No; I'm saying this is fine as it is. One single live attacking ancestral creature is needed, and the whole mechanic turns on.
So 5 or 6 in a deck (or 3-4 in a 45 card draft deck) is enough for it to be quite likely to be available to you. The more you add, the more dead creatures you'll have to choose from, and the more resilient you are against someone deliberately trying to turn it off. But it's risky to try to turn off; since the thing you kill is then available to come back itself. So maybe you're better off trying to kill things that stay dead.
Yeahl but it turns back on again as soon as you get another one. Not saying you don't need some - just that you don't need every single creaure to be ancestral. Which is less parasitic than the mechanic might otherwise be.
It turns on with 2 though, you need an attacking Ancestry creature and one in the yard. If the opponent doesn't want you rezzing each turn they just need to kill the non-remnant one and the others will be sacrificed.
Oh sure, you have to be playing the mechanic to play the machanic. It's parasitic. But it turns on with only a snigle one, so it's not like you need to absolutely stuff your deck with them.
I agree you do need the high initial cost to make up for the "And then I bring it back, forever" portion. It just encourages people to find other ways of getting it into your graveyard.
Three power of first strike, any time you have 4 mana available, isn't overcost, it feels like a fantastic bargain. White does get the cheapest mid-size first strikers though, so maybe.
Mm. Currently works like a Rocket Launcher. Which is potentially balanced, and might be what you were thinking, but Rocket Launcher wasn't intuitive. If you do want something more like Rocket Launcher, may I suggest as the activation cost? XX also isn't intuitive, but will probably result in a new player asking a more experienced player how this card works.
Also, wording about changing ownership is vague. It seems like I have a choice in whether I give this enchantment to an opponent. Probably best to skip the word 'may' altogether.
Huh, the way I envisioned it it should have read "When enchanted creature dies..." so that you could blow this turn 3 on something "small" (like a 3/3 thats problematic) then if they play some massive 7/7, you could grasp of darkness the 3/3 and imprison the bigger guy.
But if it's balanced enough as it is. I mean, this is essentially immune to enchantment removal but it will still cost you 3 everytime you play it. Still functions with the original plan too but now benefits from being hard to remove.
Hm. Strictly better than Cessation. And OK, Cessation wasn't the strongest in its cycle (that'd be Rancor by a country mile, followed by Slow Motion)... but this is a very nice variant on Pacifism. I like it.
No; I'm saying this is fine as it is. One single live attacking ancestral creature is needed, and the whole mechanic turns on.
So 5 or 6 in a deck (or 3-4 in a 45 card draft deck) is enough for it to be quite likely to be available to you. The more you add, the more dead creatures you'll have to choose from, and the more resilient you are against someone deliberately trying to turn it off. But it's risky to try to turn off; since the thing you kill is then available to come back itself. So maybe you're better off trying to kill things that stay dead.
Are you saying Ancestry ought to trigger with every attacking creature?
Yeahl but it turns back on again as soon as you get another one. Not saying you don't need some - just that you don't need every single creaure to be ancestral. Which is less parasitic than the mechanic might otherwise be.
It turns on with 2 though, you need an attacking Ancestry creature and one in the yard. If the opponent doesn't want you rezzing each turn they just need to kill the non-remnant one and the others will be sacrificed.
Oh sure, you have to be playing the mechanic to play the machanic. It's parasitic. But it turns on with only a snigle one, so it's not like you need to absolutely stuff your deck with them.
I agree you do need the high initial cost to make up for the "And then I bring it back, forever" portion. It just encourages people to find other ways of getting it into your graveyard.
But a 3/3 First Striker for 5 mana? The 4 mana discount requires another Ancestry attacker.
Three power of first strike, any time you have 4 mana available, isn't overcost, it feels like a fantastic bargain. White does get the cheapest mid-size first strikers though, so maybe.
I love first strike. It sucks that I need to overcost this so much.
Mm. Currently works like a Rocket Launcher. Which is potentially balanced, and might be what you were thinking, but Rocket Launcher wasn't intuitive. If you do want something more like Rocket Launcher, may I suggest
as the activation cost? XX also isn't intuitive, but will probably result in a new player asking a more experienced player how this card works.
Also, wording about changing ownership is vague. It seems like I have a choice in whether I give this enchantment to an opponent. Probably best to skip the word 'may' altogether.
You might want to limit the activation to once per turn.
Huh, the way I envisioned it it should have read "When enchanted creature dies..." so that you could blow this turn 3 on something "small" (like a 3/3 thats problematic) then if they play some massive 7/7, you could grasp of darkness the 3/3 and imprison the bigger guy.
But if it's balanced enough as it is. I mean, this is essentially immune to enchantment removal but it will still cost you 3 everytime you play it. Still functions with the original plan too but now benefits from being hard to remove.
Hm. Strictly better than Cessation. And OK, Cessation wasn't the strongest in its cycle (that'd be Rancor by a country mile, followed by Slow Motion)... but this is a very nice variant on Pacifism. I like it.
Pacifism tweak. Can be recurred
Pushed to uncommon. Probably could use a power boost to accommodate it
Beast Within is a straight break though, not a bend. http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/134087904883/does-beast-within-violate-the-color-pie-due-to