|
|
Post by vizionarius on Mar 20, 2023 17:17:50 GMT
I reworded the abilities to be as simple as possible with as little words as possible. Is it clear now or do I need to add or take more word. I did added the words “to activate” even though increase cost implies activation this traditional wording for mtg cards I discovered (peraphs people might be confused that it would mean something like they have to pay every turn to keep that ability even though that makes no sense) but I did not put in “planeswalker” abilities because planeswalkers do not need to be specified since they the only ones with loyalty abilities. I also put in the plural possessive opponents’ to show this affects all opponents and all the abilities of all their planeswalkers, I also specified “negative loyalty cost” because I do not want the person to think that say their positive +2 loyalty ability will now be -1. other version of wording was “Everytime an opponent activates an (planeswalker loyalty) ability with negative loyalty cost they must pay an additional -3 loyalty counters to activate that ability” however this was used more words and felt too wordy and I prefer the I showed you guys I also want opinion as to what version I should submit, the -4 loyalty counter one or -3 loyalty counter one and if either of the cards mana cost or ability is over or underpowered. I keep in mind that I want this card to be effective against planeswalker cards like nicol bolas scryfall.com/card/e01/85/nicol-bolas-planeswalker who has +3 loyalty ability which is the highest positive loyalty ability a planeswalker can have. I pretty sure I want the -3 loyalty version because it feels more balance since it won’t hurt planeswalkers with lower positive loyalty abilities such as +1 also this card would be more useful in early game so the lower it mana cost the better thus the balanced lower mana cost -3 version would work best, if I were to make -4 loyalty increase I would have to make make mana cost 2 blue blue blue I think my original wording works, but if you want fewer words, yours is very close. Instead of "worth", the term "cost" is used. This wording required the word "cost" to be used twice right after each other, which I'm not a fan of, but here it is: "Opponents' abilities with a negative loyalty cost cost an additional  to activate." As for balancing, I feel this is a very niche effect. If it was -4 loyalty, it might as well say "abilities with negative loyalty costs can't be activated." I think making the card cost 4-mana is a little high. I wouldn't put this in the main deck, and for the sideboard, I'd just put in Pithing Needle, which gets the job done better and much cheaper (sure, it only shuts down 1 Planeswalker, but that's generally enough). |
|
|
|
Post by Daij_Djan on Mar 20, 2023 19:14:00 GMT
This might be quite an interesting discussion, but it'd have to be for another thread since I need to close this one now  Word of advice for everybody, use chat gpt to help with balancing your cards since wizards of the coast has not disclosed their balancing formula algorithm for cards.. There have been written several card design articles by WotC over the years and one thing those have made very clear is that such an algorithm flat out doesn't exist. The cost of a Magic card depends on many things, from obvious stuff like effect and/or stats, over stuff like rarity all the way up to when (because of power creep and fluctuation between design spaces) and where (depending on the given Limited environment and/or meta WotC will cost the same card differently depending on how this might influence the overall gameplay of the suroundings)the card will see print. There simply is no algorithm – WotC roughly balances cards based on existing evidence, then playtests and adjusts the costs and stats till they fit what they want to achieve with the card in question. Which kind of makes me wonder how exactly ChatGPT could help here – since despite it's recent success it's still just a word combining algorithm with lots and lots of blind spots (and rasicm ).. ..and websites like scryfall only pick up key words and do not correctly interpret the meaning of whole sentences like chat gpt This probably boils down to experience with Magic and its (sometimes indeed quite twisted) wordings. For example Carth the Lion and Eidolon of Obstruction should be the only two cards existing in the game messing with the activation costs of loyalty abilities.
This thread is now closed, the poll can be found here. And here's the next challenge! |
|
"When in doubt, do a common."