/ccg/ Custom Card General

see

Good to know you're not insane.

I'm a different guy, just wanted to pointed it out to you.

Figured, so I replied to both. Card seems solid, maybe a bit off-color. Just reading his wiki page (not much comics knowledge outside the occasional Moon Knight/Hawkeye), he seems WR to me, but I'm no expert.

Well, as much as I might like the colors to match the character, I learned a long time ago that mechanics have to come before fluff. But thanks.

too pushed?

lmao just realized it says "viligance"

Can't say that i'm a fan. At least the heavy color weight makes it difficult to protect. I'd drop the doubling every turn at least.

Kinda wish I could think of more stuff for lightning-users to do than ping. At least this guy can mess with metal.

Kinda mill but also leaving some stuff open commander. Wording on the 2nd ability is specifically to increase functionality as a commander but if that's too good I'm not above making it the wording you'd expect of "exiled by ~"

opinions/criticism?

I think it should be fine without carrying the cards over between deaths. You always get a chance to copy a spell unless it has SS.

If you wanted to be really nasty you could try something like
>UB, T, Put an instant or sorcery card an opponent owns from exile into that player's graveyard: You may copy that card. You may cast the copy without paying its mana cost.

Give white/red/boros some card draw, Wizards. Pls.

I'm building a power cube with some friends made entirely out of custom cards. Anybody interested in seeing the sections already finished?

Is there a way to make actually high-res cards ? I need to print some for the boardgame café I'm working in

Friend asked me to make a R/W commander that isn't just focused on combat so I whipped this up

Might want to word it like this so you can draw cards from an empty hand

Can't*

Check the OP.

I was thinking of the most WU effect I could come up with, and this ended up as the winner. I'm sure though you fine gentlemen can tell me at least 10 different ways why this won't work/why it's broken as all fuck.

I'd make it
>you may have ~ deal that much damage
To prevent the very fringe case where it creates an infinite loop.

That's not how that ability works. It would have to be something like
>When ~ enters the battlefield, exile target spell.
>When ~ leaves the battlefield, the exiled card's owner may cast that card without paying its mana cost.
As per Spell Queller.

It could be worded similar to Ertai's meddling's oracle text

"X can't be 0.
Target spell's controller exiles it with X delay counters on it.
At the beginning of each of that player's upkeeps, if that card is exiled, remove a delay counter from it. If the card has no delay counters on it, he or she puts it onto the stack as a copy of the original spell."

No interest? Sounds like It's time to post cards regardless, fuck the haters. I need feedback anyways.

it's shit

...

Well, yeah, but... god that's a pain. It's easier to just cast it anew.

...

This is, unfortunately, all I have available to me right now. there's an unfinished U/G section, and a B/R section is finished but I don't have the cards available to me right now. I could also post some of the draft-centric cards, but, eh.

k

>tfw a mechanic you make is put into an actual set
I don't know whether to be mad that I can't use the name I came up with in my set or to be smug that I managed to do such a thing.

Show us a card you made with the mechanic.

Can't since I'm phone posting, but it's the artifact convoke, which I posted a few months back. I called it "refract" as it had to do with a crystalline race in the set.

Me and my friends play a game where they give me a word and I make a card/mechanic based on it, this one was reverse infect

Honestly it seems expensive, especially when compared to ghostly possession or whatever that card is from the original Innistrad. It probably doesn't work much differently from pacifism in practice.

Effect seems cool, but I'm pretty sure you'd need entirely different wording.
>If enchanted creature would deal damage to a creature, put that many +1/+1 counter on that creature instead.
>If enchanted creature would deal damage to a player, that player gets that many experience counters instead.
Hmm, should it give loyalty counters to planeswalkers? But if you wanted to simplify it, you could just have it gain people life.
>If enchanted creature would deal damage to a permanent or player, that player or that permanent's controller instead gains that much life.
Maybe.

When I made it I figured one less than Indestructibility would be fine, and I thought it cost 3WW. Then I it's actually cheaper than I thought. But seeing the combo potential (especially with Boros Reckoner) that costing it any cheaper might be too dangerous

Explain the combo potential to me, please.

