I would like to remind you that every nonbasic land don't have a reminder text to produce mana, if they don't contain subtype: Swamp, Mountain, Island, Forest, and Plains.
So, you would have to go this; "{t}, you gain {u} or {g}"
Lands with abilities are always powerful - even more powerful, if it's passive ability. Shroud may be fair but it's still strong as long as it's a land. I believe that destory target land is much more common in red than green and black together.
Perhaps to balance it out by word this way. "{t}, Faeries you control gains shroud until end of turn."
Returning a creature from exile to hand? That will means more costy.
You would be fine, if it requires black mana to activate to bring a creature from graveyard to hand, but it seems that's not the case.
So, instead you could go for "{4}{g},{t}: Return target Faery from your graveyard to your hand."
Or {2}{g},{t}, Sacifice Esia: Return target Faery from your graveyard to your hand."
Keep in that mind, adding exile will increase activate cost by {2}.
Otherwise, great land card!
@Floodkiller45 I would like to remind you that when preferring to name of a card, treat it as if it's title.
"Watcher in the Water can't attack or block."
Otherwise, it's good creature that acts like enchantment. It's certainly unique.
I would like to know whenever I pushed rarity and/or mana value too far. If so, please tell me how can I keep it stay one mana value and stay common.
My intention was to give extra combat step to only one creature. A red player must find way to untap it for next combat step while white player shouldn't have a problem with it. (Cough, vigilance, cough)
First strike and sorcery alone would make it severely out of balance, so I had to add another buff to balance it out. Did I made a good decision?
Choose target creature with haste. It gains first strike until end of turn. After this main phase, there is an additional combat phase. Only the chosen creature can attack during that combat phase.
That said, there's no additional combat card that's not a rare or mythic as far as I can find, so this is likely both undercosted and in need of a rarity upshift.
As for Stifling Ground, it should probably read something like:
Target creature gains first strike until end of turn. If a creature dealt damage by it this turn would die, exile it instead.
Considering cards like Heightened Reflexes exist, Stifling Ground is definitely underpowered, since Stifling Ground is both a sorcery and its secondary effect is not particularly useful. (What if your opponent doesn't block? You've then wasted a card accomplishing absolutely nothing, since you didn't even get any extra damage out of it.)
The closest sorcery I can find to this is Fit of Rage from Sixth Edition, which means you could most likely get away with printing "+3/+3 and first strike" as a one mana sorcery at this point in time. (As another example, the more recent Compelled Duel has a much stronger secondary effect but costs 2 mana.) Perhaps consider something like this:
Target creature gets +1/+0 until end of turn. Put a first strike counter on it. If a creature dealt damage by it this turn would die, exile it instead.
Even then I'm doubtful the third effect is worth the massive downside of being a sorcery, but effects like this appear so rarely at sorcery speed (especially when not paired with vigilance) that it'd probably be too strong once buffed enough to compensate for not being a combat trick.
~~~
I'd appreciate feedback on these cards: (Edit: Added a second card 'cause, among other things, I'm not entirely sure the wording is right.)
Considering Frigid Fortification, what do mean with "for each target you control" ?
Do you mean targets for that spell ? Because basically every permanent could count as a "target".
Example, if the opponent plays lightning bolt, and you have 3 creatures, 1 planeswalker, 5 lands and yourself, does Lightning bolt then cost 5 more - thats the number of possible targets for lightning bolt - or 10 more, cause thats the total number of targets a spell could hit ?
Just about the second card. Well done using attach rather than equip, but there arent many cards that attach to an opponent or an opponents creature with an attach ability, right? Or do you mean Cards being attached too all the cards? It looks right but whats your intention with Celestial interference?
@LvB Frigid Fortification functions similarly to Hinata, Dawn-Crowned (e.g. see FireOfGolden's response above). If I may, how did you arrive at that interpretation when the phrase "could target" (as seen on cards like Mirrorwing Dragon) is nowhere to be found here?
