Mainly a draw for commander but also could be a limited bomb. I'm not sure if I should add more to this (besides flavour text), like draining when you gain life or some life gain payoff. Maybe "Other clerics you control get +1/+1" or something.
With an ultimate like that, I don't think it matters if there's not much counterplay to her turtling up. If her middle ability cost [0] and I activate it every turn, then that means after I spend 5 mana in two colours on a mythic, the net result is... four turns later, I get an emblem making my turtles bigger. I get something like Assault Formation stapled onto Jacques le Vert. This is a fine turtley ultimate, but it's really not a particularly overpowering thing to get four turns after your 5 mana gold mythic planeswalker has done nothing else.
It's not even The Abyss, it's just a Trap Runner on whatever their evasive 1/1 is.
Well it's flavourful, she's a turtle planeswalker so her -2 is turtling up.
The thing is that if it's 0 then you can just 0 her over and over and you're either abyssing your opponents creatures or she's ticking up unstoppably. There's no counterplay. You lose a creature and she's on the same loyalty. After some playtesting, maybe it could be a -1 or maybe a 0 that gives 1 loyalty so that the tick up is much slower.
That first ability is really fiddly. I think it should just be standardised, either as "[+2]: Create a 1/1 green and blue Turtle creature token [with guard]", and possibly also a separate "[0]: Create a 1/3 green and blue Turtle creature token" if you really want both.
That second ability is rather unimpressive, especially on a 5-mana walker. If it cost [0] it'd be interesting - effectively a [+2] unless the opponent wastes an attacker. At [-2]+2, netting out to [0], it's purely a "skip your turn". And okay, there are occasional situations where I can't defend a 'walker this turn but I'll be able to next turn; but still, it looks bad and looks like it'd feel bad.
@Izaac: The big problem with allowing hexproof to work on spells is that suddenly Drove of Elves, Bastion Inventor and so on become uncounterable, which was not at all the design intent.
The simplest way of wording this card would be to assume the rules change I suggested above. Then the card can just have Hexproof written on this card and grant the other spell hexproof as well.
V: No, that's really not the way Wizards would template it. Instructions that modify how this spell work on the stack are always a separate ability to instructions that start happening once this spell starts resolving.
Well; I guess every set needs a few extremely-niche cards.
Oh, the first line "Can't be countered" I seem to recall causes some rules templating problems. I think it needs " by spells or abilities." tacking on (making this conceptually simple card even wordier).
How about something like:
Neither ~ nor target spell can be countered by spells or abilities.
Or:
Both ~ and target spell have protection from spells and abilities.
Counter target counterspell. Very limited, compared to, say, "Counter target Instant".
And costs more than that costs? (See Dispel).
Ok, so technically, it casts Dispel as often as needed to protect a single spell. And protects against, um Vodalian Mage. So maybe would be a reasonable cost for the effect.
As far as I'm concerned, the effect is either a good idea, or it is a bad idea. If it is a good idea, you price it appropriately so it will see play. If it is a bad idea, you don't print it.
Mainly a draw for commander but also could be a limited bomb. I'm not sure if I should add more to this (besides flavour text), like draining when you gain life or some life gain payoff. Maybe "Other clerics you control get +1/+1" or something.
Changed code to fit skeleton
Changed code to fit skeleton
Mmm. Maybe the ult shouldn't be restricted to turtles then. It admittedly feels a bit like a Duel Deck Planeswalker now that I think about it.
With an ultimate like that, I don't think it matters if there's not much counterplay to her turtling up. If her middle ability cost [0] and I activate it every turn, then that means after I spend 5 mana in two colours on a mythic, the net result is... four turns later, I get an emblem making my turtles bigger. I get something like Assault Formation stapled onto Jacques le Vert. This is a fine turtley ultimate, but it's really not a particularly overpowering thing to get four turns after your 5 mana gold mythic planeswalker has done nothing else.
It's not even The Abyss, it's just a Trap Runner on whatever their evasive 1/1 is.
Well it's flavourful, she's a turtle planeswalker so her -2 is turtling up.
The thing is that if it's 0 then you can just 0 her over and over and you're either abyssing your opponents creatures or she's ticking up unstoppably. There's no counterplay. You lose a creature and she's on the same loyalty. After some playtesting, maybe it could be a -1 or maybe a 0 that gives 1 loyalty so that the tick up is much slower.
That first ability is really fiddly. I think it should just be standardised, either as "[+2]: Create a 1/1 green and blue Turtle creature token [with guard]", and possibly also a separate "[0]: Create a 1/3 green and blue Turtle creature token" if you really want both.
That second ability is rather unimpressive, especially on a 5-mana walker. If it cost [0] it'd be interesting - effectively a [+2] unless the opponent wastes an attacker. At [-2]+2, netting out to [0], it's purely a "skip your turn". And okay, there are occasional situations where I can't defend a 'walker this turn but I'll be able to next turn; but still, it looks bad and looks like it'd feel bad.
Can't be countered is great but doesn't stop unsubstantiate or commandeer
So what about:
"~ can't be the target of spells or abilities your opponents control.
Target spell you control can't be the target of spells or abilities your opponents control."
or the less extravagant:
"~ can't be countered by spells or abilities.
Target spell you control can't be countered by spells or abilities."
???
Oh yeah... hrmm that is troublesome. What about, "Resolve target spell (you control)"?
@Izaac: The big problem with allowing hexproof to work on spells is that suddenly Drove of Elves, Bastion Inventor and so on become uncounterable, which was not at all the design intent.
(Well, uncounterable except by Summary Dismissal and Swift Silence, which is even more confusing.)
This card would be so much easier to template in a set with split second. Any chance?
The simple fix makes it very hard to distinguish a creature card with hexproof, without giving that spell hexproof too.
The simplest way of wording this card would be to assume the rules change I suggested above. Then the card can just have Hexproof written on this card and grant the other spell hexproof as well.
Well, ok; it can be two lines then. I thought the bold "cannot be countered" at all - was disallowed; was my main point.
V: No, that's really not the way Wizards would template it. Instructions that modify how this spell work on the stack are always a separate ability to instructions that start happening once this spell starts resolving.
Well; I guess every set needs a few extremely-niche cards.
Oh, the first line "Can't be countered" I seem to recall causes some rules templating problems. I think it needs " by spells or abilities." tacking on (making this conceptually simple card even wordier).
How about something like:
Neither ~ nor target spell can be countered by spells or abilities.
Or: Both ~ and target spell have protection from spells and abilities.
(Which covers, I dunno, Thoughtlace)
Alright alright, lowered the mana cost.
Counter target counterspell. Very limited, compared to, say, "Counter target Instant".
And costs more than that costs? (See Dispel).
Ok, so technically, it casts Dispel as often as needed to protect a single spell. And protects against, um Vodalian Mage. So maybe would be a reasonable cost for the effect.
I don't get it, isn't that a bit pricey for what it does? Wouldn't it also be easier to use "Split Second" instead?
@ttt: Shrug So isn't an activation from Boseiju, Who Shelters All on the round you play it. This is Guttural Response with a three mana rider.
As far as I'm concerned, the effect is either a good idea, or it is a bad idea. If it is a good idea, you price it appropriately so it will see play. If it is a bad idea, you don't print it.
Stopping an opponent's play is the most important thing a counterspell can do. Two mana gold is already pushing 'meh!' territory.
Currently quite a bit worse than Last Word conceptually I think.
I'm kinda scared of lowering the cost. This is kinda an un-counterable counterspell where the only downside is it can't stop an opponents play.