/ccg/ Custom Card General /cct/

I don't think that'd be a big issue as I can't think of many situations where an equipment wouldn't be able to legally attach to the token.

Yeah, "Dragon creature card" would work as a safer wording here. I like it though; never considered that combination of creature types. I think the cost is fine, though the base creature being on-curve already might be a bit much. I get that you want it to be usable otherwise, but maybe 4/3 or 3/4 or something?

I don't know if you need the then here since anthems are always "checking". Unless it's because you don't want an opponent to be able to respond to it?

does this need the "if it could be attached" thing? I mean there are Curses and whatnot that can't attach to them obviously, but I am not sure a card can cause an illegal operation. I guess it's alright for clarity/newbie sake. It's not like the card is super wordy. 3/3 vigilance tokens are pretty strong. This will likely trigger off Auras way more often than it will Equipment, but that's the nature of Auras I guess. Pretty funny with Totem Armor. I think the costing is okay.

Fug, forgot to post my cards.

Black commons up for critique/mockery/tearing apart.

It's not an anthem, it's part of the triggered ability

Yeah I missed that "until end of turn" thing, though it could also just be "Attacking creatures you control get +1/+1 for each +1/+1 counter on ~." Or not, I dunno, kinda tired.

Mixing mono-hybrid and regular mana costs like that looks really messy and doesn't seem interesting to play with.

>CB02
When target creature dies this turn..

>CB05
Not sure about this at common, too many and you can get them all recurring off each other.

>CB09
I'd prefer card advantage in black, rather than looting.

>CB13
This mostly ends up as a worse contaminated
bond

>CB14
I'd be very wary of granting elusive alongside a p/t boost.

You also have a fair chunk of removal at common, although that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Everything I've seen that puts a counter and then has an effect that counts them uses 'Then'

...

How so? Set's going to be about 20% gold cards if that matters to you, with shard support. What sort of monohybrid costing do you prefer to see?

>CB02
I should have caught this. Derp. Thanks.

>CB05
That's a lot of mana to be dropping on a bunch of 1/1s, but I see your point as well. I'll consider dumping it to uncommon.

>CB09
That's also fair. I like the idea of the spell, but it needs work. Part of the reason I tossed it up as-is. I really need to post something about my thoughts on the cards when I toss them up; I did it for white and blue, why did I drop the ball here?

>CB13
I was loathe to cost it at B. Thoughts on fixing it up?

>CB14
I had worried about that, but doing a card for UB that fits with the other Auras in the cycle has been kind of a bitch. The blue one grants flying and nobody protested, but I guess under the right circumstances Elusive is better than flying because it doesn't have a Reach, so to speak.

>removal
Black always seems heavier on removal and a bit lighter on creatures to me, but I could be missing some modern design cues. I should probably do some more reading just in case.

Hokay.

Ojutai indestructible? Sure, why not.

Kaladesh has three removal at common and one of those is fairly minor. It's not a problem, just something I'd thought I'd mention.

Hm, well my set is a touch smaller (230 cards opposed to 260+) so I'll try to keep that in mind when I'm doing stuff at higher rarities. I might just pluck something and redo it at uncommon if I need to. Thanks though; if I could do all this myself I wouldn't bother posting. I appreciate it.

No problem

This is a really weird and somewhat confusing card for such a simple effect.

I'm not particularly please with it either, but I like the ashling effect so I tend to throw it on things if I think I can get away with it.

I feel like this wants to be WB. Also, you need to decide if it's charge counters or soul counters.

im making a darkest dungeon set, thoughts?

Black can get indestructible just fine if that was the issue. Thanks for the counter catch though.

Intimidate is dead in favor of Menace, if that matters to you.

The card plays oddly. I'm not sure it can die unless you deal 6+ damage to it, so for the cost, it's extremely powerful.

I know it can. It was more of a "feel" thing. It's your card though. I just look at it and expect a WB card.

Whenever ~ deals or is dealt damage, put a counter on it. You may transform ~.

