|
 will need to be cheaper than lurking informant since the only thing this has over lurking is it doesn't die to creature removal. EVIL Gibson fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Aug 6, 2014 |
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 04:47 |
|
|
You can only "discard" from your hand. Also, this isn't suiblack, it's a very weak mill.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Gynovore posted:You can only "discard" from your hand. Also, this isn't suiblack, it's a very weak mill. After looking at the other cards for this contest, I don't believe I can ever think I can make busted cards of what current players are expecting in new cards without it being too busted.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
You can't actually suspend anything with this. e: would work with "B, pay 2 life: exile a nonland card from your hand with X time counters on it, where X is its converted mana cost. If it doesn't have suspend, it gains suspend." But, honestly, that effect is not needed. It's certainly not needed for balance, and the feel of the card is so much worse if he gives you an out to his downside. It's sui black, not easily managed downside black. Dr. Stab fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Aug 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
EVIR Gibson posted:After looking at the other cards for this contest, I don't believe I can ever think I can make busted cards of what current players are expecting in new cards without it being too busted. Magic is hard 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
Ramos posted:
Unless you really want it to find two cards when Hellbent, the easier templating option is: Hellbent - As long as you have no cards in hand, players lose life equal to twice the revealed card's converted mana cost instead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 07:01
|
|
|
Thanks for the critiques, I opted to keep fading on Nether Emissary (adding a 2 life upkeep makes it seem like a small tweak on Sangrophage, and I think the fading is what makes the card interesting) I changed the death trigger to hit both players so this way it takes an attack before it damages the opponent as much as it will damage you. I came up with this as a take on Flesh Reaver, but I'm not sure how its disadvantage compares.  And this isn't really suicide black, but I think it would fit well into the deck. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
 I took a page out of Hatred's book with a really angry looking face. For when you really want to let them know it's personal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
Ramos posted:
I think either its cost should be increased or the suspend count should be reduced. As it stands, this is an absurdly powerful card. Independent of anything else, it is 1 mana 10 damage. In an aggro deck, if you hadn't won by turn 5, you weren't gonna win anyway, so this card is basically without downside. It could also either deal 1 damage, or deal 2 damage to each player, not each opponent? EDIT: You could compare it to Kaervek's spite, which basically also loses you the game, costs 3 mana, and only deals 5 damage. just noticed this can't even be countered, nor can the damage be prevented... Your opponent gaining hexproof also does nothing. Gensuki fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Aug 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
 Not sure about the templating, or even if it's been done before. Assuming your opponent isn't playing white or blue, it forces some hard decisions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
Cards, finally. Pretty simple.  Inspired by Quirion Dryad's ability.  The idea for this card flavorwise was that it's the soul of a knight who participated in a doomed charge across swampland. Now he's cursed to relive that lost battle for eternity. But sadly, there's no room for flavor text on the card. I think it's mechanically interesting enough to work without spelling the flavor out, though.  This might be too similar to Gatekeeper of Malakir, but I feel like the opposite of Tribute to Hunger is an effect that has potential.  2/2s that ping you for one have been a mainstay of Suicide black decks, so I figured I'd take it the next level.  Comes into play tapped isn't really what most aggro decks want, but I think this is an enticing enough card to warrant it.  After Tibalt, I've really wanted to design some two mana planeswalkers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
Stole art from the previous contest because I'm lazy and bad at finding good art. He's an angry guy who starts riots by attacking random guards and hoping others will join in. I wanted to combine Dark Confidant with red's new temporary card draw. It also doesn't let you play lands because this guy doesn't exactly look like he's interested in building places to live. Since the draw ability is now worse and it requires a second color, I threw in some evasion so you can actually turn him sideways.  Inspired by the pay-ten-life emblem Gynovore made earlier. The flavor for "you can't win" effects is generally "a demon owns your soul, it's not really a win until you get your soul back", but it struck me that another possible flavor could be that your character doesn't even realize they've won and keeps fighting anyhow. From that we get an undead soldier, stronger than her rank would imply but never receiving an order to finally rest. Lottery of Babylon fucked around with this message at 06:15 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
