Ulaqat: Recent Activity
Ulaqat: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Mechanics | Skeleton | Ulaqat Map | Cards that actually have a flavor reference |
Recent updates to Ulaqat: (Generated at 2024-05-07 04:53:50)
Updated based on jmgariepy's advice.
This is woefully underpowered. Your opponent, after all, can just choose not to block. Or they can choose to block and take the penalty. That makes this card worse than Artful Dodge without the buyback, since at least the Artful Dodge eliminated the opponent getting a choice.
As Vitenka mentioned, the saving grace to an ability like this is that you can 'always add Lure'. But 1993 Lure abilities, where the entire team must block, are rare nowadays (probably because it was so swingy, and either did not much, or caused a total blowout.) Nowadays, we tend to use "must be blocked, if able", which means that only one creature needs to block. And even then, it's infrequent. Standard only has two such cards
(That also sets aside Vitenka's concern about a possible red flag for removing multiple permanents in common. Assuming everything in Standard is operating as per normal, this card doesn't destroy multiple permanents unless your opponent chooses to double block... but double blocking already could already result in the destruction of multiple permanents, so nothing has changed. Lure, on the other hand, does destroy multiple permanents. That's the card that would force a red flag if it ever appeared in common.)
All this said, I would raise the penalty for blocking to a minimum of -3/-3. At that p/t reduction, there is a chance some players might find the card to be a better choice in some niche decks over Moment of Craving. Maybe a deck with a lot of 'damage to players' triggers on your attacking creatures. Moment of Craving, however, would still be the more generally useful card.
I was just looking to make an instant or sorcery to fill the last spot for a black common in the set that wasn't discard, direct removal, or indestructible as I'd already included those. Fear is a dead mechanic; I believe it's a waste to reserve the word because of past applications that won't rear their head outside of supplemental reprints. The frozen part is a bit more regrettable, especially since this a snow set.
"The don't chump block me bro" was likely just me not being diverse on designs and not looking beyond what I thought a color could do.
Seems annoyingly wordy to get the effect. It's kinda flanking? But I guess that's not really applicable to anything ever again. And Archon of Supression?
Flavour seems mostly good - but the name's slightly unfortunate. Both because this doesn't grant Fear, nor lock down cratures from untapping - but also because it sounds like it should make the target freeze in fear; not the things the target then goes on to fight. "fearsome viasge" maybe?
And also, of course, red-flagged for potentially being mass-removal at common. Though you do need to pair it with Lure or a particularly dim opponent, given it's sorcery speed.
(This also seems to be one of several "Don't chump block me bro" cards in the set, is that really a big problem that the set is encountering a lot? I guess you've got quite a bit of conditional first strike?)
Was "Players can't cast noncreature spells with a CMC greater than the number of creatures they control." New Lavinia suggests that ability would not be mono-g. New ability is loosely based on flavor text.
to
Tried to adjust organization based on SecretInfiltrator's comment.
Considerations 1. This was going to be instant speed, but I was worried this would be a rules mess during combat. I was afraid adding a clause about only casting during the main phase would have been too wordy.
6 or greater reduced to 4 or greater"
Added activation cost for damage per SecretInfiltrator's suggestion. Remaining at common though of my own decision.
I'd put the mana aspect at the beginning of the ability. It seems too easy to overlook as part of the shuffling clause.
Note: Per the rules this is a mana ability and can be activated during the casting of a spell. That's treacherous grounds and is the reason for the wording difference between Chromatic Sphere and Chromatic Star. The former does unintended things and may cause condfusion at tables without judges.
The idea here is nice. I expect though that at common the removal option is a bit too oppressive without any mana in the activation cost. That's a lesson from Seal of Fire.
On principle I'd add ", " to the cost.
Note also that this as an on-board combat trick instantly becomes a source of complexity. Might be better suited at uncommon.
Sacrifice deals 1 damage to target creature> add . This change was made so it wasn't too similar to (((Cold Compass Oasis)))
increased cost from 5UU to 5UUU
Current wording or "UEOT target creature you control can block an additional creature and gains "whenever this creature blocks a snow creature, it gains +2/+2 and first strike"?
There also is no flavor here. I needed a common combat trick for white. I almost gave this a boon for targetting a snow creature, but decided snow had enough support already and needed anti-snow cards. I don't even like this name.