temporary storage: Recent Activity
| temporary storage: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Cult World references | Aerial vs. Aquatic mechanical ideas | Clan Lore and Individuals | Katonah's Plane Tests & Details |
Recent updates to temporary storage: (Generated at 2025-12-25 18:55:39)
Well; yes. That's a requirement to keyword something (except in weird future-sight type expersiments).
But... would you really want a set with twelve different cards all having this ability? It doens't seem a wide and interesting enough ability to support that.
The idea was that the ability would appear on multiple cards.
I don't really see this as something you would want to keyword.
Recycle test
You're not wrong. I was looking for a way that a creature could make use of mantra counters, but checking them rather than being incremental. This probably is not the way.
Gaining the mantra counter upon ETB you might as well remove the counter restriction altogether.
Another restriction that is unnecessary is "Attacking". Trample doesn't affect creatures that aren't attacking.
Outside of provifing mantra counters for other creatures and supposed interactions with counter removal, this might as well just have "Creatures you control have trample."
See Hymn.
Test 1 for mantra. Repeating abilities seems hard to do at common (barring something like replicate). Here the idea is players get mantra counters which last until the end of the turn. Mantra counters do nothing on their own, but cards can reference the numbers of mantra counters. I don't think mantra counters will be spent since at this point they last only UEOT.
Test design for a mechanic where an instant or sorcery could be pitched for a creature token. Ideally each color would have one type of creature token. This would increase tokens across all colors, though I could limit it to primarily naya colors with only rare instances in black and blue. The flavor I was going for on this (replaceable cannon fodder) isn't really clear if it's coming off of an instant or sorcery.
I thought the said mono-red knight, which was quite confusing
Test for color-gaining focused set.
Added "up to one" in both abilities.
Quick aside: If your opponent doesn't control an artifact or enchantment, you can't do the first option. If you don't control a creature, you can't do the second option.
Maybe that's what you want. If it wasn't, then 'up to one' does the trick as per usual.
Mirroring was never the intention nor a desire. Green can return any card from the graveyard to the hand, so I admit the first mode doesn't look as special. I had considered a Sign in Blood type effect.
I don't get why these don't mirror each other...
>Choose one -
• Return a creature card from your graveyard to your hand. Target opponent sacrifices an artifact or enchantment.
• Return an artifact or enchantment card from your graveyard to your hand. Target opponent sacrifices a creature.
Done.
The idea is the option between a mono-color boon with an enemy allied-color ability that hates on an opponent, or an allied-color boon with an enemy mono-colored hate.
Do you think Explode should be a static 1 damage with 1 mana or should I have Explode N. I ask because if a large creature with Explode for 1 seems bad, but there would be times when exploding a big creature for 3 could be useful.
As for mana generation, this came up with white I may increase the number of instants each color has or create other mana sinks to spend mana when you could only cast an instant. Alternatively, explode could be at sorcery speed only (which would be safer for the damage aspect).
It's probably pretty unintuitive to have the damage always at 1 and varied mana amounts. Also the damage is instant speed, so sometimes you'll receive the mana at really unopportune times if you try to use it as removal.
Considerations: the mana produced will vary in size depending on the creature, but I may keep the damage at 1.
This mechanic would be exclusive to red, as all mana-producing mechanics in the set would be exclusive to a single color.
I'm not talking about flavor or high-concept. I'm talking about the actual words on the card (which are important because they change how people feel about those words), and about function (which is allows this to be played with distinct sources of life gain and life loss e. g. casting Angel of Mercy after an attack for 3, so it's already seeding the separation of requirements).
And my original point about being restrictive doesn't change in this context. The necessity to fulfill both conditions at once means the card text invites comparisson to variants that only track life gain or only track life loss e. g. Sygg, River Cutthroat.
My point is: If you cannot sell the "drain 3" idea without typing out two conditions (regardless of them conceptually representing a single goal), then you can create a more satisfying reading experience by rewarding each of the conditions individually without losing the ultimate reward of tutoring a card if you drain 3 life, if the individual rewards sum up to tutoring e. g.
> "At the beginning of your end step, if you gained at least 3 life this turn, search your library for a card. Then shuffle your library and put that card on top of it.
At the beginning of your end step, if an opponent lost 3 or more life this turn, draw a a card."
You get the same overall reward, but a better impression with regards to partial success/partial failure.
Also talking about the high concept: What's the concept here? Orcish Tutor is one of the less popular ones.
Sure, you can. But the flavour is clear.
Except that you can fulfill the requirements without draining life as well.
It's kinda only a single requirement - did you drain 3 life? But that does need both lines to work.
"ei" -> "ie"
The double requirement feels a little restrictive. Part of me feels this would be better as a variant on Momir Vig, Simic Visionary - splitting the tutor in two.
Any typo'd relation to Olane's Bloodmage?