This is a rather parasitic design that doesn't do much on its own - though at least it's a free sac outlet if nothing else.
What's with this "Eye" tribal theme? Does it and if so then how to the carnivale/art theme of the set? There aren't any general introduction texts nor set comments here that I would explain this.
"Each player discards a card" is pretty sad effect for 4 mana. It's worth about 1 or even less. Making each player sacrifice a creature is worth about 1 and ½ mana (at one it's really powerful like seen in Innocent Blood).
At best you can do and hope to get out of this is to discard a creature card yourself and make the opponent discard a card and a creature. I suppose if this is your last card in hand and you have nocreatures, then you get opponent to sacrifice and discard a card but that gives the impression that with no hand and no board you're likely screwed. Even in that most extreme scenario this card only barely seems worth 4 mana to me.
I think I would lower to cost , I could prolly see it at honestly, possibly even just since making each player discard a card is almost worthless and in the best scenario, if you're lucky, you get an edict on top of that so it costing the same as Cruel Edict doesn't seem out of this world to me.
> "As long as you have 5 or less life, ~ has indestructible.
Indestructible was changed long time ago so that its usage is now similar to that of other keywords.
An indestructible infi-blocker for 1 mana seems like a questionable idea to begin with, but at common it seems like a horrendous one if you ask me. Imagine playing against a deck that ends up with 4+ copies of this in limited and once they get to that 5 of less life, you are likely in a world of paying without some serious evasion measures - even most removal is rendered moot.
If you slap "~ can't block" on this it would resolve that previous point.
"artifact you cast this cost 3 less to cast" doesn't sound like the type of ability I would put on a common. Nor would copying cards - and this card looks quite wordy plus it has an obscure on board combat trick. Is this meant to be a rare?
Visionary seems like it would be a "nonmechanic" most of time in that it seems trivial to make it always trigger. I suppose you wouldn't get them off if you tried to mana accelerate into them with rituals and such but that's hardly an issue for a two-drop. How often would it be that players would have to choose between triggering Visionary and doing something else? It just doesn't seem that likely to me.
Perhaps make it "may tap" or "up to one creature"(ie. optionally) so you don't have to tap your own creatures if they are the only applicable ones for the ability to tap.
There should be a comma after the word "battlefield" and no "a" article before "power" afaik.
> When ~ ETBs, tap up to one target creature with power 1 or less.
That should work if you paste it right in because of how magicmultiverse's supported abbreviations work.
Would it be cooler to swap the effects for that one time in a thousand a player can feel really clever about winning a game by having an opponent draw two cards and make their hand just big enough to remove a key creature?
I was inspired by what I remembered of Bakhtin's Carnivalesque, though I don't remember the detail anymore. I think hypocrisy of theme, filtered through a tenet of each color was the idea of the cycle. That hypocrisy is is one targeted ability which will likely be used to punish an opponent while the other to benefit yourself. Red is admittedly the least clear and weakest here, since the first effect has a lot less chance of happening during your own turn, which was intended as the punishment ability while the second ability was probably meant to turn a creature into a creature burn, which probably could have just have existed without the mana cost for that ability.
This starts to change the design a bit, but you could make it also target the player. As long as one target remains legal, the ability resolves to the best of its ability. The other option is having it "choose" a creature to gain hexproof rather than target it, but that's atypical.
>At the beginning of your upkeep, target player draws a card and may put a land card from their hand onto the battlefield tapped. Up to one target creature they control gains hexproof until end of turn.
(I swapped the order of the draw and ramp so that you have a chance to draw the land you want to play.)
I also think an on-board trigger that grants hexproof feels disappointing. Your opponent would need instant-speed removal to deal with the creature on your turn anyway, so they would probably just respond to the trigger. I think it would be better to be an end step trigger that grants hexproof until your next turn, to at least protect against sorcery-speed effects.
Seems to be something about audience/visual art. Maybe the Eye tokens are like video cameras? There seems to be at least one case of "security eyes".
This is a rather parasitic design that doesn't do much on its own - though at least it's a free sac outlet if nothing else.
What's with this "Eye" tribal theme? Does it and if so then how to the carnivale/art theme of the set? There aren't any general introduction texts nor set comments here that I would explain this.
"Each player discards a card" is pretty sad effect for 4 mana. It's worth about 1 or even less. Making each player sacrifice a creature is worth about 1 and ½ mana (at one it's really powerful like seen in Innocent Blood).
