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 2025-09-01 08:45:50)
Nah. Stronghold Discipline was never that powerful. You get to control the vogue on this card, but if you can force your opponent to overplay without them killing you, any stalemate-breaking card will win the game for you.
That would make keeping track of voguiness very difficult. Apply Disemvogueification?
Also, just pointing out that out of set this particular card is "Token deck? You lose." Which is a bit too good for the cost. Like, about 5 mana too good.
Envoguen might be simpler wording, but I'd rather have the word appear constant as often as possible.
Your suggested ability could be added later. Currently I'm just trying to see what I can do with the mechanic. Likely instants and sorceries won't make a creature be vogue for more than a turn, so on a card like this I'd really need to know what else is around to warrant such a suggested inclusion.
The amount of tracking to remember what creatures are in vogue is a concern though. Oddly making vogue counters doesn't work, since the length of time a creature can be in vogue isn't consistent, something I find appealing.
No, I was suggesting adding it to this card. And also the word envoguen. Mainly the word, really.
The one problem with a mechanic of this sort, is that you want to use something to represent it. And then you start thinking "Why isn't that thing doing double duty?" and you end up with either auras or +1/+1 counters.
If they have the means to do so, yes. So if a creature isn't in vogue and no spell or ability happens to make creatures vogue, then the opponents would lose life equal to the number of creatures they control that aren't in vogue.
Vogue is another top-down design I've been working with. I'm quite optimistic since I believe it has a lot of design space, although the board state may become complex. Other spells can make a creature be in vogue, although only one so far excludes creatures from being in vogue. I've used both one-off vogue creatures like Interjector that have can make themselves be in vogue, but only once and then stable vogue enablers like Popular Gorehorn, that can keep multiple creatures in vogue. Boxing Star repeatedly makes itself vogue, but only during a single phase.
So far I've limited creatures to being in vogue, but I suppose other non-creature permanents could be in vogue.
...then they may envoguen a creature they control?
See Popular Gorehorn.
Collaborate should work like the
type convoke spells Chord of Calling and Return to the Ranks, yes. That was never my intention, but rather how the ability manifested after trying to create a mechanic based on artistic collaboration from a top-down perspective.
Perhaps the cost needs to be increased, and for this card at least a second blue mana should be included in the cost since one is probably too splashy. Unlike non-
convoke spells the mana isn't ever being reduced, so collaborate can only gain bonuses if you have creatures to spare. That does go back to what is an appropriate cost based on how many creatures a player would be likely to have out when they cast a collaborate spell. While collaborate could be used on creatures, I believe such would be unnecessary as all likely abilities that could be collaborated (the threat of limited design space is acknowledged on my comments for Inspired Aggression and Ritualistic Orgy) make more sense on instants and sorceries than they do on permanents and that from a flavor standpoint the mechanic makes little sense on (most) creatures.
Gibber. Brainstorm with convoke. Gibber.
Going back to the collaborate concept I think it can be worded to remove X and give the same results.
Limited design space is still an issue however. In spite of that, it could still potentially exist in a small set I believe.
worshipper design idea
What if I limited the second ability to only targeting creatures you control. I probably was thinking along those lines anyway when I came up with the concept. That makes I think should do the same job as sorcery speed, I think.
I like that second ability. At first I thought it might be enough of a hoop that you might have found a way to let a land cycle-from-play like Horizon Canopy without the horrible life cost from Horizon Canopy. Then I thought "Is there any monoblue or blue-X deck that I wouldn't put this into, just as an ETBT Island with that second ability?" And I concluded no, there isn't, this goes in every deck with blue mana and creatures. So it's still too good.
Restricting the second ability to sorcery speed would help, though it's even more words on an already-wordy card.
Hurrk! I'm more worried about the first ability, yes. Pinging a 1/1 every turn, on a land?! Yeah, that definitely shouldn't exist.
Compare Keldon Megaliths or Rath's Edge for the kind of hoops you need to jump through to get this powerful an effect on a land.
"Target creature gets +1/+0 UEOT" is nearly fair, but even that might be too good. 1 mana per turn and no card space consumed is such a low cost, it's hard to come up with small enough effects.
CHanged "
: UEOT you may cast blue creature spells as if they had flash." to "
: Target creature with flying gets +1/+1 UEOT." I'm admittedly not a fan of that and would like to change that ability later.
: UEOT you may cast blue creature spells as if they had flash.
Changed from "
: Gain 1 life" to "
: Prevent the next 1 damage that would be dealt to target creature."
I know the second ability is probably powerful, but should the first ability be changed to something like "target creature gets +1/+0 UEOT"?
I like the design quite a bit.
I think the lifegain is a bit much, if you can get mostly-free lifegain, it's easy for that to dent the opponent's ability to attack you.
Conversely, I see jmg's point about giving up the lifegain to get the effect, but it feels like, even beginners can look at an effect and judge if they'd rather have the lifegain (whether or not they're right). If you just counter any spell targetted at you, that's probably a mistake, but you can see how scary it looks.
Huh. I would let a lot of spells and abilities target me if it meant that I didn't lose 1 life per turn. There's some real potential for 'feel bad' here, that isn't quite present with Oldchapel.
(Also, this is one of those cards that's bound to trip up new players that activate effects during their turn. As an aside, if all the card is doing is gaining life, I like to do that on my turn since there's no real value to activating it on the opponent's turn. But these are minor considerations, admittedly.)
Originally, I was also going to comment on Wizard's in-house rule that lands always produce mana. But this already does... it's a Plains... which is hard to notice, so it probably requires reminder text, like on Leechridden Swamp (if you ever moved this out of temporary storage, that is.)
I'd also argue that this is overpowered, but I think Leechridden Swamp and Mistveil Plains kind of do that job for me. Put another way: I think I would accept an additional loss of four life as part of the cost of playing this card. Maybe that's too much... it depends on the speed of the format this card is played in. And I'm not saying you should add that line... you get the idea.
See Oldchapel.
See Smokespire.