MTG Cardsmith Community Forums
Battle For Algoran: Post cards here
This discussion has been closed.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
X
When X enters the battlefield, indoctrinate (Choose an untapped nonland permanent you control and tap it. Then gain control of target creature for as long as you control the chosen permanent. It is white and blue, and is a Cleric in addition to its other types.)
This limits it to one, making it less likely to be OP. If you tapped an enchantment in the process (which the Acolytes will have plenty of), it is as good as permanently gaining control. Alternatively, you can still have indoctrinate N with the above wording, where you gain control of a creature with power N or less. This would allow for proper scaling between rarities.
Decay X (when this creature enters the battlefield, distrubute X rot counters among any number of target creatures on the battlefield. Then, put a -1/-1 counter on each creature with a rot counter on it.)
For the barbarians, we could have the polar opposite... let's call it invigorate.
Invigorate X (when this creature enters the battlefield, distribute X vigor counters among any number of target creatures on the battlefield. Then, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature with a vigor counter on it.)
And, if we want, we can make them more diverse like this:
{Invigorate/Decay} X (when this creature enters the battlefield, distribute X {vigor/rot} counters among any number of creatures.)
{Effect involving said counters}
We shouldn't have +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters in the same set.
Why? they just cancel each other out. literally. they remove each other.
It still causes confusion, so you should try to avoid it.
Sounds relatively reliable. I do think that using multiple creatures isn't terrible because you have to tap multiple permanents. This one seems quite powerful as you just need to tap one permanent and take a creature. I don't know exactly what to do, as both are good but a little too good. Maybe keep the other one but limit it based on creature power. Maybe having to tap a number of permanents equal to the creature's power. I don't know, just throwing ideas out there. I think that indoctrinate N would be used more often to balance the power if we keep it like this (Also kinda ruins the feel of indoctrinating the creature into a group, I think my original idea of targeting may need to be reconsidered.
@Lujikul
As long as we put a relatively high amount of removal and give the other factions methods of eliminating creatures like force blocking or even cards that straight up give creatures immunity from indoctrination, it should remain balanced. Obviously it would be a reserved mechanic for high CMC cards if they don't have a balancing factor. Indoctrinate N also helps. I should mention that gaining control is good, but the mechanic is relatively easy to disrupt.
@Chasmfiend
NokiSkaur is correct. New players tend to get confused when a mechanic works like this. I also don't think that rogues need -1/-1 counters to represent poison. The idea is easy. As for the barbarian one, that's not an awful idea. I'll let everyone else ponder it and we'll see the result.
@sorinjace
This is more balanced, but I'd still get rid of the indoctrinate. Still doesn't fit for the theme.
Also, I may have overstepped my boundaries by creating a legendary. Used Aurelia as a base model.
Not sure, but there aren't many updates to sustain it.
@Thatcardartist7
You should bump your challenge with content more often. Otherwise, it gets left behind others.
Yes, you may regardless.