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 2025-12-19 07:42:54)
Seeing that Flood Crab is a really odd creature to make
, it's in the right casting cost zone, and we've already got a CC in blue, I'm just going to let this Aura take up the CC creature slot in blue. At least until development takes all my nice toys I brought from home and smashes them into the playground cement.
Putting a CC creature in every color.
That's an interesting point, and something to help out the multi v. mono thingy that I've been arguing over in the 'Dedication' thread. Today's project will be to change one of each 1C guy into a CC guy. I don't think they need to all be generics... though they can be. But the CCC are carrying generic weight, so the CCs may not need it.
Adding these, though, doesn't resolve my multi v. mono problem... at least as far as I'm concerned. A higher concentration of CC and CCC cards is too subtle for some people to notice.
Well, with two negatory response, I'm going to call this a 'no'. I do think we need to strengthen mono in the set in a non-subtle way, however. If people don't immediately understand the mono v. multi theme because it's too subtle, then we don't have an easy selling point for the set. For example, Innistrad is "Classic Gothic Monsters are taking over", Mirrodin is "Evil Machines are infecting good machines", without mono v. multi, Aer is "Five different colored tribes rebel against their multicolored masters"... that sounds like 'yet another Magic set' and that's assuming the audience even notices that.
Blood Knight exists. It's just uncommon, like Black Knight and White Knight have always been.
Well, clearly is should be the red knihght.
With first strike, prot green and white, haste, blackjack and hookers.
Amusingly, this would be a first: there are no common creatures with
in their costs.
I think we can make reasonable "nice but not necessary" bonuses. But I'm not sure if dedication is the right implementation of a mono-heavy reward. I'm not sure my worry is valid, but I'm worried that people's response will not be "oh, it's worth playing monocolor", but "oh, I'll probably have enough mana to play this mono even if I have a two-color deck. Oh crap, this card is really annoying, I never get the bonus".
If we did want something else, other possibilities would be to have a scalable bonus ("gain 1 life for each W spent to cast this") that feels all-upside, or a sacrifice effect with a heavy mono cost.
ETA: "Wait, I created this? Really?" -- I think you created the card as a focus for a discussion of dedication that was going on elsewhere, you may not have designed it :)
Ha!
The benefit doesn't have to be heavy handed, if that's the sticking point. It may be tough to stradle the difference between 'minor bonus' and 'inconsequential', but it's probably doable. Let's see if I can throw together an example:
. 
was spent to cast ~, tap all lands that player controls.
Instant
Counter target spell unless that spell's controller pays
If only
Not sure if that was the best example. Like I said, it's a tricky balancing act. But at least that gives us an idea of the sort of cards we'd be dealing with.
Defender isn't. I suppose, in theory, this could be any X/1 with or without defender. I wouldn't focus too much on p/t v. cc, since that's the most likely element to change due to set constraints. Though, I do find this strange when compared to the minotaur. Sure, the minotaur can attack, but this card is so much easier to use in mono. In theory, it may be a stronger card (?!)
But, yeah, I think I'd prefer we toss the Defender and use the simplest version of this X/1. My mind wants to keep the defender, but I know it's because the word is grandfathering on me, and not for any real reason.
Editing out defender, and increasing cc by 1. I find it also interesting to compare this card to Fomori Nomad.
If this feels too out-of-pie, then we could do something equivalent with "Target Fungus and each creature blocking [or blocked by] it gain deathtouch UEOT". Ah, colour pie loopholes, how we love you :)
I don't know for sure how it'll play, but the new stats seem more interesting. 4/1 fireating seems to make big toughness swings relevant, whereas for 3/3 you're probably only pumping it occasionally.
I don't know if it should be defender or not, was that originally part of the cycle?
...I'm not sure. Dedication always struck me as pretty fiddly. It's harder to benefit from than Shrieking Gargoyle. It seems a very blunt instrument, and also I'm not sure we actually want to push people to play mono in Limited, because I don't think we've given them the tools to do so.
...Wait, I created this? Really?
Without yet looking at the green and black commons, I'd try to combine firebreathing with an existing card supporting one of the existing themes. Failing that, I'd try to add a firebreather while combining two cards currently serving different themes into one serving both.
If we can't find a way to do either of those for both black and green, then yeah, maybe cut firebreathing from both of them. I think the uncommons could add enough mono emphasis that people get the push without being unable to play their limited decks.
EDIT: Okay, I looked at them. I don't think we want to gum up the text of them by complicating any of the (relatively few) nice simple commons we've got. So I'd say just lose one of them for a firebreather, at least to try in the first playtest.
I think you could justify a
Enchantment Auramancer with the point that it can now recur itself. I think that's reasonable. Alternatively make it 
1/2 or 
2/1 or 
2/3.
That comparison probably suggests that if this keeps defender, it could be one mana cheaper.
Yikes. That is quite annoying.
In Firebreathing et. al. Cycle I mentioned that we don't have many things cuing people in to the fact that we're pushing people to play mono. When I look back at the dedication mechanic, however, I can't imagine why we didn't think to put more of this in the file. It seems like an easy way to get splashable cards that support mono in the set.
Our creature slots are probably too cluttered to make any serious changes, but almost every color has an instant or sorcery that can be 'improved' upon. I'm requesting adding Dedication to 5 common instants or sorceries. I don't think we need to keyword it... not right away.
After punching some of the cards into place, it occurs to me that I missed two 'firebreathing' cards in black in green. My question is: Do we want them? Here's a quick run-down
Pros:
Cons:
Opinions?
What if it gave spells this ability, so that you had to be actually spending the mana on something?
Annoying aside. Two Woven Lifes probably doesn't do what most people think they will do. In fact, I think they cause an infinite loop of entering the battlefield, triggering the other one to enter the battlefield, then, while waiting for the other one to enter play, noticing that there are no other enchantments are on the battlefield, and leaving play, continuing the cycle.
Trying out 4/1 for size instead of 3/3. I'll be glad to move this back to square stats if someone complains, but I do like how this gives you the impression that something is off, while still staying in the guidelines of white.
I was going to say that I don't know many creatures that do this, and it feels a bit unique. Then it occured to me that this was incredibly close to Ordruun Commando. Though, you know, different.
Changed Woven Life and added Aurora Soother to the set, solving our enchantment-matters common requirements. Don't know why I missed soother on first pass. Odd.
I really like the Auramancer idea, too. White has a tradition of returning enchantments from the graveyard, and this seems like one of the few sets where that really matters. Pity that we can't use Auramancer straight up, though. I'd prefer not to functional reprint, either. It's funny. If we just reprinted Auramancer with Gravediggers cc and made it an enchantment, it would probably be first pick material. People would probably hate us for that, though...
Also added Cutwork Knight and Thread Gatherer because we needed to add them. Altered p/t on Thread Gatherer. See notes there.