701.3a: To attach an Aura, Equipment, or Fortification to an object or player means to take it from where it currently is and put it onto that object or player. …
To answer your first question, there's a number of cards that move around (e.g. Maddening Hex) and/or turn into things that then attach themselves to permanents/players (e.g. Accursed Witch, Bloodthirsty Blade, the Licids). More broadly, my main intention for Celestial Interference will become clear(er) when I finish the partners it's meant to support.
@cadstar369 So real Attach, well great job, that gives another meaning to curses. Cool card overal and I think written properly. apart from the protection part, I can't verify that since i don't know of a ruling or card that lets you circumfent protection.
@cadstar369 Can you give an interaction with protection that negates protection in some way? Can you also give a ruling/card that states that it negates (part of) protection? Any card or rule that says "protection doesn't remove (effect that affects protection)."
@bramboy99 do the cards I inline linked to in my previous comment not satisfy your question? (If they don't, then I'm afraid I don't understand what you're asking for.) For example, consider Pentarch Ward and Spectra Ward:
Suppose a creature is enchanted with Pentarch Ward (choosing white) or Spectra Ward. Protection would normally cause either one to fall off the creature it's attached to immediately, but they both say that protection doesn't remove them (i.e. they 'negate part of protection'). Spectra Ward's effect also prevents any other Auras already on the creature from falling off, whereas the protection granted by Pentarch Ward does cause any other permanents of the chosen color attached to enchanted creature to fall off.
@Astrophibian please remember to give feedback on prior card(s) before posting for review, especially when presenting an edit of a previous card. That said, Esia might be one of the most cracked dual lands I've ever seen. Not only can it be fetched for (reminder text implies the corresponding basic land types, otherwise it would have the appropriate card text), but it provides persistent protection for your board on a card type your opponent will generally be unable to interact with. Not only that, but it can also regrow your Faeries, and it's not even legendary so you can have multiple sitting around for redundancy when the last ability isn't necessary? This card is completely bonkers.
Assuming you don't want to change the abilities, I'd suggest the following changes:
Give Esia the card text "{t}: Add {g} or {u}." instead of the current reminder text (so it can't be easily fetched for).
Make Esia legendary. (It's strange that it's named and not legendary, and it's more than strong enough to be legendary.)
~~~
I'd appreciate feedback on these cards: (Added the cards mentioned previously into the mix.)
Frigid Fortification probably need to cost more. The design is pretty great, but it's pretty close to doing everything Thalia and Propaganda do, while also taxing activated abilities. Perhaps you could build some down side into it to keep it at a mana value of 3, but as it is right now, it's really, really strong and would see a ton of play and lock most non-control decks out of the game pretty single-handedly.
Celestial Interference is really wonky in it's wording. I'm almost wondering if that would create some really bizarre rule interactions. I do think the idea is a good one, however. Maybe just refer to auras and equipment? I don't think anything else attaches to a player or permanent anyways. So "When Celestial Interference ETBs, remove all auras and equipment from permanents you control. You and permanents you control have protection from auras and equipment. You may target permanents you don't control and other players when playing an aura spell or using equip abilities as though they did not have hexproof, shroud, or protection and protection does not cause auras or equipments you control to be removed from permanents you don't control or other players." I don't know if that's better, but I feel like it is clearer to me at least.
Dorian and Locrian are great names. Nice to see another musician in the cardsmithing world. I hope you fill out the remaining 7, if you haven't already. Once again, I'd probably specify just returning aura or equipment cards to play, rather than the awkward wording that you have here. I think this is particularly confusing, though a few read throughs gets you there eventually. Locrian, in particular, can be really broken. First time you activate his ability, you discard a 12 mana aura and fail to find something with lesser mana cost. Next time you activate it, you discard a 13 mana aura and get the 12 mana one for free. I don't think there really are that many great, super expensive auras or equipments, but, it does seem like it'd be pretty capable of both discarding and reanimating a great target, so that is a little risky. You might want to restrict it somehow to avoid that.
@cadstar369 Only thing I agree with is possibly making it legendary. Also, this is an update to a previous feedback. Not really a new one.
There are plenty things opponents can do to interact with creatures. Exile, destroy, deal damage. All instant cards, so I don't see much on that end with your feedback there.
I based it off of @FireOfGolden with adding mana and I don't think it needs to change. It feels pretty straightforward.
