Results 331 to 360 of 591
Thread: MTG Share your Card Designs II
-
2019-11-12, 01:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Sideboards only have 15 slots. As is the hate cards literally hose one strategy entirely, balancing only having room for a few of them. There are several "Wipe all artifacts" "Wipe all graveyards" "Ruin all none-basic lands" and "prevent all counterspells/storm count" cards. Hate is a pressure release valve for bad game design, you can't rely on it because there is no guarantee you won't end up with more proactive broken decks then slots to stop them in the side.
-
2019-11-13, 02:00 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
All of them? (or at least those from 2012) They use a differently skewed, but it's still an RPS-like system.
Yes, multiple things work against affinity. Multiple things work against infect.
An infect burn that's slower than burn, is not a problem IMO. Burn has the advantage of being healable.
Isn't hexproof just a fancy way of "Prevent them from being cast"? Yes, you cancel spell by hexproof. Or counters. Or permanents that prevent spells from being cast, or spells that prevent poison, or permanents that prevent poison, or spells that increase casting cost of spells targeting you, or spells that increase casting cost of spells, or permanents that increase casting cost of spell...
You're making it like there are only counter-spells and no other way when that's not true.
-
2019-11-13, 04:02 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
When I asked for RPS mechanics I meant sets that included mechanics that were deliberately RPS like your mechanic is.
You're just reiterating the same old Aggro->Control->Combo triangle that is still wrong.
Yes, multiple things work against affinity. Multiple things work against infect.
An infect burn that's slower than burn, is not a problem IMO.
Burn has the advantage of being healable.
Isn't hexproof just a fancy way of "Prevent them from being cast"?
Yes, you cancel spell by hexproof.
Or counters.
Or permanents that prevent spells from being cast,
or spells that prevent poison,
or permanents that prevent poison,
or spells that increase casting cost of spells targeting you,
or spells that increase casting cost of spells,
or permanents that increase casting cost of spell...
All the good ones of these also apply for actual burn.
You're making it like there are only counter-spells and no other way when that's not true.
The fact that you need to include that much specific hate against your mechanics should be enough to convince you that they are bad mechanics.
-
2019-11-14, 03:15 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
And I gave you. They are designing all their sets to fit this square (and/or hexagram) RPS.
Whenever you design a mana dork card, you're making a card for Ramp card pool.
Whenever you design an flying haste for 2CMC you add to the Aggro card pool.
And I'm not reiterating the same old shtick. It's not Aggro → Control → Combo.
It's Aggro → Midrange → Ramp/Combo → Control/Disruptive Aggro.
Also, how is the article I linked wrong? Do they not follow this?
The closest I can think to an RPS like mechanic is an Ascend. You have few choices when playing against Ascend:
A) You go aggressive knowing your opponent won't block because Ascend
B) You go control, destroying your opponents permanents, or countering his Ascend cards
C) You go Ascend and race him, if you think you'll get more value out of it and/or do it faster.
You haven't convinced me either.
Since damage can be healed, it's easier to design around burn. Burn can be cheaper.
No. What you proved is that there are less answers to spells than permanents. MTG shot itself into the foot, when they decided only blue will ever interact with the stack.
And green cards - Veil of Summer, Autumn's veil, Gruul Spellbreaker etc.
Sadly yes.
Gaddock Teeg is expensive
Those are awful in Magic, yes. They don't have to be in the set I'm designing. They have multiple uses. And a specific counterspell isn't necessarily that bad. If I play Dissipating cloud against Infect. It's a better Fog. If I play it against poison burn, it's a counter. Or maybe just a way to heal some life. Against others, it's a cantrip.
Mostly because, if you have creatures hitting you for 10 or more, you're still going to lose. Infect or not.
So? Infect burn spells, are already slower than burn spells, and adding a turn of tempo will give you more time to execute your own strategy.
Ok, I thought there was a spell that increases casting cost of other spells, like Thalia or something.
What hate? I have like three poison hate cards ATM.
Dissipating Cloud - 1U
Instant
Target player can't get poison counters this turn.
Draw a card
Protective Fog - 1G
Instant
Prevent all combat damage this turn. You can't get poison counters this turn.
Bloodletting - B
Instant
If taget player would get one or more poison counters this turn, they lose that much life instead. If this targets an opponent, they lose life for each poison counter they have.Last edited by -D-; 2019-11-14 at 03:55 AM.
-
2019-11-14, 05:47 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Location
- Carlisle, Englund
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Last edited by Androgeus; 2019-11-14 at 06:03 AM.
"Three blokes walk into a pub. One of them is a little bit stupid, and the whole scene unfolds with a tedious inevitability." - Bill Bailey
Androgeus' 3 step guide to Doctor Who speculation:
Spoiler- Pick a random character
- State that person is The Rani
- goto 1
-
2019-11-14, 06:01 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
-
2019-11-14, 07:39 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Several aggro decks have played mana dorks.
And designing cards for ramp decks don't mean designing ramp decks to beat control decks.
And I'm not reiterating the same old shtick. It's not Aggro → Control → Combo.
It's Aggro → Midrange → Ramp/Combo → Control/Disruptive Aggro.
Also, how is the article I linked wrong? Do they not follow this?
The closest I can think to an RPS like mechanic is an Ascend. You have few choices when playing against Ascend:
A) You go aggressive knowing your opponent won't block because Ascend
B) You go control, destroying your opponents permanents, or countering his Ascend cards
C) You go Ascend and race him, if you think you'll get more value out of it and/or do it faster.
You also ignored one option: let them Ascend and beat them anyways.
Since damage can be healed, it's easier to design around burn. Burn can be cheaper.
No. What you proved is that there are less answers to spells than permanents. MTG shot itself into the foot, when they decided only blue will ever interact with the stack.
