Labrynthia: Into the Dark: Recent Activity
| Labrynthia: Into the Dark: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics |
Recent updates to Labrynthia: Into the Dark: (Generated at 2024-05-05 21:30:47)
Page 1 - Older activity
Page 1 - Older activity
Good point. The goal of the card was to create tension around revealing it or holding it up, so I'll up the reveal cost to reflect that. Thanks for the input.
There's a cycle of uncommon Planeswalkers in this set, so I felt it important that an answer exist at common.
The life loss attached is due to the kind of limited environment I'm trying to craft. I want to reward players for drafting grindier strategies, but I also don't want every game to end in a mill-out. Hence, a larger amount of incidental burn -- my goal is to create a tense "ticking clock" element for both players. The numbers on the damage might be excessive, but that's the kind of thing to adjust after testing, IMO.
A fine point. The sort of nuance I was going for with this card is probably best left in 90's Magic; I'll make both abilities permanent.
I've been bothered by that last ability ever since I first glimpsed the card. Today I took the time and had a close look. You forgot the second "cast".
It's weird that this hinders further copies of itself as well as setting a temporary rule and a permanent rule.
This is a lot for a common.
Vraska's Contempt is a rare, so you could remove both the triggered and activated ability and still be at "a lot for a common".
Why "Whenever"? It's expected to happen only once, right?
Why would you ever cast this without the cost reduction (mana cost:
) if it's always cheaper to reveal it first (activation cost + reduced casting cost: 
+ 
)?
This is basically strictly better than Negate in two ways: You can reveal it early to make your opponent play around it while keeping one mana open, and you have a chance to cast the next copy cheaper.