I went back and forth on that. I like the feeling of finding an exploit when you use the ability with no cards in hand. It probably gets confusing when mixed with the other templating in, say, a standard environment though.
Huh. If you open a hand with no land and four cards with Trek, you should mulligan.
Maybe. It's a tough call on the draw against a deck that you traditionally match poorly against (you need those extra cards to win, so you might as well take the risk.) But man, aren't you going to feel silly when you don't play a land on round 1 and discard down to seven.
All of these issues just go away if I turn it into basic landcycling, don’t they?
My hope was to have something that DID work like a basic mulligan to help fix colors from turn 1, but I’m thinking now that the answer to that question will always just be to take the mulligan.
Oh, "discard this card", not "discard a card". Alright. In that case the ability outright doesn't work. You cannot trigger an ability of a hidden card.
Also the effect is outright card disadvantage. I suppose, it's like one step up from a mulligan, but very unattractive. It feels bad to have this as the kind of enabler for your other spell that wants a player to have shuffled this turn. :(
Landcycling and Terramorphic Expanse happen at common. The thought is that it goes best on high cost stuff because those are the cards most likely to clog your hand when you need a third land — similar to where landcycling typically fits.
I went back and forth on that. I like the feeling of finding an exploit when you use the ability with no cards in hand. It probably gets confusing when mixed with the other templating in, say, a standard environment though.
I dunno. Input appreciated.
Are you purposefully avoiding the nowadays more usual "discard a card. If you do, draw a card."?
Creature - Adventure Spirit
Also, um, the ability seems likely to be not terribly useful, since this costs 3 and didn't I already comment that on a similar blue card?
Huh. If you open a hand with no land and four cards with Trek, you should mulligan.
Maybe. It's a tough call on the draw against a deck that you traditionally match poorly against (you need those extra cards to win, so you might as well take the risk.) But man, aren't you going to feel silly when you don't play a land on round 1 and discard down to seven.
All of these issues just go away if I turn it into basic landcycling, don’t they?
My hope was to have something that DID work like a basic mulligan to help fix colors from turn 1, but I’m thinking now that the answer to that question will always just be to take the mulligan.
Oh, "discard this card", not "discard a card". Alright. In that case the ability outright doesn't work. You cannot trigger an ability of a hidden card.
Also the effect is outright card disadvantage. I suppose, it's like one step up from a mulligan, but very unattractive. It feels bad to have this as the kind of enabler for your other spell that wants a player to have shuffled this turn. :(
Yeah; It's not quite mana fixing on a 5-drop; it's closer to splice - landcycle; so you want it on the big stuff.
The shuffling is indeed a downside. Not much you can do about it, unless you want to make it a wish instead of stripping your deck?
Landcycling and Terramorphic Expanse happen at common. The thought is that it goes best on high cost stuff because those are the cards most likely to clog your hand when you need a third land — similar to where landcycling typically fits.
Mana fixing on a five-drop? A keyword like that at common would cause a lot of potential for shuffling - which is time consuming.
If you do what Vitenka suggests the card will never move to a public zone, so how would you know the card type?
The current wording is perfectly functional.
SecretInfiltrator– Not sure I follow. Where’s the hidden information?
The rules are fine, the logistics are just prohibitive since IRL you'll require a neutral party to maintain hidden information.
Is it bad of me to want to add the word "Instead" on the end of this, and watch the rules explode?