Cards With No Home: Recent Activity
| Cards With No Home: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Other non-themed cardsets | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Cards With No Home: (Generated at 2025-05-06 03:27:05)
Well.. sorta. It's gonna be very hard to use this to hexproof your own creature. Usually it's be "Ok, so.. your creature is damaged and about to gain hexproof? I finish it off!"
It's more "Shock with potential downside"
Also a "device" ought to be an artifact, or a creature really; not an instant. And now, trying to find a way to verb this, I come up with "Goblin Cloaking" followed by "Goblin Cloak" - which should ALSO grant damage and hexproof, and we have the wonderful image of a haplass adventurer hiding under a pile of goblins; all gleefully piling on.
I don't know where I was going with this comment, really. But yeah; this is taking away one of blue's things. The Goblin Balloon Brigade already went there, though.
Red hexproof? :(
I love the concept of this :) But yeah, it wouldn't normally be printed like this, I'm not sure if it's ok or not.
I think the ability you suggested sounds more problematic in that remembering to deal the damage at the end of the turn rather than remembering the creature has hexproof for the remainder of the turn. The idea came for a twist on simple red instant that dealt damage, and into my mind came the idea for something that could cause a problem for the caster when used on an opponent's creature (in this case it would be if they buffed the creature) so that it couldn't be further burned. It also gains the benefit then of using it on one of your creatures, presumably something big that it'll take damage to gain hexproof, which I think is red, or at least I can see the classic MtG goblins doing that.
I feel like this is too close to just being a Shock, not a bad hexproof granter. What about "Target creature gains hexproof until end of turn. At the beginning of the next end step, ~ deals 2 damage to it."? Of course, granting hexproof is a green and blue ability anyway.
Catch // Release shows Wizards' take on this idea. They made you need
to get both halves at once.
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.
This isn't mono color. Green can do both halves and black can do the combination, so this is pretty good.
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.
Probably templated badly - this is intended to be a limited number of upgrade steps, slightly more of those steps for artifacts - and also a blue removal by "You mutate into... oh, I guess you sublimed"
Yeah, 1UB sounds good to me. It tells quite a story with the mechanics.
I don't know the flavor here, but it had definitely driven you to make a card that is not mono-blue.
Heh. Maro says this kind of thing is "something we try to avoid doing on monocolour cards". For good reason, really.
I was talking about my Kurkesh, Onakke Ancient Commander deck, and said that when I've got Pentavus or Spawning Pit on the battlefield, Kurkesh is like having Doubling Season as your commander. Which naturally leads to wondering, how could you have Doubling Season as your commander? Okay, one could make enchantments that just say they can be commanders, since Daretti, Scrap Savant and friends have opened that floodgate. But I wanted to think of a character who'd lend himself to having a Doubling Season effect (in the same way Vorel of the Hull Clade has a Gilder Bairn effect), and naturally I remembered Riku of Two Reflections. I had been thinking the character would have to be green, but it didn't feel right to have Riku be focused more on green than on blue. So just like last time, he's a blue wizard who can use magic of two other colours to double up two different kinds of effect.
Building a
EDH deck you realise how all the blue-black legends from the past 15 years are all themed around milling. (I exaggerate slightly, but not by much.) They all go in the same deck. This is another card that can also go in that same deck.
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
instead and keep it optional.
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.
This is legendary for flavor. I think the ability could probably be uncommon but it's weird so it feels like it should be rare.
Also, since he has to get killed the card is a human rather than spirit.