It's also false, as red have both copy and redirection.
And green cards - Veil of Summer, Autumn's veil, Gruul Spellbreaker etc.
Veil of Summer only protects you from blue and black, so it doesn't help against infect burn.
Gruul Spellbreaker only protects you during your turn, so it doesn't really help against infect burn.
Gaddock Teeg is expensive
I was talking about cards that hinders all of them.
Those are awful in Magic, yes. They don't have to be in the set I'm designing. They have multiple uses. And a specific counterspell isn't necessarily that bad. If I play Dissipating cloud against Infect. It's a better Fog. If I play it against poison burn, it's a counter. Or maybe just a way to heal some life.
Against others, it's a cantrip.
Mostly because, if you have creatures hitting you for 10 or more, you're still going to lose. Infect or not.
You might as well say gaining 10 life doesn't do much against burn.
So? Infect burn spells, are already slower than burn spells, and adding a turn of tempo will give you more time to execute your own strategy.
Ok, I thought there was a spell that increases casting cost of other spells, like Thalia or something.
What hate? I have like three poison hate cards ATM.
Dissipating Cloud - 1U
Instant
Target player can't get poison counters this turn.
Draw a card
Protective Fog - 1G
Instant
Prevent all combat damage this turn. You can't get poison counters this turn.
Bloodletting - B
Instant
If taget player would get one or more poison counters this turn, they lose that much life instead. If this targets an opponent, they lose life for each poison counter they have.
All your hate cards being reactive is a big problem. They also each only work one turn.
I think there's also the problem of color wheel. Preventing poison is green and white, so it's color bleed in blue and black.Last edited by Ninjaman; 2019-11-14 at 07:39 AM.
-
2019-11-14, 12:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
So? A card can fit multiple strategies.
What are you basing this on ?
I did cover it, under Aggro. I'm assuming you're going against someone that made an Ascend deck, packed with enough value to not be a joke. Also same applies to poison. You can ignore poison and just beat them the old fashioned way.
I thought it was obvious, but "advantage of burn is damage can be healed" is considered from the context of me designing cards, not cards themselves.
I meant disruptive interaction. Red can't counter, return to hand, exile or redirect a spell on the stack. It can copy an effect and choose a new target(s). If we are going with definition Blue can interact with all permanents, and white can interact with stack (Silence).
Eh, it protects you from any instant that poison. So, it would still count.
True, but one of rare burn poison burn spells cost exactly 4 mana. And even that card works, by primarily burning you, not poisoning.
I got to play Meilira in Humans and got beat by Infect this way. Think it was Seasons of Growth, Blighted Agent and just 20 damage in face turn four or five. The draws were nuts but Infect is stupid fast. I didn't get Thalia but I kept the hand, thinking Melira is good against Infect. Turns out, she's meh. I think I cut her out of side after that debacle.
Funny that you said that, I did see a match where +16 life mattered diddly squat against a burn deck.
I do see your point, but my point is, Infect can out aggro Melira using deck.
Perfect for common
It's a work in progress.
AFAIK there are no cards that prevent poison, there are cards that increase counters or prevent counters, or just remove all counters on opponent ala Suncleanser. I know Green can increase counters and White can prevent/remove counters from players.Last edited by -D-; 2019-11-14 at 12:23 PM.
-
2019-11-14, 01:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
It was just very weird example considering you could have said ramp spell.
What are you basing this on ?
I did cover it, under Aggro. I'm assuming you're going against someone that made an Ascend deck, packed with enough value to not be a joke.
Also ascend is waaaaay less parasitic than poison.
Also same applies to poison. You can ignore poison and just beat them the old fashioned way.
I thought it was obvious, but "advantage of burn is damage can be healed" is considered from the context of me designing cards, not cards themselves.
I meant disruptive interaction. Red can't counter, return to hand, exile or redirect a spell on the stack.
white can interact with stack (Silence).
Eh, it protects you from any instant that poison. So, it would still count.
True, but one of rare burn poison burn spells cost exactly 4 mana. And even that card works, by primarily burning you, not poisoning.
The fact that you need to make the poison burn cards also burn again just show how bad the mechanic is.
I'm gonna start this next section off by saying that anecdotal evidence is very poor evidence for a general case.
I got to play Meilira in Humans
and got beat by Infect this way. Think it was Seasons of Growth, Blighted Agent and just 20 damage in face turn four or five.
At first I thought you were talking about Wild Defiance, a card that actually did see some play, which is how a dealt lethal 14 through a Melira once, but that still isn't even a card you want to keep in post board.
The mere fact that you need a specific card that generally isn't even that good in order to do it proves that it's not something that is easy to do.
The draws were nuts but Infect is stupid fast.
I didn't get Thalia but I kept the hand, thinking Melira is good against Infect. Turns out, she's meh. I think I cut her out of side after that debacle.
Funny that you said that, I did see a match where +16 life mattered diddly squat against a burn deck.
I had a game with one drop zoo where I won without ever attacking, but that doesn't mean keeping me from attacking isn't usually going to be a good strategy.
I do see your point, but my point is, Infect can out aggro Melira using deck.
Melira is not good to have in your sideboard card against infect, but not because it is easy for infect to deal lethal through her.
Perfect for common
AFAIK there are no cards that prevent poison, there are cards that increase counters or prevent counters,
or just remove all counters on opponent ala Suncleanser.
I know Green can increase counters and White can prevent/remove counters from players.
Preventing damage is green/white
Oh i sure wonder what colors preventing specifically poison would be /s.Last edited by Ninjaman; 2019-11-14 at 01:58 PM.
-
2019-11-15, 11:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Yeah, but A) set isn't fully designed, B) you haven't seen other cards C) I have yet to play test it.