Boros reckoner can infintely do damage to himself for infinte +1/+1 counters, pingers would get you experice counters like crazy

I based it on infects wording
"This creature deals damage to creatures in the form of -1/-1 counters and to players in the form of poison counters." but that is only reminder text, but i like the parallel of poison to experience counters

Why would you use it on your reckoner to get +1/+1 counters when you could just use the reckoner to kill things (including your opponent). Exp counters aren't much of a balancing concern unless you're designing just for EDH, and even then they're not that prevalent of a mechanic. There are way more busted combos than this.

Right, but that's an innate characteristic of the ability. Here's a few of the relevant rules from the comp rules.
>702.89. Infect
>702.89a Infect is a static ability.
>702.89b Damage dealt to a player by a source with infect doesn’t cause that player to lose life. Rather, it causes the player to get that many poison counters. See rule 119.3.
>702.89c Damage dealt to a creature by a source with infect isn’t marked on that creature. Rather, it causes that many -1/-1 counters to be put on that creature. See rule 119.3.
Notice how none of this is actual rules text. So I don't think you could really apply the same wording to rules wording.

I'm not exactly convinced the Pausing whatever's ability couldn't work like it's framed in the card. There's precedent in spells simply being put onto the stack, and the comprehensive rules outline how to handle simultaneous stack entries. the italicized text even pretty clearly explains what happens when the exiled spell returns.

>There's precedent in spells simply being put onto the stack
Sauce?

Storm copies are put directly onto the stack, and aren't cast. They're fact they're copies doesn't change that they're also spells.

See for at least one example

Yeah, that doesn't really count, because the copies are pulling all their information from the original spell, which was cast. Basically it's just a shorthand version of the wording used in Ertai's Meddling. Yes, but that uses extra wording to specify what the spell becomes, it's not just reminder text.

For example, if you exile an X-cost spell then it got put back onto the stack later, it won't "remember" what the X value was, which is why the Ertai's Meddling wording of "as a copy of the original spell" is so important. Also consider extra circumstances like Splice.

So, again, you can't just use the wording here because it doesn't actually work.

I'm not sure why an X-cost spell SHOULD remember the value of its X. If you cast an X-cost spell without paying its manacost, there is no X, so X is 0.

That's an excellent point, I see what you mean

Rolled 8, 10, 2, 8, 2 = 30 (5d10)

Guess I might as well post this already.

Rolled 6, 2, 5, 6, 6 = 25 (5d10)

Multicolor (UR), planeswalker, card advantage, CMC 5, common (obviously ignored)

Ugh, not doing that. If anyone else wants to give it a shot, be my guest.

Colorless, instant, voltron/buff, CMC 3, uncommon

Nevermind.

Wily Wizard
URR
Creature - Human Wizard

First Strike, Haste

U: Exile ~, then you may return it to the battlefield. If you don't, ~ returns to the battlefield at the beginning of the next end step.

3/1

Izzit op or fine?

Also, [CR 702.46e] clearly says that a spell loses all splice changes when it leaves the stack.

I'm sill not seeing why the proposed wording can't function. No contradiction exists in the comprehensive rules I can find. If there's an X cost, it's 0. If the spell was spliced when it was originally cast, it's not spliced anymore. Sure, it's not identical to the spell that left the stack, but it doesn't need to be.

Rolled 7, 10 = 17 (2d10)

Wizards could've used your wording for Spell Queller. But they didn't, and they probably had a very good reason for it.

>A wizard did it

On a more serious note, just because they didn't use this wording doesn't mean it couldn't work. Maybe they used the wording they did because it led to some other kind of interaction they liked and wanted to keep?

I mean, don't forget that while the basic idea is the same in both cases, the two are mechanically a bit different. For example, Spell Queller's text leaves it open to the Oblivion Ring trick which was the reason Oblivion Ring's future variations use the Stasis Snare wording (also used by the CC we're arguing over), and also enables, say, Eldrazi who usually run off of "when you cast" triggers to trigger twice. The SS-version wording doesn't do either of those.

I'm not saying the Stasis Snare like wording is better than Spell Queller wording, but that your assertion it can't work at all isn't correct. There doesn't seem to be any (obvious) reason it couldn't work.

