/ccg/ Custom Card General /cct/

>I always fine tribal with "catch-all" types like Horror and Beast to be somewhat odd. Anyway, I feel like it should give out Deathtouch to the other Horrors, and probably be rare, but the wording should definitely be
I feel like the cost reduction and buff is already enough.

>Incorporating so many different creature types for different purposes seems very off-putting.
Yeah, I can admit that it's kinda weird, but I wanted it to feel different from a normal lord.

>Eh. Nothing exciting. I still have to question your use of tribal for so many different creature types though. Are the Horror, Samurai, Knight, Human, and Spirit tribals all part of the same set?
Yes. Think of old Innistrad way of dealing with tribals. Those tribals will be supported, but equally. Horrors will get tons of support, then Samurais and Monks and lastly Spirits, Knights and Humans respectively. In fact Humans will get almost no support besides some Backup cards (generally spirits will backup humans).

Was there ever a card in Innistrad that interacted with three different creature types in two different ways? Also, Knight and Samurai, as class types, will often overlap with race types, such as Human, and sometimes even Spirit.

Just reread His Dark Materials

>Common
Uh-huh.

>Was there ever a card in Innistrad that interacted with three different creature types in two different ways?
I'm saying that it's close to Innistrad because of how much support tribal will get, not on how tribal will be handled.

>Also, Knight and Samurai, as class types, will often overlap with race types, such as Human, and sometimes even Spirit.
Yes. That's actually the point too. Tribals might interact with each other. In this way, 3 color combinations are more viable in limited.

if that's the only criticism then I guess I'm pretty happy with it

Here's a simplier version of Zarak, I guess.

Just playing about with a vague idea of a Domain-based planeswalker. Not remotely thinking she's balanced yet.

Also I totally forgot Iona already existed when making a name for her.

Good luck.

>card
I think the second ability would be better worded
>When ~ dies during combat, return it to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.
And
>~ can't be sacrificed.

Only thing I can think of right now. Costs are nice and high, and it has a bit of a downside. Oh wait, it should be worded
>Whenever ~ becomes attached to a creature, tap that creature. It doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step.

Woops, posted an old version before.

I don't think you need the "not named "Again"" clause.

Going infinite off three CMC 4 spells that require nothing but colored mana AND a workable target isn't OP. If you can't win by 13 mana you've already lost.

I had that clause on there because I'm unsure about the interaction of whether the two sides can target each other or not. I was mostly covering the bases and being extra careful, more worried about a 1 card combo than casting 2 separate cards..

>I had that clause on there because I'm unsure about the interaction of whether the two sides can target each other or not.
They can't. A Fuse'd spell is a single spell with both sides worth of text. It's not on the stack while you're casting and selecting targets, so it can't target itself.

Still not entirely sure about this one. Should it be upkeep or end step? Should the damage be a fixed amount, or should it scale? I do think I will keep with the overall design though.

Having a lot of fun with Breath of the Wild.

I may make the non combat damage ability pirate into a voldaren duelist/crossway vampire functional reprint to make the others able to get through.

There cards are structures that opponents can "conquer" by successfully attacking their controller. I wanted it to be like Monarch (you're rewarded for attacking and politics, and cards swap between multiple controllers), but I don't think it works as I want it to.

I want to make it so only one can be "taken" per combat phase, but as I think you may be able to stack the triggers so that you can take all cards in one go, if a player has more than one to be taken.

How can I reword it so it works how I want lads?

Fuck realised the reminder text should say "that player gains control of up to one permanent..."

It's reminder text, so don't worry so much about making it work as an effect. Just make it clear that it's one conquest per turn.

"Only one conquest can be taken per turn"

That could work right? Like the wacky reminder text from Obsidian Fireheart?

Yeah, that'd be good.

Honestly, "(OOGA BOOGA LOOK IT UP FAGGOTS)" would technically work just fine. The real meaning of any keyword is in the CR definition, not the reminder text. The reminder text is just there to be an at-a-glance grokkable version.

