Weekend Art ChallengeClick through to see this weekend's art and the design requirements for your card submission, due Monday morning. Remember that you may ask for feedback by mid-day Sunday and redesign your submission once after you get it.
This weekend, the set is Tesla. While we've discussed many possibilities for its inspiration, Ekkremes, the only thing Tesla's lead designer has committed to, is Mechs that are combined from more than one card (possibly via DFC BFMs). One possibility is to set the Mechs up to fight giant monsters, and I'd like you all to explore that possibility this weekend.
Your challenge is to design a card for Tesla using WoGzilla's Uknown Danger. Beyond that, my only requirement is that your card somehow leverage the flavor suggested by the art's name. There needs to be some aspect of the unknown in your card's theme, and hopefully the rules text of your card will support that flavor. For bonus points, the more common the card is while remaining awesome, the better.
Submerged Monstrosity 2BB
ReplyDeleteCreature - Horror (C)
Surge B (B, discard a card: Remove all +1/+1 counters from this, then put X +1/+1 counters on it, where X is the discarded card's converted mana cost.)
2/2
Surge is of course based on the Terror of Misthaven discussion. This version hides the card's true size, incentives you to play with other fatties, and keeps the text relatively short. I'd appreciate feedback!
This is neat. At first, you think it sucks that you have to discard a card here, but then you realize that anytime you're doing that, you're effectively giving the creature on the other side -X/-X. And getting a permanent boost in the process. It would be frustrating the second time though. And this does suffer the usual 2:1 aura problem. Hmm.
DeleteOblivious Prey 1G
ReplyDeleteEnchantment-Aura (U)
Enchant Creature
Whenever enchanted creature attacks you or a planeswalker you control, look at the top card of your library. If it’s a creature card, you may put it onto the battlefield blocking enchanted creature.
There's always a worry with cards like this that they won't do what they say because the opponent won't attack, but I think this one may deliver. Assuming the enchanted creature's big enough (and why would you bother "removing" something tiny from attacking?), it's likely worthwhile to swing in most of the time.
Another question is whether this should be "Enchant Creature You Don't Control" to help players parse the text. The downsides being that it would make the card wordier and doesn't allow cool game play by letting you play around Act of Treasons.
"Enchant creature an opponent controls" feels much clearer than letting you enchant your own creature.
DeleteUnless I feel my big creature could make a big difference on defense, I definitely still attack while its enchanted. Most of them time, you won't reveal a creature and even if you do, it might be smaller and just chump-block. Of course, you getting a free bomb would be brutal.
Put this on a medium or small creature and, yeah, unless I've got tricks, I'm probably not attacking.
Thanks for the feedback, I guess I will go with "Enchant creature an opponent controls." Sometimes I get too caught up in one cool thing to see how little impact it has, and there's still plenty of cool discovery with Boiling Blood effects and library stacking.
DeleteI'm messing around with an idea for a green creature with Islandsurge, which should give a creature variable P/T like Terror of Misthaven, but also reward you for playing Islands.
ReplyDeleteMulti-card reveals are awkward because you have to specify what to do with all those cards. Exiling cards from the top of your library is faster, but can add up too fast. Here's where I'm currently at:
Megasaur 3GG
Creature-Lizard (cmn)
Islandsurge (Whenever Megasaur becomes blocked, you may search your library for any number of Island cards and exile them. Megasaur gets +1/+1 until end of turn for each card exiled this way. Shuffle your library.)
4/4
I like that there's tension in using more islands now or saving them for later, and that your opponent never /knows/ how many you have access to, but can ballpark it. I don't like that you could be shuffling every round. I removed "or blocks" so it's at least not every turn… that also eliminates the APNAP problem when two surgers fight. It does make them oddly bad at defending.
Feedback appreciated.
DeleteCool mechanic, but I think it operates a little strangely in practice. The opponent is very likely to just not block, even with a 1/1, since it gives you a free Mana Severance and also a potential instant-win with trample and/or Fling effects. Blocking this with a 6/6 and watching its controller get exactly 3 islands is also a feel-bad situation. The off-color usage creates additional, and I think unnecessary, tension.
DeleteYeah, giving a free Mana Severance isn't ideal. We could limit how many you can get each time: Islandsurge 4, for example. But that's more words and a little fiddly.