Again. You're still the beatdown or the value deck. You're going to win using Aggro or Control strategy.
As stated in rules yes. There are cards, in the other 260+ cards, that make you immune to poison, either by outright stopping it or by making you not lose when you hit 10+ counters.
That's not the reason why that spell deals damage. Reason number one, to punish decks that go too much into inflicting self poison. Reason number two, cards that make you immune to poison, don't make you immune to damage. Reason number three, there are damage synergistic cards.
I stand corrected. I did search the scryfall for spells that use Redirect wording. Also that effect, outside of WAR was last seen in World Wake. It's not a common mechanic for red. At best it's tertiary.
Wait, so by preventing something, you're not interacting with it. Phew! For a minute I thought blue can interact with spells on stack
A) She's a creature
B) She's a Human
C) She's 2CMC
D) There was a lot of Infect in meta
E) Friend suggested it
It's played in main deck of Infect decks, that managed to win a tournament.
It goes to show, even a Melira that isn't removed can be safely ignored. The nut draw was the SoG and two lands, everything else was pretty standard. He scried and drew the scried cards, so those aren't that crazy.
What do you mean "filled with narrow hate cards"? There are three hate cards in card pool of 110 commons and 280 other cards. Granted they are commons, but not that common.
The blue one is a mirror pair to a red card that inflicts poison. The green one is a fancier fog, and I'm considering removing the black one.
Eh. Not really. Preventing +1/+1 counters isn't really preventing poison is it. Preventing counters on players is anti-poison/anti-energy.
Really?
Dovin Baan disagrees.
-
2019-11-16, 04:39 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
And i fear that when you playtest it you're gonna discover that it's not your implementation that is lacking, it is the idea itself.
Again. You're still the beatdown or the value deck. You're going to win using Aggro or Control strategy.
As stated in rules yes. There are cards, in the other 260+ cards, that make you immune to poison, either by outright stopping it or by making you not lose when you hit 10+ counters.
For comparison the entire Mirrodin block had only 2 infect hate cards, one of them only prevented the wither on itself, and they even had broader applications than yours.
That's not the reason why that spell deals damage. Reason number one, to punish decks that go too much into inflicting self poison.
Reason number two, cards that make you immune to poison, don't make you immune to damage.
Reason number three, there are damage synergistic cards.
These designs are way too schizophrenic.
I stand corrected. I did search the scryfall for spells that use Redirect wording. Also that effect, outside of WAR was last seen in World Wake. It's not a common mechanic for red.
At best it's tertiary.
Wait, so by preventing something, you're not interacting with it. Phew! For a minute I thought blue can interact with spells on stack
Silence is used in combo decks to prevent the opponent from interacting with your combo, so yes it is the opposite of stack interaction.
Blue isn't preventing spells from being cast, it is countering them as they are being cast.
Thoughtseizing the spell out of their hand is more stack interaction than Silence is.
It's played in main deck of Infect decks, that managed to win a tournament.
It goes to show, even a Melira that isn't removed can be safely ignored. The nut draw was the SoG and two lands, everything else was pretty standard. He scried and drew the scried cards, so those aren't that crazy.
What do you mean "filled with narrow hate cards"? There are three hate cards in card pool of 110 commons and 280 other cards. Granted they are commons, but not that common.
The blue one is a mirror pair to a red card that inflicts poison.
The green one is a fancier fog,
and I'm considering removing the black one.
Eh. Not really. Preventing +1/+1 counters isn't really preventing poison is it. Preventing counters on players is anti-poison/anti-energy.
That's +1/+1 counters, which are positive. +1/+1 counters can be negated with -1/-1 counters. The card could have said "whenever a +1/+1 counter is put on a creature an opponent controls, put -1/-1 counter on that creature." and it would undoubtedly be black. Preventing counters isn't black, but preventing +1/+1 counters is.
"Bubbling", which is prevent damage to and from this creature, is blue/white, blue also get some creatures where damage dealt to them is prevented. They do not get to prevent damage dealt to players.Last edited by Ninjaman; 2019-11-16 at 04:39 AM.
-
2019-11-16, 05:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Location
- Carlisle, Englund
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
One of the largest bends in War of the Spark probably isn’t a good defence.
Oh also if you are ever curious on where a often unseen ability lies in the colour pie, check this article by Maro. Obviously some small things have changed in the past 3 years (biggest I can think of is that banisher priest effects being secondary in green never happened), but it’s still a good starting point.Last edited by Androgeus; 2019-11-16 at 05:08 AM.
"Three blokes walk into a pub. One of them is a little bit stupid, and the whole scene unfolds with a tedious inevitability." - Bill Bailey
Androgeus' 3 step guide to Doctor Who speculation:
Spoiler- Pick a random character
- State that person is The Rani
- goto 1
-
2019-11-16, 07:08 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Then I'll rework it.
Yeah, and you can beat someone with Infect dealing damage, instead of poison to them.
The premise of that theoretical setup is that Ascending is a win-condition, i.e. you can generate enough value, which is true in Limited.
It's almost as if though a card can fit two roles at once, huh The card gives you poison, makes it so you don't die when you have 10+ counters, and then steals life equal to poison counters on you.
How does a card that gives poison and damage stops decks that add poison to themselves?
Non sequitur. I'm talking about the cards in my set, but sure it applies to other cards, I guess.
Sure, yes. But I'm taking Limited into considerations. Poison burn in limited is a non-starter. Like control. Sure, it might happen if stars align, but 99.99% they don't.
For the same reason, they have Dovin Baan. The Color Pie is a guideline, not a law.
That's some word wizardry right there. Yeah, no. They interact with stack. By prohibiting interaction. Counters prevent the spell effect, but allow the cost.
