Melody: Recent Activity
| Melody: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Skeleton | White Commons | Blue Commons | Black Commons | Red Commons | Green Commons | Multicolor Commons | Artifact Commons |
Recent updates to Melody: (Generated at 2026-01-30 23:51:35)
No, Nature's Spiral says that "permanent card" is fine.
I think it just needs the "card", though that's a good point about things only really being permanents on the battlefield. Of course, cards like Creeping Renaissance refer to "permanent types", so may it's supposed to be "Whenever a card with a nonland permanent type is put into your opponent's graveyard from anywhere..."
Not sure it needs the "from anywhere" - things are only permanents on the battlefield. If you want it to trigger off discard it probably needs "permanent card", vis Amrou Scout
Past in Flames surprised me when I saw it, because I recall people panicking about Yawgmoth's Will; but it does seem somewhat niche. I imagine if I got one I might be able to put it in one or two decks, but I don't have much I'd particularly want to do with it. Perhaps if I got 4 it might prompt me to make a red/x self-mill deck?
But even speaking as a Johnny, I wouldn't say this drawback "suggests that there's a way around it". Perhaps I might say that if it said "Whenever you tap a land for mana, you lose 1 life", because that suggests you can use artifact or creature mana sources. But this one really only works with a small handful of Ritual effects, and most of them don't have much generic mana in the cost to reduce. Oh, or I guess it works with Edgewalker in a Cleric deck, preferably alongside Null Profusion, and with a way to sac the artifact after your big turn. But that's a lot of hoops to jump through.
Now Ahriman's Mirrorpool in your sample decklist? Now there's a Johnny card. It does vary based on what the opponent's doing, which makes it a bit more variable from game to game (which I see as a good thing), but it makes me invoke JMS and tap my lip with possibilities. Wants to go with targeted mill into graveyard... not many things that'll do that, but Grinning Totem or Life's Finale would do. And Coercion effects. And may want to go with ways to get the mana to activate opponents' activated abilities... Terrifying with Traumatize or Terms of Engagement... Yeah, this is an interesting card.
Past in flames I look at and see "Ok, well, clearly I'm supposed to do something special with it, because to cast a lot of stuff I'll need a lot of mana. But.. well, I can in a pinch use this as a way to cast something for a second time." I probably wouldn't run it without trying to put a lot of punch behind it (those red mana accelerants maybe?) but I could drop a copy into any deck that ran several cheap instants and sorceries, just to see if it helped.
Sins of the past, I look at, see "It's black" and move on. (Well, you did ask). Sensibly - well, it's cheaper for almost anything; only lets you copy a single thing. Hits the same niche "Might run" but is unsplashable.
Can I ask how you guys perceive Past in Flames? Because I get that Past in Flames doesn't have any sort of explicit drawback, but yet I don't look at it as something that's especially attractive to the casual player. They quickly realize that having to pay for the flashback spells really restricts their possibilities, unlike a card like Sins of the Past which removes some of the possible futures in exchange for doing exactly what you expect it to do. In this way, Past in Flames is a Spike-Johnny hybrid, which is the niche I'm trying to fill here.
There's certainly been a history of cards like this that have hideous drawbacks or are simply inscrutable.
And the drawback as it stands is the sort of thing that I thought would appeal to a Johnny, as it's painful but suggests that there's a way around it. If we look at a fix like Alex has just suggested above, the drawback is less severe, but there's no real puzzle to solve. You might lose a little life in the process, but so what?
Anyway, I'm really thankful you're all so generous with the criticism. I don't try to be so obstinate, but I'm part baloth at heart.
Or even "Spells you cast cost
less to cast and 1 life more to cast for each spell you have cast this turn." That makes the Channel reference more clear as well.
When I looked at the card, I saw the same thing Vitenka saw. "Oh. I guess I can only play this in one kind of deck." That's a frustrating thing for a Johnny to see, since they want to believe that each card has 25 different archetypes they can squeeze it in. And this is a new toy! But they're only allowed to play with it in one way! wtfmate!
That being said, I understand the concern with this going out of control. But it seems more appropriate to punish someone using this correctly than incorrectly. Perhaps something along the lines of "Whenever you cast a spell and it isn't the first spell you cast this turn, lose one life". That way, a person who's messing around with this card casually can still have his fun, but a person running this in combo has a ceiling that they have to contend with.
My train of thought is: I like this card, that's a funky ability. I'd like to play with this card. But because the funky drawback is so general, not only does it make it difficult to play this card to its best effect, it makes it impossible to play under any other circumstances. It doesn't have a difficulty curve, it has a difficulty cliff. And thus I'd never actually see this card.
