|
Some Goon posted:If they don't create a Treasure token proper (t,s, 1 mana of any color) they should say it in their card text (create a Silver token with "etc"). Sabak Reak should say "1 life" not "a life". Generally 'you' refers to the card's owner, so "Sabak Reak's controller loses 1 life. Draw a card." is probably the correct wording.  Xantcha, Sleeper Agent sets precedent for "you" being here. Why exactly is it there, I don't actually know, but I wanted to match previous examples just to be safe. I agree with you though that excluding it means avoiding this mess. Specifying what Silver tokens do I think is dependent. If monger is the only way to create such tokens, then I definitely would want to include what they do; but if the set included the artifact token in other ways, it could probably become standardized in the same way as Gold, Treasure, and Food. Finally that last part: I actually worded this card "another player," but this opens up a whole can of worms in two-headed, which allows you to activate the abilities of your partner AND give them a free mana while you're at it. One thing I'd really like to make is an aura (or dare I say it, equipment) that gives the Monger property, which I think would be extremely fun on opponents' creatures, but any ability costing "1" would go infinite in 2-headed if the ability worked for teammates. I'll try experimenting with the description text to clean it up though, I want it to be perfect tbh.
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 07:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 14:57 |
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:The idea is fine but I think the mana costs for the creatures and the effect for all of these are way, way off. Paying GGG for just untapping 1 creature seems super over-costed. Thank you for the feedback, costing stuff is always one of my weak points when designing cards / mechanics. I'm at work right now, but later today I'll go back and try to re-cost the cards 
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 12:25
|
|
|
Mikl posted:Thank you for the feedback, costing stuff is always one of my weak points when designing cards / mechanics. I'm at work right now, but later today I'll go back and try to re-cost the cards I think one of the difficult things about this ability is that as far back as 1997, this ability has costed nothing:  
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2020 03:17
|
|
|
It also uses significantly less space on a card.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2020 03:28
|
|
|
itsmekidney posted:I think one of the difficult things about this ability is that as far back as 1997, this ability has costed nothing:
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2020 03:58
|
|
|
Mulch is an ability intended to boost limited aggro decks by giving them additional utility from their creatures, both providing threat to clear the way and helping out when the curve just doesn't pan out. It's actually a pretty generic ability that could be used in a lot of ways. I'm sort of surprised it doesn't exist yet? It's currently templated like kicker, because it's kicker for dying. Please help me fix this template if it's too bizarre. "Mulch [cost]" means "You may pay [cost] when this creature dies, if you do exile this creature after all abilities on it leave the stack." Mulch is a keyword ability that represents an optional additional cost that can be paid when a creature dies. A creature has been mulched if its controller declared the intention to pay any or all of its mulch costs.  Not pictured, a goblin that is on fire, because I couldn't very well not use this image of a 'fire goblin'. I'll try to throw up some more complicated examples later.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2020 04:09
|
|
|
Behold my ultra-complicated mechanic, EMPOWER!!  Inspired by D&D5e sorcerers, Empower is a mechanic that is designed to "up the power" of an instant or sorcery - meaning that if that instant or sorcery would cause you to gain life, you gain extra life, and if it would deal damage, you deal extra damage, etc. It combos well with spells that do two things - for instance "lightning helix" would cause you to gain an extra 3 life and deal an extra 1 damage to any target. At low rarities, only one spell is empowered, but cards at higher rarities would empower multiple spells, or even the same spell over and over. To eliminate confusion from "what happens if a spell would empower a spell that empowers something?" I have decided only to put the empower keyword on cards that are NOT instants and sorceries. This is probably an impossible mechanic, but it is also one I deeply want to play with in a deck. blaise rascal fucked around with this message at 15:44 on Jun 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2020 15:28
|
|
|
  Been thinking more about my monger mechanic, and it made me realize that I sort of had a sub mechanic just within Silver tokens. The cool thing about the Silver token vs the Gold token is that they're just weak enough to allow people to accumulate a bunch of them (the eldrazi spawn comes to mind, where certain eldrazi just created as many as two or three when they entered the battlefield). This isn't nearly as big a deal to me as the Monger mechanic itself, but I think it showcases how the "currency" the monger cards create could influence the board in different ways.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2020 18:40
|
|
|
It’s starting to turn into a tokens set already, if the ones that have been posted so far turn out popular.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2020 02:07
|
|
|