The difference is, one is more proactive (Silence) and the other is reactive (Counterspell).
It wasn't a one-off card, he told me added two to his deck, though I haven't rifled through his deck to verify. And according to him it was in his starting hand. It's FNM though, you can run weird **** at FNM.
Color pair, or whatever it is called. When you have a Red spell that destroys an artifact and a white that destroys an enchantment and a green that destroys a flier.
For what it's worth. Removing counters is a strictly black thing. Which is why Suncleanser exists. It's almost as the color wheel is a joke
While true, it doesn't cover things like Guard Gomazoa.
I'm aware of the color pie article. I consulted it for looking up preventing poison, or preventing counters isn't mentioned anywhere.
However, you should also know that MaRo himself also made an article about blindly sticking to the rules. And Lo and Behold, they don't even stick to their own rules.
-----------------------
That said, talking about this, makes me wonder, if another form of counters would be better. Let's call them "corruption counters".
Corruption works like this
- You can't remove it (like poison).
- You may prevent it or reduce it (like poison). Reduce like "you can only gain one corruption"
- If your corruption (number of corruption tokens on you) reaches your starting life, you lose the game.
- If your corruption (number of corruption tokens on you) is lesser than or equal to your current health, you lose the game.
Last edited by -D-; 2019-11-16 at 07:38 AM.
-
2019-11-16, 07:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Location
- Carlisle, Englund
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
A bunch of cards? I guess you can have a cycle that destroys specific things, but it would be the loosest of cycles. Mirrored pairs was correct, if you talking like white knight/black knight. I don’t think ‘deal some damage’ and ‘prevent all damage’ are mirrored effects. To be mirrored effects, the prevent one would have to prevent exactly the amount the red card does.
That said, talking about this, makes me wonder, if another form of counters would be better. Let's call them "corruption counters".
Corruption works like this
- You can't remove it (like poison).
- You may prevent it or reduce it (like poison). Reduce like "you can only gain one corruption"
- If your corruption (number of corruption tokens on you) reaches your starting life, you lose the game.
- If your corruption (number of corruption tokens on you) is lesser than or equal to your current health, you lose the game.
Last edited by Androgeus; 2019-11-16 at 08:00 AM.
"Three blokes walk into a pub. One of them is a little bit stupid, and the whole scene unfolds with a tedious inevitability." - Bill Bailey
Androgeus' 3 step guide to Doctor Who speculation:
Spoiler- Pick a random character
- State that person is The Rani
- goto 1
-
2019-11-16, 10:47 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Not completely sure what you mean by that.
In what way would corruption be more parasitic than poison? Or energy?
Ideally, I would probably change the way poison works. Namely make it less debilitating. Second, making it interact with life. Third, consistency across different game modes. Sadly, this change would kill Infect and ruin cards e.g. Phyrexian Unlife.Last edited by -D-; 2019-11-16 at 11:07 AM.
-
2019-11-16, 02:18 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Unrelated mostly.
Toxic supertype.
Dripping Rune - G
Toxic Enchantment
"Sac 10 toxic permanents you control: target player loses the game."
Putrid Elf- G
Toxic Creature- Elf
1/2
Vial Goblin- BG
Toxic Creature- Goblin
1, Sacrifice Vial Goblin: Two permanents you control become Toxic.
2/1
"Tasked with handling dangerous toxins, Goblins proved ideal for their lack of fear. They proved less then ideal in their physical grace."
-
2019-11-16, 03:30 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
If the very idea of what you're trying to do doesn't work then you can't just rework it.
Yeah, and you can beat someone with Infect dealing damage, instead of poison to them.
The premise of that theoretical setup is that Ascending is a win-condition, i.e. you can generate enough value, which is true in Limited.
Do you know how much specific ascend hate that exists? 0!
It's almost as if though a card can fit two roles at once, huh The card gives you poison, makes it so you don't die when you have 10+ counters, and then steals life equal to poison counters on you.
How does a card that gives poison and damage stops decks that add poison to themselves?
How does the fact that a poison infect spell also deal damage help punish decks that poison themselves?
Non sequitur. I'm talking about the cards in my set, but sure it applies to other cards, I guess.
Infect creatures don't need to also deal normal damage, as the one card that prevents poison counters also makes them lose infect, so the hate card makes them deal normal damage instead of doing nothing.
Granted Solemnity does just shut down infect hard, but that card also wasn't printed in a set with infect.
My point is that you are printing cards A that do something, then you are printing cards B that hinder cards A, and then you are adding something more to cards A so they do more against cards B. That is just way too much back and fourth meta design.
Sure, yes. But I'm taking Limited into considerations. Poison burn in limited is a non-starter. Like control. Sure, it might happen if stars align, but 99.99% they don't.
Also control only happen one in 10000? Really?
For the same reason, they have Dovin Baan. The Color Pie is a guideline, not a law.
Redirecting spells is red, but you claim it is tertiary. That must then mean there is another color that has it secondary, more than red and less than blue, otherwise it would be secondary in red.
You also completely ignored my point about it not showing up often in blue either.
That's some word wizardry right there. Yeah, no. They interact with stack. By prohibiting interaction. Counters prevent the spell effect, but allow the cost.
The difference is, one is more proactive (Silence) and the other is reactive (Counterspell).
Did my point just fly completely over your head?
Silence is not a proactive hate card, it is an anti-hate card, it works by preventing the opponent from using interaction when you combo off.
Read what I wrote again and reply to the individual points I am making.
It wasn't a one-off card, he told me added two to his deck, though I haven't rifled through his deck to verify. And according to him it was in his starting hand. It's FNM though, you can run weird **** at FNM.