To test this card, and just have some fun, I built the following rough sketch of a
Creatureless Control deck:
15 Blue Spells
4 Terms of Engagement 3 Tidal Charm
4 (((Remora's Refrain)))
4 Binding Tongue
9 Black Spells
2 Trepanation
1 Thirst of the Necrophage
2 Six Low Notes
2 Hymn to Hatred
1 Diabolic Ruse
4 Blue/Black Spells
4 (((Misery)))
8 Artifacts
3 Heratian Synthesizer
1 Ahriman's Mirrorpool
2 Memory Sieve
2 Chalice of the Urumaht
25 Lands
1 Ruins of Herat
3 Sapphire Sanctum
3 Jet Sanctum
11 Island
7 Swamp
I haven't gotten to print it out and play with it, but the idea is that you can use the alternate cost of Terms of Engagement to quickly fill your graveyard, hopefully milling Misery in the process, and prepare for future turns of delving. Eventually you hope to set up landing the Synthesizer, mostly with Binding Tongue, then try to chain spells until you rob your opponent of cards through a massively discounted Trepanation.
Could be... fun. :(
Decide to remove this from the cycle and make it Wee Dragonaut Armor.
Hmmm, Sky Hussar is actually a good reference. Gives me great doubt about whether this could be a common. Maybe I'll move this whole cycle up to uncommon.
Given Treasure Trove and Sky Hussar and Jayemdae Tome, probably not very dangerous. Of course, it does amp storm count and give you oodles of ETB and LTB triggers... Sludge Strider would quite like this, but I never managed to get him to work even with Esperzoa, so that's fine.
I'm trying to figure out how dangerous it is to have a card that functions something like free enchantment in your hand that says: "
: Draw a card."
I initially had a "
" on the activated ability, like the other creatures in the cycle, but then I was all "LET THEM HAVE CAKE!"
I'm not sure that I'm entirely following your train of thought, though I gather you really don't like the current drawback.
I'm hoping you don't think that there's only a single possible combo that can be concocted with this effect though, as this magnifies the value of both traditional ritual effects and turns enablers like Manamorphose into mini-rituals, all while gradually reducing your dependence on your permanents for mana production.
Gitaxian Probe becomes "Look at target player's hand. Draw a card. You gain a 5-color medallion emblem until end of turn." All that, for 0 mana.
Honestly, what I just wrote makes me think this is impossible to balance without making it unplayable.
I want to see the combo (though I don't want the combo to be trivial) However, the restriction you've got on it means that I will never EVER see it outside of whatever its combo turns out to be. The restriction doesn't just limit the combo, it utterly nukes your ability to tap lands and do anything at all. Which seems a shame.
@ Vitenka - I don't know that there's anyway to avoid making this effect an explicit combo piece. That may be an indication that it's just not a legitimately printable effect, but even at some ridiculous cost of 10cc with no drawback, it's still just a silly combo-enabler.
That said, I would hope that the combination of Delve and the Melody keyword might incentivise the construction of a non-degenerate Synthesizer-deck.
Chain 'em up!
This is a lot neater, yes.
Well, it's now only usable if it's absolutely the only thing you do and it powers you "I win" combo of doom. I mean, if you still want to cast normal spells, at all, you have to pay life for them.
I do still want to see the "Ok, 0 drop, 1 drop with storm, 3 drop with storm, stormed fireball for 4*6, I guess I used have to pay 3 life for that?" combo go off.
Does this have any greater resonance as an ode to Channel?
After sifting through the various Storm decks (mostly Past in Flames and ANT lists), I decided 3cc was a sufficiently awkward place for the Synthethizer to sit in the curve that maybe it wouldn't be much of an issue in Legacy/Modern, especially as it's legendary and increases your risk of dying to your own Ad Nauseam.
And by forcing you to pay the life as a cost, the interaction with Phyrexian Unlife is slightly diminished, as you can't pay the cost if you have less than 1 life.
Yeahhhhh, I was just fiddling with it late last night.
The restrictions do make sense in context, I promise, but I understand that it looks terrible and cluttered. And since there's no flavor to support what's going on, it looks doubly awful.
I do think that this ability needs some form of restriction, not just "but not less than
", as it would have to cost something crazy expensive in order to move it outside of Storm-abuse range. Though I guess I have no idea if Storm decks would really want an artifact that can help them combo out quicker.
But as you can see above, one of the first (classier) restrictions was "Whenever you cast a spell, you lose 2 life for each spell you've cast this turn." Then I remembered Phyrexian Unlife/Worship/Platinum Angel and decided that might not be enough of a balance.