/ccg/ Custom Card General /cct/

>Dawn Evangel
Screams "break me". Also, Phoenix? WTF?

>Enigmatic Champion
Meh.

>Sea Swallower
Why not use the Banisher wording? Why include Black? Why Leviathan?

>Stone's Chosen
Golem? Why? Especially when this would work so much better as a Hydra. Seems OK.

>Thunder Winged
Angel? Pirate? What? Card is... I dunno, I'm so confused.

>Whiteglass Blade
Legendary? Uncommon? For a 4/4 with a shitty Lifelink? Whaaaa? I can't even

>They're also iconic in that they each have a unique creature type.
I don't understand what most of this sentence means. And I don't think you do either.

Dawn Evangel needs to only return small creatures.

2/4 is tiny for a leviathan.

Thunder Winged is too cute, seeing as you can fireball creatures for just XGU.

>Dawn Evangel
Yes, I know, that's why I was asking for help making it less broken.
>Also, Phoenix, WTF?
It's a flavor creature type, mainly. The god in question has a habit of ritually mutating his followers, as he believes the other races, which were created by the other gods, are 'impure'.

>Sea Swallower
You make a good point about the Banisher wording. I included black mainly because of Anguished Unmaking and Utter End, which seem to indicate that exiling things is W/B.

>Stone's Chosen
>Golem? Why?
Golems are the green race of the set, and do a lot of +1/+1 counter shit.

>Thunder Winged
Pirates are obviously a main theme of the set. The Angel comes from the storm god (also the god of slaughter) who blessed her for being especially good at killing things.

>Whiteglass Blade
>Uncommon? Shitty version of Lifelink
Yeah, I was unsure about this, but I really had a hard time finding a decent G/W mechanic involving lifegain that wasn't a shitty version of lifelink. I'm certainly open to suggestions.

>I don't understand what most of this sentence means
They each have at least one creature type that no other creature in the set has. It seems pretty obvious to me.

Reposting these before I head to bed.

Here's a second set of iconics. These are meant to convey the main 'themes' of the gods that they serve, and therefore the set as a whole. I'm not particularly good at coming up with new mechanics, so there's nothing particularly innovative here.

Noted. I mostly used Leviathan because I already have a few Whales and Kraken, and there's very few other 'large sea creature' types. I might have to rethink that plan.

Really dumb complaint, here, but these are all commons, yes? They seem awfully verbose. I don't mean to get all neo-WOTC on you, but many of your cards seem like slightly altered versions of already existent cards, and you literally have no vanilla creatures or reprints, as far as I can see.

MtG uses contractions where possible (~ can't be countered.)

I can't say that I care for any of them.

>They each have at least one creature type that no other creature in the set has. It seems pretty obvious to me.
Thanks for the laugh, I needed that. This doesn't make them "iconic" though within the set, I suppose this does make them somewhat unique. Which I didn't consider before because you didn't specify it, which lead me to think that you thought these were unique creature types within all of Magic or something or something. Anyway "iconic" in Magic refers to something very specific. An "iconic" refers to a creature type that best embodies any particular color.

White has Angels.
Blue has Sphinxes.
Black has Demons.
Red has Dragons.
Green has Hydras.

Iconics can exist in other colors, but they're most often found in their respective colors. Sometimes certain types are dropped in sets if Wizards feels they don't make sense, like how Angels were replaced by Archons in Theros.

In addition to the iconics are the characteristic creatures. They don't embody a color as iconics do, but they do tend to follow it closely. However, the characteristics aren't as solidly defined as the iconics.

White has Humans, Knights, and Soldiers.
Blue has Merfolk.
Black has Zombies and Vampires.
Red has Goblins.
Green has Elves.

And same as before, sometimes they get dropped, like how there were no Elves or Merfolk in Innistrad. (Personally I think Merfolk could've worked as Creature from the Black Lagoon-esque creatures, but that's just me.)

>It's a flavor creature type, mainly.
Yeah, not a great justification. Putting flavor above the color pie is something that should be done very sparingly.

>The god in question has a habit of ritually mutating his followers, as he believes the other races, which were created by the other gods, are 'impure'.
Another "WTF?" Why is he White?

1/2

>I included black mainly because of Anguished Unmaking and Utter End, which seem to indicate that exiling things is W/B.
I wasn't entirely sure if you were new to Magic before, but this clinches it. The O-Ring effect of exiling stuff then returning it later is solidly White. WB, on the other hand, exiles stuff without returning it. If you wish to know more about the intricacies of the color pie, please feel free to ask.

