/ccg/ Custom Card General /cct/

Leylines and Chancellors edition! (Cards that do something if they show up in your opening hand.)

>To make cards, download MSE for free from here
magicseteditor.sourceforge.net/

>Formatting Guide
docs.google.com/document/d/1Jn1J1Mj-EvxMxca8aSRBDj766rSN8oSQgLMOXs10BUM

>Mechanics doc (For the making of color pie appropriate cards)
docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgaKCOzyqM48dFdKRXpxTDRJelRGWVZabFhUU0RMcEE

>Q: Can there be a sixth color?
A: pastebin.com/kNAgwj7i

>Q: What's the difference between multicolor and hybrid?
A: pastebin.com/yBnGki1C

>Q: What is precedence?
A: pastebin.com/pGxMLwc7

>Art sources.
digital-art-gallery.com/
artstation.com/
drawcrowd.com/
fantasygallery.net/
grognard.booru.org/
fantasy-art-engine.tumblr.com/

>Stitch cards together with
old.photojoiner.net/
photojoiner.net/
fotor.com/features/photo-stitch.html

>/ccg/ sets (completed and in development)
pastebin.com/hsVAbnMj

OT:

Other urls found in this thread:

magiccards.info/query?q=c!w o:"gain control"&v=card&s=issue
mariowiki.com/Rex
mariowiki.com/Wiggler
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

I'm looking for ways to have white interact with artifacts, and was wondering if you lot think this card is white?

Good lord that card frame is fugly.

I think blue does artifact creatures more. White tutors Equipment though.

No. White's always been a bit weird about artifacts that aren't equipment. But right now, it looks like White can fetch artifacts from the yard no problem.

I agree with you about blue and artifact creatures. Maybe he could make the card UR; it could be mono U but red has been getting more artifacts lately and this feels like the reckless type stuff red would do.

Speaking of artifacts, still trying to get this to work in RW.

>13 Peejs
I can't believe you've been through 13 iterations of this card. That would drive me nuts. You're a more patient man than I, COanon. That said, I feel like you're going for that STARR Labs feel, so I'd suggest noncreature artifacts here. I wanted to suggest something with the "grey goo" but I think you tried that once before and the only things I can think of are too wordy to be practical with clones and stuff. Messy.

>I can't believe you've been through 13 iterations of this card. That would drive me nuts.
I brainstorm a LOT. There are times I'll look at a card for a few minutes and come up with five ideas. Actually, something similar to that happened here >That said, I feel like you're going for that STARR Labs feel, so I'd suggest noncreature artifacts here.
Yeah, sounds fine. I'll have to play around with that. Maybe combine graveyard recursion (probably to hand) with damage.

>"grey goo"
Well, I can always make another card for that.

>think you tried that once before
Yeah. An older version made token copies of artifacts.

Now for your cards.

>CW02
Hmm, I'm kinda afraid that this could really slow down a game. Though on the other hand, you need cards, and White isn't the greatest at draw. Actually, it's the worst!

>CW04
Perhaps too much value at the cost, but I'd have to double-check to make sure. Maybe make it 3W and 2/3.

>CW05
Ah, off-color casting. Cool.

>CW06
Don't really get this one.

>CW07
Personally, I think Bushido is an OK keyword, and I wouldn't mind seeing it evergreen, or "deciduous" as Maro calls it. But it certainly needs a better name.

>CW08
I really like this one. Good job.

>CW09
Huh. Very odd effect, but I can't find anything wrong with it. That is, giving the enchanted creature something but only for a turn. Interesting. I really want to see what you do with this.

>CW10
>CW11
Nice. Though I have the sneaking suspicion that they might be too good. This might just be me though. Again, have to double-check.

Ones I don't comment on seem fine.

>CW12
Huh. OK.

>That would drive me nuts.
I will admit though that sometimes it is disheartening to go through a card so many times and still not see anything good. I'm currently going through that with Damian Wayne. Good lord, he's on version 14 now. But thankfully, most of the cards I do have a pretty clear concept and just need some tweaking.

Problem is U/R already is occupied with spell slinging in this set

Good lord those frames are gross. Also, have you ever considered Replicate? And it's not like you actually need a keyword for this card, it's pretty easy to word.

