Eldrazi Futuresight: Recent Activity
| Eldrazi Futuresight: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Recent updates to Eldrazi Futuresight: (Generated at 2026-03-15 21:08:37)
| Eldrazi Futuresight: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
Recent updates to Eldrazi Futuresight: (Generated at 2026-03-15 21:08:37)
Yeah, it seems like it should have only one of "Damage when gaining counter" and "Awesome by spending a counter".
The first ability is an evil annihilate variation.
I like it without the activated ability
That's a very cool and doable card, just unnecessarily OP
That templating doesn't do any of the things I want or reasons I designed the card. The idea I had in mind was something that encourages making a deck based on populating clone tokens, populating a 3/3 isn't very interesting.
As far as the choice of keywords, I don't think they are bad, but I just like the ones I chose more.
Okay, I feel ya, bro.
How about ? :
> Pwyll the Second
> Legendary Creature — Shapeshifter (mythic)
> When you cast ~, create a 3/3 Shapeshifter creature token that's white, blue, and green.
> You may have ~ ETB as a copy of any creature on the battlefield except it gains "This creature and creature tokens you control have prowess, trample, and vigilance".
> 3/3
The reason for haste is, I don't know what other green keyword would work well here: Hexproof would be too strong here. Trample would be sorta redundant with flying (double evasion, although I do realize some cards do have both, but honestly, that always seemed like an odd design to me) Reach is pointless with flying. Deathtouch: I guess I don't see a huge problem with this one, but I just don't like it here. Vigilance: Then we'd have an issue with all 3 of these keywords being white ones.
>While forgetting that something is an artifact might be easier, it's less relevant from gameplay perspective than forgetting lifelink or flying.
As a rule, I generally design things with the expectation that players can handle things like remembering that something has lifelink. Honestly, I can't imagine anyone having trouble keeping track of something like this. There could even be a token for the clone that has those keywords on it so it's easy to remember.
Getting haste from
is questionable indeed because the ability tertiary in it. It's pretty far in there and not something it commonly does. So it doesn't represent 
well when 
grants lifelink and 
gives flying - both of which are extremely common place in their respective colors. Haste isn't. So it might as well as be getting that haste from 
.
While forgetting that something is an artifact might be easier, it's less relevant from gameplay perspective than forgetting lifelink or flying.
>Getting haste from
is questionable.
No it isn't. It's not common, but I don't see how a card having something to do with a secondary/tertiary part of the color pie is "questionable"
>There is a probability for memory issues when creating copies, especially here since the token is given a bunch of abilities even if this leaves play.
Saheeli's Artistry (which is actually a bigger deal, because it's a lot easier to forget something is an artifact than it is to forget something like flying.)
>It kinda bugs me that this is a Shapeshifter yet in actuality it doesn't itself shapeshift, but creates a clone of another creature.
Actually kinda a reasonable point.
Is this meant to be
> Counter target spell. Its controller gains control of a permanent of his or her choice.
because as is, it's you who chooses what they gain control of and you can just have them "gain control" of a permanent they already control.
... or is it purely an upside so that when you want, you can get a Donate effect of in addition? I would say that's non-intuitive and gimmicky, but I think we already covered that in that other card.
Anyway, if that's the case, then I would word it as
> Counter target spell. You may have its controller gain control of target permanent you control.
Heh, "preferment".
I think
hard-counter is plausible (something we might see down the road one day) without a drawback, though Harmless Offering / Donate effect isn't strictly a drawback. The current "rule" for hard-counters is that they require two colored mana in their mana costs of which at least one is 
. Seems great for Zedruu the Greathearted EDH.
A shame the name "Forked lightning" is taken already.
Phyrexian Equipmentmorph?
I fundamentally disagree that "gimmicky is bad," and I think that's pretty clear at this point.
Also, about how the effect is "useless," you're just straight up wrong there. There has been /many/ games of magic I've played where I'd pay 2 cards and 3 mana to counter something. It isn't constant or frequent, but it comes up. If one would already be running those cards anyways, then it'd definitely come up sometimes.
