June 2009 - MCC - Discussion thread [Archive]

JakeKessler

06-03-2009, 01:39 AM

Sorry if this jumps around. I'm not really going in any particular order.

Cashew, I just have to say? Regardless of how serious it is, Trifecta is pretty cool. :D

Seconded. Trifecta makes me really, really happy. It's a shame WUBRG costs aren't that attractive visually, because the ability you made rocks really hard.

@ Lokenta Mirana: The way this card is set up is Brokey McBrokeBroke. State-based effects on lands are powerful enough, because they're free and hard to get rid of. Then you let it tap for colored mana with no drawback (not even coming into play tapped)... and then you give it a basic land type so I can tutor it up with commons like Farseek (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=87970) or Jhessian Zombies (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=144286). Why is this card not an enchantment?

On the other hand, the actual abilities seem janky and underpowered. I need to build a whole deck based around black fear creatures? If I did, wouldn't that deck be able to win by damage?

@ Michael_Zeora: I really like that you render your card as a PNG, and that all your formatting and things like that are correct. It improves the aesthetics in a way that I can't even properly described. There's a few of us on here that do it, and it always makes me happy to see a card done that way. Looks very professional.

As for the card itself, it's solidly balanced, extremely playable, even powerful. I'd run the hell out of it if it existed. It's not terribly interesting, though... And "Wake the Dead" seems like a pretty default title for a card that brings a dead creature back to life.

@death by aggro, Punkrockanarchymagic, Cashew: I suggest you pay a little more attention to your formatting. Capitalization at the beginning of sentences, using colons for costs rather than periods, NOT putting periods after keywords that stand by themselves. On a related note, it's not in the rules, but it seems like block-specific keywords ought to have reminder text, unless they're rares that can't squeeze it in. Little things like this might not seem that important, but they make your card look less like a real Magic card.

@death by aggro specifically: I really like your card, but I can't expect I'd pay the upkeep very often. Since the third ability triggers during your upkeep anyway, you can just resolve that first to get the effect, then sacrifice the card rather than pay its cumulative upkeep cost. Since right after your upkeep comes your draw, you can immediate dredge it back and recast it, and it'll be back in play waiting for your next turn. Ultimately, for a cost of 1B per turn, you get to Terror (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=135199) something every single upkeep; and since you're dredging like crazy, the threshold restriction won't be hard to reach at all. You can get the one-card engine online with no acceleration or other combo pieces by turn five reliably: Turn two, cast Soul Drain; turn three: sacrifice to the upkeep, dredge 4, recast; turn four: sacrifice, dredge 4 and recast; turn five, there are 8 cards in your graveyard, start killing stuff. Now, if all this wasn't enough of a powerhouse, consider that short of an Oblivion Ring (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=174909)-like effect, the dredge ability means the opponent never really makes this go away--they just escape the upkeep Terror (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=135199) for one turn.

I'd mention my card, but I don't have a real good idea of what I'm going to submit just yet. My first thought was something combining Flashback and Unearth, since Unearth is basically Flashback for creatures... but my last two entries were black cards that help graveyard strategies, so I kind of want to break away from that this month. Hmm... more thought is required on this.

EDIT @Punkrockanarchymagic: I just realized something, and I have to point it out. Your card needs a "loophole" line about Split Second the same way you have one about Epic. When Cascade resolves, it'll attempt to let you play the cascaded card, but Split Second won't let you. (This is the kind of thing that's easier to catch with reminder text, if you have room.)

final_press

06-03-2009, 02:34 AM

@KD, your latest submission only has 2 keywords in it.

@ Sinapptyk, the second 2 are definately too wordy. It takes too long to read through and ruins the aesthetics of the cards because the text is too small. That alone is reason to scrap those two. Protection from Black is almost completely wasted on an enchantment, as black doesn't have enchantment removal. Also be aware that copyrighted art may not be used on submissions for this contest.

If you want to post up loads of cards without lengthening the page simply place the cards in [spoiler] tags. :)

@FP: i like the first entry better...its cleaner. This one seems clunky to play with. BTW, try changing flying to fear....it looks much better then...id recommend shadow, but....eh.

Thanks for the feedback. I don't really want to change flying to fear, as the creature is a blocker, not an attacker.. that's why I gave it flash. The same can be said for shadow.. it's main ability is useless if it is rarely going to engage in combat. Don't focus on the art. Yes the flavour is vital to making a good entry a winning entry, but if the artwork doesn't fit the card, don't look to change that card, change the artwork (which is what I will be doing if I stick with this design).

Punkrockanarchymagic

06-03-2009, 02:40 AM

Thanks Jake. I've edited my card, and will comment on your card tomorrow.

final_press

06-03-2009, 02:52 AM

@ Artifactor, the text should be written "Creatures you control with power 2 or less have flying and first strike".

Artifactor

06-03-2009, 02:56 AM

card fixed thank you final press

Kamahl's Disciple

06-03-2009, 03:12 AM

@Artifactor: - Two things: -

1. Creatures in Affinity for creatures doesn't need to be capitalized and there needs to be no period at the end. Everything else Final Press said was right.

2. This doesn't need to be a rare, I can see it being an uncommon.

That is all.

JakeKessler

06-03-2009, 03:22 AM

Just to be 100% on this

Are you considering ability words to be keywords, or not. Many don't so I want to be sure.

* Channel
* Chroma
* Domain
* Grandeur
* Hellbent
* Kinship
* Radiance
* Sweep
* Threshold

How about block-specific action words? Clash, scry, and fateseal are the only three I can think of right this second. (Block-specific is the important distinction here, as it's the only thing that separates these three from evergreen action words like regenerate, destroy, sacrifice and counter.) The rule of thumb I've been going with is, if a word or phrase has EVER been accompanied by reminder text, then it works as a keyword for the purposes of this contest. Is that a safe way to go about it?

http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd232/Drizzlepunx/AetherseaDawn.jpg

Now that I think of it, there's still more I want to say about this card.

1. Why is it hybrid? I don't see any particular reason why not, mind you; Cascade, Epic and Split second are all abilities that have been stretched into all three colors (although Cascade of course has only appeared on gold cards, since it was only in Alara Reborn, the all-gold set). I just don't see a particular reason why it IS hybrid, either. This is something I lost points over in the April contest, so I thought you deserved a heads-up.

2. Get rid of the periods after Epic and Cascade; they really shouldn't be there.

3. It's a shame reminder text here for all three abilities would be impossible, because the card looks really bare without any, and putting reminder text for only one or two of the abilities would just be incorrect. Oh, well.

4. I don't know if this is what you intended or not, but with the "fix" you put in for Split second, your opponent now has a chance to respond to your spell before Cascade resolves; the "Split second shield" isn't in place until the Cascaded spell is revealed and played. (As a side note, playing a Cascaded spell is optional, so there's the chance Split second won't ever be in effect at all.) Instead of doing it this way, you might think about paraphrasing the other ability to be something like: "You may play spells with AEthersea Dawn's cascade ability as though you had not played an epic spell this game, and as though AEthersea Dawn did not have split second."

Kamahl's Disciple

06-03-2009, 03:48 AM

Now that I think of it, there's still more I want to say about this card.

1. Why is it hybrid? I don't see any particular reason why not, mind you; Cascade, Epic and Split second are all abilities that have been stretched into all three colors (although Cascade of course has only appeared on gold cards, since it was only in Alara Reborn, the all-gold set). I just don't see a particular reason why it IS hybrid, either. This is something I lost points over in the April contest, so I thought you deserved a heads-up.

He did this because the total converted mana cost of this card is actually 8. Much like how Reaper King's total converted mana cost is 10. Thus, this spell's Cascade will work for all spells that cost less then 8 without the player actually having to pay that much if they paid using its colors.

JakeKessler

06-03-2009, 04:45 AM

Alright, so I've had some time to think and I've come up with a few initial ideas. What do you guys think?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/TouchtheUnspeakable.pnghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/DesperateUltimatum.pnghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/AdvocatesGlass.pnghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/UprootSkyshroud.png

Touch the Unspeakable (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/TouchtheUnspeakable.png) - My initial reaction to the contest, a fairly straightforward black graveyard manipulation tool. It's characteristic of my contest entries, so as much as I like it, I'm inclined to discard it (haha) for something else.
Desperate Ultimatum (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/DesperateUltimatum.png) - No lie, this one was inspired by Punkrock's entry, above. It seems fun, although it would be on the complicated side in practice. I think it'd be particularly fun to stick this in a mono-red burn deck with Spinerock Knoll (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=139514); you could cascade-storm out a library full of burn spells fairly easily. Also the text is a mite small with all those reminders. EDIT I just realized... this card doesn't actually work. Because I'm not "playing" the storm copies, I won't be cascading or rippling them. Hmm.
Advocate's Glass (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/AdvocatesGlass.png) - Speaking of tiny text. I didn't like this idea much at first, but it's been growing on me since. It feels more serious than my other entries, somehow. This might be the direction I end up going.
Uproot Skyshroud (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/UprootSkyshroud.png) - I don't like how small the text had to be for this to work. I'm pleased about the Sweep/Retrace connection, though--and the flavor connection to Skyshroud Forest getting dropped in the middle of Keld during the Rathi overly in Planeshift. (Think I'll get bonus points for having a fourth keyword, shroud, in the name?)

WTH, all my art except for that last one ended up being MYSTERIOUS FANTASY CHICK. How odd.

death by aggro

06-03-2009, 05:44 AM

@DbA: - I like this card, despite the common sounding name (And I checked, there is no card in the database with this name, which is surprising to me.)

I did this very same action before putting up the card, for the exact same reason:p. I might change up the art to be a little more sinister later on, but something about the name just seems right to me.

@death by aggro specifically: I really like your card, but I can't expect I'd pay the upkeep very often. Since the third ability triggers during your upkeep anyway, you can just resolve that first to get the effect, then sacrifice the card rather than pay its cumulative upkeep cost. Since right after your upkeep comes your draw, you can immediate dredge it back and recast it, and it'll be back in play waiting for your next turn. Ultimately, for a cost of 1B per turn, you get to Terror (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=135199) something every single upkeep; and since you're dredging like crazy, the threshold restriction won't be hard to reach at all. You can get the one-card engine online with no acceleration or other combo pieces by turn five reliably: Turn two, cast Soul Drain; turn three: sacrifice to the upkeep, dredge 4, recast; turn four: sacrifice, dredge 4 and recast; turn five, there are 8 cards in your graveyard, start killing stuff. Now, if all this wasn't enough of a powerhouse, consider that short of an Oblivion Ring (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=174909)-like effect, the dredge ability means the opponent never really makes this go away--they just escape the upkeep Terror (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=135199) for one turn.

This is a very good point Jake, except you overlooked a minor detail: Threshold. The third ability will only go off if you have seven or more cards in your 'yard, so it's a little slower than you think. Also, I'm fully aware you get to activate the threshold effect before paying upkeep; that was the point. That all being said, I had forgotten that upkeep occurs before draw step, so there'd be no reason ever to pay the cost as you could just sac and replay it in the same turn. I'm gonna have to switch out Dredge with Recover or something else, just trying to determine what the cost will be.

One last thing, Tekk... just no. Please no.

JakeKessler

06-03-2009, 11:46 AM

This is a very good point Jake, except you overlooked a minor detail: Threshold. The third ability will only go off if you have seven or more cards in your 'yard, so it's a little slower than you think.

You can get the one-card engine online with no acceleration or other combo pieces by turn five reliably: Turn two, cast Soul Drain; turn three: sacrifice to the upkeep, dredge 4, recast; turn four: sacrifice, dredge 4 and recast; turn five, there are 8 cards in your graveyard, start killing stuff.

You're dredging 4 cards a turn. After two turns of that, there WILL be more than seven cards in the yard.

Coldstone

06-03-2009, 02:28 PM

Mine's up. Would love some comments.

JakeKessler

06-03-2009, 02:48 PM

@Umexx: You don't need the "As long as CARDNAME is in play" bit--any state-based ability on a permanent is assumed to work only any time the permanent is in play unless it says otherwise. (I think Haakon, Stromgald Scourge (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=122045) is the exception, simply because he does other things from the graveyard and Wizards wanted to avoid potential confusion.) Your card isn't wrong the way it is, it just uses more text than it needs.

@evol_intentions: I don't think ThunderHog will let that fly. =D

@blinx511: There's only one removed card, so I don't think you need the word 'target' in the last ability. Look at the wording on Spinerock Knoll (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=139514), for example.

@aglamm: You, on the other hand, probably want to make this target. Also, gravestorm doesn't need to be capitalized because it's not the beginning of the line.

@Coldstone: Any reason the creature costs double-black to hard cast, but only single-black to unearth? Otherwise, I think it's solid.

By the way Coldstone... your sig is really long. Also, dunno what you're talking about with Defiler of Souls (http://ww2.wizards.com/Gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?name=Defiler%20of%20Souls) being an epic failure. I think he's pretty bamf. He's a very efficient beater that heavily punishes any creature deck that doesn't know he's coming, and he's easy to build around using only gold/hybrid creatures yourself (let alone effects that like to sac). He's a cheaper, better Lord of the Pit (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=193868).

death by aggro

06-03-2009, 02:53 PM

You're dredging 4 cards a turn. After two turns of that, there WILL be more than seven cards in the yard.

Ah, I misread. I agree, that's why I'm lowering it. Also, for balance sake, I'm making the threshold trigger occur at the draw step instead of upkeep. It's a little unusual, but much more effective without totally warping the card into something else.

Coldstone

06-03-2009, 02:54 PM

@Coldstone: Any reason the creature costs double-black to hard cast, but only single-black to unearth? Otherwise, I think it's solid.

By the way Coldstone... your sig is really long. Also, dunno what you're talking about with Defiler of Souls (http://ww2.wizards.com/Gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?name=Defiler%20of%20Souls) being an epic failure. I think he's pretty bamf. He's a very efficient beater that heavily punishes any creature deck that doesn't know he's coming, and he's easy to build around using only gold/hybrid creatures yourself (let alone effects that like to sac). He's a cheaper, better Lord of the Pit (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=193868).

Heh, I didn't catch that part. Thanks Jake.

As for the sig thing, Defilier was in there until I got any deck testing from the such people in there (who will remain nameless. But you know who you are. :p).

EDIT: Changed cost of Unearth to include 2 black.

Punkrockanarchymagic

06-03-2009, 03:11 PM

@Jake: You are really on top of this round. I appriciate your help and I'm glad to inspire. I've edited my entry again, removed the Split Second part (too troublesome with rules), and added something that Cascade has more synnergy with... Scry. Additional commments always welcome. Kahmal was right about the hybrid cost- Aethersea Dawn can cascade into a 7-costed spell with the hybrid cost. I dont see your entry up yet, but as soon as it is I'll give my 2 cents. As for your ideas, I really like Sweep combined with Retrace... awesome synnergy. I'd like to see that concept refined, though I don't think Retrace cards need the tombstone symbol, and I think that reminder text is probably unnessary in general for this round, but I could be wrong.

@Kahmal: Awesome combat trick. So very green, simple and powerful. I'm not a huge fan of the art, but the mechanic and flavor are solid.

JakeKessler

06-03-2009, 03:14 PM

Ah, I misread. I agree, that's why I'm lowering it. Also, for balance sake, I'm making the threshold trigger occur at the draw step instead of upkeep. It's a little unusual, but much more effective without totally warping the card into something else.

So, something like "Threshold--Sacrifice CARDNAME: Destroy target nonblack, nonartifact creature. Play this ability only during your draw step and only if there are seven or more cards in your library" ?

Hmm. Wouldn't that just mean people would pay the upkeep once, then sac, dredge and recast, pay the upkeep once, sac, dredge and recast, etc? The only reason you would put more than one age counter on the enchantment is if there wasn't a good target to pop that turn. For all intents and purposes, the 'cumulative' part of cumulative upkeep isn't really relevant here.

Something else to think about: The most flavorful cumulative upkeep cards, in my opinion, were always ones where you felt like you were being punished if you didn't pay the upkeep. I think the problem here might be that because your card recurs itself, simply having to sacrifice it isn't much of a disincentive.

Instead, look at cards like Illusions of Grandeur (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=159749). When the upkeep finally gets too steep for you to afford, you're looking at a massive penalty for letting it expire. That kind of thing might be the way to go here--putting in some kind of rider like "When CARDNAME leaves play, remove your graveyard from the game" or similar. Just a thought.

Drathro

06-03-2009, 03:54 PM

Due to circs beyond my control, I no longer vote on the MCC, so I figure I'll throw in my two-cents here instead. I know I'm repeating a few things already said by others, but it won't hurt to back those comments up with a second opinion.

MZ: I like the card. Curious to know if you got Brom's permission, or if he just has some copyright-free material somewhere.

Lokenta Mirana: Just a gut response, but "Fen of the Fallen" feels like it should be an Enchantment instead of a land. If you keep it as a land, consider having it at least come into play tapped to tone down the power a bit.

Umexx: I'm amused by the drawback on "Treefolk Titan" - it made me smile.

blinx511: It's extremely easy to activate your "Gateway to Psychosis," once untapped. Too easy, IMHO. If I were you, I'd consider dropping the Discard ability - Red is not a color that has a hard time emptying it's hand anyway.

aglamm: Your "Poison" seems broken. Easier to go off than Tendrils, and life gain can't slow it down either.

Coldstone: 13 life loss for 8 mana, 6 of which is direct life loss? It feels a little high on the burn spell power curve to me. I actually think the numbers are good, but maybe the trigger could be tweaked a bit, if you know what I mean...

That's my :twocents:

Kamahl's Disciple

06-03-2009, 04:01 PM

@Kahmal: Awesome combat trick. So very green, simple and powerful. I'm not a huge fan of the art, but the mechanic and flavor are solid.

Don't worry, that was placeholder art until I found something better, which I did, so the new art should be up now. Thanks for the help.

Umexx

06-03-2009, 04:37 PM

Drathro

06-03-2009, 05:25 PM

@Drathro: A sarcastic or genuine smile? :ohnoes:
I genuinely liked it! It's interesting how the tricky part with that card is: if you cost it too high, you won't have many spells in handanyway and the drawback won't be very severe, but if you cost it too low, it's easy to splash for a second color and circumvent the drawback.

JakeKessler

06-03-2009, 06:00 PM

@Umexx: Exactly right.

GG Crono

06-03-2009, 06:18 PM

@Lokena: I like the idea of your card, but as a land? And a basic land? A basic and highly tutorable land? No. Make it an enchantment or something. And a modestly expensive one, at that.

@Punkrock: Very interesting idea you have there. It's weird, but I like it.

@Coldstone: Not too bad. I could see them printing something like that.

So, uh...anyone have any thoughts on my card?

Azrael Subucni

06-03-2009, 07:24 PM

So, uh...anyone have any thoughts on my card?

It's a really cool idea... but why is it blue? Knights are white. Spirits can be white. All three abilities are fairly common in white, as is sharing boosts with the team. Ability wise, and flavor wise, this looks mono-white to me.

death by aggro

06-03-2009, 09:44 PM

New card up. Decided to forego all the hassle and go on a new track altogether, so tell me what you think.

Also, let me just say now that I'm a big fan of Coldstone's entries thus far in this contest. Every time I look at them I think "How can someone come up with an idea so basic yet so creative and good at the same time?"

Keep up the good work man, and congrats on another fine card:).

Kamahl's Disciple

06-03-2009, 10:00 PM

@aglamm: - Your card is broken dude, also, very uncreative name for a card.

@Coldstone: - Your card is my favorite amongst all the entries so far. Although, personally, I think you should reduce the life loss from 6 to 5. Even by that reduction, it still is a force to be reckoned with, and still makes Dragonstorm happy.

@DbA: - As much as I like your card, I would like to point out that your one keyword ability short from the required minimum.

Cashew

06-03-2009, 10:10 PM

At this point I'm working on two designs, but I noticed while I was trying to design something I had a tendency to want to make a perfectly meshed card tieing all three abilities in together. Something with Threshold, Madness, and Dredge. Madness, Channel, and Splice.

