Various Fandoms: Recent Activity
| Various Fandoms: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics |
Recent updates to Various Fandoms: (Generated at 2024-04-27 22:57:02)
| Various Fandoms: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics |
Recent updates to Various Fandoms: (Generated at 2024-04-27 22:57:02)
I like Vitenka's suggestion most.
One more alternative!
"When ~ is blocking or blocked by an enchanted or equipped creature, it gains deathtouch until end of turn."
I tried to keyword this ability once, as stuff-bane. Which works fine for "Elf-bane" but "Enchanted-or-equipped-bane" is pretty horrible too.
Maybe unpack the deathtouchiness of it?
~ deals lethal damage to equipped and enchanted creatures.
Hm. I like that last ability, but it's hard to understand (and hard to template).
How about "~ deals damage to enchanted or equipped creatures as though ~ had deathtouch"?
"Exile target artifact. If it was indestructible, deal damage equal to its CMC to all creatures"?
Aww, I can see why it's more useful this way; but it really feels like this should be something like "destroy target indestructible artifact, it deals damage equal to its casting cost to all creatures".
(Said wording doesn't even work; though it should)
added reach
is here for mechanical purposes to match the flavor of the character's goal rather than as a reflection of his personality. Salem is definitely WB, but positive land interaction is a green thing, so that ended up on there.
Flavorfully A should only have one
in its casting cost, but 
would look really weird. This card is not supposed to be fair or balanced for the same reason that Urza isn't likely to see a black-bordered planeswalker card (aside from him being dead).
Well this kills Siege Rhino, which wasn't the intention, but I guess is a bonus.
That clears things up a bit and keeps what I was going for so thanks. A minor note, devil fruits can be applied to non-living things, so it's a small flavor fail that I haven't made ones that could enchant artifacts.
All damage dealt to this Aura? Should that be all damage dealt to enchanted creature?
Even if so, the moment when being indestructible matters isn't actually when the damage is dealt - it's for the rest of the turn until the damage wears off. I might suggest a wording like:
> Enchanted creature is indestructible.
to have enchanted creature lose indestructible UEOT.
> Whenever a source deals damage to enchanted creature, that source's controller may pay
Alternatively, template it like Knight of the Holy Nimbus.
Turning the Suna Suna no Mi's signature liquid drain ability into a red card was very hard. Since -X/-X isn't red I opted for damage and made it temporary. Still, this is very powerful. since the enchanted creature can just burn creatures till they get killed by by attackers' or blockers' power.
So I like this concept for Logia, though I'm certain it's misworded. I think paying additional mana is a good representation of busoshoku Haki. That said, I'm not super keen on this translation of mera mera no mi into card form.
Legendary for flavor purposes
But does the game know that those are the same ability, or not? The game knows that two creatures with vigilance share an ability, but there's no "tag" on the Twinblade Slasher ability for the game to latch onto... or am I think about this the wrong way?
not really an issue for this card, but I wanted to create a card real quick before class, and I thought about doing a logia fruit, but figuring out how to represent the intangibility seems a challenge at this moment.