/ccg/ Custom Card General /cct/

>S-set edition?~

And a polemic one.

I like it. Simple, but with interesting gameplay implications. I'd consider making it affect other creatures only, so you can't play it into an empty board as an indestructible hexproof bear, which seems against theme.

Hm. I could add 'if you control another creature', but it'd be untidy.

Well this is slow.

...

"If a creature card would be put into your ..."
Only cards you own can be put into your graveyard.

Even if you exiled them, it's still too much. You're basically giving every creature you have Madness 2 with haste, plus Unearth 2 without the exile clause.

nice

Should be "Return ~ from your graveyard to the battlefield." I like it, though. Reassembling Skeleton meets Geralf's Messenger.
>Well this is slow.
This is the slowest I've ever seen the threads run. Not sure what's up.

I haven't progressed much with it so far, but an assortment of what i've got.
inb4 MUH COMBAT MATH and MUH INFECT
But seriously, i'm intentionally working to subvert the poison mechanic for other ideas than infect

Lightning Bolt variants for Standard:

Now Lightning Strike is okay for Standard but still somewhat lackluster. It needs just a bit more to make it worth as a 2 mana Lightning Bolt.

>Lightning Whatever 1R
>Instant
>~ deals 3 damage to target creature or player. Scry 1.

>Something Bolt 1R
>Instant
>~ deals 3 damage to target creature or player. Add {R} to your mana pool for each card named ~ in your graveyard.

What do you guys think?

How about Shock+
>Instant
>~deals X+2 damage to target creature or player, where X is the number of cards named ~ in your graveyard,

This is what I went with for my set. I'm shooting for a slightly higher power and complexity level from the current standard without pushing things too far.

Clashing natures is basically just worse than prey upon.
Sleepless remain's effect feels negligible I feel like you should up the cost and make it cost 3 or something.
Lakeform sentry kind of feels white, there aren't any blue cards with that effect except for mizzium skin.
putrid wood seems slightly too good.
Plaguebearer isn't technically strictly better than festering goblin, but the effect is way, way better.
Undergrowth swarm seems quite strong as well.

>Sleepless remain's effect feels negligible I feel like you should up the cost and make it cost 3 or something.
I meant up the cost to 3 and make it +2/+2

That's Galvanic Bombardment.

No, no it isn't. If it was, it would actually see play in burn.

Are you trying to tell me that ISN'T Galvanic Bombardment or that it isn't playable? Because it's clearly both.

Both.
It is neither.
or player makes spells playable

GB can't hit players, user. Huge difference.

Clashing Natures is specifically intended to work with the largely greeh -1/-1 act as +1/+1 mechanic, but i wouldnt mind it being slightly worse but playable anyway.
Doable, might cause multiplayer issues though.
Fair enough, blue commons are hard.
Shame, i thought it was interesting enough, but close to the various non typed duals.
Noted, how about it being a 0/1?
Would making it a 2/2 for 1B fix it? Don't need too many black 1 drops anyway.

Working on a 'treason' mechanic, and I want opinions/suggestions.

The mechanic works as a state-based action: The player with [requirement] controls this permanent. If there's a tie, no players control the permanent. I'm trying to work it in a way that prevents the card from ending up in limbo as a result of it's own effect.

It isn't quite the same, but it also isn't different enough for new rules.
See Ghazbán Ogre.

That was the prime inspiration. Here, however, the requirement can be anything; be it the most creatures, LEAST life, biggest hand, the options go on: Making the effect a state-based action would also make utilizing such cards more involved.

Sounds awful. If you're not going to control it, it's worse than a dead card in hand.

/ccg/ seems to be going a little slow but hopefully new cards can draw out some discussion.

I've been listening to MaRo's drive to work podcasts regarding design and development and they've honestly helped me think a little more critically about my custom cards. From Aesthetics, power levels, rarity, mechanics, there is an amazing amount of consideration that goes in, and his podcasts help a lot to flesh out "good" card making habits vs "bad" ones. I really suggest everyone who actively makes cards to listen to them, the best ones I've found are the "Things I've learned doing X block".

Anyways, I'm trying to flesh out a "new" mechanic with some design space and good aesthetics for a set I had an idea for months ago. Its supposed to be an incredibly ancient plane that *should* have been eldrazi'd and remade but, considering recent events with Jacetus league, has been left to age unchecked. It was a top down idea of what would happen to a plane that really needed to be recycled with the idea that not doing so would eventually cause a universal threat of some kind, as hinted by Ugin. The setting details are not so important as its on the "creative" side of making cards and I'm more focused on the design and development stages of the mechanics.

