@shadow123 I like the idea, the combo of a instant and commander (i assume) that fit the (lore) with eachother. Nice idea, but i do question why it says pay 4 life or pay 1 black. People will always choose the 1 black, and the effect is not worth 4 life. So, i suggest increaseing the mana cost or decrease the life. just a suggesion.
Edit: I realize why it's pay 4 life. my bad
a little commander for the sadistic boys who play with laviathans and big boy creatures
@GloomyAndSunny1_0_1 I have the pay 4 life option because it powers up the spell a lot. Since you will have lost more life during the turn, it will be able to destroy a creature with greater mana value.
@GloomyAndSunny1_0_1 - I believe the correct border you are looking for is the legendary gold border. The border you are currently using for Crok is for hybrid black/green cards.
- Fear is a pretty outdated keyword. Something like menace or trample would probably fit better, but that's up to you.
When Crok, Of The Devoured enters the field, all creatures under 5/5 are destroyed.
- When Crok, Of The Devoured enters the battlefield, destroy all creatures with power or toughness 4 or less.
- Not a fan of Consumer, since Wizards has moved away from stat-altering counters other than +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters. The wording is also incorrect, unless you want it only trigger on whenever a creature your opponents control is destroyed (i.e. cards that read "Destroy target creature") and not just when they die (i.e. to damage that reduces their toughness to less than 1, being sacrificed, and whatnot).
Consumer (Whenever a creature an opponent controls dies, put a [counter] on this creature.)
So it should probably be something like this :
Fear, hexproof
When Crok, of the Devoured enters the battlefield, destroy all creatures with power or toughness 4 or less.
Consumer (Whenever a creature an opponent controls dies, put a +1/+1 counter on this creature.)
However, I will note that consumer feels pretty strong, unless it's meant to trigger specifically when a creature an opponent controls is destroyed.
1: Consumer was not misspelled. I wanted it to be destroyed because of the ability that destroys all creatures under 5/5. but i should change it under 5 toughness.
2: the hybrid frame was also a my bad. i'll change that maybe...
@AboveAndAbout Technically i did, with the last message. Of course, it's not detailed. And thats because i have a horrible critique of ideas unless they are REALLY bad. Otherwise, i can't say much of the idea. So, my feedback is that it's a nice card, not too strong, not too weak and a decent price for the exicution. Would i ever use it? most likely not, because i rather use a card that brings cards from the graveyard without discarding. But for people who like quick results. This is a good card
@GloomyAndSunny1_0_1 It's a good card once it's out, but anything is good if it has double-strike, menace and a decent size. However most games are decided by the time you can get to 10 mana, most game end even before that so it's a dead card in your hands in most games. If you do play it late game, having a
creature's power depend on your life total but wiping all your blockers
when it comes into play is a risky move. In commander if you attack you won't be able to defend and it will get smaller when you take the counter attack. It is dangerous so it has a big target on it's back, with no built in protection for itself it is susceptible to removal.
Obviously the only real way to play it is to reanimate it while your life is still high, and of course if you give it lifelink it becomes nuts. At the end of the day, it's a hard to cast big guy that you try and cheat out.
You'll want to re-word the enter to battlefield trigger, as it is right now it will kill itself. It should say "When Soul Host enters the battlefield destroy all other nonland permanents you control."
Also the card Damnation posted is powerful becasue it effectively says "You may turn any card in your hand into a Raise Dead that cost {0} if your hand is even." When you mentioned you didn't want to discard a card for the effect, understand playing a card like Raise Dead to get a creature back, you are also discarding a card, the Raise Dead spell itself. In your case it is "Pay an extra {B}, discard a specific card (Raise Dead) to play any creature from your graveyard". It is not as flexible.
@Damnation I actually really like that keyword name, it can mean so many interesting things like be a static ability that gives benefits when certain things align, like if you and your opponent both have even or odd hands/lands/creatures, or for creatures if other creatures have the same base P/T or mana cost, such an effect can add some interesting dynamic back and forth plays.
My card and my attempt at Phyrexian mana, hope it is not broken.
I made it so that if you paid with life, you still have to pay a bit more before it becomes a creature but you get some card selection or card draw down the line.
Bonus, giving it a charge counter you can turn it back to an enchantment to dodge board wipes
It seems like you understand how powerful phyrexian mana can be (A LOT of people don't), so I don't think that the mana cost is much of an issue, but I still think this card is a bit overpowered.
