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 11:03:37)
I like the idea of restricting it to flyers as well.
I think the existence of Fortifications like this (ones with a "sacrifice fortified land" ability that needs to be used at instant speed) is a great recommendation for having some black cards that can move Fortifications around at instant speed, like analogues of Brass Squire.
Hmm, it is a bit better than Ley Druid, I guess.
Maybe in the story the black factions have invaded a number of Aeran locations?
It seems that a lot of these fortifications have a decidedly Aeran flavor, which I'm fine with... except that we want to be careful with that, since we wanted fortifications to be our
theme.
Yipe! Yeah, perhaps so. The Scope required the creature to get into a risky situation (combat). This feels like it'd be a pretty relentless source of card advantage. Perhaps if it asked you to pay some mana?
Heee. Yeah, perhaps a fortification is a slightly more sensible take on the Uniscape Bracers idea :)
Inspired by Runed Stalactite
I did a Gatherer search for common Equipment, and turned up Explorer's Scope. I think this might be too good for common...
Problem with this wording: the bonus isn't tied to the fortification being attached to a land at all.
It'd need to either say:
> As long as ~ is fortifying a land, creatures you control get +0/+1.
or somehow relate to the land, like
> Creatures you control that share a colour with mana fortified land could produce get +0/+1.
The latter is pretty horrible wording. (The former isn't exactly pretty either.)
You can just say "Sacrifice those tokens at end of turn" to avoid killing everything else that shares a creature type with it.
And yes, I think we'd like to avoid Fortifications whose abilities work just like a non-local artifact where possible, but the flavour here is good.
(It would be very problematic to try to claim the word "Fortification" for something other than an artifact subtype that attaches to lands. Although the only printed Fortification is from Future Sight, the Comp Rules have full support for them, and references all over to "Auras, Equipment or Fortifications".)
try templating slightly differently
Wheee. Funky effect. I fear this is definitely an uncommon effect, but it's awesome.
For a completely different card type, this has come out interestingly similar to Rotwood Recluse.
I like this. I don't think I'd play it except in a reasonably black-heavy deck, but I think it's a useful effect. A surprising amount of decks do something graveyard-relevant, be it Auramancer, Spider Spawning, a random Firebolt or Think Twice, Ichorid, Murderous Redcap, even Arachnus Spinner. This works something like a Braidwood Cup that also occasionally proves really handy against a graveyard manipulation card.
Ah, sorry, I wasn't sure if that was deliberate. I think doing things as well as just attacking seemed very Aer, so I thought maybe these would.
Fortifications that are not artifacts, huh?
Oops, sorry. I agree that's an interesting idea, though I agree that it probably won't go anywhere, but I didn't actually mean to suggest that -- I meant fortifications that aren't just artifacts, in the sense that this mechanically this is more of an "artifact" than an "artifact -- fortification", since mechanically the difference between this and "Artifact.
, 
." isn't much, but I really like the flavour of this being a fortification (and the cost is enough it may matter than you can amortize it over two turns).
Oh, heh. I forgot to add Haste. They have haste. Their supposed to be attacking, not just flying around the coop, though, that in itself is kind of interesting. Not common, but interesting.
Fortifications that are not artifacts, huh? That is interesting. A lot of these designs don't feel like they need to be artifacts do they? But... what would they be then? We can't make a new card type "Fortification", because of Darksteel Garrison. Although, we could. Future Sight was supposed to be about what the future might hold, not what the future will be... so we're only kind of bound by the Garrison.
Does anyone else have an opinion on this? How would you feel about the card type "Fortification"? Do you think it would need a color, if it existed? Or maybe it would be kind of unique in the fact that it is colored sometimes? Or is the whole idea the wrong road to walk down?
You know, I generally think of exiling cards from graveyards as a generally useless ability as well. But every block, they throw one of them in at common somewhere. I assume they've got their reasons, but it seems annoying when you're in a draft staring at Martyr of Bones and wondering if you would ever maindeck that guy.
If we do wish to have some amount of graveyard exiling, however, and we want fortifications to be full of tutor options... well, I assume we'd either make a graveyard exiling fortification in common or uncommon. Perhaps it's the costs that are throwing you off. Would this work better for you if cost
and 
?
Parapet as well for an old-school example. One could site Veteran Armorsmith as well if they wanted.
I'd like to hear people's responses to those questions as well. From what I've garned off of people's responses and submissions the answer to both questions seems to be "everyone has access, though fortifications are more desirable in black". That, and fortifications seems to accidently work well with some green mechanics. I don't know if we want what we're accidntly producing however, and would be happy to hear some contrary opinions.
Thanks. Yeah.
sp
I like the flavour here. In fact, I think that almost justifies the fortification-ness, even though I think we should avoid "just artifact" fortifications as much as possible. And I would suggest just "blue and red birds", that feels Aeran to me.
However, are these birds supposed to be sacrifice fodder, or are they supposed to be able to attack or block?
How about a rarer-r fortification where you can get the birds at any time, but the aerie is destroyed if enough of them die, or something?
Yeah, that's another good idea for a chunky creature that's still fortify-y.
Hm. I like the sentiment, but this seems useless unless its fortified to a swamp, so it might as well be "fortify to a swamp" in the first place.
I like the "exile a card" as a restriction -- how about "exile a card sharing a color this land could produce mana of", or similar, so you may move it around, but it's still better in mono?
Yeah. I had something very similar to the "remove attacking creature" in mind, I think that's a reasonable idea. I wasn't sure a mass-toughness boost (even +0/+1) was common, but I'd forgotten limithread field, which suggests the numbers can be tweaked into place. I think we want something like this.
I just want to clarify a few points:
- What colours are fortifications available to (in this set)?
- (flavour) Who's making the fortifications and why? (This should be flavour's job, but would be nice to get a steer)