I'm saying this merely as a cautionary tale, because the temptation to abuse block keywords is high. I already see entries that abuse them in the two major ways:
1. Use them in a way drastically differently than they originally were used.
2. Use them on cards that clearly aren't part of a block/set/guild''s design space.

That being said, Thunderhog warned you, I'm giving a cautionary warning that while I may not be judging it, I can see where he may rail you for doing this kind of thing.

For instance combining Cascade (Alara Block) + Epic (Kawigama Block) on a card.

For instance making an artifact creature Changeling. Guess how many artifact creatures were in all of Lorwyn.

These are the two things I'm tooling with right now:
http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=2150&stc=1&d=1244084985http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=2151&stc=1&d=1244084985

Kamahl's Disciple

06-03-2009, 10:14 PM

Go for Graveblossom, Cashew, we need more commons racking up some major points up in here.

Plus, I smell a Dredge deck staple.

Tekkactus

06-03-2009, 10:16 PM

I'd be careful with Enemy of Life. I can see the three mechanics, but only after reading it 2 or 3 times (the regenerate is virtually invisible) and given Thunderhog's track record of skimming I wouldn't be surprised if he missed it.

Coldstone

06-03-2009, 10:43 PM

Alrighty, after some consideration (and a few suggestions from my play group), I've indeed changed the life loss from 6 to 5, and did a power reduction from 7 to 5.

Comments again are much loved. :)

JakeKessler

06-04-2009, 02:24 AM

First things first. @Cashew: I see where you're coming from about combining mechanics from competing blocks, and therefore different design spaces. You are right to caution people to be careful about that. On the other hand, simply because things are from different times and/or places doesn't mean that they can't of necessity ever occur together.

I'll use Cascade as an example. The flavor of Cascade comes from the plane of Alara, where the chaos of the five shards being reunited in the Conflux is so potent that all sorts of energies start swirling around the plane, especially near the Maelstrom that rages at its core. The phenomenon--which is the same phenomenon causing an ever-larger proportion of the plane's inhabitants to become multicolored--is what causes the "cascading" of different spells into one another in unexpected ways. So I would say that a card having Cascade outside of Alara block specifically is not a breach of flavor, so long as the card 1) is gold, to show the competing kinds of mana that make it up; and 2) illustrates some manner of more-than-natural chaos affecting its magic.

Another example is that of Split Second and Suspend. These two abilities each depict a magical manipulation or collapse of time--a Suspended spell takes several eons to resolve, while a Split Second spell seems to take no time at all. So long as the flavor of a card reflects this sort of time manipulation, I think it could be acceptable.

I'll have more to say about this subject when my entry is ready, as I suspect the discussion will be extremely relevant to my submission. In the meantime...

@Jake: You are really on top of this round. I've edited my entry again, removed the Split Second part (too troublesome with rules), and added something that Cascade has more synnergy with... Scry.

Careful here too. Scry doesn't work with Cascade as well as you think, at least not the way you're using it. Scry X in Magic is now officially an "action word", meaning its an action the card is literally telling you to do, like regenerate or destroy. It only happens when the card says it happens... and on an instant or sorcery, with no framing sentence, "Scry 2" means "Scry 2 when this spell resolves, as part of its effect." This means it will happen well after you've Cascaded.

(Side note: I expect if/when Cascade ever does reappear in the future, it will be changed to be an action word as well. For now, though, it's a triggered ability that happens at a very specific time: when you play the spell.)

The way you want to set up your card to make it work the way you think is:

SORCERY
When you play CARDNAME, Scry 2. (To Scry 2, bla bla bla...)
Cascade (When you play this spell, bla bla bla...)

One more note about Cascade: Like Cashew and I were talking about above, using Cascade requires a commitment to the gold and chaos themes. You're technically gold (even if you're still using a hybrid border... which with your cost, you really should switch to a gold one), but tweaking the name and art of the card to play up the Conflux theme would help make Cascade feel more at home. Flavor text doesn't hurt either, if there's room.

I don't think Retrace cards need the tombstone symbol

Yea, I go back and forth with this. The way Wizards handled the tombstone symbol when it was used was that a card got one if it had any effect whatsoever while it was in the graveyard, period. It hasn't been used outside of Odyssey block, of course, but it were used today it would absolutely appear on Retrace cards (as well as cards like Haakon, Stromgald Scourge (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=122045) (second time this thread I've had an excuse to reference him!) and Sedraxis Specter (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=174838).

Actually, it occurs to me that Wizards didn't even bring back the symbol when they brought back the Flashback keyword in Time Spiral block, so I doubt we'll ever see it again. I really want to put it on cards if its appropriate, because I know I'm using it correctly... but since TH might see it differently, it's probably safer to leave it out. I'd probably only be bold enough to use it if I was making an old-border card that used Flashback or some other Odyssey-block staple mechanic.

@Marlin: So we have a gold-border colorless time-traveling Angel Demon who's stuck between worlds? I don't see the flavor at all, personally.

@George G: Like Cashew said, giving changeling to an artifact creature is a tough sell. Maybe if you put in flavor text to describe an etherium-like effect coming over the little guy during the Aurora? Or maybe if you concepted him as a "fake changeling" that some whacked Kithkin inventor came up with on a whim... the way there's two or three different artificial artifact Slivers out there?

Here's an image you might use... http://www.agalaxycalleddallas.com/2009/04/steampunk-myths-legends_16.html He looks close enough to a robotic changeling if you squint, and the guy in the back could definitely pass for a Kithkin.

One more note about using changeling... try and tie it in mechanically to what the rest of the card does. Why does this card even need to be all creature types? Are you doing something with Prowl, or Amplify, or Kinship, or Offering? Some other tribal-matters effect? Food for thought.

So, uh...anyone have any thoughts on my card?

Where is it?

p-chan

06-04-2009, 04:26 AM

[...]
I'm saying this merely as a cautionary tale, because the temptation to abuse block keywords is high. I already see entries that abuse them in the two major ways:
1. Use them in a way drastically differently than they originally were used.
2. Use them on cards that clearly aren't part of a block/set/guild''s design space.
[...]
Thanx to wizards, we have the Time Spiral Block to help us here. It doesn't have all abilities, and there are some restrictions, but you can mesh things like cycle, madness, hellbent, kicker or convoke quite easily.

Oh, and for you cards ... simple and efficient, not much more to say; just put the accurate expansion symbols on them, plz :P

final_press

06-04-2009, 04:31 AM

2. Use them on cards that clearly aren't part of a block/set/guild''s design space.

Yeah, I'm with you on that. I wanted to make a Kami with fateseal... but realised that it's just not consistent in the design, as that wasn't a Kamigawa mechanic. Unfortunately I tried modifying the design A-Team style and have been left with a rather wishy-washy submission. :(

Just for the record, is it valid for this contest to simply feature the same keyword more than once?

Kamahl's Disciple

06-04-2009, 04:57 AM

@JakeKessler: - Two things: -

1. Call it "Descent into the Maelstrom".

2. I wouldn't use this as an entry. Also, are you sure Ripple and Cascade interact with each other the way you think they do? I remember you saying something to Pram about how something like scry and cascade don't work together, since both scry and ripple involve the top of your library, don't you think it might not work? Or is there something I am missing? If so, please feel free to enlighten me.

And if you'd like, maybe take a look at my new card and see what you think of it.

final_press

06-04-2009, 05:01 AM

@Jake, You can't use a copyrighted image for a card. Bear that in mind when refining the flavour.

@aglamm, you need to work on the flavour of the card if you're want to do well. The name is pretty dull a lifeless, and the flavour text is just an Alice Cooper lyric :P As far as the name goes, perhaps try to infer something to do with the other abilities on the card (e.g "Torrent of poison", "Recurring Toxin"), or something to do with the art (e.g. "Poisonous Kiss" or "Succubus' Venom"). Imagine if WotC printed cards simply called "Elf", or "Goblin". Not only does it limit the design space, but it's doesn't capture the imagination in the way that Skyshroud Elite or Mogg Fanatic does.

Look at some existing card and see how they spin the flavour on them. They text at the moment seems to be directed from the writer to the woman in the artwork, which just doesn't work... If a direction is ever inferred, it's to the reader itself. Compare it to this:

"Better to suffer from the clean incision of an honest lancet than from a sweetened poison”.

Probably best not to use that directly though.. as it's a Mark Twain quote, and WotC no longer use quotes from real life sources on their cards.. they used to, but not any more.

death by aggro

06-04-2009, 05:24 AM

@DbA: - As much as I like your card, I would like to point out that your one keyword ability short from the required minimum.

I knew somethign seemed off; I forgot to add the last ability, forestwalk! Changing that now.

final_press

06-04-2009, 07:40 AM

@ Marlin.
1) You card currently has no colour. You need to include the rules text "CARDNAME is white, blue and black."
2) At the moment you will get heavily marked down for the aesthetics of your card. Remove the spaces inbetween each line, they look pretty ugly, make the text smaller than it has to be and are also at odds with how WotC lay text out on their cards.
3) Your wording also needs some work; You don't "put X back into your hand", you "return X to its owner's hand".
4) When writing an activated ability, be sure to seperate cost and effect with a semi-colon. You currently have it written "cost - effect", but it should be "cost: effect".
5) Your card currently has a white border. Magic cards all have black borders these days, so you'll get marked down if you leave it white.
6) Also, the artwork is pretty low resolution, any chance you can use a larger image that wont end up looking so fuzzy?

When designing a card, it's always good to look at existing card to make sure you're getting things exactly right. So for point 1 you can reference Living End, and for points 3/4 you can reference Darting Merfolk etc. Gatherer is an excellent tool for doing this. Use the advanced search function to track down similar cards in existence... it will make the difference between a fail and a pass.

Also, if you have the space once you've removed all those extra line breaks, why not try to add some flavour text? At the moment I don't really understand what you card is supposed to be just from the name and the artwork. Also, what's with it being an Angel Demon? I've seen lots of new designers before make "Legendary Creature - Demon Merfolk" or "Tribal Instant - Spirit Horror Rogue" because they think it's really cool.. but really, it doesn't make much sense. Demons aren't Angel, Angels aren't Demons.

Michael_Zeora

06-04-2009, 08:06 AM

@ Michael_Zeora: I really like that you render your card as a PNG, and that all your formatting and things like that are correct. It improves the aesthetics in a way that I can't even properly described. There's a few of us on here that do it, and it always makes me happy to see a card done that way. Looks very professional.

As for the card itself, it's solidly balanced, extremely playable, even powerful. I'd run the hell out of it if it existed. It's not terribly interesting, though... And "Wake the Dead" seems like a pretty default title for a card that brings a dead creature back to life.

A) Photoshop and some time looking over my collection.
B) I know I was going a bit strong, but at least it's an intresting play to see Cycling turn into Suspend. It's quite an intresting, and my opinon awesome move. (Costs less, takes more time, but you get a cantrip out of it)

MZ: I like the card. Curious to know if you got Brom's permission, or if he just has some copyright-free material somewhere.

I pulled this art out of my extensive Brom collection, so I'm not sure if I got it directly off his personal site or another gallery elsewhere, but no I have not gotten Brom's Permission to use this particualar art (personally it's not like it's killing anyone, he's a great artist and his work is always top notch, it's just darker than Wizards normally likes)

@MZ: its too much like goryo's vengeance for me to really like this. cost is off (vengance was 1B)

1) goryo's vengeance is a far more limited card than my own.
1.A) goryo's vengeance is limited to Legendary Creatures
1.B) goryo's vengeance is limited to a single turn for said Legendary Creature.
1.C) goryo's vengeance's limitations brought down the cost of the cards effect as a whole.
2) I'm fine you don't like it, yes, graveyard recursion has been done ad infinium since Magic's conception, I'm just adding one more to the fire.
3) the Cost of my card and the lack of drawbacks written into the card makes it quite powerful and thus the costs (on both the actual mana cost and the Cycling / Suspending Cost are well within balanced limitiations)

I need flavor help. I don't have a clue what to call this.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/untitledcontestentry.png

Ok, Delve, Cascade, Ripple? Intresting, but it really doesn't have a major effect of it's own, it's just a tool to hopefully grab things out of your deck and blast the opponent. Personally I would drop the black and add :r: and call it "Entropy of the Maelstrom"

p-chan

06-04-2009, 09:13 AM

Feedback-maniaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!

@Michael Zeora: When a black card animates a creature, if it gives it haste, it usually removes it from the game afterwards. Take it into account for color-fitting.

@Final Press: Why combat damage, and not damage like Belltower Sphinx?

@Kamahl: Hm ... it looks like "shroud" is put there just to complete the three keywords; it doesn't look like an "ambush" ability. How about deathtouch or first strike? Tweaking the mana cost, of course.

@DbA: Great art. Maybe the thing kinship + morphing, two abilities that have never been seen together, will bring you some problems with TH(personally, I would have no problem at all with it)

@GGChrono: It could be monowhite

@Lokenta: Quite overpowered, I think. At leat, make it come into play tapped ...

@Punkrock: Too complicated, and too many keywords without a reminder text

@Blinx: O_o A Concordant crossroads that not only costs 0, but it gives mana??? And with Hideaway??? Quite overpowered, man.

@Aglamm: The gravestorm doesn't feel accurate ... how about:
"Poison
B
Split second
Target creature gains Poisonous 1
Storm"?

@Jake: *Sweats* Uff ... very original, at least. Seriously, I don't know what more to say ... maybe that there's a lot of reminder text there, and that makes the card a bit ugly.

And well, mine's up. It's quite simple, and I decided to take the risk of making a futureshifted card ... in any case, I may change it along the month.

Michael_Zeora

06-04-2009, 09:41 AM

@Michael Zeora: When a black card animates a creature, if it gives it haste, it usually removes it from the game afterwards. Take it into account for color-fitting.

Keeping to the convention is fine for some people, but sometimes breaking the mold is also a good idea for the sake of the design space, it would be nearly unless giving it anything else other than haste without making it a permanent add on.

Actually I could spin it a different way now that I think about it. I could... humm... should I? I mean it would be Legal... could be intresting.

uh... yeah, I'm going to edit my card. Stand By.

final_press

06-04-2009, 09:54 AM

@Final Press: Why combat damage, and not damage like Belltower Sphinx?

Because my submission wasn't very good. :P

Posted a text version of my new card while I hunt for the right art. I'd still like to know if we can get away will multiple use of the same keyword, such as:

Izuru, the Blossom Untamed 2GG
Legendary Creature - Spirit
Defender
Other spirit creatures you control with converted mana cost 4 or greater have soulshift 3.
Soulshift 3
2/5

JakeKessler

06-04-2009, 12:14 PM

Some more rules questions for ThunderHog!

1. It's been asked by a few people, but does using the same keyword repeatedly count? It doesn't seem to me like it should, but I haven't seen you answer this yet.

2. How are you handling keywords that appear in the reminder text for other keywords? Haste is in the reminder text for suspend, flying is in the reminder text for reach. If I made a suspend creature and showed the reminder text for suspend, would that count as one keyword or two?

@Jake: *Sweats* Uff ... very original, at least. Seriously, I don't know what more to say ... maybe that there's a lot of reminder text there, and that makes the card a bit ugly.

I like how it looks with all the reminder text, personally... it draws attention to the simplicity of the card without having tons of white space. And these are all block mechanics; they WOULD have reminder text if they appeared again.

I'm thinking of combining the reminder text for cascade and ripple, since they trigger at once; that should free up some room.

Ok, Delve, Cascade, Ripple? Intresting, but it really doesn't have a major effect of it's own, it's just a tool to hopefully grab things out of your deck and blast the opponent. Personally I would drop the black and add :r: and call it "Entropy of the Maelstrom"

The coloring for ripple and cascade largely comes down to the flavor of the spell, since each of those keywords appears pretty evenly in all colors (although Cascade does require me to be in gold).

So the only thing I'm looking at to edge me into a color is Delve. Now Delve doesn't feel very color-specific because it's been used so little (three cards in future sight), but the fact is it's only appeared on blue and black cards so far. It's sort of like an evil Convoke, I guess (which I toyed with using instead of Delve).

So if Cascade wants me to be gold, and Delve wants me to be blue/black, that makes it pretty clear to me that a card with those two abilities is black/blue gold. I could get away maybe with black/red gold, since black is the stronger Delve/graveyard color. I'll give this more thought.

Also I see you've changed your card. I think this version is both tighter and more interesting, but broke as hell with a cycling cost of just BB. I'd actually suggest making the cycling cost more than the actual cost of the spell, like 3BB, since cycling it under Threshold actually takes the spell and makes it uncounterable with a cantrip.

@Jake, You can't use a copyrighted image for a card. Bear that in mind when refining the flavour.

Yea, thanks.

@JakeKessler: - Two things: -

1. Call it "Descent into the Maelstrom".

2. I wouldn't use this as an entry. Also, are you sure Ripple and Cascade interact with each other the way you think they do? I remember you saying something to Pram about how something like scry and cascade don't work together, since both scry and ripple involve the top of your library, don't you think it might not work? Or is there something I am missing? If so, please feel free to enlighten me.

And if you'd like, maybe take a look at my new card and see what you think of it.

1. I like this title. I just might use it.

2. The key here is timing. Scry needs extra words now because without them (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=126156) it happens during resolution, well after Cascade has happened. But Ripple and Cascade both say "When you play this spell..." This means that they are triggering at the same time, and as active player you get to choose how they stack.

An equivalent would be a creature with Evoke (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=146175) and another (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=189217) comes into play ability (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=189215). If you Evoke the creature, you have the option to resolve its ability either before or after you sacrifice it to Evoke, because both abilities trigger simultaneously on coming into play. Cascade and Ripple both trigger simultaneously on the spell being played.

As for your card, I think you made it simple at the cost of being narrow, if you know what I mean. How many block-flying-this-turn cards have there already been? What does putting retrace on it really do for the effect? I think this card could totally see print, but I don't know if it'll beat out more unique entries in this contest.

EDIT Alright, new version is up. I even managed to catch the winter theme of Coldsnap a little bit.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/DescentintotheMaelstrom.png
The thing is... now this card feels a little underpowered. The first version had Ripple 7, back when I was concepting it as an Ultimatum... but during refinement I realized so far Wizards has only printed Ripple 4 on cards. Is it dangerous to put Ripple with a number other than 4? Wizards has never done it, but at the same time they built the mechanic with a modular number, so it COULD be used that way.

I'm not sure, but I might change the Ripple number down the line to make the spell better. Right now it's actually pretty bad, even at uncommon.

Michael_Zeora

06-04-2009, 01:41 PM

I pulled this art out of my extensive Brom collection, so I'm not sure if I got it directly off his personal site or another gallery elsewhere, but no I have not gotten Brom's Permission to use this particualar art (personally it's not like it's killing anyone, he's a great artist and his work is always top notch, it's just darker than Wizards normally likes)

I'm currently in the middle of getting permission to use the Brom Art (just giving notice to that now, and if the response doesn't come in time or that I am denied, I will change the art)

Punkrockanarchymagic

06-04-2009, 02:32 PM

My entry seems to have too much stacked against it... divergent block keywords and complicated mechanic interactions being the foremost, so expect something completely different from me within the next 24 hours.

JakeKessler

06-04-2009, 03:29 PM

Looking forward to it, Punkrock.

Kamahl's Disciple

06-04-2009, 03:45 PM

As for your card, I think you made it simple at the cost of being narrow, if you know what I mean. How many block-flying-this-turn cards have there already been? What does putting retrace on it really do for the effect? I think this card could totally see print, but I don't know if it'll beat out more unique entries in this contest.

I intentionally did this on purpose in order to make it as powerful as I can without making CMC of the card any bigger then it already was, its purpose is to be a flexible combat trick that can be used offensively and defensively and can be used repeatedly. In one kind of deck, it can also become an overrun, minus the trample. :)

Anyways, thanks for your opinion on it, its much appreciated.

Marlin

06-04-2009, 04:33 PM

righto, changed my card. Hopefully THIS one goes down a bit better

death by aggro

06-04-2009, 04:59 PM

[B]@DbA: Great art. Maybe the thing kinship + morphing, two abilities that have never been seen together, will bring you some problems with TH(personally, I would have no problem at all with it)

I thought of that as well, and though they've never both been on a single card before, I don't see why they can't coexist. Both came from tribal sets, neither has any restriction as to what creatures or colors can or can't have them, and neither aspect conflicts aesthetically with the other from a flavor perspective. I might take a little heat, but I don't think it'll be much, especially because Morph has been in numerous sets already.

