@smax765 Wait you gave me an idea. Maybe I can go this way;
"When Ancient Device from Time enters the battlefield or becomes untapped, it phases out until your next turn. Skip your next turn. Permanents you don't control that untap Ancient Device from Time doesn't trigger this ability."
@smax765 your collection of lands fails to meet the definition of even a loose cycle, so I will briefly review them individually.
Abandoned Beachfront ~ Likely too inconsistent to justify use. It's difficult to use during an opponent's turn, and requiring the presence of creatures also makes it difficult to use early or while rebuilding.
River of Laments ~ This card is absurd in many of decks that use one or both of its colors, as filling the graveyard is often beneficial.
Flooded Cave ~ This likely provides too much colored mana in the early turns, particularly because it provides green mana. Regardless, it functions as a better Simic Growth Chamber in land-centric strategies, provides powerful support for ETB-centric strategies, and even grants split second level protection to any permanent you control.
Volcanic Lake ~ Very inconsistent, especially in multiples or outside the mid-game. This card only works if you know your opponent is heavy on noncreature spells or want to cast multiple every turn yourself, at which point you probably want a more consistent land than this one.
Llanowar Swamp ~ Seems unnecessary by the time it's online unless it's very early and you've already self-milled or sacrificed a creature. The wording of the ability also suggests a missing restriction.
Chaos Rift ~ Bonkers in madness/discard/reanimator; likely sees little use elsewhere.
Cave Forge ~ Not worthwhile unless it costs less than {r}{w} to re-equip, but at that point why risk exposing your creatures when you could play a regular dual land?
Abandoned Sanctum ~ The downside of exiling cards from your graveyard is probably too steep for WB unless you have little to no recursion. But if you have no recursion, why would you be filling your graveyard enough to consistently activate this?
Alpine Forest ~ Probably sees the most use in tandem with cumulative upkeep, even in decks that don't want the colors. Might also be a cute silver bullet against -1/-1 counters, but likely too inconsistent even then.
Lush Cave ~ This has issues similar to Abandoned Beachfront, but is easier to keep active.
Unexplored Lands ~ Likely not worth playing in many decks due to the relative difficulty of tutoring it out combined with it being generally dead in hand.
Amethyst Geode ~ The type-granting ability does not imply the reminder text (see Surgeon General Commander). The application of the type-granting ability as written also removes the last ability.
Well, considering the recent power creep i guess these two cards are ok.
However i would make Wu Yin at least a Rare and not an Uncommon card.
Sunfall Chasers card draw ability doesnt fit that good into white/red and to keep it balanced you should make it a legendary too. Being able to copy Sunfall Chaser can easily get out of hand.
My Personal Oppinion on Balancing cards mana cost wise is:
Add Power+Toughness, then divide by 2. If its uneven, round down.
Then, for each ability add 1. Or 2 if its a superstrong ability. Now you have the mana cost if this was a balanced common card.
If the card is rare or mythic rare or legendary you can subtract 1-2 mana from the costs to keep it in the "balanced" region.
Now here's a series of cards i made. Similar to the good old moxes, but not that powerful.
With the prismatic amulet i wasnt quite sure if it should cost 1 or 0. But since mana of any color is really good, i thought better go with 1 as casting cost.
@LvB I fail to see where you're drawing those conclusions from, especially considering neither ability is likely to trigger often, Wu Yin passes your method as is (avg P/T 3, +1 for the ability, -1~2 for being legendary gives MV 2~3), and Sunfall Chaser is close to passing as well (avg P/T 5, +3 for the abilities, -1~2 for being rare gives MV 6~7).
Regarding your "balancing method", vanilla test base and restriction to creatures aside, it fails to account for a number of factors, including (but certainly not limited to):
Number of colored mana pips (e.g. your method implies a card costing UUU should be the same strength as one that costs 1WW, 2B or 3)
Number of different colors (e.g. your method implies a card costing 1WUBRG should be the same strength as one that costs 3URW, 2BBGG or 5W)
Casting restrictions (e.g. your method implies Rakdos, Lord of Riots should cost 8~9, likely more to account for its last ability)
Drawbacks (e.g. your method implies Abyssal Persecutor should cost the same as Chandra's Incinerator)
Relative synergy of abilities (in a vacuum, within color identity, and in general)
@LvB I would say all "colored" artifacts are balanced and reasonable; however, Mana Amulet is more underbalanced while Prismatic Mana Amulet is a little overbalanced. However, they would be banned the moment they were introduced to MTG. If you put Contagion Engine and Voltaic Key with these artifacts; boom, you get unlimited mana.
