GDS 3: Design Challenge: Recent Activity
| GDS 3: Design Challenge: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Design Challenge #4 | Design Challenge #3 | Design Challenge #2 | Design Challenge #1 | Design Challenge #5 |
Recent updates to GDS 3: Design Challenge: (Generated at 2025-04-30 11:34:11)
Page 1 - Older activity
Page 1 - Older activity
Looking at the comments given by WotC staff, it seems that they would say that Friends in Need is too much like a creature to qualify for any noncreature slot, if that's your intention.
I also forgot to mention with Jovial Comrade that this is the kind of buff that can lead to this dying to a 2/2 bear later on the turn if the condition is no longer met. For example, if one of the three creatures dies during combat or later on to some removal. That isn't particularly desirable interaction.
"Up to" in Friends in Need is very cute, but it's perhaps too much so since it's so easy to miss. I would either specify "Create one or two" or allude to that in a reminder text.
With this 'exactly three' pattern in mind, I would wager just having it be "three or more creatures" would be the best solution from practical standpoint yet it would lose all of its novelty with that change.
For Survivor tribe, I could see the persist keyword being a pretty good fit.
Yeah, I was going for the "have friends but keep your party small" theme that a lot of Zombie-related media tends to use. Looking back, I'd probably do a different tribal, but I wanted to do something a bit more offbeat, type-wise.
Friends in Need actually has the key "up to" phrase, meaning that you don't have to "overshoot" the mark if you need to. Ideally I'd add some discard outlets in both white and black in addition to the black sacrifice outlets, but you'd be right in that there'd need to be a greater-than-normal reward for dancing around having exactly 3 Survivors. That was what Rag-Tag Band was meant to be, though I wasn't too sure about whether or not they should care about being differently-named.
Flavor seems somewhat flimsy to me.
Would trying to keep exactly three creatures in play really be engaging gameplay? I could easily it leading to scenarios where you have some creatures stuck in hand. Your creatures getting slapped with a Pacifism or such would make this even worse. Also saccing your creatures with a card like Desperate Cannibal just so you can reach that condition could lead to some strong feel-bad moments if your opponent is able to place a well aimed removal in the mix.
A card like Friends in Need can "overshoot" the mark if you have two Survivors you would like to keep alive.
Rag-Tag Band features the same concept, but slightly modified which is inconsistent.
and sorcery could work...
> Choosing a term to make into a (nonlegendary) mythic-feeling mythic is a fool's errand with this.
I don't really follow here.
Sure, I opened it up again.
Would I be able to post a mock entry in here? More exposure and cleaner than making my own set.
Now it is.
Mythic -> Rare.
Rare -> Mythic. New Design.
Yeah, this would totally be a rare if I was not so lazy in finding another better mythic-feeling design for any of the other names.
Bigtopia: Power, Toughness, and Keywords matter
>>Tightrope, Common | Contortionist, Common | Feats of Strength, Uncommon | Unicycle, Uncommon | Flaming Hoop, Rare | Trapeze Artist, Rare | Clown Car, Mythic | Ringmaster, Mythic
"Tightwire" or "Walking the Tightrope" would work much better (and I'd probably make this an uncommon that costs
) if I wasn't constrained by the challenge. Choosing a term to make into a (nonlegendary) mythic-feeling mythic is a fool's errand with this.
So, only tamed bears can safely jump through the hoop? Fiddly.
The flavor doesn't translate that well IMO.
I would expect smaller creatures getting 'inside' even easier.
So, while not perhaps this doesn't fit with the theme:
> Whenever a creature attacks you, if it's power or toughness is greater than 2, ~ deals 2 damage to it.
> Whenever a creature attacks you, ~ deals X minus 2 damage to it, where X is its toughness.
? or something...
Also, maybe it would be better as something that expires or is one-use time only rather than as a global enchantment?
> Whenever one or more creatures with power 3 or greater attack you, sacrifice ~. If you do, it deals 3 damage to one of those creatures.
"Tightwire"? I'm not a fan of strictly worse Murder, but I guess limited environments can call out for such.
Name somewhat confuses as in how it translates to verb and/or spell. Pretty nice idea though.
I don't feel the mythichness here, but it's a solid implementation of the concept regardless. Keywords matter fits really well here.