The card is for mostly EDH formatting, so you only have one most of the time. There are plenty of opponents I've seen using land destruction or at least side boarding cards. It also returns faeries, it doesn't regrow them. That sounds more like regenerate. Plus, you have to sacrifice the land to do so.
All of it is based on the theme that the land is a hiding place or refuge for the fae folk, so it makes sense that more population growth equals to more work and keeping the city safe from prying eyes.
I think I like the outright uncertainty of Spellfracture Prism. I like that the drawback is that it can all be towards your creatures. My only thing is how do we determine this randomness? Do we roll a dice or flip a coin. I think that would be better to be more concise on that end. Good job with everything else though.
The wording on Spellfracture Prism feels a little wonky (mostly because it messes with the process of casting a spell), so perhaps this would work:
Instant and sorcery spells with one or more targets have storm.
Instant and sorcery spells with one or more targets have their targets chosen at random.
As for the effect itself, while messing with your opponent's targets can be fun, I'm not sure I'd want to play Spellfracture Prism over Thousand-Year Storm outside of perhaps some odd creature combo deck that wants to end in a huge instant/sorcery for some reason, but even then the restriction to targeted spells hurts a lot. More generally, I'm not sure potentially ruining your opponent's targeting is worth giving those spells storm, even assuming they can't take advantage of it as much as you would, mainly because WoTC has been making more and more spells target only opponents' things, which greatly reduces the potential deterrent a card like this could impose. I could see this card costing up to {2} less since it doesn't appear to be quite worth the current cost.
Regarding my cards, your argument for increasing Frigid Fortification's cost appears to be overestimating its strength. Looking at cards like Archon of Absolution and Baird, Steward of Argive suggests the attack tax isn't particularly powerful (and thus not too impactful on the mana cost, which is why I figured a second blue pip in the cost should suffice), and there's certainly a vast difference between the other two abilities and Thalia. Frigid Fortification doesn't tax opponents for ramping, cantripping, etc., nor does it make edicts, board wipes, and other non-targeted removal more difficult to use. Frigid Foritification also doesn't affect triggered abilities, so I honestly can't see how it would serve as much of a hindrance to any deck outside of mono-red (or perhaps mono-blue) wide aggro. I'm not averse to having the second and third abilities affect all spells rather than just opposing spells though if Frigid Fortification is more egregious than I think. (I'm very open to feedback on effects like this since I both dislike the combat step and tend to play decks with blue in them, so cards like this usually don't affect me.)
I tried to word Celestial Interference, Dorian, and Locrian as generally as possible because we currently have Fortifications as well (which are apparently coming back in the Fallout set), so who knows what other types of permanents we'll get that attach to things. I think I might be able to get away with removing the "that could be attached to" segments, though it would technically open up some nonsensical lines. (While an illegally attached permanent falls off immediately due to state-based actions, it does still enter/leave the battlefield and leave/enter the graveyard.)
Your suggested wording for Celestial Interference allows targeting through protective abilities, which the current version doesn't (that would probably be too strong for three mana). It might also cause funky situations with cards like the Licids.
I'm glad you like the names. ? I also made Almoner Dorian and Cursemonger Locrian last year. Not sure if/when I'll do the other five Western modes, but it would be fun to complete the set. (Maybe I'll even give them a partner ability like Friends Forever.)
I fear you've misread Locrian; he trades up from the discarded card (to complement Dorian trading down). While he can be a reasonably strong recursion engine, as you suspected there are few powerful big Auras/Equipment (they cap out at mv 8 at the moment), most of which aren't in WB, so it might be a touch difficult to do things that can't be done better with something like Ghen, Arcanum Weaver. Overall, being a slow reanimator that doesn't (usually) bring back creatures is enough for me to not want to inflict further restriction on Locrian at the moment.
~~~
@Astrophibian your opponent can't exactly interact with your Faeries when Esia gives them shroud (and they can't respond to a land being played), so I don't see your point there. It is also not apparent that Esia is meant for commander when it lacks an indicative set symbol, hence it not being evaluated as such. (Regardless, there are other formats such cards are legal in that do allow copies of it, so considering it that way is still meaningful.) Additionally, lands are trivial to manipulate in green, there's no sideboard in commander, nor does the anecdotal "land destruction exists and I've seen it around" make for a particularly strong argument, but if you're so adamant it's fine and can be answered both easily and consistently who am I to say anything to the contrary.