Hey it's Worldfire's best friend! edit:  How do you lose the game? Do you lose the game for having exactly 1 life? Once your life total is brought below 1, you don't die. So just bring your life total 1 and then kill your opponent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:Hey it's Worldfire's best friend! It doesn't stop you from losing though?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:Hey it's Worldfire's best friend! ...not really. If you've pummeled your opponent to 0 or below, then cast Worldfire, their life will increase to 1.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
edit: oops, I'm reading it backwards.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
Everyone likes to play a little life for cards, but don't overeat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
Spectral Werewolf posted:Everyone likes to play a little life for cards, but don't overeat. The thing about Tempting Offer was that it gave opponents the opportunity to get some free stuff but at the cost of giving you twice as much (or more if more than 1 person takes it). This has ZERO downside to opponents taking the offer since it kills you faster that it kills them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 14:59
|
|
|
Cernunnos posted:The thing about Tempting Offer was that it gave opponents the opportunity to get some free stuff but at the cost of giving you twice as much (or more if more than 1 person takes it). e: I misread the card. You get to draw twice, which makes it a lot better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
 A 5/5 for 1cmc might is probably a bit much even if most of the things you can use it for would just kill you but oh well v v
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
Instead of having a reminder text, you could just write the second ability as "As long as you have 5 or less life, Bloodfeeder gets an additional +2/+2 and etc"
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Jenx posted:Instead of having a reminder text, you could just write the second ability as "As long as you have 5 or less life, Bloodfeeder gets an additional +2/+2 and etc" Yeah, plus let's try not to use the word stack on Magic cards, especially when it doesn't reference, y'know, the stack
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
Yeah that's a better way to do it, fixed 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
Sleepy Owl posted:Yeah that's a better way to do it, fixed I will point out that this guy will lead to a lot of draws and is actually kinda underpowered as it stands. You'll note my original fix said "whenever he deals combat damage, you lose two life" while growing in size to eventually overcome his drawbacks. I wouldn't piss on your version to put it out if it was on fire, because it can't win the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
 My last stab at this, I swear.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
Veyrall posted:
This should cost BB.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
Mikujin posted:This should cost BB. I'd say it would be mediocre at 1BB, and incredibly good at BB, almost broken.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
Gynovore posted:I'd say it would be mediocre at 1BB, and incredibly good at BB, almost broken. A 3/3 version of this without trample exists and is fringe-playable in some legacy decks, largely because it costs 1. Costing this at 3 is perfectly fine, two is merely strong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
 It's a hungry ghost. The more it eats, the hungrier it gets. This is a horrible misuse of the level up mechanic and is clearly trying to cram too much into one card.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:
This kinda pushes the envelope on complexity, but still it's cool.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
4 life and 2 additional cards to get a 4/4 probably means this can do without the timing restriction. It's going to be an awful card to draw after turn 2-3 in any game as it stands.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
I think, mechanically, it should probably go lands -> cards -> life so that you're always giving up the thing you probably need the most. Early in the game, you've got a ton of life and a full hand. Later, you've probably cast a few spells, but you're likely still okay on life. Towards the end, you've got a bunch of lands in play, and your life total might be dwindling (especially if you're playing suicide black). I like that order for flavor reasons, too, as it starts with you giving up some resources, then your personal possessions, and finally, your very life itself, all for better ability to kill your enemies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:
I'm going to say that this is a good idea, but Level up is not a mechanic that can succinctly house what you're trying to do. It's the closest thing that Magic has to offer, but I think you're breaching a new mechanic somehow. Come back to this idea and rework it again when "new mechanics" is a theme. As it stands, the idea has too many moving parts. This is an incredibly pedantic way to say: "I like it. I think this idea is better than Level Up, and I think you could come up with a mechanic around it. I just don't know what it is yet."
