Multiverse: Community Set: Recent Activity

2012-03-28 07:21:40: jmgariepy edited Another red common spell

2012-03-28 07:21:26: jmgariepy commented on Another red common spell

I'm going through finalizing the common slots. Since there isn't anything in this slot, and one of the red slots needs to be removed, then this looks like what we take out. That's not to say that we can't use a non-burn, non-creature spell in red, so I think the argument still fits. But the slot will have to be taken from a pre-existing spot.

2012-03-28 07:18:26: jmgariepy commented on Vicious Bloodlust

Poking my head in on red. Does this need the "as long as enchanted creature is tapped" rider? It doesn't ask for all in, and I think it's pretty obvious that this card is much better on offense...

2012-03-28 07:15:48: jmgariepy commented on Frenzied Yeti

I'm perfectly aware that manacycling is unlikely to stay on this card. But for now, I'm just matching the RRR card with the rest of the CCC cards.

2012-03-28 07:15:12: jmgariepy edited Frenzied Yeti

2012-03-28 07:13:52: jmgariepy edited Serve Through Death

2012-03-28 07:13:29: jmgariepy edited Flow of Memories

2012-03-23 12:55:22: Alex commented on Tel Koria Jailer

Hm, I was just looking at other flying+deathtouch creatures... this compares fine to Pestilent Kathari, not too bad alongside Winged Coatl, but looks distinctly sad next to Tidehollow Strix. Might try 2/3 or 3/1 or 3/2.

2012-03-23 12:42:45: Alex commented on Violent Zephyr

Yeah, when I said "making it less available to the red player", I meant "making the instant-speed suddenly-tapped-out effect less available to the red player" - i.e. the combat trick you're referring to. It's probably worth aiming to identify the burn spells we expect to be efficient and the burn spells we expect to be less so. I could see arguments both ways for which of those should have the instant tap-out rider on it though.

2012-03-23 12:41:33: Alex commented on Another red common spell

I always liked the "Target creature gets +N/+0 and gains first strike UEOT" instants, costing N; I believe they exist already for N=1, 2 and 3. It's a bit too similar to Devil Charge to have both in the set at common, but if DC moves then we could add one of them.

2012-03-23 12:36:05: Alex commented on White Commons Submissions

I think the way most draft pods will play out is there'll be at most 1-2 monocolour drafters, and at most 1 heavy-multicolour drafter, so there'll be at least 5 of the usual two-colours-plus-splash limited decks. These will likely have a few gold creatures, and since every gold creature has flying (and almost all of the gold commons are creatures), I think it's very legitimate to have the evasion count in monowhite slightly lower to compensate. Otherwise we risk reducing the actual creature interaction too much. So I say we don't need to bend over too much to try to fit in another evasion creature.

I agree that 7 creatures 6 noncreatures is fine; the token-maker could reasinably go in either of those buckets.

2012-03-23 11:22:56: Jack V commented on White Commons Submissions

OK, in which case it should probably be 7 creatures, 6 others, with 2-3 evasion creatures?

ETA: And yeah, I'd like a second opinion from anyone else, although I suspect we'll end up guessing until we can playtest :)

2012-03-23 11:21:36: Jack V edited the details page Common Breakdown Ref

2012-03-23 11:20:26: Jack V edited the details page Common Breakdown Ref

2012-03-23 10:46:51: jmgariepy commented on White Commons Submissions

The 14th slot is still on the skeleton, but isn't really there. 13 slots right now. I just haven't gotten around to removing them yet. Sorry if this response is curt, but I want to see someone besides me respond to this.

2012-03-23 09:48:34: Jack V commented on White Commons Submissions

I know what you mean.

My instinct is that mono-white and mono-blue should have the usual proportion of flying-equivalents, since that's such a large part of their usual identity, or failing that we need to sculpt an alternative niche for it, but I don't have much experience designing or playing limited, so I don't know that for sure. The number could presumably be smaller and still relevant.

I agree a token-maker is ok to count as a creature (although I'm not sure about (((Tie in Ribbons))), I like the idea, but I'm not sure how often you'd want to play it to get the tokens.)

I forgot what we agreed, I thought there were 13 slots, did we remove one? I was aiming my numbers at 14 so it's possible some of them should go down 1.

I realise it's a squeeze whatever we do, but I'd be in favour of squeezing in at least a little evasion. (It's unfortunate that none of it is as simple as flying.) Cutwork Knight could possibly have another ability (since I'm not sure the WWW creature should have the manacycling ability). Folded Light could possibly be uncommon and be replaced with something simple like lightmare?