"Regrowing" something refers to the iconic green spell Regrowth, which returns a card from your graveyard to your hand, hence 'Esia regrows Faeries'. (It may occasionally refer to putting a card from your graveyard on top of your library as well.)
To match your desire, please take a look at Tangled Islet, your legendary land must have following Subtype: Island Forest. These are thing that can give you a reminder text. Otherwise, you will have to add these manually rather than reminder text.
What Cadstar369 meant that ability to give Faeries shourd is too overpowered for a land. Perhaps make it much narrower to balance it out? You can go this way "Faeries you control have shroud from instants and sorceries" or "Faeries you control have shroud from permanents." I would like to remind you that you don't have to specify that permanent are involved since creatures are only nonland, nonenchantment permanent that can have subtype. (Basic lands have Mountains, Plains, Islands, Forests, and Swamps. Enchantments only have just Aura.)
@FireOfGolden Esia saying "Faerie permanent" instead of "Faerie creature" is relevant because of Tribal cards. Faeries in particular have two existing tribal enchantments: Bitterblossom and Faerie Tauntings, so those also count toward the three Faerie permanents needed for Esia to grant shroud (and gain shroud once it's online).
Ah, so that way the opponent can still target with creature abilities. Thank you for clarifying. I also coyld have sworn there are tribal enchantments out there.
Edit: I can also increase activation from three to maybe five nontoken permanents instead.
Edit: there are. "Bitterblossom" is a tribal faerie enchantment. So I think keeping it as permanents is still fine.
I orginally didnt intend to make it a legendary, but for what we're doing it'd make sense thematically.
https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/esia-fae-sanctuary-2 I still think keeping it as permanents is fine to instants and sorceries. I upped the cost by 1 on the sack ability ans specified nontoken perms and upped the cost for activayion by two for shroud. Changed it to legend mythic as well.
Stifling ground is fine, I would just up the cost by 1. I'd def put one in my deck for sure ?
Letting ya know that Stifling Ground is a little underpowered for a sorcery according to Cadstar369. It is generally best used against black users, but otherwise can be seen coming and chosen to not block it.
It is only useful when casted on big, bad wolf which player HAD to block to avoid damage. Then creatures that died way while blocking becomes exiled. That's it. ?
Here's how Esia, Fae Sanctuary's text would be adjusted into proper MTG language:
({t}: You gain Add {u} {g} or {g} {u}.) - You don't gain mana in MTG, you add it. Green mana is typed before blue mana in ability texts and mana costs. See Hedge Maze: https://scryfall.com/card/mkm/262/hedge-maze
Esia, Fae Sanctuary comes into play enters the battlefield tapped. - Some older cards used the "comes into play," but long time ago it's been changed to "enters the battlefield."
As long as you control five or more nontoken Faeriespermanents, all Faeriespermanents you control have shroud from instants and sorceries. - I don't see a reason why it has to state "Faerie permanents" since Faeries are creatures. Unless this is added with tribal permanents in mind (e.g. Tribal Enchantment - Faerie, Bitterblossom), then it's understandable. Shroud is abandoned for hexproof or ward, as it may be annoying in some game situations when not even you, the controller of your permanents, can target them with spells or abilities. So maybe "hexproof from instants and sorceries" would also be fine.
{3}{g}, {t}, Sacrifice Esia: Return target Faerie creature card from your graveyard to your hand. - Letter r was missing from Sacrifice. When targeting creatures on zones other than the battlefield, the word "card" is added to the ability text. Also, don't forget to hit space after each comma.
@Ilmarinen Hoard Mimic feels like it's caught between being strong and being effective. It's difficult to justify spending four mana on casting it if you aren't destroying at least four or five Treasures, but how often is an opponent going to leave that many lying around, especially if they're aware of Hoard Mimic being a possibility? The only likely scenario I can come up with is someone drawing a ton of cards into Smothering Tithe, but at that point whoever's digging through their deck can probably do better than Hoard Mimic if those Treasures really need answering. (Not to say that it's not interesting and/or a reasonable meta pick, just that it's awkwardly costed for most decks.)
