Magic 20XD6: Recent Activity
Magic 20XD6: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Magic 20XD6: (Generated at 2024-05-15 02:19:56)
Magic 20XD6: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Magic 20XD6: (Generated at 2024-05-15 02:19:56)
Don't forget to tip your waitress, Ladies and Gentlemen. Thank you and good night.
ROFL.
Colouring things is fine for common: Tidal Visionary, Sisay's Ingenuity, Cloudchaser Kestrel, Aurora Griffin, and the Crimson Wisps cycle. Granting protection is a bit more dubious. But putting the two of them together grants a more powerful effect (although in this case extremely mana-expensively), which is why Eight-and-a-Half Tails and Sygg, River Guide were both rare.
Yeah, I figured that this one isn't really a common. Combining two abilities on a card that would almost never be seen on a common does not cancel each other out. That being said, they are old and relatively simple abilities, the card isn't broken (I think) and the group that will draft this is generally a bit more sophisticated than a bunch of new Magic players, so I think I'll keep it. If I come up with a better common, though, I'll probably play swapsies.
In commander, paying for something is the norm. Sometimes, when I see an awesome combo in commander, I forget that not everyone plays that format. Heck, I barely even play that format.
Well... it'd be a combo, at least. Not sure I'd call it crazy. I get to hide all my cards in exile rather than in my hand, although they're face up. This aids hellbent, protects against discard, and pumps the "number of cards exiled" theme that one or two custom cardsets have. It doesn't seem game-winningly good :P
Heh. It's Eight-and-a-Half Tails... but costing twice as much :P It's a fun and silly effect. (It's probably even less suitable for common than the previous one though.)
Edited again so the card now says "Target Blue Creature" and "spell or permanent" doing two things:
1). Making my previous comment make no sense, and,
2). Allowing more shenanigans for people who have access to an insane amount of mana. (Why yes, my Blue Savanah Lions has protection from your green Lightning Bolt. Let me just tap ...
Different card now. More fun? Certainly goofier, even if it is another take on control. Is the restriction that you can only change the color of spells endearing, or frustrating?
Which is true. I've been thinking about this card, and it occured to me that it's not the sort of card many people like to play with, but feel that they need to play with it for some reason or other. Why bother printing cards like that, unless the intention is to hose a specific arcetype that has gone out of control? Instead, I'm changing this card into something more player friendly... but I'm still aiming on it being a global enchantment, because I feel every set should have one at common.
The bit about being on the battlefield is necessary so that you don't hose yourself. One of the major complaints with Gustha's Scepter on the Gatherer page is that if you activate it, and someone destroys it in response, you still need to permanently exile a card in your hand because the trigger is on the stack. This is an attempt to rectify all the problems the original scepter had. Though you're right about not having to use the word "owner"... I'm changing that over.
And, wow. Yes, this would be a pretty crazy combo.
The bit about being on the battlefield is redundant, since that's the only place you can activate abilities from unless otherwise specified. And you can just say " Return all cards exiled by ~ to your hand..." since you're exiling them from your hand.
Other than the templating corrections, I really like this card. It would make an awesome combo with my card Pandorica.
Global enchantments certainly can be common. Wizards are rather down on giving repeatable effects at common at the moment, but I personally think they're overdoing that particular inclination.
I guess this probably wouldn't be too strong for common. I still think it'd be more appropriate at uncommon, but it wouldn't break very much to be common. Just make a few Limited games get a bit predictable and frustrating.
I like the occasional global enchantment at common. If you search gatherer for these, you find a very low number of them. There's a reason for this, like you pointed out, it's difficult to make them good, because they're hard to get rid of.
I'm concerned this might be too powerful as well, but I did choose what sounded like a powerful ability "Counter target spell..." and made it worse than Shroud. If this card only granted Shroud until end of turn, would you think it too broken? It's possible. I'm not sure what the cost for that enchantment would be.
I do know that this ability, while powerful enough to be an uncommon, is easy enough to understand that common is fine for it. This is more a matter of getting the right numbers on the thing.
I like the card. I find it kind of funny that it sounds really powerful when you say that it works like Yawgmoth's Will, but no longer sounds that insane when you compare it to Retether. Originally, the card put a single 3cc or less aura into play, but then I remembered that I had the "When you cast this aura, draw a card" auras in the set, and double-backed and made something a little stickier.
That is funny. I'm hole filling right now, and I needed a few more Wisdom enablers. I've always like the stupid Jackalope Herd. It's a good drawback.
Like the Eiganjo Free-Riders cycle. Even more like Cache Raiders. The comparison with Cache Raiders is funny because as a pair of 4/4s for / where the white one has an extra ability, they remind me of Serra Angel vs Air Elemental :)
Makes me want to combo it with Gatherer of Graces/Auratog and Sisay's Ingenuity :P
Wow. That's a strong effect for a common. Utterly frustrates some decks while being completely ignored by others. Seems more suitable for uncommon.
Yeah, that sounds fair. Survivor is on the top end of complexity for a common.