Your friend could run a full playset, I don't care, the point was that most infect decks won't be able to do that.
Color pair, or whatever it is called. When you have a Red spell that destroys an artifact and a white that destroys an enchantment and a green that destroys a flier.
An infect burn spell and a prevent poison spell aren't a mirrored cycle, that's just a card and a hate card.
For what it's worth. Removing counters is a strictly black thing. Which is why Suncleanser exists. It's almost as the color wheel is a joke
[QUOTE]While true, it doesn't cover things like Guard Gomazoa.
Literally the paragraph you replied to:
That said, talking about this, makes me wonder, if another form of counters would be better. Let's call them "corruption counters".
Corruption works like this
- You can't remove it (like poison).
- You may prevent it or reduce it (like poison). Reduce like "you can only gain one corruption"
- If your corruption (number of corruption tokens on you) reaches your starting life, you lose the game.
- If your corruption (number of corruption tokens on you) is lesser than or equal to your current health, you lose the game.
Wow, that paragraph on dovin was a dumpster fire.
Kiora, the Crashing Wave has the exact same ability, which isn't on any other green card.
It also says:
"Likewise, reducing mana costs is traditionally more of a blue thing than a white thing."
While the card increases mana cost.
You can't change the way poison works, but you can make a similar mechanic that works how you think it should work.
-
2019-11-16, 06:05 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
There are non standard ways to win. You can win with Infect, without causing 1 point of infect damage.
In limited, it's a game winning advantage. Sure, you could just luck out and kill him post ascend, but even drawing one more card than opponent can be crucial.
That's because it's not a parasitic mechanic as poison.
I said it's not just a narrow hate card. It's poison hate card, that synergizes with it.
It deals damage proportional to poison. On it's own, it can deal 2*{target player poison}
No. I have three mechanics:
A) Poison synergy - either get poison for effect or positive effect that scales of poison
B) Poison punish - add poison and/or some negative effect
C) Negate poison - prevent poison in a limited fashion
A card can be just A, or B, or C, or AB, BC, AC. Usually they are combination.
You can say the same thing about counterspell. It's underwhelming in Limited, and generally doesn't work. ELD made it work by having a mill effect attached. Or a body.
White and blue enchantment based control can work.
Tertiary as in Color pie effect.
https://magic.wizards.com/en/article...017-2017-06-05
Look up Counterspell. Primary Blue, and tertiary White.
Effect can have primary and tertiary without secondary.
I hate quote wars, so I probably skipped through some of the things you wrote. Mea culpa.
Redirect is in fact primary in red and blue, but it's such a rare mechanic I assumed it was tertiary.
It's a proactive spell restriction. Counterspell is a reactive spell restriction.
According to MaRo, white is a proactive color "better prevent than treat", while blue is reactive.
I don't believe that it's anti stack card. It still allows abilities and such to resolve.
I don't understand what you mean by anti hate cards. If I play it against deck that wants to cast Approach of the second Sun, is it not preventing me from casting it?
I assumed you read and referenced the Magic Color Pie 2017.
It has no rubric for preventing counters. And the color that removes non-player counters is Black. No other color is listed.
I thought that was exactly the power of infect. That it can't be healed. Although white could still, prevent it. Or heal opponent.
Is there specific meaning to Toxic supertype?
Problem with this is that the mechanic is highly parasitic. It's like affinity. In order to play it, you need more artifacts in deck. The more artifacts there are, the better affinity decks are.
Why not just turn dripping rune into sacrifice 10 black or green nontoken permanents.Last edited by -D-; 2019-11-16 at 06:07 PM.
-
2019-11-17, 03:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2013
-
2019-11-17, 03:42 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
I'm sorry what?
In limited, it's a game winning advantage. Sure, you could just luck out and kill him post ascend, but even drawing one more card than opponent can be crucial.
Yes it's really good, yes it puts you in a nice spot, but not if you have to put yourself in a too disadvantaged spot to get there, or the opponent has bombs of his own.
That's because it's not a parasitic mechanic as poison.
It's because your mechanic is game winning and highly non-interactive.
I said it's not just a narrow hate card. It's poison hate card, that synergizes with it.
It deals damage proportional to poison. On it's own, it can deal 2*{target player poison}
No. I have three mechanics:
A) Poison synergy - either get poison for effect or positive effect that scales of poison
B) Poison punish - add poison and/or some negative effect
C) Negate poison - prevent poison in a limited fashion
A card can be just A, or B, or C, or AB, BC, AC. Usually they are combination.
You can say the same thing about counterspell. It's underwhelming in Limited, and generally doesn't work. ELD made it work by having a mill effect attached. Or a body.
Cancel has always been a bad card.
Yes counterspells generally aren't that strong in limited, due to how it is difficult to spend your mana on something else should your opponent not cast anything you want to counter, but they can still be playable, they're not unusable like a mill card without any support would be, or a five color card in a set with horrible mana fixing.
White and blue enchantment based control can work.
Redirect is in fact primary in red and blue, but it's such a rare mechanic I assumed it was tertiary.
It's a proactive spell restriction. Counterspell is a reactive spell restriction.
According to MaRo, white is a proactive color "better prevent than treat", while blue is reactive.
I don't believe that it's anti stack card. It still allows abilities and such to resolve.
I don't understand what you mean by anti hate cards. If I play it against deck that wants to cast Approach of the second Sun, is it not preventing me from casting it?
That turn yes, but they'll then use all the mana they now haven't spent on Approach to keep you from winning this turn, and then they'll win the next turn.
Also if you want to play Silence all the time to prevent the opponent from casting spells it isn't a hate card, it is a lock card.
Look here and type Silence into the search field, and tick both mainboard and sideboard boxes.
