First of all, the card looks pretty well-balanced and thoughtfully created. The basic land ability to add {c} is pretty standard, but the added ability to sacrifice a Desert for a more powerful effect adds a strategic twist to the card. The mana cost of {3}{b}{r} also seems reasonable for the effect of making your opponent sacrifice an artifact or creature, which can be a game-changer.
The flavor text is also cool and adds to the overall theme of the card as a Desert land with a darker power lurking beneath. The use of the character Samut in the text gives the card more of a backstory and context.
One thing to keep in mind is how well this card works with other Desert cards in the game. Since this card specifically mentions sacrificing a Desert, it could potentially be even more useful if there are other powerful Desert cards in the same set or block.
Overall, I think this custom card is well-made and has a good balance of power and cost for its effect.
I like where Mark of Retribution is going, but I'm concerned it's undercosted. I could easily see either of its abilities being worth WRB; having both may be too much for 3 CMC. I would personally weight this as a 5CMC card as is, or make it a non-curse that affects all players and leave it at 3. My second criticism is that I'm not getting much of a red feeling from the card; the balance effect is absolutely white and the life loss is definitely black. I think the simplest change to make it feel it has more of a red splash would be to change life loss on the second ability to damage.
Overall though, I think this is great. I've always wanted to see more curses utilized, as most existing ones are fairly weak, and this is a strong one.
@TheGamingBolasChannel I'll take a stab at these. If I understand correctly, the double-sided card features a unique mechanic where one side is a Siege that must be defeated in order to transform into the other side, a powerful artifact.
Invasion of Cosmosa has a reasonable mana cost of 3 generic mana and as the Siege subtype, it's a difficult obstacle for opponents to overcome. When it enters the battlefield, its fetch ability can provide valuable card advantage.
Blade of Cosmosa grants a bonus of +1/+1 for each counter on the equipped creature and the ability to block creatures with spaceflight. It also grants the equipped permanent the creature type in addition to its other types, which is a unique and interesting effect.
The flavor text on the card ties in well with the card's mechanics, adding to the overall thematic cohesion of the card.
Overall, the card seems balanced, and its unique mechanics make it an interesting addition to any deck that can utilize it effectively.
@jpastor to be fair, the back side is effectively Luxior with the addition of the spaceflight blocking. Also the planeswalker who uses the blade of Cosmosa uses it to destroy the flagship of the phyrexian fleet while sacrificing his own life.
@jpastor since similar existing effects are all red, with the ramp tacked on Serpentine Surge should definitely be red-green (in particular, this is like a reverse Road // Ruin). Also, note that the ramp effect won't work as written since Serpentine Surge isn't a destroy effect. Instead, you'd need something along the lines of "When that permanent is put into a graveyard this turn, ...". (reference)
I'd appreciate feedback on these cards: (4/7 Edit: Reduced the cost of Seek Revenge by {1} and added the ability to use it in the graveyard.)
For context, Ars Insidious is intended to support Ars Opalescent (they're two aspects of the same character), and generally encourage playing lots of very colorful spells (as opposed to how Niv-Mizzet Reborn is 2-color tribal for example).
@cadstar369 Seek Revenge is obviously a retake on Tetzimoc, Primal Death, and I kind of like the idea of it being a sorcery. I do think it's a bit overcosted; you could have this easily be 1BB instead of 2BB. This is because of the damage requirement; 2BB would be appropriate if you were handing out the counters without any condition on them. One flavor based modification I might consider: you could add "or from the graveyard" to the reveal, so that it's either hand or GY. This wouldn't do much on its own, but if you were playing a U/B spell recursion deck, it'd increase its functionality.
Ars Insidious - Something about the way this is written is throwing me off; I get what you're going for but it seems difficult to parse. At the same time, I'm not sure I can find a better way to write it that doesn't end up significantly longer. Also, color identity is a Commander-format only rule (well, Brawl and Oathbreaker too, but I digress). For this you'd just want to reference the color of the spells itself or if you really want color identity then "different colored mana symbols on the card". Also, if you're looking to incentivize multicolor play, you'd want to change the condition of the lifegain/lifeloss bet so that you lose life only if it's less than, not less than or equal.
I wasn't sure if Seek Revenge would be undercosted at 3 mana, since it's more one-sided than the usual 4-mana board wipe; I'll probably end up dropping it to 1BB anyway though to help compensate for the resources spent in advance. Having the activated ability work in the graveyard sounds like an interesting touch (I mainly play Commander, so I don't tend to think about those sorts of abilities).