I was feeling itchy to make some more cards and wanted to try my hand at word salad too so I have made this handy tip card: I left room for a set logo  Exhort is an triggered ability on permanents that lets you get a little extra out of your spells. The inspirations is fairly obvious, but it is not like wizards doesn't go back to the drawing board on mechanics and come back with a new take.   I wanted to balance the abilities across the colors, and it took a little shuffling, but I am happy with where it ended up. Exhort can go on any color of permanent, and ideally would have some support with things like gain life triggers, evasion, or loss of life threshold bonuses like we have seen recently on Knight of the Ebon Legion.   If you cast a spell, Exhort will trigger once for each instance of the keyword on permanents you control, so you could get quite a lot of value out of the right deck. Lack of Bear fucked around with this message at 08:18 on Jul 1, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2020 08:15
|
|
|
AJ_Impy posted:Something simple, straightforward, but potentially very versatile.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
blaise rascal posted:I like it! My only worry is that after playing a bunch of different Twin cards, it might be tough to keep track of the different tokens. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
A concept that's been floating around in my head from a while, disconnected from any particular setting, is an aztec-themed WBR faction focused on sacrificing things. The mechanic here is from that faction and is an ability word called Bloodrite. Bloodrite essentially keys off of sacrifices without actually letting you sacrifice things by itself. It's an aristocrats-style mechanic that requires a bit of a wider board and a bit more thought than just playing a dude and throwing as many things into its mouth as possible. People elsewhere here have mentioned that people are submitting a lot of token and/or token sacrifice mechanics, which this would fit into. The way I see this mechanic working across rarity levels is: Common: Mostly small effects, self-sacrificing creatures to support the mechanic and the like. Stuff like this, not necessarily stuff that has the mechanic themselves:  Uncommon: Stuff that has bloodrite or sacrifice-others mechanics, but not necessarily both (as above). Rare: Stuff that either has more impactful bloodrites or which have both. The wacky thing, and what makes me uncertain about this mechanic, is that you'd wind up having creatures with the very weird text "Sacrifice a (thing)" as an effect, not a cost.  Mythic Rare: Powerful effects. I'd probably not have sacrifice-and-bloodrites at this rarity, actually, just because it leads to them singlehandedly blowing out the game.  This mechanic makes most sense in W/B; R works with it but if we don't want a wedge set it could probably just live in W/B. The flavor is also more open, I could see demons or vampires using this sort of mechanic. Here are some questions I have about the mechanic: -Is it better for it to trigger on any sacrifice, or only creatures? It being anything plays better with other colors and with things like gold, sac lands, etc; creature-only makes more sense from an intuitive stance ("no blood from a stone" and all that) and may serve as a limiter on power - the mechanic as-written might be too good, I'm not certain. -Sacrifice mechanics generally don't show up in large quantities at common. Are we fine with a mechanic that doesn't show up there? -Is this a problem: quote:The wacky thing, and what makes me uncertain about this mechanic, is that you'd wind up having creatures with the very weird text "Sacrifice a (thing)" as an effect, not a cost. President Ark fucked around with this message at 01:54 on Jul 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2020 01:51
|
|
|
President Ark posted:Is it better for it to trigger on any sacrifice, or only creatures? It being anything plays better with other colors and with things like gold, sac lands, etc; creature-only makes more sense from an intuitive stance ("no blood from a stone" and all that) and may serve as a l I'm a little bit biased here because my own mechanic makes silver tokens and I'm a bit obsessed with my own mechanic at the moment, but I'd like the mechanic to include artifacts.. maybe I'd split the difference, have it work with creatures and artifacts, and call it something like "offering." Material offerings are still a thing, after all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2020 04:25
|
|
|
blaise rascal posted:I like it! My only worry is that after playing a bunch of different Twin cards, it might be tough to keep track of the different tokens. Remember Amonkhet and the embalm mechanic?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2020 08:21
|
|
|
Embalm had the creatures exile themselves to use so you could just use the card itself with a marker it. Here they'll be coexisting on the battlefield and, more importantly, can leave the battlefield at different times, and will go to the graveyard when destroyed where the stand a chance of coming back. In a digital implementation it's not any problem, but I could see this causing all kinds of headaches in a paper game unless you had bespoke tokens for each card. Which is very doable with a custom set.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2020 16:08
|
|
|
I was thinking about it, and realized we need some mechanics that are exclusive to certain colors, so things don't feel same-y. Instead of just complaining, I came up with something: Imbue! Inspired by Scavenge, Bestow, and Lottery of Babylon's Bequeath, Imbue is a mechanic for white and green (mostly) that involves sacrificing creatures to grant another creature you control its power and toughness, and sometimes other effects. Black may occasionally get Imbue as well, given their desire to sacrifice creatures, but it would be more rare. This also counts as a Stupid Combat Trick mechanic, to some degree!    
