Will make uncommon. I was thinking about making it a 1/2 but that's less flavorful as a 'FLICKERING' thing which should be weak in toughness. also i'm in a rush and this seems the easiest immediate fix. I'm beginning to get a better understanding of limited, and also watching my brother play mtgo he just got is really helping me understand how play design works. So this can be uncommon. it's pretty on balance with frost walker.
This seems pretty blue, maybe in a more blue/black sense tahn anythign else, but im pretty sure colors can bend into other pies when working with them. this set does have blue-black theme so i think this is fine
i suppose in general it's time consuming. This effect is very much in blue, though i could see red getting it. which is great because besides spells red and blue share next to nothing but this and maybe coinflips. also they dont even have a keyword.
It's a free keep-me-alive for another turn, sems useful. Maybe not so well put on such a big iconic creature though. it could be a prevention spell too, but this is more unique.
How many players will realize that using Aerial Predation or Certain Death on this won't have them gain any life? Whether the Murder fizzles might not matter that much if the end result is the same. However, casting something that grants indestructible to all of your creatures UEOT wouldn't save this from that Murder. Auras kill this as well. These all seem like minor pitfalls to me that could lead to misplays on the part of both players. Perhaps it's not red-flag worthy (I would instantly condemn it in NNWO) but it's something that I would keep an eye out. That is, I would check whether the environment has other cards that could lead to these "misinteractions".
This is an uncommon not for complexity, but because it's problematic in multiples. "Interesting" has nothing to do with it. Commons are allowed to be interesting.
I would also use the more modern wording and remove the "or ability". Interestingly, the "or ability" part itself would be a point of complexity pointing towards uncommon if other reasons wouldn't be more prevalent.
This looks like it would end up having "more than 3 lines of rules text" (flying + 3 from the illusion ability) so it would likely be red-flagged from that alone. That as well would suggest the uncommon rarity.
EDIT: Maybe not - looking at Phantasmal Bear, that illusion ability seems to fit 2 lines pretty well. There are some complexities that come with illusion abilities though (spells targeting them fizzle) so they might be somewhat questionable at common. It looks to me like all of the recent creatures we have gotten with the illusion drawback are of uncommon or higher rarity (Frost Walker, Labyrinth Guardian, Departed Deckhand, etc). Excluding masters 25 that has the Bear as common, but that set also exceptionally had Savannah Lions as a common.
Looking at this set as a whole, I don't think it equips you well enough for the possible case in limited where the opponent has dropped 3 of these on the board by the end of their second turn. That's 6 evasive damage per turn. So I really wouldn't recommend the common rarity.
Eh, I just don't see that is interesting enough to deserve uncommon; nor complex enough to require it.
So it can be common. But maybe it's a splashy impactful thing - in which case you can go rare. But it needs a bit more of something to go there. Not necc. something to make it more powerful; just something splashy. Heck - one way to do it would be a named legendary; which is an additional drawback. (But is clearly focussing the card on 'this is easy to remove from play, build around that somehow')
I don't see the sense of making this card a common since it would be an absolute limited power house. Even the vanilla 2/1s for a single tend to be uncommon and this has evasion to boot (even Wind Drakes tend to be pretty good in limited because of evasion). The drawback matters less in limited as well since there are less abilities that could target it and those are the ones you fear as even with spells they usually end up just spending Giant Growths or whatever as removal which is 'fine' as far as you are considered as this creature's controller (it's still a card for card transaction).
On the rare end, you shouldn't just make the card busted because it happens to be a rare. Turning a drawback of dying when targeted into "can't be targeted" would be insane. It would one of the best creatures ever printer - way better than Delver of Secrets for example if you ask me. Rarity in general is only superficially related to power level.
Hmm. This is pretty hard to work out how good it is, really. I fear its best use might be as a foil for a black-weenie-flyer type of deck.
It's certainly a jump from the normal power level. I don't see it as an uncommon though - either you're making a big statement, or why bother? I'd say common - or rare if you can somehow make it splashy enough. (e.g. shroud instead of illusion).
Oh yeah, totally forgot about that card. Good point. I've made numerous mono- weenie/aggro/tempo attempts in highlander and Gossamer never made the cut even in there. So maybe it's indeed worth considering the design as it is. I too suggest the uncommon rarity.
Also, Gossamer Phantasm. That's not a comment about power level... I just thought it was worth mentioning.
That said, common normally doesn't do hyper-efficient flyers. I could see this as an uncommon, though. Couldn't tell you if it's too good at a cost of . Needs testing.
Very strong. I would pick this over Phantasmal Bear in majority of the cases. The original Skulking Ghost had a CMC or 2 and I don't think it's entirely unplayable. Vaporkin seems to be the standard of fliers and this seems to compare to that quite well.
Interestingly, I've seen this same effect (shuffle, then draw cards) being suggested in and I also think I myself considered it way back then. Like Divination, but with shuffle as the first line. It has this 'randomish' feeling that's interesting. However, shuffling itself is something undesirable so that's an issue.
'Healing' seems super narrow. In my 'Future Sight 2' I included it as an option in a modal spell with another (possibly) niche effect: Prevalence of Normalcy.
Protection has been all but made defunct at this point. Supposedly it's now deciduous instead of evergeen, but the new 'hexproof from' makes me think it has finally been killed off for good. At least I hope so.
Will make uncommon. I was thinking about making it a 1/2 but that's less flavorful as a 'FLICKERING' thing which should be weak in toughness. also i'm in a rush and this seems the easiest immediate fix. I'm beginning to get a better understanding of limited, and also watching my brother play mtgo he just got is really helping me understand how play design works. So this can be uncommon. it's pretty on balance with frost walker.
