/ccg/ Custom Card General /cct/

Return to Theros edition!

Old: 48954774

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

>Hi-Res MSE Templates
pastebin.com/Mph6u6WY

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

>Read this before you post your shitty card!
docs.google.com/document/d/1Jn1J1Mj-EvxMxca8aSRBDj766rSN8oSQgLMOXs10BUM

>Design articles by Wizards
pastebin.com/Ly8pw7BR

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

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

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

>Stitch cards together with
old.photojoiner.net/

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

Other urls found in this thread:

mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Substance
mtg.wtf/card?q=o:"damage" (t: instant or t:sorcery) c!b sort:new
dragons-crown.wikia.com/wiki/Treasure_Art
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Should be dead threads edition.

Anyway, making some slow progress on my set. I've got the first draft of black uncommons worked up for you guys to look at. Feedback, as always, is much appreciated.

Why isn't Calamitous Request a kicker? It functions exactly like a kicker.

Calamitous is really efficient removal. Channeler is also risky at uncommon. Dark Ambitions is also something to watch, as it's quite likely to pay out a lot of card advantage in your slower format.

Kicker isn't one of the set's mechanics, so I can't really add it in for a one-off card.
I'm pushing things a bit more in this set than I have in the past, but I will keep your concerns in mind.

My Girlfriend hates spiders. So after she wakes me up this morning because she saw a spider i had the idea for this card. Hope you like it.

Why not use Escalate on Calamitous Request?

Then the modes would be
"Destroy target creature."
"Destroy target creature."
which just feels clunky.

Because kicker would function better

I was a bit down on making cards for a while. Is this the only thread to get made after the last one went under? It's been days.

With vigilance it's a bit too strong due to it being able to block AND attack for double value.

Thoughts?

I realize blue's first effect is too strong, but I'm not sure what to change it to.

Noted. Ditch, or replace it with something else? Maybe Reach? Eh, think I'll just ditch it.

How stupid is this?

Blues first effect is fine, it's flying effect is super undercosted though maybe if it gave a single creature flying that'd be better.

White doesn't feel white either. Maybe if it was minor life gain or protection from color it'd be more color wheel appropriate.

Making all creatures gain Flying is really useless outside of defense. Oh, and Blue first effect is undercosted. Choosing that plus the cantrip makes a less expensive Remand.

I'm on my phone right now, but can someone make a Beseech the Queen edit with this pic?

Really? Right now, it's a cheaper Remand at common. Not to mention you have other effects to choose from.

Also, what's so OP about giving all creatures flying?

Here's a weird idea I had for a mythic.

The threads have been very slow lately. Not sure what the deal is.

Yes, I can. Will I? Only if you choose something less cringe-worthy than Steven Universe. Weebshit need not apply.

S'all I got.
Guess I'll do it myself tomorrow

Very?

I might run it with Paradox Haze for more upkeep triggers once I'm top-decking, but even then it's dangerous. EDH might also be a home for this.

What kind of set would you print this in? What strategy would it support?

Eh, I'll throw you a bone. Not an edit though, made an MSE. Realized my hi-res template looked better than any scan of Beseech I could find, so I did that instead.

Thanks mate.

Should this be changed to be less EDH-centric?

Glad you like it. As for SU, I could quite possibly be convinced to watch it if it weren't for the really annoying Tumblr crowd attached to it.

Yeah, they go up and down.

>card
Eh... Feels clunky. I think I'd like it more if it were a scaling X-cost spell. Or, you could just attach a token to each ability.
>Each player loses 4 life. You put two 2/2 black Hound creature tokens onto the battlefield.
Also, have you used a Mummy type? I always imagined them as Black-aligned creatures with Indestructible, to show how tough they are, since I had a thought once that Indestructible is basically a continuous Regeneration.