At best you can do and hope to get out of this is to discard a creature card yourself and make the opponent discard a card and a creature. I suppose if this is your last card in hand and you have nocreatures, then you get opponent to sacrifice and discard a card but that gives the impression that with no hand and no board you're likely screwed. Even in that most extreme scenario this card only barely seems worth 4 mana to me.
I think I would lower to cost
, I could prolly see it at 
honestly, possibly even just 
since making each player discard a card is almost worthless and in the best scenario, if you're lucky, you get an edict on top of that so it costing the same as Cruel Edict doesn't seem out of this world to me.
> "As long as you have 5 or less life, ~ has indestructible.
Indestructible was changed long time ago so that its usage is now similar to that of other keywords.
An indestructible infi-blocker for 1 mana seems like a questionable idea to begin with, but at common it seems like a horrendous one if you ask me. Imagine playing against a deck that ends up with 4+ copies of this in limited and once they get to that 5 of less life, you are likely in a world of paying without some serious evasion measures - even most removal is rendered moot.
If you slap "~ can't block" on this it would resolve that previous point.
"artifact you cast this cost 3 less to cast" doesn't sound like the type of ability I would put on a common. Nor would copying cards - and this card looks quite wordy plus it has an obscure on board combat trick. Is this meant to be a rare?
Visionary seems like it would be a "nonmechanic" most of time in that it seems trivial to make it always trigger. I suppose you wouldn't get them off if you tried to mana accelerate into them with rituals and such but that's hardly an issue for a two-drop. How often would it be that players would have to choose between triggering Visionary and doing something else? It just doesn't seem that likely to me.
Perhaps make it "may tap" or "up to one creature" (ie. optionally) so you don't have to tap your own creatures if they are the only applicable ones for the ability to tap.
There should be a comma after the word "battlefield" and no "a" article before "power" afaik.
> When ~ ETBs, tap up to one target creature with power 1 or less.
That should work if you paste it right in because of how magicmultiverse's supported abbreviations work.
Changed from sorcery to instant
Swapped effect positions per SecretInfiltrator's suggestion
Would it be cooler to swap the effects for that one time in a thousand a player can feel really clever about winning a game by having an opponent draw two cards and make their hand just big enough to remove a key creature?
I was inspired by what I remembered of Bakhtin's Carnivalesque, though I don't remember the detail anymore. I think hypocrisy of theme, filtered through a tenet of each color was the idea of the cycle. That hypocrisy is is one targeted ability which will likely be used to punish an opponent while the other to benefit yourself. Red is admittedly the least clear and weakest here, since the first effect has a lot less chance of happening during your own turn, which was intended as the punishment ability while the second ability was probably meant to turn a creature into a creature burn, which probably could have just have existed without the mana cost for that ability.
Profanation of Community, Profanation of Wisdom, Profanation of Ambition, Profanation of the Heart, Profanation of the Wilds.
So... this is a cycle. But what exactly are the constraints of this cycle except "Two targeted effects"?
.
So it's kind of a psychic venom; bolted on to 'explode yourself at the bad guy'? I don't really see the connection.
Had Eagle as creature type, changed to bird.
Was missing the bullet for the last mode.
"another" to "a"
Was "Enchant Creature
: ~ becomes a copy of target Aura UEOT." Changed as Katonah's Guises is in the set.
forgot p/t
Added a cost to activate and reduced cmc from 3 to 2.
Fair point dude1818. I updated to dude1818's wording while extending the duration of the hexproof
This starts to change the design a bit, but you could make it also target the player. As long as one target remains legal, the ability resolves to the best of its ability. The other option is having it "choose" a creature to gain hexproof rather than target it, but that's atypical.
>At the beginning of your upkeep, target player draws a card and may put a land card from their hand onto the battlefield tapped. Up to one target creature they control gains hexproof until end of turn.
(I swapped the order of the draw and ramp so that you have a chance to draw the land you want to play.)
I also think an on-board trigger that grants hexproof feels disappointing. Your opponent would need instant-speed removal to deal with the creature on your turn anyway, so they would probably just respond to the trigger. I think it would be better to be an end step trigger that grants hexproof until your next turn, to at least protect against sorcery-speed effects.
Should you only be able to target untapped artifacts? Or is the thought that targeting an opponent's artifact will make them tap it in response?
Based on the interaction with mana rocks, it should cost at least
to activate. Voltaic Key is fairly popular as additional ramp in mana rock decks