>Golems are the green race of the set, and do a lot of +1/+1 counter shit.
You put the race of unliving, magically-animated constructs in the color of life? Eh?

>Pirates are obviously a main theme of the set.
Obviously.

>The Angel comes from the storm god (also the god of slaughter) who blessed her for being especially good at killing things.
But not the god of Pirates? And why is she an Angel?

>Yeah, I was unsure about this, but I really had a hard time finding a decent G/W mechanic involving lifegain that wasn't a shitty version of lifelink. I'm certainly open to suggestions.
Well, what do you want to do with it? It's your set, man, tell me what you want. Do you have an idea for a GW archetype? I can give you random ideas, but having a goal in mind helps a lot.

2/2

...

Yeah, I think I'm starting to see that criticism that your commons are too complex. Still not liking Enlightenment.

Good god these all look boring. And why the random can't be countered clause?

>neo-WOTC
Most people refer to this as "NWO" aka "New World Order". I believe Maro used the term first, so everyone else picked up on it.

...

I don't think the upside justifies the downside. Could be me though.

>Iconic Creatures And Where to Find Them
I had an idea. I think it's a good idea. How's the execution though?

That firebreathing mana cost is atrocious. Just make it 1R.

I really dislike Warding Angel being able to reset itself. I only mildly dislike it being able to reset other glyphed creatures.

Hydra's Mark is conceptually interesting, but lacking in execution. Also, it doesn't remember X once it has entered the battlefield.

Gut feeling is that Sphinx is one of: too big, too cheap, doesn't need flash.

Yep, it most certainly is. I should have put this in t a colorshifted frame. It's a callback card to Orcish Spy. I tried to make it trigger in a red way at least, but I suppose I shouldn't have been so lazy. I'll see about making it into a real card this time around.

A giant cardwall with well-made cards? You don't hide very well.
>Every deck likes drawing cards
But not holding onto them. That's the problem. I mean I'll wait to see how you handle it as things progress and flesh out before I make a real judgement. Just an initial impression.
>Scout
Yeah, see above.

I copypasted the gustcloak ability and was too lazy to remove it after I added vigilance to turn it into an uncommon.

>wr03
You realize the "cost" on this is a benefit most of the time right? Because although they are harder to remove, enchantments are less useful than creatures that can deal damage and win games.
>br04
"plus 1". The player enchanted by the curse doesn't put counters on it, its controller does. I mean, normally. This feels too fast to me, all told.
>ur01
So, cast this with 5 open mana during your opponent's turn, then swing with that flier and get a bonus card? Hm. I'd have to see how this plays.
>gr02
Hm. If you have the mana this is a lot of value, but I don't think it's too much.
>rr04
Hellkites usually ping, they don't firebreathe. But it's better than Drake. We'll see how it plays. I know that sounds like a copout statement but really with borderline cards it's the best I got.

I feel like this needs to cost 7G or so.

I liked the idea of him using trick arrows for various things. Though I'll change it if it proves to be too boring.

>White
Nice, I like it. Still not a fan of Ascend though, doubt I ever will be. It's mostly the glyph counters.

>Black
Demon side is cool, though I'm not a fan of how the front is executed. I think I'd rather it just have you pay some mana whenever an opponent loses life to put a counter on the enchantment. The fact that it gives you a bonus of making the opponent loses a bit more life that's lost when it transforms is something I don't like.

>Blue
Eh... just seems kinda easy to get out in Blue. I think it would be better if the transform trigger only happened at upkeep. Also, you write out numbers for physical things like cards, you use numerals for nonphysical things like life total or P/T.

>Green
Utterly disappointed. Doesn't come anywhere close to the others. Why even bother making it an enchantment and not a sorcery? I think the main problem with this is trying to fit Evoke onto it.

>Red
Boring. Also seems a bit disconnected. And I really don't understand your bizarre costing for the firebreathing ability. Captive Flame is a thing. Oh, and the only one in this cycle having hybrid mana is strange.

Needs more work. Not a big surprise since it looks like you just made them, that's fine. I think the first step is to change G and R so that they're creatures too. Or at least like B and U that transform into creatures. And I realize your set focuses on enchantments, but don't be afraid to break from that focus for a cycle. Not every card has to be an enchantment, turn into an enchantment, or interact with an enchantment.