>Yeah, they go up and down.
Yeah, nature of the beast, I suppose. This is the slowest I've seen them run in a long time, though, and I've been hanging around for a while.
>Clunky
Well, I'm going to need a mythic with escalate in the set, and this seemed (to me) to be a rather elegant way to reward utilizing every choice. The flavor here being that to awaken the ancient undead legions, one must complete an intensive sacrificial ritual. I wanted the individual modes to have use as well though (a modal card that does nothing unless you choose each option would be pretty unfun) so I made the "sacrifices" symmetrical.
>Also, have you used a Mummy type?
I have not, although I suppose it is an available creature type even though the only Mummy was from an un-set. The BG faction is largely undead, so I might add one in there.
>Harpy Nest
Seems fine, although it could use some flavortext and, in my opinion, a different choice of art.

Does the mythic really need escalate? Regardless, spending more mana and getting both downsides and upsides seems a bit odd to me. It just seems unintuitive.

>Mummy
I don't think you should worry too much about making a new creature type.

>Nest
Well, I'm making some cards based on Dragon's Crown art, so the art's staying, and I'll just change the card. I have to admit it's a bit hard to come up with something to fit that art though, due to differences in the Dragon's Crown and Magic. And I'm not great at design anyway.

>Idols
Eh, not sure how to judge this. Sorry.

I've been throwing around some ideas on MSE for an unusual enchantment effect set. So far I have
>Enchantments that become instants/sorceries through Evoke
>Planeswalker Auras
>Enchantments that get more powerful for each copy of the enchantment you have
>"Enchant target enchantment"
>Enchantments that affect your library/graveyard

>Enchantments that become instants/sorceries through Evoke
This will be tricky with Auras due to how they often affect P/T. If you don't know why, read this: mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Substance
>Planeswalker Auras
Doesn't sound very fun.
>Enchantments that get more powerful for each copy of the enchantment you have
Well, we already do this with creatures and nonpermanents, so I guess you could try it. Though remember that simply having multiple enchantments is usually an upside in and of itself.
>"Enchant target enchantment"
Ouch.
>Enchantments that affect your library/graveyard
Like what?

I'm sorry, but there is a reason why "unusual" isn't the order of the day for Magic.

Did you mean to quote me? Are you asking my opinion specifically?

>sphinx
>not flying
But I want an evasive 17/17 for 2GU!

That's fucking adorable. Seems pretty weak, unless I'm missing something.

>Enchantments that affect your library/graveyard
Like, "Enchant library" effects, a la Circu, Dimir Lobotomist? Most people would prefer an "Enchant player" in that case.

>card
Was originally going to be an Equipment doubler, but its a Theros thread, so Enchantments instead.

>remove cards in sideboard from game
I know it's a grey-border, but sideboard cards aren't in the game.

Two variations on the same theme.

Ensouled Vanguard lets you make interesting choices which is a hallmark of good design in my eyes. You could probably replace "that mana" with "it" in the Legacy reminder text.

>Old Kingdom Channeler
>Essence Drainer
Are these parts of cycles?

Calamitous Request should have you sacrifice a creature. Fits the flavor far better, and forces you to two-for-two rather than two-for one.

...

>I have not, although I suppose it is an available creature type even though the only Mummy was from an un-set
The OG mummy was Cyclopean Mummy, but when they made creature types more uniform it became a zombie. Many creature types did this, my personal favorite being Uncle Istvan.

>Enchantments that get more powerful for each copy of the enchantment you have
So, non-legendary Hondens?

>sphinx
>not flying
Technically, they're animated statues of Sphinxes (Which is something that the UG faction does), so they don't always fly.
>But I want an evasive 17/17 for 2GU!
Ha. I also didn't want that to happen!
>Heartstealer
Did you mean for the sacrifice to be repeated? I think that it does with your current wording.

I prefer the overall design of Ghastflame 02, but I feel like it should probably be a rare.
>>Old Kingdom Channeler
>>Essence Drainer
>Are these parts of cycles?
They aren't, but they play to the set's major theme. What made them feel like cycles?
>Calamitous Request should have you sacrifice a creature.
Done.

