/ccg/ Custom Card General /cct/

...

...

...

Comparing this to Flame Lash and Lightning Blast... hm. It's in an odd place. It's probably okay though. Electrify was just recently printed at 3R and that is worse than either of the former cards so you can probably get away with this.\

This'd probably get brewed with Coalition Victory pretty readily. A few shock lands, some creatures that can become more than one color... Scrapbasket comes to mind.

Okay, so I made most of the changes suggested to the new primer. I left Menace primary in both red and black since it's supposed to be replacing Intimidate, but if design trends don't steer that way it can be changed. As of the last 5 sets, there have been 14 black creatures with menace, or that interact with it, and 12 red along the same lines. Seems like they are trying to make it an even split, so it's primary on the list in both for now. I realize that historically there are way more red cards that have it, but I think recent design trends are more relevant for categorizing the keywords. Any other suggested changes are welcome and encouraged.

Making this exile your hand face-down (since you know what's there it's no big deal) makes this more of a choice for the opponent, and a more fun bluff card overall.

I'd make it 1R and able to target a creature or player. That'd make it roughly in line with Boros Charm.

...

I see what you did there.
>Hooked
Overcosted I think, but not too much. I feel like this would either be 1RR or 3R, depending on the set.
>Belly
I agree this would be more interesting if it didn't have the base colorless tap, and instead just concentrated on the mana gen for abilities. I like the idea of it making and the ability can't be countered. Name doesn't really fit what it does, though.
>Cliffs
I agree this is really quite good. I'd draft the hell out of it.

I feel like this needs a little extra something, though Madness decks would probably love it as it is. 2/4 felt a bit much. Maybe 3/2 instead?

Why X though? 4G would be fine. Otherwise, printable/10. Not much else to say except stop posting cards right before I make a post so I miss it and have to post separately.

Wither feels tacked on, and it's not big enough to warrant discarding a card each time. Perhaps if you only needed to discard once on cast.

Nevermind, I see it. Tired. Still, for the return on Plant tokens being able to drop this for G feels a bit too good.

Hm. I have an idea.

Intended for Grandeur support.

It does a lot more than that. Nice that it's useful even if you're not running Grandeur. I think it might be more expensive than this though if it saw print, considering things like Archaeomancer. I realize this technically isn't the same level of card advantage since you're not getting the same exact card back, but it also thinks your deck a bit in compensation. 2B?

>thinks
Thins. Jesus Tapdancing Christ I'm tired. Can't sleep though. Shitsux.

Archeomancer is common & costed as such. This is rare, & costed to be rare.

2B might not be too bad, but it's intended to be impactful in constructed. I compare it to Snapcaster Mage more than anything else, & it is a bit more versatile at the cost of speed.

It should at least cost 3 like eternal witness. In fact, why not just reprint eternal witness.

& here are the current versions of rare Insight cards.

As usual, still fiddling with these slots.

(I know whiteout is already a card but couldn't think of a name so it's a placeholder)

& finally a few common Guide ideas. Someone mentioned it would be cool on auras so I made some basic ones.

These are probably WAY too beefy / value for common so they will probably be toned down. Maybe. Or moved up to uncommon.

Something being rare isn't an excuse to make it straight cheaper for a similar effect as another card. Rarity is for complexity and draft concerns, not cost pushing.

>Whiteout
Flexible, but expensive. I realize it needs to be as such for Insight. I'm curious, how do you come up with your costing? The way I'm looking at it is that since most draft decks are multicolor, it's going to depend heavily on how many gold cards you're running (your set is wedges, right?) So early game, the chances you can get 2 copies out of Insight are lower, but late-game, the chance goes up. I figure for CMC 1 and 2 spells, you're looking a single copy, and for 3+ you're looking at 2 reliably. So this will probably copy twice. Exiling three things for 4WW is reasonably fair at sorcery speed, but I think the lifegain is unnecessary honestly. It's trinket text. Then again, hopefully you playtest so you can see for sure.
>Forgery
This one feels like it's harder to balance than Whiteout, because again, it's a late-game spell so you'll probably get two copies of this. So do you think 4U for three copies is fair? I feel like it's less so. Maybe 5U? Take a gander at Rite of Replication for reference. It's 7UU for five copies of a creature.
>Theory flare
Keep in mind that Reverberate and Twincast both cost the same as this, and you're looking at very probably getting two copies off Insight if you use this right. Still, it's not a guarantee, but you will always get one copy, so it's always at least as good. Something to consider.