I actually love green cards that have activated abilities featuring every other color. I did a green Wizard a long time ago that did something similar. It's a concept that I feel fits green and blue very well; an adaptation/improvement theme. Honestly this works for Ollie.

Made this card actually red this time. I think it still feels like a scout, of the Orcish persuasion.

>you realize the "cost" on this is a benefit most of the time right
That's part of the idea. Would you say upping the cost to 1WW or more would make it more sensible?

I just realized how little extra text it would take for it to say "..plus 1 and YOU put a...".

The sphinx side is probably a bit much and the one I'm most willing to change. I don't want to up the front side's cost any because then it sucks as a draw spell. I have considered upping the hand number requirement but then why would you want more cards?

The glyph counters are something I really like but in the interest of elegant design, should probably drop and just have it be transforming into enchantments, usually with the same abilities or that grant those abilities perhaps.

I feel the front side needs to actually do something, extra life loss seems like a good option. I could make it so you pay B whenever they lose life to have them lose that much life plus 1 instead and you put a counter on it. I also considered how it loses that ability but by giving it an immediate ping and getting bigger when it does, I think it kind of translates. Also, if you want to keep the front side's ability, you don't need to transform it unless you really want the demon.

Upkeep trigger seems like a good start to keeping this thing in line. Requiring you to have 7 cards without having had your draw step is pretty substantial actually.

Initially my hydra for the set had evoke to get across the idea of it transforming between being an instant / sorcery. Now as for this, it's also the one I'm least satisfied with but mostly out of not being able to find the right wording for what I want it to do. I want to have it enter with charge counters, give +X where X is the charge counters, and when it leaves the battlefield it makes an X/X hydra BUT that means the X in the cost and the Xs in the text refer to different things and I have to phrase it in a roundabout way.

"Interaction is for chumps!"

Also, why do half of these sacrifice and half of them exile, in seemingly no pattern? For that matter, Fathomdeep doesn't recur itself, but Truesight does?

Also Truesight abuses "exile as a second graveyard" so its pretty not okay. The rest are just sorcery effects that probably don't belong on uncounterable creatures (that can then be sacrificed at instant speed.)

>card
Old card, but I really like it.

>Old card, but I really like it.
And so do I.
If opponents don't control creatures, the entire ability cannot fire.

>angel
Well it's technically recursion, so it should be costs appropriately.
>sphinx
Well Sphinxes shouldn't be too small, so I feel like maybe you might be stuck upcosting the front side.

I have to assume it has some slot in a set concept. Otherwise, it feels like the draw thing is some of the most powerful trinket text I've seen.

I'll slap on an "up to" then. Good catch.

>seems a bit disconnected
I just don't see that, it's an board boosting enchantment that sometimes makes a dude for it to boost. Seems to play into itself well, especially in multiples where you can play one early and another later for the increased cost. You can get an upgraded fervor for a more color intense cost, or two-color aggressive decks gain access to a boosted fervor for 2RR. That all seems reasonable to me. And yeah, costing that fucking firebreathing has only made me hate it more and more. I'm going to make it cost 1R and be done with it. 2/R seems too powerful and 2/R2/R seems too expensive

These are exceptional cases for trying specifically to really get in that enchantment stuff. Partially to see if I can, partially because I love the idea, partially for synergy through the set, and partially for flavor. This cycle is pretty much the only time I would really try to hammer it in and that's partially because they provide limited bombs for decks that aren't enchantment synergy but in some way boost enchantment synergy decks. Honestly, I'd be more worried about the set being too geared toward spell slinging tempo than overflowing with enchantment synergy. Both of which I'm trying to keep in check.

And yeah, they all definitely need a bit of work, but when trying to do something so weird for a cycle that's why I post here to see if what I'm doing is working. Thanks a bunch for the feedback.

...

...

>I have to assume it has some slot in a set concept. Otherwise, it feels like the draw thing is some of the most powerful trinket text I've seen.

No real set skeleton, but designed as a reward for Delving/grave hate/flicker.

Clever. I'm still coming to terms with red tapping things but I like how this comes together. Not sure on the flavor text, though?

>card
It asplodes.

This works for tapdown, but they're still going to get the mana out of them if they can use it. Still, useful against certain decks.

Pretty steep drawback. I'm not sure about this. I have to admit I saw the name and I thought it'd be a 40k card. It kinda frustrates me how some designs just stump me.