GG Crono

06-04-2009, 05:01 PM

It's a really cool idea... but why is it blue? Knights are white. Spirits can be white. All three abilities are fairly common in white, as is sharing boosts with the team. Ability wise, and flavor wise, this looks mono-white to me.

Flying is primarily blue's color, and blue is bigger on giving temporary abilities to things than white. Plus, I dunno, it just felt like it should be a multicolor card to me. :p

Where is it?

Tinypic is weird sometimes, which is why I always include a direct link to the image. Refresh the page once or twice.

final_press

06-04-2009, 05:11 PM

righto, changed my card. Hopefully THIS one goes down a bit better

Once again you're using a very low quality image and leaving unnecessarily large gaps inbetween lines on text. Both of these things will cause you to lose points for the aesthetics of your card.

JakeKessler

06-04-2009, 06:08 PM

@aglamm: - Your card is broken dude, also, very uncreative name for a card.

http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=295151&postcount=18

Agreed. Here's a break-down of how quickly this card wins if it's in your starting hand, with zero acceleration:

Turn 1 - Swamp, Viper's Kiss for 1 with buyback. Opponent has 1 total poison counter.
Turn 2 - Swamp. Viper's Kiss for 1, buyback, Viper's Kiss for another 2 (storm). Opponent has 4 total poison counters.
Turn 3 - Swamp. Viper's Kiss for 1, buyback, 2, buyback, 3. Opponent has 10 total poison counters. Game over.

Here's how it looks if you cast a single Dark Ritual:

Turn 1 - Swamp and pass.
Turn 2 - Swamp, Dark Ritual. Viper's Kiss for 1, buyback, Viper's Kiss for 2, buyback, Viper's Kiss for 3, buyback, Viper's Kiss for 4. Opponent has 10 total poison counters. Game over.

This is a card that can win really fast, by itself, if it's in your starting hand... and if you draw it later, you're pretty much guaranteed a win the exact turn you draw it. It can't be countered, it can't be offset with life gain, it can't be blocked, and it's next to impossible to simply win faster outside of silly old combos (which are harder to pull of than this, because this is a single card).

@DbA: - As much as I like your card, I would like to point out that your one keyword ability short from the required minimum.

http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=294942&postcount=7

I don't know if he changed the entry since you posted this, but I count three: forestwalk, kinship and morph. He's fine.

I thought of that as well, and though they've never both been on a single card before, I don't see why they can't coexist. Both came from tribal sets, neither has any restriction as to what creatures or colors can or can't have them, and neither aspect conflicts aesthetically with the other from a flavor perspective. I might take a little heat, but I don't think it'll be much, especially because Morph has been in numerous sets already.

http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=294942&postcount=7

Here's where you might get into trouble, DBA.

The flavor of morph is something very specific--it's a specialized form of summoning developed by the wizard/pit fighter Ixidor. He would summon creatures concealed in the form of weird four-legged buglike creatures, and then surprise enemies when the creature morphed into its true form. Morph is specific to the plane of Dominaria, where Ixidor was from; Ixidor never learned to planeswalk, so his form of magic never escaped the plane.

Creatures in Time Spiral Block have morph even after Ixidor's death, but this is a result of lasting influence from the artifact called the Mirari, as well as the plane of Dominaria's inherent instability due to the numerous time rifts. These conditions collectively result in an environment of unpredictable magic (similar to the state of things during the Conflux of the plane of Alara), and as such, the morph magic Ixidor invented spread randomly and uncontrollably across the devastated plane.

So you see that morph on a creature represents something very specific in flavor, and would be a hard sell anywhere outside of Dominaria.

Kinship, on the other hand, is simply tribal magic that allows creatures to access more powerful effects when in the presence of others of their kind. This magic has only been seen on the plane of Lorwyn so far and appears to have been lost in the Aurora, but there's no reason I can think of why other tribal societies couldn't have developed similar magics on other planes. It's what I call the Ornithopter (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=46016) Effect--the thopter used to be considered iconic of the school of artifice derived from the Thran and popularized by Urza, but like its Mirrodon flavor text says, "Regardless of the century (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=184596), plane (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=6164), or species (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=183017), developing artificers never fail to invent the ornithopter."

So to boil all this down... Does your card work? I think so, but you're skimming the danger zone. Then again, so are most of us this month--and if you can't be bold when you're designing, you aren't having enough fun with this.

In the end, I think your card's alright, but I guess just keep this kind of thing in mind when you're deciding how to tweak. Maybe look for art that looks more like Magic's "normal" or Dominarian elves? (You want to find better art anyway, in my opinion.) Throwing in a reference to some Dominarian locale, like Skyshroud or Yavimaya or Llanowar, might not be a bad idea either in the name or in flavor text.

http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=2154&d=1244154019

1. First and most importantly, you have GOT to get some better art, man. That's just unpleasant.

2. Why is this blue? Lifelink is a white (and sometimes black) ability, flying is in white as well as blue, and indestructible isn't really known for either color so much as for artifacts and occasionally green (although if you squint, white feels okay getting it through some sort of divine or holy power). Is the card blue because it cares about hand size? Kamigawa block made that at home in every color, and this card isn't doing anything particularly blue with it. Even if you have some reason why the card needs to be blue, it should at least be gold rather than hybrid--under no circumstances should a deck with all Islands be able to cast this.

3. Flavor-wise, I don't see good reason why an Angel cares about the thoughts in my head anyway. Why would an Angel not be able to fly all the time? If an Angel has flying, it's because she has wings, not because she's a wizard and uses blue magic to levitate.

4. Finally, don't capitalize your keywords when they show up in the middles of sentences. Keywords in magic are only capitalized at the beginnings of sentences and lines. (For reference, look at Nectar Faerie (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=139451)--see how Flying is capitalized and lifelink isn't?)

Moving on.

http://i42.tinypic.com/1jagew.jpg

I'd play it. It'd make a very solid uncommon, though I don't know that it needs to be rare.

As for the color choices, I'm with whoever said it should be monowhite: Knights and Spirits are both more white than blue, and all three abilities are supported in monowhite. There's no reason this creature should require more than just white mana to summon.

If I might offer a slightly cleaner way to format it?

Twilight Sentinel 1WW

Creature--Spirit Knight 2/2

WWW: Twilight Sentinel and all other creatures you control gain your choice of flying, first strike and vigilance until end of turn.

I'm really liking the submissions this month. Kudos to ThunderHog for coming up with such a provocative contest!

Kamahl's Disciple

06-04-2009, 06:23 PM

http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=294942&postcount=7

I don't know if he changed the entry since you posted this, but I count three: forestwalk, kinship and morph. He's fine.

He didn't have forestwalk the last time I saw it.

Well, it works, so I like it a little bit better, and good job on finding some appropriate artwork for it, DbA.

death by aggro

06-04-2009, 07:04 PM

Thanks, and yeah just to clarify it was supposed to have Forestwalk on it, but I forgot to put it on when I first put the card up. KD noted that, and I changed it, so he was correct.

Also Jake, I did try to find some more Magic-central art, but that's hard to locate. I might be able to find something, but for now it looks pretty good IMO.

Marlin

06-04-2009, 07:27 PM

ok, I've updated it now.

Lokenta Mirana

06-04-2009, 07:35 PM

Now that I have a chance to come back and check out what people are saying, the main thing that I've seen is that it's overpowered (which I thought it might be, but I've never been very good with that). Thus, I will be updating the card within the next minute or two, which now looks like this:

http://i358.photobucket.com/albums/oo21/LokentaMirana/FenoftheFallen.jpg

I've done two things:
- You now need to pay one land as you put it in play
- It is now legendary (making it also a mythic)

This could be too much, but considering what would happen, it might not:
- Against a black deck this would become a massacre, with everything destroying and poisoning everything else.
- Against a differently coloured deck this would become rather massacre-esque as well, just much more one-sided.

Thank you for your suggestions.

Lokenta Mirana

Punkrockanarchymagic

06-04-2009, 09:42 PM

Somewhat inspired by Lokenta, I've put up a new entry completely different from the previous one. Comments welcome.

Kamahl's Disciple

06-04-2009, 10:10 PM

@Pram: - I wouldn't use first strike as an available ability since both colors featured on this card only use them rarely, except in multicolor and hybrids of course. Instead, I suggest provoke, you may lose the ability to have your creatures come out unharmed but the upside is that you will be able to choose your victims for deathtouch.

Punkrockanarchymagic

06-04-2009, 10:20 PM

@Kamahl: Flavor-wise, flowers don't really provoke, nor are they capable of picking and choosing their victims. I think there's enough first strike in green and black to justify it here. Additionally, provoke was a mechanic that only saw print in Onslaught block, when neither deathtouch or poisonous existed as a keyword. I was thinking within the peramaters of Time Spiral block, which featured the most keyword mechanics ever in a single block. My card could've been printed there and would have been a nice push for the Fungus theme in green and black alongside Thelon of Havenwood and Dryad Arbor.

Edit: No hybrid mana in Time Spiral block. Change in cost and slight change in ability. Also changing to future-shifted border to make sure the poisonous ability is templated correctly.

George G

06-04-2009, 10:21 PM

For instance making an artifact creature Changeling. Guess how many artifact creatures were in all of Lorwyn.

I respect your opinion so much Cashew, but I don't think Changeling will always be a "Lorwyn" block exclusive ability. It's only an ability the same way defender is an ability. Changeling existed before it was called changeling, just like defender existed as the "wall" rule before it was called defender. Haste is the same, vigilance ditto, lifelink, flash, etc...they're just cleaned up as keywords now. There have been creatures that danced around changeling(besides mistforms), being able to change their or other creatures types and any shapeshifter that can "clone" another creature and become it's type has the means to be any creature type, just not all at once. So I agree with you on cascade and epic being wrongly used together. Those are specific abilities, where changeling is there to make sure when your mutavault becomes a creature it has a type. I hope artifact creature changeling comes over as "creative", every peice of feedback TH gave on creativity was "boring, I've seen tutors before", or "kudos for something different". So I want artifact changeling to be that something different.

A year ago if you would have seen artifacts with colored mana costs you would have thrown stones.

P.S. I'm so close to going old school with a creature that has rampage and banding.

JakeKessler

06-04-2009, 10:47 PM

I respect your opinion so much Cashew, but I don't think Changeling will always be a "Lorwyn" block exclusive ability. It's only an ability the same way defender is an ability. Changeling existed before it was called changeling, just like defender existed as the "wall" rule before it was called defender. Haste is the same, vigilance ditto, lifelink, firebreathing, etc...they're just cleaned up as keywords now. There have been creatures that danced around changeling, being able to change their or other creatures types and any shapeshifter that can "clone" another creature and become it's type has the means to be any creature type, just not all at once. So I agree with you on cascade and epic being wrongly used together. Those are specific abilities, where changeling is there to make sure when your mutavault becomes a creature it has a type. I hope artifact creature changeling comes over as "creative", every peice of feedback TH gave on creativity was "boring, I've seen tutors before", or "kudos for something different". So I want artifact changeling to be that something different.

A year ago if you would have seen artifacts with colored mana costs you would have thrown stones.

P.S. I'm so close to going old school with a creature that has rampage and banding.

I have to disagree. I'm with Cashew on this one. Changeling is more like specifics like Epic and Morph than generics like flying and fear, simply because they chose to call it Changeling. Changeling is the name of a specific race of Shapeshifters on the plane of Lorwyn. Changeling as a keyword refers to that race and their innate ability to "fit in" to the other tribal societies on that plane.

You say it's been used before, but the only non-Lorwyn-block card to use a functionally equivalent ability is the unique-case Mistform Ultimus (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=111062). Click the link: you'll see Ultimus has NOT been Oracle'd to use the changeling keyword, the way pre-keyworded creatures with fear or haste have. This is because Ultimus ISN'T a Changeling, and he doesn't use the innate abilities of the Changelings to emulate other races, he does it with the entirely different brand of Mistform illusion magic.

You mention colored artifacts, and I think they are the same way. They are emblematic of the specific shard of Esper, where the magic-technology used there has given birth to an unprecedented medley of organic and metallic. After the Conflux, etherium and the colored artifacts that go with it began to proliferate around the remnants of other shards, which is why we see them in other colors, but like Changeling, and Morph, and Suspend, and Epic, colored artifacts remain something unique to their home plane.

George G

06-04-2009, 10:49 PM

http://i443.photobucket.com/albums/qq160/Ggarnermtg/mistform_ultimus.jpg

Just saying it existed before it was called changeling. Just like haste, flash, vig, lifelink, fear, provoke, deathtouch, reach, shroud, and probably other ones im forgetting

So your saying after this block they won't print artifacts with colored mana costs? I dont believe it. I also don't believe there wont be more changeling or mistforms.

The point is that cashew was saying be careful about comboing things like ripple and cascade.

Changeling isn't comboing with anything, it's there for flavor, and really shouldn't shapeshifters have changeling if theoretically they can be any type. it would just look ugly.

I will concede the point on not being oracled yet, but it wouldn't surprise me to see it.

What this boils down to though is nothing. I can take the changeling out without changing the card, i'll just need to incorperate another keyword. It was just nice to have the creativity points if they would be awarded. So the real question is whether TH veiws it as creative or a mistake.

Thoughts before the deadline TH? Or is that scouting?

Tekkactus

06-04-2009, 11:08 PM

http://i443.photobucket.com/albums/qq160/Ggarnermtg/mistform_ultimus.jpg

Just saying it existed before it was called changeling. Just like haste, flash, vig, lifelink and probably other ones im forgetting

You're missing the point. Even now that Changeling does exist, Ultimus hasn't been changed in Oracle because it's not a Changeling.

Similar example: Chub Toad has "Bushido", but since its not a Samurai it doesn't have Bushido.

George G

06-04-2009, 11:22 PM

For humor sake now I renamed it....

http://i443.photobucket.com/albums/qq160/Ggarnermtg/MistformMercury.jpg

I just think if they reprinted the ultimatus (again), it would just say changeling, heck if they reprinted chub toad(lord save us) it would say bushido...we don't know though cause I guess they haven't reprinted a card that had wordiness AFTER they made it a keyword, even a red card had fear...

non-angels have vigilance, its a stretch, but again the best thing we have to argue about is if an artifact could ever be a changeling? Really? There hasn't been anything crazier huh? I mean come on... I am really getting sick of everytime I make something different like the "tolarion enchantment" a couple months back I hear whining. If I stay in the boundries I get no creativity points. Its a freaking glob of metal that can turn into anything it wants....That's an f-ing CHANGELING!

GG Crono

06-04-2009, 11:23 PM

Words about my entry

If more people think I should be monowhite, it may be worth considering. I may do that, or I may just think of a way to make the card bluer. We'll see.

But in any case, I do like the way the card is currently phrased; it allows for shenanigans with auras and similar effects. That said, I'll probably be giving the card a nice whack with the edit stick before the month's out. We'll see.

In any case, thank you for the good feedback.

Tekkactus

06-04-2009, 11:24 PM

I just think if they reprinted the ultimatus (again), it would just say changeling, heck if they reprinted chub toad(lord save us) it would say bushido...we don't know though cause I guess they haven't reprinted a card that had wordiness AFTER they made it a keyword, even a red card had fear...

No. They wouldn't. In Chub Toad's case they've outright said they won't, because only Samurai have bushido and Chub Toad is not a Samurai. It's that simple.

JakeKessler

06-04-2009, 11:35 PM

You're missing the point. Even now that Changeling does exist, Ultimus hasn't been changed in Oracle because it's not a Changeling.

Similar example: Chub Toad has "Bushido", but since its not a Samurai it doesn't have Bushido.

This is the exact correct example. A frog with Bushido doesn't make sense unless that frog is also a Samurai, so they won't call it that; and an artifact creature with changeling doesn't make sense unless that artifact creature is also part of the Changeling race. Changeling refers to a specific race, just like Goblin or Elf.

If tomorrow they came out with a set that had a series of Vampires that all had "Whenever this creature deals combat damage to a player, put a +1/+1 counter on it," and they keyworded that ability as Vampirism, they would NOT go back and change the oracle text for all the Sliths from Mirrodin block (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=46069) to have Vampirism. Why not? Because they AREN'T VAMPIRES. They are able to get a similar effect through other means, so they don't get the keyword.

A creature, even an artifact creature, could realistically have the Changeling keyword if, and only if, he satisfies one specific requirement: he actually is (even artificially) a member of the Changeling race. See (as I already referenced in my earlier post) Metallic (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=4617)/Venser's (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=125866) Slivers.

we don't know though cause I guess they haven't reprinted a card that had wordiness AFTER they made it a keyword

http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=64&type=cardhttp://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=129544&type=card

http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=42049&type=cardhttp://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=193871&type=card

http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=4357&type=cardhttp://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=159326&type=card

http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=22982&type=cardhttp://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=142298&type=card

If an artifact could ever be a changeling? Really? There hasn't been anything crazier huh? I mean come on... I am really getting sick of everytime I make something different like the "tolarion enchantment" a couple months back I hear whining. If I stay in the boundries I get no creativity points. Its a freaking glob of metal that can turn into anything it wants....That's an f-ing CHANGELING!

No, it's a shapeshifter, and you're full in-bounds to make that it's creature type. And at the end of the day, yea, nothing's stopping you from submitting the final version for the contest with the word "Changeling" all over it. We're telling you, though, you're going to lose tons of points because it's referring to something it isn't.

Here's what really makes my case. I want to show you a card called Venomous Fangs.

http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=8908&type=card

Venomous Fangs came out in Urza's Saga, well before the invention of the deathtouch mechanic, and hasn't been reprinted since the keyword's been coined. And yet check out it's oracle page:

Card Name: Venomous Fangs
Mana Cost: 2G
Converted Mana Cost: 3
Types: Enchantment — Aura

Card Text:
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature has deathtouch. (Whenever it deals damage to a creature, destroy that creature.)

Try that trick with Chub Toad and Mistform Ultimus, who haven't seen print since Bushido and Changeling, respectively. Here they are again, for reference.

http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=3966&type=cardhttp://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=111062&type=card

And what do their Oracles text say?

Card Name: Chub Toad
Mana Cost: 2G
Converted Mana Cost: 3
Types: Creature — Frog

Card Text:
Whenever Chub Toad blocks or becomes blocked, it gets +2/+2 until end of turn.

Card Name: Mistform Ultimus
Mana Cost: 3U
Converted Mana Cost: 4
Types: Legendary Creature — Illusion

Card Text:
Mistform Ultimus is every creature type (even if this card isn't in play).

No mention of Bushido 2. No mention of Changeling. See what I'm getting at?

Venomous Fangs got oracle'd to give deathtouch because that's what's actually going on: the enchanted creature is getting the ability to inflict automatic DEATH whenever it TOUCHES something. But the Toad is not a Samurai, so he doesn't know Bushido; and Mistform Ultimus, no matter how hard he tries, will never be one of the adorable, ape-like Changelings from Lorwyn.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/CHANGELINGULTIMUS.png

I do want to point out one other thing, too. There is absolutely nothing about your card that cares at all about creature types. None of the other abilities synergize with having lots of creature types or look for things to share types with it. So why is Changeling even on your card? It doesn't do anything for you anyhow, and I promise it's only going to hurt you come judging.

p-chan

06-05-2009, 02:33 AM

@George G: Hey man, just make it a Lorwyn card; or even a FutureShifted card, with the alternative template and all. If you add some flavour text involving Velis-Vel, it'll be fine. Also, there wasn't artifact creatures in Lorwyn block? Ok, but were there colored artifacts in Ravinca? No ... wait, yes! Transguild Courier! And it was the exception ... just like your card, it would be the "exception", the one and only artifact creature from Lorwyn.

And well, there's still the thing of the "Imprint", that is also a block tematic ... and that's where Time Spiral comes into play, the block where abilities merge!

Just my toughts, in any case ... I like your card (I've even been searching for some art for it :P), and it would be a shame if you completely change it. If you like the idea of lorwyn or futuresight, here are the expansion symbols

Cashew

06-05-2009, 05:06 AM

and that's where Time Spiral comes into play, the block where abilities merge!

