YWN's wording-correction shop

[Your Worst Nightmare]

Venom Fiend - (2)(B)(B)
Creature - Horror
Trample, infect
At the beginning of your upkeep, you get a poison counter.
Venom Fiend gets +1/+1 for each poison counter on all players.
1/1

It's last ability is the only thing I'm truly unsure about.

Venom Fiend gets +1/+1 for each poison counter each player has.

Reference: Mycosynth Fiend.

Thank you. Come again.

[ThunderHog]

Excellent, thank you. And, as a side note - I did not know of the existence of Mycosynth Fiend... So much for creativity...

[FuDaWg45]

How about this:

Sneak Attack (obviously wouldn't use this name)
Instant
After this phase there is an attack phase during which you are considered the active player. After that phase, the current player's turn continues as normal.

The idea is to create an attack phase for you during anyone's turn, at almost any time. Obviously not worded correctly.

[Your Worst Nightmare]

The idea is to create an attack phase for you during anyone's turn, at almost any time. Obviously not worded correctly.

The rules don't like that. So there is no wording here for me to fix. A link straight to the horse's mouth.

Thank you. Come again.

[FuDaWg45]

Fail. I *hate* that argument. They said the same thing about -1/-1 counters at one point, mind you.

Whatever. Not worth pursuing. You must admit it'd be pretty frikkin sweet though.

[Your Worst Nightmare]

Fail. I *hate* that argument. They said the same thing about -1/-1 counters at one point, mind you.

To be honest, -1/-1 were always supported by the rules, they simply thought bringing them back would cause confusion. This thing wouldn't cause confusion, it would be a total rules kerplunk.

First, remember that cards like Relentless Assault and Seize the Day used to read, "after this phase, there is an additional combat phase" and have been errata'd to now say "after this main phase, there is an additional combat phase" thanks to cards like Vedalken Orrery (so now they do nothing if they're not cast in a main phase) because creating combat phases after the end of turn step and fiddling with the order of the phases in general is frowned upon and best left to silver-bordered land.

And second, note that despite what Time Stop's rules text seems to say, what it actually does is advance the turn to the cleanup step, not literally end it on the spot (since on certain situations, instants can still be cast in the same turn after Time Stop has resolved). What you would have that card do is create a turn of your own in the middle of an opponent's turn, but since there's no cleanup step in between the two, "this turn" and "until end of turn" effects technically do not end despite no longer being your opponent's turn. Or maybe they do, despite not there being a cleanup step to enforce that, which I'm not sure is better. (It's already bad enough cards like Virulent Wound have given two different meanings to the phrase "this turn" with virtually no way of distinguishing one from the other.) And if you want an actual case of the game breaking down and forcing MODO servers to implode, look no further than Sen Triplets. It's the Piracy nightmare all over again!

Now that you've succeeded in ignoring everything I wrote in this post which let's face it you were already going to anyway because why must an old stuck-up fake rules guy try and shackle a free spirit like that, you're nothing but a square YWN trying to take all the fun away from the kids, you and your "rules" are the reason Magic is dying, you ought to be thrown into a pit of . . . Wait, I got kinda lost there, what was I saying? Oh right, your card's wording if it were printed in a silver-bordered set, because what do I care about those kind of sets:

Sneak Attack (Not the Urza's Saga One) -
Instant
[Untap all creatures you control.] After this phase, you get an additional combat phase.

It's that simple. Any explanations you wish to include in the card itself can be done so via reminder text, a la Obsidian Fireheart. As usual, what's inside [] is optional.

Thank you. Come again.

[ThunderHog]

I come to you again, o' oracle of card-wording.

First, the card:

Beckon to Power - (G)
Sorcery
As an additional cost to cast Beckon to Power, sacrifice three creatures.
Search your library for a creature card with total power and toughness equal to the total power and toughness of the sacrificed creatures and put it onto the battlefield. Then shuffle your library.

Then, the arguments. I said:

My card is worded very carefully and specifically, so pay heed to it. The combined power of all three creatures must be EXACTLY the same number as the power of the searched for creature - same goes for toughness. Example: If you sacrifice a 1/1, a 3/3, and a 4/2; then the searched for creature must have an exact P/T of 8/6.

FuDaWg said:

you may have worded your card carefully, but it still doesn't do what you want it to. Right now it merely adds the P/T of the creatures, then asks if the creature you searched for has the same total. That is, sac a 1/1 3/3 and 4/2, and your total is 14. You can search for a 10/4, or a 6/8, or 7/7, etc.

My question:

Who's right?

[Your Worst Nightmare]

I'm gonna have to side with FuDaWg45, since your card's wording appears closer to Wild Pair than to Sutured Ghoul. Easily fixable though:

Beckon to Power -
Sorcery
As an additional cost to cast Beckon to Power, sacrifice three creatures.
Search your library for a creature card with power equal to the total power of the sacrificed creatures and toughness equal to their total toughness, put it onto the battlefield, then shuffle your library.

Thank you. Come again.

[Drathro]

Hey, first time caller, first time listener. My question is this: For the "We Make the Set" thing, I've created a card that says:

"Search your library for three cards with different card types"

What I want is for the three cards to not share any card types, because I don't want something like: Arcbound Ravager, Tidespout Tyrant, Reanimate, "Because that means I got an Artifact, a Creature, and a Sorcery." I want to make that disallowed, because two of the cards share a card type (in this case, two are Creatures).

Does my original wording seem to work to disallow that? Space is at a premium, so I'm avoiding making it explicit, like this:

"Search your library for three cards that don't share any card types"

This second version should work, but it's just more text filling the little box. Whatcha think? Can I use the first version?

[Your Worst Nightmare]

Based on Rivals' Duel, I believe the best wording for your case would be "Search your library for three cards that share no card types."

Hope this post is still timely. Thank you, come again.