Hmmm, well... Maybe reflavor it as Purge / Acceleration or whatever and...
> "Purging"
> Enchantment
> If an effect would remove one or more counters from a permanent, it removes twice that many of those counters from that permanent instead.
hmm yeah, maybe an edit, ill change the cost, and yeah this could be black, soo i can keep the card draw/disc, and black fits stealth way more than red :P ty
its an okay mechanic and yes im aware of my hipocracy xD
there are a few other cards with it, but yeah, i think it should stay a pump based spell, but no need to die first :P
Maybe something like whenever ~ attacks you may pay [strengthcost] and give it +1+1. Or maybe it would have 2 paramters the one being mana cost and other being # o counters.
Red doesn't have this kind of discard - nor this kind of card draw.
This could easily be black. Though I don't think this is a particularly attractive design with the exact current wording. The fact that you can simply choose X=0 and draw a card seems untintentional.
Does this really even need the option to pay for large X? just creating a card with a single option seems fine.
Note that the potential for card advantage here is great. The creature doesn't even need to connect. Declaring it as an attacker is enough.
thank you for commenting on this card, having a shitty day and this somehow made me feel better. never mind i feel shit again -_-
no cards until im done dying post-death inside, can't be creative when this pissed
as for your answer I liked this card, but you are right it is underwhelming... I thought it a clean and strong card, but changes would work. I think this is a good point for this set still, as camadoon is a dangerous place (think outside hekma on amonkhet, but thrice over) so planeswalkers being killed by hatred of hateful beasts is plausible. supposing now could make a hateful beast to add something to this. open for whatever, keep talkin if u wan, i'll lissen
Being forced to ping something is very red. It's kinda trinket text; because well, you just won't cast it except when you have a target in mind.
I'd say lose the flash too; just for simplification. The tapped thing is still gonna be tapped on your turn. But I'm not massively wedded to that. Instant-speed damage is a thing red can do, and dropping a sudden blocker is something anyone can do sometimes. Just need to make sure that the flavour is speed, rather than sneaky. e.g. Bogardan Hellkite is pretty much the same card as this, only huge :)
Which is a point - if it doesn't lose the flash - does this need to be uncommon? Not really for complexity (though it has a bit) but for boring repeatable "Oh, I'd better not attack, he'll just summon a 2/3 blocker deal 1 extra and kill it"
Yep flash leaves, sorry for the color pie violation!
And yes, I do think I will add a may, if it happens there were no tapped guys on opponents side, then you would be forced to ping your own, who wants that? (besides Dinos xD)
thank you for all that, I will be looking around here and trying to get a better understanding of Magic design (i'll probably read some official articles too)
I'm sorry it's taking so long for me to get good at making cards, when I started I thought I would be great, I was a little disappointed to say the least, now I know I can always rely on you guys for help and support.
Also I think I figured out a way to make this less powerful. But it might still need anoter nerf
As for why it's overpowered, I think a lot of your cards have effects that are extremely strong, but "balanced" by some sort of drawback. As for Angry Raiders, the reason why it's overpowered is because it's a common that turns all of your cards into Lightning Strike, a premium quality common/uncommon in every limited format that it's in. The same issue showed up in the other card I commented on - Clotter - you "balanced" the tutor ability by making them pay 6 life, as if that will deter players from using the ability to often. The rule of thumb with Magic is that, due to the size of the card pool, there's a good way to turn any "drawback" you add to a card into an upside.
See, for example, Lion's Eye Diamond. A very strong card - basically Black Lotus - that is "balanced" by needing to discard your entire hand to use it. Yet now it's a staple of many legacy and vintage decks (and also restricted in vintage), because people learned how to nullify or take advantage of its downside.