Obviously a 3 mana sorcery speed counterspell is bad, in the same way that "5R: target opponent loses 3 life" is bad. But there are still a lot of situations where that would be relevant.
You are taking the card apart, and treating it as multiple cards, and assessing them separately. Viewing this as a 3 CMC sorcery counter is just wrong. It's divination with an upside that won't come up often at all, but will probably be very relevant when it does.
Being gimmicky is pretty bad, so in the case of sorcery speed counterspell, I would see the main issue to fix being to reduce it's "gimmicky levels" and try to make the fact that it's a sorcery speed counterspell a natural, if not even crucial, part of its design. Usually such a design would more likely be reached in a way that it being a sorcery speed counterspell would be happenstance and not the starting point, but it could work out either way in the end.
Here, it being a sorcery speed counterspell is still very gimmicky, if not even more so since now it's a 3 CMC counterspell. It also looks like something that could be described as a "throwaway gag" since it's part of an otherwise functional charm. For that reason it might take even longer for the initial reader to realize the effect's utter uselessness in isolation. Since the first two effects pretty much play in opposition to the third effect IMO they take away from each others' designs. Less is more and so on.
Being at 3 CMC it means that the sorcery speed counter spell effect is so bad that it's a niche to a point where I have a hard time really any player type being excited about it. As I probably indicated earlier, a version that costs
can at least inspire people to try to utilize it and also give the concept the focus it deserves. After all, there's some novelty and even potential for some comedy in the concept.
My goals are to make things I (and possibly others, but that's less of a requirement) would find interesting and fun to play. Part of that is being reasonably balanced (although, I feel like anything that is pushed/competitive on custom mtg websites gets called "busted" even though Wizards makes cards just as strong all the time).
For me, this being about as strong as Mulldrifter is fine.
A lot of this gets into really a really vague philosophical area, but I feel like to some extent the designs themselves are indicative of their own goals. Saying "Sorcery speed counter is bad because it's gimmicky" is probably usually not helpful, because sorcery speed counterspells are obviously meant to be gimmicky. Now if something is particularly overpowered, has templating issues or something like that, there's a good chance that wasn't intentional, so I feel like there's a bit more room for discussion there.
Fair enough. So what are your design goals?
I was only talking about the design part of the card. Development would be another hurdle. As the card currently stands at
IMO it's too powerful for basically being a Divination+. It's contesting with Mulldrifter which also not-so-coincidentally, is a bit too powerful and likely the most widely played of all the evoke dudes from lorwyn for that very reason. Obviously, this depends what kind of power level in general is looked for. Usually some kind of equivalent to whatever may be the current standard is seen as reasonable - perhaps something that's a bit more toward modern is also common as far as I've seen. For a more quirky, expert set like this that is indented toward the advanced players, having cards that are more along the power level of legacy could be seen as reasonable as well. This is kind of the smell I get from this set, but I'm not sure.
Versatility should be costed very highly - something that some of the Charm designs may make you believe otherwise. Having two "reasonable costed" sides in the card means that the card is almost doubly as useful and should be costed to reflect that.
The reason I might seem more invested here is that I've spent a long time working and looking through various Time Spiral -inspired sets / designs. I also am of the belief that such set might be able to be made within under the constraints of NWO and, well, "good design", since as it stands, usually such sets are (seen): as mechanically hacky and constructed haphazardly from random parts that the creator saw as "cool"_. Those are also the reasons why it's very unlikely that we will see another Future Sight and hence I would be interested in exploring defeating those challenges. After all, while Time Spiral might not have been a financial success, it's likely the most inspirational one for up-coming designers for having the enormous amount of innovative mechanical implications including, but not excluded to, those relating to color pie.
Even if that's impossible, just working with such concepts surely rises the changes of making mistakes and encountering issues already embedded in the common practice conventions, that if successfully identified as such, are opportunities to learn. One doesn't really learn from one's successes.