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 2025-12-01 20:23:59)
| Link's Unplaced Cards: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics |
Recent updates to Link's Unplaced Cards: (Generated at 2025-12-01 20:23:59)
Maybe not as interesting as you may think it is. If one value is life, and the other value is life, then the end result will probably be that the creature is never equipped, or always equipped. If we assume that both players have perfect knowledge, then they would know which game state is better (everyone losing life, or no one losing life) and choosing to do that.
While some Spikes will like this, many Timmys will hate this... for the same reason. It makes your opponent and/or yourself look stupid when you are wrong.
With pay life vs. pay mana however, this isn't so cut and dried. You'll always need to pay mana of differing amounts, so the decision to equip or unequip is more complex. And that complexity makes Spike happy anyways...
I made it playable as an instant, but maybe that makes this suck. It would be... interesting if the equip cost was also life.
Changed the numbers and ability.
I can't really see the unattach ability being used much here by opponents. You'd most want to do it on this thing's controller's turn, preferably during combat, but obviously that's not allowed. It looks like it's paying 3 life for something they could just spend 1 mana to undo. Now if the costs were inverted, 1 to cast and 3 to equip, it'd be more interesting.
Not sure about the numbers on this one, but there's the general concept.
Inspired by Nevermore.
Hmm... I remembered there being a bunch (?) of people who did "Living Auras" for GDS2, but I couldn't remember the solutions.
That's the usual approach. I think it's the one that one of the GDS2 finalists used. It seems reasonable to me. (You can argue whether you want the tokens to be 0/0 and have all Auras with the new mechanic give toughness boost or not; there are arguments both ways, as there were with living weapon.)
What if it eschewed the kicker, and instead had something like "
: Put a 2/2 blue elemental creature token onto the battlefield, then put ~ from your hand onto the battlefield enchanting that creature. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery." Would that be too good, being uncounterable?
I'm just brainstorming.
I know that it wasn't right, but I didn't really know how to fix it, so I just put it up anyway. I wish it could be as simple as Living Weapon.
Hmm. I do like the idea of Auras with "Living enchantment", but this is a rather fiddly way to do it, because the Aura spell still needs a target creature that's not the token.
Also this doesn't say "change ~'s target to that token" which means that if the target creature gets bounced or shroud before the Aura resolves, the Aura will be countered even though it's not going to do anything to that target any more. But this is easily fixable by making the kicker effect change the Aura's target. It still doesn't help with the need-a-target-in-the-first-place problem though.
Changed rarity.
Hahaha, that's exactly what it is. I was just messing around.
Should be green. Also rather seems to be a case of "doing it because we can". I think it's pretty similar to a green enchantment with "ATBOYU, put a 2/1 Thing creature token OTB" and "Sacrifice ~ and all Things you control: Draw cards equal to etc". That would be a much more normal template.
Of course, Sienira's Facets contains quite a number of cases of "doing it because I can" so I can't really talk :P
Added missing quotation mark.
I made it so that it hatches any phoenix in your graveyard, because I thought it might be interesting... but I might change it back.
Changed ability slighty. Now it also goes for any phoenix.