Something about the use and placement of "it" bugs me, because I could honestly convince myself that the exiled card's owner OR Eternal Judgement's owner loses 1 life. Maybe
>At the beginning of each end step, each player who owns a card exiled with ~ loses 1 life.
Might just me attempting to read cards poorly, though.

>card
I love this art for having a scale knight instead of scale birds. Name sucks though. Also, possible memory issues for checking something that's never been checked before? "Counting things that died" has been done, if rarely, but "checking things among things that died" hasn't.

Slightly iffy in monoblack, but still perfectly kosher. Fight me

>Did you mean for the sacrifice to be repeated? I think that it does with your current wording.
Yeah, I did. Thought it was an elegant way to do the upside/downside.

Why so expensive? This could be uncommon at six mana. And why the trigger on each end step? You could just double the life loss on their own upkeep. Also-
>At the beginning of each end step, if a player owns a card in exile exiled with ~, he or she loses 1 life.

This feels green, actually. I could totally see it in green.
Given that it's an instant, why not just make it the last creature that died? Or the next one?

But neither white nor black deal unconditional damage. Pretty solidly red and black if you ask me.

mtg.wtf/card?q=o:"damage" (t: instant or t:sorcery) c!b sort:new
it's a little out-there, but that's what the futuresight frame is for

>That's fucking adorable. Seems pretty weak, unless I'm missing something.
Yeah, the art from Dragon's Crown is amazing. Card is pretty much a creature twist on Thopter Foundry, but I probably will change it.

I like this one more. I realize spells can gain abilities, but that feels kinda weird. Either way, both cards should be rare.

Nice card. I'm curious, what's the state of keywords in your set now? Did you decide to get rid of them as that other user suggested? (Was that Grumps?) Or was that person talking about someone else and my memory is just being worse than usual today?

Black used to be able to do it, before Wizards realized that "everything gets hurt" is far more a Red-aligned ability that a Black one. While in Black, it was usually used to represent sickness and disease, which now are represented with -N/-N effects. Also, there was Pestilence Demon, so it could still get a pass every now and then.

I think Planeswalkercycling would be a better idea, frankly.

>Given that it's an instant, why not just make it the last creature that died? Or the next one?
I agree with it being green, but I'm not sure how to template your suggestion, or if its at all possible. What happens if I cast it right before/after a Wrath of God? I'm sure this something that's been resolved before with "the next time... deals damage" sorts of things, but I can't remember how.

>card
Order of Succession meets Show and Tell, or something.

I've been meaning to use Protection like this for quite a while.

Couldn't you use this to fuck someone playing with Pacts when they don't have the right mana available? It's really weird to not see a "may" in there.

The way I intended it is that you choose a card from the person from your left/right, and YOU cast the card you chose, even though you don't own it. Intended for Conspiracy-style multiplayer chaos.

If you cast it with nothing but a Pact in your hand, then yes, the last person in the circle has to pick your Pact and cast it (if there's a valid target, so Pact of Negation won't typically work). Maybe it does need a May, I guess, but I think it'd be fun to accidentally force a board wipe or something this way.

I have an idea for a cantrip, I've got a few ways to word it but I think this would be the neatest:

Choose two:
-Scry 1
-Draw a card
-Scry 1

Basically you can scry 1 draw, draw then scry, or scry 2. Would this wording work?

If not I'd cut the scry 2 option but I like the oomph the extra option provides.

Ooh, this gives me an idea for something. Tell me if it's any good.
>Each player shuffles his or her library, then each player exiles cards from the top of his or her library until he or she exiles a nonland card. Starting with you, each player may cast a nonland card exiled this way without paying its mana cost.

Hey Captcha, fuck you.

Yeah, that's valid. You perform modes in the text order, top down, so that's a clever bit of design. I like it.

