Fetish Wars: Recent Activity
| Fetish Wars: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Fetish Wars: (Generated at 2024-05-06 16:19:31)
| Fetish Wars: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Fetish Wars: (Generated at 2024-05-06 16:19:31)
Elite Vanguard is now blue? The power creep is real.
increased power from 2 to 3.
Do you have any suggestions to fix the AP-NAP concerns?
Fetish as a mechanic has the problem that players need to concern themselves with AP-NAP order of resolving triggered abilities and get some nonintuitive results. I like the concept though and it looks like it could be made quite simple.
"each upkeep" to "each player's upkeep" and "each player" to "that player"
"first time" to "first time each turn." It was always intended to be first time each turn, but I forgot to include that in the text.
2 life to 3 life.
increased cost by
art was in wrong spot
Increase toughness from 2 to 3.
2/3 for
to 1/2 for 
. The card's ability remains the same.
Suid or swine would be a better term, but I think boar can fit here? I'm worried if boar should only be animal we know as the Eurasian wild boar (and its subspecies), and a more broad term should be used. I now am unsure if peccaries should use the boar type (I may have to go back to Coaxkika and Spectrum of the Storm) and give peccary its own type.
Still, this isn't as bad as the mess that are canidae of South America.
Pig type changed to boar. It's supposed to be a warthog. I don't know if warthogs should get their own creature type. Creature types are a mess imo anyway.
Followed SecretInfiltrator's suggestion.
More standardized wording: "When ~ enters the battlefield, if there is a creature card in your graveyard, you may gain 3 life."
Actually, with all the fours already floating around the card, I would go for "4 life".
Reduced checking creatures in graveyard from 3 to 1.
The effect could not be mandatory, yeah. There's also no point in restricting the type of counter- that was the whole reason I worded blemish as I did. This card needs to be a hybrid though, and I don't think green gets to bounce opponents' creatures. Further, I think that bouncing an opponent's creature with the potential to draw would be pretty strong.
Added mana to the activation cost. Currently at two hybrid
.
No, this doesn't want to remove counters. But yeah, the ability is kind of bonkers and could probably use mana in the activation cost.
Your comment on Vengeful Murdered suggests the activated ability wants to remove counters, right?
Either way the ease of abuse of counters in this set means that I suggest adding a small mana cost to the activated ability.
+, -s
Even if a drawback is abusable, it's a drawback. In this case this clearly makes multiple copies of the card undesirable - and 1 toughness in general.
I would say the ability is better suited for a larger body efficient uncommon.
Are you certain about Hexeater Troll Could it be you wanted the activation cost on that one to be something different?
Yeah, the mandatory part is iffy. It's basically a drawback that is not cost as one because it can be used as card advantage.
I also would change it from "target" to "another target" (or use the cast trigger condition suggested above).
I don't know what the actual intent here is, but as a (mandatory) drawback this also seems harder to cost correctly.
"Affecting other permanents" is a bit too vaguely expressed, but it generally means making combat math harder to process since the combination of things to do (during combat) increases. Sorcery speed bounce doesn't do that. This is also why Benalish Trapper doesn't really break that rule since it pretty much makes the actual combat easier to process, not harder. Yeva's Forcemage isn't red flagged either as far as I know.
Even drawing the card is limited here and you pay it in tempo. If the draw there isn't guaranteed (you can't always get enough dudes with -1/-1 counters in limited) then it wouldn't be red flagged for that either. For example, a card like Blazing Volley isn't red flagged even though it could theoretically give you lots of card advantage, but it's not so likely to do so.
The main culprit here definitely is the text length you would rather ignore, but IMO here it would really server it's purpose. That text describes a quite convoluted process that has a trigger (etb), target (creature), effect (bounce), restriction (you control), and a condition (if had counter) that grants an additional bonus effect (draw card). Each of them is simple on its own, but when you pile them all up it becomes just slightly that more taxing all in all. Easiest way to explain the potential issue is that the card's text just keeps on going too long.
However, it's worth noty that the phrase "enters the battlefield" is given some leeway when it comes to text lengths - similarly to how the commonly used pseudokeyword trigger phrases of landfall and rally are as well.
That text length issue could be quite easily fixed here. The following fits three lines:
> When ~ cast, return target creature to its owner hand. If it had a counter on it, draw a card.
So obviously we should accept using ETB instead of cast since it's one of the most common phrases that appear in MTG as it is. So I would recommend
> When ~ ETBs, return target creature to its owner hand. If it had a counter on it, draw a card.
I'm pretty sure that using "that creature" isn't entirely necessary since it already uses the tense word "had" for it. Using generic counter as a conditional filler makes the card just more flexible.
EDIT1:
One problem here is that the effect is mandatory for some reason and may not be intuitive in that fashion. Obviously adding "you may" would help, but I think that would certainly be the final push to make it over the text limit since we've made several concessions already...
EDIT2: I seemingly just dropped the "you control" restriction from my suggestions without noticing it until now. I think that's a clue as well that this is just too wordy.
Many of my commons would be red-flagged under nwo. While I'm still salty about some of the red flags, this is one of the cards I'd be fine redoing the ability to fit with nwo. I find the 4 lines flag to be silly, so I'm mainly concerned with the affecting another permanent and card advantage here.
Yeah. If you pick the third mode, the whole thing resolves as a mana ability. Should add "Activate only as an instant" prior to the choices if you want to keep the mana choice.
Needs less linebreaks to become legible.
As far as I can tell this has the unfortunate side effect of being a mana ability? Maybe?
Turned draw a card to looting and increased gain life from 2 to 3.
Added reminder text for when she's a creature
Because only searching basics to hand on an ability that only occurs under a specific circumstance sounds unplayable.
The card's creation was likely mechanical, a design to work with artifacts that had fetish, as well as the other cards that exiled in this block.