kauefr's cards: Recent Activity
| kauefr's cards: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Color Pie Slices | Colors x Types |
Recent updates to kauefr's cards: (Generated at 2025-06-21 11:31:34)
| kauefr's cards: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Color Pie Slices | Colors x Types |
Recent updates to kauefr's cards: (Generated at 2025-06-21 11:31:34)
"permanent or player"?
If I could make Unleash work it'd be a nice addition to Brasilia, with it's counters-matters themes.
Seems pretty crazy for a common. Compare Wakedancer.
--CF
Ooo. O-Ring minus Journey to Nowhere. Leonin Relic-Warder plus planeswalker hate. Nice.
Nice powerful card to remove planeswalkers have versatility.
You don't necessarily know whether the deck you are facing is creatureless or completely independent of them - even by turn 5. Plus, if they aren't playing any creatures, dropping this at those times might look like a good idea since you are seemingly ahead in tempo and can afford to do that.
Meaning, that in that case one design is a dead card and the other just plain stupid. So, mildly disappointing vs overwhelmingly irritating.
Okay, so it's a dead card against a creatureless deck either way - and it is easy for you to just not play it either way and save your mana.
I agree that the all-upside design is superior, but I just would not justify either design as an okay card against a creatureless deck.
> It's not really a drawback though - if your opponents don't have any creatures; then you win.
You really haven't played against control decks with no creatures have you? Even lists with couple of creatures have such creatures that they don't really care about this.
IMO this definitely should be
> At the beginning of your end step, you may have target creature you control fight target creature you don't control.
Specifically I would have it say "up to one... fights" instead of "you may have... fight" but whatever.
+1 upvote thumb.
It's a minor drawback, but it feels like something Wizards would avoid anyway. They don't like any possibility of a feel bad moment on Timmy cards.
That's going to come up, oh, approximately no percent of the time; though. And to avoid it, you just need a creature with regenerate, or high toughness and no power; or just cast a sacrificial 1/1 or...
So yes, technically, it could be a disadvantage. But almost never, and only when an opponent has no creatures against a green deck. You're gonna steamroll them.
Opponent doesn't have any creatures.
You control two 3/3 Elephant tokens.
At the beginning of your end step they fight...
I wouldn't call that winning...
It's not really a drawback though - if your opponents don't have any creatures; then you win.
But it's a fine fine card; and end step is an interesting choice of timing. Lets you drop a big creature in main2 to pick off combat survivors.
I wonder what this would cost if opponent got the choice of which you fight?
Iinteresting. Looks powerful, but it is a 5 mana rare. Reminds me of Asceticism.
Yes, if your opponents don't have any creatures your creatures must fight each other.
The name sounds like it would be a Cleric rather than a Horror.
The ability seems a little specific, but considering this is a strict upgrade to Walking Corpse that's less ofa power level concern and more of a question of where you would ever want this ability enough to not go with a simpler design instead.
Five months later, and now I'm not sure if Poleis should be different from Planeswalkers. It should be hell to balance either way.
Ooh, so they get attacked automatically whenever you do? But multiple of them let you divide the damage between them? Hmm. That's quite different to Jack's loyalty land cycle of Arcane Scriptorium, Mouldering Laboratory and friends. You'll definitely need to spell that out somewhere - perhaps your point 3 could be reminder text on this card.
I like the idea, anyway. Presumably also they can only use loyalty abilities in your turn?