More of big fish girl from .

It would work, yes. Though I will point out that it's not the same as Scry 2. Might as well change it to
>Choose one:
>Scry 1, then draw a card.
>Draw a card, then scry 1.
>Scry 2.

True, I suppose Scrying 1, then Scrying 1 again is strictly worse than Scry 1 Draw 1.

On second thought, Scrying 2 would still be worse than the other options, as all the options see 2 cards, so maybe it would be redundant to worry about the merits of having Scry 2 over Scry 1 + Scry 1 and simply leave the multiscry there as an option for when you can't/don't want to draw.

Would like more thoughts on this, the original idea being the option to scry then draw or viceversa.

Would having the Scry 2 option be appealing in favor of a cleaner textbox?

trouble is that scry 1, draw is basically always better than either of the other options.

Why not make it more expensive and increase each scry to 2? Or weight the second scry higher?
>Scry 1
>Draw a card
>Scry 2

Or do other weird stuff like always guaranteeing the draw and letting you pick how you scry.
>Choose one:
>Scry 2, then Scry 2
>Scry 3

>Draw a card.

Well draw then scry is the option for when you aren't digging for anything specific, like if you're content with a land or a spell, whereas scry then draw lets you slight-of-hand for a specific card.

My main contemplation is whether Scry 2 would be worth it in any situation, in which case Scry 1 Scry 1 would be an "equivalent" option for the fringe situations where the draw options are null.

>What's the state of keywords in your set now?
After a lot of negative feedback regarding Augment, I cut it. So now I just have the five faction keywords and escalate.
>Card
Oh, are you making an Egyptian-inspired set as well?

I'll dumpreview in a sec.

Trying not to use Regen since it seems that Wizards is dead-set now on ditching it, but they're holding off simply because they need something to replace it. I also realize Kamigawa didn't do actual Japanese mythology, just pretend it's another Japanese-inspired plane or something.

Have to say, glad you cut Augment. I still think you should swap the "spent 5 or more mana" with "converted mana cost 5 or more" but that's just my opinion.

>Oh, are you making an Egyptian-inspired set as well?
Nah, I'm CO user (getting a little tired of CO stuff for right now). I tried making an Egypt set quite a while ago, but I didn't get very far before I wanted to shoot myself. Actual set-building bores the fuck out of me. Did get some ideas though. Things like curses, for example, to reflect superstitions about being cursed for robbing graves. Traps since pyramids were full of them. Tried doing Fortifications before I realized how useless they are. Made what is basically a version of Infect but without the -1/-1 counters bit for scorpions and snakes. It was going to be dual-color, with 5 different groups. And mummies were going to show up a bit. One of the legendary characters would actually be a former pharaoh resurrected mummy, who was an ancestor of the current pharaoh, and the names would reflect that, like you'd have Pharoahname I and Pharoahname VI or something like that. The current pharaoh would also be a planeswalker.

Creature subtypes are listed in alphabetical order.
>Druid, Dryad, Elemental, Saproling, Shaman, and Treefolk

That would work as well but I was thinking of a Modern-balanced cantrip, something that wouldn't invalidate Sleight of Hand or Serum Visions while staying away from Preordain's powerlevel.

Basically it would be:
Scry 1 then draw a card, or draw a card then Scry 1.

Not certain if the option to only use Scrys should even be there since it seems a bit redundant. Currently ar sorc speed, but instant speed could escalate the powerlevel greatly.

Here, have a Phyrexian Theros card.

Oh a newguy. Welcome 01
Hm. I think it's pretty well balanced. It'd be a really interesting card if your set has self-mill.

>02
Not sure why, but plainly don't like it.

>03
This is amaziiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing. I'm even getting the feeling of 'I should thought of this before'. Right up my alley. Even the art fits excellently.

>04
God, this is annoying. Really solid card.