If you rely on that, you're going to get burned severely. You have to realize even Futuresight had rules. Not everything existed in Futuresight, and everything that did had rules to its design space. There simply isn't carte blanche to do as you will. Sure mechanics intermingled, but they didn't destroy each other.

Don't take my word for it, I just want stiffer competition, if I wanted you to fail I'd say nothing. Take Thunderhog's word for it:

2) Use block-specific keywords sparingly. I am allowing them, but if you intend on using one, I had better be able to picture your card fitting into whichever set you intend on using your keyword from.

I think Jake made an excellent point on the Changelings. (Chub Toad always makes me snicker)

Changeling isn't a mechanic as much as it is a race of creatures specific to Lorwyn. You are purely inventive and will probably suffer greatly if you attempt to reach outside of that plane and their established existence.

JakeKessler

06-05-2009, 07:23 AM

I changed my entry, bee tee dubs. Decided to go with something a little different. I still think Cascade can be combined appropriately with other non-Alaran mechanics if the flavor's done right... but this just seems more fun to me.

http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=295560&postcount=24

CoglineErro

06-05-2009, 08:11 AM

@George G: Also, there wasn't artifact creatures in Lorwyn block?

Ummmmm...... (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&name=+[Scarecrow]||text=+[Scarecrow]||type=+[Scarecrow]||subtype=+[Scarecrow])

But George, creativity is not simply making something different from everything that came before, but making something new, that fits within the boundaries of the creative element's rules. I could enter:
Merfolk Shaman
2RB
T: Prevent X damage to target creature where X is the number of blue cards in your library.
1/1

Buty that would score poorly because it is not something that would be seen. Look up the design article on changeling at wizards.com's mtg column page. We aren't bashing your creativity, in fact you've got loads of it, what you need is focus and control over it. Once you get that you'll no doubt be able to hit top 5's everytime.

final_press

06-05-2009, 08:19 AM

@ MZ, I like the new version of your card, but you need to sort your wording out buddy:

Wake the Dead :2mana::b::b:
Sorcery {Rare}
Remove target creature card in your graveyard from the game with two time counters on it. If it doesn't have suspend, it gains suspend.
Cycling :b::b:
Threshold - Whenever you cycle Wake the Dead, if you have seven or more cards in your graveyard, remove target creature card in your graveyard from the game with two time counters on it. If it doesn't have suspend, it gains suspend.

George G

06-05-2009, 08:57 AM

Ok, one last thing here though, Deathtouch...To be touched by death...to instantly die....not the same thing as poisened by venom...but they still changed venomous fangs to give the creature deathtouch because its the same freakin thing. Deathtouch is a black ability...DEATH....but where the ability refered to venom, it now says deathtouch.

You also showing that raging goblin has haste isn't what i was referring to, I was referring to an ability like what were saying that is exclusive to a part of magic, but is changed in a newer version of the card because of now having a keywords. Akroma has no relevance to this argument.

There is an arguement against the imprint though....

Amanata

06-05-2009, 09:32 AM

Here is the card I want to post in the submissions thread
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll197/Amanata/HealingMonk.jpg

But I have some questions:
Does someone know a better card name, and should the card type be cleric, or cleric monk, or even human cleric monk or so?

Thanks in advance

final_press

06-05-2009, 09:40 AM

Calling it a Monk in the cardname and a Cleric in the creature type? That's a bad move, seeing as both are supported creature types. In design terms that's about as bad as having Raging Goblins creature type be "Elf".

In modern magic card design it wouldn't just be a "Cleric". Cleric is more of a profession than a race of creature, so at the very least it would be "Human Cleric" or "Elephant Cleric" or whatever. However, I don't see this card being a Cleric at all... the ability seems exclusively Monk (but that's really just a matter of opinion, as both types are good with life-gain). I guess Human Monk seems the most straightforward... but you could always let the race be determined by whatever art you decide.

In terms of the name, it's definately too boring to be used, and would cost you marks. A good tool for this is using a thesaurus (http://thesaurus.reference.com/). Why not type words like 'healing' or 'kind' in and find something with a little more flavour to it?

evol_intentions

06-05-2009, 10:54 AM

mines up, any comments would be nice, i know it sort of hs only two keywords but im waiting for th to confirm if thats a loophole or not. otherwise i will just give it vigilance

SalutCapitaine

06-05-2009, 11:43 AM

My current submission is Undercity Sewer, but maybe I should add some drawback like Contaminated Sewer?
http://i589.photobucket.com/albums/ss331/SalutCapitaine/UndercitySewer.jpg

http://i589.photobucket.com/albums/ss331/SalutCapitaine/ContaminatedSewer.jpg

All comments are welcomed

JakeKessler

06-05-2009, 05:49 PM

Deathtouch...To be touched by death...to instantly die....not the same thing as poisened by venom...but they still changed venomous fangs to give the creature deathtouch because its the same freakin thing. Deathtouch is a black ability...DEATH....but where the ability refered to venom, it now says deathtouch.

The rules text never used the word venom, it said "Whenever enchanted creature deals damage to a creature, destroy that creature."Venomous Fangs (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=8908) gives Deathtouch now because if you're bitten by the creature, the venom instantly kills you. And they've been giving Deathtouch to green creatures and effects almost as much as to black ones since it's been keyworded: Gilt-Leaf Ambush (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=145984), Lace with Moonglove (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=143376), Thornweald Archer (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=130630), Wren's Run Packmaster (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=140194), Wren's Run Vanquisher (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=158129).

You also showing that raging goblin has haste isn't what i was referring to, I was referring to an ability like what were saying that is exclusive to a part of magic, but is changed in a newer version of the card because of now having a keywords. Akroma has no relevance to this argument.

Worldly Counsel (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=142298) does, though--it's block-specific, and in the Conflux version, uses the word Domain because as of that set Domain was now a keyword. It's not just because they chose to reprint it, either. They've errata'd (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=23089) other (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=26383) Invasion-block (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=178018) cards (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=26261) to have Domain (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?text=+[domain]) too. They still haven't errata'd Chub Toad (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=159226) to have Bushido 2 or Mistform Ultimus (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=111062) to have changeling, though.

The funniest thing about this whole debate, for me, is that you could concept this kind of thing to be an actual changeling so easily. All you have to do is find some art that could pass for a poorly-copied Changeling, something stooped and ape-like and clearly mechanical, and call it something along the lines of Velis Vel Imposter or Karn's Changeling, with flavor text about it being artificial. It worked for Venser's Sliver (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=125866).

Here's an example (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/DarksteelChangeling.png) of one way you could do this, as the eccentric creation of some planeswalker. Alternately, you could flavor it as the mechanical creation of some other inhabitant of Lorwyn--fantasy art of things that look like Kithkin are easy to find. I linked you this art (http://www.agalaxycalleddallas.com/2009/04/steampunk-myths-legends_16.html) pages ago in the discussion, but here it is again.

And all of this is moot as long as your card doesn't have any other rules text that cares at all about creature types, because right now you have a completed card that doesn't gain anything functional from being a Changeling. It just has the ability because you needed a third keyword and you think flying is boring.

If you want to make a nifty tribal card that exploits Changeling by combining it with older abilities, why not use things like Affinity for X (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=49429) (which always wanted to be a tribal effect anyway) or Amplify (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=43723). Even Lorwyn-block mechanics like Prowl (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=153122) and Kinship (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=152682) are pretty busted when they're attached to a dude who shares a creature type with every creature.

CoglineErro

06-05-2009, 10:30 PM

My pre-render idea:

CARDNAME
2GR
Creature- (Type depends on image I get permission for)
Haste, Rampage 1, Deathtouch
All creatures able to block CARDNAME do so.
2/1

Could be monogreen, but the haste would then be a stretch....

Any thoughts?

p-chan

06-06-2009, 04:44 AM

If you rely on that, you're going to get burned severely. You have to realize even Futuresight had rules. Not everything existed in Futuresight, and everything that did had rules to its design space. There simply isn't carte blanche to do as you will. Sure mechanics intermingled, but they didn't destroy each other.
Of course there are rules, I wasn't saying the oposite. But it wouldn't be rare to see a Futureshifted changeling (at the moment futuresight was released, Changelings were "future"). There are very weird things in futuresight, such as Sarcomite Myr, a colored artifact, theoricaly exclusive from Esper, but it's a Myr, a Mirrodin exclusive creature type.

Cashew

06-06-2009, 05:27 AM

However, Sarcomite Myr was intended for Esper. It was rejected by the design-team that chose to develop Hommonculi rather than Myr as they felt the filigree design didn't support the Myr design.

The point being, if you rely on Future Sight to justify questionable actions you will probably find yourself getting severely penalized or dq'ed. TH has little to no regard for questionable design or loose adherence to the intention of the month's rules.

AlexCaetano

06-06-2009, 09:12 AM

hi peolpe =D
this is my first card so please help me. if someone has tips...

http://g.imagehost.org/0107/tears_of_fear.jpg (http://g.imagehost.org/download/0107/tears_of_fear)

final_press

06-06-2009, 09:21 AM

My first advice would be to read the rules of the contest to make sure you meet all of the minimum requirements. A submission must include at least three keywords to be valid this month. Your submission contains none at the moment.

Michael_Zeora

06-06-2009, 12:15 PM

JakeKessler

06-06-2009, 12:19 PM

final_press is right of course. This has nothing to do with this month's contest. Hybrid is not a keyword just because it has reminder text.

Speaking of hybrid, your unique casting cost has two things I want to point out.

1. Your card's converted mana cost is 6, not five. The one black-red hybrid symbol is 1, the colorless symbol is 1, and the two monocolor hybrid symbols count as 2 each. Strictly speaking, the converted mana cost of a card with monocolor hybrid symbols is the maximum you could pay for it (excluding costs with X, of course).

2. Because you have monocolor hybrid symbols (if you don't know what I mean by this term, it refers to symbols where you choose between one color-specific mana or two of any color) for more than one color, the correct border for a card with this cost is a gold one with a red/black gradient. For reference, Reaper King (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=159408).

ThunderHog

06-06-2009, 07:57 PM

The first post of the submissions thread has been edited. I strongly suggest that all participants please read the edits on the first post of that thread.

~TH~

JakeKessler

06-07-2009, 03:41 AM

kingez36@hotmail.co.uk

06-07-2009, 06:32 AM

@ YourWorstNightmare: link (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=295787&postcount=27) Under the new additions TH posted to the submissions thread, you've only got two keywords on your card. I really like how they work together, does the "simple-yet-elegant" thing well, but I think you need a third.

@ ThunderHog: If it's not too much to ask, could you clarify a little bit? I think I understand what you mean, but please let me know if I've mis-inferred:

Standard actions like tap, destroy, sacrifice, draw, counter (as in a spell) do NOT count as keywords;

Keyword abilities like flying, cycling, echo, suspend, cascade DO count of course;

Condition words like threshold, hellbent, channel, reinforce, forecast DO count;

Action keywords like regenerate, scry, clash, fateseal DO count.

And out of all the things that do count, you need three unique keywords. Am I about right?

I dont know what you mean by Standard actions but the examples you have listed are Keyword actions *see section 501 on page 62 on the comprehensive rules. Sacrifice, tap, counter and destroy for example are keyword actions as however much they seem like standard english they are actually still part of magics content specific lexus. Tap is a perfect example of this as it means something in magic that it doesnt mean in standard english, therefore making it a keyword. Regenerate, Scry, clash and fateseal and attach are allso Keyword Actions. So im guessing from that respect we are not allowed to use them.

and allso threshhold, hellbent and channel are ability words unlike reinforce and forecast which are keyword abilitys. The difference is that ability words dont have any rules baggage tying them down. There just words to help group similar abilitys, whereas Keywords have their own rules texts.

TH i am soo sorry for starting this and ruinig this simple little contest

final_press

06-07-2009, 06:39 AM

a Semicolon, seriously? I'll take point on that instead of re-rendering the entire card in Photoshop for the forth time thank you very much.

Where did I suggest adding a semi-colon? I suggested changing your wording from being incorrect, to being correct. Your current wording says:

"Remove target creature card in your graveyard from the game put two times counters on it."

It says this twice, but both wordings are wrong due to being gramatically incorrect and differring from the WotC wording used on existing cards. The correct wording is:

"Remove target creature card in your graveyard from the game with two time counters on it".

JakeKessler

06-07-2009, 03:24 PM

the examples you have listed are Keyword actions *see section 501 on page 62 on the comprehensive rules. Sacrifice, tap, counter and destroy for example are keyword actions and also threshhold, hellbent and channel are ability words unlike reinforce and forecast which are keyword abilitys.

I'm just trying to figure out what TH is counting for the purposes of this contest and what he's not. I was/am guessing that words you see all the time with no explanations on cards as far back as you care to look, like draw, counter, sacrifice, destroy and tap, won't count as keywords here, but pretty much anything more complex what has a simplified keyword to stand for it does, like everything from hellbent to regenerate to cycling. A direct yes or no from TH would be helpful. I don't want to risk disqualification because I thought something counted when it didn't, but neither do I want to limit myself creatively by playing it safe and unnecessarily restricting myself only a handful of terms that seem safe to use, thereby weakening my entry compared to others.

I suggested changing your wording from being incorrect, to being correct. Your current wording says:

"Remove target creature card in your graveyard from the game put two times counters on it."

It says this twice, but both wordings are wrong due to being gramatically incorrect and differring from the WotC wording used on existing cards. The correct wording is:

"Remove target creature card in your graveyard from the game with two time counters on it".

I didn't notice how your card reads, Michael Zeora, but FP is right about what wording is correct. Epochrasite (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=136143) is one relevant example here.

George G

06-07-2009, 03:34 PM

http://i443.photobucket.com/albums/qq160/Ggarnermtg/RingofKaldra-1.jpg

went different route

i know art sucks, but its mine and its on microsoft paint so shoot me

fun...

JakeKessler

06-07-2009, 03:39 PM

@ George G: I actually kind of like the art. It looks kind of abstract and fantastic, like a stained glass window or a tapestry... like this is the only surviving description of something that was seen centuries ago. I think it rocks.

The card itself works, both mechanically and flavor-wise. The only block-specific reference is Kaldra in the name, and you have Indestructible to link it to Darksteel. (Indestructible has appeared since Darksteel, with a variety of flavor explanations, but it does have a specific connection to Mirrodin block so the name with Kaldra banks on that connection. Nice work.)

One slight tweak you might like to make is to change just the single word Indestructible to the sentence "Ring of Kaldra is indestructible." This is how Indestructible is usually used on real cards; for example Darksteel Ingot (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=48048). (For reference, saying a creature is unblockable or cannot be countered works the same way.)

My only real criticism of this card is that it isn't very interesting. It's an equipment that gives two keywords and can't be blown up. This specific card has never been made before, but it doesn't scream out LOOK AT ME, AREN'T I AWESOME, I DESERVE TO WIN THIS CONTEST.

Umexx

06-07-2009, 03:45 PM

One slight tweak you might like to make is to change just the single word Indestructible to the sentence "Ring of Kaldra is indestructible." This is how Indestructible is usually used on real cards; for example Darksteel Ingot (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=48048). (For reference, saying a creature is unblockable or cannot be countered works the same way.)

Will be helpful for me too :)
Does this ''indestructibe'' still count as a Keyword?

JakeKessler

06-07-2009, 04:18 PM

Does this ''indestructibe'' still count as a Keyword?

I'm guessing it counts, since it came with reminder text when it was first printed as a block mechanic in Mirrodin. But TH is the only person who can answer that for certain.

NeoMagicwarrior

06-07-2009, 06:16 PM

My only real criticism of this card is that it isn't very interesting. It's an equipment that gives two keywords and can't be blown up. This specific card has never been made before, but it doesn't scream out LOOK AT ME, AREN'T I AWESOME, I DESERVE TO WIN THIS CONTEST.

sometimes simplicity and function are the ways to go. Doing something relatively simple, and having it never occur in the magic universe is MUCH more difficult than coming up with complex and abstract card abilities. Most simple things have been done...and if it hasn't, you must have been creative enough to see the gaping hole that design has yet to fill.

@ G: finding originality inside the box is a true challenge. Grats Dude.

JakeKessler

06-07-2009, 08:34 PM

I agree with all that Neo, and George's new card is exceedingly printable. I'm just not sure it'll win this contest.

Cashew

06-07-2009, 08:50 PM

I agree with all that Neo, and George's new card is exceedingly printable. I'm just not sure it'll win this contest.

I'd disagree arguing that it isn't really printable. It is well-made, but I doubt R&D would go ahead with it as the Kaldra equipment is an accepted closed cycle. I am all for innovation and completing cycles, but this isn't completing a cycle where something is missing. In this case, everything is there.

Beyond that the art kinda evokes the One Ring from LOTR

NeoMagicwarrior

06-07-2009, 10:40 PM

I'd disagree arguing that it isn't really printable. It is well-made, but I doubt R&D would go ahead with it as the Kaldra equipment is an accepted closed cycle. I am all for innovation and completing cycles, but this isn't completing a cycle where something is missing. In this case, everything is there.

Beyond that the art kinda evokes the One Ring from LOTR

very well said. If it wasn't a Kaldra equipment, it would probably see print, however the flavor kills it more obviously than OJ killed his wife.

JakeKessler

06-08-2009, 12:11 AM

@ evol_intentions: link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=295090&postcount=16) This is powerful and I like it, but technically you only have two keywords.

@ c0lefalk: link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=295911&postcount=29) This card seems way more green than black/red. Putting a creature directly into play has historically been a green ability (Dramatic Entrance (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=154003), Hypergenesis (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=113533), Protean Hulk (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=107598), Defense of the Heart (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=12442)) with the occasional limited exception in red (Mindwrack Liege (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=151132), Sneak Attack (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=5594)). Black almost only ever puts creatures directly into play from the graveyard. The cycling ability feels blue/black, since it's technically milling. I see flavor-wise you're trying to make this black/red by showing a Demon is being invoked to cast this spell for you, but it's still doing things that aren't really on-color.

final_press

06-08-2009, 02:23 AM

@ G: finding originality inside the box is a true challenge. Grats Dude.

You have a box of originality? :eek: Can I borrow it?

@ c0lefalk: link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=295911&postcount=29) This card seems way more green than black/red.

I'd have to agree with this. The flavour is nicely done in black/red, but the mechanic is neither. It's certainly green, possibly blue/green when you look at some of the Simic cards from Ravnica.

kingez36@hotmail.co.uk

06-08-2009, 04:09 AM

I'm just trying to figure out what TH is counting for the purposes of this contest and what he's not. I was/am guessing that words you see all the time with no explanations on cards as far back as you care to look, like draw, counter, sacrifice, destroy and tap, won't count as keywords here, but pretty much anything more complex what has a simplified keyword to stand for it does, like everything from hellbent to regenerate to cycling. A direct yes or no from TH would be helpful. I don't want to risk disqualification because I thought something counted when it didn't, but neither do I want to limit myself creatively by playing it safe and unnecessarily restricting myself only a handful of terms that seem safe to use,

I am taking TH's response in the simplist form; the 9 keyword actions dont count in this competition: attach, counter, destroy, regenerate, sacrifice, tap, scry, fateseal and clash.

JakeKessler

06-08-2009, 05:04 AM

I am taking TH's response in the simplist form; the 9 keyword actions dont count in this competition: attach, counter, destroy, regenerate, sacrifice, tap, scry, fateseal and clash.

Those last three just seem different because they were block-specific and had reminder text attached to them. Then again, regeneration gets reminder text in every core set now too. ThunderHog, if you're reading this, final clarity on what specifically doesn't count would be really helpful.

p-chan

06-08-2009, 08:09 AM

First what's first:

@George G: Personaly, I liked a lot more your old entry :P

And now ... I would like some feedback. Here is a somewhat updated version of my entry, and a new posible entry; it came up to my mind while I was playing Guilty Gear XX with Baiken, and this (http://www.goear.com/listen/61b002c/Momentary-Life-Daisuke-Ishiwatari-&-Koh-Ichi-Seiyama) song started to play (I think april's theme is still affecting me :P).