And the reason why I said "colored" instead of colored. When they entered the battlefield, in game's view, they aren't color. Just like land. If you don't want that, you should go this way; "This artifact is [color]."
Now, to Mana Amulet, it's kinda weak for making a colorless mana. Yeah, it's very useful in colorless deck with full of Eldrazi, but still. I would go for "You gain {1}{c}" or "You gain {2}".
For Prismatic Mana, I would go for "Remove three mana counters from...".
Then finally, to limit the potential abusable ability, I would go for;
"On your upkeep, put a mana counter on [Card name].
Permanents and spells doesn't add or remove counters from [Card name].
Red already has some other cards that steal creatures for one turn so thats fitting. Usually those spells are instants or sorceries, so making this an enchantment is interesting.
As an enchantment you can play it only during your turn, but after that turn the creature cant attack you anymore, so enchantment makes sense.
I dont understand the devoid part, since red already is a good choice for cards about insanity and chaos and madness and so, but i guess its there for flavour to represent the Insanity.
But over all a really good card that a lot of red decks can play.
And now: Snailtime!
I think we should start a movement to convince wizards of the coast that magic needs a lot more snails
@cadstar369 There have been several recent creations from different cardsmiths that utilize the trigger of a spell or ability not resolving. Whenever I see this condition with no limit to how many times it can trigger in a turn, my thinking goes to how people used to combine Nivmagus Elemental with Ground Rift to "storm off" for big effect. I think something similar could be done with Wu Yin, Ground Rift, and a creature that can sacrifice or bounce itself. Alternatively, Grapeshot, Flusterstorm, and Reaping the Graves can all be stacked onto the same target to cause subsequent copies to fizzle. An even better combo comes from combining Wu Yin with cards that have a 0 cost targeted ability like any en-Kor creature, Mavinda, Students' Advocate, Reconnaissance, Soltari Guerrillas, or Spirit Mirror to draw all cards of their type in your library. Used in a less degenerate way, Wu Yin can give any of your permanents with a targeted ability (especially one that targets creatures) the chance to become repeatable dig for more cards of that type. When not being abused, Wu Yin at its cost, P/T, and raritiy seem fine as a fizzle mitigator for you or fizzle rewarder for your opponents, but the ceiling on that effect is quite high as it's currently worded.
Sunfall Chaser is no more powerful than Baneslayer Angel and slightly harder to cast, although it's rare instead of mythic rare and a member of arguably more useful tribes than Angels. Overkill, as I had initially created it, only applied to the creature that had that ability, so it was pretty creative to extend that to all of your creatures, although multiple copies of Sunfall Chaser (or any creature with Overkill in this form) then become pretty crippling to someone who's already in the position to have to chump block. I especially like that the reward for overkill on a Boros card is card draw, which incentivizes and rewards playing pump effects, which historically don't see a lot of play outside of decks like Bogles. As an aside, I find first strike on large creatures fascinating because I think of first strike as more of a small creature ability to mitigate their lower toughness and break combat stalemates. First strike doesn't really help large creatures to stay alive, since they can affort to take the damage in most cases anyway. I suppose causing an opponent to sacrifice an artifact before normal combat damage is deal may be consequential in some cases, so it's not like it has zero interaction with Overkill. Good job overall.
I didn't realize such a storm strategy existed. ? I totally forgot about free activated abilities since I don't tend to use those cards that way. I'll limit Wu Yin to once a turn then since it's too easy to pull off something degenerate quickly and at minimal cost.
For Sunfall Chaser, I ended up with this form of Overkill mostly to mitigate the impact of flying, since it probably won't trigger Overkill often itself. I do wonder if it'd be a little cheesy when combined with something like Chandra's Ignition though (though maybe the build-your-own Decree of Pain takes enough effort to justify that interaction). The first strike is for when the player is on the defensive, since it might slay an artifact creature, remove an equipment, or draw you a trick before the brunt of combat damage comes in.
~~~
@LvB calling The Snailor nuts would be an understatement. Beginning with the body, every existing 3/7 has mv 5+, so costing this less implies the presence of one or more drawbacks among its abilities. While it has defender, this is not a drawback given its two activated abilities have {t} in their costs. Considering neither of these abilities removes the defender restriction though, why does it have vigilance?
Additionally, why does it need a huge body when it has such powerful removal abilities? Having a Suspend effect at will lets you lock down any creature that doesn't have ETBs/haste/etc., which can be extended into perpetuity with cards like Clockspinning, but this seems like the backup to the second ability. Having Impede Momentum at will lets you lock down up to four opposing creatures even without proliferate support (which blue is strong in). Given the strength of these abilities and how undercosted they are, how on earth is this an uncommon?
