[Card Dump] Tahazzar's Designs: Recent Activity
[Card Dump] Tahazzar's Designs: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics |
Recent updates to [Card Dump] Tahazzar's Designs: (Generated at 2024-05-03 15:59:00)
->
I like this one myself. It has a lot of flexibility - either cast your own out-of-colour card, or snag your opponents.
While reanimate dead does both a lot cheaper; this is instant and can't be disenchanted.
And the card you steal is CAST. That's sometimes really valuable.
And on the flip side - you pay for that flexibility. I still like this card. It feels like a puzzle piece.
Well, you can't use Raise Dead on a card in opponent's grave. So if you combine the aspects that you use it as a graveyhate on their Bloodghast, say at their end step, and then draw something else and go with that instead like with Raise Dead. There is no variation of those two existing cards/effects that could achieve such. Stir mandates that you have to have all that mana available + it would make it so that you would throw the creature card itself out on the battlefield on the same turn which this can't when cast it on opponent's turn unless that creature card also has flash. Instant reanimation can be quite swingy.
When it comes to actually getting the creature card out of the grave there are multiple differences as well when it comes to managing your mana. For one thing, this indeed fixes mana similarly to how Stir does, but Stir also would require you to have that additional mana when you want the creature itself out. A card having "costs an additional to cast" can make or break the game state.
So I think that "dump" does give the foundation to show what this can achieve that just isn't possible with neither of those two cards. They might be minor when parsed one by one, but when you start taking all of them into account they start to accumulate quickly. I'm quite certain there are many other scenarios that I haven't laid out where the differences would be crucial.
It's also noteworthy that all these nuanced differences increase its total flexibility when compared to those two cards. Like a charm with those two effects, but much more as well.
> As I state though the question is always which aspects really matter in context.
I'm not sure what are you trying to say here. All of the cards in this 'set' exist without context. The context itself also gives meaning (as to which particular differences to those two cards would be more or less important) so am I supposed to suggest an environment for it?
EDIT: For example, I could see this as an uncommon in a "Conspiracy 3" (like?) set that has a graveyard theme. A card that hoses and steals opponent's dead creatures with a low initial cost and doesn't skip mana costs entirely. This also adds the "players waiting/fearing/evaluating" aspect in multiplayer, especially if the spell was used on a large creature (that an opponent was about to reanimate).
You point out the obvious. But there are X variants that partially fulfill those as well. You can add a second black mana to Stir the Grave and make it instant speed - maybe allowing it to target cards in any graveyard etc.
As I state though the question is always which aspects really matter in context. Nothing about "Card Dump" gives that context - and in a vacuum no one can appreciate which aspects of this card actually matter.
I don't know why you point out the dynamic of casting this turn 2, when that dynamic... doesn't really seem all that different from using Raise Dead turn two - and usually not what you want to do, because a "big baddy" is a better target for Zombify variants (that ignore mana cost/converted mana cost) if you consistently get them into your graveyard turn 2.
It can work as a gravehate in a pinch. Compared to Stir the Grave the effect is different that if you use this on some big baddie on turn 2, the dynamic is now that all the players know it's coming. This is somewhat similar to Raise Dead, but it can't be used on a creature card that's in an opponent's graveyard. The instant speed also changes its nature somewhat when compared to Stir again, in that you can use it on opponent's end step (enabling you to keep mana for instant speed removal or counterspells), but then end up draw something more relevant once your turn begins and decide to hold off casting the exiled creature. Going back to Raise Dead this card fixes your mana regarding casting the creature, which again is somewhat similar to what Stir does.
So I would say it's a nice mix between the two, that can at certain circumstances work as a gravehate. As an instant it has a lot of little nifty features, one of them being that you can cast flash creatures with it from a grave at instant speed.
Having designed in this general space the question is always how much of a difference it really makes to simpler Raise Dead/Stir the Grave effects in context.
@Vitenka:
To me that tells that it should only be included in limited environments where the drawback would matter. Such as one with a block mechanic that involves drawing like clues or cycling.
@Mal:
What would making it a Djinn or Illusion do that would make it more interesting? I don't think Illusion fits this mechanically. I personally find the flavor implications of the current card quite enjoyable.
The sign in blood question is interesting. Would you play "Destroy up to two target creatures controlled by the same player. That player draws two cards." for ? I would certainly consider it.
@jmgariepy:
Yeah I don't see the ability being much of anything if it were on a fatty. Plus, one point of it being is that you can also evade the drawback by playing instant speed draw on your opponents' turns that draw only one card at a time.