That brings me to the mechanic I am testing: "generic mana devotion" or mana dissonance as I have called it. It does a number of things that I find gives me a decent amount of design space, namely it focuses and alters on the board state, it motivates you to play creatures and artifacts, it allows you to make easy "french vanilla" creatures as MaRo refers to them, and it calls the players attention to something on the card they usually dont pay attention to (the generic mana cost). Also, it pushes against the growing trend of having gold cards since a MN card will have no generic mana cost and thus not help trigger mana dissonance.

Anyways, thanks for readying this tl:dr, thoughts and recommendations greatly appreciated.

My biggest criticism of the idea is how much bigger the number needs to be in order to be a relevant mechanic than devotion, a mechanic i already felt to be clunky.
Rather than a total devotion, how about a mechanic that cares about individual cards generic mana cost, instead of their cmc.
A simple example would be an anthem that gave each creature +x/+x where x=generic mana in its cost.

I like the theme of cards that grant you mana and cards that reward you for spending over a certain amount of mana. These cards are pretty solid, I dont have much criticism for them.

Very nice. Red is usually the hardest color to design and I think you've done a very good job here. Also:
>dat ass on reader

Wording is a little ambiguous. Are you copying it twice unless they pay 2, in which case Intercept fails? Do they pay 2 for one copy and have to pay 2 for the second copy? Other than that it looks like a solid card, though it feels more UR than RW.

If I am understanding this right, you can use it to slow down their next spell (though I dont know if instant speed will allow you to overload a spell they cast thats already on the stack, you may know.) or, what, spend it on yourself and get a free mana? Either way I like it, although again Im not sure how RW this is. I suppose W has taxes but this one does seem significantly more UW.

I really like these ambush cards. Simple but useful.

>My biggest criticism of the idea is how much bigger the number needs to be in order to be a relevant mechanic than devotion, a mechanic i already felt to be clunky.
I wont lie, I've had a huge boner for large numbers since RoE and the recent BfZ and GW left me very unsatisfied. In terms of designing cards the Timmy in me really wants to see a mythic with mana dissonance 15 that gives you indestructible or something. If I had an example I'd post it.

The clunkyness is a valid criticism, since I know you would have to keep track of it. That kind of thing breaks NWO, adding complexity but also making a player keep track of a constantly changing number. I'll think about what I can do about it.

>Rather than a total devotion, how about a mechanic that cares about individual cards generic mana cost, instead of their cmc.
My only problem with this is that it is a huge step down in design space. A card that cares about its own generic mana cost would eventually just revolve its abilities around its cmc, which doesnt seem as flexible. To use your example, a 2R Human Soldier that gets +2/0 when it attacks is fine, but then I'd just write it like that instead of tying it to its generic cost. At least the "generic devotion" cares about board states and cares about those 4M or 5M creatures that would normally not be as useful as the multicolored 1MN cards.

Thanks for the response though, I'll probably use your idea for commons and uncommons. I cant imagine I'd use more than a handful of "generic mana devotion" cards anyways, think the same amount as flip cards in Innistrad.

>I refuse to let you win, even if I die of alcohol poisoning

It seems a little undercosted desu senpai. Its pretty easy to get a token out and by turn 3 having everything become indestructible seems quite strong. Maybe just inch it to 2GW?

STRONG, so strong

Simple and persistant. I like it, cant think of anything wrong with it.

I actually like it a lot and don't have a huge problem with the power level. If you want to listen to , who does have a point (but doesnt your set have a high power level?), you could make the cost of playing the creature 3 instead of 2. I think its fine though.

This No one would put this in their deck, and no one would want to play a treason themed deck if it meant never owning your cards when you get behind.

>Custom Set Edition

Heres a cycle of enchantments that affect both players. Its kind of a throwaway, I didnt put much time into them and while they seem cool I dont know if anyone would care to use them in an actual game. It has a lot more to do with politics than anything, and Im aware they would almost certainly never get off in an EDH game.

Meh, here they are.

...

This is such a garbage mechanic. You are aware that the mana pools continuously empty, right?

Trying to make a super enchantress.

Do you know what devotion is? Its doing the same thing but instead of looking at W its adding up all the generic mana numbers. It has nothing to do with mana pools or how many lands youve tapped.

I like this a lot. Simple, subversive, a good ability attached to a small creature, and add flash for utility. Nicely done.

Oh, I thought it was mana in the mana pool. Still though, not great. This is exactly why Wizards hasn't done Devotion to colorless. Which, ironically, they now can do. Still, you're going to get a lot of confusion between people asking if the amount of generic mana counts, or if the amount only counts as one.

I ran into that same problem, wording *can* be confusing. I'll have to change it to something like "Your X is equal to the total of all the cmc added up together" or something to that effect. Referencing devotion was ideally the way to do it but clearly it still caused some confusion.

Posting this old set, which of these mechanics are worth keeping and which ones are hot garbage?

Thanks in advanced.

...

I remember the last time people talked about these...
Are you a troll or something? we've discussed most of these at length.