Lifelink, intimidate
Whenever ~ deals damage, remove a counter from it. Then if ~ has no counters on it, transform ~.

It's a trigger, it dies before it can transform.

WB wouldn't fit in with how it wants to play, as it benefits a lot from mill,

i thought you could only transform on your turn
ill add a line saying so just in case you dont have to

A rather odd intersection of tribes.
Also not sure how out of control the first ability gets in a realistic setting.

Which version do you think I should include in my set?

The first one. The entire point of them is that they have answers, otherwise it might as well be an instant/sorcery.

Left. Didn't you ask this question in the last thread? Eh, I'm not really one to talk, I like making sure a card gets positive feedback several times before I finalize it.

So, are you making a set or something? I feel like it's been a while since I've seen you around.

Transformation can work at any speed, it just depends on the ability it's attached to.

>Occultist
First, you're not using the new card frame, which isn't bad, but considering that you also didn't have the DFC frame, it looks like you need to upgrade your version of MSE. I'll help you, but before I can, quick question, did you install MSE in one of your Program Files folders?

Second, I feel like this needs a second subtype, like Wizard.

Third, you need a comma between mana symbols and tap symbols in activated abilities. For future reference, the order and templating for activated abilities it
>[mana cost], T, [others costs]: [ability]
Of course if it's just one of those things, you don't use commas.

Fuck, who are you again? The user formerly known as Savage user?

>CB01
Kinda weird to see a Spider without reach, but it's up to you in the end, and it's not a dealbreaker.

>CB02
Should it be something like
>Choose target creature. When that creature dies this turn, its controller loses 1 life.
Also, feels awkward and clunky. I feel like it might as well just have
>Target player loses 1 life.

>CB03
Uh... huh, no idea about this one. Probably fine though.

>CB04
Cool.

>CB05
Because I'm a fan of Black Exalted, I immediately recognized the art. Duty-Bound Dead. I'm not really feeling the ability here, I guess I just don't like how it comes back attacking. Huh, and now that I'm actually looking up cards, it seems like Wizards really doesn't like things going from the graveyard to the battlefield at common. This'll probably have to be uncommon material at least.

>CB06
Eh... man, I do hate seeing 3/2's for 2B, and then this also has a downside. Though having it for BB seems nice. Although... well, looks like precedent has stepped in again. It looks like in mono-color, only G gets to be this efficient with creatures. Again, it's up to you what to do. Maybe not being able to block can justify the cost, I dunno.

>CB07
Huh. Eh, seems fine I think.

>CB06
Eh... not really sure how to feel about this one. Feels kinda complex I guess. Maybe just Bolt a creature and get 2 life, and if the creature dies this turn, maybe then get a counter? I dunno, that might be too complex too.

>CB09
Weird. What made you come up with this?

>CB10
Seems odd for B to be reactive like this, that's usually more W's thing.

>CB11
Dunno. If it feel like I'm not being very useful when it comes to your hybrid cards, it's just because I'm not a big fan of strictly better cards, I like them to be at least a bit different, but that's my preference, you do whatever.

1/2

>CB12
Flavor text seems off. As for the card itself, I think this might deserve to be the 5-cost B common creature removal card of this set.

>CB13
You didn't template this properly. Pic related. That said, I think it would be easier to just say
>Whenever enchanted creature attacks or blocks, its controller loses 3 life unless he or she discards a card at random.
Unsure about cost though. Something tells me it should be more expensive. Could be wrong though.

>CB14
Why discard? I think paying the U should at least net the creature one-turn Curiosity. At this point, you might as well make it a cantrip if U was spent.

>CB15
Huh. Well... Eh, I dunno.

2/2

Red instant that gives all creatures under your control double strike until end of turn.

How would you cost it?

Probably just R more than a sorcery that does the same thing.

Thanks

Are there any rules for how such a thing is madness costed?

Not really, at least as far as I know. Though speaking generally, the Madness cost and mana cost will be different, and the Madness cost will be lower than the mana cost. But again, that's only generally, there are plenty of exceptions.