-If I'm not mistaken, the text "As long as Moona has a charge counter on it, Moona isn't a creature" should be on a separate line. The way that it is now, it's part of the etb effect, which means that once a charge counter is placed on it while it has no counters on it, Moona will remain as a creature.
- I think that the first activated ability gives a bit too much protection. Hexproof does give it a good amount of protection already, and I think that the ability to dodge board wipes might be a bit much, considering that most gods have only one layer of protection (Indestructible, or some way to return itself).
- The second activated ability seems fine to me, but 2 mana might be safer.
@feralitator I feel like you can probably tack on a keyword or something to make it stand out. I haven't played around with Ikoria so I can't say much, but it feels more like an underwhelming variant of Fox rather than a balanced version of it. Maybe reduce the cycling cost to {1}? No idea. I'd say more but I have to go to work soon, sorry.
@feralitator I had "As long as Moona has a charge counter on it, Moona isn't a creature" not separated due to space reasons. Originally it didn't have an add counter ability but I thought of it later on and I thought it was a really unique way to do faux indestructible, instead of just giving it indestructible which I felt was boring and lazy design, perhaps {3} to add a counter would balance it. Without indestructible I added hexproof because I felt it was too vulnerable to a simple enchantment destruction, unfitting for such a powerful creature. The {1} to remove a counter I think it's justified since you also paid life for them, otherwise as it is it can be seen as a {5}: Draw a card or a {3} scry 1. I don't really design huge Timmy creatures but I wanted this to be a powerful bomb.
@Damnation I like Nightglow! It almost feels out of color; this definitely seems more black/white to me, but nonetheless this is a great card... it reminds me of Profane Memento. While Nightglow is obviously better than PM, it's limited to green or white decks unlike PM, but it's still very playable. I'll drop a favorite!
This doesn't seem WUBRG at all. I personally would make it B. Curses can be all colors, but they're most strongly associated with black. Not only this, but the second ability is very much black as well.
So, with the first edit, it now looks like this:
Cursemage's Path 1BBBBBB Legendary Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may search your library for an aura curse card attached to target opponent. If you do, shuffle.
Aura curses you control have "When this card is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, you may shuffle it into its owners library."
Another point is that this seems a bit under-powered for 1BBBBBB. It's very situational, so I'd make it 5BB or 2BBBB. So...
Cursemage's Path 5BB Legendary Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may search your library for an aura curse card attached to target opponent. If you do, shuffle.
Aura curses have "When this card is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, you may shuffle it into its owners library."
There is a small wording issue. It's very minor, but in both abilities it should say 'curse' not 'aura curse'
Cursemage's Path 5BB Legendary Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may search your library for an curse card attached to target opponent. If you do, shuffle.
Curses you control have "When this card is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, you may shuffle it into its owners library."
Interesting card! I like the idea! I published the feedback on the comment section!
Curses are all colours, yes, but black is the colour that they're most emphasised on, also the ability on the second ability synergises with graveyards.
@TheDukeOfPork, I agree with @AboveAndAbout. Although curses are mostly black, I think it is okay to use all five colors in this case. Also, Just because it synergises with graveyards, does not mean its black. Such abilities are found on Eldrazi's too, which are colorless.
@TheDukeOfPork thank you for your detailed feedback! I feel in this case all colors makes sense because curses come in all colors; it feels very similar to Sanctum of All with shrines. As @AboveAndAbout and @FORFUN stated above, graveyard synergies isn't just a black thing, every color and colorless can care about cards in graveyards. As for the wording, I believe you are correct, saying "aura curse" isn't necessary. I wasn't exactly sure how to word it correctly so I went with what I thought made sense.
Thanks again for giving a thought-out review of my card, I really appreciate it!
I agree that Cursemage's Path shouldn't be 5-color, although not for the reasons already stated. It feels like a 5-color card for the sake of a 5-color card. The reason why it worked for Sanctum of All was because there was a balanced but small amount of shrines for each color, forcing a 5-color strategy, and Kamigawa has experimented into 5-color cards or synergies, particularly through the shrines. And every other 5-color card has a reason to be 5-color; the Slivers are spread across each color mechanically ever since the first set they appeared in and are still encouraged to be 5-color, Niv-Mizzet Reborn synergises with each color combination and became the Living Guildpact in the set, even something like Horde of Notions worked because of Lorwyn's mulitcolor themes and plentiful use of Evoke and 5-color elemental theme in each color. And a different portion of 5-color cards have the 5-color "Theme" of being good beaters or casting spells for free, generic things for most colors.
