Cards With No Home

Cards With No Home by Alex

575 cards in Multiverse

57 with no rarity, 80 commons, 159 uncommons,
210 rares, 67 mythics, 1 basic, 1 token

6 colourless, 56 white, 87 blue, 77 black, 59 red, 50 green,
113 multicolour, 16 hybrid, 6 split, 40 artifact, 64 land, 1 plane

1456 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

Cardset comments (9) | Add a comment on this cardset

The set creator would like to draw your attention to these comments:

On Fervor Stoker (reply):

How's this for a take on red card advantage? Is it legitimately red? It's just a Mad Prophet with built-in Illusionist's Bracers, after all :)

Recently active cards: (all recent activity)

Choose one: Until end of turn, you gain control of target permanent and it gains haste; or target player sacrifices a permanent.
Entwine {w/g}{b}
last 2014-11-25 17:10:09 by Alex
Choose one: Target creature gains deathtouch until end of turn; or target creature you control fights another target creature.
Entwine {b} (Choose both if you pay the entwine cost.)
last 2014-11-25 17:06:52 by Alex
Enchantment – Aura
Enchant Creature

Gain control of enchanted creature. At the beginning of your upkeep discard a card. If you can't sacrifice the enchanted creature.
last 2014-11-22 17:27:34 by Jack V
Enhantment – Aura
Enchant Creature
When enchanted creature deals damage to a player, its controller sacrifices it; then they may fetch a creature costing exactly {2} more to the battlefield. If they do, attach War Plan to it.
1 comment
2014-11-22 18:08:31 by Vitenka
Legendary Creature – Human Druid
{1}{g}: Target creature gains deathtouch until end of turn. Regenerate that creature.
{2}{g}: Target creature you control fights target creature you don't control.
last 2014-11-22 08:21:36 by Alex

Recent comments: (all recent activity)
On Peculiar Ultimatum:

­Catch // Release shows Wizards' take on this idea. They made you need {u}{r}{w} to get both halves at once.

On Peculiar Savagery:

True - that's the whole idea of the Peculiar family. Either half of this, or either half of Peculiar Putrefication, is fine in green; but green (and blue) aren't meant to directly get removal in a single card, so the combinations are nongreen. Peculiar Ultimatum demonstrates that even the ultimate colour pie bugbear, red enchantment destruction, is possible with combinations of red effects, but they absolutely shouldn't be on the same mono-red card.

But there's a risk, when you design a bunch of custom cards, that you start exploring things just because you can. I did it with Thoughtwisp. That's what MaRo was talking about when he said

The end goal of design is to make something for the audience. Not to show how clever you are as a designer. When you start showing off what you can do as a designer, I think you tend to do a disservice to the audience.

On Peculiar Savagery:

This isn't mono color. Green can do both halves and black can do the combination, so this is pretty good.

On Peculiar Savagery:

As I mentioned on Kamahl, Beastmaster, Maro says they wouldn't do this on monogreen. He elaborates more in his podcast on meeting expectations:

One of the things you can do in design is you can take the tools of a color to do things it’s not supposed to do. For example, I could make a sorcery that makes a 1/1 token with deathtouch, that when it comes into play, fights target creature. All those are green. Green can make tokens, green can have deathtouch, green can fight.

Okay. Now, let me walk through what that does. If I do this, I’m going to play it. Barring a zero-power creature, I’m going to kill whatever creature the thing fights, and my 1/1 is going to die. So essentially I have a spell that kills a creature.

Now, some people are like, “Okay, green can do A, green can do B, green can do C, good to go.” And I’m like, “No, no, we’re not good to go.” The goal of a designer is not to outwit his tools. Remember. The end goal of design is to make something for the audience. Not to show how clever you are as a designer.

When you start showing off what you can do as a designer, I think you tend to do a disservice to the audience.

This applies to the whole Peculiar family, really. They're a lot of fun as explorations of concepts, and they can teach us something as designers exploring implications of mechanics, but they're not the kind of thing to actually put in a real set.

On Iago's Coaxing:

Yeah, 1UB sounds good to me. It tells quite a story with the mechanics.

On Iago's Coaxing:

I don't know the flavor here, but it had definitely driven you to make a card that is not mono-blue.

On Kamahl, Beastmaster:

Heh. Maro says this kind of thing is "something we try to avoid doing on monocolour cards". For good reason, really.

On Iago's Coaxing:

I got rid of the ability to discard being optional.

The creature needs to be sacrificed for flavor reasons, so it can't be just the aura getting sacrificed. I could make the card {1}{u}{b} instead and keep it optional.

On Iago's Coaxing:

You sacrifice the enchanted creature instead of the Aura? That makes it essentially a blue Murder with upside, and that isn't something that belongs in blue.

On Desolating Tyrant:
See other cardsets