Insight is hard to cost, for sure. Forgery floats between 5 & 6 CMC, "Whiteout" is the same.

Reverb & Twincast are 2cmc, not 3. I wanted Theory to still be playable, but not so cheap it overpowered the classics. Considered making it a Sorcery, too.

These read really clunky. Though they do make me think you should consider Auras with Guide on them that do different things based on what it's doing. Like +2/+2 and vigilance if it's enchanting a creature and -2/-2 and defender if it's guiding a creature. Something like that. Anyway, they never made any Auras with Haunt on them so I can't tell you if this works or not. I feel like it should be "or" not "and" though. As a final thought, compare Drains to Crippling Fatigue.

>reverb+ twincast
Ha, you're absolutely right. I wish I could fucking sleep, goddamn. Anyway, yeah it's likely that Flare is fine. I dunno where my head was. I wouldn't make it a sorcery though, it loses too much in the process. Well, unless you wanted it to ACTUALLY be the same cost as Twincast and Reverberate.

I combined them.

Turns out, it's a perfect idea.

-2/-2 kills the thing, dropping the enchantment into the yard so you can guide a friend.

It's so... Melvin.

Yeah this looks way cooler, cleaner, and more interesting.

...

Cut the second part out. It's extraneous information.

>turn 7
>play this
>play out reaper king for free
>play out coalition victory for 3
>win

...

...

...

I don't know if this was the intention but this card will normally shuffle itself back into the library with its ETB effect.

That Kinda was the idea so it can't be abuse by graveyard re

bump

...

Change it to nonland, or it will read "exile a fetchland, get another one from your deck"

Looks like trash to me. Are you a fan of Epic?

I've seen Red takes on Mind Unbound before, but I think this is the worst of them for denying draws.

>Belly
Seen this before too. Still not convinced by it.

>Cliffs
Seems interesting.

Tri-color for 6 damage seems fair.

Probably broken, but I really like the idea.

You don't know how mana reduction works, do you? If he cut out the restriction to only reduce colored costs, then it could also reduce generic costs.

Cool idea, but I agree with the other guy. Oh, and it should be
>Exile all cards from your hand

Seems good. I'll try to remember to start using it.

I think a better design would be to cut out Domain and make a token for each counter on it. And replace Sunburst with Converge. But that's just me.

Kinda with the other guy, might as well just be Eternal Witness. I guess you could make it something like Secret Salvage, but then you'd have to up the cost a lot.

>Whiteout
Eh, not too much of a fan of White exiling creatures unconditionally. But at that cost and rarity it seems in-line with cards Wizards has already made. Have to ask though, why 1 life? Seems rather paltry.

>Forgery
Jeez, Spitting Image was 6, right? This... I feel like this should cost more. It would be a lot easier to cost though if it only targets a creature you control though.

>Theory Flare
You probably need to up the cost. Though I'm just wondering why you don't make it
>Insight
>When you cast your next instant or sorcery spell this turn, copy that spell. You may choose new targets for the copy.
Functionally the same, but I think it's cleaner.

Cool, you used my suggestion. Or at least I think it was my suggestion. I think these are fine by themselves, but I like the other guy's idea. Reminds me of the Nyx auras from JOU.

Nice.

I like it. A fine uncommon.

Eh... unsure.

...

...

So it draws a card for playing itself at end of turn?

...

What would you cost the following at?

Lead Into Oblivion
Instant
Exile a permanent you control and all permanents that share a subtype with it.

I think I'd make it rare.

Subtype? Seems really narrow. No idea, sorry.