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/2607/isoldafiremane.png http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/769/ujiofleshrenderoni.png

The thing is that I'm not very good at finding balance in planeswalkers, and that's why I would like to hear (read) any comments about these entries.

Thnx in advance!

final_press

06-08-2009, 08:31 AM

@ p-chan, I'm not really very good with designing Planeswalkers either, but I will say this: I think the abilities cross-over a little too much. The third ability has the same "sac at end of turn" as the first, and the second and third abilities are both essentially board sweepers. You could argue that Planeswalker Chandra Nalaar is a good example of existing cards having abilities that are all pretty similar, but I think that's because she's supposed to be the poster-child for red mages.. very aggressive and fairly narrow-minded in the way they acheive victory. This guy doesn't have that same feel (only in my opinion, of course).

I also don't think the first ability should increase the loyalty so much, as it's potentially ready to use it's ultimate ability on the second turn it's in play under your control. It also makes the Planeswalker too sturdy as being able to regain 3 loyalty a turn makes them rather hard to kill off. And I think making the third ability fairly easy to pull off makes the second ability a fairly redundant option, as I'd only put this guy in a deck where I wanted to repeatedly sweep creatures off the board (which the third ability does better).

p-chan

06-08-2009, 08:50 AM

Well, i made the first ability at +3 because you lose a creature every time you cast it; but in any case, you're right, maybe it's abilities are too redundant ... I'll work on that

Cashew

06-08-2009, 09:36 AM

Well, i made the first ability at +3 because you lose a creature every time you cast it;

Way too powerful. For numerous reasons. Black and Red should not wince at creature sacrifice, it is an accepted norm for that color combination for the most part, especially when you are converting them into direct damage. Your +3 and 5 base loyalty allows you to achieve your ultimate the turn after you cast it, and your ultimate to say the least is game ending. Not only does it wipe the board if the game for some reason continues, it also allows a full swing into an opponent with everything on the board. Go look at the casting cost of similar cards for an idea of how powerful WotC considers that. Card needs a ton of fine tuning.

SalutCapitaine

06-08-2009, 10:00 AM

I got another idea. Wish one is better and what can I done to improve them?

http://i589.photobucket.com/albums/ss331/SalutCapitaine/BurnedSkinGargoyle.jpg http://i589.photobucket.com/albums/ss331/SalutCapitaine/UndercitySewers.png

Thanks

final_press

06-08-2009, 10:08 AM

Haven't got much time to go in-depth, but my first thought on the Gargoyle is that the flavour didn't make sense. Why does it gain provoke? Perhaps a change in name and art could help tie the card together better.

The land is horribly overpowered. Even if you removed the keywords from the rats and made the land legendary it would still be too good. At the very least you should have to discard a card or sacrifice something. Or perhaps greatly increase the cost of creating the rats, and make the labnd come in to play tapped. Really, for the purposes of this contest I can't think of any alterations to power ti down that don't make it an invalid entry.

NeoMagicwarrior

06-08-2009, 10:58 AM

You have a box of originality? :eek: Can I borrow it?

I'd let you borrow it...but then it wouldn't be original anymore. It would then become a box of pop music...and who needs that.

@ SalutCapitaine: if you REALLY want to lower the power of the land...dont let it make mana. it kills it pretty bad..although i'd still increase the cost for two rats with those abilities....and preferably make them 1/1's as most rat tokens are small.

Kamahl's Disciple

06-08-2009, 05:32 PM

@P-Chan: - I would go with Isolda Firemane, I like this card better then your planeswalker.

@Final Press: - Because I like your card and because I noticed this while looking through the entries again, I saw that you have a bit of a magic grammar error on your card. In your channel ability, instead of ":3mana::g:, Discard Izuru," it should say ":3mana::g:, Discard Izuru:". There should be a colon at the end instead of a comma. Just wanted you to know.

@SalutCapitaine: - I think this card is good, but its second ability needs to be fixed a bit. Fear and poisonous 1 is a excellent combination, but instead of two rats, I think there should be one. There is no need for this rat to also be a 2/1, since it has poisonous 1 and fear, it doesn't really need the boost in power, so keep it a 1/1. The activation cost of the ability should remain the same though. Other then what I mentioned, everything else is fine as it is.

JakeKessler

06-08-2009, 06:01 PM

@ Salut: The art on the sewers isn't MtG at all, but I love it.

@ p-chan: I've put a lot of thought into planeswalker design over time, and I've made quite a few myself. I like to think I've got a good sense of their balance and flavor. I've got some thoughts on yours, but I admit a lot of this is my opinion. I think it's an informed one, but it's my opinion nonetheless.

First of all, a lot of the most popular planeswalkers feel like they have a specific path to victory: Jace Beleren (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=185816), for example, has a powerup ability which in a way feeds into the mill strategy his ultimate seems to support. Liliana Vess (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=140212) has a powerup that puts cards in graveyards, and an ultimate that likes there to be cards in graveyards. Connections like these between first and third abilities aren't a flat requirement for a planeswalker, and they don't have to be overt; but when you can design a planeswalker with this kind of multi-turn "win strategy" in mind, it makes the overall design of the card feel tighter and better planned.

Second--a bit of flavor for you. Planeswalkers' longevity in battle is measured in loyalty, not life; when a planeswalker leaves play, it isn't dead, it's simply fulfilled whatever contract of service brought it there. Since a planeswalker's first ability traditionally generates more loyalty than it started with, it seems to me that such an ability is something the planeswalker really likes doing, whether he's on the job or not. In fact, he likes this activity so much, that when you tell him he can do it while he's working for you, he's motivated to extend his contract and fight for you even longer. Second and third abilities, which traditionally exhaust loyalty rather than generate it, are things the planeswalker is willing to do--is good at doing--but doesn't love to the point that he'll stick around to do it more.

Using the Vess example: Liliana Vess (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=140212) really loves messing with people's minds. Discarding cards is the game's representation of going insane, and Liliana's favorite passtime is torturing people into madness. If you give her license to do this while she's working for you, she'll be so pleased with you that she'll become more loyal to you and stick around for a longer time. Conversely, while Vess is willing to teach you some of her secrets (via her tutoring ability), she won't do so just for her own enjoyment, and as such it becomes part of the job for her. It exhausts loyalty for her to use this ability, because she sees it as a favor she's doing you in order to settle part of whatever debt you've called in.

(It's interesting that Elspeth (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=174859) of Bant has no "middle" ability, but two power-up abilities instead. To me, this suggests she is so devoted to defending her home that even while serving your agenda, she wants to do anything she can to aid her armies. No matter which of her abilities you let her use to power up, she thanks you for it, and will become more loyal to you as a result of letting her defend her homeland. Eventually, she will be so grateful to you that she will be willing to settle her debt by making all your possessions indestructible.)

A planeswalker's "ultimate", now, is the most powerful effect the planeswalker can summon. Often (as in the case of Chandra Nalaar (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=185815)), the ultimate is emblematic of the planeswalker's identity--it's a trademark ability they are known for among the planeswalker community. Indeed, it's likely the reason you summoned them in the first place and allowed them so much freedom is exercising their favorite, first abilities. While the planeswalker probably relishes the chance to use this powerful spell, it's also extremely taxing on their magical reserves, and as such they won't commit to its use lightly. If they feel strongly enough in their loyalty to you, they can be convinced to cast this powerful final ability to further your goals, but it's such an intense action that they will usually see it as settling for good whatever arrangement the two of you have made.

Having a +3 loyalty attached to an ability, like you do, implies that it is something the planeswalker greatly enjoys, so much so they he feels he owes you just for letting him off the leash to carry it out. This means two things: first, the ability needs to be something the planeswalker loves doing, to the point where nothing else matters--he'll actually reward you for letting him do it--and second, in the interest of card balance, you need to offset this somehow.

Here are three ways to make a +3 ability balanced. You should consider implementing one or more of them.

1) - Have the planeswalker's third (ultimate) ability very steeply costed. Flavor-wise, this shows a planeswalker who will do anything for the chance to get his hands dirty, but is wary because he knows his ultimate will take a lot out of him. It also shows he is shrewd enough to renegotiate his service. (You're already doing this with the -8 cost on the ultimate.) Nicol Bolas (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=179441) is a good example: he really likes blowing things up, but he's clever enough to make sure you'll let him do it a lot if you want him to use his ultimate more than once.

2) - Give the planeswalker a low starting loyalty. Flavor-wise, this shows a planeswalker who is cautious about becoming attached to another planeswalker for an extended period, but is willing to do so if he's permitted to use his favorite (first) ability. Jace Beleren (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=185816) isn't very loyal to you when you first convince him to join you, but if you let him start drawing everybody lots of cards, he becomes more devoted to you in a hurry.

3) - Give the planeswalker a high mana cost to initially summon. This cost represents the payment of mana you're offering the planeswalker in exchange for their service, as well as the spell to forge the magical contract between you. Planeswalkers like Nicol Bolas, who are willing to pledge far greater loyalty if you'll indulge their favorite activities, are smart enough to demand a high investment from you to sweeten the deal.

4) - Make the +3 ability have some sort of extra cost which makes it harder to abuse. Having to sacrifice a creature or discard a card is a good example--once you run out of the necessary resource, you can't power-up the planeswalker any more. (You're already doing this, since the creature you're beefing dies at end of turn.) Be careful, though--this can be a dangerous way to balance the planeswalker, since you risk the card being near-unusable if it's drawn on an empty board/hand.

So now that I've talked about all this in an abstract, general sense, let's talk about your character in specific. He's an Oni, presumably from the plane of Kamigawa. I don't know of a card called Fleshrender Oni, so he's not based on a specific existing Oni; I do know the card Rend Flesh, however, which is from the same block. Since Rend Flesh is a kill spell, it seems like your planeswalker would enjoy killing creatures. You've got this nailed: your first ability ends up sacrificing a creature, and your middle ability kills one directly. Judging by the first ability, though, the Oni doesn't just like killing things: he especially likes tricking them, playing with them, and sending them to their death.

So what is your planeswalker's battle plan? His first ability (what he really likes doing more than anything else) is to make your creatures big and scary for a short time, at the cost of their lifespan. The middle ability makes sense as a loyalty exhaustion: Your Oni would really rather play with his food and kill his enemies one at a time, but if you make it part of his job to kill a few of them at once (since the one you target explodes for global damage), he's willing to do things your way. There's even a cool parallel going on between the first and second abilities: with the first, he turns one of your minions into a supercharged glass cannon that pops at EoT, and with the second, he targets an enemy creature to explode for AoE damage.

The have-it-your-way principle also applies to the ultimate: from the Oni's perspective, tricking everybody on the table into serving him (or you) for one massive assault and then nuking the whole pile afterward is a great way to end the show, even if he could sit back and pick them off one at a time for a lot less effort. He's sad there won't be anybody left to play with afterwards, but hey, this is what you're paying him for; and besides, after this is done his service with you will probably be over, and he'll be free to go find new people to kill on some other plane.

So flavor-wise, your planeswalker's abilities are right on in my book. Let's talk balance.

The first ability is pretty powerful: It's almost always going to read "Target creature gets +4/+0 and is unblockable until EoT." The fact that you have to expend a creature every turn to keep doing this offsets the brokenness somewhat, but it's still an almost strictly better version of Elspeth's second ability, just a turn later and requiring an additional color.

The second ability is possibly even stronger. It's Terminate attached to an indefinite-sized Pestilence (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=21149), for only 4 loyalty? That's pretty sick for a base-turn 5 play, especially since you can get 3 of that 4 loyalty back in pretty short order.

The third ability really takes the cake, though. It's effectively Insurrection (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=35457) plus Damnation (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=122423), which should cost you twelve mana and two cards; you're getting it for eight loyalty, as early as turn six with no acceleration. That's insane.

So you definitely need to tweak some numbers. Part of what makes all three of these abilities so potent is the fact that the 'walker comes out on turn 5. Nicol Bolas is a relevently-sized 'walker with similarly priced abilities, and he's an 8-drop in three colors. He's got a little more utility than your guy of course, since beef-and-sac and pop-for-sweep are a little more narrow than straight Control Magic (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=21141) and Creeping Mold (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=129512), so maybe your guy ought to cost 7. On the other hand, your boy is only two colors and has a lot more damage potential than Mr. Bolas, so maybe 8 isn't an unfair cost either. My point is, certainly 5 is too little to charge for this stacked a card. Bump it up.

At turn 7 or 8, the first ability is pretty acceptable. It's not broken, but it's still potentially powerful enough to be worth using.

The second ability remains sick as hell. I'd consider setting a fixed value (2 or 3) for the Pyroclasm effect. Changing the loyalty cost to X and basing the Pyroclasm value on that isn't really an option, since your boy comes in with 5 loyalty already. 4 or 5 damage to the board is usually going to be a board sweeper, even at turn 7 or 8--which isn't even good, since you want creatures around to steal with the ultimate.

The third ability rightly costs 7BBRRR, so even on turn 9 it's still pretty broke. Consider raising the loyalty cost for the ability to 10 or more, so the 'walker can't come right in, power-up once, and then go off the next turn.

Whew... that was a lot longer than I intended. I hope it helped you out.

Cashew

06-08-2009, 08:44 PM

I got another idea. Wish one is better and what can I done to improve them?

Gargoyle hands down is better.

The Rat Land breaks the fundamental rule of lands for current Magic design: It is better than a basic land when played as that a basic land. It produces mana, but it also can be cycled or create tokens. At that it creates two tokens, far cheaper than any land has ever produced tokens before, and not just basic tokens but 2/1's with fear and poisonous.

See: Urza's Factory, Kher Keep, Vitu-Ghazi, the City Tree

On your Gargoyle a point of contention on the flavor. When they are in Defender mode one usually assumes they are Stone, yet yours is Flying in this mode, which seems to suggest movement and not stone-form.

death by aggro

06-08-2009, 09:11 PM

On your Gargoyle a point of contention on the flavor. When they are in Defender mode one usually assumes they are Stone, yet yours is Flying in this mode, which seems to suggest movement and not stone-form.

While this is certainly true, Wakestone Gargoyle is the same way as Salut's, so it shouldn't be that big of an issue. Not only that, Wakestone's kinda considered the "lord" of defenders, so I think he well establishes that a stone defender can have flying.

Also for reasons stated by Cashew you're much better off tweaking the Gargoyle SalutCapitane.

JakeKessler

06-08-2009, 11:04 PM

Maybe it's as high up on the wall when it's stone, as things that are flying?

As for the land... Consider Kjeldoran Outpost (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=184555) or Rupture Spire (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=142301), Salut. With a few tweaks you could get your card looking similar to this one and it wouldn't be as broken. In terms of making multiple rats at once, you could try for Goblin Warrens (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=15421)-esque effect.

For example:

Undercity Sewers
Land

Undercity Sewers comes into play tapped. When it does, sacrifice it unless you sacrifice a Swamp.
T: Add B to your mana pool.
2B, T, Sacrifice a Rat: Put two 2/1 black Rat creature tokens with fear and poisonous 1 into play.
Ratcycling 1B

final_press

06-09-2009, 02:26 AM

@Final Press: - Because I like your card and because I noticed this while looking through the entries again, I saw that you have a bit of a magic grammar error on your card. In your channel ability, instead of ":3mana::g:, Discard Izuru," it should say ":3mana::g:, Discard Izuru:". There should be a colon at the end instead of a comma. Just wanted you to know.

I did? Bah.. curses, now I have to re-render the bloody thing. I was so preocupied with making sure to use that "-" after the word Channel that I overlooked the basic Magic grammar. Cheers KD :)

Haven't noticed much other feedback on my card. Does anyone have any suggestions or criticisms? As a whole I'm pretty happy with the card, but it just doesn't quite strike me as a winning entry. Maybe it's just not original enough... even though it's something new for Kamigawa (granting Soulshift), it's not really thinking too far outside the box.

Kamahl's Disciple

06-09-2009, 06:30 AM

Haven't noticed much other feedback on my card. Does anyone have any suggestions or criticisms? As a whole I'm pretty happy with the card, but it just doesn't quite strike me as a winning entry. Maybe it's just not original enough... even though it's something new for Kamigawa (granting Soulshift), it's not really thinking too far outside the box.

Well, despite having the possibility of a spirit retrieving two cards from the grave, I still think you might up the soulshift count, or possibly have each spirit creature you control gain soulshift 3, maybe even come up with some creative soulshift X shenanigans. Well, that's all I can think of at the moment, I hope I was of some help.

final_press

06-09-2009, 06:46 AM

Well, despite having the possibility of a spirit retrieving two cards from the grave, I still think you might up the soulshift count, or possibly have each spirit creature you control gain soulshift 3, maybe even come up with some creative soulshift X shenanigans. Well, that's all I can think of at the moment, I hope I was of some help.

Do you mean for the Channel ability?

I think I'd probably take your advice and change it to some kind of Soulshift X, with an X payment. The first draft of the card was a one-shot of "spirit creatures you control with cost 4 or less gain soulshift 3", but that felt too boring as it's the same as it's in-play ability. I tried to spice it up a little by granting it to any single spirit creature, so regardless of CMC... but it just feels like something people wouldn't use that much.

I think I'll either go for, "Channel - :Xmana::g::g:, Discard Isuzu: X spirit creatures you control gain soulshift 3 until end of turn."
or ""Channel - :Xmana::Xmana::g:, Discard Isuzu: Spirit creatures you control gain soulshift X until end of turn."

edit - probably the second one.. it seems more fun.

Kamahl's Disciple

06-09-2009, 06:52 AM

Do you mean for the Channel ability?

Yeah, that.

Glad to hear I helped, hope to see your revision in the near future.

SalutCapitaine

06-09-2009, 07:47 AM

Thanks for all the comments. I made some changes. I modified the gargoyle and tuned down the power of the land.

link (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showthread.php?p=295601#post295601)

final_press

06-09-2009, 08:01 AM

A comment on the flavour of the land: You seem to be wanting to give it a Kamigawa flavour by using the name "First Lord" (Marrow-Gnawer's title), but the Nezumi lived in Takenuma Swamp, not sewers. Sorry.

Some comments on the gargoyle:

1) You've given it a coloured artifact border, but it's not an artifact creature. You'll lose marks for this. You should either make it an artifact creature (but I advise against this as coloured artifacts are currently only an Esper thing, and this card is definately more Invasion block than Alara block), or just give it the standard white border.

2) You've given it the ability to gain extra toughness in exchange for red mana, but red only increase power, it's white that increases toughness. You'll either need to change the cost or the effect to avoid losing marks on it. Personally I'd suggest making it ":1mana::r:: CARDNAME gets +1/+0 until end of turn".

Edit - 3) I'd also suggest changing the rarity in the gargoyle. If you give it a gold (meaning 'rare') symbol, it will be judged as a rare card... but this card doesn't really have anything that makes it a rare. I'd advise lowerring the rarity to uncommon.

SalutCapitaine

06-09-2009, 10:18 AM

A comment on the flavour of the land: You seem to be wanting to give it a Kamigawa flavour by using the name "First Lord" (Marrow-Gnawer's title), but the Nezumi lived in Takenuma Swamp, not sewers. Sorry.

Thanks, one of my weaknesses is the knowledge of the Magic world. I will look at something else.

1) You've given it a coloured artifact border, but it's not an artifact creature. You'll lose marks for this. You should either make it an artifact creature (but I advise against this as coloured artifacts are currently only an Esper thing, and this card is definately more Invasion block than Alara block), or just give it the standard white border.

My mistake, I forgot to remove the artifact border.

2) You've given it the ability to gain extra toughness in exchange for red mana, but red only increase power, it's white that increases toughness. You'll either need to change the cost or the effect to avoid losing marks on it. Personally I'd suggest making it ":1mana::r:: CARDNAME gets +1/+0 until end of turn".

In fact, the 2 red gargoyles in magic have that ability :Basalt Gargoyle (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=118883) and Granite Gargoyle (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=159259)

death by aggro

06-09-2009, 01:20 PM

In fact, the 2 red gargoyles in magic have that ability :Basalt Gargoyle (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=118883) and Granite Gargoyle (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=159259)

Basalt Gargoyle was a throwback to Granite, and Granite was around before Wizards had developed certain "character traits" of the five colors. By current standards, toughness boosts do not fit in Red's field of expertise. Besides, changing it to a power increase will not only make your card much stronger, IMO it's more flavorful.