girl dick energy fucked around with this message at 17:01 on Jul 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
PMush Perfect posted:I was thinking about it, and realized we need some mechanics that are exclusive to certain colors, so things don't feel same-y. Instead of just complaining, I came up with something: Wait, does its power and toughness become equal to the sacrificed creature's power and toughness, or does their base power and toughness become equal to the sacrificed creature's power and toughness? Or does it add that creature's power and toughness to the power and toughness already on the creature? I think it's the latter do to your last example card, but I think this is a pretty important thing to clarify. Also, I think a lot of us have been intentionally trying to fit our mechanics into all 5 colors just to suggest the possibility; I could easily see my own mechanic restricted to blue, white, and green,* with a single example in the other colors similar to how Ixalan had Legendary dinosaurs in all colors despite the tribe being Distinctly Naya. EDIT: In retrospect, I want to say the monger mechanic leans heavily Temur: Green being the color that likes sharing, red being the color that likes sharing (things being blown up) and blue being the color that loves shenanigans. The defensive nature of white and the selfish nature of black both don't lend themselves to Monger too much. itsmekidney fucked around with this message at 01:09 on Jul 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2020 21:11
|
|
|
itsmekidney posted:Or does it add that creature's power and toughness to the power and toughness already on the creature? What about this? A slight change. Imbue [cost] (Sacrifice ~, [cost]: Target creature gets +X/+X until end of turn, where X is ~'s toughness.) girl dick energy fucked around with this message at 22:05 on Jul 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
PMush Perfect posted:I was thinking about it, and realized we need some mechanics that are exclusive to certain colors, so things don't feel same-y. Instead of just complaining, I came up with something: The biggest problem is the incredibly complex boardstate something like this would do in multiples. Because this can be done at instant speed, it also leads to some of least favorite kinds of gameplay: the Arcbound Ravager/Walking Balista can't-block-one-you're-dead trick. You're playing against affinity with a Ravager out, they attack with everything, you can block everything but one, they sac everything and put all the counters on that one thing, oops you're dead. Sorry to sound to angry about this, but a mechanic like this seems very unfun to play against. I also wish that more people would comment on my ideas and tell them what's they don't like about it, then I would try and tweak them some.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2020 07:14
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:The biggest problem is the incredibly complex boardstate something like this would do in multiples. Because this can be done at instant speed, it also leads to some of least favorite kinds of gameplay: the Arcbound Ravager/Walking Balista can't-block-one-you're-dead trick. You're playing against affinity with a Ravager out, they attack with everything, you can block everything but one, they sac everything and put all the counters on that one thing, oops you're dead. Sorry my friend, I'll be honest and say I'm not very used to responding to people's entries; in our old contest thread, it was a competition more than it is now, so it's taking me some time to get into friendly mode. Your unfinished mechanic is pretty neat, but I think it needs to be fine tuned a bit? Part of the mechanic is that it can essentially do anything that auras can do, but once we start building a set I think it would need to be a lot more specific if we were to use it. I specifically was a little shocked to see your cards sort of resembling "ghosts" what with the allusion to haunt and the Unfinished keyword, but then mostly supplying positive benefits to your own creatures. I'd love to see you try a couple "focuses" to show how the cards might fit thematically in a set. I know they're not set specific but I'm still a top-down person at heart and love some inspiration. PS: I made two more cards with the "monger" mechanic, because as I've said earlier I'm a bit obsessed with the idea:  
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2020 08:12
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:The biggest problem is the incredibly complex boardstate something like this would do in multiples. Because this can be done at instant speed, it also leads to some of least favorite kinds of gameplay: the Arcbound Ravager/Walking Balista can't-block-one-you're-dead trick. You're playing against affinity with a Ravager out, they attack with everything, you can block everything but one, they sac everything and put all the counters on that one thing, oops you're dead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2020 10:44
|
|
|
Hmm, we could do wedges and a mechanic for each. Imbue for Abzan, Twin for Jeskai, Bloodrite or Vengeful Strike for Mardu, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2020 15:54
|
|
|
That’s a good idea. We can talk about it once we know what we’re making.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2020 22:04
|
|
|
I was trying to think of an ability that would fit into a temur wedge and this is what I came up with.    The name could use some work. It feels a little too Izzet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2020 00:04
|
|
|
Momentum? I really, really like the concept. If we go for Tarkir shards, it's Temur as heck, though if we go for Alara shards, it'd fit Naya alright.
