Ankheret: Recent Activity
| Ankheret: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Skeleton | Draft Archetypes | Story | Design Principles | Artwork Repository | Gods |
Recent updates to Ankheret: (Generated at 2025-05-01 09:11:34)
Is there any reason it needs to say "damage equal to its power" rather than just "2 damage"? Opponents using their Giant Growths to get extra burn that way can't be a very frequent use case.
But sure they can still be common, given things like Vampire Lacerator and Loyal Pegasus.
2-power 1-drops aren't common any more. Imagine someone curving out with 3 of these by turn 2.
+art
I like this. Reminds me of Riot Piker, with a slightly different drawback. Probably better than Riot Piker since if an attack is bad this can just not attack and block as a Goblin Piker rather than suiciding, which makes this pretty strong, but probably not excessively so.
At its most basic, this effects has a minimal cost of
, and even at common often gets a bonus (Rain of Embers, Shrivel, Scouring Sands, Yamabushi's Storm). I suspect about 
or 
more for the scaling life gain is about right (cf. Blunt the Assault).
Gaining N life for each creature is pretty cheap (especially in white), but life gain incidental to other effects has proven many times before that it is not all that innocent, especially where it can scale.
Blood Tithe is a common, although it's a card where the lifegain becomes significantly better in multiplayer than in 1v1. I'm not sure which rarity it would be at, but I think it would probably cost more.
Should black have this effect at common? We know that dealing 1 damague to everything is fine at common (Barrage of Boulders and Dry Spell for example), but I'm wondering if the lifegain makes it too swingy for common.
This is a new possible version of the Expedition cycle at common (see Royal Palace for the previous version). The basic ideas of this redesign are:
All lands at common have the same bonus, to help reduce complexity. At uncommon or higher, the expedition can give other rewards.
They no longer ETB tapped. So even if you're running a UG expedition deck, you might still want to grab the red expedition land in draft.
It's not as good at mana fixing as it was before, to balance the fact they enter untapped.
Less words.
redesigned
702.XX Worship
702.XXa Worship represents two abilities, a triggered ability and a static ability. "Worship" means "Whenever a non-Human creature enters the battlefield, you may pay this permanent's worship cost. If you do, put a +1/+1 counter on that non-Human creature" and "This permanent's worship cost is 'tap this permanent'."
702.XXb "Worshiping" on a permanent refers to paying that permanent's worship cost.
702.XXc If worshiping doesn't cause a permanent to tap, its controller must ignore all "tap this permanent" costs when paying for its worship cost.
702.XXd If a permanent has multiple instances of worship, each triggers separately.
Using "Worship[p]ing" as a verb for a keyword action, the effect of which another ability then modifies, is a pretty unusual situation.
What doesn't work about it?
It's a custom set. As long as it doesn't conflict with the existing rules, I can make anything work the way I want.
The way I read it was that it could only renew onto preexisting 0/0 spirit tokens, not that it created them.
+new name
Reminder text doesn't need to be exact; it's fine to use slightly more informal language as long as the meaning is understood. The template you proposed would be the full rules for renew in the Comprehensive Rules.
Use the last ability to return the god to your hand then cast it again once you have enough creatures to worship him and he can remain a creature. No need for putting +1/+1 counters on enchantments.
The boosters are supposed to contain a "map card" (similar to the checklist cards) which you can use to keep track of your current destination by placing a bead or whatever. Here's a mockup reddit user /u/Skaarg_Guildgeek made.