Foundations: Recent Activity

Mechanics | Foundations | Sect Evolution

Recent updates to Foundations: (Generated at 2025-05-01 11:04:01)

2012-01-09 20:31:44: Sorrow edited Sandstorm Keep
2012-01-09 20:25:14: Sorrow created the card Deathblinker
2012-01-09 20:21:41: Sorrow moved the card Barbaric Harassment from Isolation into Foundations
2012-01-08 14:27:56: Sorrow edited Sundering the Holy
2012-01-08 14:27:27: Sorrow edited Sundering the Holy
2012-01-08 14:22:43: Sorrow edited Camelback Barterers
2012-01-08 14:21:51: Sorrow edited Camel Pursuers
2012-01-08 13:58:46: Sorrow moved the card Benthas, Bearing Infinity from Isolation into Foundations
2012-01-08 13:51:16: Sorrow edited Trachol, Worldbuilder
2012-01-06 15:14:04: Sorrow edited Clanking Dragon
2012-01-05 03:39:50: Sorrow edited Ornin, Scalemaster Bey
2012-01-05 03:37:04: Sorrow edited Cavemaster
2012-01-05 03:36:13: Sorrow edited Cavemaster
2012-01-05 03:31:18: Sorrow edited Clinging Vines
2012-01-05 03:27:01: Sorrow edited Avian Evolution
2012-01-05 03:26:01: Sorrow edited Righteous Vitality
2012-01-05 03:25:25: Sorrow edited Gnarsuth, Hero of the Sands
2011-12-15 07:26:04: Sorrow created the details page Sect Evolution
2011-12-02 00:31:40: Alex commented on Bridgar Tolde

I'm not sure it is that green. "Gain control of" is vanishingly rare in green - the Archdruid is virtually the only example. Red and blue have both done gaining control of lands: Conquer, Annex - so I think this is fine.
2011-12-01 20:57:36: Vitenka commented on Bridgar Tolde

It's a very green ultimate though. But the target land destruction bit is very red, so I forgive it.

An "I win" ultimate at rr2 +5 turns even if interrupted? yeah, that's probably allowed.
2011-12-01 14:26:07: Alex commented on Bridgar Tolde

@jmg: One point in favour of the ultimate is that it's an ability that's been seen on a printed card: Gilt-Leaf Archdruid.
2011-12-01 11:35:46: jmgariepy commented on Bridgar Tolde

I'm not too keen on the ultimate, because it's a bit like saying "Target player concedes." But I admit, it's not a game winner in multi-player, and the game might still be alive after that. It certainly feels like an ultimate, which is good. Too many people design Planeswalkers that are difficult to go ultimate, then for a final ability, they toss out a 4 casting cost ability. Wrath of God may be a good spell, but it's just a punch in the gut. Ultimates need to be a flying punch in the gut, stay levitating with your fist in the opponent's gut, then slowly rotate.
2011-12-01 10:35:45: Alex commented on Bridgar Tolde

Planeswalkers are extremely difficult to design, certainly. But this looks like a reasonable design. Perhaps a little unexciting due to being so focused, but Nissa Revane and Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas say it's okay to have focused planeswalkers occasionally.
2011-12-01 07:39:11: Sorrow edited Bridgar Tolde
2011-12-01 07:38:24: Sorrow commented on Bridgar Tolde

I'm finally happy with him. I feel that I have the most trouble designing Planeswalkers out of all card types.
2011-12-01 07:36:57: Sorrow edited Bridgar Tolde
2011-10-21 14:55:04: Alex commented on Plate Collision

Sure, but at common, 7-mana spells will sit clogging up the 14th picks of a lot of drafts.
2011-10-21 04:46:42: Vitenka commented on Plate Collision

It's evil, but it costs 7. It's ALLOWED to be game winningly evil.
2011-10-20 22:40:56: dude1818 commented on Plate Collision

Mass land destruction at common? Might I recommend "Destroy three target tapped lands."
2011-09-25 23:50:00: Link commented on Vinesnapper

Is this supposed to be "Whenever you discard a card, ~ gets +1/+1 until end of turn," or "Discard a card: ~ gets +1/+1 until end of turn?" I only ask because they're very different things.