DeleteTrample and Fling are also valid concerns.
I think the biggest issue is the shuffling. Players want to play magic, the more "mechanical" operations a player needs to do the less they actually get to play the game. As eggs has shown in modern each shuffle takes away from the enjoyment of the game. Personally I would love if I only had to shuffle my deck before each game and never durring. Obviously shuffle effects are the only way to make many cards work, but I think being that we are only designing one set we should try to have as few shuffle effects as possible.
DeleteThis creature is simply unblockable because the defending player doesn't want to block this and have it become an 8/8 or something.
DeleteThe best way to get around that would be to make it trigger after blockers are declared regardless of if it's blocked so that people get scared and block it, but at that point I suspect too many games will end when a blocker's removed and suddenly you swing for 12.
DeleteA lot of my concerns have already been voiced here, but I did want to add that the two G in the mana cost creates a bad kind of tension when the surge land is island. Constructed decks are going to want their nonbasic mana fixing, and limited decks simply aren't going to have enough islands to start throwing them away left and right. In either case, unless the block rewards you otherwise for playing basic lands over nonbasic (and nothing about Tesla thus far makes me think it will), this is going to create some bad experiences for players frequently.
DeleteIt would be a very different story btw if the creature was blue or if the surge was for forests.
@Rory—I agree. Shuffling multiple times from one card is a pain, and the worst thing about this design.
Delete@Chah—It's not remotely unblockable: It can be chump-blocked all day long. That's very different. I do agree that it'll rarely be blocked with an expectation of trading or winning.
@zefferal—You're right. 4G is more appropriate. I do think it's important that it references an off-color land, because that makes the limit to how many times you can pump it relevant.
Unseen Threat (4GGG)
ReplyDeleteEnchantment (U)
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice Unseen Threat. If you do, reveal cards from the top of your library until you reveal a creature card with converted mana cost 7 or greater. Put that creature card onto the battlefield. It gains haste. Shuffle all other cards revealed this way into your library.
Feedback welcome!
Very cool. We don't know what's coming, but we know it'll be big and angry.
DeleteMy only concern is that it will often be a proxy (and ramp card) when you only have one big monster in your Limited deck or one playset in your Constructed deck:
Green's Diabolic Tutor 4GGG
Sorcery
Search your library for the only creature in your deck with CMC 7+. Cast it without paying its mana cost.
Goes right into the Modern Emrakul deck.
Unseen Threat could even persuade a player to include fewer giants so they can be sure to get the better one.
Having a guaranteed chance to hit exactly one playset of a dude is an issue with this card in Constructed. I don't think it'll be that problematic in Limited, though. Remember that having fewer things to tutor up increases the likelihood of drawing all of your tutor targets before you can cast Unseen Threat. Obviously, we haven't figured out what the Limited environment is going to look like, but given the choice between playing a single 7cmc bomb + Unseen Threat vs. playing a 7cmc bomb + an average 7cmc creature, I suspect the latter will be correct a significant amount of the time. The one turn window between tapping out for Unseen Threat and actually getting the creature might allow the opponent to develop an insurmountable board/life advantage, or just play enchantment removal.
DeleteTerror of the Deep 4UU
ReplyDeleteCreature - Lizard Mutant(C)
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
~ doesn't untap unless an opponent controls a creatures with power six or greater.
6/7
"It lay slumbering upon the ocean floor until the something on the surface was big enough enough to awaken it."
Feedback welcome
ReplyDeleteI like the concept. Is this simpler? (Not saying it is, just wondering)
Delete~ can't attack unless defending player controls a big creature.
~ can't block unless a big creature is attacking.
I'd say it was on par in terms of simplicity but plays quite differently. Your version possibly has a touch more complexity in multiplayer games such as 2HG.
DeleteI do kinda like the idea of 'cheating' Terror of the Deep into combat through threaten style tricks or even burst of strength tricks. The question is whether Tesla wants such a thing happening in it's sole big blue creature slot at common.
Language wise I think it should clean up like this:
Terror of the Deep 4UU
Creature - Lizard Mutant(C)
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
~ doesn't untap during your untap step, unless an opponent controls a creatures with power six or greater.
6/7
"It lay slumbering upon the ocean floor until the something on the surface was big enough enough to awaken it."