>Leylines and Chancellors edition!

Whipped these up real quick. Leylines are traditionally souper sideboard tech (barring Meek in dedicated token decks and Anticipation in certain decks) so I tried to keep that theme, but this was just quick brainstorming so meh.

>brainstorm
It's feast or famine with me, which is why I am so irregular with card posting, and quality in general. Sometimes I'm on, sometimes I'm off.

>artifacts
I dunno about grabbing cards from the yard; as I recall most of her stuff was original, if not volatile, so recursion might not be the ticket. THOUGH... what if she gave your creatures the ability to Convoke artifacts into existence? I know you don't like non-evergreens but Convoke has been in core sets at least, so it's considered "beginner-friendly". It'd be a good way to have her not only synergize with artifacts but make it seem like she's the one who runs STARR Labs as well?

>CW02
Keep in mind the set has Madness access, so you may be able to get additional value from it. Though White will have next to no Madness in it; you'll have to draft two colors to get it (which is the idea anyway, as it's a multicolor set). I was a touch worried about the body being cheap, though the effect is a common spell itself. I might have to jostle some things around if I have to recost the creature, but that's just a part of setbuilding.

>04
I made it a bit better than Seller of Songbirds because you don't get the token till after, so I figured it could be a bit beefier up front. It's possible that it'd need to be recosted as I may have aimed high.

>06
I forgot to change the flavor text. The bird is a familiar; in order to get full effect, it needs a "master". I was thinking of Loyal Pegasus when I made it. Needs a flavor text update; the flavor confusion is real.

>07
I agree, though since it's not a recurring keyword in the set I avoided it for this likely one-off. I always though "Aptitude" or "Bravado" or something would be a good generic replacement for the name.

>08
Thanks.

>09
It's for Madness enabling, basically. And to buff Auras a bit. There will be cycles.

>10&11
Will keep an eye on them.

I recall your issues with Damian. I'm around 60 cards into a 217 card set and already feeling the burden of creative blocks myself. Sometimes cards just happen though, and that part's nice. I've never minded tweaking; it's why I appreciate these threads. No bones feedback is a nice community feature to be a part of.

>Damage
I dunno if that last "it" needs to be "~" for clarity or not. I hope not because WORDS. I like what he does but it's a shame it's such a verbose ability.

This basically, but without the frames thing. I don't like them either but that's an aesthetic thing and up to you.

The WU one is nuts, I think. Very strong. Makes white weenie bonkers; all those value priced little dudes are now flyers and ace blockers too? Prosperity is very good as well; I feel like it should only reward lands and creatures, and maybe enchantments. Wrath is fine, I think. Too situational to be a big deal. Ferocity is also crazy good; RG has access to a lot of early big beaters, and this turns them into burn spells for free. Conspiracy seems tame compared to a lot of these, but it still feels like a very strong effect to be getting for free. Most of these are okay-ish if you had to cast them, except Wrath seems underpowered, which is kinda the target for Leylines I think. So I dunno about them myself.

So I'm making this set and one of the subthemes is taking control of creatures from your opponent. Would something like this work? There would be a cycle of enchantments like this.

>I dunno if that last "it" needs to be "~" for clarity or not. I hope not because WORDS. I like what he does but it's a shame it's such a verbose ability.
Nope. Because you can't put counters on players. And there's a bunch of precedence for it.

True, players "get" counters. Well that's good, anyway.

>subtheme of taking control of creatures you don't own
I wonder how you will do this outside red and blue, and possibly black? Or by subtheme you mean it'll only be in those colors and supported there? Cause cycle makes me think five colors, which is why I ask.

Red blue and black would have the most ways to steal a creature. White has Preacher as a template on how they do it.

Green would get an enchantment but no real way to steal creatures. The enchantment would be there to support the other color.

Preacher's a bit old to template modern cards off of due to how the pie has changed over the years. If you can find a more modern version of it to base your white effects on though then that'd be fine.

The idea of supporting "turncoats" more than your own creatures comes off as mechanically dissonant to me. On one hand, it makes game sense because you might not have that creature for long, so you'd want to get the most out of it. On the other, your creatures are yours, why do you favor this other asshole? I'm also not sure how much design space this whole concept can fill, but I'm more than willing to sit back and see what you do with it.

