Now this should be more clear. Is this only comparing printed creature types with printed creature types or is this comparing the printed creature types of the new creature with the set of creature types (printed and acquired) of other creatures? The wording is ambiguous with the introduction of this new terminology.
Except that you cannot use the Blackblade wording because the condition for the reduced cost is not inherent to the creature being equipped, but some other board state. Which is why the current wording on that card looks... unfortunate. (It also doesn't help that you put all the equip abilities at the top rather than below the static and triggered abilities that don't modify equip itself, where they are on a regular Equipment.)
Really, if you wanted this to somehow work at all with two equip abilities, it would probably more like:
> Collaborate -- As long as there are five or more creature types among creatures you control, ~ has equip .
But at that point you may as well replace the "~ has equip " with the cost reduction clause.
I think it works. Most magic would probably put the collaborate on the effect rather than the cost though. Partly because it would have a lot more of an effect on the game.
It's an extreme hoop to jump through. Either it's changeling tribal, or you have to have at least 3 creatures in play that don't have much synergy between them. Difficult hoop suggests that the payoff should be high.
It is probably a bit easier to do in a janky limited deck; which is kinda funny. But also pulls against the power level.
2018-07-14 07:41:25:
HarrisonA
created and commented on the card CA02
IIRC there was a discussion whether a single land that had the ability to be discardedas a Cancel was too oppressive for simply not using a spell slot. That's tame by comparisson.
You took the one effect not to mix with retrace and put it on a card with retrace.
Yeah, this is gonna be seriously un-fun; since there's basically no way to get rid of it. At the very least this should exile on its second use; and even then wants to cost a fair bit more.
Wait, all the lands in my hand are Cancels as well? Oh boy, that's crazy nasty. Repeatable counterspells are dangerous. Even Forbid is deceptively powerful. This is why Fervent Denial is so lackluster.
> Choose two target creatures. UEOT, for each creature chosen this way, it gains trample and gets +X/+X, where X is the power of the other creature chosen this way.
In addition.
Entirely. It does so little that adding "up to one" felt necessary for the versatility.
Subtly has (slow) cycling despite an empty board. Neat. Intended?
Isn't that a kidnapper more than a larcenist? A Goatnapper but for kids... I mean, someone who takes people rather than their things.
does "gains a creature type" mean the same as "becomes a creature type" or "becomes a creature type in addition to its other types"?
Now this should be more clear. Is this only comparing printed creature types with printed creature types or is this comparing the printed creature types of the new creature with the set of creature types (printed and acquired) of other creatures? The wording is ambiguous with the introduction of this new terminology.
Except that you cannot use the Blackblade wording because the condition for the reduced cost is not inherent to the creature being equipped, but some other board state. Which is why the current wording on that card looks... unfortunate. (It also doesn't help that you put all the equip abilities at the top rather than below the static and triggered abilities that don't modify equip itself, where they are on a regular Equipment.)
Really, if you wanted this to somehow work at all with two equip abilities, it would probably more like:
> Collaborate -- As long as there are five or more creature types among creatures you control, ~ has equip
.
But at that point you may as well replace the "~ has equip
" with the cost reduction clause.
Equip legendary creature 3
Equip 7
As per black blade reforged.
Either is fine it seems, I'll probably switch to the ghostfire template later
Why doesn't this just reduce the equip cost the way Ghostfire Blade does?
2R->1R common->uncommon
Shifted the words, equip now 2 from 3,
I think it works. Most magic would probably put the collaborate on the effect rather than the cost though. Partly because it would have a lot more of an effect on the game.
But how's the template? Regardless of costs I'm wondering how I should be piecing it together.
For the record this is all for the limited first, I've little interest in meshing the set with anything changeling
It's an extreme hoop to jump through. Either it's changeling tribal, or you have to have at least 3 creatures in play that don't have much synergy between them. Difficult hoop suggests that the payoff should be high.
It is probably a bit easier to do in a janky limited deck; which is kinda funny. But also pulls against the power level.
I'm looking more at template than power atm
Mm, still significantly better than Cancel. But it costs as much as Cancel so it's not a proper Counterspell so I give it a pass. (But most wouldn't)
I've been wondering when y'all would find this one.
IIRC there was a discussion whether a single land that had the ability to be discardedas a Cancel was too oppressive for simply not using a spell slot. That's tame by comparisson.
You took the one effect not to mix with retrace and put it on a card with retrace.
Yeah, this is gonna be seriously un-fun; since there's basically no way to get rid of it. At the very least this should exile on its second use; and even then wants to cost a fair bit more.
Wait, all the lands in my hand are Cancels as well? Oh boy, that's crazy nasty. Repeatable counterspells are dangerous. Even Forbid is deceptively powerful. This is why Fervent Denial is so lackluster.
My wording suggestion:
> Choose two target creatures. UEOT, for each creature chosen this way, it gains trample and gets +X/+X, where X is the power of the other creature chosen this way.
Risky boots, of course, is a pirate.