Yeah I asked this in the last thread but I only got one reply so I wanted some more feedback. I've decided to go with the flash one.
Yeah I'm making a set but progress is very slow since I don't have much downtime.

Give us details. What's the set about? Return to Battle for Shadows over Alara?

You're right about odd. I don't even really know how to judge this. Personally, I think I would've tied the flavor to the Vamps turning what they kill into thralls or something. Like, take the classic Vamp ability, but tweaked so you get tokens instead of counters.

...

I like the idea, though making it mono-Green is kinda weird.

...

...

>locking down a land for effectively two turns
Beyond broke.

...

...

>inb4 wastes is not a land type

fuck, i forgot a
>When ~ is turned face up, add two mana in any combination of colors to your mana pool.

New version. Better body, no Haste, and it only makes one token and only on your upkeep. I actually never thought about using it defensively, but I actually kinda like the idea. Ra's definitely seems like the kind of guy who would just let his minions do all the work.

Pointing out your problems doesn't make them go away. This would create a land with the subtype Wastes with no abilities, other than being able to be turned face up through Terramorph.

Regardless, this doesn't seem to me like some huge leap from Morph. What's even the point of this really?

Not to mention that you can't cast lands.

...

Is this really worth 2 mana?

I'm a little worried about this. Am I putting too much power on one card? I may need to drop it to a 1/2.

it's fine. If you wanted to make it more aligned with modern power level it would be a 3/2.
Are you tryin to have this reflect the power level of older sets or simply the themes?

Ah, you probably didn't notice. It has islandwalk. That means that if an opponent has an island, they can't actually block it. Obviously, raising the power up to 3 would necessitate 1 or even 2 more mana in its cost.

I'm not trying to design a bomb here, just a nice mid-range card.

This wasn't funny the last time you posted this. Or the previous fifteen times.

I've posted it once before, months ago.

But if someone is actually reposting it, I feel a lot better about this joke.

Land walk is weaker then flying, so if a 2/2 for 3 with flying is fine a 3/2 for 4 with island should be fine.

It's not weaker than Flying, it's just far less predictable. Which is why Wizards killed it.

What color is this ?
White ?

...

I guess WB, since it uses a W requirement for a B effect. Remember, W kills things with high power, B kills things with low power.

W or B. It can B if it is a "wide board matters" set, or if it's a "Tap your shit bro" matters set. otherwise generally white.

>who are you?
Ellllllllllvis, mama. No but really, you got it. I finally got a symbol for the set, even if it's shit.

>CB01
I wanted something that made sense to be around people and castles, given the nature of the set, so I went with a Spider. I figured black getting a tiny one was fine if green gets a bigger one with Reach and all that.

>CB02
Fixed based on feedback.

>CB03
It's more of a flavor card than anything, I'll admit, but it also hates on white a little.

>CB04
Thanks.

>CB05
Ah, will swap it. Also will probably toss it into the Uncommon bin, since you're not the only one to point that out. Given the flavor of the set, I wanted to experiment with alternate "regen" substitutes, and figured a military-themed thing might ETB tapped and attacking to make it a bit riskier and limit when the trigger can happen to limit abuse. Missed the mark, I guess.

>CB06
I figured if red could have Boggart Brute, I could get away with this.

>CB09
Yeah I dunno what I did here. I was trying to make an alternate Sign in Blood that's easier to cast, but I made a shit sandwich instead. I'll scrap it and do something else.

>CB10
Well, it already gets -2/-2 for B at instant speed, so I figured slowing it down but making it potentially beefier would be okay, and again, a bit of thematics crept in.

>CB11
This is meant to fall solidly between Assassinate and Death Stroke. I figured that making it hybrid would be a cool way to do that.

>CB12
Yeah not happy with it. I could bump it to 4B. Sound good?

>CB13
Okay, I can do that. It's basically a different Contaminated Bond, as was mentioned. A bit worse, but I didn't want it at B, that's for sure.