Moving to the color identity, this card is not hybrid blue/black; there is nothing black about this card. Vigilance is freshly secondary in blue (whereas exactly one black card has vigilance and three others can only obtain it from dead creatures), and defender is rare in black while being primary in blue. This also extends to both activated abilities: suspend-based removal is only in blue, and stun counters are also almost exclusively blue (with Solitary Sanctuary being white). Thus it makes no sense to have this card or its abilities cost hybrid mana, as they should be mono-blue.
P. S. – The Snailor fails your method above in spectacular fashion. (Avg P/T 5 + 4 abilities + 2 for the two 'superstrong' activated abilities gives mv 11.)
@cadstar369 That makes sense that the Sunfall Chaser will connect with your opponent more often than it triggers its own Overkill, but I presume doming your opponent for 5 repeatedly is the preferable outcome rather than using the Sunfall Chaser primarily for generating card advantage. I don't think it's too cheesy to use Chandra's Ignition (or even Too Greedily, Too Deep) with this card. At least with Chandra's Ignition there's the risk of your opponent killing the Chaser in response.
@LvB Defender and vigilance..? Yes, it's defender, but what is vigilance for? It cannot attack at all because it's a defender, so is there something I missed?
Anyway, for name of Sailor, I would take "The" away from it, unless it's a legendary. ?
I am wondering why it is split between black and blue? I don't see anything black-y (Such as discarding, bringing zombie back from death for giggles, etc). There is a wording issue and balance issue, I would go for;
Imprison - {2}{u}{u}: Exile target creature under opponent control with two time counters on it and gains suspend until it leaves exile.
Enhanced Interrogation - {1}{u},{t}: Tap target creature with three Stun counters in it.
Because these abilities CAN be abused easily and Snailor can just make a giant hole for controller to keep attacking for up to three turns. Perhaps even more.
Hence, I would like to see {2}{u}{u}, not {2}{u/b}{u/b}.
I would love a feedback on the new color;
(Can be used in white and red commander deck, as long as commander contains black as well. Music symbol represents a pink mana OR a white mana and a red mana. Meaning, Devil's Twisted Melody may costs between 5 to 7 mana to cast. With pink mana, it's 5. Otherwise, it's 7.)
Hey, I'm new here, and while I'm pretty confident with most of my cards, these two in particular are ones I'm not sure about. I think they'd be fun together, but in particular I'm worried about Moon being a bit underbalanced if anything, even if you're using the Rarefraction Cell with Data Pearls and not some other stronger artifact.
@Ecramox Welcome to the community! As for Rarefraction Cell, its a good card, and I see it as a different take on Rings of Brighthearth, though the ability needs rewording. It would better read as "Whenever you activate an activated ability on an artifact you control, you may pay an additional {1}. If you do, that activated ability activates an additional time. This ability can only be used once on the same ability per turn." I beleive this card is actually overpriced, and i think it would be safe to make it around {4}, though a decent card overall. Now for Moon, Restored Strength. The first ability should read, "Creature a colorless Data Pearl artifact token with, "Sacrifice this artifact: Draw a card." Other than that its a pretty good card, and I believed it would be fine to make its cost {2}{w}{u}. Overall two great cards, keep up the great work!
@Ecramox Hello there, mate! We are glad to have ya!
The rule in first page states that every people who submit cards must give a feedback to mostly recently card submitted. I will let you slip this time, but please be sure to give a feedback before submitting a card. (Really, @TheKeefMan? You should be better than this!)
As for Rarefraction Cell, I would say for first time, it works well. However, if you word this way, both will have same results. The difference is it's more real MTG-y and easier to read.
Other artifacts you control have "{1}: Copy next this artifact's activated ability. You may pick a new target for copied ability. Can be activated only once a turn." Or See @TheKeefMan above this comment.
I would say if activating for mana will be copied then I would say it is balanced. Otherwise, I would reduce mana cost to 4 like TheKeefMan says and I would alter the ability;
Other artifacts you control have "{1}: Copy next this artifact's activated ability. You may pick a new target for copied ability. Activated ability for mana cannot be copied this way. Can be only activated once a turn.
Otherwise, neat card! I will take a look at Moon; Moon is a planewalker, hence, every planewalker must have same planewalker type as its name. In your case, it would be Moon.