Ah, I gotcha. I suppose that works. I guess I'm just whiffing on grasping card concepts tonight.
>Auto-Dragon
Okay, don't take offense at this, but this feels like the sort of shiny mythic they put in a precon. It'd make some Timmies cream their drawers.

>Okay, don't take offense at this, but this feels like the sort of shiny mythic they put in a precon. It'd make some Timmies cream their drawers.
Excellent. Creamed Timmy drawers is half of what I live for.

That sounded less creepy in my head.

>Trinket Fence
This seems incredibly niche. Its Glintnest Crane intersecting with Trinket Mage, which makes it seem incredibly unlikely it will actually do anything.

>card
Can't remember if I've posted this before.

>Fence
It is. Trinket Mage was originally printed as an Uncommon, so I wanted to take a stab at a common version (the Commander one doesn't count because what the hell does rarity matter in Commander?). How do you think I can improve it? Better body? I considered a straight tutor for 0 cost artifacts and putting them onto the battlefield, but that sounded too good. Maybe I'm wrong?
>Ranger
I dunno how well "favored enemy" translates to MtG, but assuming this is an acceptable level of "game memory", which given some of the things they've printed, it probably is, this'd be one way to do it.

Page 8 bump with a semi-Bramblecrush.

The limitations on this card can hardly be called limitations for something that basically says "Destroy target artifact, enchantment, or planeswalker."

...

Could cost W

I still don't understand why you used hybrid mana for just the Red one. And as for firebreathing, have you thought of making it global like Purphoros? Then you could make ut a DFC where it transforms into a dragon with more efficient global firebreathing.

Also, have you thought of making enchantment creatures?

I've probably mentioned this before, but I think you should have the Dragon look at how much damage it deals instead of its power.

Can you guys give me some specific examples of which cards are too complex? I specifically kept an eye on complexity when making these; every card has a simple effect, each card only does one thing at a time, etc. Parley is naturally wordy, so that might be part of it, but even they have simple, common effects.

web.archive.org/web/20150111095646/http://www.mtgsalvation.com:80/forums/creativity/custom-card-creation/578926-primer-nwo-redflagging

Thanks for the primer, grumps, but I was hoping for some specific feedback on this group of cards. Of what people considered overly complex. Perspectives other than my own, you know? I've read the design primers; if I'm still overcomplicating my cards, I need fresh eyes on the issue.

My new general i use for my 5-color Wall-Tribal EDH. Hope you like it!

CO user here, I'll give it a shot.

>01-04, 06, 07, 09, 14, 16, 18, 19
Red-flagged, four or more lines. Holy shit, that's 50% already.

>05
Think the cost should be WW. Otherwise fine.

I just realized something. None of these have reminder text. You just assume everyone has perfect knowledge of all the keywords.

>08
Seems OK. Though I am a bit thrown-off at this being White. Just seems odd for it to get draw like this.

>10
I think this one is fine, but I could be wrong, as it's similar to a sorcery pump, and doesn't clog the board much.

>11
Seems fine to me.

>12
I'd red-flag this since you're probably going to use it to save something you have from targeted removal and it draws you a card, which means positive card advntage overall. Could be wrong though.

>15
Seems fine to me.

>17
I'd remove Scry. Seems fine otherwise.

So, by my estimate, that's 12 red-flagged cards out of 19 for over 60%.

From the primer:
>My current stance is that they [ability words] act similar for reminder text if they all have the same trigger like battalion
Which includes my cards with Parley and Enlightenment, right?

>Ability words like Battalion on Wojek Halberdiers have currently not been officially declared if they fall under this red flag. My current stance is that they act similar for reminder text if they all have the same trigger like battalion but if they care about something but all do very different things at common like the Domain or Morbid mechanics, I'd be wary of using them as a way of getting around this red flag.
It looks like a gray area. I'll try to see if someone confirmed it one way or the other, but just from your card, I would discount Enlightenment as 03 and 04 have different triggers. I'd have to see more to judge Parley. But if you use it as it was used in Conspiracy, I'd probably discount it too.

Speaking of 04, I just realized how finnicky this can be, since it cn get shut off simply by casting spells. I think this will lead to situations where you are affraid to cast spells since you will lose your Enlightenment bonus.

Okay, Ascend is dead. Long live Ascend.

Card type means enchantment, creature, etc, so does it keep its creature sub types? I'm okay with that.