Furthermore, while you should strive to make commons exciting, there's a fine line between "exciting" and "holy crap, I'm snap picking this because it's broken beyond hell". Repeatable effects - see the two cards of yours I mentioned earlier - are generally dramatically more powerful than any single card with that same effect, and costed appropriately. Those effects should generally be avoided at common unless they're weak, appropriately costed, or contribute to your set themes as a whole. This is one of the primary reasons why Capsize is so hated in Commander, and why Sprout Swarm was hands-down the best card in the Time Spiral block limited format. Since players are going to be able to pick up multiple commons, you want to avoid cards that basically say "remove me or you're going to lose", because having multiple cards like that pop up over the course of a game can be troubling. As a general rule of thumb, look to sets like Innistrad, Theros, Khans of Tarkir, and more recently Shadows over Innistrad to get a feel for what kinds of roles commons should play in your set. If you don't play limited, try playing draft or sealed a couple times so you can get a feel for how limited decks come together and what kinds of effects players of certain types of decks want.
Other than what I'm saying, I highly recommend reading Maro's articles on design, or even commenting on other sets to ask about their cards - I'm sure most designers on here would be happy to share what their design process was for one of their cards. The more designs of other people you are exposed to, the more you can understand what types of cards people might like and want to play with.
Is it okay to keep them similar, so they are like different versions of the same card? I think that could be flavorful...
If they are just a bit TOO similar, we could still differentiate them. What are you thinking? (Also i'd like to balance the power levels if possible, or at least make them niche cards in their own ways)
okay. I am letting go of this card for the bettering of my sets. I would ask of you to help me nerf all my designs that have these absurd win conditions, are overpowered, overkill, etc. Thanks!
Anyway, any ideas? I think this should be helpful for this set, and it should work with the other mechanics.
Hmmm, well... Maybe reflavor it as Purge / Acceleration or whatever and...
> "Purging"
> Enchantment
> If an effect would remove one or more counters from a permanent, it removes twice that many of those counters from that permanent instead.
Reminds me of Dimir Cutpurse and Dimir Guildmage. Mono-
is a bit sketchy IMO.
hmm yeah, maybe an edit, ill change the cost, and yeah this could be black, soo i can keep the card draw/disc, and black fits stealth way more than red :P ty
its an okay mechanic and yes im aware of my hipocracy xD
there are a few other cards with it, but yeah, i think it should stay a pump based spell, but no need to die first :P
Maybe something like whenever ~ attacks you may pay [strengthcost] and give it +1+1. Or maybe it would have 2 paramters the one being mana cost and other being # o counters.
this sound good? i likes
Why not? You are using it on only this card, right?
Red doesn't have this kind of discard - nor this kind of card draw.
This could easily be black. Though I don't think this is a particularly attractive design with the exact current wording. The fact that you can simply choose X=0 and draw a card seems untintentional.
Does this really even need the option to pay for large X? just creating a card with a single option seems fine.
Note that the potential for card advantage here is great. The creature doesn't even need to connect. Declaring it as an attacker is enough.
thank you for commenting on this card, having a shitty day and this somehow made me feel better. never mind i feel shit again -_-
no cards until im done dying post-death inside, can't be creative when this pissed
as for your answer I liked this card, but you are right it is underwhelming... I thought it a clean and strong card, but changes would work. I think this is a good point for this set still, as camadoon is a dangerous place (think outside hekma on amonkhet, but thrice over) so planeswalkers being killed by hatred of hateful beasts is plausible. supposing now could make a hateful beast to add something to this. open for whatever, keep talkin if u wan, i'll lissen
oh yeah deth to speling
Hero's Downfall? What's the point of this?
can already redirect its burn spells to 'walkers so it has much more flexible answers to them.
Also, the name "Hatred" has been used.
thank you so much!
That last point is a very very nice sneaky combo piece. Very good design.
actually nah, i like its compatibality with Dinos :3
should I append "you don't control" onto the end?
dammit! I MEANT TO LOSE THE FLASH LAST EDIT! Very sorry, i dont know how i forgot!
Also I think you are right, i think i'll lose the may, lose the choice basically.
Given the fact that it complicates combat math and is a potential 2-for-1, yeah, it probably does need to be uncommon if it keeps flash.
Being forced to ping something is very red. It's kinda trinket text; because well, you just won't cast it except when you have a target in mind.