Ars Insidious is meant to be a commander card, so using color identity won't cause any problems. Also, if I let the life loss be on only less than and not equal, it would work for even a monocolored deck, whereas I want to push the player into playing a variety of cards with at least two or three colors in their identity (I'm especially curious about what the average manabase for such a deck might look like). (Unfortunately, this also puts me in a bind with the wording for the triggered ability, since I can't figure out how to make it easier to parse. I considered a version where the life gain/loss was fixed at 2 or 3 rather than varying with the spell you cast, but then it'd probably favor 2-color or 3-color decks more than I'd like.)
~~~
Regarding your cards:
Iesthia, Life's Warden
This looks like a watered-down Yasharn with wings. While the body is fine, I'm not sure she's generally worth playing over similar hate pieces outside of Angel decks (though redundancy never hurts).
Predatory Tactics
Aside from the current version avoiding inspired triggers and such, perhaps consider simplifying this to "Creatures you control have provoke."
Paying two Treasures for an unrestricted reanimation seems way too cheap, especially since we have cards like Revel in Riches, Life Insurance, and Pitiless Plunderer. Consider these similar cards, all of which cost more, are harder to activate, and/or come with a downside for the resurrected creature. Since Treasures aren't exactly hard to come by, perhaps consider adding a mana cost to the ability and/or increasing the number of Treasures sacrificed.
I'd appreciate feedback on these cards:
(See my previous post for additional context regarding Ars Insidious.)
@cadstar369 Thanks for the feedback! As a follow-up regarding the CMC of Seek Revenge, some comparative help: Blood Money, Kindred Dominance, and Necromantic Selection are all asyemtric beneficial black board wipes for 7CMC. Destroy everything your opponents control is 9 CMC with In Garruk's Wake and Plague Wind, although both of those are considered underwhelming. So currently at 4CMC, it's currently 7 mana (albeit not at once) to kill 3 creatures, which is kinda meh. This is why I thought it might be safe to go to 1BB.
Regarding Predatory Tactics: my initial text for the card was "You may declare attacks against tapped creatures." - but this leads to too many rules questions on how to resolve it. (Do the attacked creatures hit back? What happens to trample damage? etc.) The biggest reason I didn't just go with Provoke here is that many times, the creatures you want to target have activated abilities that let them tap, such as mana dorks. So as soon as you Provoke them, they tap in response and can no longer block. I suppose I could change it to "Creatures you control have Provoke. Creatures opponents control that are provoked may not activate abilities until the end of turn."
Harmonious Antagonism - I can see the issue with Authority and Blind Obedience. How does Ghostly Prison or Hushbringer interact with this? It doesn't do anything to untapped creatures. I'll need to debate toning it down; perhaps have it check for if the creature used an activated ability that required them to tap.
Deathbound Ferryman - The number choices on this one were mostly a flavor decision; the myth of putting two coins under the tongue or over the eyes to pay Charon's fee. I think requiring an opponent's creature to die is probably sufficient instead of mana cost, but I definitely forgot to add that it should be a "Tap, Sacrifice two treasures:" so it's only one a turn at best.
@Creid233 for Predatory Tactics, perhaps you could use “Your opponents can’t activate abilities during combat. Creatures you control have provoke.” (Feels like it’s dipping into white though.) Having Deathbound Ferryman tap like you mentioned would definitely make it more reasonable.
For Harmonious Antagonism + Authority of the Consuls, adding Hushbringer turns off ETB effects like Reclamation Sage, as well as LTB effects with Hushbringer in particular (this way your opponent can’t play their creatures into the lock like pseudo-sorceries). Ghostly Prison is mainly to help prevent your opponent from killing you with whatever creatures they have before you secure the lock, and is easily substituted for other things. Overall, I don’t think Harmonious Antagonism actually needs toning down, since it’s like a meaner Verity Circle; just wanted to discuss the strategy it probably works best in.
@cadstar369 It was a noble intention to try to differentiate Seek Revenge from Tetzimoc, Primal Death. However, I'm afraid that some of the modifications that were made don't do any favours for its playability (except the ability to give out grudge counters on your opponent's turn, but that was a necessity). Firstly, requiring the targets of the grudge counters to have dealt damage to you or a permanent you control makes Seek Revenge feel like a more expensive, albeit more flexible, Retaliate. I agree with Creid233 that the spell itself could be taken down to 1BB given the upfront investment of having to put a counter on each of the creatures to be destroyed, which is itself contingent on your opponent meeting the condition for you to do that at a time when you have the necessary mana. I'm intrigued with the idea of allowing the grudge counter effect to be activated from the graveyard, which can let you setup/bluff future copies of Seek Revenge.