Oh wait, the page has updated info. I assumed Grumps gave us an archived version because the original page was deleted. What gives, Grumps?

Anyway, it basically jjst repeats what was already said. Ability words with the same trigger get leeway. But not if the same word has different triggers.

Okay, so I can disregard the parts of Enlightenment that mention each player having four cards (as that's the same trigger every time) as well as the parts of Parley that mention the reveal, the draw, etc.
I like this version much better than the version with counters. It's a lot cleaner.

Oh, I figured you'd say something like
>When this creature dies, return it to the battlefield as an enchantment with a glyph counter on it.
But yours works too. Technically the subtypes will only matter if ths card has the corresponding card type, like how Vehicles have P/T but it doesn't mean anything if they aren't creatures.

Ah, can you link me the new version? I did think it was deleted.

No prob.

mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/creativity/custom-card-creation/578926-primer-nwo-redflagging

Decided I might as well archive it too.

web.archive.org/web/20170522142948/http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/creativity/custom-card-creation/578926-primer-nwo-redflagging

This is really useful, I think I'll add it to the OP links for future reference.

An idea I had for a green "direct damage" card.

I kinda get what you're trying to do, but the main point of the "toughness -> power" effect is that on the cards it's been used, it's global or semi-global. Having it affect only itself just makes me wonder why it's not a straight 12/12.

Also, it doesn't feel like a tribal lord, since it doesn't care at all about what else might be on the battlefield.

Not certain on balance, but the idea is very cool. A few small things though, like how the frame and wording need to be updated. Specifically
>you gain 3 life.
>~ deals 2 damage to up to one target creature.
>create a 1/1 green Saproling creature token.

Will do.
Here's another card that got inspired by that image :p

Urgh... How do I make an asshole with a suit, a harpoon, and heat-vision interesting?

Maybe focus on his defining trait, and then build from there?

Like I did for this asshole, he sucks your blood to make you super-strong.

Side-note about the card colors: they should be dictated by the card's effects, not whatever physical colors your inspiration happens to be. Senketsu was a happy coincidence: compare and constrast this dude.

>Maybe focus on his defining trait, and then build from there?
Being a massive asshole. How does that translate to a card?

>Vampiric Armor
Guh, I absolutely despise basing P/T boosts on P/T modifying counters. The card's kinda sorta interesting, but I just can see myself using it personally.

>they should be dictated by the card's effects, not whatever physical colors your inspiration happens to be.
No shit? I'm sorry, but this is pretty dead obvious advice. I realized this shit a long time ago man.

>Syndrome
I think I'd at least have him boost himself somehow. Though personally, I think a better idea for the character would be something that actively helps you get artifacts onto the battlefield. Also, why Metalcraft?

Okay, so I added an extra card at common to balance things out. I also moved or adjusted complex effects onto fewer cards and outlined those that still exceed NWO complexity standards in red. If I'm not mistaken, I should now be down to 20% after discounting lines that just say "enchant creature" and common-trigger ability word text.
Cute.
That double sacrifice trigger is harsh, especially since he can nuke potential blockers.
I too dislike cards that get stronger from -1/-1 counters. It just feels clunky and unintuitive. That said, your card is one of the better attempts I've seen at this sort of thing. I do feel like it's lacking white, though.
Flavor to mechanics on this one is still A+

OK, now justify the remaining red flags. How do they contribute to your set's theme or limited environment?

My set, particularly the UW factions, cares about people having cards in hand.
>Filane Outpost Sentry
Acts as protection in limited and can put a card into your hand at-will.
>Falconer's Companion
The only common creature with flying. Puts counters on other creatures to highlight white's lots-of-smaller-guys focus. I should probably make it a may effect, though, so that player's aren't forced to put a counter on an opponent's creature.
>Fortune Seekers
Again, puts a card into your hand. Focuses on card types that white cares about.
>Isolated Imprisonment
Removal that, again, allows you to get another card into your hand at will.

>pretty dead obvious advice
I don't know man, I don't know shit about Black Manta beyond googling him just now, and it looked to me like you really want him to be BR because of his suit when he could easily be blue as well because of his use of artifacts and underwater specialty.

>why Metalcraft?
Because it's through mechanical aid that he wanted to give power to everyone. And the point is that he "boosts" himself by pushing everyone "down" in a completely counter-intuitive way.