It's an interesting idea, though since they are stealable some of them seem kinda me. Like Redrum Tavern. Can't use it on 1 life creatures to give them menace and only makes enemies lose a single life a turn.

These are kind of a neat idea, actually. I feel like gimmicks like this are one way WotC could widen the gap between artifacts and enchantments. If it were me though, structures would be like PWs and be attackable, with a P/T but aren't creatures, so they can't be removed, not even by artifact destruction because they are too big. Deal damage to them equal to their T, they crumble. But that's just a thought. Conquest is... hm. I could see it as a keyword for a special format of MtG called Conquest actually. Sounds like it could be a fun time as a multiplayer format. The WU one could be monowhite, so maybe that needs a rework. BR one isn't very good sadly. Hunter's Campsite is really cool. Lakeside Harbor is workable, but I think it needs a new name to do with smugglers or something nefarious.

Creature types are capitalized, so a bit of an edit needed on the Cutthroat. Ghastly Reaver is too good, I think. Okiba-Clan Shinobi is a 3/2 with Ninjutsu that does the same thing at 3BB, so I would make the Reaver a 3/2. Zonbi Smuggler is probably fine, but keep an eye on it. Necromantic Thirst is 2BB and needs a creature to enchant, and Woebearer is uncommon and the same body and ability + Fear for 4B. It might need to be uncommon as well, but cost-wise I think it should be okay.

I thought these guardian Hylian robot things were a pretty neat idea for the game. Haven't played it myself, but I've watched some let's plays, and it looks fun. Zelda meets Skyrim.

Card seems fine, but the guardians don't seem to activate very fast in the game, so maybe nix the Haste and re-cost accordingly?

I'd have him divide X damage between any number of target creatures or players, where X is the number of charge counters on him. Feels more interesting and delivers less front-end damage but becomes more flexible later on.

Fixed Ghastly Reaver. The smuggler costs mana to disentomb, while woebearer doesn't.

>The smuggler costs mana to disentomb, while woebearer doesn't.
Why yes, I read the same thing. Not sure why you're pointing it out.

nvm I interpreted your post wrong.

>I thought these guardian Hylian robot things were a pretty neat idea for the game. Haven't played it myself, but I've watched some let's plays, and it looks fun. Zelda meets Skyrim.
The Guardians are interesting. I heard that the idea was based on the Octorock, but they thought fighting giant, walking octopuses would be kinda gross, so they made them robots instead. And yeah, the game is pretty awesome. Kinda wish it had a few changes to it though. If Nintendo wants to make this a trend for Zelda (fuck me, Google, you don't know that Zelda is a name?) though, it's a great first step.

>Card seems fine, but the guardians don't seem to activate very fast in the game, so maybe nix the Haste and re-cost accordingly?
Eh, they seem plenty fast for me. Oh wait, are you talking about the old, rusted ones seen near the beginning? Those will be a separate card. This card is for the healthy, active ones roaming around Hyrule that can keep up with you even when riding a horse. I do think I'll add R to the costs though.

>I'd have him divide X damage between any number of target creatures or players, where X is the number of charge counters on him. Feels more interesting and delivers less front-end damage but becomes more flexible later on.
Sounds good. Should I move the trigger to end step then?

>card
I think I'd just make the mill an effect that happens rather than a cost. Kinda seems like millstrike to me, though it is a bit better I think.

One could argue that with that wording the cost only needs to be paid once and at any time, which may not be the intention

Why do some cost mana to use their triggered ability?
Why dont you just change the stats?

It happens.

Vixen is a bit much at common as a one-drop. Now, I know peeking at a single card isn't really that strong, but if you're concerned about NWO at all (which I doubt you are because most people don't see to be anymore) it should really be one or the other just for simplicity's sake. Outlaw is fine per Chasm Drake. Æther Marauder is a bit of an edge case. It's technically worse than Æther Adept because it doesn't automatically bounce, but it's a better body and it's repeatable, even if it does cost. I think it's probably okay. Uncovered Treasure seems alright though you'll get people talking shit about making Gold tokens outside black.

