Weekend Art ChallengeClick through to see this weekend's art and the design requirements for your card submission, due Monday morning. Every submission warrants feedback, which I will try to provide, and which everyone is welcome to provide as well.
If you choose, you may use that feedback to revise your submission any number of times. I will post and review the most recent submission from each designer some time on Monday, life permitting. To help ensure I recreate your design accurately, please use CARDNAME instead of ~ and don't use the {} symbol images in your submissions.
This weekend's art is by keepwaling07 and we're back in the world of Tesla. Your card must be a colored artifact, common or uncommon. Bonus points if it's relevant that the card is both colored and an artifact, the subtler the better.
Idle Idol
ReplyDelete2B
Artifact - Uncommon
Whenever a creature dies, put a charge counter on CARDNAME.
Sacrifice a creature: CARDNAME becomes a Construct artifact creature with "This creature's power and toughness are each equal to the number of charge counters on it."
I can't remember if Tesla's development has resulted in specialized counters of some sort, but this is just another in the lineage of Chimeric Constructs.
Not an especially subtle color-relationship, but who doesn't love the trope of long-forgotten technology that demands a blood-sacrifice to turn on?
The two abilities clearly play well together, and I like feeding a black robot with bodies. It reads a little strange that you can animate the construct permanently multiple times. Maybe it's should be Until EOT.
DeleteI simply left that line out by accident as I think I got distracted looking at the templating for Chimeric Mass as I originally had written it as:
Delete"...becomes a Construct artifact creature with power and toughness each equal to the number of charge counters on it."
Except, rules regarding layers apparently make it so you have to append the P/T-setting ability as a clause that it gains. Maybe Jenesis (some other rules guru) can clarify that.
Anyway, it should in fact be:
Sacrifice a creature: Until end of turn, CARDNAME becomes a Construct artifact creature with "This creature's power and toughness are each equal to the number of charge counters on it."
I'm also curious why they use "this creature's" in the second clause, as opposed to the card's name. I suppose it's just a text-length thing.
Cool.
DeleteUsually when a card grants rules text, it's on another card, so they use "this card" to refer to whatever it may be. I guess they do that on cards that grant themselves rules text just to be consistent. Funny though.
Would this be a simpler wording:
DeleteWhenever a creature dies, put a +1/+1 counter on Idle Idol.
Sacrifice a creature: Idle Idol becomes a 0/0 Construct artifact creature.
A little different interaction wise but cleaner.
Well, there is certain precedent that I was designing with in mind, in terms of aligning it with the previous Chimeric cards.
DeleteThere's also an issue where if a set has +1/+1 counters and Charge counters, they typically try to ensure readable boardstates by only putting +1/+1 counters on things that are permanently creatures.
That all said, were this design to be submitted into a real-world development environment, I bet it would eventually be pushed along to just be something like Arcbound Ravager without Modular.
Wandering Colossus - 1/w 1/u 1/b 1/r 1/g
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature - Uncommon
Vibrance - CARDNAME enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters on it, where X is the number of colored mana used to cast it.
1/1
I think the starting power/toughness here is what keeps it at uncommon. It could probably use a boost, but I'm not sure how to valuate a cost/power ratio on this one, honestly.
Making colored mana matter on Tesla might not be the best fit - not too familiar with Tesla and this is only my 3rd design attempt for the plane. And obviously I derived Vibrance as a cousin to Domain, where at least Vibrance gives the benefit of the doubt of having dual lands rather than the actual basics.
DeleteIs this functionally different from mana cost {5}?
DeleteThis is basically sunburst, right?
DeleteDevin and axx1e are right. I like this card, but it's really:
DeleteWandering Colossus 5
Artifact Creature (Uncommon)
Sunburst
1/1
Well you can cast it for RRRRR and it'll be a 6/6.
DeleteWow I didn't realize that I messed this up. I missed the mark on this one. Don't know what I was thinking, clearly.
DeleteSo I basically gave it sunburst.
Doh.
It needs to read: Number of DIFFERENT TYPES of colored mana, but that still makes it sunburst.
