Community Set: Recent Activity
| Community Set: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Skeleton | Common Breakdown Ref | All commons for playtesting |
Recent updates to Community Set: (Generated at 2025-12-20 11:40:28)
Oh, oops. I misread your post. Apologies.
Ah, no. I was suggesting something, then pulling it back. Had nothing to do with your creature.
With Red going all in, I figured we need more creatures mid-range creatures that don't mind dying. This one likes to attack, and may do it for a bad trade, or even suicide run to race through your deck for an answer.
Alright.
I felt that way, too, but I resisted. It will be filled with flavor text at some point, though.
This isn't Tremor at all. It's Ashmouth Hound with a different body.
I also just realized that Cryoclasm isn't common. Oops. Maybe it can fit in at uncommon, maybe not.
I would rather this be the other way around: "Destroy target land and all fortifications attached to it."
A card I wanted early on in the set, and never got around to including.
You don't need "through." But yeah, it's definitely a "wow" card to first see, until you look at the costs.
Alternative
creature. I keep wanting to change the creature type to "Elemental" and include the word "Ball" in the name...
Yeah. This card is going to be setting a precedent. I don't think we want to tell people that this is how fortifications normally work...
I really don't like Cryoclasm here. It's too cheap a land destruction spell when it works right, and useless when it isn't working. More importantly, though, is that it takes the focus away from mono-red fighting Aer, and encourages people to think that mono-red is fighting Mono-Blue and/or Mono-White.
This card, however, seems more appropriate to me. A situational blow-out card that doesn't ream a person for having too few lands in the early game.
Far cry from +3/+3 for each creature, but I know what you're getting at. Really, this seems less powerful than Icy Tempest, and both cards shouldn't be at common.
Seems good to me. Compare to Taste for Mayhem.
So +2/+0, or +4/+0? That seems okay, but it feels like we need to have more colorless. I find it funny, that adding an extra
makes the card better and worse at the same time.
Maybe we can make this the expensive card du set, and do something like:
spent to cast ~.
Sorcery
Target creature gains First Strike and gets +1/+0 until end of turn for each
I like this "playing with more red is advised, but not necessary" mechanic. We may want to step back into the other colors and introduce it, or tie it into uncommon.
This and Arc-Tail Devil both get screwed up by Aer, who may have the right color creature to deal with you. One of them seems fine, but both two cards might not work.
We may want to try Jack's wording on your "Multicolor Doom Blade" here. "White, Blue, Black and Green creatures can't block this turn." Nifty trick. We may be able to sneak that wording into another color as well, to make it begin to feel natural.
I don't think I like this as a combat trick. Sorcery seems fine by me, though.
Funny. It's definitely appropriate, but it makes me want to add something to it. Like the empty box is a fill in the blank.
Nice! a 1/1 that keeps beating even as you're throwing away the rest of your creatures.
Tremor when attacks may be a good idea. Subterranean Shambler was a monster of a common.
Now that I think about it, continuous tremors may not be such a good idea at common...
I think we might as well make it a 0/6 creature. That, or give it an ability similar to Aurora Wall.
Since I was talking about creatures cheating fortifications, and the types of cards they may disallow us to make, I figured I'd make an example card. This one seems about right, and shouldn't screw up playtesting commons too much, since it is only as powerful as the commons it can search for.
This ability seemed like a gimme with fortifications, so I gimmied it.