|
|
Post by gurfafflekins on Mar 25, 2020 22:20:17 GMT
 feelin' a bit crabby |
|
|
|
Post by Daij_Djan on Mar 25, 2020 22:39:40 GMT
After dropping the idea of using either Monstrosity or Tribute to fulfill the challenge, I decided to take a completely different approach. So how about a Miracle at common - and on a creature?
|
|
spazlaz
6/6 Wurm
Posts: 335
Color Alignment: Blue, Black
|
Post by spazlaz on Mar 26, 2020 15:40:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by arthurxiv on Mar 26, 2020 18:20:32 GMT
spazlaz: Maybe add a sentence prohibiting Righteous Protector from gaining and/or having vigilance to make sure it doesn't get broken.
|
|
|
|
Post by ZephyrPhantom on Mar 26, 2020 22:55:22 GMT
spazlaz: Maybe add a sentence prohibiting Righteous Protector from gaining and/or having vigilance to make sure it doesn't get broken. I know it ruins the callback to Righteousness but I think it'd be safer to lower the power/toughness boost instead. "X can't get Y" or some weird tap clause would ruin how clean the current card looks. |
|
|
|
Post by arthurxiv on Mar 26, 2020 23:53:17 GMT
ZephyrPhantom: Indeed. That's the kind of sentence that feels bad on a card because it tackles something way too specific. "Activate this ability only during an opponent's turn." would probably be ok though.
|
|
|
|
Post by kefke on Mar 27, 2020 7:47:53 GMT
spazlaz : Maybe add a sentence prohibiting Righteous Protector from gaining and/or having vigilance to make sure it doesn't get broken. I know it ruins the callback to Righteousness but I think it'd be safer to lower the power/toughness boost instead. "X can't get Y" or some weird tap clause would ruin how clean the current card looks. Combining the wording of a couple effects, "Activate this ability only when ~ blocks a creature." gets as close to built-in Righteousness as possible, I think. |
|
|
|
Post by gluestick248 on Mar 27, 2020 16:27:08 GMT
I know it ruins the callback to Righteousness but I think it'd be safer to lower the power/toughness boost instead. "X can't get Y" or some weird tap clause would ruin how clean the current card looks. Combining the wording of a couple effects, "Activate this ability only when ~ blocks a creature." gets as close to built-in Righteousness as possible, I think. Just to throw in my opinion: attacking for 8 without any evasion on turn 4 is hardly the most broken thing to do. I would consider that a feature, not a bug. Personally, I’d just add some cost to activate the ability, or maybe just up the cost of the creature |
|
|
|
Post by ZephyrPhantom on Mar 27, 2020 22:29:37 GMT
Combining the wording of a couple effects, "Activate this ability only when ~ blocks a creature." gets as close to built-in Righteousness as possible, I think. Just to throw in my opinion: attacking for 8 without any evasion on turn 4 is hardly the most broken thing to do. I would consider that a feature, not a bug. Personally, I’d just add some cost to activate the ability, or maybe just up the cost of the creature I'd have this in mind as well while pondering the card - like, this will certainly not make an impact in Modern, and with the bar for Pioneer being Dimir Inverter at the moment it might even be safe to say this isn't the biggest threat there either. Maybe Fires decks could use this but I think Fires decks have better things to do than plop down a 3 for 1/1 that might be easily removed. Accorder's Shield is not exactly the most menacing of combo pieces in this context...maybe Bladed Bracers? I think the question is if this warps Standard/Limited - I'm mainly thinking back to when Lightning Bolt was legal for a time and R&D admitted that forced every creature they made for a while to be checked against the Bolt test. You'd have to be careful designing every Vigilance aura and equipment in the set to not step on the toes of this card, assuming it is broken - but even then, it's a conditional creature that needs at least 4-5 mana, 2 cards, to be an 8/8 that dies to Shock. That's miles worse than a Gigantosaurus. So if anything, I think this card's current mistake is seemingly being at  . Either it should be an  to limit its frequency in Limited and push Vigilance-matters in draft (and I think it's impactful enough to justify this) or it gets an additional limitation like "activate only while blocking" or lower p/t boost to make it less impactful at its current rarity. |
|
|
|
Post by Boogymanjunior on Mar 29, 2020 17:02:40 GMT
Well, he doesn't have to rely on other cards helping them; he can be a freethinker to become the genius of smashing he maybe ever wanted to be.   |
|
|
|
Post by sleepyjackdaw on Mar 30, 2020 1:17:11 GMT
A more generic hand of emrakul
|
|
|
|
Post by ameisenmeister on Mar 30, 2020 8:56:22 GMT
Edit: 
|
|
|
|
Post by Boogymanjunior on Mar 30, 2020 9:26:24 GMT
Hey, your card has to be a common. |
|
|
|
Post by ameisenmeister on Mar 30, 2020 9:57:59 GMT
Hey, your card has to be a common. Thanks for catching that! Posted a new card. |
|
|
|
Post by Daij_Djan on Mar 30, 2020 21:32:34 GMT
This thread is now closed, the poll can be found here. And here's the next challenge! |
|