I just really like the flavor of getting drunk on power ("who cares about the toughness loss, I'm indestructible!") until the armor kills you, or at least leaves you a drained husk. It may be easier to visualize as the armor transforming all -1/-1 counters into +1/-1 counters as long as it's equipped.

In any case, here's another attempt at a (THE, really) super

I did my own take on Supes a while back. I'd nix the flavor text on yours so that the rest of the text doesn't shrink so much.

Fuck it here's more

>he could easily be blue as well because of his use of artifacts and underwater specialty.
The only thing that comes to mind with "underwater" is Islandwalk, and I'd like to avoid using dead keywords. Might do something with artifacts though, thanks.

>In any case, here's another attempt at a (THE, really) super
Way ahead of you.

>green makes him shit
Clever, but built-in color hate is eh. Any non-monogreen deck is gonna do peanuts with that.

>Supergirl
Holy shit we had pretty much the exact same idea for the cold breath/heat vision combo

A few nitpicks:
- specifically damaging attacking/blocking creatures is white, not red
- Destroyer, not Destoyer
- what the fuck Doomsday is completely nuts

Here's an idea for Bizarro: replace his indestructibility with Mossbridge Troll's permanent regeneration. That pushes his color identity as well as his "weird version of Superman" angle.
Only problem is that regeneration taps the creature, and I don't how "Whenever Bizarro attacks or regenerates, untap it." works, rules-wise.

>Holy shit we had pretty much the exact same idea for the cold breath/heat vision combo
Convergent design, it happens.

>- specifically damaging attacking/blocking creatures is white, not red
Actually, it is on a few Red cards, thought it's usually done that way to work with White. But the idea was to make the ability as close to things White gets as possible.

>- Destroyer, not Destoyer
Can't believe I missed that, thanks.

>- what the fuck Doomsday is completely nuts
I could easily adjust the mana cost and P/T. Maybe 6GGG to mirror Supes?

>card
Eh, seen this a bunch of times before, never really liked it though, sorry. I think part of me just really dislikes the phi mana and how using it that way makes a nearly worthless creature. It just makes me wonder why it has that stuff in the first place. Plus I'm not a big fan of the different planes crossing over, especially Phyrexia. After the tenth Phyrexian planar invasion idea you see, it gets old. Besides, Avacyn's dead already. In a completely shit storyline, but still.

Sorry, not using Regen. I used it before, but since Wizards changed their stance on it, I've stopped using it. On the cards I used to have it on, I've replaced it with either Indestructible or some sort of graveyard recursion, like with X-23 here.

>card
Eh, seems like it might be interesting. Have to see it in action though. And I feel like it should cost a little more maybe. Could be me though.

Cyborg. Artifact interaction is the idea of constantly upgrading himself with new tech, ping for arm cannon.

Make it all about his insatiable lust for fucking with Aquaman.

More diversity for orcs!

You need a comma between {X} and "where".

An user encouraged me to make the token ETB attacking and to give it Vigilance. Not entirely sure of this myself though. Opinions?

I'd really rather not do something narrow and parasitic like "Destroy target creature named Arthur Curry, Aquaman" or "Destroy target Atlantean". And speaking of Aquaman.

>card
Eh, I think I'd rather use Voidmage.

Seems fine. Nothing flashy, pretty solid.

Actually, now that I look at it some more, why does he have Reach? Like, we ever use him to block when you can use his activated ability to ping flyers?

>Oliver Queen
>Quiver
Comics were a mistake

>Eh, I think I'd rather use Voidmage.
>No flash
>Activated ability costs mana
>Dies to bolt and push

Voidmage Prodigy isn't a good card user. This isn't either but that's entirely because Wizards suck, and it's better in both Wizard decks and non-wizard decks than prodigy. Now if it were Faerie...

I dunno, you can block and then ping for more damage?

I like it, creature you don't control clause is superfluous alongside a may ability, also not sure why a number of creatures is specified. "Create a 2/2 green bear creature token. You may have it fight target creature." Why the extra wording?

Thank you. Posted this yesterday but thread was dead and got no feedback.

I just don't know what to think of this. Is this really worth mythic rarity with all the drawbacks it comes with?

Perhaps not, the reason for mythic status is more because it's a color break and they don't print 1-drop dorks into standard anymore. I could definitely see it being just a rare, though in the right limited format it could be a house. If you're playing black in limited/standard, do you slam this every time? I think most of the time.

