Homelands Restored: Recent Activity
| Homelands Restored: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Skeleton |
Recent updates to Homelands Restored: (Generated at 2026-04-11 00:14:00)
| Homelands Restored: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Skeleton |
Recent updates to Homelands Restored: (Generated at 2026-04-11 00:14:00)
Because, you know, why bother restricting? What's the worst that can happen? The card becomes moderately usable in the late game?
I do wonder if I've done enough, though. It ever bother anyone else that this card doesn't cost
? I mean, not the way either version is printed... I just mean it bothers me that any Thopter costs anything besides 
. It's like making a Kobold that costs 
. Seems wrong somehow. I suppose I could re-add the restriction... but that seems wrong, too.
It's annoying when Melvin and Vorthos fight.
Original Card: Roterothopter
Part of a cycle, including Merchant Scroll, Merchant Shears, Merchant Scales, Sylvan Scrying and Drudge Scrying. This card raises my hackles, what with it being a Raise Dead stapled onto an Entomb. Sounds strong. But at least this card is far more restrictive, not allowing you to dump Iona, Shield of Emeria or Bridge from Below in your graveyard.
Oh, right, yes, I forgot that pingers can be used to target players... when there aren't any creatures left on their side of the board...
My phrasing would technically work, but it does fail to spell out the thing you wanted to make very clear.
Edit: Whoops, I almost forgot why I did what I did. Doubling back.
The reason why I have it written the way I currently have it, is because I wanted to make sure that people understood Reveka stayed tapped for a turn no matter how you use her. Your suggestion, Alex, technically requires more than words than what you wrote. Something along the line of "If you targeted a creature, that creature doesn't untap during its controller's next upkeep. Either way, Reveka doesn't untap during your next upkeep."
Seems wordy. Maybe their's an easier way of saying it. I admit, I'm too tired right now to think about it. To bed!
Suggested wording for the new clause: "That creature and Reveka don't untap during their controllers' next untap steps."
Stunning the target is very sensible if you're keeping the stun on Reveka herself. (Which is sensible, as dealing 2 damage to any target without a drawback is better than has been available at 4 mana before: Hatchet Bully, Tar Pitcher, and Heavy Arbalest all have some significant drawback.)
I have fond memories of Reveka in my Thousand-Year Elixir / Fatestitcher / Mangara of Corondor deck, but you're right that she shouldn't be monoblue.
Hmm. I think I overdid it with this card, making the kind of card I would like to see as opposed to the card that Root Spider should have been.
I get the +1/+2 thing. That's me removing first strike from a creature and replacing it with more appropriate stats. The flash and fight, though... I must have chosen them because they match the flavor of a hidden root spider, ready to lunge. Since neither flash or fight existed in 1995, I updated the card with modern keywords that match the flavor. But I didn't need both keywords. That's just overkill (neat as they are together.)
Hmm... and now I'm seeing another reason why I did what I did. Blocking trigger. This is yet another defensive card in an overly defensive set. I could make the card more natural by triggering fight on 'when ~ blocks', but that's just going to encourage more ground stalling. Etb bonus plus fight should be fine. Maybe a little more toughness on the bonus.
Original Card: Root Spider
- Added Flash
-
Changed trigger from blocking to an enter the battlefield. Now grants deathtouch.
-
Increased power by +1/+0.
Note: Originally, I gave this Flash and fight when it enters the battlefield. It was a bit much.
Even at rare or mythic, I couldn't let Reveka get away with dealing damage in blue. Save that for the Timespiral sets, but not normal Magic. But the fact that Reveka doesn't untap as normal, and that very blue artwork would suggest Reveka should be blue/red. And we needed to make this card a little better, so I added the bit about pinning creatures that Reveka can't kill.
Original Card Reveka, Wizard Savant
-
Changed casting cost from
to 
.
-
Now 'freezes' creatures being targeted.
-
Increased toughness from 1 to 3.
Retribution is a fun card. It shouldn't be destroying creatures if it doesn't have to, though. Seven damage is an arbitrary number, but I had to choose something. I made the card more splashable, because I'd like to see more and different decks use the spell.
Now that I think of it, though, I think I could have cut this down to
. Maybe I will if red isn't performing well.
Original card: Retribution
- Changed casting cost from
to 
.
-
Changed 'destroy' to 'deal 7 damage'.
Renewal
I do appreciate how many of the early cantrips were just little tools to help you out. By today's standards, however, it's missing its bite. Which is unfortunate, since the basic idea is pretty useful.
Original card: Renewal
- Reduced cost by
.
-
Removed sacrificing a land as a cost. Now it's a part of the resolution. Wish I could do the same to Harrow...
-
Changed from "Draw a card at the beginning of the next upkeep." to "Draw a card."
Don't mind me. Just making a card relevant over here.
Though, it occurs to me that I never switched 'damage' to 'combat damage'. Seems potentially broken. But maybe not really... I don't think any common combos are bound to pop up, and there are much easier ways to win the game, then to try to get these zombie pirates to ping from a distance 9 or so times.
Original Card: Reef Pirates
Cards do use pronouns referring to themselves, but creatures always say "it" of themselves, which is quite annoying: Karn, Silver Golem, Jareth, Leonine Titan. Planeswalkers get to use personal pronouns - Garruk Relentless says "him", as does Sarkhan the Mad and both Gideons. But that is a convention that custom card makers diverge from deliberately fairly often, especially for legends.
As for text size, the only problem is that you're trying to include the flavour text as well. 7 lines of rules text is fine, but not with flavour text too.
Also change to "any number of black creatures, plus one additional creature..." That wasn't my intent, but it will at least clear up confusion.
Also, another product of "Looked fine while zoomed in. Text seems a bit small now." Consider the first two lines combined into "Rashka the slayer can block any number of black creatures, and may block black creatures with flying, intimidate and/or landwalk as if they did not have those abilities."
Also noticed, when making this card, that cards never use pronouns when referring to themselves. I kinda wanted to write "Whenever Rashka blocks, she gets...", but instead I was forced into writing her full title, then using the word 'Rashka' as if it was a pronoun, itself.
So, a few things. White shouldn't really get reach just because it has archers. But if the point is that Rashka refuses to let black creatures past her, then I can dig that. In order to hammer home that concept, I also tacked on the other two common methods of black evasion.
Two, if Rashka is now going to be picky about the type of creatures she can hunt, there's no real reason to double down and maker her picky about which creatures give her the bonus.
Three, it saddens me to see the line "Whenever Rashka the Slayer blocks one or more black creatures, Rashka gets +1/+2 until end of turn." If she somehow was able to block two creatures, she should get the bonus twice. Normal Bushido makes sense on commons, but she's a rare, and should act like one.
Four, if she's going to get a bonus for each creature she blocks, she might as well get an ability that lets her block multiple creatures in odd situations. Again, Rashka won't let any black creatures get past her, so doubling down on that here makes sense.