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
Am I really the only one who sees just how bad it is? It's either an incredibly awful Carnophage (4 life to get to a 2/2 for 1 CMC), or an evasionless foil of Serra Avenger - it's just awful. It's also not suicide black, which is power now consequence later, since this wants to build up power slowly at a crippling cost. That said, I think there's something to be said for the design space, which is worth exploring.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 01:00
|
|
|
Mikujin posted:Am I really the only one who sees just how bad it is? It's either an incredibly awful Carnophage (4 life to get to a 2/2 for 1 CMC), or an evasionless foil of Serra Avenger - it's just awful. It's also not suicide black, which is power now consequence later, since this wants to build up power slowly at a crippling cost. I'd say it's bad as is, but if the 'once per turn' clause was removed, it would be a good 'high risk, high reward' card. Say, if it was changed, you play it on turn 1. Then on turn two you drop a land and Thoughtseize. If the opponent has no cards left that can remove it, you pay 4 life, discard 2 cards, sac 2 lands and swing with a 6/6. If your opponent doesn't topdeck removal, you swing with a 7/7 next turn, then again for game. In fact, come to thing of it, that's a bit too swingy for my taste. Maybe leave it as is but drop the payment a bit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
Thanks for all the advice everyone!  My thought process making the card was something along these lines: "Hey, they never did level up with non-mana costs, what if I used that to make one of those pay-life-for-above-curve-stats suiblack creatures? But I need a third level, and if I let the 1-mana creature go up to 3/3 just by paying life it's going to just be stupid in one direction or the other. Hmmm, what if the higher levels required more valuable non-life costs instead? Forget readability let's add a zillion lines of microscopic text. Wait, did I just make a 1-drop that can immediately become a 4/4 or 5/5 with evasion? Even with the costs that seems pretty dangerous so let's nerf it." Which is how it ended up being too slow and drifting away from the suiblack intent, and how it moved from being a simple play on level up to a convoluted parody of level up. I agree that the once per turn restriction was too harsh and took it too far away from suicide black, but I like Gynovore I think without that clause it encourages you to pitch your whole hand to it almost immediately and put your opponent on a 3-turn answer-or-lose clock, which is pretty dumb. I know that would make it the pinnacle of "give up everything for immediate power", but I don't want it to make the other cards in your deck blank. Here's a new version, switching from level up back to a more freeform Figure of Destiny-ish setup to be less of a rules mess. As a "compromise" between the original too-slow version or the unchained too-fast version, I've replaced the once-per-turn limit with the free spell mechanic to gate when you're allowed to use its stronger abilities, so you can't swing for 6 turn 2 but you don't get screwed if you draw it turn 4. As free spells are always popular and never broken, this seems like a perfect solution with no possible negative consequences.  If nothing else, only costing 2 life to get up to 2/2 should be enough to make it worth considering. Meanwhile, here's a much, much simpler take on the original "level up with life payment" idea from before I drove it completely off the rails:  The "10 or less life" restriction gives you a reason to not just max it out immediately, and it aligns with suicide black's goals. CellBlock posted:I think, mechanically, it should probably go lands -> cards -> life so that you're always giving up the thing you probably need the most. Early in the game, you've got a ton of life and a full hand. Later, you've probably cast a few spells, but you're likely still okay on life. Towards the end, you've got a bunch of lands in play, and your life total might be dwindling (especially if you're playing suicide black). Interesting. I was thinking of it the other way around, since usually in magic you care about them in the opposite order, so the life -> discards -> de-ramp would be from least to most damaging. Thematically, I saw it as rising from eats some vague energy -> eats your stuff -> eats the world itself. I think there's design space in 1-drops that eat your land turn 1, but I think that decidedly makes it a 1-Drop That Eats Your Land Turn 1 (oh and maybe some other stuff later). Sacrificing a land that early in the game is an enormous setback, and no matter how you phrase it losing a turn 1 land will always feel like a much, much steeper cost than whatever life it asks you to pay later in the game. Lottery of Babylon fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Aug 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:
quote:<Creature Name> B It's simple, plays to black's theme of pain for power. It's pushing the power curve just a bit at common, but could easily be slotted in as an uncommon. Just remember: simplicity does not mean cards are bad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:49
|
|
|
Mikujin posted:You're too hung up on level-up as a mechanic and making really ham-fisted compromises as a result. It's totally within black's color pie to have 2 power 1 drops with drawbacks and/or conditional abilities. There's no reason this guy can't just be something simple like: You're right that level up, the long-term get-stronger mechanic, really isn't a good fit for the long-term-what-long-term suicide black. But I think there's a very good reason this guy can't look like a 2/2 for B with an upside and no downside, regardless of rarity. (And that upside is much stronger than it looks, since after 10 life it says "block me or I become a 10/2 and kill you, also you can't block me because I have built-in evasion.") Here's a simple card, though: 
Lottery of Babylon fucked around with this message at 07:38 on Aug 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 07:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 04:47 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 09:41
|
|