Post your cards here, see what others think



  • 01010011 01110100 01101111 01110000 00100000 01101001 01110100 00101110 00100000 01000111 01100101 01110100 00100000 01110011 01101111 01101101 01100101 00100000 01101000 01100101 01101100 01110000 00101110 00100000 00101000 01001001 00100000 01101000 01100001 01110110 01100101 00100000 01100010 01100101 01100101 01101110 00100000 01101111 01100010 01110011 01100101 01110011 01110011 01100101 01100100 00100000 01110111 01101001 01110100 01101000 00100000 01101101 01100101 01101101 01100101 01110011 00100000 01101100 01100001 01110100 01100101 01101100 01111001 00101001
  • Sorry for posting so many, but still another one:
  • @MrRansom, That thing is pretty OP. You get a 5 mana 5/5 with flying, scry, and draw 2 cards. Ughh... Maybe a 7 or 6 mana would be better, but the idea is nice.
  • edited August 2016
    I've got a planeswalker I kinda want some feedback on. Everyone knows planeswalkers are hard to make, and I want this guy to be good:


    Soul Fluctuation is the mechanic I've really been working on because it forces you to actively figure out what you really need. You can have high power creatures, with a price.

    Soul Fluctuation: Whenever this creature deals combat damage, you gain life equal to its toughness and lose life equal to its power.

    Though Saisi can return all of the creatures from all graveyards, he presents a problem which is, if you choose the wrong creatures at the wrong time, you could end up killing yourself with your own creatures. But if you use it just right, you can completely dominate. The -3 I thought was interesting because it gives soul fluctuation indefinitely, so your opponent really has to think about attacking you. And the +2 was just basic soul fluctuation boost.

    Also just realized Saisi is my 400th card. So yeah, I'd like him to be a very good milestone card haha
  • Is uncommon the right rarity for this design?

  • @MrRansom
    Does the changing type change the mana it produces, or is it still colorless? If it's still colorless, then definitely. If it changes mana produced, I would say no
  • edited August 2016

    Ordinarily, changing a card's subtype does not automatically change its abilities, but the basic land types are an exception. If a land gains a basic land type, it also gains the ability to tap for the appropriate color of mana (and loses all other abilities, unless the type-changing effect allows it to keep its original types.).

    Rule 305.7. If an effect sets a land’s subtype to one or more of the basic land types, the land no longer has its old land type. It loses all abilities generated from its rules text, its old land types, and any copy effects affecting that land, and it gains the appropriate mana ability for each new basic land type. Note that this doesn’t remove any abilities that were granted to the land by other effects. Setting a land’s subtype doesn’t add or remove any card types (such as creature) or supertypes (such as basic, legendary, and snow) the land may have. If a land gains one or more land types in addition to its own, it keeps its land types and rules text, and it gains the new land types and mana abilities.
  • edited August 2016
    @RohanDragoon: Whoa, I think I'm awestruck. That Planeswalker is quite well thought-out.
  • edited August 2016
    @MrRansom The card is nice, but you forgot to add the creature type, it also seems like more of a rare.
  • @Leaf_Juggernaut, thanks for pointing that out. Ahahaha! Silly mistake.
  • edited August 2016
  • @RohanDragoon That's arguably one of the most interesting and creative abilities I've ever seen, and I really like what you did with the planeswalker. I think if I had to change something, it would simply be to change his -3 to a -5 or so, because as you said, it's a powerful disincentive to attack you, and as a -3 is too easy to use.
    Just a thought!

    Here's a card that I'm pretty proud of!
  • edited August 2016
    Would anyone be up for looking at this card and giving some thoughts?
  • edited August 2016
    Kind of have a feeling I made at least one of these OP.
    EDIT: Removed some if it's better and I added some feedback in a later post.
  • @MrRansom, putting a token for each creature is already like 5 mana. Add 1 mana to give it flashback. Add 1 mana to give it a instant. Add 2 mana to give those tokens flying. Take away 2 mana because it's too expensive. Change colorless mana to white.

    The mana cost and flashback should cost {4}{w}{w}{w} or {4}{b}{b}{b}

    @Victator, I don't think you should use red. And the wording seems off.

    @RohanDragoon, your basically giving 2 free lands for 1 mana.

    @Shagoth, please don't post so many cards at a time. I can't read all of them. I'll check on em later.


    Now someone mind seeing these:
  • edited August 2016
    @TrippleBoggey3, some people leave comments on cards themselves, so you won't see them on the forums. Also, the title of the thread is "See what others think" which implies the poster is seeing what other people think rather than necessarily exchanging ideas. For example, I needn't give feedback to see what someone else thinks of my card, it would be nice to do so, but it is not a prerequisite unfortunately.