If you're required to reveal Seek Revenge from your hand in order to give out grudge counters (and this under a condition that your opponent has full control over), the obvious downside is that you're giving away information about having the card that your opponent can now use to play around it. Board sweepers are good primarily because you know they're coming and your opponent doesn't, so you can try to make your own playing around them look like a bad draw and bait your opponent into overcommitting resources before you wipe the board. The way one beats a sweeper is to commit just enough resources to the board to apply moderate pressure to your opponent without allowing yourself to be blown out when they eventually pull the trigger. From this position, you can essentially play chicken with your opponent, constantly chipping away at their life total until they're forced to wipe the board. Once they do, you'll still have enough resources reserved to rebuild a reasonable offense and continue the pressure.
The issue with Seek Revenge is that once you reveal it the first time (and in future games now that your opponent knows you're running it), your opponent can just take this tactic to not overextend into the next copy. It's even worse with Seek Revenge than with Tetzimoc or traditional symmetrical sweepers because of the condition for giving out the grudge counters. With a Tetzimoc or a Wrath, your opponent can't even play out their creatures because just being on the board makes them vulnerable to these cards. With Seek Revenge, your opponent can proceed to play out their hand and efficiently use their mana every turn and only commit to attacking or blocking with the creatures they're OK with exposing to grudge counters. They're not held back in any other way.
The other downside of Seek Revenge compared to Tetzimoc is that, although it does have the nice touch of gaining you a few points of life, you're not likely to sweep your opponent's entire board with it unless they walk into an alpha strike while you're fully untapped. This means there will likely still be creatures on your opponent's side of the board that you'll have to deal with once Seek Revenge resolves. Yes, you should have your own creatures and/or other removal to deal with them, but just compare this with a Tetzimoc that can unconditionally target any creature with its prey counters and, after completely wiping your opponent's board, leaves a 6/6 deathtouch creature to commence the beatdown or defend against any other creatures your opponent plays. That flexibility for removal and the residual fatty are an absolute steal for an extra 2 mana on the back end.
As for Ars Insidious, I know it's supposed to be a non-commander assist to Ars Opalescent, but I find it funny how weak it is as a standalone commander being a monoblack legendary that rewards playing maximum colour identity cards. As a side note, Ars Insidious does work in monocoloured decks even if flipping an equal colour identity card won't trigger the life loss because there are always colourless lands and artifacts. Overall, I can see this effect being abusable with cards such as Mirri's Guile, Sylvan Library, and especially Sensei's Divining Top and Scroll Rack to put colourless cards on top of your library repeatedly. It's a cool effect, and you're capped at draining 5 life once per player's turn, so it's probably not obscene.
As for the wording of the card, here's my shot at it. It's slightly longer that the existing wording, but it breaks up all the different clauses in a way that I think is easier to understand: Whenever you cast your first spell each turn, reveal the top card of your library. Each opponent loses life equal to the number of colors in that spell's color identity if it's greater than the number of colors in the revealed card's color identity and you gain that much life. Otherwise, you lose that much life. Then put the revealed card into your hand. This makes sense because the order of operations has you reveal the card, then do the comparison between the spell and the revealed card, then resolve the effect either way, and then the card gets put into your hand after no one needs to look at it anymore.
Wouldn't it be useful for control decks to scare their opponent into holding back via a card like Seek Revenge? If they see you holding it over their head and decide to hold back, it would give you more breathing room to use your other cards. (This might just be how I play control though, as I don't tend to play decks that can bait opponents into overcommitting like you mentioned, and Tetzimoc's ability being usable only on your turn is the main reason I've never considered playing it.)
On the other hand, is Seek Revenge perhaps better in the opposite position? Since you can place grudge counters when your creatures or planeswalkers are damaged, you can poke your opponent to toss out grudge counters when they block, or use a planeswalker to bait attacks. Then Seek Revenge can be used to clear the way for an alpha strike if your opponent doesn't take action for you.
For Ars Insidious, I've changed the wording to your suggestion, though the images above don't seem to want to update at the moment (it should show the new text when clicked though). The interaction with Sensei's Diving Top and such is annoying, but I do like how colorless cards give Ars Insidious moderate value in decks with fewer colors (I just want to make sure it strongly encourages playing more colors). Now that I think about it though, Ars Insidious would be hilarious with Gonti and friends.
