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 2025-12-18 19:44:23)
Heh. Jack, you just argued for "works better in set" with Cleansing Powder, and "works better outside of set" with Soft Filter. :D
I'm cool with this card changing over. I like the ability as it stands, but, I'm the designer. Of course I'm going to like my design. Changing over.
Oh, also, I should remind people that this is an on the board trick. That's not necessarily discouraged in common, but I doubt it is encouraged.
Edited the card to represent what Jack is talking around. Flipped the abilities also, so it made more sense... since, if the card just sac'd for 3 life, you'd just sac it.
We don't need more creatures, so I'd suggest turning this into one. It seems clear to me that the pros are: works better with mechanics, and the cons are: made marginally more complicated with marginal return. I'll let other people figure out which way they like.
It seems there's always been a bit of a gap between 1CMC and 4CMC burn spells, I guess because the standard environment always wants a strong cheap burn spell, usually at R, and that limits the opportunity to print anything ar 1R or 2R without making too many good spells in standard. So I think there's more opportunity to make a strong R, 1R or 2R burn spell in a block which isn't going to be part of standard, even if wizards haven't printed one recently.
That said, I agree this probably wants to be toned down. I'll reduce it a bit, but we'll almost certainly want to move it around after playtesting.
OK, with one vote of support I'll probably move this back in until we've done some playtesting. For now I'll give it the spare slot (CR13), which gives us two "finishers", but that's fine; we can switch something else out if there's any other good ideas we want to try.
Oh, I forgot Dodger, that suggests this is about right (as someone pointed out, we can't have any white creature reprints if they're going to be enchantments, so it's better to have a new P and T). Thank you.
Reminds me of Turn to Slag or Murderous Spoils. I could go with either way round - "fortification and any land" or "land and any fortification".
1R 4dmg seems pretty aggressive. I'd rather have a Volcanic Hammer / Incinerate than a... I'm not sure there's ever been 4 damage for
before; Flame Javelin was just 
. Yeah, searching shows that it's just Sonic Burst and a bunch of random conditionals, of which Flame Slash is the best. This is a drawback in most decks, but I think it's so good that it'd be picked by more or less any player who has or thinks they can get any manafixing, making it less available to the red player... Of course a cost of 
might help alleviate that.
Nice take on Lava Axe. Very good on a random 4/4, but much more vulnerable to being tapped, fogged, etc. I like it.
I'm normally the one saying "this isn't common", but in this case I think it could be common actually. ICBW, of course.
I agree that this kind of effect is much better than landwalk-style on/off. Goldmeadow Dodger is the closest precedent, and I agree this is better for common than the Skulk's protection.
Yeah, I don't quite see why Seasoned Marshal is always uncommon either. The rule continued as far as Innistrad (Niblis of the Urn - cf the common Niblis of the Mist), but Master Decoy has been common for ages so I don't see why this would cause a problem.
Oh, you're right, I'd not noticed the asymmetry between armorer and swordsmith, although I'd thought there should be one. This could easily only pump enchantments if that helps.
But I think +0/+1 is probably better: it's hopefully just about playable, which means it's interesting to make and see what use people get out of it.
I think +1/+0 is a lot stronger than +0/+1; it's the better half of Glorious Anthem. I think +0/+1 is plausible for all your creatures at common (Veteran Armorer / Lumithread Field) but +1/+0 isn't going to happen for all your creatures anywhere less than rare (Swordsmith was just for Soldiers).
I'd rather have only "enchant creature"s at common, and an "enchant enchantment" or two at unc/rare.
An act-of-treason variant. It does work to remove an opponent's attack step, but only on a creature which is already attacking you.
It's not set relevant apart from the flavour.
It should probably be uncommon.
Yep, an Enchantment Auramancer seems a great plan.
Boy, red commons are boring. I looked on gatherer, and it's all burn, burn, burn, useless, burn, useless, burn... We could have another burn spell (probably Hurly-Burly?), but it'd be nice to have anything else.
Is there anything else red is likely to need in this set? Anything red usually gets at uncommon we could move down to common, or a nice red common people would be happy to see here?
I like destroying land and whatever fortifications that land has.
OK, I'm putting this in the skeleton, but I reserve the right to change round which way it's written :)
"Destroy target fortification and any land its attached to"?
"Destroy target land and any fortifications attached to it"? "Destroy target artifact and anything its attached to"?