Since COanon wanted to see what else I was doing with Magnify, enchantments, and temporary effects...

I love this little thing.

There are no other steal effects in white apart from preacher. I suppose I could restrict white stealing to a single legend and have green and white play support to blue, black and red stealing.

The idea for the set is Italy between late middle ages and the renaissance, when city states and Papal Italy would wage war against each other mostly via mercenaries, but those mercenaries often changed sides and even arranged how battles would go so they would extract the maximum amount of money from their employers.

That does look pretty neat.

I like that too. I wonder about the power level a little but it's too clever not to like.

>white stealing creatures as a one-off legend
Maybe. It depends on how you do it. You might be able to get away with a trade or something since white does balance effects, so if you did it in a "balanced" way it might fly.

The banners so far have been interesting, but again, I worry about how much design space and mileage you can get out of this subtheme.

>There are no other steal effects in white apart from preacher.
There are a few more, but they're all off-color. Well, at least now they are.

magiccards.info/query?q=c!w o:"gain control"&v=card&s=issue

Blue commons for a ded thred.

The 1 mana loot seems a bit too pushed for a set with Madness at common.

I like it. Just ally color cycle madness? Or just WBU madness?

New idea for a card, don't got access to the computer right now, but tell me what you think about it anyways.

>Tasigur's Pride (X)(X)(U)(B)(G)

>Creature – Zombie Hydra (MR)
>Delve, Trample, Deathtouch.
>Tasigur's Pride enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters on it.
>When Tasigur's Pride dies, manifest X Creature cards from exile.
>0/0

Madness shows up in all colors, but it's most rare in white, since white is the "last bastion" of civilization on the plane: the towns and cities. The flavor of the set so far is that basically the entire plane is starting to go "weird" with all kinds of odd shit happening. Some of it is subtle, like fae influences on people, turning them into Elves. Some is not so subtle, like merfolk and flying eels. It's also loosely based on Russian/Slavic folklore, for more flavor.

As for Crippling Doubt, there's a "cycle" of cards that have allied costs attached to them. UB does a lot with discard and madness, so it gets a common that plays along.

>one drop
Yeah, I figured that maybe I could get away with it since you can get a 1/2 that does the same for 1U. I guess it's just the fact that it drops so early that's the potential problem. Red gets a 1/1 haste one drop that forces a discard as part of casting it, then you get to draw when it dies. I wonder how well received that will be.

Glad you like them though. Feels good to be on the right track.

Magnify: Literally kicker.

This could potentially pretty nuts. Exile four creatures cards for a 2/2 deathtoucher, block with it, it dies and removes a creature, you get four 2/2s that you can then flip face up for their mana costs. All that for three mana. It's a pretty neat idea though, don't get me wrong.

Yep. We've discussed that before though; even WotC thinks Kicker is too broad, so they tend to use it in different skins with different themes for set-specific stuff now, which is basically what I did because Madness and Unearth are things in my set as well, so it fits well.

I feel obligated to post a card, so... here.

>CU02
I like the flavor. Hmm, actually, after looking through come cards, it looks like Wizards really doesn't like Blue creatures having this ability. If I had to venture a guess, it looks like they don't like having Blue creatures draw on entry, even when it's looting.

>CU03
Strongly recommend bumping to uncommon and increasing the activated ability cost. You know you're almost never going to attack with this, right? It's a superb blocker. Pretty much anything without Trample is fucked.

>CU04
It's ironic that the ability is actually on a lot of Green creatures. Seems fine.

>CU05
I recommend changing "Umysul" to something else. It's just so weird, I have a hard time saying it, and I keep thinking "Unusual" instead. Otherwise I think it's fine.

>CU08
Nice job.

>CU09
Meh. Though I kinda like how it messes with Equipment-based Voltron strats.

>CU10
Eh, Flying and unblockable? Seems like overkill. If it were me, I'd change the magnify effect. Not very keen on giving Blue a P/T boost and outright unblockable.

>CU11
>Counter target spell. Look at its controller's hand.
So, a strictly better Lay Bare.

>CU13
Interesting. Though I'm not a fan of how easy it is for your opponent to deal with. Meh, tradeoffs.