@cadstar369 I suppose Seek Revenge can be used in a control deck to cause your opponent to slow down their assault on you once you start putting grudge counters on their creatures. This is definitely preferable to nothing, but a symmetrical board wipe should be at least equally devastating and one-sided in such a situation and is more likely to be cast onto your opponent's overextended board. It doesn't take any special kind of deck to cause your opponent to overextend, you just need to put up some defenses of your own or blunt their offense to the degree that they don't want to hold back and give you more time to develop your board or play your game since they're clearly in the aggro position and have the board advantage. If you've got a lot of high toughness creatures that can survive your opponent's attackers but not kill them, Seek Revenge could be useful, since your opponent will either need to attack with more creatures than you have blockers or start using evasive creatures to get around them. In this case, you have your choice of what gets grudge counters.
It's a thing that grudge counters can go on creatures that have dealt damage to permanents you control, not just you, which is an improvement over cards like Retaliate and Reciprocate. I would imagine that if you're playing a deck that wants to be attacking from the beginning, you'd want more proactive sources of removal and not want to waste a turn getting a creature blocked (which might result in you losing the blocked creature) in order to remove a blocker for future turns instead of getting a creature through to actually hit your opponent.
I just saw that I made a typo in my suggested wording, I forgot to include an apostrophe in "spell's". Ars Insidious definitely would be funny with Gonti, too bad the effect isn't worded as "for each color in the color identity of that spell that isn't in the color identity of the revealed card, each opponent loses 1 life and you gain 1 life."
I think it works. Suspend is a bit hard to price, but the best read I have on it is that Suspend 3 is worth about a 4CMC equivalent effect. The Vanishing, including just being in theme, also helps with the color pie cost increase for a mono-white reanimation. Nicely done.
The only criticism I have is a rules wording nitpick: creatures don't exist in graveyards. In every zone other than in play, things are referred to as cards. (So in this case it'd be "Choose a creature card in your graveyard and exile it.") Speaking of which, flavor win for you here too: Ground Seal, the rock that barred the tomb, cannot stop this card because you're not targeting.
@Creid233 A couple aesthetic notes first: Azusa doesn't have a legendary frame nor a creature type. As for the abilities, I've never seen an Eminence activated ability before. I'm not sure it works flavorfully. The idea of Eminence is that the commander is so amazing that they don't even need to be on the battlefield to have an effect. I suppose you could argue that this would be your commander working diligently from behind the scenes, but then I think it might warrant a different name for the ability, as well as specific rules that allow you to activate the ability from the command zone.
Mechanically speaking, it's not bad, but it could be better. Unlike with the Suspend ability you seem to be mimicking, you've tied the removal of the counters to Azusa's presence in the command zone or on the battlefield. If she ends up anywhere else and you decide to leave her there, then the counters won't be removed and the land just sits in exile until she returns.
The idea is solid, though, I'd just recommend getting rid of/tweaking the Eminence part of the ability, and tying the counter removal ability to the exiled land and not to Azusa.
Altar of Ascension is good as is, I think. I might've made it rare instead of mythic rare. The only note I can think to say is that I'm not sure how the rules would interpret it if you duplicated the artifact to give your commander Offering twice. Would that allow you to sacrifice two creatures to pay for its cost? If so, making the artifact Legendary could mitigate that, and it fits flavor-wise regardless.
If you want my initial thoughts: this cycle of cards is like a group of forgetful gods who keep demanding sacrifices and getting confused about which sacrifice goes with which card - but at least they're consistent! ... but let me give you actual feedback!
Overall, this cycle seems to be well-designed and balanced in terms of cost, rarity, and abilities. Each card has a unique effect that requires sacrificing specific types of permanents, which adds an interesting strategic element to gameplay.
The flavor of the cards is also consistent and cohesive, with each card being a different type of "of Forgotten Gods" with its own set of abilities. The synergy between the abilities and the types of permanents required for sacrifice adds to the flavor and enhances the overall theme of the cycle.
One minor suggestion for improvement would be to make the abilities of each card more distinct from each other. For example, the abilities of Augur and Guru of Forgotten Gods both involve discarding or sacrificing noncreature cards, which could lead to some confusion or redundancy in gameplay.
Overall, this is a well-designed cycle of magic cards with a consistent theme and interesting gameplay mechanics.
I made a haiku and would love someone's thoughts on the design or just a favorite if I left you speechless (in a good way).
@Korora12 Oh these are pretty cool, red and green are pretty on point but white... very underwhelming. Nothing can be done about sac'ing enchantments to keep to the theme but sac'ing enchantments is a hefty price, enchantments are never expendable since there is almost never a pay off when enchantments die and enchantment tokens are not a thing. So the white one should do something powerful. I think exiling 2 cards is kinda meh and having an opponent sac'ing an enchantment will be rare and it's at the cost of 2 of yours. Maybe put 2 stun counters on 2 permanents, or defender counters, how many time are you ever gonna have 2 enchantments you are willing to sac? And the last ability can be a revive a creature with power 2?