DeleteTrying to think of ways to make the fact that it's a colored artifact matter. I'm not including this in my submission (because I have a cooler idea that ignores the colored part), but the best I can think of is a riff off Convoke:
ReplyDeleteFabrication (Each artifact you tap while casting this spell pays for 1 or one mana of that artifact's color.)
Cobbled Colossus (uncommon)
ReplyDelete6BB
Artifact Creature - Golem
Fragmentation 8 (This creature enters the battlefield with eight +1/+1 counters on it. If damage would be dealt to it, instead remove that many +1/+1 counters from it. For each counter removed this way, put a Scrap artifact token onto the battlefield.)
Sacrifice eight artifacts: Return CARDNAME from your graveyard to the battlefield.
0/0
Fragmentation is neat (though perhaps too ambitious for a keyword). I do worry about an 8/8 creature that never dies (and that the opponent is better off leaving as a 1/1 or 2/2 than finishing off), particularly at uncommon. 8 lines of text
DeleteAs much as I like the flavor of Fragmentation (the idea of parts flying off a robot as it gets hit is pretty cool), I think your instinct is right that it doesn't belong as a keyword. There's too much going on there by itself for the card to do much else with the text.
DeleteJules said elsewhere that scrap tokens really need to do something in order to not just be Johnny fodder. Let's explore that idea a bit.
Cobbled Colossus
4BB
Artifact Creature - Golem
When CARDNAME dies, put five Module artifact tokens onto the battlefield. They have "Sacrifice this artifact: Put a +1/+1 counter on target creature."
5/5
I imagine this implementation will make combat too complex, but I like the concept. Maybe "When this enters the battlefield you may sacrifice any number of artifacts. Put that many +1/+1 counters on target creature."
DeleteIt shouldn't be usable at instant speed, although that can be easily fixed.
DeleteIt still feels too much like Modular and the similarity to Mirrodin is a problem with Tesla as a whole.
That said, I feel that proactive, satisfying things that you get to do like this one (placing counters to customize something) are a step in the right direction, rather than mechanics that are only there for satisfying specific costs like "sacrifice an artifact."
If Slow was evergreened, you could easily slide it onto scrap tokens.
DeleteI don't know how much/where we've discussed scrap before but as an equivalent to eldrazi spawn they are certainly at least interesting.
I hope the sorcery-speed clause doesn't make this too wordy.
DeleteCobbled Colossus
4BB
Artifact Creature - Golem
When CARDNAME dies, put five Module artifact tokens onto the battlefield. They have "Sacrifice this artifact: Put a +1/+1 counter on target creature. Activate this ability only anytime you could cast a sorcery."
5/5
Six lines in MSE. Not too wordy.
DeleteCompared to Vastwood Hydra, should this also be rare?
There's been talk of Tesla being a battlecruiser set, and I played off that, where big splashy creatures show up at all rarities. Vastwood Hydra being rare is probably the correct decision for M14 limited but I could see it being printed at uncommon in other sets.
DeleteSo, dredging up that bonus card I made for Challenge 15...
ReplyDeleteTeslan Juggernaut (2/B)(2/B)(2/B)
Artifact Creature - Juggernaut
Intimidate
Teslan Juggernaut can’t block.
4/3
This one went through various incarnations before I finally hit upon something I liked. It's the same post-apocalyptic Tesla I've been using for all my other challenges, with super duper twobrid synergy:
Motorized Forge (2/R)(2/R)(2/R)
Artifact Creature - Golem (U)
3, T, Sacrifice an artifact: Add mana equal to the sacrificed artifact’s mana cost to your mana pool. (Mana cost includes color. If a mana symbol has multiple colors, choose one.)
2/2
Flavor text:
In a world where metal is scarcer by the day, any rock can serve as an anvil.
Feedback appreciated.
I assume it's intentional you can play Forge for {R}{R}{R}, and sack it the next turn, netting {3} for that turn.
DeleteIt's surely necessary, but nonetheless fairly awkward that the player has to pay {3} for the right to produce mana.
