Post your cards here, see what others think



  • Also would anyone care to evaluate this one?

    Its wierd, but if need be Il gladly explaìn
  • I made an Azorius commander with mechanics from outside Ravnica, but I think I captured the Azorius flavor well enough:

  • edited December 2016
  • Thanks, @KJMartin and @Daragonion. I am trying a more complex planeswalker this time, but am unsure if it is too restrictive for the opponent. Is this better?
  • image
    Pretty proud with this one.
    A person (say the girl in the picture) - or the creature you control - gets switched with her reflection - or the creature in exile/outside the game. Although the reflection-thing is a completely different entity to the original creature, it shares some traits - or activated abilities. The flavor text is pretty spooky too...

    Please leave some feedback!
  • edited December 2016
  • @KJMartin Great flavour, but cheating out an expensive creature isn't that hard, so it could actually be pretty broken with Eldrazis, since you're generating additional value by copying the abilities of one creature onto another. I'd remove the last sentence, personally, and just have it be a straight polymorph.
  • @ShadowKnight1224
    Thanks for the feedback!
    The original one didn't have the last clause, but I thought it made the card cooler, more flavorful and more interesting ^^
    I think it is balanced - it reminds me a bit of Eldritch evolution, which certainly wasn't overpowered, and it seems worse at doing it than the evolution.
  • edited December 2016
    @KJMartin How is this not much more powerful than Eldritch Evolution? Eldritch Evolution may let you fetch a creature that's 2 mana more expensive than the one you sacrificed, but yours lets you a) fetch from exile (which makes it a counter to exile-based removal), b) fetch from the sideboard (which means you don't actually occupy a deck slot with the card you want, letting you run a more efficient deck), c) retain value by grafting the abilities of one unto the other (so it makes the additional cost you pay not even that big of a deal).
  • edited December 2016
  • edited December 2016

    His first ability is curious, the part about using the dead for something is totally black, no doubt. But, if you kill the opponent's creatures he gains tokens too which is weird. this brings a "sense of justice" to this ability that is kinda white (like in a group hug strategy).
    His second is okay, but what if you switch to "until your next round"? and a question if both creatures died, the ability triggers twice?
    His ultimate wins the game like most ultimates, its just weird that it is an activated emblem, but not bad at all.
    Not my favorite, since i don't like all this dead stuff (despite playing rakdos) but not a bad PW

    Ah, sweet Tibalt. he's considered one of the worst planeswalkers ever made despite having one of the greatest ultimates ever. Ral Zarek has one of the worst ultimates. why? you ask. Because both are based on random abilities. Tibalt discard cards at random so he can even discard the card that you just draw or worst. Ral can give you 5 extra turns, or just 1, or 4, or 0. players appreciate randomness that don't BLEEP their game like cascade (you don't know what is going to come but if you don't cast it it's not the end of the world) or "exile the top card of your library. Until end of turn, you may play that card." effects. that being said, this is the type of card that players would probably rip apart if they get on a booster.

    First ability: it's an interesting ability. unless an opponent is really behind on board, you will rarely draw a card tho. i think something involving lifegain would be better (at least for commander and multiplayer games in general).
    Second: again, that ability makes her awesome for multiplayer games. it's pretty broken 1v1 too, since the opponent will be forced to exile a creature he controls. just great.
    Ultimate: Your opponents will probably choose only one type of permanent, but that doesn't make this ability bad. wipe all creatures except yours? awesome. remove all enchantments or artifacts from the game? i take it. Armageddon? i don't know why would they do that but okie dokie. the worst thing that can happen its everyone choosing the planeswalker type while there's no PW on the battlefield. in that case you probably would want to keep +1 and -2 her.
    You should switch her cost to 1WW, since all the 3 mana planeswalker follow this pattern.
    In case you didn't get it, she is my favorite between the 3. i don't play white that much but i'll have to admit she is pretty cool and well balanced.
  • What do you guys think:
  • edited January 2017
    I'm personally pretty proud of this one, though I'm sure it could use some work. Also careful reading is reccomended. I think this could be trade secrects level of broken in commander and useless everywhere else.

    @kltmtg99 I think that is a generally balanced design, but it kind of feels a bit generic. Also maybe the mind control ability is too powerful.
  • Hello @Shagoth,

    I am sorry to say, but that card is pretty busted. Paying 1 life for any card, even the worst card in your deck, is very powerful in commander. I would add the clause of "Activate this ability only once each turn" and maybe up the mana cost to 3BB.