Here you can see decks that have placed well and play Silence. You should be able to recognize that they are combo decks, because that is when Silence is good. Silence works by keeping your opponent from interacting with your combo on the turn you are trying to win.
I assumed you read and referenced the Magic Color Pie 2017.
It has no rubric for preventing counters. And the color that removes non-player counters is Black. No other color is listed.
I thought that was exactly the power of infect. That it can't be healed. Although white could still, prevent it. Or heal opponent.Last edited by Ninjaman; 2019-11-17 at 03:44 AM.
-
2019-11-17, 12:25 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Good question. The envisioned setting is one where they have discovered how to make artificial mana, but the chemicals involved are awful carcinogens.
Countererspell- UB
Instant-U
Counter target spell with CMC less then the number of toxic permanents you control. Sacrifice a toxic permanent you control.
I'm actually blanking on what I intended right now, be back later.
-
2019-11-17, 01:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Just because you enter the game with plan A to win, doesn't mean it's going to work, or work as effectively as plan B.
If cards fall the right way, you can out aggro an aggro deck, or out control a control deck. Or deploy an unorthodox strategy to win.
Yes. It is. A large advantage is a game winning advantage. If you put yourself in a disadvantaged position, you don't have an advantage do you?
Of course, you could let disadvantage go to waste or misplay.
Ok. Sure. I thought parasitic implied some degree of non-interactivity.
What? Why would you run spell that deals damage to you, when you can run spells that heal you, give you cards or make your creature tougher, while also giving you poison.
In Limited, because other cards check for damage.
In Standard, because 4 of those are enough to kill someone at 20 life. If an opponent has much poison on them, they just kill sooner.
Counterspell in Limited, and especially Draft is usually a no go, because you can't find enough good counters, because the card quality is much, much lower.
No. Proactive is anything that acts in advance of future event happening. You can't play Silence as a reaction to someone playing something.
Because it doesn't deal with things on stack casted before or after it, nor does it deal with triggered or activated abilities.
No Doom blade is anti creature card because it deals with 5/6 of possible colors.
But will you say Doom is an anti permanent card?
The biggest problem to me, is that I never, ever, even once heard of someone calling Silence, stack hate card. Or anti hate card.
Sure, but it implies color roles change.
-
2019-11-17, 02:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
I was correct in my assumption that you did not get my point. You still act as if winning against someone who has ascended is some completely unlikely thing.
If cards fall the right way, you can out aggro an aggro deck, or out control a control deck. Or deploy an unorthodox strategy to win.
Yes. It is. A large advantage is a game winning advantage. If you put yourself in a disadvantaged position, you don't have an advantage do you?
Even if he has multiple of those you still have a decent chance of winning by playing big creatures/removal/card advantage of yours own.
When you have 10 poison counters you die on the spot outside of very specific circumstances.
You somehow constantly underplay that fact.
Ok. Sure. I thought parasitic implied some degree of non-interactivity.
What? Why would you run spell that deals damage to you, when you can run spells that heal you, give you cards or make your creature tougher, while also giving you poison.
In Limited, because other cards check for damage.
In Standard, because 4 of those are enough to kill someone at 20 life. If an opponent has much poison on them, they just kill sooner.
The key to a good design is to do as little as possible, but your designs seem to very often want to do multiple things.
Counterspell in Limited, and especially Draft is usually a no go, because you can't find enough good counters, because the card quality is much, much lower.
No. Proactive is anything that acts in advance of future event happening. You can't play Silence as a reaction to someone playing something.
No Doom blade is anti creature card because it deals with 5/6 of possible colors.
The biggest problem to me, is that I never, ever, even once heard of someone calling Silence, stack hate card. Or anti hate card.
You completely ignored my points about how Silence is actually played in the decks that play it.
Sure, but it implies color roles change.
-
2019-11-27, 09:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Almost all of those are enough of a win condition in Limited, especially draft. You don't need a huge advantage to win.
Assuming all things are near equivalent:
- You have evasion, and I don't. Most of the times I die.
- You draw more and I don't, I die. Even if I can remove your big threats, I won't be able to deal with each and every one of them on a continued basis.
Yes, I get it. 10 is death (unless cards say otherwise). But you're comparing two different environments.
You seem to conflate self-poison deck, with a poison burn deck. If you run a Anti-Poison Bear that prevents you from dying at 10 poison, you're going to run cards that give you poison and advantage, because the poison is irrelevant. Why would you run 2*{Poison counter} damage to the target player is beyond me?
Well of course you won't play just those, you can have other colors that add poison. In that case, two would probably be enough. Get opponent on 5 counters cast two of those. Each deals 10 damage.
Also 4 of them add 4 poison => Almost dead
That's not how a counterspell based control deck is made, which was my original claim. You can't make a counterspell based control deck in limited (barring some super kind of super luck).
Yeah, I get it. And you don't get the point what PROACTIVE means. PROACTIVE means I prohibit your options before you play them. Not after or when you play them.
Whether it is by preventing all spells for a turn, or Gaddock Teeg, or Thalia, is irrelevant.
Yeah, you're right. No one plays white anymore
Guess what, neither are black or white. It's a way to filter the "color-ness" of permanents. It's anti-color or negative-color, but it's still something you can select by.
Sure, and you ignored my question on whether Doom Blade is anti permanent. Tbh Silence I only ever saw played in prison decks, never as a control hate card.
If they can bend the rules, so can I. Also, you're still wrong on your account.
Colors that "prevent counters" are black and white (maybe green), not green and white. Green didn't get to prevent counter in a long while.
-
2019-11-27, 10:12 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Pretty sure there are exactly two ways that Silence ever really saw competitive play:
1. Alongside some method of recurring it, as a soft-lock. Isochron Scepter + Orim's Chant being the most common one.
2. As protection or counter-bait for a high impact or game ending play, like in Storm or when landing a game ending haymaker vs control.