@Astrophibian If you are seeking to create it as realistic as possible then Ilmarinen's advice would be perfect for you. Myself, always try to make cards as realistic as possible, didn't know that I had to type "{t}, Add {g}" rather than {t}, you gain {g}".
@cadstar369 The first is great. I love the idea, but the second and third was just a little confusing however. Maybe just simplifying the abilities on Dorian and Locrian would make it a bit more easier to understand.
MTG Cardsmith Community Forums
Comments
Of course.
I would like to remind you that every nonbasic land don't have a reminder text to produce mana, if they don't contain subtype: Swamp, Mountain, Island, Forest, and Plains.
So, you would have to go this;
"{t}, you gain {u} or {g}"
Lands with abilities are always powerful - even more powerful, if it's passive ability. Shroud may be fair but it's still strong as long as it's a land. I believe that destory target land is much more common in red than green and black together.
Perhaps to balance it out by word this way.
"{t}, Faeries you control gains shroud until end of turn."
Returning a creature from exile to hand? That will means more costy.
You would be fine, if it requires black mana to activate to bring a creature from graveyard to hand, but it seems that's not the case.
So, instead you could go for "{4}{g},{t}: Return target Faery from your graveyard to your hand."
Or {2}{g},{t}, Sacifice Esia: Return target Faery from your graveyard to your hand."
Keep in that mind, adding exile will increase activate cost by {2}.
Otherwise, great land card!
@Floodkiller45
I would like to remind you that when preferring to name of a card, treat it as if it's title.
"Watcher in the Water can't attack or block."
Otherwise, it's good creature that acts like enchantment. It's certainly unique.
I would like to know whenever I pushed rarity and/or mana value too far. If so, please tell me how can I keep it stay one mana value and stay common.
My intention was to give extra combat step to only one creature. A red player must find way to untap it for next combat step while white player shouldn't have a problem with it. (Cough, vigilance, cough)
First strike and sorcery alone would make it severely out of balance, so I had to add another buff to balance it out. Did I made a good decision?
As for Stifling Ground, it should probably read something like:
The closest sorcery I can find to this is Fit of Rage from Sixth Edition, which means you could most likely get away with printing "+3/+3 and first strike" as a one mana sorcery at this point in time. (As another example, the more recent Compelled Duel has a much stronger secondary effect but costs 2 mana.) Perhaps consider something like this:
~~~
I'd appreciate feedback on these cards:
(Edit: Added a second card 'cause, among other things, I'm not entirely sure the wording is right.)
Permanent can count toward target, if it becomes target of that spell.
So, if a spell targets only land, it costs 1 more to cast.
If a spell targets two creatures and one land, it costs 3 more to cast.
@bramboy99 as per 701.3:
Suppose a creature is enchanted with Pentarch Ward (choosing white) or Spectra Ward. Protection would normally cause either one to fall off the creature it's attached to immediately, but they both say that protection doesn't remove them (i.e. they 'negate part of protection'). Spectra Ward's effect also prevents any other Auras already on the creature from falling off, whereas the protection granted by Pentarch Ward does cause any other permanents of the chosen color attached to enchanted creature to fall off.
I took some of your advice. Let me know how you feel about this one.
https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/esia-fae-sanctuary-1
Assuming you don't want to change the abilities, I'd suggest the following changes:
- Give Esia the card text "{t}: Add {g} or {u}." instead of the current reminder text (so it can't be easily fetched for).
- Make Esia legendary. (It's strange that it's named and not legendary, and it's more than strong enough to be legendary.)
~~~I'd appreciate feedback on these cards:
(Added the cards mentioned previously into the mix.)
- Frigid Fortification probably need to cost more. The design is pretty great, but it's pretty close to doing everything Thalia and Propaganda do, while also taxing activated abilities. Perhaps you could build some down side into it to keep it at a mana value of 3, but as it is right now, it's really, really strong and would see a ton of play and lock most non-control decks out of the game pretty single-handedly.
