The Wonderful All-Encompassing Card Clinic

@gorgonzola : Seems reasonable. Wouldn't change a thing.

How about this?

Flawed Invocation
Sorcery
Create a 4/4 white Angel creature token with flying. It has “Creatures your opponents control have protection from white.”

This sort of design doesn't belong at uncommon-- stuff that grants downside to your entire team is usually rare.


Yes. The added drawback relative to regular STP (every opponent gaining life instead of just the controller) is interesting in multiplayer, but white getting to exile two creatures at instant speed for three mana is still too much for the color that's not supposed to get unconditional spot removal.

Ok, Xenagos , but why is this not just a creature? 

Oh hey I didn't know this thread made it over.

I'm trying to make a dual land appropriate for common, thoughts on a cycle of lands like this? 

Flourishing Meadow
Land
Flourishing Meadow enters the battlefield tapped unless you control another land named Flourishing Meadow.
: Add  or .

How about if it replaced the basic land slot? I don't into limited so I don't know if it would show up enough for the ability to be meaningful at all.

Note that if you're following Wizards' conventions, the difference between common/uncommon duals and rare duals is that only the latter have the capacity to enter the battlefield untapped. Of course, they do this to punish you with a tempo hit for not shelling out $100 for duals, so you do you. I think this is probably not relevant enough a rider in limited.

Hello, new here. I have been having a idea of some industrial theme cards and those are two ideas I dont know how to deal with.

Hello voltaic-qui, I mean if a card like this appears. magiccards.info/scans/en/chk/243.jpg

Okay, the mechanic still needs some work. I got a lot of help making it though. I am still wondering how strong this will be as a power check drawback. Which is what I intend to use it as. Well I should probably talk about the mechanic.

Sever N things (usually non severed lands)

Example:

Mana addict Selach. ::R::
Creature - Goblin
Haste
When ~ dies, sever a non severed land.
(A severed land has no types and can only tap for ::C::.)
2/2

Several things I want to know.
One, is the reminder text should mention that things can only be severed once or if it is shorter and better to say non-sevred or maybe there another option
Two, any possible problems with the mechanic. I know it can colorless fix, but I am not really planning having cards that require ::C:: in their cost. Also, they should make less than ideal lands for things like eldrazi. Then again, there is a color/colorless clash. There are going to be colorless cards that have generic costs, but benefit from using specific colors to pay for the casting. So I do not think the sverering should work in unexpected ways. Correct me if I am wrong.
Three, as a drawback for a card, does it work as intended in this example? Should it be an enter the battlefield trigger instead?
Four, anything else that you can think of.

I will appreciate the time, taken to look at this.

PS:
I intend this to work like sacrifice. However this suffers with a problem I encountered with sacrifice. Back when I started learning, I read a card with the sacrifice keyword and wondered what did it exactly do, because some cards seemed way to strong if you were sacrificing your opponent's creature. That coupled with the fact that some people at school thought that Llanowar Elves ramped you a forest, I mean allowed you to search for a forest and put it on the battle field. Has me worried that people might misunderstand what severing means. You can only do it to your own things. Like sacrifice.

Daij_Djan
Yes, sever is supposed to work as a drawback like sacrifice.

I see, I figured it was way too powerfully as a die effect. Especially since it is comparable to Goblin Guide.If it had no haste, would the drawback work as a die effect?

Hey all, new here and have a quick question. I've been interested in posting balanced cards based on other games, and hopefully maybe even releasing a set in the Showcase sometime. (I've browsed around the community for a little while but this is my first time actually participating in it.) I've noticed a lot of cards here state a trademark and copyright of WOTC, which is expected considering most of them are original (to my knowledge). If I were to create cards based off of another game, e.g. Overwatch or Diablo or something, would I put the copyright under WOTC or the creator of the original idea? (e.g. Blizzard entertainment, in the case of overwatch. An example of what I've been putting on the cards I've been creating is below.)
Thanks for your answer in advance.
_{Hopefully that spoiler worked....}

Thanks for the clarification. As for the render, it was probably the link that was too long. I'm not sure of any sites I could upload to that would be able to give shorter links, could you provide one for me?
My main confusion was that I'm primarily using art inspired by games such as Overwatch, but not directly from them in most cases. Is there any place I should put the credit to the inspiration of the card in that kind of situation?

Well, I'm using a German host personally, so I'm not sure if this really helps you Other than that, quite a few people use imgur.com as far as I know.

If the artwork is "only" inspired by Overwatch, then credit goes to the artist that got inspired by it. Which basically means if it's not an official artwork (or direct screenshots), then credit goes to the artist just as for any other picture. The inspiration doesn't matter here - if anything, the artist will give that credit

Gonna go ahead and link these cards now that they've been judged, tho I'm here I'm more looking for feedback on the mechanic itself:


How healthy a mechanic is it? My thinking it's an interactive way of doing a cost reduction mechanic but I also worry that it would be too snowbally, as your cards are basically unplayable if you're answered early or forced onto defense.

---

oddnanref : Continuing from what daij_djan was saying on sever: As written, there's no reason you shouldn't be able to sever your already severed lands, or even severed lands you don't control. Even if it's not in the rules text it should definitely be in the reminder text. The mechanic has also memory issues so I would use counters personally, which would result in something like this:


Which is now a bit wordy but that's the cost of complex mechanics. I'm not sure what else you wanted to be able to sever, but from there you could just sever multiple times if you want to sever N or something.

Getting that "sever" semantic satiation. Sever sever sever

For Rechromatize there's probably no clean way of doing this. I posted something pretty similar to this in the old thread but got shut down pretty hard, so I scrapped it and made it into essentially split cards instead. That was for instants and sorceries tho, for permanents your only option is likely a pseudoability with the rules text swiped from Cankerous Thirst and the like.

kinotherapy
It is a little ironic how that reads so similar to my original design. Yet at the same time has better wording.

Do you have a link for your mechanic similar to mine? I am curious as to how it was worded.

Most of the limitations arise from the need to explain every single detail of a new mechanic. I think I can reduce the letter count from the proposed sever mechanic.

When ~ dies, sever 1. (Put a sever counter on an unsevered land you control. Severed lands lose all types and only tap for )

I want the lands to truly become nearly unusable. So even an Urborg or a Riftstone Portal cannot make them produce anything but .

---

Instigate cards, to me at least, seem cards that would normally offer battalion effects, except they offer them upfront, without the need to attack. I would start from there and see how it goes.