>CB14
I'm getting mixed reactions on this, but I can redo the U bit and see where it stands when I post them again later on.

>CB15
It's good, but I don't think it's too good. Though, maybe I'm wrong. Nobody seems to have claimed it was glaringly overtuned or anything. I'll go back and look to be sure.

Thanks man.

Mostly white. A little black for the sole reason that it is able to kill tiny guys. But then again, Whaler's Shot told us that 3 power is big enough for white to kill.

Hm. I kinda like this. I feel like the drawback is at once not enough and just about right. Maybe if you also lost 1 life when it died? I dunno, I kinda don't want to ruin the simplicity of the card.

I'd make it black, personally (assuming monocolor). Black gets Convoke now, which this sort of is, and the potential for it to kill things under 3 power makes me think black is better for it if it has to be monocolored, but if you can do gold cards, WB is ideal. Neat card, by the way. Has a very "the Senate kills Julius Caesar" feel to it.

Considering you can get anything AND a 2/1 to boot with Eternal Witness, this seems expensive. However, I am not privy to the weird shit that you could do by forcing an opponent to reclaim a card, so maybe the cost is justified? It's also instant speed, which is another thing.

This feels a bit better, yeah. Ra's himself is a very able fighter, but would only ever meet someone in combat he sees as an equal. So sending lackeys to do his bidding seems pretty spot-on.

Seems pretty good. Decent combat trick, and with things like Totem Armor Auras, could potentially save a creature too.

Huh. Actually this is a pretty neat way to do this. Using that image makes me feel like it's a joke card, but really it could be quite good in draft or even Standard depending.

I remember this card. People used to really like it, as I recall.

WB then.

...

This may be one of my personal favorite designs I've ever made

Pretty cool. Spellweaver Volute but for creatures. Probably fine in G, though the copying kinda makes me knee-jerk for GU.

Hard to beat Sol Ring for ramp value, but the draw adds a nice capstone mechanic.

I got nothing to post because commons. Lots of commons. And the next batch ain't done yet.

This is probably too good for the cost and downside. For the most part, it's a Serendib Efreet with less downside. Black also has more than enough ways to kick it out of your graveyard once it's done its thing.

Wizards doesn't do this because it causes memory issues.

An easier way to do it is to exile the chosen creature card, then refer to that. And then it exiles the next and returns the first one like Mimic Vat. It just makes it much easier to track. Also, that is a blue ability.

Not really sure how I feel about this. I don't really understand the flavor, so it just kinda falls into "just value" card.

...

The ability is white, but that way I'm trying to use it feels anti-white. Which confuses me.

Slap some green or black in there.

...

I actually just realized how WB it was while I went to do something else. I even wrote it in my post. Must be time for bed.

Definitely not a common.

I can easily drop its power by one.

Rolled 2, 8, 10, 7, 1 = 28 (5d10)

Rolled 1, 5, 1, 5, 10 = 22 (5d10)

Blue, artifact, mana, CMC 4, common

Not on my comp, sorry
>3U
>Tap an untapped artifact you control: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool. Spend this mana only to cast artifact spells or activate abilities of artifacts.
I hate commons.

A card that I wanted to be token friendly, turn your token-spawning spells and abilities into burn

Looks broken as fuck. I also don't get the color hate since Red is an ally of Black. Really, color hate in enemy color pairs is always kinda weird.

maybe change it to "imania deals 2 damage to a creature target player controls"?

...

Still wouldn't be a common. A almost always 5/4 with trample for 4 seems really good. Even if it was a 3/4 with trample it would be an okay 4 drop at common.
Just make it 5 mana.

...

...

Now with extra flavor!

I was going off the fact that you can get a 4/4 trample for 2GG at common.

Interesting. I think the lifegain should relate to the exiled card (maybe gain life equal to toughness), but other than that, I like it.

...

Shit idea.

Huh... Unsure about this.

Why?

Oh, and who's Sevos? OC?