|
CardName: Charisma Cost: 3rr Type: Creature - Incarnation Pow/Tgh: 4/4 Rules Text: Whenever a creature blocks or becomes blocked by Charisma, gain control of that creature for as long as you control Charisma. {3}{R}: Target creature attacks or blocks if able this turn, and you choose how. Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: Multiverse Design Challenge Mythic |
History: [-] Add your comments: |
Created for Challenge # 156. I imagine this as something like Enthralling Victor++.
Doesn't really need the "and you choose how" clause, as on Brutal Hordechief/Master Warcraft. But it makes it more mythic. Might make it less fun though.
Also, don't the rules break down if you choose how some creatures block, but not all? Maybe just make it "target creature blocks target creature if able" or something like that?
I like it! It's a good interpretation of a concept that might otherwise be hard to put into Magic.
I'm a little surprised you didn't include an evergreen keyword on this or Posterity, since barring Personal Incarnation, Genesis was the only incarnation to not have. Well Guile has some weird some weird menace+1, but that seems to be a nerf to unblockable, which seems in spirit with the evergreen keywords.
*shrug*. I don't think "having an evergreen keyword" is a vital part of the identity of "being an Incarnation".
Now when Incarnations are in a tight cycle, then sure, having an evergreen keyword helps to simultaneously tie the cycle together and distinguish them. That was presumably why Purity/Guile/Dread/Hostility/Vigor (all 3MMM 6/6) had their keyword. And obviously keyword abilities were key to the entire Valor/Wonder/Filth/Anger/Brawn tight cycle (all 3M 2/2 except green gets +1/+1).
But Glory and Genesis didn't have a particular reason to have an ability; I imagine Glory had flying just for skeleton/dev reasons ("the ability wants to be on a 5-drop, we don't want it to be bigger than 3/3 - give it some simple ability"; or "the art came back looking like it flies - give it flying").
(Personal Incarnation doesn't really count, as it only acquired the Incarnation type later via errata; it wasn't designed as "an Incarnation" in the sense of Challenge # 156.)
So the question really is "did Alex intend his creations to be part of a tight cycle?" And the answer is clearly no. Certainly not with each other - it'd be practically impossible for a mythic and an uncommon to be in a tight cycle with each other. And I didn't even envisage them within separate tight cycles. Posterity's 2/4 stats don't lend themselves to a tight cycle either; and mythics in cycles tend to have a strong flavour tie to the set they're in, and I can't quite imagine a set where incarnations like Charisma here are vital elements to the story and flavour and setting.