There are some wording issues; +1] Create a Data Pearl Token. (It's an artifact named Dara Pearl token with "Sacifice this artifact: Draw a card.") {P.S. You don't have to listen TheKeefMan about that wording. Game will always assume creating an artifact will be colorless, even if you say it's colorless. All artifact tokens, by default, are colorless.} -1] Sacifice a Data Pearl Token. If you do, draw three cards. {The reason why I word this way is your wording currently is adusable. With it, I can just use -1 immediately without creating any token. -X] Put X top cards in your graveyard into your hand. {Probably not many people know this ancient rule, but players cannot change the order of cards in graveyard nor shuffling it. They will only draw the most recently card that entered the graveyard.} Overall, everything looks balanced, there are just some wording issues.
Now as for you, @TheKeefMan, I shall leave your card alone to teach you a lesson. ?
Kidding, Tithe Bearing made my brain twisted, now I am saying to myself; "What am I reading?"
Now, my brain is online and your card is about giving lands away to a single or more opponents then caster will put twice lands gave away from their library to their battlefield. I don't see how could I word it different - because it's too unqiue. However, I will do my best to make it less confusing;
"For each opponent, you may have an opponent gain control of any number lands you control. For each land that were put under opponent's control, search your library for two basic lands, put these onto the battlefield tapped then shuffle your library."
Otherwise, it's interesting card, but I would prefer it being white and green, because white is about sharing and green is about growing.
@FireOfGolden enough of that, onto your card. Guessing this Music(?) stuff is all custom or you're playing some goofy ass obscure formats. I know nothing of the strong suits and drawbacks of this Music mana and Music permanents so I dont know if this is overpriced or underpriced for the abilities, though i will say it is rather unique. Though if this works how I think it does, wouldn't the second ability be "On your combat step, defending opponent sacrifices a nonmusic creature. If they can't, they create a music 1/1 Spirit token instead." If not, correct me on that. Overall a good, and interesting concept, including this Music mechanic as a whole. Also good editing on those colors, almost passes as a good bad job. Only joking, love you man.
@FireOfGolden Whoops, sorry about that. I'll keep that in mind for next time!
Also, thanks for the feedback (This also goes for @TheKeefMan). I'll be going with Fire's first suggestion (Although I do think by "Copy next this artifact's activated ability" you meant "Copy this artifact's next activated ability" and will be writing accordingly on the next draft of the card).
To answer your question, yes, activating for mana is duplicated and is why it costs so much. After all, you don't want someone to be able to use it with a card like Basilica Skullbomb (,
Sacrifice Basilica Skullbomb: Target creature you control gets +2/+2
and gains flying until end of turn. Draw a card. Activate only as a
sorcery.) to get two super powered flying cards at the converted cost of only 4 mana that early into the game.
Also, to make up for my lack of originally giving feedback, here's my feedback on Tithe Bearing. As someone who's most recent deck was a land deck (Got lots of land and lots of buffs from and to land), this card looks like a godsend to me. You could have so much fun with something like this, and is basically a free ticket into the late-game, made even freer if you don't share a color with your opponent. Really, my only criticism is you have an extra 'of' ("any number of opponents of any number of lands") that really threw me off.
@Ecramox You are welcome! That's what we are here for.
@TheKeefMan I am trying to build card in most realistic possible with new colors. So, I wouldn't say it's for giggles.
We have five main colors which are red, blue, green, black, and white. If we mix red and white together, we get pink. It's called Music. The new color IS NOT ALWAYS same as its parent color. Music is focused on creatures and only is powerful as long as there are at least a creature. No creature = no power. If we introduce new colors to MTG, pink will be allowed to be in white and red commander deck because red and white can be mixed into pink for unqiue abilities. Of course, there are drawback; pink cards are expensive in white and red deck, while pink deck heavily depends on number of creatures. Pink itself can only create Spirits, but not else creature type. They may possess ability to "borrow" enemy's ability to be triggered or activated as if pink is charming a creature to do something.
Hence, pink is expensive in white and red because it can control the people like blue do so.
@FireOfGolden ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh thats cool, but like I said, this wasn't explained so I just guessed of inference.
@LvB "This card is pink. {i} represents a white mana and a red mana or a purple mana."
If I rephrase this way;
"This card is pink. {i} represents {w}{r} or a purple mana." Would that be less confusing?
Otherwise, unlike split color cards, a single purple mana in mana cost takes either one each white and red mana or just one purple mana. In this case, two each white and red must paid for two purple mana.
I will keep that in mind. I could see a music creature being immune to sound of music, yet they still cause controller to lose a life, so I would say it's fair.
As for "The End of Everything", it's not a legendary creature, so I would take "The" out of name.
There is a little problem. You cast it. You lose the game. It just no longer exist. Nothing happens afterwards. There are some wording issues. I don't see what resolving have to do with this spell after all, it just already done the job, but if it's for counter;
"Split Second
If End of Everything would be casted successfully, copy it three time.
