounds fun too :)
Should this say "Target spell you control"? Or is it deliberate that if you play Darigaaz's Charm pumping your creature, I can use this to make it also burn your other creature?
Based on the name of Intaki Deathwing
Trying to capture the flavour of flying, but able to deliberately dive-bomb an enemy creature.
Stylish tweak on Stab Wound. Could perhaps even debuff further, like -4/-2 or something, since the damage is quite a hoop to jump through.
Based on Mummy Rot
I wanted the an aura, because mummy rot is ideally an ongoing effect. But also to tie it to "have been infected". Hence the unusual extra hurdle of a creature dealt damage. But I wanted to make a big enough effect the opponent might be in trouble if you get it on a creature that doesn't immediately die.