Homelands Restored: Recent Activity
| Homelands Restored: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Skeleton |
Recent updates to Homelands Restored: (Generated at 2025-08-06 23:43:03)
| Homelands Restored: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Skeleton |
Recent updates to Homelands Restored: (Generated at 2025-08-06 23:43:03)
Also, note to self: Put Dwarven Gate on another card's flavor text so players know this wasn't a random choice.
Original card based on a location mentioned only in the Homelands comic. There are only two sentences in MTGSalvation on the Dwarven Gate, so I'm just going to copy/paste them here:
"The Dwarven Gate was a planar portal beneath Castle Sengir that led from Ulgrotha to an unknown plane. Baron Sengir wished to conquer Ulgrotha, then march his troops through the portal to take whatever was on the other side."
I tried to give this flavor of 'first my kingdom, then yours'. It's probably not a perfect match, but I like how defensive and aggressive decks would use it in different ways, so I'm cool with it.
Fair enough. I gave the creature restrictions to make it efficient, then nerfed the creature because I was afraid of the thing I restricted.
Hmm. Do you really think we can get away with a bear? It seems much too good to me. But I got to admit that I like when cards encourage you to go G/W. It's the combination that needs strong gold cards to act as an excuse for playing the most overlapping mechanics. Bear it is.
To be honest, I made it 'U, T:' partially because I miss Apprentice Wizard, and partially because it makes it 'look' better, thus making it 'feel more rare'.
The more I've been thinking about this card, though, the more I've been thinking that it wouldn't hurt for the bonuses to be +2 and +5, respectively. I mean, maybe that's too good, but I should let playtesting inform that, not fear. That, and it gives me an excuse to keep the blue in the activation cost... it makes it so the first ability remains a smidgeon worse than Renowned Weaponsmith's first ability.
It made sense to me. Though certainly if it was more unique in some way it'd be more interesting.
On second look, I notice that I'd not realised there was mana in the cost, so this is effectively +1 and +4. I think I liked +2 and +5 more, since you're fairly restricted what you can spend it on. Would that be too good?
And in general, I don't like, "U->2" abilities just because people can get muddled about how much they net (tho' I agree they're common, they certainly don't need to be avoided). Is it necessary, or would just "T" cost be equally good?
Mm. I added the first ability so Baki could, you know, do something ... assuming that sacrificing auras for artifacts was something that would pop up rarely even when you built around him. But maybe I got a little too restrictive and should have let
become 
like an artificer Apprentice Wizard.
Still... it'd kind of be a shame if people felt they didn't need to activate the second ability because there wasn't such dramatic a boost... they could just wait to get a couple more lands. And I don't think it's wise to go higher than +4 mana unless I really ramp up Baki...
Hmpf. That first ability is supposed to be underwhelming. But I'm not sure if keeping it that way is a sign of good design, or bad design.
The second ability is rather cool and extremely flavourful. The first one not so much - seems rather bad compared to Renowned Weaponsmith.
I wouldn't worry about the art. You could apply filters to wash it out and blur the lines if you're really bothered by it :P
I like this. The double restriction does seem very harsh though (plus being a 4-mana 2/2). Compare Thunderfoot Baloth or Pathbreaker Ibex, or of course Kamahl, Fist of Krosa.
When I read the text box here my thought process was something like "Ooh, activated Overrun, albeit without trample. But they don't untap - okay, fair enough, Overrun needs to be game-winning if you're going to bother with it anyway. Only at sorcery speed? Hmm, I guess that lets this creature be smaller or more efficient. So this is what, a bear? ...No wait, a 4-mana 2/2? Ew."
Tapping to granting vigilance reminds me of the awful Oracle text on Johan. But something simpler like "
, 
: Creatures you control gain vigilance UEOT. ~ doesn't untap next untap step" sounds good.
No, that seems fine. Change "the defending player" to "target opponent" and we're all good.
I mean, a 2/4 vigilance with upside at 3 mana is moderately pushed anyway. But it's not like we're talking Brimaz levels here.
