Cards With No Home

Cards With No Home by Alex

2392 cards in Multiverse

563 with no rarity, 261 commons, 573 uncommons,
737 rares, 250 mythics, 4 basics, 4 tokens

1 token black, 1 colourless blue, 1 token red, 1 token artifact, 39 colourless, 292 white, 347 blue, 235 black, 271 red,
230 green, 531 multicolour, 68 hybrid, 21 split, 167 artifact, 183 land, 2 scheme, 2 plane

5320 comments total

Cards that don't fit into our actual themed sets. Open to all: throw your random ideas in here, or come along for some random ideas for your set.

Cards With No Home: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity
Mechanics | Other non-themed cardsets | Skeleton

Cardset comments (20) | Add a comment on this cardset

Recently active cards: (all recent activity)

 R 
Sorcery
Destroy all creatures. Then, if {b}{b}{b} was spent to cast Cleansing Wrath, transfrom it. Otherwise, exile all cards from all graveyards afterward.
Necromancy's Temptation
 
 R 
Sorcery
Return target creature or planeswalker from each player's graveyard to the battlefield.
3 comments
last 2020-02-25 15:42:39 by Sorrow
 R 
Creature – Something Cleric
Whenever a spell is countered, return that card to it's owner's hand
Whims come and go. The devil yesterday may be an angel tomorrow.
2/2
3 comments
last 2020-02-18 13:57:09 by Izaac
Creaature – Beast
Feral (When this spell resolves no player controls it. It untaps every turn, and attacks a defending player at random every turn).
3/3
1 comment
2020-02-17 17:36:33 by SecretInfiltrator
Legendary Artifact
Each player can cast spells only any time they could cast a sorcery.
If only he survived to see his success
Instant
Target player sacrifices a spell.

Retort (Discard a card: Put this spell at the top of the stack. Any player may activate this ability)
4 comments
last 2020-01-25 11:08:42 by SecretInfiltrator

Recent comments: (all recent activity)
On Cleansing Wrath:

Makes sense Alex. I was just trying to see if a dfc instant/ sorcery could justifiable exist. Ultimately, this is a just ended up being an exploratory adamant with extra steps.

On Cleansing Wrath:

I agree with Alex - this is clunky as a DC and the rules as is don't support it afaik.

Perhaps alternatively an aftermath would be proper for this? Ala Dusk // Dawn type of deal.

On Cleansing Wrath:

It feels to be this would be easier to understand if it wasn't a DFC. It also has the problem of needing targets in the back side that were never chosen. Unless the intended meaning of transform on an instant or sorcery is "transform, choose targets if necessary, and all players get a chance to respond including with countermagic"?

On Collector of Spurns:

I guess you could use it in that way. And that it should probably specify what the source of the countering is

On Thrashing Runac:

Since you are giving up control of the creature, shouldn't it be something more than a Centaur Courser that might come back to bite you?

How about at least a cantrip or "Whenever ~ attacks a player other than its owner that player sacrifices an artifact."?

On Collector of Spurns:

So this is Aura-deck tech against 2-for-1s, right?

On Collector of Spurns:

Kinda like Grand Abolisher but doesn't shut off half as much stuff. Additionally, it doesn't STOP counterspells it just makes them bad. Obviously a strong hate piece against counterspells but doesn't do anything to aggressive or tap-out control decks.

On Choice Denial:

The thing is this: Black already ventured into the counterspell business with Dash Hopes. So using that template (also seen on Temporal Extortion), I'd rather see

When you cast this spell, any player may discard two cards. If a player does, counter ~.
Counter target spell.

than anything with retort. It's just a complicated way to do something straightforward. Actually I'd rather see

Counter target spell unless its controller/any player discards two cards.

than see the Planar Chaos template return, but that's a matter of WotC themselves being to high-concept IMO.

The spell is just too rarely populated to make "Target player sacrifices a spell." a color's "thing". It's too narrow.

I don't think every innovation into these directions is bad, but these two don't seem too pull the weight necessary to justify expanding terminology and adding keyword mechanics.

After all that's probably why his is a Card With No Home: That home is either in a Future Sight style set as a preprint that never gets expanded upon or in a set that somehow justifies more use of retort... I can imagine the first, but the second... tough order.

On Choice Denial:

There's been talk of how blue shouldn't have complete dominance over counterspells and this is an example of how that could be remedied. Sacrifice is blacks wording so that's why I used it

Retort is a different mechanic that I thought would be cool here. If you've only got one spell on the stack, you could cast an opt or something, then activate retort in order to sac your little spell.

On Choice Denial:

Sacrifice effects usually state who has to control the object.

Even so "puts a spell [they control] into its owner's graveyard", "counters a spell [they control]", "exiles a spell [they control]" all work nicely.

Doesn't make retort any better a mechanic or this any less of a bend of the color pie.

(All recent activity)
See other cardsets