Pyrulea: Recent Activity
| Pyrulea: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | More Detail on The Set | Skeleton | Color Archetypes | Creative/World Building | Cycles |
Recent updates to Pyrulea: (Generated at 2025-05-01 19:34:58)
"You suggested making them ETB tapped WITHOUT untap on transform" I said "Would prefer putting back the ETP tapped than getting rid of the untap for when they transform." Notice than not then.
You suggested making them ETB tapped WITHOUT untap on transform, which would make them worse than all the dual lands. I could put them back to ETB tapped plus untap on transform though. Tapping for
is interesting, but not necessary. Would look too much like BFZ then too.
@dude1818 Not strictly better. Basics have generally positive landtypes and you can have any number in your deck. But I agree that they are developmentally concerning in how little drawback that actually is. Hence why I suggested making ETB tapped with untap on transform as originally entered into the file here.
Without entering tapped, that cycle is now strictly better than basic lands. There's not a lot of knobs, but they could enter untapped and tap for
on the front.
2 Rare cycles is where I think we want to be, especially if we want to play around with man lands. and then 1 or 2 at each other rarity seems good. Does mean the power level of the utility lands will be restricted but im not too worried about that
Mb, thats why I though it was weird
In order to do the DFC manland thing we might need to do another cycle at rare.
I agree with BrainPolice that we should have more than the usual amount of unique lands. The numbers to keep in mind is BFZ's as-fan of 0.98 with 6 common, 6 uncommon, 10 rare. We probably want something around this number to support our own land theme, especially when nonbasic lands are necessary to make Discovery not Domain. If we do a cycle at each rarity that already gives us 0.77. We could add another cycle at rare and have one or two misc across common and uncommon. Or perhaps one or two misc at each rarity (6/7/7 ascending for instance).
removed "untap"
removed "untap"
removed "untap"
removed "untap"
removed "untap"
@DJK3654: Yes, but you need to fulfill the trigger, which makes them harder to abuse. ETB tapped without untap makes them flat out worse than guildgates. Removing the untap is a good option though, because you could get 2 Mana out of them right now.
4 Mana would also mirror its own ability. 3 Mana 3/2 would be good too, but looks a bit too on the curve to me.
@Gustostuckerl
"They probably should not ETB tapped to make them not strictly worse than gates, forgot about that." But they untap when they transform. Currently they are too good. Would prefer putting back the ETP tapped than getting rid of the untap for when they transform.
Why does it cost three right now? That's really strong. I meant 4 mana 4/3 if that wasn't clear, and that's what I think this should be. Alternatively, we could make it a 3 mana 3/2 or something.
By the way, a basic skeleton is now available for the set. Not sure if you want to use it, but it makes filling out missing roles much easier. Comparing similar cards as well as submitting different iteration for each number is also easier.
Also, "whenever becomes untapped" is Inspired, which is already a Mechanic. It fits the theme, but makes the card a bit weird. "Whenever becomes tapped" would differentiate it more to Inspired creatures.