/ccg/ Custom Card General /ccg/

I still don't understand exactly what the fuck Nahiri is so mad about.

...

...

...

Yeah, it's really weird. I mean, everything surrounding Sorin seems to have been abandoned. Eldrazi? Mostly dead. Ugin? Didn't even find him. Avacyn? Killed. Nahiri? Enemies. For fuck's sake, part of the build-up for Avacyn and Nahiri was that, despite being mostly a cold bastard, he did care for them. Then Wizards decided to blow their entire load on a few shit stories. Fucking hell... This is what I was afraid of. From now on, the stories will always be about the Origins 5. Interesting side characters? NOPE! I've said it time and time again, putting the focus onto the planeswalkers is an incredibly stupid decision.

Guys, what's the generally accepted ratio of commons/uncommons/rares in a set?

...

So if you get a island it'll activate both effects?

Have it check the greatest number of poison counters among opponents. You don't want it to target.

...

seem kinda meh

That's generally how things work unless they state "instead"

...

Lose the cantrip on Divine Protection, adjust the costs.

Cost modifying abilities go on top. Spell Mastery is a lot easier than Metalcraft. I'd recommend changing Deny to 2UU, mastery: -2.

Uniform your templating.
"If there are two or more instant and/or sorcery cards in your graveyard, ..."

Is this too abusable? Or is it a fun little trash rare?

20 noncreature spells is a lot. You're looking at EDH only.

EDH-tier blue mythic. I like it. Seems fun.

Definitely not common.

I intended it to be for EDH.

Fun trash rare. It would need to be much lower to really be abusable. At the point where you've cast 20 noncreature spells without your opponent doing anything, you've basically won regardless.

In that case, I'd say it's no more broken than other "EDH wincons" like Felidar Sovereign. If people let you chain 20 noncreature spells without disrupting you with a single piece of enchantment removal, you deserve to win. Although you'd probably see it as part of some janky Infinite Mana + Buyback shenanigans, but Infinite Mana is pretty much the last thing people should design around.

...

...

...

...

This is one I've been having trouble with for a while. There are two Zataras, Zachary and Zatanna. They're wizards, but also stage magicians, so I've been trying to get that across for a while, usually my ideas tend to go towards drawing cards or turning them face-down, since it means physical interacting with cards as actual cards, since stage magicians use cards. Alternatively, I had another idea that turned things like creatures or spells into rabbits or birds, to imitate stage magicians who use rabbits and doves in their acts. Any advice?

You can always do stuff about manipulating Card Position, for example, putting things on the top of one's library, like a magician who fakes a lucky chance.

Also, good work, you been doing this for a while, I should try and do something with Marvel stuff, for a good chuckle.

I think you could say
>~ can't block or be blocked by creatures with power less than ~'s power.

Sneaky Homunculus says that works, and it makes room for flavor text.

Where do you think I got the template from?

...What, like, Scry? Though speaking of the library, I did have a few ideas for a tuck effect, though nothing really fleshed out yet.

Do you have any Marvel characters you want me to work on? And don't say Cosmo the Space Dog, I'm already working on him.
>Who?
Exactly.

Another way to "handle" cards is to do separating things into piles. Hell, what about a "pick a card, any card" type effect where you shuffle cards in a face-down pile and either you or your opponent picks one to target some effect?

>When ~ enters the battlefield, shuffle all creatures your opponent controls into a face-down pile. Your opponent chooses one. Turn that card face up and return all other creatures to their owner's hands.

Yeah, definitely a lot of things to do with piles. Though that'll be hard for me because I'm not great at understanding what makes the ability, at least on Fact or Fiction, so good.

How's this effect, just by itself?
>Look at the top [number] cards of your library and separate them into a face-down pile and a face-up pile. An opponent chooses one of those piles. Put that pile into your hand and the other on the bottom of your library [or into the graveyard].

Oh, and thanks for your suggestion, but I'm probably not going to go with choosing face-down cards because then it might as well be random.

You want ~44% commons, ~35% uncommons, ~15% rares, and ~6% mythics, depending on your set and how many cards. You can adjust the spread of commons and uncommons if you need more flavor/filler (commons), or want more workhorse cards (uncommons). Sets with a higher % of uncommons are usually considered more "draftable" and fun, so keep that in mind.

>Not silver-bordered
Why are you doing this?

Not him, but I think you'll enjoy this.

God is dead.

>Oh, and thanks for your suggestion, but I'm probably not going to go with choosing face-down cards because then it might as well be random.
Yeah, I realized that afterwards. A slightly less random effect would be to separate into two face-down piles and have them pick A or B, and bounce the non-chosen pile.