All evidence says they wouldn't use Spell Queller's wording, as they know how people can abuse it with stack manipulation. But they did anyway. Why? Probably because they don't have any better wording. Your wording, if it works, is better. But they didn't use it. Probably because it doesn't work.

I think it's kind of a boring design. Honestly. I think the high power restrictive cost design should have more flare.

Maybe drop protection from creatures and instead "has landwalk for each basic Landtype you don't control." To go with the crusader vibe.

"I don't know why it doesn't work, it just doesn't!" is a sad argument, user. C'mon, you're better than this.

I am looking at the facts and drawing conclusions from them. I'm sorry that Wizards doesn't like your wording. Get over it.

Not that user, but putting a spell directly onto the stack skips all targeting and mode choices.

Anyway, let's post some cards.

I don't know about the wording, but I thought this would be a good idea for another hate bear. Stopping Daze and FoW from being cast for "free" seems really cool in my book. Then I realized it'd stop Invigorate as well so its not just good against legacy counter spells. The card could be too samey to Thalia, Guardian of Thraben though.

Ahh, mode choices. Well yes, that would do it.

Yeah the idea is fine, although I'm not sure it would be that impactful. Wording should be "Alternative costs of spells can't be paid." I believe.

Wouldn't it be easier to just have 3 damage divided as you choose? A bit more powerful but not so much so and means you don't need a modal choice.

Hmm, maybe
>Whenever a player casts a spell, counter that spell if no mana was spent to cast it.

OK, sounds cool.

But then that would counter Memnite which isn't really in the flavor of the card. I feel like there should be a more precise wording to it.

Maybe word it to only affect instants and sorceries?

Uh...
>Whenever a player casts a spell with converted mana cost 1 or greater, counter that spell if no mana was spent to cast it.

Friends and I decided we each wanted to make custom commanders to build decks around. I ended up choosing BUG as my color combination. What do you guys think? The flavors not really great because I built it thinking about the abilities and just kind of slapped on a name and type there at the end.

>Whenever a nontoken creature enters the battlefield under a player's control, each other player creates a token that's a copy of that creature.
First ability seems fun, but the last ability is super tacked on and weird. Not entirely sure how to make it truly BUG though, sorry.

...

...

Why blue for a double death trigger?

Actually, a card the copies another continuously uses really weird wording.

Any suggestions for these fuckers? I'm not entirely happy with some of their current states.

>Silara is garbage, only things I'd keep if it was redone would be Flying and counters subtheme.
>Edlyn was designed originally as a looter, but kind of evolved into a voltron looter where you aim to steal equipment along with combo pieces.
>Runo feels like he's teetering that fine line of being strong but busted. Maybe increase the amount of life you need to pay for his second ability by 1 life so you can't abuse it too much.
>Ryfon feels straightforward, but also pretty boring. Not sure where to go for him asides from an aggro-focused direction.

Oh yeah, Lychnus had a "deal 1 damage to target opponent for each card discarded this way" effect for his tap ability, but that seemed a bit too broken if you got too many tokens out. He and Runo were the ones I felt the best about, followed by Edlyn, Ryfon and Silara in that order.

Oh my god, you don't even understand the basics, and you want to make 4-color commanders? Are you joking?

Yeah, I came up with the first ability one night and always wanted to use it. Since this was a BUG project and the ability I wanted to use was very UG I honestly just tried to shoe-horn a black ability onto the card.

>I honestly just tried to shoe-horn a black ability onto the card.
Well, obviously. I think it would be better for the card if you make it purely simic and cut out the Black ability, and just make a BUG cards from the ground up.

I was bored and wanted to come up with some commanders focused around the 2016 decks and their basic structures (GWUB counters, WUBR artifacts, UBRG chaos/discard, BRGW aggro, and RGWU Politics).

I went and reworded the cards too, even redid Silara and I like how she sounds a lot better now.

...

Oh my god this hurts. Well, let's begin.