-
2019-11-27, 11:56 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
No they're not. How does a 2/2 double striker just win you the game on a stalled board?
Late game you don't care that your 2/2 double striker cost only 2 mana, as you have plenty mana. A 2/2 double striker is about a 4 drop, so if your opponent played a 4 drop while you played your 2 drop you're still even. If he played a spell more than you while you drew a land, he might very well still be ahead. If he drew a card more than you at any point in the game, that single card might very well be better than the 2/2 double striker.
Assuming all things are near equivalent:
- You have evasion, and I don't. Most of the times I die.
- You draw more and I don't, I die. Even if I can remove your big threats, I won't be able to deal with each and every one of them on a continued basis.
Most of the cards that are better than average with city's blessing are worse than average without it, so until your get city's blessing your opponent has been playing better cards, so on average he should be ahead and you should only be starting to catch up.
The fact that they require you from already having about the same level of board presence as your opponent mean they are extremely far away from winning you the game on their own.
Compare this with poison where it doesn't matter if you control no creatures and your opponent has a massive board, five cards in hand, and lethal in the air next turn, you still win on the spot.
Yes, I get it. 10 is death (unless cards say otherwise). But you're comparing two different environments.
You seem to conflate self-poison deck, with a poison burn deck. If you run a Anti-Poison Bear that prevents you from dying at 10 poison, you're going to run cards that give you poison and advantage, because the poison is irrelevant. Why would you run 2*{Poison counter} damage to the target player is beyond me?
Well of course you won't play just those, you can have other colors that add poison. In that case, two would probably be enough. Get opponent on 5 counters cast two of those. Each deals 10 damage.
Also 4 of them add 4 poison => Almost dead
At this point it should just be some unique counter type that didn't do anything except interact with stuff that cared about it.
This is poison in name only, except for horribly punishing the self poison deck, once again proving how horribly rock-paper-scissors your entire design is.
That's not how a counterspell based control deck is made, which was my original claim. You can't make a counterspell based control deck in limited (barring some super kind of super luck).
Yeah, I get it. And you don't get the point what PROACTIVE means. PROACTIVE means I prohibit your options before you play them. Not after or when you play them.
Whether it is by preventing all spells for a turn, or Gaddock Teeg, or Thalia, is irrelevant.
Yeah, you're right. No one plays white anymore
Guess what, neither are black or white. It's a way to filter the "color-ness" of permanents. It's anti-color or negative-color, but it's still something you can select by.
White, Blue, Black, Red and Green are all colors as defined by the rules of the game, while colorless isn't. You know this, I have no idea why you're being purposefully obnoxious.
Sure, and you ignored my question on whether Doom Blade is anti permanent.
This point is completely irrelevant to everything. The point is you continue to ignore how Silence is actually played.
Tbh Silence I only ever saw played in prison decks, never as a control hate card.
And you have no excuse for not seeing other decks running Silence, because I already told you where to find them:
Look here and type Silence into the search field, and tick both mainboard and sideboard boxes.
Here you can see decks that have placed well and play Silence. You should be able to recognize that they are combo decks, because that is when Silence is good. Silence works by keeping your opponent from interacting with your combo on the turn you are trying to win.
If they can bend the rules, so can I.
This is a thread for getting feedback on your designs. I am telling you why your design isn't good.
Also, you're still wrong on your account. Colors that "prevent counters" are black and white (maybe green), not green and white. Green didn't get to prevent counter in a long while.
-
2019-11-28, 05:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
Because it's a model, a simplified view on things. Sure you can look at a scenario that's strictly outside of model.
Ok, sure, but now you're massively oversimplying things. What if opponent plays Solemnity or Melira (if this is infect deck we're talking about)? See, I can make complicating assumptions, too.
Nowhere did I say it is... I just said both are an example of RPS like mechanics. One is more insular, and the other is generally weak because they didn't add any really powerful Ascend cards. They could have.
So does the card I gave example. You can pair it, with a creature that poisons on ETB or attack, few more direct damage/poison spells and it could still work.
Yes. And you refuse to see it can be used like a ****tier Gadock Teeg. Humans used to run a similar card - Ranger Captain of Eos. This is a similar effect to silence. In non-creature decks, it's effectively a Silence. Point is, you play it on opponent's turn 4 to ensure he can't use sorcery speed sweepers or ensure your opponent doesn't do something important that will prevent you from winning next turn.
Looks at pre-ban Standard tournaments that saw more Breeding Pools than Plains (in aggregate). Sure feels funny to me
Because while it isn't exactly a color, it is a filter for color like filtering. Things can search for colorless cards, destroy colorless/non-colorless, etc. I mean, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.
I agree, but neither is anti-stack.
Blightbeetle although not on players. And it's part of the Color Pie. Also green didn't prevent counters in general Melira prevented Infect and Melira's cards prevented counters on creatures. White is the only color that had two cards that prevented counters in general AFAICT.
Also this is my last reply to you regarding this. It's going nowhere, and your arguments aren't persuasive enough, and to make matters worse, the cards probably changed massively from when we started talking.
-------------------------------------------------
Changing the subject
Did you guys see Mystery playset boosters? They look like new Un-Set. Since Unsets are basically R&D proving ground, I'm wondering which of the cards there could you see become part of the standard. For me I could see them doing something like - Frontier Explorer or Sarah's Wings.
In fact, before this made a card similar to Sarah's Wings.
University of Akham - 2U
Legendary Enchantment
Tap two untapped Cities and/or Wizards: Creatures without flying can't attack you.
Although this was inspired by Form of the Dragon, not Sarah's Wings.Last edited by -D-; 2019-11-28 at 05:58 PM.
