Community Mashup Set: Recent Activity
| Community Mashup Set: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Recent updates to Community Mashup Set: (Generated at 2025-07-06 21:37:03)
| Community Mashup Set: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Recent updates to Community Mashup Set: (Generated at 2025-07-06 21:37:03)
um, yeah; flash and haste are different things, aren't they.
I agree it's rare you're gonna want to pay the one extra. But when you need that 3 damage unblockably (and another 3, blockably) right now, you've got it. That's probably worth the extra cost - I can't in good conscience cost the megatrample ability down at
.
It's just a touch stronger than "~ can deal damage as though unblocked" - like, um Tornado Elemental has (also Close Quarters but that affects all your stuff)
I... guess I should remove the "and sacrifice it" bit; that loses the source card though.
Do you mean flash? Maybe you mean haste?
It'll be a rare circumstance when I want to pay a 5th mana to get a 3/3 haste for one turn. Compare Arc Runner (the common, non-trampling Ball Lightning).
The "damage you when you block me" ability is very nifty, though. I can't think where I've seen it before, except perhaps Greatbow Doyen.
A little too much mana for a rare, but I like the card nonetheless. I especially like the idea of a card that provides you with a 'now and later' effect, if you don't quite need the deathtouch immediately. I'm guessing, though, that the card really wants to be U/G, though, to get the 'untap my team' a bit cheaper...
Though, I got to admit, I also think this would be cool if the cost of the artifact was
and the cost of the deathtouch was 
.
Well, Rust itself is green, so there's my reasoning. You're right, both colours get fighting, both colours get wolves, both colours get artifact destruction - so green-ness isn't vital.
I can see the argument for uncommon. I think it really depends on the impact it had, and that you want it to have; it could go either way really. The other rarity factors are a wash. I reckon making it gold this way means it's not going to see wide enough use to make all-destruction-all-the-time a thing, while still being a 2/2 that you can feed your own creatures to to make quite a stompy beast. (It's like modular, whether you like it or not.)
I'm kinda glad I stuck to artifact creature though. If this were allowed to destroy target artifact, it would need to go to uncommon or rare, just from the complexity. (I mean, what, it animates an artifact then fights it? The flavour is all wrong!)
This could be any of mono-red, mono-green, gold, or hybrid. Red and green both get Smelt/Oxidize and both get Pit Fight.
I seem to recall that in original Mirrodin, many limited decks had a few small artifact creatures, even if they were just Myr, Drill-Skimmers and so on. But yes, since this is potentially repeatable it perhaps should be uncommon.
I think in some ways green makes more sense, but I think it would be fine in red, I don't think it needs to be two-colour.
I think it would normally be uncommon. It's not very splashy, but it's quite narrow. If it were common, it would be almost impossible to play a small artifact creatures deck, since most people would have a rustwolf in the sideboard, and if there isn't a small artfiact creatures deck, people will be annoyed by a useless common.
I didn't do rarity. And it really ought to be at least part green too. It's reasonably powerful, but also reasonably simple; and not that splashy. I reckon common in any set that has enough small artifact creatures to make it worth having at all.
I like it, especially the name!
It's hard to balance: it has to fight a 0/1, 1/1, 0/2 or 1/2 to make use of the embiggening ability, but if it does get bigger, it's really good against artifact creatures. But it's narrow enough it's hopefully ok.
This is nastier; it exiles as soon as it blocks, not after the combat. So you have to find a hobbit to stab it, you can't just keep marching dwarves into its cocoons :)
Ooh. As in, "Whenever ~ blocks a creature, exile that creature until ~ leaves the battlefield"? That's a very nifty mechanic indeed!
...Ah, bother, it's been done before: Wall of Nets. This is still great though, especially for the spider flavour.
Rare is certainly right for this.
This hasn't quite been printed. It's a bit similar to Eladamri's Vineyard. It's also similar to Collective Voyage; if all players between them pay a total of 1 to Collective Voyage, you get this.
I think this deserves to exist, and indeed at this price point. (It'd also be one of those cards like Ghost Quarter that force tournament decks to run 2-3 basic lands, which I'm all for because all-nonbasic manabases annoy me.)
Oooh, it's a card drawing Vedalken Ghoul, aka reverse Slate Street Ruffian! I don't see how this can violate NWO, honestly.
Pure cardspace argument; if I put "Living weapon" in the rules box, there isn't room for the reminder text without it becoming flyyspack text.
what does reminder text have to do with types? and how does your excuse justify turning a non-evergreen keyword into a type, which are supposed to be evergreen? even basic lands have reminder text and they're as evergreen as it gets.
Well, the alternative is to have no reminder text for "Living Weapon" at all, and it's hardly an ever-green keyword.
before making a new type, you should ask if it really deserves a new type and can't be done with a keyword. in this case, obviously not, since you turned the keyword Living Weapon into a type.
let's pretend the rules team agreed to make 'living' a reminder textable thing, like legend.
let's pretend the rules team agreed to make 'living' a reminder textable thing, like legend.
(missed a comment there about Abusing reminder text omission on rares too... and it seems I can't edit comments associated with an update.)
use hybrid mana to make the first clauses shrink, and bring back a grizzly-bear-type cost while I'm at it. But now colourless would have a cost of 3+3 for the effect; so shrink the initial cost to bring it back to 5. But now it's only a single 2/2 bear so really it wants to be even cheaper - but I can't make it cost less than two to cast! Which means.. I don't know what it means. Reduce the attach cost? But then it loses the flavour. Live with it being expensive? It's not like green is supposed to get cheap removal, anyway. And turning your opponents creatures into things is more blue's schtick. Ah lump it for now.