>Silara
>Whenever a creature is put into your graveyard form the battlefield
While technically different, the wording
>Whenever a creature you control dies
is far more succinct.
>remove a time counter.
Should say
>remove a time counter from that creature
or something similar. Though the entire ability has memory issues. I think it would be better if it perhaps made a token that's a copy of the creature and just gave it Suspend 2 (unless it already has Suspend). Maybe something like
>Whenever a creature
Actually, this needs specifying. Should it be
>Whenever another creature
or
>Whenever ~ or another creature
Because Wizards generally likes using those two now. Anyway, I'd make it
>Whenever another creature you control dies, create a token that's a copy of it. If it doesn't have suspend, put two time counters on it and it gains suspend.
And I see no reason why the last ability specifies creatures with time counters on them already. Just, why? And the ability isn't Green or Black.

>Edlyn
>combat damage to an opponent
Oh yeah, wouldn't want it to trigger when it deals combat damage to you, right? Seriously, what's the point of specifying opponent?
>top X cards of that opponent's library, where X is ~'s power
Eh, I'd prefer a static number, like 3, but it's up to you. And also, the general rule for legends is that you have to use the full card name the first time, but you can skip it every time afterwards.
>their library
God I hate it when people use "their" on cards.

Oh my lord, there are like five things wrong with the last ability alone. Look, I'll just give you proper wording for that ability, because pointing out every flaw would take so much longer.
>1WR, T: Put an artifact card an opponent owns from exile onto the battlefield under your control. It gains indestructible until your next turn.
Also, this ability isn't White in the slightest.

1/?

>Also, this ability isn't White in the slightest.
I take this back. The ability is White due to using Indestructible.

>Runo Stromkirk
>Shroud
First, this ability belongs in Blue or Green. Second, Shroud is dead, replaced with Hexproof, though it also belongs in Blue or Green.
>Whenever a creature card is put into your graveyard
Let's just shorten this to
>Whenever a creature you control dies
Also, same thing I said with Silara, use either
>Whenever another creature
or
>Whenever ~ or another creature
Anyway, I don't see why is uses the wording "target player" instead of "target opponent".
Proper wording for the last ability is
>GU, Pay 3 life: Put the top three cards of your library into your graveyard.
The rest looks fine. Also not Blue, or really Green, though it could easily be Green if you dropped the life payment and the Zombie and Vampire specification. Otherwise it's just straight up Black.

>Ryfon
>First Strike, Forestwalk
You only capitalize the first keyword in a sentence (and even then only the first word if a keyword has two words). Also, Forestwalk, and all the Landwalk abilities, are dead. They haven't really been replaced by anything.
>discard a land card from your hand
Obviously your hand, you can't discard cards from anywhere else. Cut out "from your hand". But other than that the ability seems fine, though I'd personally change it to
>At the beginning of combat on your turn
I dunno, I just feel like it's weird to Fight in the middle of attacking. But that's just me.

The last ability is mostly fine, but why not just creatures you control? And why 3 or less power?

2/?

>Whenever an opponent plays an Instant or Sorcery spell
Ugh, no. You only use the wording "plays" if you are referring to any group of cards that includes lands. Otherwise, you use "casts".
>create a */* Saproling token with "* is equal to the number of Instants and Sorceries in your graveyard."
Oh lord. First, specify a color. Second, you don't need to use */*. Third, why your graveyard? It doesn't make sense, it should obviously look at the I/S cards in opponents' graveyards. OR it should create one whenever you cast an I/S spell. Anyway, the proper wording for the ability would be
>Whenever an opponent casts an instant or sorcery spell, create a green Saproling creature token with "This creature's power and toughness are each equal to the number of instant and sorcery spells in your graveyard."

Last ability is OK in wording, but why exclusively creature tokens? And it's not really very Red, despite the discard, way more Green and Blue I think.

Man, I'm sorry, but it really feels like you're trying to run before you can walk, which happens a lot here. I know that multicolor mythic legends look cool and can be fund to design, but you seriously need to step back from them for a while until you have all the basics down.

3/3

Sorry, for Lychnus, I used wording that made the Saproling Green, it would probably be better to make it Green and White.

Because blue copies abilities.

...

bump

God these threads have been doing poorly.

I don't really know how this would be used, but it looks like it could be interesting. I do feel like it's weird that the discard-draw effect doesn't just apply to whoever cast the spell though.