Weird drawback for Blue. I would think this ability would make more sense on a big Green creature. But I understand the thought process that it's more likely the drawback will kick in in Blue. Hmm...
I'm not quite sure why this is an angel. I suppose it's a bit of an opposite to Illusory Angel (maybe? Both of them have some sort of "second" themeing to them), but this might be more interesting as a Djinn or an Illusion.
Otherwise, this card seems pretty balanced and interesting. The deck that runs it will probably not have to worry about the drawback, but that's the whole point of building a deck around it.
The real question is, is targetting an opponent that has two of these with Sign in Blood worth it? My guess is no.
Seems rather good. I mean, sure, the limitation is something that blue does like to do. But run this in limited where that isn't really a factor?
+0/+1
Not necessary. Round 2 this, round 3 Mind Rot puts your opponent in a very awkward position. If you have any more discard to back that up, they could get stuck in Heckbent. They may think that it's better to play slowly to build their hand so that the worst case scenario doesn't happen. But that's exactly what a discard deck wants you to do.
I suppose you could sandbag this until the opponent only has one card left in hand, but I feel like I'd rather just play Liliana's Specter at that point, since it's probably at least T5-6 and it has evasion.
Played at the right time this is gonna make people tear their hair out. But most games, it'll probably not do very much.
I like it. It's a nice variation on discard.
I'm mostly convinced that the ability won't do much unless it's played when the opponent has one card left in hand. It's easy to keep an extra land in hand to protect the card that they actually want, and if the opponent is heckbent/hellbent then they probably won't hold a card in their hand with this on the field unless it's some sort of reactive removal/blowout card that they're banking on you walking into.
There's a lot to be said about the psychological pressure this would apply, however. Opponents may be constantly encouraged to make suboptimal plays (such as spending premium removal on this or not casting a second creature when they should, or spending mana on an on-board draw effect in response to the trigger) in order to not lose value.
Pretty sweet card. I kind of want the first ability to be removed, though - the only way you can really play around a deck built around this card is to be faster than it or to use discard. Allowing this to be countered might help broaden the number of deck types that are able to interact and have counterplay against this hypothetical combo deck, simply because this is the type of card that begs to an opponent "Counter me or you are probably dead", and most decks will probably only have one counterspell available anyway at most given turns.
combined the two abilities (flash & silence)
made uncounterable; removed the flash reminder text
I personally like how it can synergize with bounce effects.
Ooh. That could be a tough hole to crawl out of. I'm conflicted as to the power level of this card, which probably means it's just right.
Yeah, life gain from a strictly competitive point of view is weird. I think I remember Wizards doing an informal questionnaire of pro-tour players, asking how much life gain is necessary for them to think about playing a one mana instant that only gained life. Results varied, but I think the average reasonable starting point was 8... which is clearly not Magic baseline.
Personally speaking, I prefer to pretend that the current life gain model that we use is the right one. Mostly, because I assume Wizards has playtested other options, and I have not. But I definitely understand the desire to slide the life gain scale up to a more competitive level. As long as you're okay with the idea that playing this card on round 5 demolishes red burn and suicide black. Not every fake Magic set needs to have the same metagame parameters.
I've personally been thinking about the subset of cards with 'Whenever you gain life' with which this is quite bonkers with. Hence the edits. I might have erred on the side of too much caution with the "until ~ LTB" clause.
Gaining ~40 life for doesn't sound that impressive when you think about it competitively. Life gain does have the problem of stretching out games though.
Lab Maniac has always been questionable in multiple ways. In this case, I would say you are still better of with Leveler and especially with Puresight Merrow + Paradise Mantle. Regardless, if Maniac were to be truly problematic, I would say the issues there lie with the design of Maniac more so than with this card.
minor reminder text edit
- to mana cost; + to activation; ... until ~ leaves play
A lot of things combo with Laboratory Maniac. It doesn't really combo well with Barren Glory since it doesn't get things off the table, which is the tough part of the Glory.
Not sure what the 'degenerate combo which involves putting things on the bottom of your library' is. You'd still have to exile the rest of your library just to play that card over and over. The end result would need to be on par with Eternal Dominion for it to be worth it (in a strictly Spike-y way of 'worth it'.)
Which isn't to say the card isn't Bonkers T. Bobcat. Since most games use less than 30 cards out of a 60 card deck, this card roughly represents a gain of 40 life for with few negative ramifications (since you would only gain the life if you were about to die.) The card is admittedly trickier if your opponent has a Demystify ready... but you could probably sneak 20 life out of this card before it goes to the bin without worrying too much about being decked.
I'd say "Gain 1 life for every two cards" but people don't like 'drawback' mythics that are balanced. Tricky problem.