Link's Unplaced Cards: Recent Activity
Link's Unplaced Cards: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics |
Recent updates to Link's Unplaced Cards: (Generated at 2024-05-18 19:39:06)
Link's Unplaced Cards: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics |
Recent updates to Link's Unplaced Cards: (Generated at 2024-05-18 19:39:06)
See Shattered Shelf.
Cycle Proposals: : Mill? Discard 2?
: "Target player loses 4 life.".
: "Creatures you control gain haste, trample, and first strike UEOT.".
: "You gain 4 life. Your life total can't be lowered this turn.".
: "Return target permanent card with CMC 2 or less from your graveyard to the battlefield.".
: "Exile target instant, sorcery, or artifact card from your graveyard. You may cast that card this turn."
See Style Scroll: The Warrior Twins.
Or red getting reach? That makes sense.
Blue Odric could take from opponents' creatures, sure. I feel that to prevent it from being a break, it would have to be something at least tertiary in that color, but primary or secondary in the other colors. Like a green creature that got haste with mountains and deathtouch with swamps.
Interesting.
If this is out of color for white, is it in color for another color (using different lands and keywords, of course)?
And could white get a version of Odric #2 that took from opponents' creatures? Or would that be blue?
Come to think of it, "this has deathtouch as long as you or another player controls another creature with deathtouch" might be white from an "evening things up" standpoint.
But I agree about the swamps, it's not unbalanced, but it's out-of-pie in multiplayer, I think but am not 100% sure.
Yeah. Funnily enough, that's what it does read in duels. It's multiplayer that makes the break.
I'd consider it a bleed. It's definitely not something white can do, but it doesn't undercut white's weaknesses as far as I can tell. If it at least required you and an opponent, I'd have less issue. As is, I think it's too much.
What are your opinions on this and the color pie? Is it a bleed or a break?
It's still a fun card.
I play it in my monored modern control deck. It's not a very good deck.
I play it in my red EDH deck.
I forgot that card existed.
But what about the FLAVOR, continuumg?
The current wording was influenced by Kazuul, Tyrant of the Cliffs, which likely predated common explicit references to planeswalkers in rules text. I prefer it because it allows the card to continue to function at its highest capacity should there be more attackable permanents added to the game, but under the current rules the are fairly identical.
It doesn't need to have defender if it's never a creature on your turn
"Aigoren, the Guardian City isn't a creature unless you're the defending player and at least one creature is attacking."
"Aigoren, the Guardian City isn't a creature unless a creature is attacking you or a Planeswalker you control."
They're the same length, but the second one is a lot more standard template. I don't see a functional difference.
As SadisticMystic noticed, the wording was very intentional.
... I think the type line is long enough, don't you?
The creatures could also be attacking one of your planeswalkers, in which case they may not be attacking "you" but you're still the defending player, because you still need to be the one in charge of making blocking decisions.
Speaking of which, if you depict this as being a city on Zendikar that's home to a certain indigenous tribe, it could be Legendary Land Creature - Plains Wall Kor.
Isn't a creature unless one or more creatures are attacking you.
Simpler
Final ability changed from static to triggered
If there were, I would think it would pop up when talking older fairy tales, such as in Anderson's 'The Steadfast Tin Soldier'. I believe Dungeons & Dragons calls creatures like this "The Created"... though, that term is pretty much a second edition Ravenloft thing. So I guess there's supposed to be a veneer of sinister-ness to it. That, and, now that I think of it, the Created are pretty much limited to a single adventure module, in which... I think a Geppetto-like character is the Dark Lord?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Created
Yeah, the artifact gnomes are a little weird, but I agree, I like that magic does develop these little bits of worldbuilding.
And it's not as weird as it might seem. Modern fantasy tradition as influenced by DnD has a lot of clear divisions between creatures, but I think in older tradition, it's often a lot more ambiguous, and lots of small underground creatures are sometimes just tunnelers and sometimes have some sort of "made out of rock" thing.
OTOH, I guess, magic gnomes always look constructed, they're like "tiny golems" or "tiny clockwork creatures" -- is there a standard name for that sort of thing?