Speaking of stronger and more flavorful, I recommend also changing the kicker to :1mana::r: and giving the gargoyle first strike instead of fear. That way your only tied down to two colors and can devote more to Red, and thus more to pumping up your gargoyle. It's also more fitting of a rare slot than your current design.

I think you've got a really good idea here, so don't give up on it:)!

Edit: New card up, just feel like playing around with different ideas. Tell me what y'all think.

GG Crono

06-09-2009, 02:56 PM

After some consideration, I've decided that I like my card how it is. It's just blue enough to justify that :u: in its mana cost, and it feels like it should be blue besides. Will it win? Probably not. But I am content with it.

So :p.

SalutCapitaine

06-09-2009, 04:30 PM

Basalt Gargoyle was a throwback to Granite, and Granite was around before Wizards had developed certain "character traits" of the five colors. By current standards, toughness boosts do not fit in Red's field of expertise. Besides, changing it to a power increase will not only make your card much stronger, IMO it's more flavorful.

Speaking of stronger and more flavorful, I recommend also changing the kicker to :1mana::r: and giving the gargoyle first strike instead of fear. That way your only tied down to two colors and can devote more to Red, and thus more to pumping up your gargoyle. It's also more fitting of a rare slot than your current design.

I think you've got a really good idea here, so don't give up on it:)!

Thanks

I really like the first strike idea, and I transform the pump abillity with the flowstone abillity ":r:: CARDNAME gets +1/-1 until end of turn"

Flowstone Gargoyle (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showthread.php?p=295601#post295601)

@death by aggro - I'm just a unexperienced designer, but compared to No-Dachi (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=75265) and Fireshrieker (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=48203) your equipment is stricly superior to both for an uncommon. Personnaly I would put an equip cost higher than 2.

Michael_Zeora

06-09-2009, 07:21 PM

@death by aggro - I'm just a unexperienced designer, but compared to No-Dachi (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=75265) and Fireshrieker (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=48203) your equipment is stricly superior to both for an uncommon. Personnaly I would put an equip cost higher than 2.

As an experienced Designer I have to say he's skirting it. a total of :5mana: for +3/+0 and Double Strike doesn't seem too bad for a Legendary, even +3/+0 and First Strike doesn't seem horrible for a normal. but it's cost just ticks it on the edge of either.

it's a very very powerful uncommon, or a decent but not stellar rare.

So I think his choice for uncommon is pushing it, but it's the safer bet.

JakeKessler

06-09-2009, 07:56 PM

Some minor spelling/grammar notes:

@ Michael_Zeora link (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=294913&postcount=2) - In the first paragraph, "Remove target ... from the game put two time counters on it" should read: "Remove target ... from the game with two time counters on it." You have a run-on sentence.

In the last paragraph, "if there are seven or more cards in your graveyard, Remove target ..." should read: "if there are seven or more cards in your graveyard, remove target ..." You are capitalizing a word in the middle of the sentence.

@ death_by_aggro link (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=294942&postcount=7) - In the first paragraph, "Equipped Creature" should read "Equipped creature". You are capitalizing a word in the middle of the sentence.

Also in the first paragraph, "gains +3/+0" should read "gets +3/+0". Gains is used to describe temporary abilities, while gets is used to describe power and toughness modifiers. (Has, on the other hand, is used to describe ongoing abilities, and you use it correctly here.)

Additionally, I would consider breaking the first paragraph up into two, one for the +3/+0 and the other for the first strike/double strike. At present, there is some ambiguity about whether the double strike for legendary creatures replaces only the first strike or the +3/+0 as well.

@ final_press link (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=294918&postcount=4) - "Spirit creature you control" should read "Spirit creatures you control". You left out an s to make it plural.

final_press

06-10-2009, 01:51 AM

@ final_press link (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=294918&postcount=4) - "Spirit creature you control" should read "Spirit creatures you control". You left out an s to make it plural.

I'm sure I don't know what you mean :D

(also, thanks)

JakeKessler

06-10-2009, 05:37 AM

You're welcome. ^^

Cashew

06-10-2009, 09:58 AM

Does Exile count as a keyword =)

Put up my real entry, barring some clarification with M10 wording haha.

final_press

06-10-2009, 10:06 AM

Does Exile count as a keyword =)

Put up my real entry, barring some clarification with M10 wording haha.

Be careful with that flippant new-wave wording on your card Cash', they might burn you for heresy! :P

:lynch:

George G

06-10-2009, 10:27 AM

long shot but a try.....does equip count as a key word???

JakeKessler

06-10-2009, 11:23 AM

@ Mechanical_Mind link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=296272&postcount=30) - First: this is a gold card, not a hybrid one. See Esper Stormblade (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=188968), Bant Sureblade (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=188975) and the rest of that cycle. Because you have two mana symbols with mutually exclusive colors, you need to use a gold frame.

Second, this is probably overly nitpicky, but the "definite" monowhite mana symbol should probably be on the right end of the cost rather than the left. Again, see the 'Blade cycle for reference.

Third, I'm not sure I see the flavor of an entity that controls (or embodies) time and is white-blue-black having wither. Is he using control over time to stop the wounds he inflicts from healing? Is he reaching backwards and attacking you in the past? Is he reaching past reality and attacking your soul directly? Some flavor text might help explain just what is going on here.

Fourth, speaking of wither, you might run into some trouble using such a Shadowmoor-only ability in conjunction with shadow and suspend from Time Spiral block. I'm not saying you can't make the flavor work (see above), only that it puts added stress on the design and you might end up losing points in the end. (Also, by my count you have no fewer than five keywords total on your card, so if you clipped wither completely the card would still be within the parameters of the challenge.)

Fifth, the correct wording for the last paragraph is "Whenever a time counter is removed from Kronos, Deity of Time while it's removed from the game, you may scry 2." You have an extra comma in there, you need to use "while" instead of "and" (which actually changes the whole function of the ability), you need to account for other players taking time counters off of the card, and you don't need to capitalize "scry". See Aeon Chronicler (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=122449), and Eyes of the Watcher (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=73925).

Sixth, you need an artist attribution.

Does Exile count as a keyword =)

Put up my real entry, barring some clarification with M10 wording haha.

link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=294915&postcount=3) - I have no idea if Wizards is going to count Exile as a keyword... or more importantly, if ThunderHog is. =D In any case, you also have regenerate, deathtouch and dredge on the card, so you should be safe.

Other thoughts on your card:

First, the "as an additional cost" rider needs to be its own paragraph. Add a line break before "Regenerate" to separate what happens as an extra cost as you play the spell, and the actual effect that happens when the spell resolves.

Second, you've gone and made the last part of the spell a run-on sentence. I believe the best way to word this line would be "Regenerate target creature. That creature gains deathtouch until end of turn," but it certainly isn't right as is. I'm basing my wording off of Gaze of the Gorgon (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=83933).

Third, speaking of Gaze of the Gorgon (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=83933), you might be worried about being too close to an existing card. I'll leave that to you to consider, since I don't have any advice on it.

long shot but a try.....does equip count as a key word???

I'm pretty sure it does. It's formatted the same as cycling: a word followed by a cost followed by a cost-colon-effect activated ability in reminder text. ThunderHog's is the opinion you want on this, though, since he's judging the contest.

@ Streetz link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=296273&postcount=31) - I like this card a lot, but I have a couple of things to point out. First, why is it green? Is it just for the relatively high power/toughness? All five colors have access to provoke, and shadow is most often a white-blue-black ability. Since white gets high toughness as well as shadow, you might think about changing this to be WUB instead of GUB, or even 3UB.

Second, in order to use provoke correctly, you will almost always have to abuse both of the activated abilities. For simplicity's sake, you might think about combining them into "UB: Target creature you don't control gains flying and shadow until end of turn."

Third, while I really like this combination, you might run into trouble with mixing an Onslaught-block-only mechanic (provoke) with a mechanic from only Tempest and Time Spiral blocks (shadow). Provoke, to my knowledge, didn't make an appearance in Time Spiral even though it could have. The flavor is gray here; you might luck out, or you might eat a penalty. You might want to PM ThunderHog about it.

Oh, and one last thing. Because you're listing multiple items in a line, you don't need to capitalize shadow since it's not first.

death by aggro

06-10-2009, 12:43 PM

I really like the first strike idea, and I transform the pump abillity with the flowstone abillity ":r:: CARDNAME gets +1/-1 until end of turn"

Now that's thinking like a designer! Good on ya;)!

@ death_by_aggro link (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=294942&postcount=7) - In the first paragraph, "Equipped Creature" should read "Equipped creature". You are capitalizing a word in the middle of the sentence.

Also in the first paragraph, "gains +3/+0" should read "gets +3/+0". Gains is used to describe temporary abilities, while gets is used to describe power and toughness modifiers. (Has, on the other hand, is used to describe ongoing abilities, and you use it correctly here.)

Additionally, I would consider breaking the first paragraph up into two, one for the +3/+0 and the other for the first strike/double strike. At present, there is some ambiguity about whether the double strike for legendary creatures replaces only the first strike or the +3/+0 as well.

I'll adress each paragraph:

1. Ah yes just a mere typo.

2. Thanks for the tidbit, I didn't catch that when I was looking at wordings in Gatherer. Of course that could just be because I'm a lazy skimmer:p.

3. I had also worried about ambiguity issues, though for some odd reason it never occured to me to put it into two separate paragraphs. This'll help a lot.

Thanks for the help Jake:).

Edit: Going to re-render card soon, but I'm having some troubles with the particular issue of equip cost. Originally I had just decided to go bold and see how it worked but now I'm really torn on whether I should keep the cost at two or bump it up to three. Any thoughts?

JakeKessler

06-10-2009, 05:36 PM

@ Kinghonkey: Your planeswalker (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=296333&postcount=33) sure looks a lot like the one p-chan was pitching (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=295958&postcount=122).

kingez36@hotmail.co.uk

06-11-2009, 08:21 AM

new card up, dont know for how long though

allso MasterPie, transmute is synonymous with the dimir guild, thats where the ability comes from and that guild is blue and black not blue and white, meaning flavourfully it doesnt really work with your card.

final_press

06-11-2009, 08:21 AM

MasterPie, bear in mind that you aren't allowed to use copyrighted images. Wen M's illustrations are used in the card game Anima, and they're all copyrighted, sorry.

Also, always be sure to double-check your wording. You've put "put target permanent on top of their owners library" instead of "on top of its owner's library".

p-chan

06-11-2009, 12:43 PM

Uf, a couple of days have passed without being able to read the forum.

First of all, thank you everyone for the feedback about the planeswalker ... but in special to Jake. Man, I was reading your post, and I found myself nodding once and again :P. You took my card's flavour perfectly, and I really learned a lot about designing planeswalkers ... I think. And, as an evidence:
http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/8331/ujiofleshcrafteronit.th.png (http://img268.imageshack.us/i/ujiofleshcrafteronit.png/)

I think it's now much more balanced, but still has a well defined flavour. Now it doesn't matter if you have creatures for the first ability to be casteable, wich makes it much more reliable, and there are an obvious sinergy between the first and the ultimate abilities; even the "middle" fits in the tactic. Also, it has to keep pumping for 3 turns to cast it's ultimate, just like Liliana.

And now, some feedback:

@KingHonkey: Jake is right, your walker seems a lot like mine ... well, not anymore, mine has changed enought to make them quite different, so who cares?. In any case, for the first ability, usually that effect is flavoured as "flinging" a creature ... but it's hard for me to imagine a necromancer flinging a, let's say, tarmogoyf :D.

@Masterpie: I know there were gold hybrids in Alara Reborn, but plz ... that's an ugly mana cost, you know that. For the transmute ... as long as it's well flavoured, I see no problem: there are a lot of cards with hellbent or convoke that are not rakdos nor selensya. The thing is that I can't see any flavour in the transmute ability, and this is for your card and for wizard's ones :P

@Kingez: XD, I like the cad, but plz, remember to change the name and the art. Also, it's border should be grey, just like Ghostfire

Also, here's a new and completely different idea; I like it a lot, but I can't find an art for it!
http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/5838/headbutt.th.png (http://img31.imageshack.us/i/headbutt.png/)

Any comment about any of the cards would be welcome :p

Kamahl's Disciple

06-11-2009, 04:18 PM

@Sinapptyk: - I am wondering the relevance of trample in this one, since it has defender. Otherwise, the rest of the card seems to be fine to me.

@Raghart: - Excellent submission, there is no need to change this one. Its quickly becoming one of my favorites shown thus far.

JakeKessler

06-11-2009, 04:22 PM

First of all, thank you everyone for the feedback about the planeswalker ... but in special to Jake. Man, I was reading your post, and I found myself nodding once and again :P. You took my card's flavour perfectly, and I really learned a lot about designing planeswalkers.

You're welcome. =D You might do one more read-through for grammar before the contest ends, but overall the new build is a lot more balanced and flavorful. Kudos.

@Masterpie: I know there were gold hybrids in Alara Reborn, but plz ... that's an ugly mana cost, you know that. For the transmute ... as long as it's well flavoured, I see no problem: there are a lot of cards with hellbent or convoke that are not rakdos nor selensya. The thing is that I can't see any flavour in the transmute ability, and this is for your card and for wizard's ones :P-

First off: This is a gold card, not a hybrid card. It's also an artifact. Its frame, ultimately, should look exactly like Esper Cormorants (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=184983)'.

As for the guild abilities, yes they've appeared on non-Ravnica cards when they came back in future sight. But they still stayed within their guilds' colors. Convoke (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&set=|[%22Future%20Sight%22]&text=+[convoke]) was only on white and/or green cards, hellbent (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&set=|[%22Future%20Sight%22]&text=+[hellbent]) was only on red and/or black cards, and Transmute (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&set=|[%22Future%20Sight%22]&text=+[trans]) (not to mention its nephew Transfigure) was only on blue and/or black cards. So I say it's a stretch for this blue-white card to have it.

The fact that it's a colored artifact with Future Sight-appropriate keywords and flavor text from Teferi doesn't bother me--thanks to Sarcomite Myr (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=136212), this is entirely Future Sight-appropriate.

But honestly? I think Raghart (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=296435&postcount=35) is who we need to be worried might be winning this contest.

Oh, I forgot to mention... I changed my submission (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=295560&postcount=24) last week and never advertised I had done so. What do you guys think of the new one?

Sinapptyk

06-11-2009, 04:54 PM

@Sinapptyk: - I am wondering the relevance of trample in this one, since it has defender. Otherwise, the rest of the card seems to be fine to me.

True, true. I always forget the rules for trample only apply when it attacks, not whenever it does damage in battle. Looking at it that way, "Trample" does seem a little tacked on. I think the inherent nature of the challenge makes most of the cards a little messy anyways.

And now starts my reign of nitpicky! This is only my second contest, so take everything with a block of salt.

@p-chan: The synergy between the first and second obviously makes sense, and I'm probably being a bit pushy, but the "middle" doesn't necessarily work with the Ulti, since, of course planeswalkers only fire once a turn. You could be cheap and pull a Jace with "-1: Target player sacrifices a card.", but that would be almost redundant with the way most people would run Ujio.

@M_Z: Typos
...from the game and put two time...
shouldn't the creature technically gain suspend 2?( both instances)
in your graveyard, remove target creature card.

@Sinapptyk: Trample, what were you thinking?!
Oh...

@Blinx511: Typo
All creatures have haste.

@Marlin: I think your wording is fine, but if you wanted to shorten it, you might try "If you have at least <number> cards in your hand, <effect>."

_b4g3r_

06-11-2009, 05:23 PM

So my card is up, maybe its overpowered or something like that :)
Any thoughts?

NeoMagicwarrior

06-11-2009, 05:43 PM

@B4g3r: yes...yes it is overpowered

it would have been passable before the new counter rule...but now that -/- and +/+ cancel...that means the persist and bloodthirst cancel...keeping this guy around a LONG time. and that wouldnt be too bad....but trample kinda pushes it over the edge.

side note: he dosnt feel very green.

Kamahl's Disciple

06-11-2009, 06:00 PM

But honestly? I think Raghart (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=296435&postcount=35) is who we need to be worried might be winning this contest.

Tell me about it, this is going to be a tight, neck-and-neck race between his piece and Coldstone's.

Punkrockanarchymagic

06-11-2009, 07:33 PM

Changed my entry again. Comments welcome.

Kamahl's Disciple

06-11-2009, 07:45 PM

@Pram: - This is a nice change from your last entry, I can see this fit into white weenie builds with Glorious Anthem and Crusade easily. My only gripe is that there shouldn't be a period at the end of reach, change that and you should be good.

@Raghart: - After looking at your card again I noticed something that needs to be changed, much like the post above me, you need to remove the period at the end of defender. Other then that, keep it the same way.

EDIT: - I almost forgot, you two need to change the commas in your first line of keywords into semicolons, since defender in both cases are not in the usual set of common keywords. Example of this can be shown in the errata for Giant Solifuge.

Raghart

06-11-2009, 07:56 PM

- But honestly? I think Raghart is who we need to be worried might be winning this contest.

-Tell me about it, this is going to be a tight, neck-and-neck race between his piece and Coldstone's.

-After looking at your card again I noticed something that needs to be changed, much like the post above me, you need to remove the period at the end of defender. Other then that, keep it the same way.

first i must say, i'm glad you liked it. ^^ First it was a Defender - Trample - lifelink creature, but i think that Vigilant seems better for it, and it's more acording to the spirit of the card (also makes it a litle less powerfull)
but i was fearing anyway that it was a very simple card.

I'll fix that, thanks Kamahl's.

@_b4g3r_
Well, seeing that it's Fu-leng of who we are talking.. i see that it should ve more black instead of green. Red fits him well, but black does it more. Maybe a 2 black 1 red 1 generic.

Trample and bushido combines well together, but it seems pretty easy to be playing a 6/4 whit Trample and Haste for "only" 4 mana.

It's just what i think :P.

@MasterPie
I see that it, like a creature, its a little poor. i say.. it has a very high cost, but his main power is pure defense. The best part is his versatility at casting time, ¿maybe he should not be a creature, but a spell?

death by aggro

06-11-2009, 08:10 PM

New card up for me. As always, comments are welcome, especially if you have an opinion on the art.

Punkrockanarchymagic

06-11-2009, 08:31 PM

@Pram: - This is a nice change from your last entry, I can see this fit into white weenie builds with Glorious Anthem and Crusade easily. My only gripe is that there shouldn't be a period at the end of reach, change that and you should be good.

EDIT: - I almost forgot, you need to change the comma in your first line of keywords into a semicolon, since defender is not in the usual set of common keywords. Example of this can be shown in the errata for Giant Solifuge.

Thanks. Made edits as per your suggestions. Edit: Also cleaned up flavor text and added 'alone' to blocking ability.

@Death By Aggro: First art peice is better. Watch out with the warchief name though... all other tribal warchiefs make creatures of that tribe cost you 1 less to play.

Kamahl's Disciple

06-11-2009, 10:03 PM

first i must say, i'm glad you liked it. ^^ First it was a Defender - Trample - lifelink creature, but i think that Vigilant seems better for it, and it's more acording to the spirit of the card (also makes it a litle less powerfull)
but i was fearing anyway that it was a very simple card.

I'll fix that, thanks Kamahl's.

No problem, I'm glad to help, especially since I like your entry so much. If you didn't see, I edited my post and added a bit more information on what you need to fix. Otherwise, I will be glad to see it updated.

Thanks. Made edits as per your suggestions.

Glad to help you too.

@DBA: - Honestly, I really liked your other card too, but if the mismatched block keywords worried you too much, then I suppose there is no helping that. Your new card though, still impresses me, but I think the cost may be a little high for what it can do, especially if it doesn't reduce the cost of Orc spells by some amount. I think a more adequate cost would be either :2mana::r::r: or :1mana::r::r::r:.

As for the art, use the first one.

death by aggro

06-11-2009, 11:19 PM

@Death By Aggro: First art peice is better. Watch out with the warchief name though... all other tribal warchiefs make creatures of that tribe cost you 1 less to play.