- Celestial Interference is really wonky in it's wording. I'm almost wondering if that would create some really bizarre rule interactions. I do think the idea is a good one, however. Maybe just refer to auras and equipment? I don't think anything else attaches to a player or permanent anyways. So "When Celestial Interference ETBs, remove all auras and equipment from permanents you control. You and permanents you control have protection from auras and equipment. You may target permanents you don't control and other players when playing an aura spell or using equip abilities as though they did not have hexproof, shroud, or protection and protection does not cause auras or equipments you control to be removed from permanents you don't control or other players." I don't know if that's better, but I feel like it is clearer to me at least.
- Dorian and Locrian are great names. Nice to see another musician in the cardsmithing world. I hope you fill out the remaining 7, if you haven't already. Once again, I'd probably specify just returning aura or equipment cards to play, rather than the awkward wording that you have here. I think this is particularly confusing, though a few read throughs gets you there eventually. Locrian, in particular, can be really broken. First time you activate his ability, you discard a 12 mana aura and fail to find something with lesser mana cost. Next time you activate it, you discard a 13 mana aura and get the 12 mana one for free. I don't think there really are that many great, super expensive auras or equipments, but, it does seem like it'd be pretty capable of both discarding and reanimating a great target, so that is a little risky. You might want to restrict it somehow to avoid that.
Anyways, here's a card I'd like some feedback on:https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/spellfracture-prism
Only thing I agree with is possibly making it legendary. Also, this is an update to a previous feedback. Not really a new one.
There are plenty things opponents can do to interact with creatures. Exile, destroy, deal damage. All instant cards, so I don't see much on that end with your feedback there.
I based it off of @FireOfGolden with adding mana and I don't think it needs to change. It feels pretty straightforward.
The card is for mostly EDH formatting, so you only have one most of the time. There are plenty of opponents I've seen using land destruction or at least side boarding cards.
It also returns faeries, it doesn't regrow them. That sounds more like regenerate. Plus, you have to sacrifice the land to do so.
All of it is based on the theme that the land is a hiding place or refuge for the fae folk, so it makes sense that more population growth equals to more work and keeping the city safe from prying eyes.
I think I like the outright uncertainty of Spellfracture Prism.
I like that the drawback is that it can all be towards your creatures.
My only thing is how do we determine this randomness? Do we roll a dice or flip a coin. I think that would be better to be more concise on that end. Good job with everything else though.
The wording on Spellfracture Prism feels a little wonky (mostly because it messes with the process of casting a spell), so perhaps this would work:
Instant and sorcery spells with one or more targets have their targets chosen at random.
Regarding my cards, your argument for increasing Frigid Fortification's cost appears to be overestimating its strength. Looking at cards like Archon of Absolution and Baird, Steward of Argive suggests the attack tax isn't particularly powerful (and thus not too impactful on the mana cost, which is why I figured a second blue pip in the cost should suffice), and there's certainly a vast difference between the other two abilities and Thalia. Frigid Fortification doesn't tax opponents for ramping, cantripping, etc., nor does it make edicts, board wipes, and other non-targeted removal more difficult to use. Frigid Foritification also doesn't affect triggered abilities, so I honestly can't see how it would serve as much of a hindrance to any deck outside of mono-red (or perhaps mono-blue) wide aggro. I'm not averse to having the second and third abilities affect all spells rather than just opposing spells though if Frigid Fortification is more egregious than I think. (I'm very open to feedback on effects like this since I both dislike the combat step and tend to play decks with blue in them, so cards like this usually don't affect me.)
I tried to word Celestial Interference, Dorian, and Locrian as generally as possible because we currently have Fortifications as well (which are apparently coming back in the Fallout set), so who knows what other types of permanents we'll get that attach to things. I think I might be able to get away with removing the "that could be attached to" segments, though it would technically open up some nonsensical lines. (While an illegally attached permanent falls off immediately due to state-based actions, it does still enter/leave the battlefield and leave/enter the graveyard.)
Your suggested wording for Celestial Interference allows targeting through protective abilities, which the current version doesn't (that would probably be too strong for three mana). It might also cause funky situations with cards like the Licids.