A couple of common-ish card ideas, based on the idea of having an "underwater" creature whose P/T are not fixed. Feedback welcome and appreciated.
ReplyDelete1. Deepwater Leviathan (Common)
Creature- Leviathan
{3}{U}{U}
3/3
Whenever Deepwater Leviathan blocks or gets blocked, it gets +1/+1 until end of turn for each Island the defending player controls.
2. Submerged Leviathan (Common)
Creature- Leviathan
{3}{U}{U}
1/7
Hexproof
{U}: Submerged Leviathan gets +2/-2 and loses hexproof until end of turn.
I think Deepwater needs its lines split, because I kept reading it as caring about your opponent, not the defending player:
DeleteWhenever ~ blocks a creature, it gets +1/+1 for each Island you control.
Whenever ~ becomes blocked by a creature, it gets +1/+1 for each Island the defending player controls.
I really like Submerged Leviathan, although it feels underpowered as a 5 drop.
There's nothing inherently wrong with "U = +2/-2" but it does feel odd. I get that you want it to be splashy (pun intended) to justify the loss of hexproof. What about:
DeleteXU: CARDNAME gets +X/-X until EOT and loses hexproof until end of turn.
I like Deepwater, but I think Submerged tells a better story.
Shadowborn Monstrosity - 4U
ReplyDeleteCreature - Shapeshifter Beast (Uncommon)
3/3
When ~ ETB, exile up to seven cards from the top of your library face down.
Whenever this creature blocks or becomes blocked, you may reveal any number of cards exiled this way. If you do, ~ gets +X/+X for each card revealed this way, where X is the revealed card's converted mana cost. Put the revealed cards on top of your library in any order.
I like that, but its nine lines of text. I also think it might be more interesting if you could only reveal one card at a time. Also, should the cards go to the /top/? But again, nine lines is a problem.
DeleteYeah, as I was typing it out I realized it was going to read long. Definitely not a common, maybe not even uncommon.
DeleteAs far as where the cards end up, I felt like self-milling for such an unpredictable effect needed some constant upside, so I thought at least library stacking may be in order.
I renamed him Carl and rephrased the PT boost, but that only brought it down to 8 lines. Still not good. I'm going to rethink this one a little bit.
Maybe:
DeleteWhen CARDNAME ETB, exile up to seven cards from the top of your library face down.
Reveal a card exiled by CARDNAME and put it on the bottom of your library: CARDNAME gets +X/+X until EOT, where X is that card's converted mana cost.
That gets it down to... 8 lines (or 7 for 'Carl').
Another possibility (which I'll use if you don't):
DeleteXU: Reveal the top X cards of your library. Shadowborn Monstrosity gets +1/+1 until end of turn for each Island card revealed this way. Put the revealed cards on the bottom of your library in a random order.
Probably missed the cutoff (been a little busy with school and moving), but I think that the first suggestion's wording is easiest and doable at common, even if it loses some of the mystery hugeness I was aiming for. And we're sticking with "Carl" if its still an option.
DeleteTidecaller Leviathan (uncommon)
ReplyDelete{4}{U}{U}
Creature - Leviathan
Islandwalk
Whenever CARDNAME is turned face up, target land becomes an Island until end of turn.
Metamorph {3}{U} (You may cast this face down for {3}. Turn it face up or face down at any time for its metamorph cost. While it's face down, it's a 2/2 creature.)
5/5
Thoughts?
I really like the variation on morph and how you give players an incentive to use it. 6UU is a lot to pay for one unblockable attack, though. Maybe turning it face down again should be free?
DeleteThis is cool, pay a cost and he either emerges from the depths or sinks back down, where you can't tell how big he is. In general, I think Metamorph might play better with 'turned face down' triggers to give players a gameplay incentive to re-morph their monsters. Either that or some way to give it hexproof while face down, it would make sense if they could dive to evade a spell.
DeleteThe flavor is pretty sweet, but this effect isn't quite justifying the mechanic yet. I admit 5 unblockable damage is often worth it, but 6U is a lot to pay and James' point that making this a vanilla 2/2 again is pretty unattractive on its own.
DeleteReworked:
DeleteTidecaller Leviathan (uncommon)
{5}{U}
Creature - Leviathan
Whenever CARDNAME is turned face up, target land becomes an Island until end of turn.
