Traveler Tales: Recent Activity
| Traveler Tales: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Four Colour Factions (Nephilim Lineages) | Skeleton | Flavour/Worldbuilding | Alt Colour pair | Card Ideas | Design Principles |
Recent updates to Traveler Tales: (Generated at 2025-05-03 10:36:45)
Noted:
My idea was a "Four mana spell that destroys a creature with four + power unless it has four or more colours." , under the idea that using 4 repeatedly was more elegant.
And this is supposed to be "Four Colour Matters" set where players build decks to play four colour creatures is limited, so I am trying to make an environment where that restriction matters. (That's also why I'm trying to make Gold tokens a major mechanic.)
I will consider cutting this card.
And thanks for the feedback.
I might be undervaluing gold. I would like a second opinion for this. This is an elegant short flavourful design with a lot of versatility, so I am biased in its favour.
The problem is this seems overpriced at
as you'd be spending your fourth turn doing absolutely nothing. At two your spending your third turn to do absolutely nothing. If you don't store anything its a worse than unknown shores. and if you store once you're effectively spending three mana to turn it into a slightly better Unknown Shores during your next turn.
Storage lands usually cost 1 and a tap to get a counter, then require you to tap the land to spends its counters (using Mage-Ring Network/Crucible of the Spirit Dragon/The time spiral filter lands as a baseline. To 3 lands seems to be the rate to get mana next turn. This lets you spend the mana immediately but costs 6 to 2 counters, instead 5 mana to use 2 ; a cost which gets bigger the more counters you get (3 counters is 9/5 ; 4 is 12/7). It does give you any colour of mana instead of just 2, which I'm assuming is compensated for the more expensive build up cost.
The token production with artifacts seems to be the strongest part, but clues and serves already exist and three mana for one token doesn't seem that good.
It is however very versatile, which does make it dangerous so I would like extra opinion on this cards power level.
"Fewer than four colors" feels arbitrary and wonky. Even in this (or any) environment I have a hard time seeing it ever being that relevant of a restriction.
Am I the only who thinks this is just bonkers? This soooo much better than Unknown Shores or some storage land. Abilities on lands are usually a bit overpriced anyway, but with this you get serious mana fixing (fix up to two mana at next round and so on), ramp and also an artifact to boot to work with some nifty interactions. Heck, just saccing these with something as lowsy as Etherium Astrolabe would feel pretty good.
Tahazzar:
While this a ramp card, it takes three turns before you've actually gotten ahead on mana, and that requires not using a land the previous turn. And like a burst card, you can only use the Gold tokens once. (Contrast this to Llanowar Elves style cards, that are act like 'extra lands')
Wizards has decided to discontinue rituals as they enable degenerate strategies and has also discontinued free spells for similar reasons. The idea here is you need to build up the burst of mana over time and you can't generate more mana than you spend, limiting broken combos. Slowly amassing a horde of gold, then spending all of it at once on a giant spell/dragon feels very red and should play similarly to a mana bursting fuelled big turn while enabling more board interactions. (Even if planning ahead and not instantly spending gold is blue instead of red, the payoff feels red.)
The sacrifice a land design, while flavourful and very red, wouldn't accomplish the goal of enable limited decks to run four colour spells. And would be a lot weaker since a land is usually worth more than a single a gold token so it would greatly weaken the filtering effect. And sacrificing a land to make multiple gold tokens would be a different flavour and play style. (It would have to cost 3-4 mana to prevent racing ahead.)
Vitenka:
The tap an untapped land, while playing almost entirely the same as "
, 
:", feels much more flavourful to me, as the creature is using the land itself instead to produce the gold, instead of using the land's mana to fuel a gold production spell. I will keep this in mind though and it goes point.
Um; why not just:
: ... (Or even 
)
It seems like it would capture the same flavour, and be less fiddly to read.
Flavour is great. The dwarf goes finding gold in the hills.
Mechanics is less great; but it's no worse than a storage land or artifact; which red has always been able to use.
I'm okay with shifting color fixing to
, but this is more of a ramp than a burst kind of card.
It would be much more in red if it were instead:
>
, Sacrifice a land: Create ...
A great point.
The theory here is
all get cannot be countered, with blue being tertiary at this effect.
Meanwhile 
get hexproof with White theoretically being tertiary in Hexproof.
I might shift "the can't be countered" to "can't be countered by spells or abilities" as trinket text. Or shift just "the can't be countered" to the anti-blue common instead.
It's weird to see this in "nonblack" rather than "nonblue"
The token still says it draws cards.