I'm glad you like the names. ? I also made Almoner Dorian and Cursemonger Locrian last year. Not sure if/when I'll do the other five Western modes, but it would be fun to complete the set. (Maybe I'll even give them a partner ability like Friends Forever.)
I fear you've misread Locrian; he trades up from the discarded card (to complement Dorian trading down). While he can be a reasonably strong recursion engine, as you suspected there are few powerful big Auras/Equipment (they cap out at mv 8 at the moment), most of which aren't in WB, so it might be a touch difficult to do things that can't be done better with something like Ghen, Arcanum Weaver. Overall, being a slow reanimator that doesn't (usually) bring back creatures is enough for me to not want to inflict further restriction on Locrian at the moment.
~~~
@Astrophibian your opponent can't exactly interact with your Faeries when Esia gives them shroud (and they can't respond to a land being played), so I don't see your point there. It is also not apparent that Esia is meant for commander when it lacks an indicative set symbol, hence it not being evaluated as such. (Regardless, there are other formats such cards are legal in that do allow copies of it, so considering it that way is still meaningful.) Additionally, lands are trivial to manipulate in green, there's no sideboard in commander, nor does the anecdotal "land destruction exists and I've seen it around" make for a particularly strong argument, but if you're so adamant it's fine and can be answered both easily and consistently who am I to say anything to the contrary.
"Regrowing" something refers to the iconic green spell Regrowth, which returns a card from your graveyard to your hand, hence 'Esia regrows Faeries'. (It may occasionally refer to putting a card from your graveyard on top of your library as well.)
To match your desire, please take a look at Tangled Islet, your legendary land must have following Subtype: Island Forest. These are thing that can give you a reminder text. Otherwise, you will have to add these manually rather than reminder text.
What Cadstar369 meant that ability to give Faeries shourd is too overpowered for a land. Perhaps make it much narrower to balance it out? You can go this way "Faeries you control have shroud from instants and sorceries" or "Faeries you control have shroud from permanents." I would like to remind you that you don't have to specify that permanent are involved since creatures are only nonland, nonenchantment permanent that can have subtype. (Basic lands have Mountains, Plains, Islands, Forests, and Swamps. Enchantments only have just Aura.)
Oh, that makes sense. Yet, I will still stay stick with just Faeries creatures.
Ah, so that way the opponent can still target with creature abilities. Thank you for clarifying. I also coyld have sworn there are tribal enchantments out there.
Edit: I can also increase activation from three to maybe five nontoken permanents instead.
Edit: there are. "Bitterblossom" is a tribal faerie enchantment.
So I think keeping it as permanents is still fine.
I orginally didnt intend to make it a legendary, but for what we're doing it'd make sense thematically.
Thanks for clarifying again ?
https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/esia-fae-sanctuary-2
I still think keeping it as permanents is fine to instants and sorceries. I upped the cost by 1 on the sack ability ans specified nontoken perms and upped the cost for activayion by two for shroud.
Changed it to legend mythic as well.
Stifling ground is fine, I would just up the cost by 1. I'd def put one in my deck for sure ?
Everything looks good now
Letting ya know that Stifling Ground is a little underpowered for a sorcery according to Cadstar369. It is generally best used against black users, but otherwise can be seen coming and chosen to not block it.
It is only useful when casted on big, bad wolf which player HAD to block to avoid damage. Then creatures that died way while blocking becomes exiled. That's it. ?
Esia, Fae Sanctuary comes into play enters the battlefield tapped. - Some older cards used the "comes into play," but long time ago it's been changed to "enters the battlefield."
~~~
I'd appreciate feedback on these cards:
Appreciate the opinion, but it actually functions perfectly for what we needed it for. Thank you.
If you are seeking to create it as realistic as possible then Ilmarinen's advice would be perfect for you. Myself, always try to make cards as realistic as possible, didn't know that I had to type "{t}, Add {g}" rather than {t}, you gain {g}".
The first is great. I love the idea, but the second and third was just a little confusing however. Maybe just simplifying the abilities on Dorian and Locrian would make it a bit more easier to understand.
Anyway I'd like some feedback on this card: