I don't see the reason a mechanic is supposed to work with burn, but not drain - especially since the reasoning "appears in RB and red deals damage" sounds quite similar to "appears in RB and black drains life".
It's that distinction that I don't get and that might trip up players.
Speaking of creature types. Aren't Worms their own thing? A larva of sn Insect shouldn't be called a worm, but a grub or maggot etc. IIRC.
I chose damage over the general loss of life since this mechanic appears in RB and red deals in damage. I also didn't want the card to work with drain spells (whether or not that's a good decision, I don't know).
I wonder why this only punishes opponents that were dealt damage and not those that have otherwise lost life.
This keyword gets quadratically stronger with the number of players in free-for-all multiplayer games. If you have a reliable repeatable damage effect e. g. Pyrohemia this can deal 12 damage per turn-cycle in a four-player game as opposed to 2 damage in a two-player game.
Well, the "current" is pointless since the way it is worded right now both creatures' powers are checked both during announcement/casting of the spell and during resolution.
I think the complexity of the effect is not worth it or telling a compelling story even with a simpler wording, but this should do it:
> Target creature gets -1/-1 until end of turn. Then destroy another target creature if that creature's power is less than the first creature's power.
I don't see the reason a mechanic is supposed to work with burn, but not drain - especially since the reasoning "appears in RB and red deals damage" sounds quite similar to "appears in RB and black drains life".
It's that distinction that I don't get and that might trip up players.
Speaking of creature types. Aren't Worms their own thing? A larva of sn Insect shouldn't be called a worm, but a grub or maggot etc. IIRC.
Ooze type instead of slime. Maybe just remove ooze? Slime sounded kind of right, but not ooze. I'm also just biased against oozes.
Adjusted to SecretInfiltrator's wording.
Likely, I just tried to combine blacks creature debuff with a kill spell.
I chose damage over the general loss of life since this mechanic appears in RB and red deals in damage. I also didn't want the card to work with drain spells (whether or not that's a good decision, I don't know).
changed from attack to combat damage (since it's on damage, the creature obviously wouldn't be attacking)
I wonder why this only punishes opponents that were dealt damage and not those that have otherwise lost life.
This keyword gets quadratically stronger with the number of players in free-for-all multiplayer games. If you have a reliable repeatable damage effect e. g. Pyrohemia this can deal 12 damage per turn-cycle in a four-player game as opposed to 2 damage in a two-player game.
Well, the "current" is pointless since the way it is worded right now both creatures' powers are checked both during announcement/casting of the spell and during resolution.
I think the complexity of the effect is not worth it or telling a compelling story even with a simpler wording, but this should do it:
> Target creature gets -1/-1 until end of turn. Then destroy another target creature if that creature's power is less than the first creature's power.
What is the point of this card anyway?
Forgot p/t
Since the set won't be using Waste, I guess I will have to use the Imprisoned in the Moon wording.
Eh; rules can easiy enough be expanded for wastes to be a proper land type.
That rules text doesn't work. See Imprisoned in the Moon compared to Song of the Dryads
...Ok; nonbasic. Phew. Seems cromulent and sideboardable to me.
Whoops. I meant to to say Wastes, not Wastelands.