Inspired by roborosewater.

roborosewater came up with "whenever a player taps... that player adds G, add CC to your mana pool."

Interesting and unique

Broken.

What's your explanation for wither?
btw the 1st version is better. 2nd one has too much text for an uncommon and the additional text doesn't really add too much.

"if you casted an artifact spell this turn" --> "if you cast an artifact spell this turn"

Question since I'm not too sure. What would be the main colors for stealing stuff like counters and mana?

stealing is blue and black. Potentially red.

mana I'd say blue, counters I'd say u or b

Alright, I had a creature that can sort of take counters from other creatures as B/R but maybe red wasn't right

I'd say if it hits a dude it can take counters would be black with a side of red

Na, it's more like it get counters that you remove for other counters

close enough to vampirism to be BR

Fair enough then. Thanks.

Stealing counters isn't seen much, and seems to get split between G, B, and U. Stealing mana I've only seen on one card, and that was U.

Don't listen to what the other guy said about R, AFAIK, he's dead wrong there.

Well thanks too.

Might as well just explain it to make it easier. Basically dude comes in and gets however many do nothing counters. Then once per turn one of these counters can be removed to move a counter from another creature on to it.

I asked about the mana stealing because I was thinking of making it so you could also take mana from someone when they tap using the counters but I've decided that might be too silly and just taking counters seemed simple enough

that's purely U / B. Exchanging things where you're guaranteed to benefit is U as hell.

I recommend getting rid of the do-nothing counters. Actively mixing up multiple counters on the same card screams memory issues. Just say something like
>[cost]: Move a counter from another target creature onto ~.
If I understand you right.

Oh, and for wording help, I got some pretty good results with this query:
magiccards.info/query?q=o:move o:counter -o:remove -o:graft&v=card&s=issue

And for one other avenue you can go down, you could just remove a counter entirely, then put a predetermined counter on the card. It's not precisely the same, but has more or less the same favor. For that, I refer you to Thief of Blood.

And as for R, the only cards I can think of that are mR and manipulate counters only manipulate time counters. Oh, and while R does get some stealing, B and U do it far, far, FAR more often. It's one of the few things that B and U share, actually.

Ah, I thought'd be more black since I'm taking shit but I guess that makes sense. Thanks my dude

Older design, obviously. I'm just not feeling the newer design with him turning into stuff. Idea is to capitalize on his job as a reporter. Creatures appearing or leaving = news = card draw. I hope that makes sense.

I don't think he plans on exchanging the do-nothing counters, it seems he's using them as a sort of cap on the creature, so it can't steal counters indefinitely. If I'm right, I think it would be a lot more fitting in Black.

I hope I don't sound rude, but could you please spend a minute getting a mockup of your card so we can all see it? It's like the blind leading the blind without a concrete idea of what the hell you're actually making.

...

Hmm, I get where you're coming from about the multiple counters causing issues, I had thought about it myself. I kinda just wanted to use counters though as I wanted to have this ability as a limited use thing.

Of course the real trouble starts to come in if you start taking different counters like, for example, a +1/+1 counter and an energy counter.

Ah yeah, sorry, I would have but I'm travelling right now so I can't actually get to the card. I'd probably have it in a couple hours at most

Well, permanents can't get energy counters, but yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. +1/+1 counters, brick counters, charge counters, etc. And you can't even make an argument that it would only be +1/+1 counters if that card's a creature, since you might want to use the ability just to get counters away from your opponent.

Ah. Well, could you at least give us some rules text so we have an idea of how it works? Like, is it a triggered ability or a replacement ability, how many counters, how much does it cost, etc. The rules text doesn't have to be perfect, just so we have an idea of how the entire card functions.

Oh wait, I just remembered we have this
mtg.design/
You can use it to design cards even from your phone or tablet. You have to sign up, but it's pretty easy.

...

I like the idea, but how often do you really need more lands once you're at 6 mana?

...