Whenever CARDNAME is turned face down, target creature gains islandwalk until end of turn.
Metamorph {2}{U}{U} (You may cast this face down for {3}. At any time, you may turn it face up for its metamorph cost or turn it face down for {0}. While it's face down, it's a 2/2 creature.)
4/4
More incentive to turn it face down + less of a hoop to jump through to do so. Thoughts?
Unknown Danger G
ReplyDeleteInstant (C)
The next creature card you cast this turn can be cast as though it
had flash.
Add G to your mana pool.
Feedback
DeleteScout's Warning in Green at Common for 0 mana. That's not going to fly. Don't get me wrong. I like it a lot, but it's incredibly powerful, even without the cantrip.
DeleteI'm not too worried about power level. "Add G to your mana pool" is quite a lot worse than "Draw a card".
DeleteI could see this as a common, but it's pretty unattractive. The players who are most likely to play automatic 1-for-2 cards aren't the ones who are most excited by this kind of trickiness.
I think it's fairly lenticular. That's how one player can see it as a "1 for 2" and another can see it as "incredibly powerful". At best, this card is a Green Rebuke, one that's pretty dependent on things going right.
DeleteI like this card for three reasons: 1) It's the sort of weaker removal that you'd expect to see in a battle cruiser Magic set, 2) I'd imagine it also plays well with Mechs, because you're able to flash in a missing piece when your opponent isn't expecting it, and 3) I like the "free" mechanic of Mirroden for a factory set, because it captures the feel of an assembly line well to me. It might also open the possibility for Deconstruct to be an uncommon reprint, which is about the level of artifact destruction I think the set might warrant.
I'm glad to have gotten zefferal and Havelock's opinions, because otherwise I might have assumed most players would like this card; I love it.
DeleteI would even consider trading the G for "any color" to add a little extra surprise potential.
I hadn't considered that. I think that making it cost {G} straight up would reduce the power level too much, and {1} might be the right call even if that makes Deconstruct less likely. Changing it to any color is a bit too much of a leap. It adds extra surprise, but it really changes the ability of the card. Suddenly, a card that was about casting a creature with flash becomes about fixing your mana. You might not even use that mana for the creature.
DeleteHungry Tyrant {3}{G}{G}
ReplyDeleteFlash
Digest (Whenever a creature is killed by Hungry Tyrant, exile that creature card with meat counters on it equal to its toughness. At the beginning of your upkeep, remove a meat counter from that card. If you do, put a +1/+1 counter on Hungry Tyrant and tap it.)
3/5
Uncommon. Feedback wanted.
DeleteA couple of questions on the wording: First, how are you defining "killed"? Is it like Sengir Vampire, or does it check for death in combat? Second, is the meat counter removal optional? If not, this creature is basically useless for a couple of turns after it kills something.
DeleteIs it worth it to parse out the digestion or can we just get all the counters immediately?
DeleteThere is mounting tension as you watch the creature grow.
DeleteLike suspend, it can be allowed to become a huge size without costing like an Eldrazi because it takes time and it can't attack/block while it's growing.
If your opponent's digest creature becomes too big, you can throw something to this creature to distract it a few turns.
If it just gets +1/+1 counters immediately, it just becomes a "never block this" mechanic + When it works it would be swingy and just gets unfairly big.
@Ipaulsen
DeleteI think it should mean to kill in combat rather than just damaged.
The counter removal is mandatory. That's the gameplay behind this card: It's allowed to be huge for its cost because of the time it takes to grow. For the opponent, letting the monster grow becomes a real possibility because it can buy time.
Changing it to this to be clearer:
DeleteHungry Tyrant {3}{G}{G}
Flash
Digest (Whenever a creature dealt damage by Hungry Tyrant this turn dies, exile that card with +1/+1 counters on it equal to its toughness. At the beginning of your upkeep, move a +1/+1 counter from the exiled card to Hungry Tyrant if able. If you do, tap Hungry Tyrant.)
4/4
My concern is this kind of mechanic is going to create "feel bad" moments where your creature survives 4 turns in digesting mode, then the opponent unceremoniously kills it with a Doom Blade.
DeleteShould also say "nontoken creature" for clarity.