Compare to Cursemage's Path. Innistrad had no 5-color themes, and the curses have no synergy or reason to go 5-color.
However, I do not believe that it should be Mono-Black because of second ability. Shuffling from graveyard isn't in the Black color pie, and is probably closer to Golgari or Orzhov,
My other complaint that I do have is that it is extremely similar to an already existing card, Curse of Misfortunes, which is 1 less mana for an ability that is designed to be less oppressive (Inability to stack certain curses that make playing the game impossible for certain decks) and has far less mana restrictions. I can't imagine a world where both exist due to the similarities, unfortunately.
@TheDukeOfPork Not a bad card, like the idea. Simple and basic. Could be pretty damn useful for those growing decks. Sadly, i rarely ever use green in my decks. So if this card was legal, then i would most likely not use it most of the time. But that's personal situations
@GloomyAndSunny1_0_1interesting card, but you need to work on your wording to streamline what you are trying to get across. There are rules for words like "plays", "target" and "choose" It should look something like this.
It still needs to change though, you can't use the equip ability on creatures you don't control, so it should be changed unless you want a bunch of equipment laying around. A constant -2/-2 can lock down most decks, they can't play */2 creatures and anything else loses almost all of it's value when it gets -2/-2 having it only to nonblack is still 80% effective. Adding the bit of killing the creature when it blocks is redundant, a creature that has been -2/-2 is going to die to most creatures you attack with and you're making the card more powerful than it already is. I think you should remove the bit about +1/+1 counters and use that space to make your equipment parasites turn to 2/2 creatures once they fall off.
It's a very powerful card for 6 mana the closest thing I can compare it to is aether flash and that deals 2 to all creatures for {2}{R}{R}, your card does it better as it also reduces P/T to anything that survives. Unless they have a few powerful creatures already in play you will likely win game when this gets cast, especially vs mono red.
My card, I hope my reminder text covers most of the rules. I'm sure there will be cases where something breaks, anyone think of any interesting situations?
@BT9154 This seems fun. A little cleanup on the rules text would be in order: "if you do, until the beginning of your next turn, gain control of all creatures that player controls." I'd like to see a small drawback added to balance out the equip cost. Maybe instead of "Equipped creature gets +1/+1" it might read "Equipped creature gets -1/+1." This would help to counteract people slapping it on some 1/1 Unblockable creature. I can't see any issues with swapping control, but alas, I'm not omniscient.
This card is something I brainstormed while bored at work. Enjoy?
@SiphiliSx Some minor wording issues... Each player may search their library for a card, reveal it, and put it into their hand, then shuffle. Dance of Chaos deals damage to each creature and player equal to the total combined mana value of the revealed cards.
It's fairly evil, considering if you don't choose a card, you still suffer. My one suggestion to increase the evilness would be to make it a nonland card, as that has no mana value.
@Corwinnn I like the card, but I think the name should be "mogg impersonation", because "mogg impersonator" sounds like it's a creature but "mogg impersonation" sounds more like an instant or sorcery.
@WarriorCatInAhat, Good card, I think you should have made the border be for a black artifact. But other than that, solid card that could really useful in monoblack decks.
@Zaheer_The_Grim ;that's a really great design space. It's taking the Persistent Petitioners idea, but is still solidly in Green's color pie. Honestly, if I had only one critique, I'd make it Uncommon, so there'd be more chance of having multiple Druids while Drafting. Favorited!
@TerryTags cute little card! There are some minor wording issues, such as with the last ability, the second instance of the word 'exile' should be capitalized. But nonetheless it is a cute card, nice work, and really interesting concept!
MTG Cardsmith Community Forums
Comments
Edit: I realize why it's pay 4 life. my bad
Thanks for the feedback!
- I believe the correct border you are looking for is the legendary gold border. The border you are currently using for Crok is for hybrid black/green cards.
- Fear is a pretty outdated keyword. Something like menace or trample would probably fit better, but that's up to you.
- Not a fan of Consumer, since Wizards has moved away from stat-altering counters other than +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters. The wording is also incorrect, unless you want it only trigger on whenever a creature your opponents control is destroyed (i.e. cards that read "Destroy target creature") and not just when they die (i.e. to damage that reduces their toughness to less than 1, being sacrificed, and whatnot).
So it should probably be something like this :
When Crok, of the Devoured enters the battlefield, destroy all creatures with power or toughness 4 or less.