Note to self: I need to make some value auras if this card and Baki's Curse are to make sense in the same set. I know I put Flight of Fancy in this set for that purpose, but I could use some variety over here. Something to think about in the uncommon spot.
Original card.
Baki seems to like artifacts, between the Workshop Gnomes and Roterothopter's flavor text. Baki's Curse infers he's not fond of auras. I ended up with this.
Original Card.
The Abbey Matrons seemed too violent for white. Red/White it is.
I wanted Gulsen to have an ability that worked with Abbey Matron. This is only a mild boost to her tribe, and it's unlikely they would end up working together, what with the Matrons being inefficient even in my update. Still, the thought is there, I suppose.
The obvious choice for Gulsen was to take the alt. art for Abbey Matron, which I did. But the alt. flavor text wouldn't work since both flavor texts are spoken by a third party, and refer to Matrons in general. So I decided to give Gulsen flavor that acts like a response to an event that must have happened due to Halina's flavor text:
"The Matrons are kindly souls, but don't ask one for an ale." —Halina, Dwarven Trader
I will say, though, that I like how this creature, Reveka, and Samite Alchemist all seem to work together. I might need to stick another card in this mechanic. Maybe a creature that taps to grant vigilance but doesn't untap next turn? Or make a blue creature that untaps creatures, but skips...
Original Card.
So, a few notes...
- I wanted to have a cycle of 10 gold cards, but have barely scratched that goal. There's also too many white Legends in this set, and this ability could be both White or Green... so G/W it is.
- I really don't like giving a double restriction. But it seems necessary considering the mechanic. I want the ability to be used every other turn, not threaten to be used, but never activated (as an aside, I was planning on moving this card to blue, but I just couldn't think of a good ability that was dramatic enough to warrant the 'every other turn' clause. I mean, seeing how Reveka, Wizard Savant was already using the obvious choice. I suppose I could have granted flying and +1/+1.)
- This art is... unfortunately too good? It doesn't jive with the rest of the set. I could swap it for a male human alchemist with closer approximate art... but I don't know. I'd prefer this card to be an Elf Cleric if I'm to tie it together...
Oh, no, "defending" should say "target opponent". I'm not sure if that was leftover text as I was manipulating the card, or just a strange quirk of playing too many different games with different rules in my life.
This is supposed to be done at any time... which I admit probably makes the card too pushed. Or maybe not? It's admittedly best when your opponent has and keeps one card in hand. How long is your opponent going to just sit there with one card and let Baris roll them?
Oh yes, wait, what? I like this a lot, I think it's a good inquisitor design. But I missed that ambiguity, I just assumed it could be used at any time and meant "an opponent". Activating when this attacks would also make sense, but then probably should could attacking creatures not tapped creatures.
Reads a bit oddly, because there's no sign you have to activate it during combat except for "defending player" in the middle of the text.
Intentional that you can use this while you're defending player? I assume so?
Original card. I'm not really sure what I want to do with Baris, but this placeholder card I left behind seems to get the job done, even if it isn't perfect. The flavor of inquisition matched with a Cleric and/or Knight theme works for me. Just wish it did more for Serra Inquisitor than "works well with Clerics".
Wish these guys had flavor text. Guess I'll have to make it myself, someday.
Enough with the anti-Black in this set. These Inquistors will rebel against anything. Except artifacts creatures. That seems like a good defense.
Tiny URL! Why didn't I think of that. Silly me. Oh, and thank you for editing, Alex. I'll take care of my own messes in the future. :)
In my mind, in order for this to be a true rare, it needs to be bigger than Howl of the Night Pack, otherwise it compares oddly. But I suppose I could just go for efficiency instead. I think I can draw this card down to a 5/5 for
with the same ability (albeit, with one human per Forest.) Anybody want to throw in a deciding vote? Tournament worthy, or absurd EDH monster?
And yes, this does seem somewhat overboard :) I think 6 mana rather than 8 and one token per Forest rather than two would be both more sensible and more useful.
Um. TBH I think that URL is longer than it has any business being :P Especially given that things like tinyurl.com exist.