I like the concept, but you might be overcomplicating it. The flavor is that it spends time to eat its prey and gets ginormous in the process.
DeleteWhenever a creature dealt damage by ~ this turn dies, you may put X +1/+1 counter on ~, where X is equal to that creature's toughness. If you do, ~ doesn't untap during your next untap step.
He gets big immediately, takes a turn to nap and digest, and then goes hunting again.
The game play of my version is something like Arc Blade + Cyclical Evolution. Do you really mind removing a creature every few turns?
DeleteI don't think the main feeling it produces is frustration, it's more like mounting doom. The feeling I want is this: "The first time we sighted the monster, it was big as a ship (3/3). It went on a rampage, then it seemed to be hibernating under the sea. The next time it emerged, it was as big as a mountain (6/6). It caused legendary destruction, then went back to the sea. Now it's been sighted again a few years later. It looks like an mountain range under the sea as it's sleeping, the tip of its back fins forming a chain of islands where it breaks the ocean surface. It's still growing, and it would reach the sky when it gets up (12/12). God help us all on that day."
About Doom Blade: Even a design like Eldrazi suffers the problem of "what if I go through all this work to cast this and it gets Doom Bladed?" so I don't think it's unsolvable.
I think it's important that it sleeps a long time to digest, because it means it actually does get blocked and gets to grow to epic size. Who would want to block it otherwise?
If it's going to be a very late game creature, maybe zefferal's tapdown effect is enough of a slowdown. It could have an Eldrazi-style size that forces people to chump block. It could have an Eldrazi-style cost to balance that high power. The defending player would die in a few hits if it's unblocked, so they would chump block it to buy 2 turns per chump block.
But we've seen that kind of general late finisher style play pattern before on the Eldrazi. Basically, I mean the style where it enters the game late, races for a few turns with an ability that doesn't immediately kill the opponent but makes it ultimately hard to race against, then wins.
Instead, we can have it enter play earlier, re-emerging bigger and scarier multiple times over the course of the game at different stages. But it needs to have a long tapdown time for that version. With relation to Mechs, it's going to create the feeling of "Uh oh, the monster found its prey! Now we've got to find the parts and build a Mech before it comes back in 3 turns!"
It is possible that Digest could work on other bodies.
DeleteOn this 3/5, it's a downside mechanic:
I only chump-block your Hungry Tyrant when tapping it down for multiple turns will (probably) win me the game. Otherwise, I just take 3 or block with a 2/4.
Blocking it with a 3/3 takes it out of commission for three full turns. If I don't turn the game around in that time, I can chump-block with a single 1/1 every other turn.
On this card digest is terrible.
Somehow missed the 4/4 flash version. That's much better.
DeleteNOTE FROM THE EDITOR:
ReplyDeleteI accidentally deleted a post from R_Stech, as it was nested under a post that he/she had removed.
In the future, if you feel compelled to remove one of your posts because of the lack of an edit button, please do not respond to that post.
Let it rest and ponder its ignominy until I delete it.
Emerging Monstrosity (Common)
ReplyDelete5U
Creature - Lizard Horror
3/5
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may vex an opponent. If you win, Emerging Monstrosity gets +3/+5 until end of turn. (To vex, exile a card from your hand face down, then the opponent chooses odd or even. Reveal the exiled card and return it to your hand. If its converted mana cost isn’t the chosen value, you win. Zero is even.)
I'm hoping 8 lines of text is mitigated by the fact that you only need 3 lines to know what the card does after you understand vex. Big if.
Not sure why vex feels fairer than a coin flip, since they're both 50/50, but for some reason it does. Both players feel like they're more in control and there are interesting decisions to make when you know some of the cards the opponent is holding. The length of the rules text is an issue, though, and doing it every turn could potentially be pretty tedious.
DeleteI agree vex is better than a flip and once you know it, it's pretty quick and easy. Even so, 8 lines of text is brutal for a common.
DeleteIs upkeep the best time for this trigger?
Slumbering Ancient
ReplyDelete5UU
Creature - Leviathan (C)
Slumbering Ancient enters the battlefield tapped and doesn't untap during your untap step.
Whenever you're attacked, untap Slumbering Ancient.
5/5
You won't like it when it's awake.
You never know when you play it if it'll wake up and bash faces. My hope is that's "unknown" enough while still being common.