Regarding pile effects, some dude on the Magic subreddit had this to say about Fortune's Favor, which I thought was pretty insightful:
>Yeah, but the opponent gets the full information, and gets to choose what information to hide from you. Exactly how big a deal that is is not obvious to me, but it seems significant.
>Fact or Fiction always gives you the better pile of cards, but the piles will usually be a close to even as the opponent can make them.
>Steam Augury always gives you the worse pile of cards, but the piles will usually be a close to even as you can make them.
>This will sometimes give you the better pile, and sometimes the worse pile, and there's no guarantee that the piles will be even.

But Wizards has been pretty good about exploring the fringes of Fact or Fiction style piling, so its hard to find new space, I guess. Pic related is my attempt from last thread at it.

why does it need to me mono white
it could also be blue

Is the wording here correct?

Because it's not a blue dragon, and it's not a white-blue dragon. It's just a white dragon. With blue eyes.

Don't think this works, but I could be wrong. Here's a modified version of Rout's wording.
>You may cast ~ as though it had flash if you pay U more to cast it.

Uhh... this is weird. Probably not, because my first reading is that all I have to do is pay "U" instead of "4GG" and I get it with Flash.

"You may pay 2UUGG rather than pay ~'s mana cost. If you do, you may cast it as though it had flash."

Or the Invasion style 2-flash spell's wording, like suggested.

I was thinking of stuff like Sensei's Diving Top, ordering Card Pairs. Also I know who is Cosmo.

I am also trying to try out a 100 card set about a Plane named "Calico". Here's a card I made.

I'm pretty sure that doesn't work. Unlike those other creatures that care what type of mana you cast, they check after they're on the battlefield to get abilities.

I think it'd be something like where you have to pay an alternate cost.

Blue can't get first strike like, ever.

Woah, a bit of a train wreck here. Also, this is the kind of thing that only gets dropped when you're ready to win.

I'd be okay with a rock that taps for more than usual but you have to share it, but probably not this crazy. Like, a 1- or 2-drop rock that taps for 2.

Also, consider:
>Calico's Poppy
>1
>Legendary Artifact
>At the beginning of each player's upkeep, that player gains control of ~. Untap ~.
>T: Add two mana of any one color to your mana pool.

Yeah, but unless White is in the cost then there's no difference anyway. It's completely missing the point.

...

yeah but it seems to me it either needs to be blue or you shouldn't have to pay blue mana to play it
the blue mana seems to be there for no reason, basically

Here's an additional wording based mostly on Necromancy, with a hint of Quenchable Fire.
>You may cast ~ as though it had flash. If you cast it any time a sorcery couldn't have been cast, the controller of the permanent it becomes sacrifices it at the beginning of the next cleanup step unless he or she pays U before that step.

>Sensei's Diving Top
Crap, currently taken by John. Who, interestingly enough, is a friend of Zatanna's.
>Card Pairs
Eh?
>Cosmo
Darn. I was trying to think of something in Marvel that's obscure. I guess I should've gone with Cardiac.

>card
Wow... Yeah, listen to what says. Although... you could try
>When ~ enters the battlefield, if it's not a token, each other player puts a token that's a copy of it onto the battlefield.

Last thread I posted one of these cards, 01, to gauge people's responses to it. It seemed like people generally thought it was okay, but needed some tinkering/adjustment. I couldn't use most of the name suggestions, since it's supposed to be in Jund (well, BRg anyway) and it has to sound aggressive. So I did some thinking at work and decided to post two more ideas. I personally like Relentless. And yes, a lot of the time 01 will just die in an exchange, but in a Jund faction, that's just fine, they were too weak to live. 02 is a bit worrisome because it trades REALLY well the first combat it's in, since it will be larger when damage gets applied, but after that it's never going to get any better so it's easier to plan around, and it has to swing so you know it's coming. 03 is basically a compromise mechanic or something, I dunno. Actually I think it's the worst of the three, but it's got that flavor.

Thoughts? Input? I appreciate it.

Ah damn, I kept the "cleanup step" part. You don't actually need to specify that, you could just make it the end step instead. The cleanup step thing is because of how damage works. It's complicated.

...

03 would be better if the 'attack every turn' was part of the 'if it's not ruthless' thing. Because right now it's pretty much worthless.

Thanks, I was thinking of some overpowered cards with limiters, I have some Dual lands that can only be used so many times before sacrificing them.

Perhaps it should be called Calico's Bong, since it's going to be passed around like one.