>don't print 1-drop dorks
Forgot about that. Damn, just did a check, looks like the last original one-drop dork with no conditions to fulfill is Elvish Mystic from M14.

So you can play the card even if there's no other creatures on the board.

>by a single source
How can 1 damage be dealt by multiple sources? Are you playing Unhinged with 1/2 damage?

It's a may ability user.

Ah, yes, but "you may have it fight target creature" still requires a target, which means you can't cast the spell if there are no viable targets aka no creatures on the board. The reason most abilities are worded that way is because they have no other effects and just fizzle when there are no targets, but since the spell also has the effect of making a token, I want it to be castable even if there's nothing to fight. (See for example Ajani, Valiant Protector's +2 ability, which is worded with an "up to" so that it can be used to buff him even if you have no creatures to buff.)

Okay... I'm thinking if I don't score a 7/10 on this batch of commons I may just have to give up.

I know the little transform one is weird, blame the photojoiner, it's still legible and I'll do the necessary adjusting for a color that has more transforming.

I also know that this color has a shit ton to do with enchantments, but the majority of the cards are usable without having stacked your deck with enchantments so it's partial flavor partial ensuring the archetype can work. White is the enchantment color for the set, so it had god damn better have the commons to fuel that strategy.

Yeah, I'm not that great at costing things that split up their costs.

Anyway, lore. Ugh, this is gonna be a long one. Billy Batson is granted the powers of various mythological figures by the wizard named Shazam to fight evil!

Solomon grants wisdom.
Hercules grants strength.
Atlas grants stamina.
Zeus grants power.
Achilles grants courage.
Mercury grants speed.

By speaking the name of the wizard Shazam, Billy is transformed into a superpowered alter ego. This is why I have shazam counters, and why you need six of them. Also, he has lightning powers, so yeah.

This is where the annoying stuff comes in. The alter ego was originally named Captain Marvel, completely unrelated to the Marvel Comics of today. Captain Marvel was created and owned by Fawcett Comics until they were killed off by DC. After this, Marvel Comics jumped in and trademarked their own Captain Marvel. Eventually, DC bought all the Fawcett Comics rights, but due to Marvel Comics making their own Captain Marvel, they ran into some trouble when they tried to bring back the Fawcett Comics Captain Marvel. Eventually it was settled that DC could keep the name of the character, but as long as Marvel held the rights to their Captain Marvel, DC couldn't actually use the Captain Marvel name on anything featuring the character. Eventually, DC got sick of this and just changed the name from Captain Marvel to Shazam after Flashpoint. And since DC after Flashpoint is an absolute mutherfucking clusterfuck, nobody's ever gotten around to clarify what the fuck is going on to all the other characters related to Captain Marvel, like Captain Marvel Junior and Mary Marvel. So for now I'm just going to use my own names for them.

Could this be costed lower?

>WC08
Red-flagged: Four or more lines of text, effective combat trick that can easily kill multiple creatures at once.

>WC09
Red-flagged: Uncommon terminology (upkeep trigger).

>WC03
Why put them out of order?
Red-flagged: Four or more lines of text.

>WC13
Red-flagged: Four or more lines of text.

>WC14
Red-flagged: Four or more lines of text, uncommon terminology (beginning of each combat).

>WC17
Red-flagged: Four or more lines of text.

>WC18
Red-flagged: Nah, just foolin'. Though I think this body for this cost at least belongs at uncommon in a standard set, or at least a set trying to be a standard set.

>WC19
Seems fine.

>WC06
Red-flagged: Four or more lines of text. Though this one I can easily see keeping since it plays into the enchantment theme. Also, why no Nyx frame?

>WC07
Seems fine.

>WC10
Red-flagged: Four or more lines of text.

>Wc11
Red-flagged: Four or more lines of text. I also don't really like the design of this one. I get you have an enchantment matters theme, but this seems really weak. A virtual vanilla enchantment, really?

>WC12
Another one?

>WC15
Seems OK.

>WC20
Red-flagged: Four or more lines of text.

>WC05
Huh? Just that one tribe? Seems odd.

>WC09B
Didn't I already see this one?

>WC04
Not a huge fan but OK I guess.

>WC01
Wait, what? Conduit sacs enchantments? Why?

>WC02
Red-flagged: Four or more lines of text. Might also count for affecting the board state. I also really don't see the connection to the trigger, why CMC 5 or greater? You been around Time user's last set too long?