I think this is pretty much what I wrote. Forgive any of my shitty formatting especially as far as explaining the part about taking counters and the once per turn bit as I'm not quite sure if that's how it should be done:

Coin purse # (As this creature enters the battlefield, put # coin counters on it. You may remove a coin counter from this creature and move one counter of any kind on any permanent to this creature. You may only remove a coin counter from this creature once per turn.)

Maybe if you're playing a weird Stax deck? Or in EDH?

That was meant to

The picture looks like Don Quixote came back from the dead. He's excited, Sancho Panza is not.

Anyway, card seems interesting, but I feel like it's a bit too easy to just recur to make yourself the Monarch whenever you want.

Holy god, a keyword? Now, you shouldn't jump to conclusions, and you should definitely wait until you get feedback on this from people other than me before making any decisions but... I don't think I'd ever consider keywording something like this in a million years. Simply, it's way too complex.

Oh wait, this reminds me of something Pirate user did. Hopefully this helps you a bit.

>remove counters to make +1/+1
Ok yeah, that's way better, thanks.

Yeah, now that I think about it didn't need to be a keyword, I could just have the description of the keyword as the actual effect.

I'll think about it more, thanks again for your help.

Don't think there's been any change to this. Idea is to get across a tinkerer. He makes his own stuff, even from scrap, and turns them into weapons.

I did point you to Thief of Blood. Did you miss that?

Sure, no problem. That's what we're all here for, right?

I saw it, I just sort of glossed over it though when it removed everything that I was too stupid to notice the conversion to +1/+1s

Based on another card I saw that I really liked. I just added cantrip. Plus I thought it would be cool to do something similar to Acrobatic Maneuver since Nightwing was raised as an acrobat in a circus.

Eh, that's fine. Pirate user actually made a few cards with that mechanic. Let me know if you want me to post them for ideas.

Thanks for the offer but it should be good. It should be a simple enough ability

Should cost way more. Compare to The Abyss, which was a staple in its day.

I couldn't help myself.

...

Oh cool, a color-shifted Mana Vortex.

...

...

Was it your intent to give the card all the keywords, no matter which one's in the grave?

yes?

...

...

...

Functional common/10. I really like the flavor. I'd be happy to see it show up in a set. It could ALMOST be U because Hydrosurge, but blue likes holding onto cards so much that it's safer at 1U.

I realize the UUBB in the cost is something of a conventional necessity, but damn if it doesn't make this hard to use. I suppose that stands to reason though since it's really powerful. This card wins games.

One would expect a token creature out of the +1 on a CMC5 PW, so the Clue token is a bit odd. Of course, the fact that it doubles up means that may be for the best. A simplistic card that works. Not terribly impressive but kind of charming. Not really a fan of the name though. It invokes Populate to me, so I want to see GW not GU.

Whew. I'm not sure about the cost on this but it's got to be close. Pretty good idea overall.

Kinda clunky since it defies expectations a little by looking for one keyword but granting three. Most cards that fish for keywords like this just grant whatever's there and that's it, so it could be jarring to some players. Also so easy to set up that it might as well just have those keywords. A black one-drop activates this no sweat.

Kinda like the decision making here. Would have loved to see this in Tarkir somewhere.

>seems good
Good to hear. No pressure, I just felt like finally updating it. Maybe I'll do the challenge sometime too, but i'm not sure I can change it without making it more complex.
>Matrix
Can't this be worded with the "until ~ leaves the battlefield" Banisher Priest wording?

>explain wither
I... like it? It felt like it needed something. I actually prefer the second version; the first is too obviously pushed for Madness decks and stuff. The 2nd one is more usable overall and needs less justification for the Disfigure effect.

Not sure black should interact with Equipment like this, but I'm tired, I'll toss some shit at the wall.

>Firestorm Matrix
I'd have to think of a way to apply it to your own stuff. I'll see if it looks cleaner than this version. But I'm guessing the core mechanic is good and fairly costed?

Ugh, forgot to give feedback.

>card
I don't get the -X bit. What does it represent exactly? I realize the idea is that the Equipment somehow weakens the other creatures. I feel like it's just asking for FStrike.