>05
Hm. I'd like for you to tinker around with the mana cost (not the cmc), the p/t, and the proc of the second ability. Something about it feels odd, it's a good card tho.

>06
That's a really good card, extremely solid. Might be a bit too strong.

>07
I have a very similar card, again, right up my alley. Absolutely love it.

>08
Hate the fact that is similar to Essence Drainer, and that you get to choose if you pay life.

Really cute. #bringbackkavus

That fucking ass.

Who's Henrietta? I'd like for it to cost 5, but it'd be a wincon for decks that run it.

This is incredibly fun. Especially in a Zedruu deck.

It does feel clunky. How about Choose one or more, you may choose the same mode more than once -- etc for each time you chose one, put etc.

You've posted this before, haven't you? Still like it.
>No.

Aw. Cute.

I like how Aneketian sounds. I don't understand how the effect relates to everything else on the card.

That's nasty.

This is extremely good. That's different from the regular Hi-Res template, isn't it?

Hm. I think that card might play a bit messily.

Fun card.

This would be a much better card at 3GG.

Why does this hit you?

This is G or B.

That's an awful drawing.

>Chandracycling

Cool :3

Hm. Fun card.

...

Oh, hey COanon. I wasn't aware that you had tried to make a set; you always mention how much you don't enjoy it. But I am excited to see a larger variety of your work.
>Egypt set ideas
I considered some similar things for my set, including curses. It's always interesting to me to see the different directions people go with similar ideas.
>Oh a newguy. Welcome

>Oh a newguy. Welcome Who's Henrietta? I'd like for it to cost 5, but it'd be a wincon for decks that run it.
Cool. Don't know who Henrietta does, and the wiki for DC doesn't help much. BTW, the wiki is where I'm getting all this art: dragons-crown.wikia.com/wiki/Treasure_Art

>You've posted this before, haven't you? Still like it.
Yes.
>>No.
Got it.

>Aw. Cute.
Thanks, but I'm going to change it. Not entirely sure how... I think first off, I'm going to make harpies Blue instead of Black as they are in Magic.

>That's nasty.
Honestly not really even a fan of that one anymore. Need to change it.

>Cool :3
Thanks. Glad to know my Complexity Addiction doesn't infect everything I do.

Wow, this is a planes mashup. I think the first ability should trigger only on your upkeep, you get one counter, but each opponent loses 2 life.

I wanted to make a card for all of my fellow timmies.

Aw, thanks. But yeah, did try a few sets, which is how I realized I dislike them so much. The other big idea I had was a zombie apocalypse-styled set in the modern day. There would be -1/-1 counters, and mostly focus on human survivors fighting off zombies. The humans had an artifact subtheme running through the set, with one-use artifacts as well as equipment, to represent supplies and gear. I was even thinking of expanding it to a block, though I didn't really do anything after trying the first. The next two sets (I started it during the three-set blocks period) would involve aliens and demons, and keep legendary creatures and certain other things as they changed throughout the block. Like one character, Eli, would always have the relevant protection from the enemy creature type, and become more powerful and skilled as the block went along.

Here are a few cards I made for that set.

Oh yeah, I realize the Equipment get really weird. It's an experiment I was doing with how projectile-based Equipment worked, but it didn't really work out very well. If I went back to the set, I would simplify the fuck out of those cards.

Oh ;-; Well hi timeanon.

Hm. I remember making a single card with Dragon's Crown art, lemme see if I can find it.

>Nastyness
Yeah, change it. It's a nasty card, but it stalls too much.

How about this?

>card
So, like that Arena card? Meh, seems fine.

Draft 3 of my white commons for an instant/sorcery matters set.

You have a stray line at the start of your card.
"Gets +3/+3 and gains trample"

Also regenerate is trash

>Detain
You can't have a card with the same name as a mechanic

Except lifelink
And fear
Oh. And flash
And probably other ones too

To be fair, most of those mechanics are named after the card rather than vice versa.

