CardName: Graceful Gargantuan Cost: 3GG Type: Creature - Beast Pow/Tgh: 4/4 Rules Text: Sublime (This enters the battlefield with a +1/+1 Aura token of all colors attached to it. It has enchant creature) {G}: Counter target spell that targets an permanent you control enchanted by an Aura you control, then sacrifice that Aura. Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: [Assorted] Card Repository Uncommon |
Code: History: [-] |
See Blessed Beast.
This whole experiment seems like it's moving in the wrong direction. These variations are becoming more and more complex instead of more simpler and/or elegant. Shouldn't it all be about "What is the absolute minimum version that will create the intended gameplay?"
Is an Aura that grants +1/1 more complex that an Aura that grants 1-shot hexproof? What is the intended gameplayb to you?
I ask because your comment seems to try to be helpful, but I cannot figure what the critical thought is.
Well, to me it seems that you're still iterating on Blessed Soldier. What I mean by wrong direction is that it started out as a fairly simple keyword with 4-line reminder text in Soldier. Now with this it has become a keyword with 3-line reminder + activated ability with 3 lines. Then there's this concept of "+1/+1 Aura token of all colors" that sounds kinda vague and waggy. The activated ability also seems like a thing you have to read 2+ times to get properly. The "the next time this would die, it doesn't" seems more meaningful than "the first time targeted, counter" as well.
The initial concept seems like it could even have evergreen capabilities (ie. Divine Shield from heartstone) while this new with countering and activated abilities is teetering more on the side of "nonsense design" IMO that I would hard time including in a set of mine. It uses a lot of design tools to achieve relative little, which is a bad sign.