Good point there, I hadn't thought about them. It's a fairly general term though, so it shouldn't be too hard to replace;).

@DBA: - Honestly, I really liked your other card too, but if the mismatched block keywords worried you too much, then I suppose there is no helping that. Your new card though, still impresses me, but I think the cost may be a little high for what it can do, especially if it doesn't reduce the cost of Orc spells by some amount. I think a more adequate cost would be either :2mana::r::r: or :1mana::r::r::r:.

As for the art, use the first one.

Thanks for the comment. The other card I made I felt good with, but it seems just a little off flavorfully, and the whole "mixed block keywords" thing. After having been through two contests hosted by TH I'm starting to get a bead on his grading style, and I'm fairly certain I'd lose points for at least one of those two reasons.

As to the cost, I can see it being dropped down to :2mana::r::r:. I mean, even then he'd still be the most expensive orc in existence barring Changeling shenanigans:p. Y'know, for things that are supposed to basically be bigger goblins, they're actually pretty small. Kinda odd, huh?

Lastly, it looks like the first art is probably the better choice, so I'll re-render with that one.

Edit: Card is up. I think the new name is a bit more flavorful:p.

Streetz

06-11-2009, 11:44 PM

@ Streetz link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=296273&postcount=31) - I like this card a lot, but I have a couple of things to point out. First, why is it green? Is it just for the relatively high power/toughness? All five colors have access to provoke, and shadow is most often a white-blue-black ability. Since white gets high toughness as well as shadow, you might think about changing this to be WUB instead of GUB, or even 3UB.

Second, in order to use provoke correctly, you will almost always have to abuse both of the activated abilities. For simplicity's sake, you might think about combining them into "UB: Target creature you don't control gains flying and shadow until end of turn."

Third, while I really like this combination, you might run into trouble with mixing an Onslaught-block-only mechanic (provoke) with a mechanic from only Tempest and Time Spiral blocks (shadow). Provoke, to my knowledge, didn't make an appearance in Time Spiral even though it could have. The flavor is gray here; you might luck out, or you might eat a penalty. You might want to PM ThunderHog about it.

Oh, and one last thing. Because you're listing multiple items in a line, you don't need to capitalize shadow since it's not first.

Thanks for the comments. I have completely revamped the card as I too thought the multiple abilities was a bit clunky. Hopefully the new one will be super sexy. :)

Tekkactus

06-11-2009, 11:53 PM

You're using a hybrid frame on a gold card, Streetz. For shame.

Lokenta Mirana

06-12-2009, 12:42 AM

MasterPie, I do believe you're having much too much fun with hybrid mana costs. A quote I pulled out from something Arix once said a long time ago says it nicely:

1. Please don't mix hybrid mana symbols with normal ones (in costs like {1}{R/G}{R} etc.). The whole purpose of hybrid mana is to give the player a choice of what type of deck to play it in - if you're forcing them into a certain colour anyway, there's no point. Mixing with monocolour hybrid ({2/B}{B}, for example) is a bit better, but I'd still avoid it where possible).

As another note, the use of not only a hybrid frame but an abnormal hybrid frame is probably going to be frowned upon come grading. Also, as others have mentioned, it is an artifact.

Lastly, based on other cards with choice happenings, I might suggest rewording the card as follows:

Flash
Flying
When you cast ~ you may choose one — Exile target permanent; or counter target spell; or put target permanent on top of its owner's library.
Transmute {cost}

Reference for the wording was Cryptic Command and Wydwen, the Biting Gale.

Lokenta Mirana

Edit: The flavour text is off as well, might I suggest: "Its origin and maker are unknown but its power is so widely throughout the plane." — Zeferi, Mage of Zhalfir

Streetz

06-12-2009, 12:48 AM

You're using a hybrid frame on a gold card, Streetz. For shame.

Fixed. Thanks.

Tekkactus

06-12-2009, 12:50 AM

Fixed. Thanks.

It's still gold. You need to pay 2 different colors.

JakeKessler

06-12-2009, 12:58 AM

@p-chan: I'm probably being a bit pushy, but the "middle" doesn't necessarily work with the Ulti, since, of course planeswalkers only fire once a turn.

Somthing interesting I didn't touch on in my wall of text about planeswalkers is the way a few of them almost have a sort of "alternate win strategy" if you only use their second ability. Ajani Goldmane (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=140233) is a good example, as is Jace Beleren (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=185816): I know people who will pile +1/+1 counters on their weenies or draw free cards until the 'walker runs out, and never bother to power them up or pursue their ultimates.

The other option is make the second ability some sort of defensive or "controlly" ability, like Ajani Vengeant (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=174852)'s or Garruk Wildspeaker (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=140205)'s--a protection mechanism the 'walker can use to defend itself.

In either case, so long as the second ability is on flavor for the planeswalker as a whole, it doesn't really need to synergize much with the first and third abilities--after all, if you're spending loyalty to use the second ability, you're making it harder for yourself in the long run to activate the ultimate.

@M_Z: shouldn't the creature technically gain suspend 2?( both instances)

This isn't necessary, since the number in suspend only dictates the number of counters it's removed from the game with, and the rest of the ability here is already doing that. Jhoira of the Ghitu (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=136194), Delay (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=132228) and Epochrasite (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=136143) are the relevant examples.

edit Oh f me, I just hit backspace and lost my whole edit. Alright, let's try again.

This is @ Streetz: link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=296273&postcount=31)

I really like the "S" theme! I even looked up "subcestial" and couldn't find a definition--what does it mean? (For extra cheese, consider putting Snow or snow mana somewhere on the card. There was a Snow Creature--Centaur (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=130684) in Future Sight, so it's totally in-bounds for block!)

A few brief notes on things you should fix:

1) This card is gold, not hybrid, and needs a gold border. In order to cast it, a player has to spend mana of at least two separate colors. This is why Crystallization (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=179621) is gold rather than hybrid, and why Beseech the Queen (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=152079) is monoblack rather than some kind of "colorless hybrid" nonsense.

2) While it's not expressly forbidden, putting a hybrid black-white mana symbol in the cost when you already have a "solid" white and a "solid" black mana symbol is something that has never been done before on a card. I don't think it's a good idea. Others have already commented on this, but I agree with them: the purpose of a hybrid symbol is to offer the player a choice of how to cast it (or put another way, to offer the deckbuilder a choice of which color or colors to support). This is not the same as a card like Crystallization (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=179621), where you still have to choose between making your deck blue-white, green-white or all three; in 99.9% of situations, a card that costs (W/B)(W)(B) is the same as it costing (1)(W)(B). It's also extremely unattractive visually.

3) A note on Scry. You're not the first person to make this mistake, and you won't be the last. I think I'll just quote myself here:

Scry X in Magic is now officially an "action word", meaning its an action the card is literally telling you to do, like regenerate or destroy. It only happens when the card says it happens... and on an instant or sorcery, with no framing sentence, "Scry 2" means "Scry 2 when this spell resolves, as part of its effect."

On a permanent, "Scry 2" by itself as a complete line has no meaning, because "scry" is an action that needs to be placed in a triggering sentence. Specifically, you need to tell the player when to scry... When he or she casts the spell? When the creature comes into play? Every upkeep?

Here are some examples of permanent cards that use scry: Unblinking Bleb (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=130342), Eyes of the Watcher (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=73925), New Benalia (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=126198).

edit 2 Hey punkrock, this was way earlier, but I just realized something:

No hybrid mana in Time Spiral block.

There totally was. Henchfiend of Ukor (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=130695) (who got kept out of Shadowmoor by having echo) and Graven Cairns (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=130581), the start of the filter-land cycle! So whatever Time Spiral project it was you were using hybrid for, you can totally do it.

evol_intentions

06-12-2009, 04:45 AM

finally have a proper entry, lets hear the heads up

JakeKessler

06-12-2009, 05:19 AM

You want to say "Protection from creatures with flying." Flying isn't a characteristic (like "red" or "artifacts").

Kamahl's Disciple

06-12-2009, 05:24 AM

@evol_intentions: - Basically what Jake said, plus, I don't think it should be a rare, its at best an uncommon.

EDIT: - @DBA: - Like the new name, great reference.

Streetz

06-12-2009, 08:14 AM

Thanks, Jake. The scry thing kind of messes up my S theme. Grrr.

death by aggro

06-12-2009, 09:53 AM

finally have a proper entry, lets hear the heads up

Ooh ooh ooh I like it! I want four:D! Although it can probably be an uncommon, but the design is just cool!

Also, thanks Kamahl. Ironclaw is iconic with orcs, and I just caught myself thinking of Steamflogger Boss and went "Eureka!" lol :p.

Raghart

06-12-2009, 11:00 AM

submission fixed (maybe... )

Kamahl's Disciple

06-12-2009, 12:09 PM

submission fixed (maybe... )

Actually, on second notice, you should have vigilance come first, then trample, then defender. Sorry about the inconvenience, I really should of noticed that earlier. Take Oakgnarl Warrior for example.

Otherwise, your good to go, I don't see anything else that needs to be changed and I am definitely sure about this, hope you win.

ButaWombat

06-12-2009, 12:23 PM

I think now the best submissions are:

Artifactor - Angel's Chalice
The image must be fixed, and the mana cost has to be 5wu IMO.
ColdStone - Dreadblast Dragon
I want IT now.
Raghart - Golem Tower
Good timing. We lose painlands with M10, and it will be harder to activate.

Have a gr8 trip to Top4.

For the others: Have a nice month :)

I hope everybody hates me now...

final_press

06-12-2009, 12:40 PM

Artifactor - Angel's Chalice

Cards with wording errors tend not to make it to the top 4.

Have a gr8 month :D

Kamahl's Disciple

06-12-2009, 01:38 PM

@YWN: - YES! YES! THIS IS DELICIOUS!

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b394/Ducktitan/4chan%20Folder/YesYes.jpg

Man, I have always wanted someone to do a legendary crocodile and you did it quite superbly. Its slight drawback really does countermeasure it being extremely cost effective. You made it in my top three, alongside Coldstone's Dreadblast Dragon and Raghart's Golem Tower.

evol_intentions

06-12-2009, 02:09 PM

You want to say "Protection from creatures with flying." Flying isn't a characteristic (like "red" or "artifacts").

Well actually I checked this out with the comprehensive rules about this and protection from can have any charachteristic value and as far as the comprehensive rules dictate, an ability is a charachteristic value. So there we go

death by aggro

06-12-2009, 02:42 PM

Kamahl's Disciple

06-12-2009, 02:52 PM

Why is everyone suddenly talking about this contest like it's ending tomorrow? Last i checked we still have another half a month left for new/improved entries, so to talk as though the game's already over is just silly.

On another note, teh gator is winz. Definetely a limited house, but what's the point of it having two versions of landwalk if the opponent can just let it through and transfer the damage to one of their creatures, essentially making it blocked anyway?

I'm not, I think its just Butawombat, I am just talking about my three favorite submissions thus far.

Also, I think it has those landwalk abilities more so for the creature's flavor, since crocodiles tend to lurk around swamps and coasts, plus its always nice to have it just in case.

Sinapptyk

06-12-2009, 03:21 PM

@P.R.A.M.: That seems a little O.P., IMO. Try adding at least 2 colorless to the cost. Either that or giving her only +5 or +6. Don't get me wrong, I would run this in a heartbeat, but you might lose points in the plausibility/design section.

SalutCapitaine

06-12-2009, 03:39 PM

I'm playing with some more ideas. Any comments?

Frenetic vampire, Soul Cloak, Sakura-Tribe Fanatic (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showthread.php?p=295601#post295601)

Kamahl's Disciple

06-12-2009, 03:51 PM

@SalutCapitaine: - I like Soul Cloak better then your other entries shown thus far, if I were you I would go with it. Just so you know, you should put the equip cost on the bottom and have the equip ability on top.

SalutCapitaine

06-12-2009, 04:12 PM

JakeKessler

06-12-2009, 04:19 PM

Goes really well with Fecundity (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=5604). Nevermind, no it doesn't, because you'll get the draw trigger before your scry resolves.

I think Soul cloak is awesome, but it would be awesomer--that is, there'd be more ways to abuse it--if it were changed to a "when equipped creature is put into a graveyard from play" trigger rather than a "sacrifice equipped creature" activated ability. The reasoning is you can choose how to stack other abilities triggering from the same event to get the best use out of them; scry before you draw, or fateseal before you mill them with Altar of Dementia (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=4596).

Just my ten cents. Awesome concept.

ButaWombat

06-12-2009, 04:37 PM

Cards with wording errors tend not to make it to the top 4.

Sorry, I forgot about wording error, but if he/she fixes it, then it'll be a gr8 card.

I'm not, I think its just Butawombat, I am just talking about my three favorite submissions thus far.

I talked only about my favourites, too.

Soul Cloak looks good, too.

I want to see more great cards!!! (from you)

JakeKessler

06-12-2009, 05:04 PM

@ YWN: Damn (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=295787&postcount=27). I've been outclassed hard.

Moving on.

Well actually I checked this out with the comprehensive rules about this and protection from can have any charachteristic value and as far as the comprehensive rules dictate, an ability is a charachteristic value. So there we go

"Protection from X" means "This can't be blocked, damaged, targeted, enchanted or equipped by anything X."

Far gone are the days when misworded cards would refer to "flying creatures". Flying doesn't enchant things or deal damage; it's a static ability on the card, and not a characteristic value. "Protection from flying" is a phrase with no meaning.

edit I just looked through every card with protection every printed (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?page=8&text=+[%22protection%20from%22]). "Protection from flying," of course, has never seen print; neither has protection from shadow or haste or any other keyword. This is because you can't have protection from keyword abilities. They aren't characteristic values--they don't define what the card is, only what the card can do. You can have protection from colors (like black or red), from card types (like artifact or instant), from card subtypes (like Goblin or Arcane), or from any other value that defines the card's base characteristics. You can even have protection from certain converted mana costs or names, because these define the card itself.

Flying doesn't define a card, it just lists something the card can do.

Azrael Subucni

06-12-2009, 05:23 PM

Finally. After half a dozen failed ideas due to inability to find art, or inability to fit a third keyword on, I've finally settled on an entry. Which will undoubtedly be changed before the deadline. But I like it, for now. Based off the Coldsnap keywords and subthemes.

JakeKessler

06-12-2009, 05:27 PM

I like it. You need to clean it up a little--don't capitalize upkeep, change "2 card" to "two cards," probably word the last ability better. Overall it's pretty cool though.

Azrael Subucni

06-12-2009, 06:03 PM

I like it. You need to clean it up a little--don't capitalize upkeep, change "2 card" to "two cards," probably word the last ability better. Overall it's pretty cool though.

Thanks. I fixed the other things, and adjusted the wording on the last ability. But it doesn't look good with both sentences beginning with 'each card'. I can't seem to find any similar enough effects to get the correct wording. Anyone have any advice?"

Kamahl's Disciple

06-12-2009, 06:13 PM

@Azrael Subucni: - Now, I may be wrong, and correct me if I am, but since every spell in your graveyard has recover, doesn't that mean when a creature hits the graveyard, you would need to pay for all of them to play them again or else they are removed from the game? At least that's what I read on recover's reminder text. This card is hard to set up as it stands and chances are you won't be able to play all the cards you want either by them not being in the graveyard or not having enough mana to pay for them then consequently getting them removed from the game.

This is a hard card to get working... But I can see why you have been stressing over finding the right keywords that would work for all spells, since some are more restrictive to certain types then others, like Unearth and Flashback.

Azrael Subucni

06-12-2009, 06:27 PM

@Azrael Subucni: - Now, I may be wrong, and correct me if I am, but since every spell in your graveyard has recover, doesn't that mean when a creature hits the graveyard, you would need to pay for all of them to play them again or else they are removed from the game? At least that's what I read on recover's reminder text. This card is hard to set up as it stands and chances are you won't be able to play all the cards you want either by them not being in the graveyard or not having enough mana to pay for them then consequently getting them removed from the game.

You are is correct. That's what I feel balances the card. It fills up your graveyard, but you're most likely not able to get back everything. Ideally, you want to use it with cheap or free cards. It's intended as a very Johnny-ish card.

JakeKessler

06-12-2009, 07:06 PM

KD is right, the very first time anything dies, most of your graveyard is getting RFG'd. However, I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing. It just means that the strategy you would use with this card is different from other graveyard strategies out there. With this card, you're managing your graveyard much more closely, and your graveyard at any given time isn't very big. The longer the enchantment sticks out, the harder it's going to be to grab everything you want to save; but on the other hand, every land you mill gets to your hand for free, which is a really cool fringe benefit.

(As a side note, this card at first glance is terrible in multiples, but having two of them is really good. You keep the second in hand, and when the first's upkeep gets to be too much to handle, let it die and cast the second one. This will give the first one Recover, and you get put it safely back in hand.)

Actually, you don't want to use it with traditional good-in-your-graveyard effects like flashback or reanimator targets, since you only use your graveyard in this strategy to funnel cards back to your hand. Ultimately, this isn't a graveyard-deck card at all, it's a draw-power-deck card. It zooms you through your deck to the cards you want really fast, but usually won't do much from the graveyard itself. It feels more like a Puresight Merrow (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=158745)-style effect in practice.

Ideally you want a lot of mana when you're working with this card in play. Again, the free lands from your graveyard will help this.

...

Now then, to answer your question re: the last ability. I think it should be "each" rather than "all", because each individual card affected gets a different value for its recover cost. You can't say "their mana cost" because all of the cards collectively don't have just one mana cost. Each card has a different value to use.

Here's a card that's similar, although not as complicated: Ashes of the Fallen (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=87334). Baki's Curse (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=2936) might be a better example; it has to use "each" because each creature is receiving a different value in damage based on the number of Auras attached.

Oh! Here's the best example: Djinn Illuminatus (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=97197). Because each spell has its own value for the replicate cost, it has to say "Each instant and sorcery spell" rather than just "Instant and sorcery spells".

edit You still need to change "card" to "cards" in the upkeep cost.

Azrael Subucni

06-12-2009, 09:38 PM

edit You still need to change "card" to "cards" in the upkeep cost.

Oops. Fixed. Also adjusted third ability, based on Djinn Illuminatis (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=97197). Thanks for the help with that. Looks much cleaner now.

As a note, I didn't even realize it filtered in free land when I made it. This makes it more powerful than I original thought... I'll leave it as is right now, but I may make it 'each nonland card'.

As for Bloodfire Eruption, I really like the loose interaction between Gravestorm and Delve, and to a lesser degree Flashback. I worry that it's a little too powerful with gravestorm, but even at RRR you still need to set it up with something else. My main recommendation is to change the name. Bloodfire [Blank]s (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=+[bloodfire]) are always creatures that deal damage to everything equal to their power when sacrificed.

PS: I love your expansion symbol. Sure beats my lazy celtic cross.

Streetz

06-12-2009, 10:03 PM

@Jake: It should have read subcelestial, not subcestial. i have since fixed that. :)

Tekkactus

06-13-2009, 01:56 AM

Put up a pencil sketch for my card art. Who knows, I might actually get this one done!

JakeKessler

06-13-2009, 03:10 AM

@ Azrael: Yea, it started out as a more traditional Bloodfire card, and then it took a turn. I'm probably scrapping it for an entirely different concept soon... it was a cool idea, but I can't quite get it the way I want it, and it takes way too much reading for people to get the "oh, wow" aspect of it right away. It'd be a fun actual card, I think but it's too complicated and overreaching for this sort of contest.

Side note: You know what word means Bloodfire? Pyrohemia (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=122436). And it does the same thing.

And thanks, I'm rather proud of my symbol. I came up with it for a graveyard set I was working on awhile back, and I like it enough that when I decided to start entering these contests I just kept on using it.

I'm thinking of going with something similar to this (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/StenchofDecay.png). Or this (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/TolarianSkyhook.png).

@ Tekkactus: Regardless of how your card ends up doing in the contest, I just want to say it's really impressive you're doing your own art. That's more attention and skill than most of us have, let alone are devoting to our entries. Just wanted to voice my respect.

evol_intentions

06-13-2009, 04:04 AM

"Protection from X" means "This can't be blocked, damaged, targeted, enchanted or equipped by anything X."

