Seems entirely legit. Feels quite strong; though I wouldn't have thought you'd have much of a chance to get the partnering effect in a draft.
And... actually; if you're drafting this, then you're drafting your commanders. The chances of there even being two legends in reasonably matching colours in the entire draft are pretty low, let alone you getting them. So maybe it's not so desirable after all?
"You may have an additional commander" means you can have up to three commanders with partner, but also e. g. a team up between Horde of Notions and Trenna, Elemental Summoner. In that case only Horde of Notions gets an increased cost.
Any commander with normal "partner" ignores the cost increase entirely (unless it is your only commander for some reason).
The creature is not coming back. The card is exiled to note that a vacancy has been filled. I'm pretty certain if I meant to create a Zombie creature, I would put the creature type Zombie in there.
Yes; you're talking about the same thing. partner, from elder-dragon-highlander format.
I'm pretty sure that a creature that comes back from the grave as a 2/2 is a zombie. The flavour just feels like a miss here, since you're unintentionally invoking different flavour.
> Doesn't 'partner with' already have a different mechanical meaning? Yeah; it means "My elder dragon legend is spread across two cards".
'Partner with' is an existing mechanic. I just expand it to have more general parameters than a cardname.
I don't understand what you mean with that though. I am refering to this mechanic: Blaring Captain, Blaring Recruiter. Not an Elder, not a Dragon, not legendary.
Are you mixing up 'partner' & 'meld'? On a legendary creature 'partner with' also means that you can have it be one of multiple cards to be your commander if they all agree to play nice with each other. Are you refering to commander/general as "elder dragon legend"?
> The two abilities on the card don't feel very linked together. The second one links nicely to the flavourtext, making this some kind of necromancer-mob-boss. The first one lets you prepare some living mobsters.
Actually not a Necromancer at all. It's a mob boss that comes with two flunkies/minions. A Rogue card in your graveyard is a minion who gets replaced - by a new Rogue, not a Zombie.
The idea is that I wanted a tribal effect that doesn't necessarily encourage chaining Mob Boss. The link between both abilities is thematic: Neither of them cares about the faceless minions as individuals (hence "two Rogues"; "I call them left one and right one", Mob Boss might say).
For all Mob Boss cares the tutor'd cards don't even get cast, but used as discard fodder.
It's the seed for a mechanical theme that might include cards like Faerie Macabre.
Doesn't 'partner with' already have a different mechanical meaning? Yeah; it means "My elder dragon legend is spread across two cards".
The two abilities on the card don't feel very linked together. The second one links nicely to the flavourtext, making this some kind of necromancer-mob-boss. The first one lets you prepare some living mobsters.
Eh, zombie master didn't actually DO anything. The other lords had 'make bigger' in common; the zombies just got swampwalk.
Dunno. I never saw zombie tribal in the wild; anyway. And heck; people did elf tribal back before that was even possible - so clearly there's the little matter of flavour on goblins' side too. :)
And.. I totally forgot there was a minor recur theme for goblins. Yeah; that seems like a "Player feels clever for discovering" benefit, rather than "Whoops, broke the game with a loophole". Go for it.
I like that this is a cost that gets the big "MAYBE" from someone - that's exactly what I was going for. Good point about giving up a Goblin to put out a card that wants Goblins around though.
Something that came to mind during my time afk was that my apparently not entirely arbitrary choice of Goblin and my unmotivated use of "discard" over "exile" means this gets to discard Squee, Goblin Nabob for profit. I think, I like that.
Even saving up a Squee, the Immortal to later pump this is neat. Squee seems like someone you want around starting a posse.
It's a fair view to hold. Goblin King and Lord of Atlantis were the original tribal lords. And, well, Goblins got way better cards than merfolk (I mean, merfolk tried to shine in fallen Empirse. But that's rather like trying to shine while in pitch blackness and your audience is in another room entirely; watching a Michael Bay film.)
SO yeah; goblins are the first tribe. And certainly the one that's had the most support - because individual goblins are never particularly good. And phrasing it that way; it's a real shame they're not also white.
Aaanyway. This is a nice build around goblin; and goblins want to come out early so MAYBE it's sometimes worth sacrificing a card to do it? I mean, it's a card that you KNOW is worth +1/+1 as well, so it's a pretty big loss.
Certainly seems worth trying. Subverting casting cost is always risky, but I suspect it'll be fine here. By the time it's a game winning bomb, you'd have the mana to flat-cast it anyway.
Playing around with the infamously "most broken mechanic". Tribal edition.
Each day of the previous week I found out something interesting about Magic or how I think about the game. Today that thing was that I consider Goblin the tribal tribe. If I think about making a random card effect tribal I default to Goblin.
I expect there is some other creature type more deserving of this design, but I thought "Pitch spells but for a tribe rather than color" and here we are.
I know that pitch spells used to exile. I'm using discard just to see whether it is a notable difference.
The idea is to design the cards in such a way that the fact that any color the tribe is in will not break the color pie, so feel free to point out if I'm unsuccessful in that regard.
Seems entirely legit. Feels quite strong; though I wouldn't have thought you'd have much of a chance to get the partnering effect in a draft.
And... actually; if you're drafting this, then you're drafting your commanders. The chances of there even being two legends in reasonably matching colours in the entire draft are pretty low, let alone you getting them. So maybe it's not so desirable after all?
