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 2026-03-14 05:11:18)
Well said :) I don't remember seeing the last discussion, was it one of the things that disappeared?
My impression is: I like the fungus idea, I've a couple of concerns but not more than other colours.
I think I was subconsciously worried about the overlap with flood, but didn't realise it, and that made me view everything else a bit negatively. I think green is fine, and what was putting me off was the overlap with flood, even if I didn't realise it.
I think the overlap bothers me because the two mechanics are similar enough to stand out, but not similar enough to be given some mechanical/thematic connection (see below). I'll think about any possible resolutions, but I think if nothing seems better, we should live with the similarity, as it doesn't have to be a problem, and I don't think we want to redo either color from scratch.
With that out of the way, I'm not very worried about the current state.
I think the original idea was that green creatures would usually put a +1/+1 counter on your own creatures, and then someone suggested adding them to your opponent's as well with mixed drawback/advantages. (I think "caring about opponents fungus" dominated cards because that was the complicated bit, it's possible several basic "put a +1/+1 counter on a creature you control. it's a fungus" cards were considered on the commons submissions but not made into cards.)
I'm not sure we want to stick to that, but I think it makes sense. I think the default breakdown would be something like: several creatures/spells that put a +1/+1 fungus counter on any creature (but often your own); one or two creatures that put a +1/+1 counter on an opponent's creature as a cost; several creatures which benefit all/one fungus you control; several creatures which hose fungus opponents control.
Open questions for me would be: is there room for enough non-fungus creatures for putting +1/+1 on your own creatures to matter? Does it matter if there isn't, if the +1/+1 counters can go on an existing fungus creature?
How will this be templated? Will all cards that add a +1/+1 counter say "becomes a fungus" or will cards that care about fungus say "all fungus" or "all cards with +1/+1 counters" or will some/all cards say "creatures with +1/+1 counters on are fungus"?
Is it possible to have a reasonable mix of cards that make fungus, care about fungus, and aren't fungus, or will you end up drawing cards that don't really interact?
I think the first thing to do is make a suggested skeleton with obvious slots, and see if that looks like they'll interact how we'll hope.
Is there too much Johnny and Spike in here and not enough Timmy?
I think Mycoshamble (3/3 for GG) will satisfy many Timmies (since you can say "if my opponent doesn't have a creature, it's a 3/3 for free!"), and we can have a giant fungus that gives all your other fungus +?/+? which is very Timmy!
Whoops. Forgot about the fortifications. Change that to:
: Add 
or 
to your mana pool.
: Add 
to your mana pool could instead be interesting, if we want the lands to help multicolor more than mono-color.
Dual/Strange Mono Land
: Add 
or 
to your mana pool.
: Untap ~.
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
Mm. I had forgot that you could always activate that land first for
, then activate your Mountain for 
. That wasn't the point. I thought I hit on something that forced you to play only splashable spells, but clearly I whiffed.
Not a Drop to Drink is also an answer, but I agree it makes sense to have "lose flying" or similar at common as well if we can.
Thanks. Good question, I don't know. I know I tend to do the same thing with Brave the Elements etc and think "oh, well, it won't matter about the color restriction", and then forget it. But OTOH, there are existing cards that say "all COLOUR creatures you control".
I also considered this making all your red creatures attack if able, but decided it was too complicated, but maybe that would make it more obvious?
Hm, quite possibly. In fact, it should probably have some positive static ability too, so there's a reason being able to play it before attacking is good. In fact, maybe the drawback could be tacked onto another creature we already have that's a little strong.
I don't like cmeister's idea - it's extremely insular. I fear jmg's might lead to rules confusion: "Can I spend R on a spell from one of these, then tap another one for the other R?" (The answer's no.) But apart from cases involving multiples, it's just a Utopia, because you can always tap it first before any other lands.
All right, that's done. Over in the main message board, there were some grumblings over green, its mechanic, its identity, and the fact that it sits close to blue. I came out and defended green, mentioning that I thought it did something different than most sets, and forced you to think out a plan of attack. No one responded to that comment, which I'm going to interpret as "No one wanted to tell the head designer that he's wrong."
Tell me that I am wrong. I most certainly cannot do my job the right way if I voice an opinion and it is met with silence. That would become "John-Michael, the set, with occasional guest submissions by Multiverse", and I don't want that. I want other people to tell me if we did something wrong, so that we can fix it.