Oh wow, probably should've changed this to "Target opponent." Or... oh, I'm not sure now.

Nah, it's so spendy and hard to cast that it's probably fine this way. Or you could make it "each player"; Johnnies might like that.

Repost from the old thread. I can't really find help in existing cards for this kind of thing, and i want to know if the wording is correct.

I think it would fit better in what sultai does if it mills each player like the top 5 or 6, or maybe exiling all graveyards.

...

"Each opponent loses X life and you gain X life, where X is the number of permanents with Extort that you control.

Draw a card."

Barring Pontiff of Blight shenanigans, this works just as well and reads cleaner.

>02
Yeah there were some older cheapies that blue got that did this, and blue still does it, but not on creatures too much anymore. I figured 1/1s were basically considered worth less than one colored mana these days, given that even blue gets them with keywords now at U, so I thought I'd go for it. I can tweak as needed, but I am tempted to take it to playtesting anyway as-is, just to see what happens.

>03
You're right, needs more gustcloakage. I'll add something to it that only lets you activate it when if it's blocked. That should help maybe? Or do we want to keep it as a Fog Bank sort of thing? I can mess with it a little if so.

>04
Ah, good. Glad to hear.

>05
Part of that Russian flavor. I actually liked it because it starts with U, and now that you mentioned it sounds like or reminds you of the word "unusual" I like it even more, because of the set themes.

>08
Thanks. A lot of people seem to like that card.

>09
Yeah I figured reactions on this one would be mixed. It's an odd card.

>10
I can futz around with the ETB Magnify. I'll see what I come up with.

>11
Yeah, Lay Bare kinda sucks. Telepathy effects aren't really that great so it feels like they way overcosted the card, especially since they themselves admit Cancel should cost UU and half a generic mana.

>13
Yeah, I wanted it to be situationally crappy while also being situationally annoying. I think I got it but we'll see.

Thanks for the feedback. This was me by the way, I had to go do something so only had time to reply to your card beforehand. Now that I'm back I'm replying to your feedback. Don't want you thinking I was ignoring your card.

You should only be able to manifest the cards exiled with 'CARDNAME'.

But that's not what he wants it to do.
Make it an instant. "You may pay 0 to pay extort costs this turn."

>Make it an instant. "You may pay 0 to pay extort costs this turn."
That won't do it either, because Extort triggers on cast, so you'd have to cast another spell to Extort.

But they go on the stack, you cum drinker.

I think Deathtouch might be pushing it, but I wanted it to feel blacker. The idea was to have it be a good fattie in a self-mill deck

The original idea was to have the ability be...

>When Tasigur's Pride dies manifest all creature cards exiled with it, then distribute X +1/+1 counters among them.

But I thought that'd be OP. Still, no deathtouch + new ability would be fine maybe?

Yes, but the spell "You may pay 0 to pay extort costs this turn" will only resolve AFTER it's own extort opportunities.

Meaning you need to either cast a spell, hold priority, cast this, or cast this, extort as normal, and then cast another to extort for free.

As long as CARDNAME is on the stack and until end of turn, extort costs 0 to pay, instead of W/B.
Or something like it.

Or just "X costs Y less to pay as long as CARDNAME is on the stack.
Draw a card for each extort cost paid this turn. Then discard Z cards"

Exiling 4 cards would only net you 2 manifested creatures, since X=2. That seems still good, a 2/2 trampler / deathtouch that turns into 2 3/3s for 3 mana.

The main issue is how many 2/2s you get after the fact, not the creature itself. One card giving you four 2/2, for example, and trading 1 for 1 with an opponent, is massive card advantage. And, all that is three mana. I just think the concept needs a bit of tweaking. Maybe you can choose one creature card exiled with it to manifest? That might be more in line.

Ah yeah, point taken. Ignore that part of then, but yeah, even getting half the creature cards is still crazy good.

Does this seem like a terrible idea?

I have to ask "why?"

The only thing I can think of is some kind of Enchantment "tribal" EDH deck but Zur already exists so what do you need this for?

Because this should have always been a valid leader choice.

Mind you, Theros kind of fixed that.

I mean, we've already seen non-creature commanders (walkers).

Do you think this could extend outwards towards other permanents?

Repostin' cause why not.