Is Splice onto Creature a horrible idea

Yes.

Well, first, it would have to splice onto a creature spell. Second, not in and of itself, but Splice isn't that great anyway.

I made a couple of foil tokens about 2 hours ago. Tell me what you think.

...

Would've been a lot more interesting if it actually had token art on it. Really just any art, as long as it looked like an actual Magic token.

i was planning on printing king kong or harambe throwing a child like a football but i need more practice using my printer.

...

Big FUCKIN titties

Wizard's doesn't really like to mess with your opponent's library order. It's just one of the reasons why Jace was so retarded, even with just the top card.

Yes. There's big everything in this game, pretty much. Again, very exaggerated and stylized. Like Frank Frazetta up to eleven. What I really loved was when some video games "journalist", probably from Kotaku or Polygon, complained about the Amazon and Sorceress (the latter is pictured here), the artist basically responded with "I'm sorry, I didn't know that those weren't to your taste. How about this instead?" and he posted of three nearly-naked (male) dwarves, who are basically small piles of muscles on top of muscles. Cue freak-out from the journalist.

They've done it before. Though if you really think I should ditch it, I'll do so. I already have a plan B in mind.

>and he posted of three
Meant to say "and he posted an image of three"

This name feels dumb.

The name is the least of your worries. First, this should ETB tapped. Can you tell me why? Second, the ability should either be
>Add two mana of any one color to your mana pool.
or
>Add two mana in any combination of colors to your mana pool.
CC is equivalent to the old 2. It's just two colorless mana.

You've read it wrong.
You get to tap for 2 colorless or 1 of any color.

I also don't think the acceleration is that bad considering you do sac a land.

That's what I get for staying up late. Though I don't think it should do both, either one or the other. If you still want to keep both, please just make them separate abilities.

Initially it was two lines, but think of it as a dual-land, which offer two colors (this or that) on the same line. They do this because there are no other costs or effect associated with tapping for either one.

The effect itself I think is worth having both as a gameplay/deckbuilding decision. I don't really want to punish the player a land for trying to access one any-color mana. They either have the same number of generic mana, or basically have a filter-land.

My take on a black counterspell that win big or lose big

Isn't Calamitous Request a strictly better Murder in two ways? It's costed the same, has the same effect, is an instant rather than a sorcery, and can be kicked for an extra kill.

I'm really uncomfortable about this card. While it does have less P/T than Phage and is worse in combat against creatures, it is cheaper and also doesn't have the same restrictions. Also keep in mind that the effect can only be found on Phage and Vraska in the official sets, and that getting either one to work is a bit of an ordeal (hardcast Phage for 3BBBB or let a planeswalker ult).

Why

That's really powerful if they don't have heavy draw/filtering.

"Terran Convergence" maybe for the name.

Color pie exists for a reason, and losing somewhere between 10 and 1 life doesn't make up for it.

>Murder
>Sorcery

>Blade
For draft, I think bumping it to mythic will solve most problems, maybe legendary too. I could just rework it so you had to pay mana over time so it works slowly like an ult. I did really like the simplicity though...

>Prophesize
Keep the effect but lower the number of cards?

OK, this is one I've had around for a while, and I'm basically asking if I should keep it or not. I made this quite a while ago back when I was determined that the CO cards would all be mono-colored but they could have off-color abilities. Terrible idea, I know, which is why I ditched it. But I have to say, I do like how this one turned out. So if the abilities themselves are good, I could probably get away with just swapping the U and R for W. Oh, and does anyone realize what the abilities and their colors are supposed to represent from the character? I've had a few people ask me, even though I thought it was kinda obvious. Just so everyone knows, she has the exact same powers as Superman.

You realize 2 mana and one mana of any color aren't really comparable, right? 2 mana is going to be what people pick probably 95% of the time.

Oh great, I guess this thread's going to die too.