I'm being dramatic here, I know, but I'm doing it for a reason. If people pass on Green and let me build it the way I would like, then test it and find out that, no, they don't like what I like, then we'll either have to go back to square one after a lot of work, or we'll 'release' a product that it's designers aren't fond of. If we're going to go back to square one, I need to know so we can do it now.
Here's my take on what I see in green right now: We're going to have a lot of fungus that enter the battlefield and put a +1/+1 counter on their opponent's creatures. There's a rider on most Fungi that say that if a creature has a +1/+1 counter it is now a fungus. The Fungus are either big creatures that either don't care if they accelerated the game a little, or get minor advantages when getting into combat with other fungi, or take advantage of their opponent's newly found yeasty state, or suck up +1/+1 counters on any creature for an effect.
Is there too much Johnny and Spike in here and not enough Timmy? How much do you squirm at the idea of giving your opponent better creatures whenever you play a creature? Is there something else that is inherently not fun about this? Is there a way for this to be more fun? Would you prefer to scrap this idea, or do you think we can alter it in a way that makes you happy?
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Blue is virtually done, save for the 'Disrupt' slot, so I'm moving over to Green, since that color is open, and people seem to be talking about Black. Green however, is a bit dead in the water. It was even missing it's submissions page.
I'm going to dredge up the green cards and link them here. Then we'll see how I feel about this color, once everything is out of the box and on the table.
You know, I like the idea, but I don't know how to twist it without ending up with Soulshift.
: Add a mana to your mana pool of a color not currently in your mana pool?
Ooh. Yes, that's a good point. Um. Crud.
I like the effect, but "Draw 4, discard two" is pretty damn strong for a common. I made the card a little messier for the sake of drawing cards. Do you think it needs to change? Also, do we need to say "in any order" when putting cards on the bottom of your library? If not, then assume they go in your graveyard.
I think I like this as a bigger creature. Coming into play tapped doesn't mean anything on turn 1 in this set. A large 6/6 creature that doesn't stop your all 'All tapped' shenanigans on turn 5, however, means more.
I've always been a bit confused by Channel and Kicker. They feel like natural things you could do with a card, not worthy of a keyword. Not that I think they're bad... far from it. It's just more of a... 'peeve'. After all, Faerie Macabre didn't bother mentioning Channel.
Anyhow, ignore my grumbling. Channel seems like a good idea. With Aer collapsing all around, we could reenvision it as acts of desperation if we wanted.
I was hoping this would be a reference to Beast of Burden somehow. If we want to have an arbitrarily large flyer, a rare flying version of the original could be cool.
Can we get a mild mana bump in the process?
and discard: Add 
? Or do we not want to annoy Timmy with that option?
Would manacycling count as cycling and trigger Astral Slide et al?
Either way, I don't feel that this ability would require a keyword.
I would like to see some creature with an activation of
be in 'all-tapped red' common or uncommon slot. It certainly doesn't have to be this one, though.
Would colored Cycling make more sense? It would do a good job supporting Enlighten...
I'd also be pumped to see Evoke make a comeback, but I'd have to point out that Evoke is a bit complicated, and most modern sets would insist on having reminder text for Evoke on common cards. Since we couldn't sneak that many Evoke cards in, we'd probably end up with some very uninteresting evoke creatures in the end...
As an aside, we could make a Sorcery-speed common version of Overrun for
. Something like "Creatures you control get +1/+1 and gain Lifelink, Vigilance and Trample."
We got to be careful with trying to protect the red creatures. To much of that, and we lose the whole feel of throwing away resources. That being said, we may want to look into replenishing resources in mono-red. Normally, a breakneck red deck would have another color backing it up for a sense of stability... but we're not encouraging that here.
Disrupt makes a lot of sense (or a Disrupt variant for another card type). I'll be putting it in if no one comes up with a better plan.
Yeah, that's unfortunate. New players wouldn't know that they don't get the mana... that can't stay at common.
Anybody think that "Enlighten - You may Sakura-Tribe Elder is a good idea? Maybe not.
What if it changed basic land types when you drew a card? Fits the set, card drawing normally happens on your turn, and rarely in the early game during your opponent's turn, and secretly mixes with Mono-Blue...
My first thought lined up with Jack's second. We may want to add the occasional large flyer in common to this set because the set can handle it. We're looking at at least 5 anti-flying cards in common... if a large flying common could be in any set, it would be this one.
It would be a problem if we designed into it, but, if we don't give people a specific reason why they would want to dump a bunch of flood counters on one land, then it's probably fine. Note to self: Do not design a card that says "Whenever you tap a land add
to your mana pool for each flood counter on that land."