End all effect that contains "Until end of turn.", remove all counters on each permanent, these loses all abilities. Destroy all permanents then each opponent discards all their hand.
When this spell resolves, you lose the game."
Because, when a player loses the game, ALL cards just phases out beford it could even resolves or do anything as if if doesn't exist at all. Am I wrong, @Jadefire and @cadstar369?
Now, that's done. I would love a feedback on this Star card;
@FireOfGolden essentially yes. Here's the appropriate rules references:
104.5. If a player loses the game, that player leaves the game. If the game is a draw for a player, that player leaves the game. The multiplayer rules handle what happens when a player leaves the game; see rule 800.4.
800.4a When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game and any effects which give that player control of any objects or players end. Then, if that player controlled any objects on the stack not represented by cards, those objects cease to exist. Then, if there are any objects still controlled by that player, those objects are exiled. This is not a state-based action. It happens as soon as the player leaves the game. If the player who left the game had priority at the time they left, priority passes to the next player in turn order who’s still in the game.
Why i chose this wording is a bit complicated, but ill try to explain.
"Split Second
When you cast "The End of Everything",
you lose the game.
If "The End of Everything" is successfully cast,
it resolves three times.
End all "until end of turn" effects. All
permanents lose all counters and all abilities.
Then destroy all permanents. Then all players
must discard their hand."
The "you lose the game" was put in the "when you cast this spell" part because at this time you can be immune to losing the game. Lets say you have a platinum angel and you played angels grace and then you play "The end of everything".
It's the same mechanic as with for example, Emrakul, that triggers something just by casting it and not by resolving. That way you can have an effect on a card that triggers when the card is cast, and other effects that trigger later, when the card isnt countered/exiled and resolves.
In the example with platinum angel / angels grace, while casting it, you are immune to losing, so the game keeps going on. Casting means, you pay the mana cost and say you play it. Even if it gets countered or exiled or so, its still cast and so the "you lose the game part" will trigger.
Then it resolves 3 times. The "Angels Grace" effect would be lifted, the platinum angel loses its abilities and is destroyed. If the "you lose the game" was in the spells effect, the 2nd or 3rd resolve would always cause you to lose the game, because at that time there is nothing left that could prevent losing the game.
But why make it resolve 3 times? i wanted to be really sure that the board is cleard. If it resolved only once there could be permanents that exile other permanents, but the exiled permanents can come back into play once the other permanent is destroyed. To prevent this it wipes the board then wipes it again to kill stuff that comes back if other permanents are destroyed and then it wipes everything again just to make sure there is nothing left.
This card is meant for exactly 2 situations.
1. Cast it when youre immune to losing the game to wipe the board of everything.
2. Somehow force the enemy to cast it and make him lose the game.
Usually a boardwipe in black and red who can both trigger graveyard effects with it should be more expensive or should have a really hard disadvantage for the caster. I chose the disadvantage here.
As a card costing 1YY (more likely 2YY), cheap instant speed land exile is quite strong. Caustic Rain is a 4 mana sorcery that just exiles a land, so Collapse Into New Planet should probably cost more given its flexibility and additional upside. (Btw, I would advise against using Star as both a subtype and supertype; it's needlessly confusing.)
As a card costing 1GGUU, having the land be exiled instead of destroyed matters so infrequently that the 4 colored pips will probably make Collapse Into New Planet not worth playing when green has plenty of better ways to remove lands and the potential fixing is almost certainly irrelevant. (In general, why must your alternate costs for these experimental colors consistently completely disregard the color pie when you have 10 pairs to choose from? Additionally, why is this mixture reductive when the others were additive?)
@cadstar369 Oh, whoops. So the spell still do something even if its caster lose the game? That'd be my bad.
Maybe making a new color was a mistake. I just want to experiment these new colors and see if they could be still balanced and can be used in two colors commander deck where they couldn't cover some features but only new colors can do so.
@LvB Ah, so that's what resolve's for. Since spell would still do anything even if its caster lose the game, I don't see wrong with End of Everything... However, second ability still have issue wording in my opinion. I would go for;
"End this turn. Remove all counters from each permanent, these loses all abilities. Destroy all permanents then each opponent discards all cards from their hand." Because "End this turn" would end all effects that says "Until end of turn" and the spell would be still on stack. If that doesn't work then I can go for "End all effects that contains "Until end of turn."
MTG Cardsmith Community Forums
Comments
Wait you gave me an idea. Maybe I can go this way;
"When Ancient Device from Time enters the battlefield or becomes untapped, it phases out until your next turn. Skip your next turn. Permanents you don't control that untap Ancient Device from Time doesn't trigger this ability."
