Compared with Phantasmal Image I think this should cost or . Blue gets the "ghostly" flavour too - there's no need for white in the mana cost just because of the word "ghost" in the name.
Before we can answer that I think we first need to understand: why is there a lot of land destruction in the set? I assume you aren't intending to make a Ponza-style deck with 8+ 3-mana LD options viable. So why does the set have all this land destruction?
From how you said you're making these cards, I might guess the answer is something like "because a lot of events in the book map to land destruction in Magic terms". Okay, if you want the feeling of playing with this set to involve a lot of events that feel like lands being destroyed, I guess that's fair enough. In which case I think it's fine for there to be a number of lands with hexproof (at a bit of a higher power level than this one). Given Blossoming Sands, I'd say an Elfhame Palace with hexproof would be just fine.
Hee, it's Sabotage creatures! I playtested that ability a little and it's pretty fun. Yes, this looks like a sensible set of fixes to the mechanic.
The underlying creature is surprisingly strong though. Black would be happy with a 3/2 first strike for without any other effect... heck, red was happy with Halberdier, so getting a 4/3 first strike for even with a fiddly condition seems very good. I'd suggest base stats of 2/2 here would still be fine.
I designed exactly this as Shore Leave and I wasn't sure at the time but I still like it: it seems like a combination which is going to be exactly what you want some of the time.
Ooh. Okay, any land. Sylvan Scrying onto the battlefield. Nice. Green does get to do that, occasionally - Reap and Sow, Primeval Titan - but it makes sense that to do it this cheaply it'd need help from another colour.
+1/+1 counters can be in all colours. (Rage Forger, Markov Blademaster etc). Putting a +1/+1 counter on everything is... normally white, possibly green, but primarily fiddly. Put charge counters or growth counters on this card instead, and then say "All creatures get +X/+X, where X is the number of charge counters on ~." (Though that won't work after this gets destroyed... hmm... maybe make the "destroy ~" effect also say "put X +1/+1 counters on each creature".)
Preventing things from attacking until a condition is met is not normally red. (Though individual red creatures can certainly not bother attacking until a condition is met: Slumbering Dragon, Goblin Mutant etc.)
I think this would be better as a white card though. White is very much a colour of armies and battles, war and warcraft, and "building up to a final apocalyptic conflict" is probably slightly more of a white concept than a red one. Plus mechanically you don't have to stretch to justify preventing combat in white.
Hm. I rather like this tweak on Sacred Nectar / Sun's Bounty. Tapping a creature is worth less than a card normally (see Niveous Wisps), but with a little lifegain stapled on too, this will sometimes be as good as Holy Day, and sometimes better. Two mediocre effects seem to add up to make a possibly-reasonable effect. Nice.
Ingenuity has a rating of 3 to 3.5 stars, which doesn't sound like it needs improving on to me. Sure, it's not going to break anything, but why push power creep if there's not a really compelling reason to do so? Power creep is an insidious danger that runs the risk of destroying the game. There are sensible applications of it, but in general it's to be treated extremely cautiously.
Yeah, red is definitely allowed 2/2 for . Every colour gets 2/2 for CC - the Izzet Guildmage cycle provides precedent there, though even blue had it from much earlier in Lord of Atlantis. But red and blue don't get 2/2 for / without a drawback. (Frazzled Editor is pretty weird like that. Who knew Un-sets had better vanillas than anywhere else?)
Oh... while we're talking exceptions, I guess I should also mention Lore Seeker. Which can be played in any deck as a Grizzly Bear (that can be Shattered). Because the Conspiracy team decided it wasn't going to break Legacy like that, which is after all true.
I'm aware. It's a very good card.
The default way to appraise sets on Multiverse is to assume the user is utilizing the modern color pie and creating a set that might appear in Standard rotation. Wizards doesn't like to print efficient removal at common anymore because they believe it makes limited better.
Because CC is allowed to have more powerful cards than 1C, since it requires more color commitment and therefore is more difficult to cast. A bear is by definition a vanilla 2/2 creature for 1C, and red does not get that.
Compared with Phantasmal Image I think this should cost
or 
. Blue gets the "ghostly" flavour too - there's no need for white in the mana cost just because of the word "ghost" in the name.
Before we can answer that I think we first need to understand: why is there a lot of land destruction in the set? I assume you aren't intending to make a Ponza-style deck with 8+ 3-mana LD options viable. So why does the set have all this land destruction?