"You may have an additional commander" means you can have up to three commanders with partner, but also e. g. a team up between Horde of Notions and Trenna, Elemental Summoner. In that case only Horde of Notions gets an increased cost.
Any commander with normal "partner" ignores the cost increase entirely (unless it is your only commander for some reason).
Published here.
Published here.
"you control" >> "your team controls"?
Lore Reference: Riptide Laboratory.
See (((Weird Specimen))).
(For meld cards I'll make only one a DFC and put all information there raher than splitting it over two halves.)
Since this card is a horror story of type I it implies the existence of another card, but I won't show you.
"Partner with" is a mechanic from Battlebond and doesn't even need to go on legendary creatures
The creature is not coming back. The card is exiled to note that a vacancy has been filled. I'm pretty certain if I meant to create a Zombie creature, I would put the creature type Zombie in there.
Yes; you're talking about the same thing. partner, from elder-dragon-highlander format.
I'm pretty sure that a creature that comes back from the grave as a 2/2 is a zombie. The flavour just feels like a miss here, since you're unintentionally invoking different flavour.
> Doesn't 'partner with' already have a different mechanical meaning? Yeah; it means "My elder dragon legend is spread across two cards".
'Partner with' is an existing mechanic. I just expand it to have more general parameters than a cardname.
I don't understand what you mean with that though. I am refering to this mechanic: Blaring Captain, Blaring Recruiter. Not an Elder, not a Dragon, not legendary.
Are you mixing up 'partner' & 'meld'? On a legendary creature 'partner with' also means that you can have it be one of multiple cards to be your commander if they all agree to play nice with each other. Are you refering to commander/general as "elder dragon legend"?
> The two abilities on the card don't feel very linked together. The second one links nicely to the flavourtext, making this some kind of necromancer-mob-boss. The first one lets you prepare some living mobsters.
Actually not a Necromancer at all. It's a mob boss that comes with two flunkies/minions. A Rogue card in your graveyard is a minion who gets replaced - by a new Rogue, not a Zombie.
The idea is that I wanted a tribal effect that doesn't necessarily encourage chaining Mob Boss. The link between both abilities is thematic: Neither of them cares about the faceless minions as individuals (hence "two Rogues"; "I call them left one and right one", Mob Boss might say).
For all Mob Boss cares the tutor'd cards don't even get cast, but used as discard fodder.
It's the seed for a mechanical theme that might include cards like Faerie Macabre.
Doesn't 'partner with' already have a different mechanical meaning? Yeah; it means "My elder dragon legend is spread across two cards".
The two abilities on the card don't feel very linked together. The second one links nicely to the flavourtext, making this some kind of necromancer-mob-boss. The first one lets you prepare some living mobsters.
"A deck can have any number of cards named ~." ? :)
Recycling the name Assassinate.
Context: Assassinate, Assassinate, Assassinate.
Recycling the name Assassinate.
Context: Assassinate, Assassinate, Assassinate.
Recycling the name Assassinate.
Context: Assassinate, Assassinate, Assassinate.
Eh, zombie master didn't actually DO anything. The other lords had 'make bigger' in common; the zombies just got swampwalk.
Dunno. I never saw zombie tribal in the wild; anyway. And heck; people did elf tribal back before that was even possible - so clearly there's the little matter of flavour on goblins' side too. :)
And.. I totally forgot there was a minor recur theme for goblins. Yeah; that seems like a "Player feels clever for discovering" benefit, rather than "Whoops, broke the game with a loophole". Go for it.
Don't forget Zombie Master!
I like that this is a cost that gets the big "MAYBE" from someone - that's exactly what I was going for. Good point about giving up a Goblin to put out a card that wants Goblins around though.
Something that came to mind during my time afk was that my apparently not entirely arbitrary choice of Goblin and my unmotivated use of "discard" over "exile" means this gets to discard Squee, Goblin Nabob for profit. I think, I like that.
Even saving up a Squee, the Immortal to later pump this is neat. Squee seems like someone you want around starting a posse.
It's a fair view to hold. Goblin King and Lord of Atlantis were the original tribal lords. And, well, Goblins got way better cards than merfolk (I mean, merfolk tried to shine in fallen Empirse. But that's rather like trying to shine while in pitch blackness and your audience is in another room entirely; watching a Michael Bay film.)
SO yeah; goblins are the first tribe. And certainly the one that's had the most support - because individual goblins are never particularly good. And phrasing it that way; it's a real shame they're not also white.
Aaanyway. This is a nice build around goblin; and goblins want to come out early so MAYBE it's sometimes worth sacrificing a card to do it? I mean, it's a card that you KNOW is worth +1/+1 as well, so it's a pretty big loss.
Certainly seems worth trying. Subverting casting cost is always risky, but I suspect it'll be fine here. By the time it's a game winning bomb, you'd have the mana to flat-cast it anyway.
Playing around with the infamously "most broken mechanic". Tribal edition.
Each day of the previous week I found out something interesting about Magic or how I think about the game. Today that thing was that I consider Goblin the tribal tribe. If I think about making a random card effect tribal I default to Goblin.
I expect there is some other creature type more deserving of this design, but I thought "Pitch spells but for a tribe rather than color" and here we are.
I know that pitch spells used to exile. I'm using discard just to see whether it is a notable difference.
The idea is to design the cards in such a way that the fact that any color the tribe is in will not break the color pie, so feel free to point out if I'm unsuccessful in that regard.