Technically PWs are against the rules as far as the official ruleset is concerned, which means one of two things:

Putting "this can be your commader" on a permanent invalidates/overrides that rule.

or

The official rules need to be updated, and if they are, likely they will be updated to include any "unique" permanent that you may only control one of at any one time, which would include any Legendary permanent.

If #1 is true, sorry Genju fans. I agree with you but WotC doesn't. Houserules are your friend. If #2 is what happens, then you'll get to do it anyway.

Oh yeah, this. I had a chuckle the first time I saw it.

WHY STOP AT PERMANENTS?!

>Mind you, Theros kind of fixed that.
Did it?

>3 damage for r is great
>3 damage for 2R is... okay
>3 damage for 4R is garbage
>and so on

>trips
Of course Satan would suggest something like this

...

Indeed.

Well now it's just silly.

I wanna make more hybrid/crab cards but I'm short on ideas.

>mariowiki.com/Rex
>(R/G)(R/G) dinosaur
>2/2
>persist

>mariowiki.com/Wiggler
>(4)(R/G) horror (1 mana per body segment, lol)
>???

No fucking idea on wiggler.

>wiggler
Well their thing is getting mad so... I dunno man. There are a few things you could use.

Here it is!

>Wiggler
>Creature - Insect
>~ enters the battlefield with four +1/+1 counters on it.
>If damage would be dealt to ~, prevent that damage and put two +1/+1 counters on it.
>Whenever one or more +1/+1 counter are placed on ~, remove three +1/+1 counters from it at the beginning of the next end step.
If we're using the idea that each hit breaks off a segment, but makes him angry.

Hm.

I'd say its neither red nor white. Red loves sacrificing artifacts not the opposite (non artifacts) and white usually tutors for enchantments, auras or equipment.

Two common vanillas is core-set tier. And at they're at the same cmc to boot.

Orzel Familiar is fine, but feels weird. Like there's a flavor disconnect or it's jumping through extra hoops. Perhaps "~ gets +1/+0 as long as you control another creature."

I suppose the U ability on Mollify is to stop spellshapers, but it feels like a negligible part of the card compared to the humility effect.

Man, you make me want to do cards for the Paper Mario party members! I'll have to remember this Probably going to try Lady Bow first...

WU is nuts. Flying anthem is already a 4 mana enchantment that's always relevant, and you're getting it for free with bonus vigilance.

GW is very strong. I agree it should only trigger on certain types, or only trigger on your own stuff. It shouldn't trigger on all lands and all creatures.

RG can get out of hand, but it can also backfire on you so it might be fine.

UB and BR are alright (fuck fetches)

Not really sure with this one. I wanna make the wiggler rage a thing.

I wouldn't do stealing in all colors. It's not supported in white or green (and barely in black) so you're have to do a lot of stretching and bending for honestly not a lot of gain. There are only so many ways you can steal creatures, and you're going to need a lot of cards that do that if you want "creatures you don't own" to matter.

This looks weak (a whole card for just one turn of trample?) but is deceptively powerful.

This is cool. Art displays a really big creature for a 1/2 though.

Second ability is weird, and the templating is wrong anyways. Not that the proper templating is much better. Something like:
"Prevent all damage that would be dealt to ~ this turn. Wiggler gets +1/+0 and can't block until end of turn. Activate this ability only before blockers are declared."

Remove the last clause if you want to be able to juke the downside, which always bugs me, but some people like cards that allow that sort of "technically correct" play.

Rambling Lush is pushed. Reprint Hapless Researcher if you want something in that slot, or have it be a death trigger like Salvage Drone.

I'm not sure if Banisher needs the extra toughness, but it should be fine.

Crippling Doubt is great. Delirious Revelation is really strong.

The creature permanent doesn't remember what X was when casting it. Either use wording from Venarian Gold, or have it check +1/+1 counters on itself. There's also way too much value.

I'd let the green effect untap a land, rather than add mana.

Dimir is boring because there's no play or counterplay. You cast it and hope you live long enough till they deck themselves. At least with the mono black one, you can surgically extract threats, and the mono red one lets you switch between burning creatures or burning face.

Golgari is alright. Selesnya is going to be hard to track because of all the varying tokens. Boros is too similar to the green snake one, and also really weak because you whiff on lands. The fact that three of them make tokens feels uninspired.