Fixed the wording on Vexing; I dunno how I missed the "or her" part in the reminder text not once but twice.

Ah, yeah I've only seen the beginning of the game. I dunno if you need to add R to the cost at all, because artifacts don't need colored mana as an excuse to do anything, but if you think it works better then go for it.

>Static
Hrm. I dunno that it matters too much when the damage effect goes off. I mean there's little nuanced differences, but it's overall probably best at the upkeep because most triggers like that happen then so it's a familiarity thing.

>vexing
So when it becomes blocked it mills? Hmm. That could work. Might cut a few words too, which is always welcome. And yes, it's a better millstrike because mill is garbage even if it's fun.

One could, but since reminder text isn't rules text, so it's be a moot point. Still, preventing arguments among newer or casual players is always a good idea. If I change the wording to what was suggested above, then it basically resolves the issue, so maybe that's another good reason to do so.

>becomes attached

Not actually. The game understands the wording of a creature becoming "equipped", because it can understand whether or not a creature "is equipped".

So is this what we were talking about for Vexing? Or just literally "this swings and mills its power in cards"?

Because something like this becomes way more powerful if it's the latter. And yeah, I'd probably do away with the reminder text in an actual set because the card is very crowded if I keep it.

Without the clause, iyou had two of them in your hand, you could infinitely copy any instant or sorcery for 8 r/u, so the clause is probably for the best.

I said "becomes attached" because there already exist creature cards that use the wording "Whenever an Aura becomes attached to ~". Notice that they don't say "Whenever an Aura enchants ~" or "Whenever an Aura becomes enchanted to ~". Which is why I believe that if a triggered ability existed on the card that was being attached, it would use "attached" instead of the subtype-specific "enchanted" or "equipped". Additionally, searching for "becomes equipped" or "becomes enchanted" both turn up zero results.

You'd need three, wouldn't you? I don't see how the two-loop would work.

Yeah, the stalkers are crazy fast. What's cool is that you can cut off their legs, but if you don't do it fast enough, they use the remaining legs to keep their distance.

>Static
Good point.

>Vexing
Yeah. I imagine the reminder text would be something like
>Whenever this creature becomes blocked, defending player puts a number of cards from the top of his or her library into his or her graveyard equal to this creature's power.
Wait, should it trigger whenever it becomes blocked, or whenever it becomes blocked by a creature? The latter would be interesting to see in combination with Menace.

I'd be inclined to make this "target attacking creature".

>vexing
Hm. "whenever it becomes blocked by a creature" sounds fun, but KISS rule; sure it's more fun with Menace but it also makes the ability not function as expected in that case, confusing players who aren't as attentive, so I'm a bit loathe to do it that way. And sadly the new wording is more wordy. Oh well. I dunno if it's worth going back to the "cost" wording over two or three words.

"...becomes blocked by one or more creatures..."

Split cards become a single spell when fused, so you'd make a copy that basically reads "Copy target spell. Copy target spell" each time.

Stack would look like this:
>Cast Lightning Bolt
>Cast Again/Again, targeting Bolt twice
>Cast Again/Again, targeting Bolt and A/A
>Resolve A/A, put a copy of Bolt onto the stack and a copy of A/A
>Copy A/A targets Bolt and A/A
>Repeat

So you think it should have this?

...

Really not sure how to design the BUG one for this without it just being a rip off the enchantment from Tarkir. Any input or suggestions appreciated.

Might as well be instant speed and able to hit creatures. No one ever called lava axe too good.

>Bowling ball
>Batter up!
You either play weird ass baseball or a very exciting game of bowling.

Another BotW card. Think I'll be working on some more of them for a while.

I guess it's more like swinging a broom.

...

Seems good. Not really a fan of the effect in White, but that's just me.

interesting. Could even be b/w hybrid

>downloading software
>from Veeky Forums

FEAR.exe

should cost a bit more, 3 colorless and 1 white.