Hm. yeah thats a weird-ass card :P
This seems pretty blue, maybe in a more blue/black sense tahn anythign else, but im pretty sure colors can bend into other pies when working with them. this set does have blue-black theme so i think this is fine
This is desirable for Cosi's Trickster decks
i suppose in general it's time consuming. This effect is very much in blue, though i could see red getting it. which is great because besides spells red and blue share next to nothing but this and maybe coinflips. also they dont even have a keyword.
some thoughts
that's way too expensive for me, i'll edit the effect and we can keep a discussion going if it's still unercosted
It's a free keep-me-alive for another turn, sems useful. Maybe not so well put on such a big iconic creature though. it could be a prevention spell too, but this is more unique.
Different idea that isn't straight out damage prevention, that's overused in my sets as it is
How many players will realize that using Aerial Predation or Certain Death on this won't have them gain any life? Whether the Murder fizzles might not matter that much if the end result is the same. However, casting something that grants indestructible to all of your creatures UEOT wouldn't save this from that Murder. Auras kill this as well. These all seem like minor pitfalls to me that could lead to misplays on the part of both players. Perhaps it's not red-flag worthy (I would instantly condemn it in NNWO) but it's something that I would keep an eye out. That is, I would check whether the environment has other cards that could lead to these "misinteractions".
This is an uncommon not for complexity, but because it's problematic in multiples. "Interesting" has nothing to do with it. Commons are allowed to be interesting.
I would also use the more modern wording and remove the "or ability". Interestingly, the "or ability" part itself would be a point of complexity pointing towards uncommon if other reasons wouldn't be more prevalent.
This looks like it would end up having "more than 3 lines of rules text" (flying + 3 from the illusion ability) so it would likely be red-flagged from that alone. That as well would suggest the uncommon rarity.
EDIT: Maybe not - looking at Phantasmal Bear, that illusion ability seems to fit 2 lines pretty well. There are some complexities that come with illusion abilities though (spells targeting them fizzle) so they might be somewhat questionable at common. It looks to me like all of the recent creatures we have gotten with the illusion drawback are of uncommon or higher rarity (Frost Walker, Labyrinth Guardian, Departed Deckhand, etc). Excluding masters 25 that has the Bear as common, but that set also exceptionally had Savannah Lions as a common.
Looking at this set as a whole, I don't think it equips you well enough for the possible case in limited where the opponent has dropped 3 of these on the board by the end of their second turn. That's 6 evasive damage per turn. So I really wouldn't recommend the common rarity.
Eh, I just don't see that is interesting enough to deserve uncommon; nor complex enough to require it.
So it can be common. But maybe it's a splashy impactful thing - in which case you can go rare. But it needs a bit more of something to go there. Not necc. something to make it more powerful; just something splashy. Heck - one way to do it would be a named legendary; which is an additional drawback. (But is clearly focussing the card on 'this is easy to remove from play, build around that somehow')
Lol, that's not how rarities should be used.
I don't see the sense of making this card a common since it would be an absolute limited power house. Even the vanilla 2/1s for a single
tend to be uncommon and this has evasion to boot (even Wind Drakes tend to be pretty good in limited because of evasion). The drawback matters less in limited as well since there are less abilities that could target it and those are the ones you fear as even with spells they usually end up just spending Giant Growths or whatever as removal which is 'fine' as far as you are considered as this creature's controller (it's still a card for card transaction).
On the rare end, you shouldn't just make the card busted because it happens to be a rare. Turning a drawback of dying when targeted into "can't be targeted" would be insane. It would one of the best creatures ever printer - way better than Delver of Secrets for example if you ask me. Rarity in general is only superficially related to power level.
Hmm. This is pretty hard to work out how good it is, really. I fear its best use might be as a foil for a black-weenie-flyer type of deck.
It's certainly a jump from the normal power level. I don't see it as an uncommon though - either you're making a big statement, or why bother? I'd say common - or rare if you can somehow make it splashy enough. (e.g. shroud instead of illusion).
Oh yeah, totally forgot about that card. Good point. I've made numerous mono-
weenie/aggro/tempo attempts in highlander and Gossamer never made the cut even in there. So maybe it's indeed worth considering the design as it is. I too suggest the uncommon rarity.
Also, Gossamer Phantasm. That's not a comment about power level... I just thought it was worth mentioning.
That said, common normally doesn't do hyper-efficient flyers. I could see this as an uncommon, though. Couldn't tell you if it's too good at a cost of
. Needs testing.
Very strong. I would pick this over Phantasmal Bear in majority of the cases. The original Skulking Ghost had a CMC or 2 and I don't think it's entirely unplayable. Vaporkin seems to be the standard of
fliers and this seems to compare to that quite well.
This might be deceptively strong. On surface it seems kind of fine when we compare it to Prying Questions and Lost Hours or just 1 CMC discards.
though? It's possible. Probably makes more sense than Stunted Growth :)
Interestingly, I've seen this same effect (shuffle, then draw cards) being suggested in
and I also think I myself considered it way back then. Like 
Divination, but with shuffle as the first line. It has this 'randomish' feeling that's interesting. However, shuffling itself is something undesirable so that's an issue.
Erm, no? 2/2 for 2 that doubles as an instant speed Saltblast is not cool man. Way too efficient. I would expect this to cost around 6 mana or so.
'Healing' seems super narrow. In my 'Future Sight 2' I included it as an option in a modal spell with another (possibly) niche effect: Prevalence of Normalcy.
Protection has been all but made defunct at this point. Supposedly it's now deciduous instead of evergeen, but the new 'hexproof from' makes me think it has finally been killed off for good. At least I hope so.
sensible
That's usually ok. As long as it's not too many words.