Madoka Magi-ka: Recent Activity
| Madoka Magi-ka: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics |
Recent updates to Madoka Magi-ka: (Generated at 2024-05-18 20:40:32)
| Madoka Magi-ka: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics |
Recent updates to Madoka Magi-ka: (Generated at 2024-05-18 20:40:32)
That'd give you a much nicer and shorter wording too: "Gain control of all permanents UEOT. Untap those permanents. They gain haste UEOT."
(Word of Seizing and Zealous Conscripts show red can temporarily steal lands, but stealing all lands starts to evoke Gilt-Leaf Archdruid which does make it feel a bit greener.)
Insurrection is very red. Metallic Mastery is red... so I'm guessing the love child of Metallic Master and Insurrection is also red. Gain control of all your opponents lands until end of turn? That's up for grabs. I guess you could argue that that's a green ability, or a green/red ability. To be honest, it seems red to me as well, but there isn't a precedent for it.
I agree that the fast mana is legit.
Actually, now that I think of it, why doesn't that last ability just say "permanent". If there's one thing red shouldn't be gaining control of, it's the enchantments. I'd think that would help justify the green side, and make the card look more powerful. (It would also sweep all the Planeswalkers in the process... but I don't really see the downside to that...)
I've made the changes some of you requested.
Here's the thing. I'm actually working on a whole BLOCK design and there's going to be 5 'walkers that span the three set block, each of which are an allied color pair.
But how is this card red/green you ask? Well, +2 is temporary fast mana, which is red. But it's got the Omnath/Upwelling effect added, which is green. The -3 ability is a winds of change effect, which is all red. The ultimate -11 is tricky to place. Stealing anything is blue and stealing creatures temporarily is red. Red and Green are both colors that have always had strong interactions with artifacts, creatures and lands and making it a temporary effect is very red. I don't think the ultimate is so much of a stretch for the colors personally.
CMC increased to 6. Starting loyalty increased to 5. +2 ability changed to "end of YOUR turn."
I did as well. Otherwise, I wouldn't have thought the interplay between the two abilities was clever. I thought Alexander wanted me to add mana to my pool for next turn, then take a chance and dump my hand for 3 random cards off the top.
That's pretty strange... I'd assume most people would get it wrong, since players have a tendency to imagine how they would like an ability to work while they are reading it, then assume the card works like that before they finish reading the sentence. You could add reminder text, but that would be some really weird reminder text.
Personally, I prefer this adding mana to your mana pool which doesn't empty until YOUR next turn. Holding the mana over is what gives this card relevance, and doesn't make it 'just another planeswalker', while at the same time making the card do what players think it will do. That might be overpowered for cost (Maybe. With the ulitmate the way it is, the overall card is probably too good.), but I'd alter the power level of the card around that +2 ability, which feels, to me, to be the most interesting part of this card.
@Link: Is this Green? Hmm. The way it is right now? The first ability almost feels green/blue to me. It's kind of odd... I can see what Alexander is going for here with the red... it's a temporary burst of mana... but it also sticks around. I'm not sure what color that is, really. If what you're saying, though, is "Right now, looking at the card as a whole, it makes more sense in mono-red", I think I'd have to agree with you.
I did, but I read it different. I though it didn't empty until the end of YOUR turn.
Let's talk about a different issue: I don't see how this is green.
Quick poll: how many people also misunderstood the timing?
@Vitenka I think you're misreading it. The mana pool doesn't empty until the end of "THE next turn." It would only give 9 mana if it said, "YOUR next turn." So in a likely scenario, on turn 5 if you hit your land drop each turn and had appropriate acceleration you would only have 8 mana.
You must have 5 to cast this, and it gives +4 for 9...
Well, I assumed that the whole set was being designed to a different standard than which I'm used. I would suggest getting rid of the "mana pool doesn't empty until next turn." Having the ultimate only be temporary is also a good idea.
Changed the "gain control permanently" to "until end of turn."