Feedback, as always, appreciated.
Seems underpowered to me: something like 6/6 for 4UU would be totally reasonable at common, especially since the creature is effectively a defender most of the time. I like the design, though.
Delete6/6 quasi-vigilance, though? I think this is much, much stronger than it looks.
DeleteI don't think my design (7 for 5/5) is that strong, which I'm okay with. Compared to Harbor Serpent or Chained Throatseeker, this feels weak. Again, I think it's an acceptable blue common while also occasionally able to hold its ground.
DeleteIf you're being attacked when you cast this (which you probably will be, since you've been sitting on this card until turn 9 or so), then you know it'll defend you (and possibly also race). If you're on the offense, you know this is a dead card.
DeleteWhile the reverse of win-more is much preferable, it would be pretty sad to hold onto this card for so long only to finally cast it and have it do nothing.
What if, instead of psuedo-vigilance and conditional usefulness, Slumbering Ancient was always fine, but better when you're attacked?
Monster from Below 2G (Uncommon)
ReplyDeleteEnchant land
When Monster from Below enters the battlefield, exile a creature card from your hand face down.
Whenever enchanted land becomes tapped, put an emerge counter on Monster from Below. Then you may sacrifice Monster from Below and cast the exiled card, paying 1 less for each emerge counter on Monster from Below.
It's important that there is unknown danger to the opponent while still maintaining known-ness to yourself. Avoiding the use of the library for its random data generation can be both too cumbersome logistically and leading to being random for yourself as well.
The design of this card tends to favor the creature being exiled face down being of the LARGE variety - which is a good thing. This means whoever has a deck with large monsters in it would want to play this card.
I costed it at 2G, so that, if cast on turn three, it goes like this:
Turn 4: Can cast a Cost-5 creature.
Turn 5: Can cast a Cost-7 creature.
Turn 6: Can cast a Cost-9 creature.
And so on. Note that this the above is the BEST CASE scenario if you cast the aura on turn 3 AND have your awesome creature already in hand (like a 9-cost creature for your planned turn 6 play). Otherwise, other scenarios will not be as impressive as above.
Neat. I like the suspense.
DeleteThis could be a non-aura enchantment. Is it an aura so opponents have two ways to answer it?
This is currently 8 lines of text.
Why do you say it's important that the danger is only unknown to the opponent?
You're right about how this can be a non-aura. I was just in my flavor mode of thinking and thinking about how each tap of the land increases the chance that a monster will awaken from within.
DeleteInstead it'd be like this:
Monster from Below 2G (Uncommon)
Enchantment
When Monster from Below enters the battlefield, exile a creature card from your hand face down.
At the beginning of your upkeep, put an emerge counter on Monster from Below. Then you may sacrifice Monster from Below and cast the exiled card, paying 1 less for each emerge counter on Monster from Below.
I didn't make it an Aura to give the opponent two ways to answer it. In fact, I wouldn't want the opponent to answer it because then it would leave a dead card exiled face down, and that's card disadvantage.
I don't know how to accommodate for this card disadvantage problem AND tackle the 8 lines of text. Well, 8 lines of text IS O.K. on an uncommon, I believe, as long as it is straightforward, which it is. Just an upkeep trigger.
I say it's important because then the opponent will feel more dread. Knowing that the player who cast it put something potentially devastating makes it that much more of a feeling of looming danger. When it's random for both players, it feels more... red. And has a different feeling than "Monster from Below." More like "Critter Lottery." Like a Russian Roulette.
Hey, it's an Ice Cauldron that's much easier to understand and doesn't have memory issues! I like it, but it's possibly a bit too complex for uncommon.
DeleteUnknown Leviathan
ReplyDelete4UUUU
Creature-Leviathan
4 Lurk:You may exile ~ from your hand during your end step face down.
If ~ is Lurking you may pay 3UUU to cast it as though it had flash. It gains haste.
Trample
6/8
Uncommon
If we were to use this mechanic at uncommon each creature would be french vanilla. I believe this could work at common on vanilla creatures. Rare could experiment more.
I like this in theory, but I would have to see how (if) it plays differently than Morph.
DeleteFlavor wise it makes more sense than a random 2/2. Also being in exile is much less restrictive than having to be a 2/2. It would be similar
Delete