The blue one powerful since it's a mana free counter spell that can also counter copies, but it is telegraphed so I don't know. Maybe exile 2 noncreature spells since there are so many pay offs for discard and graveyard strats on top of the counter spell. Why not mill 2 to keep to the 2 theme?
@jpastor I do like the haiku, but the design feels a bit lackluster imo. It’s not bad, but it just doesn’t feel “chaotic” enough to me to justify red. It feels more mono-black. It needs a bit more spice.
a few ideas:
instead of randomly discarding two cards, the opponent draws a card, then randomly discards three cards.
Opponent randomly discards three cards, then returns a card at random from their graveyard to their hand
Here’s mine. It’s a bit odd, and I’d like some input on balancing.
@LvB I don't see why this card is white, when black tends to be the one that gets symmetric creature sacrifice (also, cards with the 'sacrifice when there's no creatures' clause tend to be in black and red). Aside from that, nothing seems particularly notable about it (though it feels more like an uncommon than a mythic).
I'd appreciate feedback on this card:
I honestly have no idea if this is balanced or playable. For context, here's the prompt that generated it:
Using a time-traveling ability or mechanic, create a card that represents discovery of something forgotten and potential consequences.
"Discovery of Something forgotten": sounds for me like a card that gets another card out of the graveyard or out of exile.
Since the name is "Recover Lore" maybe make it target only spells and artifacts.
Time-Travelling usually has something to do with extra turns, losing turns or suspending cards so they resolve later. Or something where the effect comes first, but in the next turn you have to pay for it or something bad happens.
About Witchfire Season, its not about symmetrical sacrifice. Imagine playing this in a tribal white deck with lets say Knigts against a Deck with multiple creature types. Your creatures are only Knights, so you name them. The enemy has an orc, a goblin and a dragon. Enemy names "dragon". Then all players have to sacrifice a creature that is not a knight or a dragon. Since you have only knights, you dont have to sacrifice anything, while the enemy must sacrifice the goblin or the orc. The idea behind it was whites fanatic idea of "we are the good guys, so we are save. Now lets kill everyone thats not the good guy."
@LvB I understand what you're going for; my point is that your execution does not fit well in mono-white (even in the situation you described, it doesn't sound like a white effect because it doesn't align with white's major themes). The majority of sacrifice effects in white are either combat tricks or symmetric board wipes. The only similar effects to your card I can find in white are World Queller (one of the only recurring sacrifice effects in white) and Harsh Mercy (a very old board wipe). On the other hand, black has plenty of recurring sacrifice effects, particularly for creatures, so it would make more sense for the card to be white-black or mono-black.
Regarding your comments on Recover Lore:
While a number of "Time" cards are extra turn spells, it wouldn't make sense in context of the prompt. Similarly, I find suspend to be a boring answer to the prompt, so I looked at other cards that imply time travel. Cast Through Time implies that rebound can be interpreted as time travel. Similarly, a number of "Time" cards involve library manipulation, so I opted to play with that. (I should also note that "Lore" cards tend to involve card advantage, which was convenient in the broader context of the card.)
The hand and library are often considered analogous to the player's mind. In this sense, if tutor effects represent bringing knowledge to the front of the mind, then cards on the bottom of the library could represent things forgotten. Thus Recover Lore represents rediscovering forgotten knowledge, particularly in the scenario where one or more of the cards you get from it were put on the bottom of your library earlier in the game.
MTG Cardsmith Community Forums
Comments
First of all, the card looks pretty well-balanced and thoughtfully created. The basic land ability to add {c} is pretty standard, but the added ability to sacrifice a Desert for a more powerful effect adds a strategic twist to the card. The mana cost of {3}{b}{r} also seems reasonable for the effect of making your opponent sacrifice an artifact or creature, which can be a game-changer.
The flavor text is also cool and adds to the overall theme of the card as a Desert land with a darker power lurking beneath. The use of the character Samut in the text gives the card more of a backstory and context.
One thing to keep in mind is how well this card works with other Desert cards in the game. Since this card specifically mentions sacrificing a Desert, it could potentially be even more useful if there are other powerful Desert cards in the same set or block.
Overall, I think this custom card is well-made and has a good balance of power and cost for its effect.
https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/mark-of-retribution
My first attempt at a tricolored card in a long time.