Far gone are the days when misworded cards would refer to "flying creatures". Flying doesn't enchant things or deal damage; it's a static ability on the card, and not a characteristic value. "Protection from flying" is a phrase with no meaning.

edit I just looked through every card with protection every printed (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?page=8&text=+[%22protection%20from%22]). "Protection from flying," of course, has never seen print; neither has protection from shadow or haste or any other keyword. This is because you can't have protection from keyword abilities. They aren't characteristic values--they don't define what the card is, only what the card can do. You can have protection from colors (like black or red), from card types (like artifact or instant), from card subtypes (like Goblin or Arcane), or from any other value that defines the card's base characteristics. You can even have protection from certain converted mana costs or names, because these define the card itself.

Flying doesn't define a card, it just lists something the card can do.

Now im not saying your wrong, but heres my point...

502.7. Protection
502.7a Protection is a static ability, written “Protection from [quality].” This quality is usually a
color (as in “protection from black”) but can be any characteristic value.

201. Characteristics
201.1. An object’s characteristics are name, mana cost, color, card type, subtype, supertype, expansion
symbol, rules text, abilities, power, toughness, and loyalty. Objects can have some or all of these
characteristics. Any other information about an object isn’t a characteristic. For example,
characteristics don’t include whether a permanent is tapped, a spell’s target, an object’s owner or
controller, what an Aura enchants, and so on.

JakeKessler

06-13-2009, 05:03 AM

Yea, I've got no answer to that, evol. Why they're including "abilities" as a characteristic value is beyond me.

If you're convinced a card can have "Protection from flying" and have it mean the same thing as "Protection from creatures with flying," I guess go ahead and put it on your card. It still looks wrong to me, though, and it seems like just putting "Protection from creatures with flying" would be a lot safer.

Hell, I don't know. Try PMing ThunderHog about it. Ultimately he's the one who will decide whether to dock you points over it.

p-chan

06-13-2009, 05:14 AM

Some feedback:

@DBA: I love that card! Just try to find a picture with a bit more resolution.

@PunkRock: Cumulative upkeep - Gain 7 lives??? A bit too much I think, even for a creature that must have Glorious Anthem into play.

@Evol: I think it's not problem with protection from flying. If dopplegangers copy the flying ability, it means that it's a characteristic of the card ... I think.

@SalutCapitaine:I think you should keep your current submission.

@MechanicalMind: A greek Titan as a magic card? I think it's a bit out of flavour.

@Coldstone, Ragh, YWN: I see big guys are the favourites :D

Also, I've changed my entry. At last I find a submission wich I'm comfortable with. The art is not mine, of course, but I felt the need of making the alter. What you guys think? About the card and about if I should keep the alter or not :P

JakeKessler

06-13-2009, 06:00 AM

@ Punkrock link (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=295027&postcount=13) - On the one hand, "Cumulative upkeep--Gain 7 life" is unprintably good; on the other hand, 0/0 with no built-in buff is unprintably bad. This is the opposite of balanced. I guess you're trying to pull a Force of Savagery (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=130713), but remember people don't even use that card. I liked your earlier attempts this month a lot better. On the up, the art kicks ass.

@ p-chan link (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=295320&postcount=22) - You mean "its", not "it's". Also the art made me shoot milk out my nose. It's a neat effect, but I don't think Wizards ever does that outside of Un-cards and planeswalkers.

EDIT By the way, who was it last month who was trying to tell me Attunement isn't a word? Attunement (http://beta.gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=5596) is already the name of a Magic card!

Punkrockanarchymagic

06-13-2009, 07:46 AM

Made major edit to my entry. Thanks to everyone who pointed out that it was stupidly undercosted, overpowered and imbalanced. Hopefully it's slightly better now.

@Jake: Force of Savagery's problem was that green effects and elemental tribal effects didn't (and still dont) have enough permanent global toughness boosters to support it. In monowhite, this isn't nearly as much of a drawback.

JakeKessler

06-13-2009, 08:46 AM

It's a much tighter card now. And I see what you're saying about green not getting the boosts, but even green has Gaea's Anthem, Boartusk Liege, etc. Not to mention (gasp!) going into two colors. And yet the creature doesn't get play.

evol_intentions

06-13-2009, 10:18 AM

right scew, protection from flying, a new bad boy is in town. Lets hear the heads up and i promise i will not argue back (sorry jake, your only doing it to help and i think i was just being contrary).

death by aggro

06-13-2009, 01:25 PM

Some feedback:

@DBA: I love that card! Just try to find a picture with a bit more resolution.

Also, I've changed my entry. At last I find a submission wich I'm comfortable with. The art is not mine, of course, but I felt the need of making the alter. What you guys think? About the card and about if I should keep the alter or not :P

Thanks, I'll try to find better art, but you'd be surprised how hard it is just to find some good orc art that isn't locked down in red tape (i.e. copyrighted). I just stumbled on the one I have now by sheer luck.

Furthermore, the way your art extends into the bordering gives it too much of an Un-set feel. Other than that though, this card is hilarious and awesome, and the flavor text is perfect:D!

right scew, protection from flying, a new bad boy is in town. Lets hear the heads up and i promise i will not argue back (sorry jake, your only doing it to help and i think i was just being contrary).

I think you could probably drop it to an uncommon, but that's just because I like super-power equipments. The design itself is awesome and reminds a bit of Sigil of Distinction, one of my favorite cards from Alara. Kudos on the idea, and lovely art too:).

George G

06-13-2009, 03:17 PM

edited my entry

dropped ind. and added flavor text, none of the other kaldra ep. had it but the card was TOOO simple without it I think.

Dropped the eq cost cause it's not on par with the helm but i've thought about it too much now so i'm clouded

what u guys think?
thanks

JakeKessler

06-13-2009, 04:32 PM

uber_panda

06-13-2009, 09:03 PM

Ok, I've posted my submissions. Tell me what you think, my biggest problem right now is with my first entry, but I want to know what other people think before I do anything.

evol_intentions

06-14-2009, 05:43 AM

@ Evol: link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=295090&postcount=16) - I'd use vanishing rather than fading, for a few reasons. First, fading has never been printed since the invention of equipment. Second, vanishing largely obsoleted fading as it's a better-worded and more intuitive functioning of the same ability. And third, because with vanishing your creature will still get +1/+1 the last turn the equipment is in play (with fading it won't get any p/t bonus because fading lasts a turn after the last counter is taken off).

thanks for the input, i tried vanishing, as you can see but the rules texts is alot longer and clunkier and it makes the text as a whole look less aestheticly pleasing. Also with the fading mechanic when the last counter is removed it would still have trample (or first strike when i update it, trample is just to strong) so its not sitting on the creature doing nothing. But i know where your coming from and i will probably stick to vanishing.

Ok, I've posted my submissions. Tell me what you think, my biggest problem right now is with my first entry, but I want to know what other people think before I do anything.

First may i point out, you only get one submission in this competition, posting more than one will only lead to your disqualification. and now to your cards.

With the first one, it is not white, at all. maybe red, maybe red and black but definatly definatly not white. allso unless there babys, dragons are never 1/2. dragons represent this massive deadly creature and arent 1/2. Allso dragons should never be white but ive covered that.

with the second one to much is going on it loses the elegance of design by throwing to much stuff on there. allso a 9/9 for 6!! That Cant Die!!! thats broken by a very very long way

the same is true for the third however this is definatly the one you should enter into the contest. the only thing i will tell you to do is lose some keywords so i would lose flash, it doesnt really do alot except make it clunkier, i would lose double strike as like flash it is pulling the card in to many directions. I would lose that watermark as its ugly and you would only lose pints for it. Finally i really dont want to design your card for you but i would give it vanishing 1 making the haste more important. Oh and Aspect is not a creature type so you need to change that, i would go for human warrior??

edit: to get the right wording look at Keldon Marauders

Finally to Coldstone, if i where you i would take out haste to make unearth that much more 'splashy' and oooph-ish, seeing as unearth gives it haste anyway so it would still count as one of you 3 (i think, seeing as it is in your rlues box. just my 2 cents

uber_panda

06-14-2009, 09:06 AM

Thanks so much!
I wasn't sure, how somethings went with the card contest, but I saw some people post more than one card, I thought I'd be in the clear.

death by aggro

06-14-2009, 12:21 PM

Revamped my card with some minor wording fixes and a new art, tell me if you like it better than the last one.

JakeKessler

06-14-2009, 02:41 PM

@ evol: Changing trample to first strike is an interesting choice. Trample is arguably more powerful, but first strike makes more sense for a sword.

GG Crono

06-14-2009, 10:41 PM

I just have to comment on Streetz'. Awesome. XD

Even if he doesn't win, he deserves an honorable mention.

Streetz

06-14-2009, 10:45 PM

Wow. Thanks, GG. :) I wasn't expecting anyone to like it. I was just like, let's do an S theme. :E

Kamahl's Disciple

06-14-2009, 11:32 PM

@evol intentions: - I would go with the Vanishing 5 version of this equipment.

@p-chan: - I am not sure if I reviewed your new card yet, but if I didn't, I think you did a fine job with this one, I really like the art and flavor text for it too.

@ALEX Ryugami: - I like this entry better then your previous entry, despite the slight clash in keywords from different blocks. I hope TH doesn't give you less points because of it, they both work together really well and make this card shine.

@DBA: - Sweet jesus in a birchbark canoe... You really found some badass art for this card. I thought the previous one was pretty sweet, but this new one just wipes the floor with the last one.

@PRAM: - This is a much better revision, stick with it.

ALEX Ryugami

06-15-2009, 02:29 AM

Thank you Kamahl :)
Both of my current submission are from the same set, which it's about when all known planes are merging.

kingez36@hotmail.co.uk

06-15-2009, 06:10 AM

happy :)

George G

06-15-2009, 12:21 PM

Just want to say that I think YWN's card, as usual, is so good that even if you didn't play the game and just collected it you would still want it. Even people that have never seen magic would want to play after seeing his entry this month. That's the kind of card that would suck somebody into opening their wallet to try this game.

Tekkactus

06-17-2009, 02:00 AM

Updated with the final art.

Yeah, I know. Astonishing.

JakeKessler

06-17-2009, 02:07 AM

I've been meaning to ask... what does Cetatillious mean?

Tekkactus

06-17-2009, 02:13 AM

I took the first half of Cetacea (order of whales) and smashed it into the second half of Vespertilio (genus of bats). Of course, in the final art it ended up looking decidedly unwhalelike, and doesn't even have flying anymore. Oh well.

JakeKessler

06-17-2009, 03:05 AM

Gotcha. Might I suggest considering a name change before the contest ends? It's not really a viceroy, either. Or a Leviathan.

edit My new submission:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/RecalltoSlaughter.png

Thoughts:

@ akashmar link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=297098&postcount=41) - Cool card, and I know the problem you're talking about with MSE, it happens to me sometimes. Try reordering the keywords? Who knows, maybe jumbling your list around might fix it.

@ Uber_panda link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=296703&postcount=40) - Vanishing 1 is really really steep, since the card doesn't have any built-in way to recur itself. You only get one shot with this, and while 4 life, 2 damage to a creature, 2 damage to a player, and the potential for more in an attack are really good for four mana, it still feels like casting a janky sorcery than a powerful creature.

A couple of other notes: The text being so big actually make it looks less like a real card; I'd advise coming up with some flavor text or something to shrink it down a notch. Also, while "when" and "whenever" are functionally the same in Magic, "when" is the preferred word to use when you're describing an trigger that will probably only happen once for an object, like "comes into play" or "leaves play". Yea, the card can be recurred, but the creature will be a new game object if/when it comes back. You should probably change it to say "when".

@ ButaWombat link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=296564&postcount=38) - This is an interesting card, but the way you chose to arrange the mechanics is strange. It would be a more useful (and powerful) spell if the removal was guarunteed and the life drain was the part contingent on clashing. As is, I don't think I'd ever run this in anything--if I'm casting Wrath of God, it's because I need those creatures off the board; I'm not going to play a 12-mana spell and just cross my fingers.

Speaking of the cost: Even with Delve, this is huge. Epic spells generally cost between 5 and 7 depending on their effect, and even with Delve, there's no way this effect is worth more than 8 or 9.

As for the keywords: I like mashmashing abilities together for cool new interactions as much as the next guy, but come judging time you're probably going to run into trouble. You're combining block-specific mechanics from Lorwyn, Future Sight and Kamigawa without any regard for the conflicting flavor involved in each. Clash was about rival "tribes" or races in Lorwyn's pastoral frontier literally clashing with one another over territory.

Delve's flavor is harder to deduce since it's only been on I think four cards, but it clearly involves sifting through (literal or figurative) relics of the past in order to cast your magic. It's only ever appeared on blue and black cards (although plausibly it could get printed in other colors), and in it has a strong relationship to the magic of death and undeath. Finally, Epic represents a mage of Kamigawa casting the last spell of his lifetime because that's what is required to save the mortal world from the invading kami. Your art and card name aren't bad, but they are too vague to effectively explain this confusing flavor.

Finally, centering the text is also probably not a great idea; you rarely see this on magic cards except for old Portal and Starter sets with very few words in the text box.

CoglineErro

06-17-2009, 06:55 PM

Mine's up. Changed from my original idea. Any thoughts?

death by aggro

06-17-2009, 11:35 PM

Gotcha. Might I suggest considering a name change before the contest ends? It's not really a viceroy, either. Or a Leviathan.

@ Jake: To be fair on the leviathan part, it is friggin' huge, and blue is the color of leviathans. Now as to your card: I like the idea, but gravestorm just doesn't seem right to me. A much more flavorful and probably equally (if not more) effective option would be Flashback for :1mana::b: or whatever you want to cost it. This way fits much better with the name and allows for a neat interaction where you get to abuse kicker twice. I'd also switch it out of future frame, as I can't see TH liking that and personally neither do I.

@ Cogline: This card doesn't need to be multicolor IMO, as all the abilities fit in black. My recommendation would be to up the cost to :4mana::b::b: and lower the activation cost to just :b:, but that's only my idea. I really do think this is a cool design that has a shot at making the top four, so keep working at it:).

@Tekk: I like your new art a lot actually. Out of curiosity, I broused your DA account and I must say I'm impressed. Your works have a simple, yet bold feel to them, and you've got some very creative ideas there. In particular I enjoy your piece "Church on the Prowl", a very entertaining take on Svogthir. May I request permission to use this piece as my avatar sir? I think it would add brilliant contrast to the platypus:E.

CoglineErro

06-18-2009, 12:06 AM

Tekkactus

06-18-2009, 12:12 AM

@Tekk: I like your new art a lot actually. Out of curiosity, I broused your DA account and I must say I'm impressed. Your works have a simple, yet bold feel to them, and you've got some very creative ideas there. In particular I enjoy your piece "Church on the Prowl", a very entertaining take on Svogthir. May I request permission to use this piece as my avatar sir? I think it would add brilliant contrast to the platypus:E.

Oh Jesus, are you serious? I hated that Svogthir art back when I drew it, nowadays I can't even look at it without gagging a little. It was one of those times when my skill level just couldn't catch up to my brain, I guess. As for avatars, please feel free! I have no qualms with you being my personal walking billboard. :paranoid:

Even though I rarely promote it, if you're interested I'd like to remind everyone I write and illustrate a webcomic (http://www.webcomicsnation.com/sandgate/sandgate_wcn/series.php), too.

akashmar

06-18-2009, 12:31 AM

@ akashmar link (http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=297098&postcount=41) - Cool card, and I know the problem you're talking about with MSE, it happens to me sometimes. Try reordering the keywords? Who knows, maybe jumbling your list around might fix it.

tried that too, still does the same thing.

death by aggro

06-18-2009, 01:29 AM

@death: You are correct, but I think 4BB is a little high. Gonna make it 4B and the activation BB.
As for your guy: The pro humans must be flavor, but it doesn't feel right. Elves feels more of a natural orc enemy in fantasy. Trample was given to red, but orcs are small and +1/+1 isn't going to make a 2/2 orc have trample be much of an asset. First Strike feels more Orcish anyways. You'll also need to explain the third one too. But the idea of an orc lord is a good one.

That's fine with me. It's your card, so do as you will. Also, as just a quick comment on your suggestion, Pro Elf would make sense on an orc in more classical fantasy like LOTR, but in Magic's history (in particular those dealing with the Brassclaw and Ironclaw org gangs) Orcs are seen as constant raiders of Human villages and skirmish with them frequently (or at least did back in their hayday). They also fought Dwarves, but Dwarves were allies of Humans, and as a creature type Human is extremely expansive, giving Ironclaw Boss plenty of cards to be protected against.

That all being said, the more I look at the card, the less I like it. There's just too many holes and it feels too "been there, done that". I'm working on a new design with another under-utilized Red creature type that I hope y'all will like.

kingez36@hotmail.co.uk

06-18-2009, 05:27 AM

can i have some feedback please

Michael_Zeora

06-18-2009, 07:14 AM

can i have some feedback please

After fiddling with MDV forums (quoting then grabbing the Photobucket address) I see your card.

Flying (check), Fateseal (check), Scry (check) well that passes the three needs. Also the last ability of naming a card works great with the fateseals/scry move. Good call.

2UB for a 2/2 body with those abilities seems just right, personally you could even go straight mono-blue with it, since the fateseal is only a little black, and bleeds well with blue.

In other news, nothing from my artist, so I'm withdrawing my submission. By all means the abilities and the theory their in can be used by anyone as long as they credit me.

Also, those who don't have photoshop, I'm glad to do so for you, just hit me up with a PM in the next few days or something.

JakeKessler

06-18-2009, 11:55 AM

@ Jake: To be fair on the leviathan part, it is friggin' huge, and blue is the color of leviathans.

See but Leviathan isn't just "something that's blue and really big," it's a specific creature type. Look up some of the Leviathans Wizards has printed, they all look fairly similar. It's like if you used the creature type "Wurm" for something that was wurm-sized and green, or "Dragon" for something that was dragon-sized and red, but it wasn't actually a wurm or a dragon.

"Gargoyle" and "Leviathan," the way Wizards uses them as specific species of creature, seem pretty mutually exclusive. In fact, "Gargoyle" (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?type=+[gargoyle]||subtype=+[gargoyle]) has never appeared on a card with another creature type, and "Leviathan" (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?type=+[leviathan]||subtype=+[leviathan]) has only appeared on Nemesis of Reason (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=188962) (a Leviathan Horror, mutated and changed by the overlap of Grixis and Esper magics).

Now as to your card: I like the idea, but gravestorm just doesn't seem right to me. A much more flavorful and probably equally (if not more) effective option would be Flashback for :1mana::b: or whatever you want to cost it. This way fits much better with the name and allows for a neat interaction where you get to abuse kicker twice. I'd also switch it out of future frame, as I can't see TH liking that and personally neither do I.

link (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v390/tomorrowjake/RecalltoSlaughter.png)

I designed the card to be a counter to Wrath of God (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=129808). As a 4-mana instant, you can turn an opponent's Wrath into a ton of Zombies... Alternatively, you could combo out on your own turn with some kind of sac engine (which is when you'd want the kicker).

The point is, without gravestorm, it's a completely different card.

I used the future border because that's the only way gravestorm has appeared so far (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=136049); it's a Future-Shift-only ability, so I figured a gravestorm card had to be Future-Shifted. It's the same thing with Delve and Grandeur.

After thinking about it, if you're making a card with a Future-Shifted ability, there's really only two ways to do it: you're either showing a card that could have been in Future Sight itself, in which case you use the FS border; or else you're showing a card that's from your vision of the ability's "home set," the forthcoming block down the line where you expect the ability to return. In the latter case, you use a normal border.

I'm not trying to show a card from gravestorm's "home set." I'm making a card with all Time-Spiral block abilities, and one of them is Future-shifted-only. To make a card with Gravestorm and Kicker (or Echo, or Split Second, or Suspend) together with any non-Future border would be like Equipment or Epic appearing on an old-style border; it would anachronistic and just incorrect.

As for TH just plain not liking it... that'd be a shame. I've put a lot of thought into this and I'm doing it the right way; I'd hate to lose points for doing something correctly.