From how you said you're making these cards, I might guess the answer is something like "because a lot of events in the book map to land destruction in Magic terms". Okay, if you want the feeling of playing with this set to involve a lot of events that feel like lands being destroyed, I guess that's fair enough. In which case I think it's fine for there to be a number of lands with hexproof (at a bit of a higher power level than this one). Given Blossoming Sands, I'd say an Elfhame Palace with hexproof would be just fine.
Hee, it's Sabotage creatures! I playtested that ability a little and it's pretty fun. Yes, this looks like a sensible set of fixes to the mechanic.
The underlying creature is surprisingly strong though. Black would be happy with a 3/2 first strike for
without any other effect... heck, red was happy with Halberdier, so getting a 4/3 first strike for 
even with a fiddly condition seems very good. I'd suggest base stats of 2/2 here would still be fine.
Same applies to Kull Bloodrager.
I designed exactly this as Shore Leave and I wasn't sure at the time but I still like it: it seems like a combination which is going to be exactly what you want some of the time.
Ooh. Okay, any land. Sylvan Scrying onto the battlefield. Nice. Green does get to do that, occasionally - Reap and Sow, Primeval Titan - but it makes sense that to do it this cheaply it'd need help from another colour.
+1/+1 counters can be in all colours. (Rage Forger, Markov Blademaster etc). Putting a +1/+1 counter on everything is... normally white, possibly green, but primarily fiddly. Put charge counters or growth counters on this card instead, and then say "All creatures get +X/+X, where X is the number of charge counters on ~." (Though that won't work after this gets destroyed... hmm... maybe make the "destroy ~" effect also say "put X +1/+1 counters on each creature".)
Preventing things from attacking until a condition is met is not normally red. (Though individual red creatures can certainly not bother attacking until a condition is met: Slumbering Dragon, Goblin Mutant etc.)
I think this would be better as a white card though. White is very much a colour of armies and battles, war and warcraft, and "building up to a final apocalyptic conflict" is probably slightly more of a white concept than a red one. Plus mechanically you don't have to stretch to justify preventing combat in white.
Hm. I rather like this tweak on Sacred Nectar / Sun's Bounty. Tapping a creature is worth less than a card normally (see Niveous Wisps), but with a little lifegain stapled on too, this will sometimes be as good as Holy Day, and sometimes better. Two mediocre effects seem to add up to make a possibly-reasonable effect. Nice.
One thing: this should be common.
Yeah, I think this is okay in monoblack. It's a bit of a weird take on Mind Rot, but that's fine.
Ingenuity has a rating of 3 to 3.5 stars, which doesn't sound like it needs improving on to me. Sure, it's not going to break anything, but why push power creep if there's not a really compelling reason to do so? Power creep is an insidious danger that runs the risk of destroying the game. There are sensible applications of it, but in general it's to be treated extremely cautiously.
Yeah, red is definitely allowed 2/2 for
. Every colour gets 2/2 for CC - the Izzet Guildmage cycle provides precedent there, though even blue had it from much earlier in Lord of Atlantis. But red and blue don't get 2/2 for 
/ 
without a drawback. (Frazzled Editor is pretty weird like that. Who knew Un-sets had better vanillas than anywhere else?)
Oh... while we're talking exceptions, I guess I should also mention Lore Seeker. Which can be played in any deck as a Grizzly Bear (that can be Shattered). Because the Conspiracy team decided it wasn't going to break Legacy like that, which is after all true.
Alright.
I'm aware. It's a very good card.
The default way to appraise sets on Multiverse is to assume the user is utilizing the modern color pie and creating a set that might appear in Standard rotation. Wizards doesn't like to print efficient removal at common anymore because they believe it makes limited better.
I still don't see how it's white, but alongside Rite of Replication, it now looks alright.
This is a green card, I think, in mechanics and flavor. I also wouldn't argue heavily against white. It's not blue.
This is ridiculously good red removal. It's better than Path to Exile, which is some of the best removal in Modern.
I'll concede the point about flavor, but it's still a mono-white card mechanically.
Because CC is allowed to have more powerful cards than 1C, since it requires more color commitment and therefore is more difficult to cast. A bear is by definition a vanilla 2/2 creature for 1C, and red does not get that.