It's not from here, it's from sourceforge. Why are you so afraid? First time on Veeky Forums? If you don't want to download MSE, use mtg.design

>First time on Veeky Forums
no, but I'm scared by downloading things, I don't want to lost my PC due to a virus, it's my part of autism

Sheer Drop/Murderous Compulsion says its fine.

Then run it in a VM.

ok

A couple more cards.

I keep having this complaint, so I'm thinking it's more of a me issue.

But like a lot of other "action words" I see, plunder seems like it's not a good fit. When I envision plundering, I think "taking somebody's stuff", not "making gold".

I feel like it is on the edge of being just right, but I can't place what needs to be changed.

Illusion is a creature type. If you want to use it, either the artifact should become a creature, or tribal. Also, the last bit should probably be "When this permanent" and certainly not "this card"

Not him, but how about Loot instead? It could be used as a verb similar to Plunder, or a noun referencing the gold itself.

>Permanent
How could I forget that, thanks.

I see the reasoning on not liking on any artifact, I guess I saw it as something that can be worked on/with since the ability works for any artifact, not just noncreatueres.

>not liking on any artifact
Supposed to say not liking Illusion on any artifact.

Outside the wording that was already mentioned I feel the card is solid but is right with illusion being a creature type, I get what you were trying to do but you are essentially changing something that doesn't need to or work with change.

Well the game already has"looting" regarding card draw so it might get confusing.

Don't really see what about W makes sense for artifact cloning.

This is fun, not practical, but fun.

I guess when I had the card in mind I thought of it in a sense where he uses the energy of spirits to make these weapons but they manifest in the form of illusions. (Flavor stuff)

Flavor doesn't define mechanics though.
if you want to do sprite weapons I'd consider making an equipment that gets charge counters whenever something dies, and the equiped creature gets +1/+1 per charge counter.

Interesting idea but needs some wording cleanup.

Oh baby

>tfw wastes/X dual lands never

I'd call it "Again" and "And again"

But saying you cast "Again and And Again" just makes you sound like a 'tard.

How about "Again" and "Yet again"

I'll give my two cents: "Again" and "Again!". Yes, exclamation points are black border legit.

This kinda reminds me of the user who thought the split cards were supposed to be said with "or" instead of "and".

...

...

This seems better than Shrine of the Forsaken Gods because it's easier to use, but it also doesn't have the single mana generation fallback. Not too sure about it.

I cringe whenever I see Storm on a card, to be honest. I am no good at judging cards that have it at all.

It's like you're going out of your way to make it more complicated than it needs to be.
>~ can't be blocked unless defending player discards a card.

I just copied Ogre Marauder, user. I assumed there was some odd reason it was like that.

Not entirely sure why it's like that. Maybe for the weird situation where the defender has only one creature then tries to block with the creature they sacrifice? Regardless, I'm very certain that Awesome Presence means the wording I gave you works just fine.

Ogre Marauder was rewritten like that to preserve the triggered ability. "Can't be blocked unless" works fine.

Yeah I originally had it as you suggest and saw the Ogre and went "wait, I better do this just in case because at least I know this works". I guess there is such a thing as reading too much Gatherer? Huh. Anyway, changing it.

The haste is a lil wonky, but is fine if B in the set is rather aggressive. Otherwise it would feel a little out of place. The input by others on wording is good, and I have nothing else to add.

Nothing about this is red besides trample.

Could be fixed by making it RW for the indestructible hellbent bit, and just nixing the UB library theft for the impulse draw red normally gets.

The second effect most definitely is red.

Ah yeah, forgot about Grenzo. I wonder what their reasoning was for taking a UB thing and making it R. Red certainly needs more tricks/stuff it can do, but this was something of a strange choice. I guess red's thing now is just "exiling cards from the tops of libraries and casting them". Not really complaining because like I said, it's always needed more in its toolbox.