I like where Mark of Retribution is going, but I'm concerned it's undercosted. I could easily see either of its abilities being worth WRB; having both may be too much for 3 CMC. I would personally weight this as a 5CMC card as is, or make it a non-curse that affects all players and leave it at 3. My second criticism is that I'm not getting much of a red feeling from the card; the balance effect is absolutely white and the life loss is definitely black. I think the simplest change to make it feel it has more of a red splash would be to change life loss on the second ability to damage.
Overall though, I think this is great. I've always wanted to see more curses utilized, as most existing ones are fairly weak, and this is a strong one.
For consideration:
https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/invasion-of-cosmosa?list=set&set=68199
and back side
https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/blade-of-cosmosa?list=set&set=68199
I'll take a stab at these. If I understand correctly, the double-sided card features a unique mechanic where one side is a Siege that must be defeated in order to transform into the other side, a powerful artifact.
Invasion of Cosmosa has a reasonable mana cost of 3 generic mana and as the Siege subtype, it's a difficult obstacle for opponents to overcome. When it enters the battlefield, its fetch ability can provide valuable card advantage.
Blade of Cosmosa grants a bonus of +1/+1 for each counter on the equipped creature and the ability to block creatures with spaceflight. It also grants the equipped permanent the creature type in addition to its other types, which is a unique and interesting effect.
The flavor text on the card ties in well with the card's mechanics, adding to the overall thematic cohesion of the card.
Overall, the card seems balanced, and its unique mechanics make it an interesting addition to any deck that can utilize it effectively.
I'll give this ⚡⚡⚡ out of 5.
Serpentine Surge by jpastor | MTG Cardsmith
Finally - I've created a monogreen kill spell that I'd love to play.
I'd appreciate feedback on these cards:
(4/7 Edit: Reduced the cost of Seek Revenge by {1} and added the ability to use it in the graveyard.)
For context, Ars Insidious is intended to support Ars Opalescent (they're two aspects of the same character), and generally encourage playing lots of very colorful spells (as opposed to how Niv-Mizzet Reborn is 2-color tribal for example).
Seek Revenge is obviously a retake on Tetzimoc, Primal Death, and I kind of like the idea of it being a sorcery. I do think it's a bit overcosted; you could have this easily be 1BB instead of 2BB. This is because of the damage requirement; 2BB would be appropriate if you were handing out the counters without any condition on them. One flavor based modification I might consider: you could add "or from the graveyard" to the reveal, so that it's either hand or GY. This wouldn't do much on its own, but if you were playing a U/B spell recursion deck, it'd increase its functionality.
Also, Horobi, Death's Wail loves this as much as it does Tetzimoc.
Ars Insidious - Something about the way this is written is throwing me off; I get what you're going for but it seems difficult to parse. At the same time, I'm not sure I can find a better way to write it that doesn't end up significantly longer. Also, color identity is a Commander-format only rule (well, Brawl and Oathbreaker too, but I digress). For this you'd just want to reference the color of the spells itself or if you really want color identity then "different colored mana symbols on the card". Also, if you're looking to incentivize multicolor play, you'd want to change the condition of the lifegain/lifeloss bet so that you lose life only if it's less than, not less than or equal.
Regarding my cards:
I wasn't sure if Seek Revenge would be undercosted at 3 mana, since it's more one-sided than the usual 4-mana board wipe; I'll probably end up dropping it to 1BB anyway though to help compensate for the resources spent in advance. Having the activated ability work in the graveyard sounds like an interesting touch (I mainly play Commander, so I don't tend to think about those sorts of abilities).
Ars Insidious is meant to be a commander card, so using color identity won't cause any problems. Also, if I let the life loss be on only less than and not equal, it would work for even a monocolored deck, whereas I want to push the player into playing a variety of cards with at least two or three colors in their identity (I'm especially curious about what the average manabase for such a deck might look like). (Unfortunately, this also puts me in a bind with the wording for the triggered ability, since I can't figure out how to make it easier to parse. I considered a version where the life gain/loss was fixed at 2 or 3 rather than varying with the spell you cast, but then it'd probably favor 2-color or 3-color decks more than I'd like.)
~~~
Regarding your cards:
Iesthia, Life's Warden
- This looks like a watered-down Yasharn with wings. While the body is fine, I'm not sure she's generally worth playing over similar hate pieces outside of Angel decks (though redundancy never hurts).
Predatory Tactics- Aside from the current version avoiding inspired triggers and such, perhaps consider simplifying this to "Creatures you control have provoke."
Harmonious Antagonism- This is nuts when combined with cards like Authority of the Consuls and Blind Obedience. Considering white also has plenty of cards like Ghostly Prison and Hushbringer, it's fairly easy to lock most decks out of the game by turn 3~4.