-
2019-11-29, 01:42 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
That's just a completely meaningless way to put it up. A 1/1 flyer is going to win you the game when all other things are equal, but that doesn't mean that a 1/1 flyer wins you most of the time.
Ok, sure, but now you're massively oversimplying things. What if opponent plays Solemnity or Melira (if this is infect deck we're talking about)?
See, I can make complicating assumptions, too.
Nowhere did I say it is... I just said both are an example of RPS like mechanics.
It's also completely wrong. Ascend isn't very RPS, and the fact that was your best example just goes to show how wizards don't design how you claim they do.
One is more insular, and the other is generally weak because they didn't add any really powerful Ascend cards. They could have.
The power level isn't really relevant to the discussion unless they made an ascend card that straight up said "you win the game".
So does the card I gave example. You can pair it, with a creature that poisons on ETB or attack, few more direct damage/poison spells and it could still work.
Yes. And you refuse to see it can be used like a ****tier Gadock Teeg.
Yes beast within can also be played as a token generation spell, but that's obviously not the point of the card.
Humans used to run a similar card - Ranger Captain of Eos.
This is a similar effect to silence. In non-creature decks, it's effectively a Silence. Point is, you play it on opponent's turn 4 to ensure he can't use sorcery speed sweepers or ensure your opponent doesn't do something important that will prevent you from winning next turn.
It can also stop storm, Living End, Ad Nauseum and Snapcaster Mage.
But it's not a card that's good against burn, which is exactly where you claimed it could be used to start with.
Looks at pre-ban Standard tournaments that saw more Breeding Pools than Plains (in aggregate). Sure feels funny to me
Because while it isn't exactly a color, it is a filter for color like filtering. Things can search for colorless cards, destroy colorless/non-colorless, etc. I mean, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.
What you said wasn't kind of correct, it was flat out wrong.
I agree, but neither is anti-stack.
I've shown you the link again, I've explained it, Gauntlet explained it, you still don't seem to want to recognize it.
Blightbeetle although not on players.
And it's part of the Color Pie.
Also green didn't prevent counters in general Melira prevented Infect and Melira's cards prevented counters on creatures.
White is the only color that had two cards that prevented counters in general AFAICT.
Also this is my last reply to you regarding this. It's going nowhere, and your arguments aren't persuasive enough, and to make matters worse, the cards probably changed massively from when we started talking.
I think there could be ways of doing some of the stuff you want to do, but you are too focused on exactly how you want to do it to ever consider that.
The individual cards aren't of much importance when the entire concept is deeply flawed.
You're also somehow ignoring that you also put a counter preventing effect on a blue card. Where is your basis for that?
I think you can get something that works, possibly something that works well, but not if you insist on using poison.
University of Akham - 2U
Legendary Enchantment
Tap two untapped Cities and/or Wizards: Creatures without flying can't attack you.
Although this was inspired by Form of the Dragon, not Sarah's Wings.
-
2019-11-29, 08:41 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Location
- Tron Spacetime
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
You mean the thing that was linked multiple times in this page?
My point is/was, they probably moved that ability from green to white. Kinda like they removed blue's ability to negate damage. Or red counterspells. And yes, black gets to remove counters from permanents, and I assume by extension, to prevent counters.
As for the rest, I'm not dancing this dance again.
Hm, I could add a drawback that you can't attack either, without fliers.
Or would it be better if it was like or Sarah's Wings, where it prevents combat damage from non-fliers?
But this still doesn't answer my question - which of the Mystery Booster playtest cards could you see as real cards?Last edited by -D-; 2019-11-29 at 09:13 AM.
-
2019-11-29, 11:46 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
Re: MTG Share your Card Designs II
That says removing counters, not preventing counters. Those are two different things. Just because black can remove counters doesn't mean it can prevent it.
It's also worth noting as I think it has been before that white is not noted as removing or preventing counters, yet Suncleanser and Solemnity exist, so they might have moved the counter removal completely to white. They might not, we don't know for sure, but what we do know is that preventing counters was never black.
Make black cards that remove counters all you want, just don't claim preventing counters was ever black.
My point is/was, they probably moved that ability from green to white.
and I assume by extension, to prevent counters.
Hm, I could add a drawback that you can't attack either, without fliers.
Or would it be better if it was like or Sarah's Wings, where it prevents combat damage from non-fliers?
But this still doesn't answer my question - which of the Mystery Booster playtest cards could you see as real cards?
For your set I would do something like:
Corrupting flame - 2R
Instant - U
Put a corruption counter on target opponent.
Corrupting flame deals damage to target opponent equal to the number of corruption counters on that player.
Everlasting Corrupter - 2BB
Creature - Spirit - R
Menace
Whenever Everlasting Corrupter deals combat damage to an opponent, put a corruption counter on that player.
1B, Remove 2 corruption counters from target opponent: Return Everlasting Corrupter to the battlefield tapped.
4/3
Pox Ghoul - 3B
Creature - Zombie - C
When Pox Ghoul dies, put a corruption counter on target opponent.
4/2
Disciple of the Foul - 2B
Creature - Elf Cleric - C
Lifelink
Disciple of the Foul gets +1/+0 as long as an opponent has one or more corruption counters.
2/2
Foul Strike - 2B
Instant - C
Target creature gets -3/-3 until end of turn. If that creature dies this turn, put a corruption counter on that creature's controller.
Frothing Leafkin - 1R
Creature - Elf Berserker - C
Frothing leafkin has menace as long defending player has 3 or more corruption counters.
2/2
Corruption counters don't do anything.
I'm still not a huge fan, since it's still quite parasitic, but it gets rid of some of the problems inherent with infect.