I think a replacement effect would work. "If a player would discard one or more cards, that player discards that many cards plus one instead." That also makes you discard down to 6 during the clean-up step if you have more than 7 cards in hand, but that's a pretty minor repercussion
I'm trying to prove that you can put a 3/3 uncommon flyer in a set with extra upside for , but I'm having a hard time because cards that hit exactly that are scarce. Voyager Drake seems to be the only solid example. A few more 2/4 fliers... but 2/4 isn't 3/3.
Anyhow, the key point is that I think a 3/3 flash flyer is probably worth in uncommon. Like Vitenka pointed out, while it's not unknown for a player to cast two instants in a turn, the chances of it happening on any one turn in particular aren't terribly high. Which means that I would call this a little on the expensive side at . Personally speaking, I'd probably split the difference, make this a 3/2, and cost it at . Or maybe push it as a 2/4 for ... at least until I was proven that that was much too good.
I mean, sure, there's a possibility that the opponent can fire off four spells in a turn, and the responding player gets a 3/3 flyer for the low-low cost of . But... the opponent just fired off four spells. The responding player probably needs more help than what a single Phantom Monster can provide...
Hmm. Are opponents often cast more than two sorceries in their main1? I like the idea, it seems difficult to correctly tune. The gap between "This is often too strong" and "When would you ever cast this?" is very thin.
I think a replacement effect would work. "If a player would discard one or more cards, that player discards that many cards plus one instead." That also makes you discard down to 6 during the clean-up step if you have more than 7 cards in hand, but that's a pretty minor repercussion
I'm not sure if I have these worded correctly. I would like the two abilities condensed into one, but I'm not sure if that is able to be done.
Honestly not feeling this atm. I may change later.
Where are you getting 9/9 from?
Won't this be, effectively, a 9/9 at that point? The opponent is going to be more worried by that than the spell, I'd wager.
Likely meant this to be
to begin with, as the rest of the cycle has that CMC.
I'm trying to prove that you can put a 3/3 uncommon flyer in a set with extra upside for
, but I'm having a hard time because cards that hit exactly that are scarce. Voyager Drake seems to be the only solid example. A few more 2/4 fliers... but 2/4 isn't 3/3.
Anyhow, the key point is that I think a 3/3 flash flyer is probably worth
in uncommon. Like Vitenka pointed out, while it's not unknown for a player to cast two instants in a turn, the chances of it happening on any one turn in particular aren't terribly high. Which means that I would call this a little on the expensive side at 
. Personally speaking, I'd probably split the difference, make this a 3/2, and cost it at 
. Or maybe push it as a 2/4 for 
... at least until I was proven that that was much too good.
I mean, sure, there's a possibility that the opponent can fire off four spells in a turn, and the responding player gets a 3/3 flyer for the low-low cost of
. But... the opponent just fired off four spells. The responding player probably needs more help than what a single Phantom Monster can provide...
Hmm. Are opponents often cast more than two sorceries in their main1? I like the idea, it seems difficult to correctly tune. The gap between "This is often too strong" and "When would you ever cast this?" is very thin.
Designed to play with Salvage
See Damned Whisp
I think this should say creature card