Deathbound FerrymanI'd appreciate feedback on these cards:
(See my previous post for additional context regarding Ars Insidious.)
Thanks for the feedback! As a follow-up regarding the CMC of Seek Revenge, some comparative help: Blood Money, Kindred Dominance, and Necromantic Selection are all asyemtric beneficial black board wipes for 7CMC. Destroy everything your opponents control is 9 CMC with In Garruk's Wake and Plague Wind, although both of those are considered underwhelming. So currently at 4CMC, it's currently 7 mana (albeit not at once) to kill 3 creatures, which is kinda meh. This is why I thought it might be safe to go to 1BB.
Regarding Predatory Tactics: my initial text for the card was "You may declare attacks against tapped creatures." - but this leads to too many rules questions on how to resolve it. (Do the attacked creatures hit back? What happens to trample damage? etc.) The biggest reason I didn't just go with Provoke here is that many times, the creatures you want to target have activated abilities that let them tap, such as mana dorks. So as soon as you Provoke them, they tap in response and can no longer block. I suppose I could change it to "Creatures you control have Provoke. Creatures opponents control that are provoked may not activate abilities until the end of turn."
Harmonious Antagonism - I can see the issue with Authority and Blind Obedience. How does Ghostly Prison or Hushbringer interact with this? It doesn't do anything to untapped creatures. I'll need to debate toning it down; perhaps have it check for if the creature used an activated ability that required them to tap.
Deathbound Ferryman - The number choices on this one were mostly a flavor decision; the myth of putting two coins under the tongue or over the eyes to pay Charon's fee. I think requiring an opponent's creature to die is probably sufficient instead of mana cost, but I definitely forgot to add that it should be a "Tap, Sacrifice two treasures:" so it's only one a turn at best.
For Harmonious Antagonism + Authority of the Consuls, adding Hushbringer turns off ETB effects like Reclamation Sage, as well as LTB effects with Hushbringer in particular (this way your opponent can’t play their creatures into the lock like pseudo-sorceries). Ghostly Prison is mainly to help prevent your opponent from killing you with whatever creatures they have before you secure the lock, and is easily substituted for other things. Overall, I don’t think Harmonious Antagonism actually needs toning down, since it’s like a meaner Verity Circle; just wanted to discuss the strategy it probably works best in.
If you're required to reveal Seek Revenge from your hand in order to give out grudge counters (and this under a condition that your opponent has full control over), the obvious downside is that you're giving away information about having the card that your opponent can now use to play around it. Board sweepers are good primarily because you know they're coming and your opponent doesn't, so you can try to make your own playing around them look like a bad draw and bait your opponent into overcommitting resources before you wipe the board. The way one beats a sweeper is to commit just enough resources to the board to apply moderate pressure to your opponent without allowing yourself to be blown out when they eventually pull the trigger. From this position, you can essentially play chicken with your opponent, constantly chipping away at their life total until they're forced to wipe the board. Once they do, you'll still have enough resources reserved to rebuild a reasonable offense and continue the pressure.
The issue with Seek Revenge is that once you reveal it the first time (and in future games now that your opponent knows you're running it), your opponent can just take this tactic to not overextend into the next copy. It's even worse with Seek Revenge than with Tetzimoc or traditional symmetrical sweepers because of the condition for giving out the grudge counters. With a Tetzimoc or a Wrath, your opponent can't even play out their creatures because just being on the board makes them vulnerable to these cards. With Seek Revenge, your opponent can proceed to play out their hand and efficiently use their mana every turn and only commit to attacking or blocking with the creatures they're OK with exposing to grudge counters. They're not held back in any other way.
The other downside of Seek Revenge compared to Tetzimoc is that, although it does have the nice touch of gaining you a few points of life, you're not likely to sweep your opponent's entire board with it unless they walk into an alpha strike while you're fully untapped. This means there will likely still be creatures on your opponent's side of the board that you'll have to deal with once Seek Revenge resolves. Yes, you should have your own creatures and/or other removal to deal with them, but just compare this with a Tetzimoc that can unconditionally target any creature with its prey counters and, after completely wiping your opponent's board, leaves a 6/6 deathtouch creature to commence the beatdown or defend against any other creatures your opponent plays. That flexibility for removal and the residual fatty are an absolute steal for an extra 2 mana on the back end.
As for Ars Insidious, I know it's supposed to be a non-commander assist to Ars Opalescent, but I find it funny how weak it is as a standalone commander being a monoblack legendary that rewards playing maximum colour identity cards. As a side note, Ars Insidious does work in monocoloured decks even if flipping an equal colour identity card won't trigger the life loss because there are always colourless lands and artifacts. Overall, I can see this effect being abusable with cards such as Mirri's Guile, Sylvan Library, and especially Sensei's Divining Top and Scroll Rack to put colourless cards on top of your library repeatedly. It's a cool effect, and you're capped at draining 5 life once per player's turn, so it's probably not obscene.
