Branches of Skavjando: Recent Activity
| Branches of Skavjando: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | References | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Branches of Skavjando: (Generated at 2024-09-13 18:52:19)
Regular cost reduced from
to 
increased power to 4
Increased CMC and Voyage costs from
to 
.
Reduced CMC and Voyage costs from
to 
.
was missing p/t
"you may purify during your opponents' turns" to "you may purify any time you could cast an instant."
to 
Today I heard that Kaldheim will have spirits and I feel very validated making them a theme here, even if mine are only tokens are were more from the Japanese influence.
Aww, I was hoping for a pinniped
Reduced cost from
to 
Reduced cost from
to 
So all your instants can also be counterspells? That doesn't like it would come up very much, although I guess you'd fill your deck with proactive instants to make use of this
Added ""When you cast this spell, you may pay
. If you do, counter target spell."" because the creature didn't feel mythic.
WW to 1W cost
"sacrifice ~" was almost certainly meant to be "Sacrifice a creature"
fixed typo in flavortext
"unless you've sacrificed a rune this turn" to "unless you control two or more runes."
A valid critcism. Runes There are a number of cards that can produce runes multiple times, so two is probably the safest. This will really force this card to only be played in rune-heavy decks in limited, but I believe there's enough cards that make rune in this set for that to be possible.
Some of the runes in this set might be preferable to activate during or after combat, so the fact that this cannot attack unless you (potentially) waste a combat trick or post-combat ability isn't ideal.
Maybe this should not be able to attack unless you control one or more Runes? I don't know how heavily supported this archetype is (seems pretty huge in this set), but if it's a lot of support, you might want to consider requiring at least 2+ runes...
I got this advice from the new Gadrak, the Crown-Scourge card. It would make sense here to use something more like this, though 4 would almost definitely be too high.
removed a word left in from a different written style
You might be able to say "of a double-faced creature card," which I suspect means a creature permanent that's a DFC or a DFC in any other zone whose front face is a creature, but no examples of the latter exist with activated abilities that can be activated off the battlefield iirc
Added "
: Add 
." at dude1818's suggestion.
@Alex- I considered using the phrase "of a creature that can transform," but as unsure if that wording would cause issues. Since 28/33 dfcs in this set automatically transform during each turn, I thought the the "transformed this turn" was a safe bet, though it would force you to use the ability during the second main phase.
Yes, this definitely feels like it should be able to tap for
. And does it really have to only be able to activate creatures that transformed this turn?
I don't like a land that only has a pretty restrictive mana ability. There are 9 cards like this in Pioneer, and they all also have "
: Add 
" with no restriction. Would you consider that?