    To be clear, I agree with you. In fact, I posted on August 6th:
    "There should be some requirement that you leave a constructive comment on the most recent previous couple of designs (that weren't yours) before you post your own design.
    This would hopefully do two positive things:
    1) prevent people from spamming this with their designs without contributing feedback to others.
    2) Give people who posted cards here some guaranteed critiques of their cards.
    Just an idea..."
  • @TrippleBoggey3
    I usually leave feedback on the actual card. It's just easier and cleaner for me to leave it there instead of crowding this thread with it.

    And darn it I knew I should have made Rangers of Turrun cost {5}{w}{g} haha
  • edited August 2016
    I'm not sure if this ought to be mono-green.

  • @MrRansom I think it can get away with being mono-green, it could work better if it had black in it though from a flavor perspective but mechanically it gives green something to build around. Very well balanced card, it's like a fixed version of a lot of the creatures used in dredge.
  • edited August 2016
    Returning to my work on Spell Mastery. I think it's a fun way to combine two previous WOTC cards into one.
    Do you know what cards combine to make this?

  • edited August 2016
    Bloombark Elemental... hmmm... I think there's a keyword for its graveyard effect. It's called retrace. (However, retrace is apparently an instant/sorcery-only thing.) But I do like the concept.

    Rapid Alteration is pretty bog-standard, though the spell mastery function is a nice touch. It reminds me of how Turn to Frog works in Magic Puzzle Quest.

    Anyways, here's the latest card I've made. Warning, it's a doozy.


    The idea behind this card is that you - yes, you, the player - personally step onto the battlefield to kick some ass. This prevents you from being attacked directly by your opponent's creatures (well, it technically doesn't stop them from attacking, it just stops them from being able to hurt you because, well, you aren't there to take the hit). And since your power is equal to twice the number of lands you control, you can dish out some serious hurt. However, since you're a creature on the battlefield, you can be injured in combat just like a creature. And I threw in a "must attack if able" ability and a "must block if able" ability, as well as vigilance, because I knew that someone would inevitably try to abuse this card's characteristics to make themselves nigh-invulnerable by just refusing to put Manifested Self in combat. (Granted, you can still do that if you can manage to tap Manifested Self every turn. I'd have included something along the lines of "Manifested Self can attack and block while tapped" to stop that, but I was running out of space.) So while it's hard (but not impossible) to use this card to turtle endlessly, it does perform its design goal of completely turning combat on its head and rendering blitzkrieg attacks rather unwieldy on your opponent's part. (Okay, your opponent can just have all their creatures block Manifested Self (again, I didn't have room for an ability putting a cap on the number of blockers (a la Stalking Tiger (but not that extreme; I think I'd have capped it at three or four creatures))), but by the time this card enters the battlefield, its power will likely be incredibly high, so your opponent may lose all their creatures by doing that.)
  • edited August 2016
    I think so in the right deck. Imagine this in Golgari "self-mill" (since you don't need blue to overload), T2 you're all like "Ha! We both put the top 20 in our graves! Just wait to see what I can do with that!"

    Awesome art though!
  • @TrippleBoggey3
    He's overpowered. Unfortunately, I don't see it very balanced when his toughness is equal to the number of creatures on the field. If you're playing against a token deck, you could make this guy like a 1/20 for four mana.

    Other than that, I think he's very versatile. If you need some good toughness, you don't invoke him. If you need some good power, you sacrifice as many as you can.

    As a side note, I would not recommend specifically asking certain people to comment on your cards. I don't know if that was because you thought I just posted cards here and didn't look at anyone else's or what. If people are up for commenting, they'll do it on the own volition. I honestly think I've posted three cards on this thread, and I've commented on a few. This thread is "Post your cards here, see what others think" not "Comment on every other person's card in here if you post a card".
    I apologize sincerely if this comes off seemingly rude, however I do have a life and the time I have to devote to this site is very limited. I'm always happy to leave comments when I have an actual thought about a card, but prompting people about certain cards just, at least to me, isn't very constructive. If people have a concern, or advice, or anything, they usually will comment by themselves.
  • @RohanDragoon - That was nicely said... I think @TrippleBoggey3 just respects your opinion and he's working hard to get more people involved. Sometimes it's difficult, because we all have things to do that interfere with our cardsmithing time... like jobs and family (ugh!).
    Just kidding family... you know how important you are to me!
  • edited August 2016
    Like I said in the comment section of the card: just something little to replace Mind Stone in the hedrons-colorless-mana-sacrifice-carddraw-cycle.

This discussion has been closed.