I like Ruthless. As long as you're careful about the effects you put in the set with it, it would probably be balanced just fine. Savagery has some wording issues, and is just generally kinda boring. I don't like that Relentless makes the creature attack each turn if able before anything has even happened to it to make it Relentless.

...

Certainly not Ruthless, because it's just Unleash by a different name.

RE: randomanon that replied. Yes it is quite powerful, and can crush specific opponents by itself (combo decks, in particular, and many control decks) if not removed.

Uba Mask amounts to a sort of combination of Necrogen Mists & Dosan, except with a easily exploited combos (Necropotence, Sylvan Library etc.) It's one of the most underrated cards in MTG imo. I used to play it in stax and it really does deliver.

My guy currently doesn't feature the broken combos for you to use but I may bring 'em back because it could be fun.

>not "counter that spell unless its controller discards a card."
Do you even smash?

Relentless is a downside mechanic.
Ruthless penalizes you for attacking.
Savagery is perhaps the most workable of the three, but encourages defensive play and leads to board stalls.

Why not reuse Renown? There's still a lot of design space available.

I think I would make it so X couldn't be larger than the spell's CMC, but that's just me.

So... it's basically just forcing Red's impulse-draw onto others, right? Why not
>If an opponent would draw a card, that player exiles the top card of his or her library instead. That player may play that card this turn.

Well, it's not "worthless" it's just weak if you're not attacking into an advantage already. It's kinda winmore, and I think it's really just the name I like more than anything. I can make it so it swings every turn until it becomes ruthless, but I dunno how that's gonna bloat the wording.

Ha, you have the opposite issue with Relentless the other user seems to have. Interesting. I guess I could step extra carefully with 02, but we'll see what other people think.

How do you figure? Unleash is a decision you make at the time you cast the spell. Ruthless is the defending player's judgement call.

Nah, that's for the Colorado plane.

Also here's another card, with a new mechanic.

A couple of complicated cards based on an old D&D villainess

...

>relentless
I'm not 100% privy to all the jargon, so please explain.
>Ruthless
I guess? I assume you think the +1/+1 counter isn't worth the drawback.
>Savagery
You can't get the counter unless the creature was attacking when the other one dies. Maybe it doesn't read right somehow? That's what it's supposed to do.

>renown
I thought about it, but the main issue is that it doesn't get used in black much, and I need it for Jund. I don't want to assume it's okay to do so.

I'm sorry, but good god that flavor text is clunky.
>"You can touch dynamite. BUT STAY AWAY FROM SCORPIONS, BRO, DAT SHIT'S INSANE!"

I'm glad I'm not the only person who was bugged by that.

>tfw you're from Colorado and all anyone ever talks about is the weed

That's actually a thing? Huh. Florida here, and my knowledge of the other states extends to "Most of them are white as fuck." I'm always amazed by the lack of diversity in other areas. Except for California.

...

Sorry.

No stats for unlevelled form, my dude.

Whenever I mention I'm from Colorado, 90% of the time I'll get a response that's weed-related (when that person's from another state, of course). I don't even smoke. Colorado to me will always mean mountains and winter sports.

Though I admit my knowledge of Florida basically consists of
>old people
>NASA
>everglades
>rich young vacationers on the beaches
>the continuing adventures of Florida Man

oops, thanks

Wording also needs some serious work.

Also, this makes me want to ask: why do people like Level Up? It seems to me that it's a pretty big waste of mana; you could be casting other spells with that, and one removal spell is costing you a lot of time and spent mana. Especially since, often times, when you do the math you could get a creature that does the same thing, or close to it, for less total mana anyway, and you were free to spend the interim turns doing something else with the mana in the meantime.

...

I guess I'm in the minority then, or maybe it's because I'm older, but I always think of Aspen and skiing when I think of Colorado. That and how Xbawks hueg the Denver Airport is.

It's an interesting mechanic, and people like it.

>interesting
Fair enough, to each their own.
>people like it
Indeed, but I was asking why that is. I already know they do.

Different strokes, different folks.

It's not only about winning.

Probably due to the idea that a low cost creature can be invested into to be useful all game long.
I mostly think of the Murals, I can see how the first two can be Black cards about general creature destruction and the complete removal of some creatures.

>Except for California.
You called?

inb4
>strictly better Standard Bearer

I like the option to spend extra mana that I don't use. Level-up cards tend to have some interesting abilities as well. It's almost like getting a contract phone.

...

You "put" counters "on" something. It's an interesting card but nowhere near rare worthy.

I don't think we need a cheaper colorless Sneak Attack.

...

Whoops, forgot an unbearable pun in the flavor text. Silly me.

En garde!