@Vitenka I don't see where you're getting the 9 mana from. I'm only counting 8. And if this gets played on turn 4, you have to wait until turn 7 to activate the ultimate and that's assuming nobody has messed with it and you haven't used the second ability.
@dude1818 I agree this rough draft is hardly balanced. Any suggestions?
Balance issues aside, I like the interplay of the +2 and -3 ability. There's a nice "Press your luck" mechanic going on in there.
No, this is an example of why Planeswalkers should be balanced. This isn't a good example of a legitimate Planeswalker, since Alexander is creating an OP set.
Ugh, if this survives to your next upkeep you've got nine mana to spend? On turn.. realistically 4. (3 is, I think, possible but optimistic.)
And then if it manages to survive that turn, you win.
Seriously unpleasant, and a poster-child for why planeswalkers should not be.
You're right, it's really hard to compare this to anything. RPD needs hellbent, only costs 4 to cast, but then needs 3 mana on the turn you want it to be 12 power.
Hmm... well, we'd kind of be assuming that this card comes with the line "When a creature is assigned to block or bed blocked by this, destroy it." I mean, there are creatures and scenarios that this wouldn't prove true, but the majority of the time, that's what will happen.
Hmm... it is tough to compare it to anything. Nova Chaser doesn't seem like a good analogue... too many fiddly differences.
Ah. What would you say if I compared this card to Rakdos Pit Dragon Alex? It doesn't get double strike until you reach hellbent, but then it can easily jump into a 12-power evasive creature. Does this card look more dangerous than that one?
I don't think 12 power for 6 mana should exist at rare. It might be okay at mythic: cf Armada Wurm. True, a simple Shock would kill this, but if they don't have that then this will kill in two hits, and red is the colour that's best at removing blockers.
This is an update of Ridgetop Raptor with "Firstest Strike" which I've chosen to call "Fast Strike." The creature deals both Fast Strike and regular combat damage. In an attempt to make this work with as few words as possible, I've expanded the rule of "fight" to include combat as well, meaning when this creature blocks or becomes blocked the creatures it would deal damage to are affected by Fast Strike. I can see why Wizards hasn't done something like this yet, it's not very elegant. But the reason Fast Strike exists is so I can do Triple Strike on this card, Triple Troublemaker.
Added "divided as you choose."
"And it deals no combat damage this turn"? Or is this a variant of double strike?
Looking at the cost, I guess this probably is an update to Ridgetop Raptor.
See Spear Slicer for the Fast Strike rules.
Heh, I used to play .hack//ENEMY. It was quite fun.
Let's see... as I recall, it didn't have basic lands the way MtG or Pokémon do, but instead it had the simpler play-one-card-per-turn rule, along with "spot" requirements. Which functioned pretty similar to mana cost, but less predictably; it's like every kill spell the opponent has also works like a land-destruction spell.
@jmgariepy I have not played WoW, either the video game or the card game. WoW doesn't interest me. However, while it was still in print, I played the .hack//ENEMY TCG made by Decipher and I liked that game a lot more than Magic as well. I actually was really good at it and by the time the game went kaput, I was ranked 7th overall in the state of Michigan and I think I ranked within the top 100 out of 10,000 registered players worldwide. So I can proudly say that in at least one competitive activity in my lifetime, I was a member of the top 1%.
Oh, excellent, on both accounts. I have a lot of experience with games, but the Japanese tcg market is something I'm not as familiar with, since that requires more dedication than playing a couple games and writing an article (though, I did give a positive review for Battle Spirits when it came to America).
Out of curiosity... have you ever got your hands on World of Warcraft's CCG? I have... issues... with deck building (it's like playing Magic with 10 colors, but you can only play mono). It's resource system, however, is pretty cool. 'Lands' are put into play face up in front of you. They all have one activated ability, and when you use it, you turn it face down... so you get a mini-sorcery with every land. Man, I wish that game was good... it has a lot of strong points, but it feels like the creators couldn't figure out if they were making a gimmick or a real game.