As for the wording of the card, here's my shot at it. It's slightly longer that the existing wording, but it breaks up all the different clauses in a way that I think is easier to understand: Whenever you cast your first spell each turn, reveal the top card of your library. Each opponent loses life equal to the number of colors in that spell's color identity if it's greater than the number of colors in the revealed card's color identity and you gain that much life. Otherwise, you lose that much life. Then put the revealed card into your hand. This makes sense because the order of operations has you reveal the card, then do the comparison between the spell and the revealed card, then resolve the effect either way, and then the card gets put into your hand after no one needs to look at it anymore.
Wouldn't it be useful for control decks to scare their opponent into holding back via a card like Seek Revenge? If they see you holding it over their head and decide to hold back, it would give you more breathing room to use your other cards. (This might just be how I play control though, as I don't tend to play decks that can bait opponents into overcommitting like you mentioned, and Tetzimoc's ability being usable only on your turn is the main reason I've never considered playing it.)
On the other hand, is Seek Revenge perhaps better in the opposite position? Since you can place grudge counters when your creatures or planeswalkers are damaged, you can poke your opponent to toss out grudge counters when they block, or use a planeswalker to bait attacks. Then Seek Revenge can be used to clear the way for an alpha strike if your opponent doesn't take action for you.
For Ars Insidious, I've changed the wording to your suggestion, though the images above don't seem to want to update at the moment (it should show the new text when clicked though). The interaction with Sensei's Diving Top and such is annoying, but I do like how colorless cards give Ars Insidious moderate value in decks with fewer colors (I just want to make sure it strongly encourages playing more colors). Now that I think about it though, Ars Insidious would be hilarious with Gonti and friends.
It's a thing that grudge counters can go on creatures that have dealt damage to permanents you control, not just you, which is an improvement over cards like Retaliate and Reciprocate. I would imagine that if you're playing a deck that wants to be attacking from the beginning, you'd want more proactive sources of removal and not want to waste a turn getting a creature blocked (which might result in you losing the blocked creature) in order to remove a blocker for future turns instead of getting a creature through to actually hit your opponent.
I just saw that I made a typo in my suggested wording, I forgot to include an apostrophe in "spell's". Ars Insidious definitely would be funny with Gonti, too bad the effect isn't worded as "for each color in the color identity of that spell that isn't in the color identity of the revealed card, each opponent loses 1 life and you gain 1 life."
I think it works. Suspend is a bit hard to price, but the best read I have on it is that Suspend 3 is worth about a 4CMC equivalent effect. The Vanishing, including just being in theme, also helps with the color pie cost increase for a mono-white reanimation. Nicely done.
The only criticism I have is a rules wording nitpick: creatures don't exist in graveyards. In every zone other than in play, things are referred to as cards. (So in this case it'd be "Choose a creature card in your graveyard and exile it.") Speaking of which, flavor win for you here too: Ground Seal, the rock that barred the tomb, cannot stop this card because you're not targeting.
If you want my initial thoughts: this cycle of cards is like a group of forgetful gods who keep demanding sacrifices and getting confused about which sacrifice goes with which card - but at least they're consistent! ... but let me give you actual feedback!
Overall, this cycle seems to be well-designed and balanced in terms of cost, rarity, and abilities. Each card has a unique effect that requires sacrificing specific types of permanents, which adds an interesting strategic element to gameplay.
The flavor of the cards is also consistent and cohesive, with each card being a different type of "of Forgotten Gods" with its own set of abilities. The synergy between the abilities and the types of permanents required for sacrifice adds to the flavor and enhances the overall theme of the cycle.
One minor suggestion for improvement would be to make the abilities of each card more distinct from each other. For example, the abilities of Augur and Guru of Forgotten Gods both involve discarding or sacrificing noncreature cards, which could lead to some confusion or redundancy in gameplay.
Overall, this is a well-designed cycle of magic cards with a consistent theme and interesting gameplay mechanics.
I made a haiku and would love someone's thoughts on the design or just a favorite if I left you speechless (in a good way).
Chaos Elemental by jpastor | MTG Cardsmith
Great idea. I reformatted the card.
a few ideas:
I'd appreciate feedback on this card:
I honestly have no idea if this is balanced or playable. For context, here's the prompt that generated it:
Regarding your comments on Recover Lore: