My Universe, My Rules: Recent Activity
| My Universe, My Rules: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Recent updates to My Universe, My Rules: (Generated at 2026-04-29 21:31:03)
| My Universe, My Rules: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Recent updates to My Universe, My Rules: (Generated at 2026-04-29 21:31:03)
I'd say "It might as well sac, since it's only realistically going to do its job once, on a rare occasion", but, geez, that stops people from living the dream. Could you imagine countering an opponent's spell with a Twiddle? Also, how come I never thought to combine Twiddle with Disruptive Student. "Force Spike your spell?" "What?"
Well, also, it's not optional ;)
Yeah, it's a card you have to be clever with to get any use at all from; but the times you do get it to work will be recounted for weeks afterwards, so I'm not really too upset with that. Combined with the silent winning of games because it holds your opponent off for a turn (and you usually will see those, when the 3-drop gets cast a turn later than it would have been really useful) I think it's probably a reasonable niche card.
Maybe make the ability sac after all, with some kind of "When this leaves play, draw a card" or similar recompense? then a player can blow it up once it's no longer useful.
I like the card. But I got to admit it has a couple of frustrating components. One is that it's really easy to work around (though, it could be pretty funny when combined with instant speed proliferate...). I get the feeling that many people would play the card, and feel bad because they never counter anything with it, yet they have to keep an island and this untapped. It could even be the clutch card that stopped a three casting cost card at the exact right time, but owner of the Spikemage will never see his Spikemage work. He only sees when it doesn't work.
The other problem is that it keeps accumulating counters well after the point where it doesn't matter anymore. It goes to six... well, that's unlikely, but I better increase it by one. Now seven. Now eight. Once it gets to the elevensies-plus it doesn't seem to matter... but what if my opponent draws a fireball, and Spikemage is on the exact casting cost it would take to kill me? Guess I got to keep pushing this dork up...
That was my thinking, and why I didn't make it sac.
But the prospect of a deck dedicated to casting this, then cloning it every turn, or with some counter moving-around ability, is a pretty terrifying lockdown.
Still, maybe it's ok. It starts off a few turns behind "highest casting cost" and you have to work relatively hard to keep it up.
The screams when someone finally gets to more mana than you have time counters on your biggest one; and you use Force Spike instead will be heard for miles around.
Except it only counters spells that cost exactly X, and you don't control what X is, so it shouldn't be that had to play around.
Although the way it's worded now, it can only counter 0-drops.
A second hyperspace influenced card.
Probably ought to sac for its ability.
Utterly terrifying with, say, Followed Footsteps so the whole idea probably needs a rethink.
Interesting conundrum. I was going to submit a few possibilities, but none of them were any better. The real problem seems to be that you have to make players think a little differently than they probably already do about combat. It's not that the ability runs long, so much... it just forces a conversation about it, and there's only so many people who find rules conversations fun.
Maybe this?:
"After your opponent chooses order of blockers, if ~ is not a blocking creature, you may block with ~. Combat damage is dealt to ~ last."
It still forces the conversation... but it lets players be sneaky, so you might be able to win over the crowd that likes to be sneaky. I'm pretty sure for that ability to 'work' you'd need to appeal to a completely different player archtype...
It's an interesting idea - might need some re-wording?
"When an attacker chooses the order of combat damage, ~ must be first/last" maybe.
We're running into banding-level complexity here, though; for a situation which arises pretty rarely and is hard for a defender to deliberately provoke.
I'm curious though, what color should "blocks each turn if able" be given to? White, as a martyr? On that same note, one mechanic which I haven't seen is something like this:
Cowardly Pikeman
Creature - Goblin Soldier [U]
Whenever ~ blocks with other creatures, it blocks last if able.
5/1
With the change in blocking rules, you now assign damage to creatures one at a time, of the attacker's choice.. this would force you to assign damage to this guy last, so he can't be damaged unless everyone in front of him is killed.
And I just spent a paragraph to explain what that line of text does, so I guess that's why it won't appear on a card. :P
Eh; I kinda forgot the size should have changed once I changed it to green :)
Adding vigilance is a natural fit; but I think I'll just let it sit. It's the mechanic I saw as interesting; not finding a body to fit it on (though it does have to be the right sized creature - too tough and it's no drawback; too powerful and it'd be attacking anyway)
Um... Nessian Courser? Perhaps this should be a 4/2? Maybe 3/2 Vigilance?
We're so used to seeing "attacks if able"... I don't see any reason why we can't have the obvious opposite; and I think it would quite often be an interesting drawback.
Cool :D
I think that's pretty much the stated aim of this entire set.
Funny card, but it shouldn't be at common. ((b) could go for planeswalkers)
The point was to explore the mechanic change; the card chosen to doemonstrate my suggestion for retempating was regenerate, as something everyone knows.
So why doesn't this card just specify regenerate? If you want the creature untapped in the end you could just say G, T: Regenerate enchanted creature then untap it.
So was your intent to give the rules gurus migranes?
True, but "tap it" and "
,
" are about the same length...
Shortness, mainly.
But why bother? If you can always pay the cost, you don't lose anything by making it an effect instead.
That said, there's a common phrase "tap an untapped creature you control:" so presumably you could maybe have "tap a tapped or untapped creature you control:"...??
But it could be, is my point :)
It's not really a "cost". It's more of an effect, as on Niveous Wisps.
I don't think that the rules as they are cover such a case^^, I like this goat. But usually you can't do things if you can't pay for them, if you can't sacrifice a creature (be it because the goat is out or because you don't have any) you wont get sac abititys activated.