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 2025-12-20 00:39:26)
Yeah, I was going to say this wants to be a bit better. Reminds me of Warren Pilferers, which is a lot better (although it's also playing a different role, which may be taken by Return to Service in this set of commons).
Conditional ETBT seems like a reasonable way to take
off the cost of Moonglove Winnower.
Flanking that works on defence. A little bit defensive, but also not a bad attacker; can trade with an X/2 on either attack or defence. Good common, and the cost looks right.
We're still short a real mechanic. Maybe we can make a sacrifice theme work: there's been done a lot, but maybe there's room for more.
I don't think we specifically need a "sacrifice an X"; that's been done a lot. If we simply have "sacrifice a creature" cards and "put two X tokens into play" I think people will get the idea.
It doesn't fit the theme entirely but how about sacrifices that care about the size of the creature for a mechanic? Then there's some benefit to sacrificing your centaurs and behemoths as well as your 0/1 thrulls?
Edit: Or maybe to play up the "slavery" theme have creatures that use other creatures as a cost in various ways: both sacrifice, return to hand, tap, untap, etc.
You mention over on Blue Commons Submissions that you'd be up for volunteers taking a look at one colour (counting multicolour as a colour for this purpose). I could volunteer to have a go at one colour. I'd most like to do white, multicolour or green.
I'd like to clarify what we're after before I start though. Are you envisaging that the task for the moment is to collect together the assorted common submissions, assess what's missing and what we want at common, and assemble some unified whole (just focused on commons for the moment)?
That's a very good argument against having this at common. In fact, I think it might be better to save this kind of mechanic until the second set.
I could volunteer to have a go at one colour. Discussion of non-blue factions continues on Jump Starting the Community Set.
People complained about Planar Portal being too slow (although I wasn't one of them). In particular, they complained at the need to invest
before getting anything back. This has that problem but worse: investing 
over 2 turns to get a Diabolic Tutor is rather unattractive, even if you are getting a tutor every turn from then on. It's just too front-loaded.
Perhaps you could take the Bringer of the Black Dawn approach, and drive the costs down by putting the searched-for card on top of the library. That'd turn it into something a bit like Archmage Ascension (get a free tutor each turn).
I think we can't have flyers in monocolour. If we're saying gold does flying, we should stick to that. Also, black has never got a Flying Men before, so giving it one with a benefit seems a bit mad. How about making this a "Clipped-Wing Harpy" without flying?
I think plainswalk is odd enough that we should have a particular reason for having it, rather than just do it "because it doesn't happen very much". It doesn't help that the word is so confusable with Planeswalkers. For that reason, I prefer Weft Weaver.
An Entwined Healing Salve. Seems very sensible.
clarify to just be an Aura with no P/T
This is at the moment pretty subtle Aura removal, with a sideline in animation. I think if this were common I'd want to see it with "Enchant non-Aura enchantment" to simplify its effect. Or it could stay at "Enchant enchantment" but move to uncommon.
I like this: it's a textshift of Soul's Attendant / Leonin Elder for this set's white mechanic :)
Well, yes. But it also activates for
. And can be activated on the turn after you play it, if you have access to 
. If you think that Planar Portal is fair, than I couldn't imagine this costing less. The Fortify cost could probably come down a peg, though, to let people play something on round two.
Oh, extra bonus thingy. If anyone is keen on taking up one color, I'd suggest handling multicolored. I know the file on multicolored is a bit of a mess, but it would make sense if the opposition forces were assembled by a different brain than mine.
Innefecient removal of counters as an answer (for example a 4/4 for
that, as an additional cost, requires you to remove a flood token) isn't such a bad idea, but, you're right... it should probably wait for uncommon as well. After all, the focus is Aer vs. the 5 mono colored planes. If we featured cards at common that showcased a different fight, it could warp people's first perception of the set...
I don't think you need put it in yet at all, I think we should wait and see if UU and 2U mana costs work out, and only if we feel they don't come back and recost some using hybrid mana.
These got designed as Idyllic Crest, Sea Crest, Gorgon's Crest, Arctic Crest and Fungal Crest.
So this is Planar Portal but more expensive and slower to get started?
That's not a bad idea. It's up at an awkward time, but I'm sure that we can work with it by just changing the casting cost of spells going into the skeleton. Shall I suggest that we do one per color in common, and always the same casting cost (for example
, 
, etc..) to make it feel special? Any more than that, and I fear designers will feel that we should have been building around it, and want to go back and change too many submissions. It does give us plenty of space to monkey in the uncommon slots, though.
Skyknight Legionnaire was jolly good, but it was one of a theme focused in Boros, one of the four guilds in Ravnica (the first set). The corresponding theme in this set is spread around all five colours. Realistically, most draft decks will be 2-3 colours, so they won't be able to get all the aggressive Aer flyers. So I think it's okay if in a vacuum this is slightly better than Skyknight Legionnaire, because it won't have such strong support for the strategy it naturally lends itself to.
Good thought. As MaRo said, hybrid is a tool; one you don't want to use all the time, but one that's available for use sometimes if it's the right tool for the job. This could be such an occasion for monocolour hybrid.
add reminder text
Yeah, I agree: removing flood counters as a cost is interesting, and colours should have some answer to flood counters, but not a common which does so repeatably.
Random thoughts:
ETA: Maybe we can have a couple of blue commons which do so as a cost, but (possibly indirectly) don't work as anti-blue measures, or do so only very innefficiently? I like the as-a-cost idea, because it makes multiples more relevant, but you're right that they easily turn into anti-blue cards. (Or maybe that's ok, maybe people won't draft blue-hate so highly, and if they use a random blue common that's not very useful in their deck to fight flood, that's a sufficient up-side for the flood deck.)
"layer it with things that we must have, then should have, then seem cool"
Oh yes, good idea, definitely. I probably need to get some other stuff done today, but might have a look at another colour later.
"In this case, I'd suggest we start by over-comitting to the themes"
Definitely. Last thing I'd want to see is us get timid and not do our job the right way.
"The bullet points"
Seem about right. I don't want to write the entire skeleton down in one pass, and prefer to layer it with things that we must have, then should have, then seem cool. My first thought was to focus on creatures as musts, mostly because almost all the cards in blue, right now, is so focused on flood that I'm not concerned about getting enough of the flood mechanic in there. That being the case, I have no intention of shirking it.
Provisional lists for other colors
Oh, by all means. Like I mentioned in the previous post, whatever we do here will be torn through by our 'development team', so I'm not concerned about making a perfect list anyways as much as getting a good representation. If someone wants to tackle a color, just say so and it's yours. If you want to set up for me to come behind and clean up later, that's fine too.
I don't suggest we include this for its own sake, but several of the suggested blue skeletons ran into difficulty balancing the number of
and 
mana costs, not wanting too many, but wanting as many cards as possible to be reward mono-U decks.
If so, it occurs to me a couple of
or 
mana costs may help the "reward players heavily for playing mono-U decks without completely screwing over people who splash". I suggest only using this if we feel we need it, but I think it might be useful if we do.