temporary storage: Recent Activity
| temporary storage: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Cult World references | Aerial vs. Aquatic mechanical ideas | Clan Lore and Individuals | Katonah's Plane Tests & Details |
Recent updates to temporary storage: (Generated at 2025-09-04 02:43:57)
Mechanics that are dependent on the opponent are usually problematic. I suppose you have seen the often suggested version that is really similar to surge and gets discount on your own spells cast, right?
It wold be interesting to know the reason why you'd prefer this - usually the above-mentioned version can be calibrated fairly well by deciding how much generic mana you allow in the cost.
I'm especially baffled that you went from a mechanic that counts your instants and sorceries to a mechanic that counts your opponent's spells.
Seems like a workable mechanic for instants. You'll almost always get a discount of 1, but that's ok, you can just price that in. I agree it's likely to be slightly format warping - it'll impact against rush decks.
And while this usually won't aid sorceries much, a potential after-combat discount of 1 or 2 is always nice; and you are indeed setting up for the very rare "Ok, whoops, we dogpiled and now are casting 8 cost at each other for free" multiplayer situations that will echo down in legend.
So yeah, I like the basic idea of the mechanic.
Reminds me a bit of surge. Knowing this mechanic is in the format would discourage playing extra cards to avoid enabling your opponent's instants. Meanwhile sorceries like this will almost never get discounted anyway
The original thing I wanted to do was simply too complex for paper Magic and available word-space. The original idea involved exiling the card to cast later (a la Foretell), and it gaining counters when you cast instants and sorceries. Each of those counters would reduce the spell's cost to cast by
.
~ spreads a Rumor is fine. I didn't realize there were implications from the wording, had I tried this for more things, I might have ended up using that as well without thinking.
If I choose to do more with this, there most likely would be cards that care about spreading Rumors.
Multicolor wasn't something I was thinking about. That being said, I would hazard it's probably fine for a set without heavy multicolor use. If adjusting for multicolor would absolutely be necessary, then I would probably use "if it's at least one of this creature's colors and has a lower mana value," and make all Rumors mono-colored.
Could it be "~ spreads a Rumor"? That way you could also have "target creature you control spreads a Rumor".
It might be kinda neat to combine such with interactions like "Whenever ~ spreads a Rumor"
Sure a shame about the immense reminder text. how should the ability interact with color-changing effects that e. g. make this multicolored? "same color" reads restrictive.
See Lethal Resentment. [This iteration of Rumor is probably too much going for a set that also wants to have Mystery tokens and intrigue.
See Grankhala's Lightning Staff.
See Sheranu Arsonist.
See Jostby Vandal.
Gemae is the Stranger's alias on her home plane, though of course not her real name. Gemae is derived from the abbreviation of my favorite author's pen name combined with her birth name (that's a personal bit that has no reflection on the card).
See Gossipmonger.
So when I moved forward with this mechanic, at one instance I forgot (or intentionally chose?) to a card just go back to hand, rancor style. That felt simpler, so I went for that over the color-based discard that I had updated to on here.
The upside with mill I'll leave- let those decks have their fun. However, the lack of color requirement was a significant oversight on my part that I will need to fix.
Where are the starfall rules again?