2012-03-23 08:46:08: Jack V commented on Another red common spell

Yeah, I meant non-creature, possibly aura, but probably instant or sorcery. It's not urgent now because I'm going to put Final Charge back into this slot for testing, but I expect either that or Devil Charge to move later so it would be good to have some more ideas.

2012-03-23 08:44:36: Jack V edited Another red common spell

2012-03-23 05:02:26: jmgariepy commented on Another red common spell

I take it we're looking for another instant or sorcery and not neccesarily an enchant creature? There's a plethora of enchant creature space we can plumb... just off of things like "enchanted creature gets +4/+2".

But not the usual stuff and good? Hmm...

Sorcery. When a creature goes to the graveyard from play this turn, draw a card.
Threaten variants. Maybe even a purely defensive variant, to shake things up.
Flash Counter?
Each player discards two cards, then draws three cards.
Copy target spell you control?
Put a creature from your hand into play, redirect all spells and abilities to it. Sacrifice that creature at end of turn.

2012-03-23 04:38:13: jmgariepy commented on Violent Zephyr

I could see this being 4 damage if it was sorcery speed. In fact, I have a hard time seeing how tapping all your creatures at instant speed is relevant except in very rare scenarios that involve things like killing your opponent's creature before they have regeneration mana up.

I know the drawback of sorcery speed is a drag, but at least it seems like a drawback you're working around. Finding out that you got screwed by a 'no-drawback' instant because you just happen to need to use it at sorcery speed... well... I'd assume that would cause more people to frown. That, by the way, is very weird, I confess.

Edit: Wait! Ha! I designed this card and intended it as a combat trick! That's funny. I see where I was going with that, but there's probably a cautionary Cursed Scroll story in there somewhere. Okay, I got to admit, the combat trick makes me curious... but if we're to do that, I'd suggest not costing it efficiently so that, when a person intends to use it for that, they are using it for that.

2012-03-23 04:32:59: jmgariepy commented on Devil Charge

I like it too. Probably doesn't need to cost {4} {r} , since it still requires a creature to be in play and attack. I know the trample can give you more value, but the requirements seem to outweigh that.

2012-03-23 04:30:47: jmgariepy commented on Icy Tempest

Any version would be fine by me. Though, I think I'd prefer the 'bonus to one creature' version. I can't think of the last time red did that... is that because it's too close to the way blue does things?

2012-03-23 04:28:45: jmgariepy commented on Sneaking Gust

When I saw Jack's write-up in White Commons Submissions I didn't realize this was new... I just assumed I missed it somehow in first pass. Either way, we have some things to talk about there before this can be added to the file.

2012-03-23 04:25:04: jmgariepy commented on White Commons Submissions

This makes sense to me, but with 13 slots, we're a bit strapped on meeting all our 'prerequisites'. Currently, I added Bolstering Light because I saw it first, and Gustrider is playing alternate because I saw it second. Right now we have 7 creatures out of 13, with an enchantment that puts two token creatures on the battlefield (albeit, inefficiently). Adding an evasion creature to white either complicates an existing creature (Like Cutwork Knight or Thread Gatherer) or pushes another creature out or top-heavy's white creature count and pushes a non-creature out.

That's not to say we can't do that. I'm perfectly aware of how important evasion is in draft environments. I would like to remind the team, however, that there technically are 6 creatures with flying in all colors... you just wouldn't have any evasion if you're playing mono-white. Whether or not that's acceptable is beyond my role to argue.

2012-03-23 04:23:26: jmgariepy commented on Gustrider

See White Commons Submissions for my comments.

2012-03-23 04:10:47: jmgariepy commented on Bolstering Light

Looks good to me. It also does a good job of updating Parapet... and oddly, I've wanted a new Parapet. Added to file, replacing Battlefield Bolter.

2012-03-23 04:10:18: jmgariepy edited Bolstering Light

2012-03-23 04:09:18: jmgariepy commented on Battlefield Bolter

Changed to Uncommon. See Bolstering Light.

2012-03-23 04:09:00: jmgariepy edited Battlefield Bolter

2012-03-23 04:05:03: jmgariepy commented on Disempower

Changed to Disempower for now. Really, this could be a lot of things... and still can be. As for the +2/+2 or exile/destroy, I think we don't want to give players the choice... but not because of complexity issues. The whole reason we want this to not be Demystify is because we don't want it to kill white creatures. That, and that card would cost {2} {w} , and good non-creature cards that cost {w} are harder to come by.