I'll try to do something with the hound. I agree with you on that though.

Familiar could work your way too, but I like that my way puts a card in the yard too for a few set-based reasons.

Mollify's U ability is actually meant to let you prevent blocking, but you can also force spellshaper abilities with it too, so that was a nice addition, yeah.

Okay good, I'm glad. I wanted it to look like it wasn't that great at first but actually be solid, especially paired with Unearth and Madness.

I'll look into swapping the Lush even though I'm not convinced he'd break anything. I'll check out the drone and the researcher.

Banisher has extra toughness because blue needed another slightly bigger butt.

Glad you like Doubt. And hopefully Revelation doesn't prove to be too good.

>Mollify's U ability is actually meant to let you prevent blocking
The fact that all it can do is chump should dis-incentivize blocking enough.

>Familiar
I think my problem with it is that it's trying to do too much. It's an aggressively costed flyer, it cares about having lots of creatures, and there's graveyard shenanigans?

I can change the Familiar if it feels like it has too many levels to it. I mean after all it's a common, so it should feel like one.

Thanks for the advice!

...

Alright, how's this:

>Tasigur's Pride (X)(X)(U)(B)(G)
>Creature – Zombie Hydra
>Delve, Trample.
>Tasigur's pride enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters.
>When Tasigur's pride dies, manifest the top X cards of target player's graveyard, where X is the amount of +1/+1 counters on it. Each of those creatures is a zombie in addition to the rest of its types.

I put that last clause in because I'm a sucker for tribals and its pretty flavorful, since the concept is an hydra made of the corpses of the dead put together with necromantic arts. Still, I'll remove it if its too wordy

I'd like it to be something like a cross between Empty the Pits and pic related (which is one of my favorite janky EDH cards), since I figured that if I put together two shitty but cool mythics I could make an actually neat one.

Anyways, is it fine now?, or still too much value?

Tell me how you'd abuse it, lets see if its absurdly broken.

Man I wish there was more done with Manifest.
Fucking Dragons of Tarkir block just pissed me off at every turn.

Also unless a lot of stuff has been dying or you have a player with a lot of graveyard stuff, Delve is kind of counteractive to getting a bunch of 2/2 stuff.

Since you're in UBG, what if it milled/manifested when it blew up?

A delve hydra is a good card. A hydra that dies into a bunch of creatures is also a good card. One that does both is insane. There's also the tension between wanting to empty your graveyard to delve a big creature and wanting to leave it full to manifest a bucnh - it's interesting to design but doesn't always lead to fun gameplay. Graveyard-order matters is also archaic.

...

...

There's no need to keep your graveyard stocked, since the card's ability allows you to target any player's graveyard. That way you have a reason to play it with will mill/selfmill strategies, draw/discard, creature destruction, +1/+1 counters. All very Sultai in flavour and makes it an awesome build-around card.

Just to be clear, from Siege Rhino to Jace the Wallet Sculptor how broken is this?, I might let it pass (after some rewording) if its not too bad.

...

Thoughts?

10/10

That blue is so much better than the red it's almost like you're working for WotC

"Catalyze" sounds pretty weird for a keyword, as in, it doesn't really seem to be anything other than a random word attached to an uninspired mechanic, like Outlast.

Thats fine and all, not all mechanics can be masterstrokes, but maybe you should consider trying to make it more flavorful. How is up to you.

Direwood Shambler and Snapwing Drake are terrible, I'm pretty sure. The mechanic is a downside mechanic and that's not very good.

It's not much of a downside, reverse graft is strong.

2 More

...

>Rak Ugar
>If a creature dealt damage by ~ this turn would die, exile it instead. Search its controller's graveyard, hand, and library for any number of cards with the same name as that creature and exile them. That that player shuffles his or her library.

It works just fine as a triggered ability.

...

...

And that refutes him how?

Yes? That prevents any death triggers from working but it doesn't make a trigger invalid.

Useless in this conversation because it's a different effect.

See, this exiles the CARD from the graveyard, not the CREATURE from the battlefield. I thought I was giving proper wording for what he wanted. Either way, he needs to change his wording to either fit Kumano's or Unscythe.

See above.