I know that the reminder text doesn't really make sense. Oh well.

Pretty awesome idea. It's like P/T switching, but inflicted on anything this gets into combat with. Although it's got a little bit of infect to it in that damage from this doesn't work together with damage from other creatures or burn spells. Though I guess burn spells could have this ability too...

I was thinking really hard about other ways to mess up combat that didn't involve actually changing P/T. Unfortunately the rules don't exactly accommodate this right now, but I think it's understandable (if a bit complex) and that the rules could potentially accommodate it.
Interesting points:
• It could appear on noncreatures.
• It makes most Walls and a lot of creatures with defender easy to kill... Which is already one of red's things.
• When combined with blue -X/-0 effects, it turns them into removal.

I like Faze and I need to come up with a rules-sensible way to word the reminder text. I think what it says now is easily comprehensible, but it's not really accurate. Perhaps "Damage this deals considers a creature's power rather than toughness when determining lethal damage."

"This creature deals lethal damage if it deals damage equal to or higher than the damaged creature's power."

(If this creature has dealt damage to a creature this turn, use the other creature's power instead of its toughness to determine if it's taken enough damage to be destroyed.)

As an alternative, you could do something like this:

"Target creature gets -2/-0 until end of turn. Then, if that creature's power is less than 1, destroy it."

I know red doesn't normally get power reduction. But blue doesn't normally get direct damage. And this certainly simplifies the problem in a way more Magic players would be able to digest...

Oh, sorry. I just realized his was a creature (my mind converted this to a Shock.) I guess it reduces power instead of dealing damage? I admit, the timing of this is unfortunate...

I like SadisticMystic and Circeus's suggestions. Mystic, I'm pretty sure lethal damage can be referenced in reminder text. You suggestion has a difference from the intent and current implementation, in that your version makes all damage apply to toughness.

Jmgariepy, I'm having a hard time sorting through your comment. What do you mean about the timing?

If you went with my suggestion, there would be an unintuitive bit when dealing with combat damage. The defending creature (assuming Liquid Doubt is the attacker) would simultaneously deal damage and reduce in power. I think most people would know what to do, but it wouldn't sit well with some... especially those who would think of the mechanic as a single card bombo ("It could have reduced damage before damage is dealt. Then the card would be so much better!")

I'm wondering if SadisticMystic has the right idea about Faze unifying all damage dealt to a creature. It's perhaps confusing to have a 4/4 with two damage and two "faze damage" marked on it and not dying.

Possible faze rewording: "Use power rather than toughness to determine whether a creature dealt damage by this has been dealt lethal damage this turn."

I'm still not happy with the reminder text for faze. I don't think the concept is that complex, but maybe I'm wrong.

I didn't realise it didn't work like that, I think the current implementation, while not perfect, is a lot clearer than it was. And maybe some minor tweaks will make it shorter and clearer.

And I realise you were trying to ignore this, but would it work to change it so it DOES swap P/T?

That seems more complicated to me, personally, since then you have to think about layers and all that. But perhaps it's not.

Maybe "... To determine lethal damage to a creature dealt damage this turn by a source with faze."

The new Godzilla card has the inverse of faze!

Godzilla just gives all your opponents' cards faze

Indeed.

Did anyone in the world think that we would ever see Godzilla printed on a Magic card?

If I'd realised Hasbro owns the Godzilla property, I would have expected it. After Transformers, D&D and My Little Pony, it was only a matter of time. But since I hadn't realised that - no, it caught me completely by surprise. I find it amazing that there's a black-bordered card with "Bio-Quartz Spacegodzilla" in the name box. (Even if it's not technically "named" that.)

They don't. Godzilla is owned by Toho, so Wizards licensed the rights

Oh wow, I misunderstood. Gosh, so this is just a licensing deal. Wow. In principle the exact same thing could be done with Batman, Totoro or Spongebob Squarepants then. Yikes.

Or Batman, Toronto AND SpongeBob! :)

When I first saw some of the alternative names I was confused, I couldn't remember if the name was actually from somewhere else or if I was imagining it. But Godzilla obviously was. Interesting to compare to the Godzilla cards on multiverse :)

Toho is notoriously stingy with the way it protects its right, too. There's a ruling in the Japanese courts that says that all Japanese movies made before... 1976? 1975?.. somewhere around there... are in the public domain. Except for Roshamon and the Godzilla series. Toho spent millions in their lawsuit to maintain control of something they should not legally own.

So yeah. If Hasbro can work with Toho, they can work with anyone. Expect to see a Duel Deck of Sailor Moon versus Dragonball sometime soon. [Shrug emoji]

Toho is also super into crossovers, though, as long as you go through them properly

Studio Ghibli magic cards!?

This reminds of the fact that I answered one of the questions on a Great Designer Search by saying they should make special crossover cards and sets to promote the brand.