Consumer (Whenever a creature an opponent controls dies, put a +1/+1 counter on this creature.)
Anyway, next card.
1: Consumer was not misspelled. I wanted it to be destroyed because of the ability
that destroys all creatures under 5/5. but i should change it under 5 toughness.
2: the hybrid frame was also a my bad. i'll change that maybe...
3 i rather use fear.
4 The card you posted is nice.
It seems like you understand how powerful phyrexian mana can be (A LOT of people don't), so I don't think that the mana cost is much of an issue, but I still think this card is a bit overpowered.
-If I'm not mistaken, the text "As long as Moona has a charge counter on it, Moona isn't a creature" should be on a separate line. The way that it is now, it's part of the etb effect, which means that once a charge counter is placed on it while it has no counters on it, Moona will remain as a creature.
- I think that the first activated ability gives a bit too much protection. Hexproof does give it a good amount of protection already, and I think that the ability to dodge board wipes might be a bit much, considering that most gods have only one layer of protection (Indestructible, or some way to return itself).
- The second activated ability seems fine to me, but 2 mana might be safer.
Here's my card. I think that Flourishing Fox is a bit strong, so I'm considering a more balanced version for a set I'm working on.
https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/plant-spine-serpent
I feel like you can probably tack on a keyword or something to make it stand out. I haven't played around with Ikoria so I can't say much, but it feels more like an underwhelming variant of Fox rather than a balanced version of it. Maybe reduce the cycling cost to {1}? No idea. I'd say more but I have to go to work soon, sorry.
Next card :
My card: https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/cursemages-path?list=set&set=60007
Interesting, I like the idea, but...
This doesn't seem WUBRG at all. I personally would make it B. Curses can be all colors, but they're most strongly associated with black. Not only this, but the second ability is very much black as well.
So, with the first edit, it now looks like this:
Cursemage's Path 1BBBBBB
Legendary Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may search your library for an aura curse card attached to target opponent. If you do, shuffle.
Aura curses you control have "When this card is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, you may shuffle it into its owners library."
Another point is that this seems a bit under-powered for 1BBBBBB. It's very situational, so I'd make it 5BB or 2BBBB.
So...
Cursemage's Path 5BB
Legendary Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may search your library for an aura curse card attached to target opponent. If you do, shuffle.
Aura curses have "When this card is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, you may shuffle it into its owners library."
There is a small wording issue. It's very minor, but in both abilities it should say 'curse' not 'aura curse'
Cursemage's Path 5BB
Legendary Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may search your library for an curse card attached to target opponent. If you do, shuffle.
Curses you control have "When this card is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, you may shuffle it into its owners library."
Interesting card! I like the idea! I published the feedback on the comment section!
Here is my card:
Curses are all colours, yes, but black is the colour that they're most emphasised on, also the ability on the second ability synergises with graveyards.
Thanks again for giving a thought-out review of my card, I really appreciate it!
Compare to Cursemage's Path. Innistrad had no 5-color themes, and the curses have no synergy or reason to go 5-color.
However, I do not believe that it should be Mono-Black because of second ability. Shuffling from graveyard isn't in the Black color pie, and is probably closer to Golgari or Orzhov,
My other complaint that I do have is that it is extremely similar to an already existing card, Curse of Misfortunes, which is 1 less mana for an ability that is designed to be less oppressive (Inability to stack certain curses that make playing the game impossible for certain decks) and has far less mana restrictions. I can't imagine a world where both exist due to the similarities, unfortunately.
I'd like to see a small drawback added to balance out the equip cost. Maybe instead of "Equipped creature gets +1/+1" it might read "Equipped creature gets -1/+1." This would help to counteract people slapping it on some 1/1 Unblockable creature.
I can't see any issues with swapping control, but alas, I'm not omniscient.
This card is something I brainstormed while bored at work. Enjoy?
Some minor wording issues...
Each player may search their library for a card, reveal it, and put it into their hand, then shuffle. Dance of Chaos deals damage to each creature and player equal to the total combined mana value of the revealed cards.
It's fairly evil, considering if you don't choose a card, you still suffer. My one suggestion to increase the evilness would be to make it a nonland card, as that has no mana value.
I guess I need to put a card up here...
@WarriorCatInAhat
I like the card, but I think the name should be "mogg impersonation", because "mogg impersonator" sounds like it's a creature but "mogg impersonation" sounds more like an instant or sorcery.
here's my card:
Here's my card:
Here's mine:
Here's my card: https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/campfire-tales-1?list=user