Abandoned Beachfront ~ Likely too inconsistent to justify use. It's difficult to use during an opponent's turn, and requiring the presence of creatures also makes it difficult to use early or while rebuilding.
River of Laments ~ This card is absurd in many of decks that use one or both of its colors, as filling the graveyard is often beneficial.
Flooded Cave ~ This likely provides too much colored mana in the early turns, particularly because it provides green mana. Regardless, it functions as a better Simic Growth Chamber in land-centric strategies, provides powerful support for ETB-centric strategies, and even grants split second level protection to any permanent you control.
Volcanic Lake ~ Very inconsistent, especially in multiples or outside the mid-game. This card only works if you know your opponent is heavy on noncreature spells or want to cast multiple every turn yourself, at which point you probably want a more consistent land than this one.
Llanowar Swamp ~ Seems unnecessary by the time it's online unless it's very early and you've already self-milled or sacrificed a creature. The wording of the ability also suggests a missing restriction.
Chaos Rift ~ Bonkers in madness/discard/reanimator; likely sees little use elsewhere.
Cave Forge ~ Not worthwhile unless it costs less than {r}{w} to re-equip, but at that point why risk exposing your creatures when you could play a regular dual land?
Abandoned Sanctum ~ The downside of exiling cards from your graveyard is probably too steep for WB unless you have little to no recursion. But if you have no recursion, why would you be filling your graveyard enough to consistently activate this?
Alpine Forest ~ Probably sees the most use in tandem with cumulative upkeep, even in decks that don't want the colors. Might also be a cute silver bullet against -1/-1 counters, but likely too inconsistent even then.
Lush Cave ~ This has issues similar to Abandoned Beachfront, but is easier to keep active.
Unexplored Lands ~ Likely not worth playing in many decks due to the relative difficulty of tutoring it out combined with it being generally dead in hand.
Amethyst Geode ~ The type-granting ability does not imply the reminder text (see Surgeon General Commander). The application of the type-granting ability as written also removes the last ability.
~~~
I'd appreciate feedback on these cards:
(Overkill N by Jadefire)
Regarding your "balancing method", vanilla test base and restriction to creatures aside, it fails to account for a number of factors, including (but certainly not limited to):
I would say all "colored" artifacts are balanced and reasonable; however, Mana Amulet is more underbalanced while Prismatic Mana Amulet is a little overbalanced. However, they would be banned the moment they were introduced to MTG. If you put Contagion Engine and Voltaic Key with these artifacts; boom, you get unlimited mana.
And the reason why I said "colored" instead of colored. When they entered the battlefield, in game's view, they aren't color. Just like land. If you don't want that, you should go this way;
"This artifact is [color]."
Now, to Mana Amulet, it's kinda weak for making a colorless mana. Yeah, it's very useful in colorless deck with full of Eldrazi, but still. I would go for "You gain {1}{c}" or "You gain {2}".
For Prismatic Mana, I would go for "Remove three mana counters from...".
Then finally, to limit the potential abusable ability, I would go for;
"On your upkeep, put a mana counter on [Card name].
Permanents and spells doesn't add or remove counters from [Card name].
Remove X mana counters, {t}: Add [Mana]."
Now, I would like a feedback on this card;
Sunfall Chaser is no more powerful than Baneslayer Angel and slightly harder to cast, although it's rare instead of mythic rare and a member of arguably more useful tribes than Angels. Overkill, as I had initially created it, only applied to the creature that had that ability, so it was pretty creative to extend that to all of your creatures, although multiple copies of Sunfall Chaser (or any creature with Overkill in this form) then become pretty crippling to someone who's already in the position to have to chump block. I especially like that the reward for overkill on a Boros card is card draw, which incentivizes and rewards playing pump effects, which historically don't see a lot of play outside of decks like Bogles. As an aside, I find first strike on large creatures fascinating because I think of first strike as more of a small creature ability to mitigate their lower toughness and break combat stalemates. First strike doesn't really help large creatures to stay alive, since they can affort to take the damage in most cases anyway. I suppose causing an opponent to sacrifice an artifact before normal combat damage is deal may be consequential in some cases, so it's not like it has zero interaction with Overkill. Good job overall.
I didn't realize such a storm strategy existed. ? I totally forgot about free activated abilities since I don't tend to use those cards that way. I'll limit Wu Yin to once a turn then since it's too easy to pull off something degenerate quickly and at minimal cost.
For Sunfall Chaser, I ended up with this form of Overkill mostly to mitigate the impact of flying, since it probably won't trigger Overkill often itself. I do wonder if it'd be a little cheesy when combined with something like Chandra's Ignition though (though maybe the build-your-own Decree of Pain takes enough effort to justify that interaction). The first strike is for when the player is on the defensive, since it might slay an artifact creature, remove an equipment, or draw you a trick before the brunt of combat damage comes in.
~~~
@LvB calling The Snailor nuts would be an understatement. Beginning with the body, every existing 3/7 has mv 5+, so costing this less implies the presence of one or more drawbacks among its abilities. While it has defender, this is not a drawback given its two activated abilities have {t} in their costs. Considering neither of these abilities removes the defender restriction though, why does it have vigilance?
Additionally, why does it need a huge body when it has such powerful removal abilities? Having a Suspend effect at will lets you lock down any creature that doesn't have ETBs/haste/etc., which can be extended into perpetuity with cards like Clockspinning, but this seems like the backup to the second ability. Having Impede Momentum at will lets you lock down up to four opposing creatures even without proliferate support (which blue is strong in). Given the strength of these abilities and how undercosted they are, how on earth is this an uncommon?
Moving to the color identity, this card is not hybrid blue/black; there is nothing black about this card. Vigilance is freshly secondary in blue (whereas exactly one black card has vigilance and three others can only obtain it from dead creatures), and defender is rare in black while being primary in blue. This also extends to both activated abilities: suspend-based removal is only in blue, and stun counters are also almost exclusively blue (with Solitary Sanctuary being white). Thus it makes no sense to have this card or its abilities cost hybrid mana, as they should be mono-blue.
P. S. – The Snailor fails your method above in spectacular fashion. (Avg P/T 5 + 4 abilities + 2 for the two 'superstrong' activated abilities gives mv 11.)
Defender and vigilance..? Yes, it's defender, but what is vigilance for? It cannot attack at all because it's a defender, so is there something I missed?
Anyway, for name of Sailor, I would take "The" away from it, unless it's a legendary. ?
I am wondering why it is split between black and blue? I don't see anything black-y (Such as discarding, bringing zombie back from death for giggles, etc). There is a wording issue and balance issue, I would go for;
Imprison - {2}{u}{u}: Exile target creature under opponent control with two time counters on it and gains suspend until it leaves exile.
Enhanced Interrogation - {1}{u},{t}: Tap target creature with three Stun counters in it.
Because these abilities CAN be abused easily and Snailor can just make a giant hole for controller to keep attacking for up to three turns. Perhaps even more.
Hence, I would like to see {2}{u}{u}, not {2}{u/b}{u/b}.
I would love a feedback on the new color;
Custom border made by 121092
Now I'd like some feedback on this card I made.
https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/tithe-bearing
Hello there, mate! We are glad to have ya!
The rule in first page states that every people who submit cards must give a feedback to mostly recently card submitted. I will let you slip this time, but please be sure to give a feedback before submitting a card. (Really, @TheKeefMan? You should be better than this!)
As for Rarefraction Cell, I would say for first time, it works well. However, if you word this way, both will have same results. The difference is it's more real MTG-y and easier to read.
Other artifacts you control have "{1}: Copy next this artifact's activated ability. You may pick a new target for copied ability. Can be activated only once a turn."
Or
See @TheKeefMan above this comment.
I would say if activating for mana will be copied then I would say it is balanced. Otherwise, I would reduce mana cost to 4 like TheKeefMan says and I would alter the ability;
Other artifacts you control have "{1}: Copy next this artifact's activated ability. You may pick a new target for copied ability. Activated ability for mana cannot be copied this way. Can be only activated once a turn.
Otherwise, neat card! I will take a look at Moon;
Moon is a planewalker, hence, every planewalker must have same planewalker type as its name. In your case, it would be Moon.
There are some wording issues;
+1] Create a Data Pearl Token. (It's an artifact named Dara Pearl token with "Sacifice this artifact: Draw a card.") {P.S. You don't have to listen TheKeefMan about that wording. Game will always assume creating an artifact will be colorless, even if you say it's colorless. All artifact tokens, by default, are colorless.}
-1] Sacifice a Data Pearl Token. If you do, draw three cards. {The reason why I word this way is your wording currently is adusable. With it, I can just use -1 immediately without creating any token.
-X] Put X top cards in your graveyard into your hand. {Probably not many people know this ancient rule, but players cannot change the order of cards in graveyard nor shuffling it. They will only draw the most recently card that entered the graveyard.}
Overall, everything looks balanced, there are just some wording issues.
Now as for you, @TheKeefMan, I shall leave your card alone to teach you a lesson. ?
Kidding, Tithe Bearing made my brain twisted, now I am saying to myself; "What am I reading?"
Now, my brain is online and your card is about giving lands away to a single or more opponents then caster will put twice lands gave away from their library to their battlefield. I don't see how could I word it different - because it's too unqiue. However, I will do my best to make it less confusing;
"For each opponent, you may have an opponent gain control of any number lands you control. For each land that were put under opponent's control, search your library for two basic lands, put these onto the battlefield tapped then shuffle your library."
Otherwise, it's interesting card, but I would prefer it being white and green, because white is about sharing and green is about growing.
I am still waiting for a feedback on this card.
Nah, I can't take that credit, it's all thank to @121092 for creating an awesome custom borders.
You are welcome! That's what we are here for.
@TheKeefMan
I am trying to build card in most realistic possible with new colors. So, I wouldn't say it's for giggles.
We have five main colors which are red, blue, green, black, and white. If we mix red and white together, we get pink. It's called Music. The new color IS NOT ALWAYS same as its parent color. Music is focused on creatures and only is powerful as long as there are at least a creature. No creature = no power. If we introduce new colors to MTG, pink will be allowed to be in white and red commander deck because red and white can be mixed into pink for unqiue abilities. Of course, there are drawback; pink cards are expensive in white and red deck, while pink deck heavily depends on number of creatures. Pink itself can only create Spirits, but not else creature type. They may possess ability to "borrow" enemy's ability to be triggered or activated as if pink is charming a creature to do something.
Hence, pink is expensive in white and red because it can control the people like blue do so.
Thanks lol ^^
Welp, forget what I said. Sorry about that ?
"This card is pink. {i} represents a white mana and a red mana or a purple mana."
If I rephrase this way;
"This card is pink. {i} represents {w}{r} or a purple mana." Would that be less confusing?
Otherwise, unlike split color cards, a single purple mana in mana cost takes either one each white and red mana or just one purple mana. In this case, two each white and red must paid for two purple mana.
I will keep that in mind. I could see a music creature being immune to sound of music, yet they still cause controller to lose a life, so I would say it's fair.
As for "The End of Everything", it's not a legendary creature, so I would take "The" out of name.
There is a little problem. You cast it. You lose the game. It just no longer exist. Nothing happens afterwards. There are some wording issues. I don't see what resolving have to do with this spell after all, it just already done the job, but if it's for counter;
"Split Second
If End of Everything would be casted successfully, copy it three time.
End all effect that contains "Until end of turn.", remove all counters on each permanent, these loses all abilities. Destroy all permanents then each opponent discards all their hand.
When this spell resolves, you lose the game."
Because, when a player loses the game, ALL cards just phases out beford it could even resolves or do anything as if if doesn't exist at all. Am I wrong, @Jadefire and @cadstar369?
Now, that's done. I would love a feedback on this Star card;
When you cast "The End of Everything",
you lose the game.
If "The End of Everything" is successfully cast,
it resolves three times.
End all "until end of turn" effects. All
permanents lose all counters and all abilities.
Then destroy all permanents. Then all players
must discard their hand."
As a card costing 1YY (more likely 2YY), cheap instant speed land exile is quite strong. Caustic Rain is a 4 mana sorcery that just exiles a land, so Collapse Into New Planet should probably cost more given its flexibility and additional upside. (Btw, I would advise against using Star as both a subtype and supertype; it's needlessly confusing.)
As a card costing 1GGUU, having the land be exiled instead of destroyed matters so infrequently that the 4 colored pips will probably make Collapse Into New Planet not worth playing when green has plenty of better ways to remove lands and the potential fixing is almost certainly irrelevant. (In general, why must your alternate costs for these experimental colors consistently completely disregard the color pie when you have 10 pairs to choose from? Additionally, why is this mixture reductive when the others were additive?)
~~~
I'd appreciate feedback on these cards:
Oh, whoops. So the spell still do something even if its caster lose the game? That'd be my bad.
Maybe making a new color was a mistake. I just want to experiment these new colors and see if they could be still balanced and can be used in two colors commander deck where they couldn't cover some features but only new colors can do so.
@LvB
Ah, so that's what resolve's for. Since spell would still do anything even if its caster lose the game, I don't see wrong with End of Everything... However, second ability still have issue wording in my opinion. I would go for;
"End this turn. Remove all counters from each permanent, these loses all abilities. Destroy all permanents then each opponent discards all cards from their hand." Because "End this turn" would end all effects that says "Until end of turn" and the spell would be still on stack. If that doesn't work then I can go for "End all effects that contains "Until end of turn."