    Here is my final draft for my planeswalker:
  • @Shagoth there is no mind control ability. It is an threaten ability. Thanks for the feedback!
  • edited January 2017
    Nice card! I think your chances of winning the contest are high :)
    But there are a few problems, so I'm going to break the planeswalker down:

    "+1: Target permanent you control becomes a creature with base power and toughness equal to 1 until the beginning of your next turn."

    For a start, this ability is worded pretty weirdly. 'Until your next turn, target permanent you control becomes a creature with base power and toughness 1/1' and 'and loses all other types and abilities' might need to be added on. Secondly, this mechanic seems a bit of a color pie break - effects like this are usually kept in blue, with cards like Turn to Frog, which makes me think this feels really out of place in green :/ Not to mention it seems to be on the verge of being a downside ability, which players are really not fans of and seem terrible on a three mana planeswalker. ^^ I like what this ability is trying to do, but think it needs to be tweaked quite a bit.

    -1: You get an emblem with "At the beginning of combat on your turn, target 1/1 creature gets +1/+2 until end of turn."

    So now I can see the planeswalker taking shape. The flaw with this would probably be how, although green can sometimes interact with 1/1 creatures, weenies seem more in white's territory, so, again, this doesn't really seem to belong in green. Another problem with the theme of 1/1s would be how specific it is. While most planeswalkers have a cnetral kind of idea (e.g. Tezzeret with artifacts) none are as specific as this. The numbers all seem a bit weird too (see Mark Rosewater's lessons on design and see what he says about aesthetics). Having it work with 1/1 creatures and give them +1/+2 seems like something you should avoid doing. Perhaps it should give each creature you control with 1/1 a boost? But, as I said, I think you need a less-specific theme.

    -X: Create X 1/1 green Guardian creature tokens with "As long as a creature is attacking Eldre, Minimage, this creature gets +1/+1."

    It seems odd for the last ability to function with planeswalker itself. I get how you're meant to put it down onto 1 loyalty and then defend her with the tokens, but usually with ultimates and X abilities I just want to suicide the walker. This is also arguably overpowered (you can play her, boost up her loyalty once or twice and then suicide her, getting a ton of 1/1s). Perhaps this would work better if she was 4-5 mana, and if it said "...with "As long as a creature is attacking you or a planeswalker you control, this creature gets +1/+1""?

    I like the "interacts with small creatures" theme, but don't think completely working with 1/1s is the way to go, as well as keeping the walker green. I would probs bump up the cost, perhaps deal with creatures with lower P/T than others, and make it G/W. I would give you what I'd change the abilities too, but it's your walker not mine :)


    Flavor: 9/10
    Balance: 7/10
    Formatting/Wording: 4/10
    Art: 8/10
    Originality: 8/10

  • Oh and @Gelectrode and @Shagoth:
    I don't think it's *that* broken - they can just load you up with lands (if you don't need them) or give you too expensive/cheap creatures. It should be bumped up by about {1} or {2} tho.
  • @Gelectrode and @KJMartin
    Thanks for the feedback. KJ, though I agree that's how it would work in a dual match, in commander, or god forbid Two-Headed Giant, this card is actually far more powerful than necropotence because in addition to the larger life total, when you and someone else team up, they can give you all the cards you could want. I'll probably bump it up in cost though, I can't really fix this in accordance to Commander, though. It will probably be Trade Secrepotence forever.
  • @KJMartin, thanks for your advice. Here is another go at the planeswalker:
  • @Gelectrode
    That link is broken for me :(
  • edited January 2017
    Trying to come up with some flavor text in the short amount of space I have. Thinking about something like "He works for those who offer the most bodies"

    But how can I make the card itself better?
  • Another planeswalker for your consideration:
  • @kltmtg29 I think the card is a bit underwhelming Tried to make cool flavor text
  • What do you think?
  • @Gelectode. I feel like he deserves dash. You could save some room by rewording it to "Hadmaz must attack a player that controls the creature with the greatest power or tied for the greatest power each combat if able."

    Although that's slightly different.

    Other than that it's a pretty neat card.
  • A very strange card (please read my comment before judging the stupidity of the card, afterwords, feel free to judge alllllll you like)
This discussion has been closed.