girl dick energy fucked around with this message at 11:21 on Jul 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2020 11:16
|
|
|
Momentum is good, or Avalanche.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2020 12:48
|
|
|
How about turning it into a reverse Convoke? Something like "Momentum (Whenever this creature attacks or blocks, add one mana of any of its colors to your mana pool.") Or you could specify, "Momentum R (Whenever this creature attacks or blocks, add R.)" Maybe limit it to only when attacking, since outright paying for a spell is a little stronger than just discounting it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2020 19:11
|
|
|
Anshu posted:How about turning it into a reverse Convoke? Something like "Momentum (Whenever this creature attacks or blocks, add one mana of any of its colors to your mana pool.") Or you could specify, "Momentum R (Whenever this creature attacks or blocks, add R.)" Maybe limit it to only when attacking, since outright paying for a spell is a little stronger than just discounting it. you'd need to specify "this mana doesn't empty from your mana pool except at EOT" though, otherwise it'd only be useful with flash or combat tricks e: other potential names: Invoke, Channel President Ark fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Jul 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
I like invoke or momentum. I think adding a specified amount of mana might make it a little too complicated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2020 23:47
|
|
|
After brainstorming a few ideas, here's what I came up with. Resolute Inspired a bit by Persist and Undying, representing less "coming back from death" and more "delaying death" by either supernatural means or sheer tenacity. Primary in white and red, secondary in black, tertiary in green.     It's a bit clunkily worded, and I could see a few ways to tweak it already, but let me know what you think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 06:44
|
|
|
What if you used it as a more simplified one-shot regenerate? Resolute X (~ enters the battlefield with X endurance counters.) And a side rule could be “Whenever a creature with an endurance counter would be destroyed, instead remove an endurance counter and all damage from it.” It wouldn’t necessarily need to be on the card, MTG sometimes has mechanics that don’t quite fit into reminder text. Also, doing it this way would allow for spells that put endurance counters on other things. It would also work similarly to Indestructible this way, without letting you stall indefinitely like an Indestructible creature might. girl dick energy fucked around with this message at 09:33 on Jul 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 09:27
|
|
|
PMush Perfect posted:What if you used it as a more simplified one-shot regenerate? I believe the wording would probably involve the word 'prevent' somewhere in there. Almost certainly 'If ~ would take lethal damage and has an endurance counter, instead remove an endurance counter and prevent that damage.' Which admittedly does leave it open to corner case Death of a thousand cuts by draining counters via one damage and then dealing another, but that kind of appeals to me. EDIT: ("This creature enters the battlefield with an endurance counter on it. If it would take lethal damage and has an endurance counter, instead remove an endurance counter and prevent that damage.") Torchlighter fucked around with this message at 11:08 on Jul 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 11:01
|
|
|
I get that it's more flavorful to only prevent death from damage, but it's going to make play testing much harder since creatures and burn are made weaker by their very existence and non-damage removal stronger, and everything will need costed around that. I think PMush has the right idea, having it protect from anything greatly simplifies the board state and prevents the knock on effect.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 13:25
|
|
|
Some Goon posted:I get that it's more flavorful to only prevent death from damage, but it's going to make play testing much harder since creatures and burn are made weaker by their very existence and non-damage removal stronger, and everything will need costed around that. I think PMush has the right idea, having it protect from anything greatly simplifies the board state and prevents the knock on effect. At that point, Just steal from Ikora and make it an indestructible counter, and then the keyword resolute would involve removing the counter on 'being destroyed'. I'm mostly trying to get the syntax and text down because I'm out of practise and this is useful. EDIT: 'This enters with an indestructible counter. If it would be destroyed, instead remove the indestructible counter.'...? Torchlighter fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Jul 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 13:55
|
|
|
I don't think that works since the 'destroy' event never happens to indestructible permanents. Ref the wiki, where it states that if an indestructible permanent ever regenerates the shield will never pop. That is to say, a trigger that says 'if it would be destroyed' will always evaluate to false for something with indestructible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 14:03
|
|
|
Some Goon posted:I don't think that works since the 'destroy' event never happens to indestructible permanents. Ref the wiki, where it states that if an indestructible permanent ever regenerates the shield will never pop. That is to say, a trigger that says 'if it would be destroyed' will always evaluate to false for something with indestructible. hmm, awkward. It may be easier to do it the opposite way, the same as undying and persist, where being destroyed instead puts a counter on it. But I digress, not my mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2020 14:51
|
|
|
Torchlighter posted:hmm, awkward. It may be easier to do it the opposite way, the same as undying and persist, where being destroyed instead puts a counter on it. But I digress, not my mechanic. That's one of the options I was considering. Something like "If this creature would be dealt lethal damage, if it has no (name) counters on it, instead prevent that damage and put a (name) counter on it."
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2020 01:22
|
|
|
i feel like we're just making regenerate again
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2020 03:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 14:57 |
|
|
President Ark posted:i feel like we're just making regenerate again It basically is, except the creature comes with a free shield on etb keeps going.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2020 03:18
|
|