Magic 20XX: Recent Activity
| Magic 20XX: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Recent updates to Magic 20XX: (Generated at 2025-04-30 15:04:23)
Page 1 - Older activity
Page 1 - Older activity
Is "Norin, the Weary" an older fed-up Norin the Wary?
Should probably be reworded to: ~ can't block + Indestructible (remainder text).
Awesome card. Personally I'd define it so that if a card is common anywhere all versions of it are common (Pauper).
This a great cycle, and all the cards are great, but does it really need to be a mythic cycle?
You can define the rarity of a card as the rarity when it was first printed, like how they did with expansion symbols.
Very cool idea to structure the card this way, I like it. Not clear how good the "ultimate" is, but that's the sort of thing that playtesting would iron out.
I like the pun in the flavor text. "Come on." Har har har
What Link is referring to is this line:
"(A card is uncommon if it is uncommon in the set it is printed in.)"
Which I just cut. Magic 20XX was only ever intended to be drafted among a group of friends, so there are a number of cards that were a bit -un, this one one of them. That reminder text was more to stop arguments about cards that were reprinted in Magic 20XX with different commonalities, and whether or not they counted as uncommons. For confusion sake, I decided to let the cards do what they said they did, and reflected that in the reminder text.
But you're right, Link, that isn't the way normal Magic works. And while this card would never be printed, it should probably conform to the the rules as we know them. Edited, and thank you.
The reminder text on this is inaccurate as reminder text, isn't it? Formats that care about rarity don't care what rarity a specific printing holds, as long as another printing had the rarity that matters. That's why you can play your M13 Rancor in Pauper.
I like the way you think, Alex. Changed first ability to 0, changed the second to -2 and upped starting loyalty to 6, so you have to work to kill Lim-Dul early.
I like the idea of a PW with a 0 ability that scales off itself, like Marrow-Gnawer's effect. But this design makes me wonder why the +1 actually grants loyalty at all.
Maybe you could decide that a theme of Nicol Bolas's planeswalker pawns is that they should only go down in loyalty, like Sarkhan the Mad. Make the abilities cost [0], [-1] and [0] in their current order (and maybe rearrange them).
(Yes, okay, Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas breaks that pattern before it starts. We could decree that he's an odd exception.)
Part of the "Who could still be kicking around as a Planeswalker" cycle, started with Serra, Resplendant and continuing into Feroz, Warden of Ulgrotha. Lim-Dûl is pushing that theme. Obviously, he was never a planeswalker in any of the stories. My plan was to explain it away as Leshrac intentionally holding his pawn back from his destiny and trapping the spark within him. Nicol Bolas, however, recognizes a time travelling Lim-Dûl spark, though, and decides that Lim-Dûl not only shows the promise of power, but he's already shown that being a peon is in his nature, so he unburies Lim-Dûl's spark.
I know, at the time, I was trying to make the 'cheapest' planeswaker I could (less color commitment than original Jace. It doesn't hurt that this guy can cost the equivalent of
on round 3, if you want.) The ultimate isn't really an ultimate so much as a way to go out of control if left unchecked. I wonder if it resonates. Ulitmates might need to feel ultimate to feel 'right'.
Ah! I missed Didgeridoo! Well, I guess that settles it.
Sorry, Vitenka. The art is somewhere, but unfortunately, I'm going off of my notes, and not my card set. If I had it, I'd post it.
Also, it seem cruel for you to give these comments and not link the art.
Canonically, the answer re: Feroz appears to be settled by, of all cards, Didgeridoo.
Part of the "Which past planeswalkers could still be around" cycle in Magic 20XX. If Serra, Resplendant is fair game, then her lover Feroz must be too.
I got a general positive vibe from the card. The idea working hard to lock all creatures out of the game appealed to a few people. It's unfair... but ultimates, by their nature, are unfair.
The artwork on this card, however, got a few... responses. When I was shopping for stock art, I found a picture of blue wizard doing just what Feroz seems to do. The wizard, however, was a pretty woman. I did some thinking, and did some research. Any story that had Feroz in it was pre-revision, so mentions of Feroz as a 'he' from before 1997 don't count. And none of the flavor text in Homelands hints at Feroz's gender... people just assumed Feroz is male by virtue of being Serra's lover. But if there's any character in Magic that's a candidate lesbian, it's probably Serra. I mean, have you seen her realm? She's the reason why all angels in Magic are women by default. At the very least, it's obvious that she prefers the company of women.
So I made Feroz a female, and a number of people took me to task on it. I explained my position, but they didn't like it. They just always though of Feroz as being male. I got to admit, the name doesn't sound very feminine. But outside of that, I'm pretty sure all the whiners were all sticks in the mud.
Finally, a note on costs. I don't have my original costs for planeswalker loyalty (who knows why), so I kind of have to guess. I guess this is right? I'm willing to listen to suggestions.
Ha! Yes it does. :)
Cool. Looks good. Probably wants a planeswalker subtype though :)
That's a fair criticism. I moved the starting loyalty from 4 to 5. I always liked the idea of using the -4 as an "always useful emergency option", but I'm sure other players won't enjoy popping their Serra because the designer likes stress.
Akroma's Memorial screws up a lot of cards. I don't like the idea of granting haste and trample in a dedicated white card... hmm... adding lifelink. That will probably push it far enough. It's true... I kind of wanted this card to be promoted based on it's first two ablities, not its ultimate. But I can't make the ultimate bad in the exchange.
Given that Serra Angel is not exactly great these days (she's great in limited, but, well, cf Baneslayer Angel), I feel that either the middle cost should leave the planeswalker alive, or the card should be easier to cast than 3WW, not harder.
The + looks good to me. Glorious Anthem plus global MoLaG is very good for an attacking deck. It's fine on a 5-mana walker.
Akroma's Memorial as an ultimate doesn't look especially exciting at -10. That's fine by me because the other two effects are so good. But that's not even all of the Memorial.
Time to get some planeswalkers in Magic 20XX.
20XX Planeswalkers were designed just a little while after Time Spiral, and their theme was "After the mass house cleaning of planeswalkers in Time Spiral, who could technically be left kicking around?" I came up with six (one for each color and Karn, funny enough, because I assumed he could rebuild himself, which he did.). Serra's here because of a loophole. In theory she's long dead... but that's based on flavor articles written before Weatherlight block. Everything written before Weatherlight is technically 'non-cannon' except for card flavor text... and there isn't a card that talks about her death... just cards that talk about how she left her Realm, or Ulgrotha. (It turned out that J. Robert King also spotted that loophole, and used Serra in the book Scourge, warning her people to leave their realm before the Karona event. Unfortunately, Serra's Realm was... um... kind of destroyed by Urza previously (see Planar Collapse), so who knows what that scene was about.)
As for the card: When a friend of mine first saw this card, he lamented how weak it was. Then someone got their hands on it in draft and started wrecking everyone.
Causation and correlation are two different things, though. I'm pretty sure Serra was nuts because it was a draft, and all Planeswalkers get nutty in a limited format. It is expensive for what it does. Though, I'm not sure what the loyalty costs were all set to (for some reason, the file I'm taking this from didn't save loyalty costs), but this seems about right. I want the casting cost and -4 to stay the same, since I like the idea that this could always just be a Serra Angel for the same converted cost. Hmm. I'd like to move the -6 to -7 so the ultimate wasn't so easy... but the card is on the border of playable.
Oh, I know. Changing +1 to +2, and -6 to -10. Now the card can get lots of loyalty fast, but leaves the -4 alone. Does this card look good? Or do I need to drop the -10 to -8 to make her sexy enough?