I'd say lose the flash too; just for simplification. The tapped thing is still gonna be tapped on your turn. But I'm not massively wedded to that. Instant-speed damage is a thing red can do, and dropping a sudden blocker is something anyone can do sometimes. Just need to make sure that the flavour is speed, rather than sneaky. e.g. Bogardan Hellkite is pretty much the same card as this, only huge :)
Which is a point - if it doesn't lose the flash - does this need to be uncommon? Not really for complexity (though it has a bit) but for boring repeatable "Oh, I'd better not attack, he'll just summon a 2/3 blocker deal 1 extra and kill it"
Yep flash leaves, sorry for the color pie violation!
And yes, I do think I will add a may, if it happens there were no tapped guys on opponents side, then you would be forced to ping your own, who wants that? (besides Dinos xD)
Flash is not traditionally
+ having it here makes the card more defensive which also isn't exactly in 
's nature.
I would drop it. Also, maybe add "may" on that etb ability?
basically should I keep the flash?
thank you for all that, I will be looking around here and trying to get a better understanding of Magic design (i'll probably read some official articles too)
I'm sorry it's taking so long for me to get good at making cards, when I started I thought I would be great, I was a little disappointed to say the least, now I know I can always rely on you guys for help and support.
Also I think I figured out a way to make this less powerful. But it might still need anoter nerf
Froggy, when formatting abilities, generally you use this template:
>[Mana Cost], [Tap/Untap], [Additional Cost]: [EFFECT].
As for why it's overpowered, I think a lot of your cards have effects that are extremely strong, but "balanced" by some sort of drawback. As for Angry Raiders, the reason why it's overpowered is because it's a common that turns all of your cards into Lightning Strike, a premium quality common/uncommon in every limited format that it's in. The same issue showed up in the other card I commented on - Clotter - you "balanced" the tutor ability by making them pay 6 life, as if that will deter players from using the ability to often. The rule of thumb with Magic is that, due to the size of the card pool, there's a good way to turn any "drawback" you add to a card into an upside.
See, for example, Lion's Eye Diamond. A very strong card - basically Black Lotus - that is "balanced" by needing to discard your entire hand to use it. Yet now it's a staple of many legacy and vintage decks (and also restricted in vintage), because people learned how to nullify or take advantage of its downside.
Furthermore, while you should strive to make commons exciting, there's a fine line between "exciting" and "holy crap, I'm snap picking this because it's broken beyond hell". Repeatable effects - see the two cards of yours I mentioned earlier - are generally dramatically more powerful than any single card with that same effect, and costed appropriately. Those effects should generally be avoided at common unless they're weak, appropriately costed, or contribute to your set themes as a whole. This is one of the primary reasons why Capsize is so hated in Commander, and why Sprout Swarm was hands-down the best card in the Time Spiral block limited format. Since players are going to be able to pick up multiple commons, you want to avoid cards that basically say "remove me or you're going to lose", because having multiple cards like that pop up over the course of a game can be troubling. As a general rule of thumb, look to sets like Innistrad, Theros, Khans of Tarkir, and more recently Shadows over Innistrad to get a feel for what kinds of roles commons should play in your set. If you don't play limited, try playing draft or sealed a couple times so you can get a feel for how limited decks come together and what kinds of effects players of certain types of decks want.
Other than what I'm saying, I highly recommend reading Maro's articles on design, or even commenting on other sets to ask about their cards - I'm sure most designers on here would be happy to share what their design process was for one of their cards. The more designs of other people you are exposed to, the more you can understand what types of cards people might like and want to play with.
Angry raiders isn't overpowered, if it is could you use a helpful nooby guide to explain how?
As for this, i will put in a tap symbol (christ how did i forget that xD?)
Is it okay to keep them similar, so they are like different versions of the same card? I think that could be flavorful...
If they are just a bit TOO similar, we could still differentiate them. What are you thinking? (Also i'd like to balance the power levels if possible, or at least make them niche cards in their own ways)
okay. I am letting go of this card for the bettering of my sets. I would ask of you to help me nerf all my designs that have these absurd win conditions, are overpowered, overkill, etc. Thanks!
Anyway, any ideas? I think this should be helpful for this set, and it should work with the other mechanics.