Motorized Forge's interaction with mono-hybrid is pretty neat. It's a little weird that I can choose 2 or C for each symbol. It might be worth simplifying it to "add to your mana pool an amount of {R} equal to the sacrificed artifact's converted mana cost."
DeleteI think caring about "mana cost" still has a place in this world, but it's probably not below rare. Here is a revision that keeps the twobrid synergy, but slims down a lot of the awkwardness:
DeleteMotorized Forge (2/R)(2/R)(2/R)
Artifact Creature - Golem (U)
T, Sacrifice an artifact: Choose one — Add 2 to your mana pool; or add one mana of any of the sacrificed artifact’s colors to your mana pool.
2/2
Flavor text:
In a world where metal is scarcer by the day, any rock can serve as an anvil.
Yes, you can sacrifice a colorless artifact, choose the second mode, and get nothing. This will probably never actually come up in gameplay, so I'm not worried about the potential for confusion.
I have a couple here:
ReplyDeletePlatinum Servitor 3WW
Artifact Creature - Golem (U)
When Platinum Servitor enters the battlefield, return target artifact or white card from your graveyard to your hand.
4/4
Junkheap Trawler XB
Artifact Creature - Golem (U)
When Junkheap Trawler enters the battlefield, sacrifice eight minus X artifacts or creatures or sacrifice Junkheap Trawler.
8/8
Rusted Rumbler 4RR
Artifact Creature - Golem (U)
Modular 4
Remove a +1/+1 counter from Rusted Rumbler: Rusted Rumbler deals 1 damage to target creature.
0/0
If I get any crit, I'll put the one people think is best up for submission later (poss. with edits). Otherwise, just pick your favourite.
I like Platinum Servitor and Rusted Rumbler. Both seem very strong. We know we'll need artifact recursion to offset the card disadvantage of the mechs. Modular is a fit, but we might be avoiding it simply to keep Tesla more distinct from Mirrodin.
DeleteI wonder if Platinum Servitor should just read "white card" assuming that all artifacts in Tesla are colored. Let the player figure out that they can get that sweet artifact back.
DeleteI also think Rusted Rumbler should have "1, Remove a counter:" so that it's not always "4RR: ~ deals 4 damage to target creature"
I think Ben's right about Rusted Slasher, but as for Platinum Servitor, returning white cards from the yard isn't part of white's slice of the color pie: it's only allowed to get back permanents.
DeleteJunkheap Trawler doesn't have anything glaringly wrong with it, but just isn't clicking for me.
Maybe Rumbler should be:
DeleteRusted Rumbler 3RR
Artifact Creature - Golem (U)
Modular 4
1, Remove a +1/+1 counter from Rusted Rumbler: Rusted Rumbler deals 1 damage to target creature.
0/0
The 6 mana, pay 1 version seems a bit weak.
Platinum Servitor 3WW
Artifact Creature - Golem (U)
When Platinum Servitor enters the battlefield, return target artifact or white permanent card from your graveyard to your hand.
4/4
I assume that fixes the issue about spell returning, even if it makes the card a bit clunkier.
Warweary Walker 1W
ReplyDeleteArtifact - Equipment (C)
Equipped creature is a 3/5 white Giant.
Equip - 4W
Cool. I suspect the equip cost could be 3W since some of that cost if front-loaded.
DeleteDefinitely. I costed this super conservatively to keep it common (and let dev decide). The other idea would be for the common cycle to all reflect traditional vanilla/french vanilla creatures, with equip:casting cost of the original.
DeleteIf there were some reason the set really wanted C or 0-cost artifacts at common, they could fill that role too, though the flavor is a little weird at 0.
I really like this kind of equipment as a way to capture creatures operating vehicles. It's a little weird that the creature keeps abilities like flying or first strike, but I could probably get over that as a player.
DeleteFiguring out how P/T setting works with +N/+N effects often confuses players, so I don't think we want this cycle at common. Even an uncommon cycle might be pushing it, but I'd be more inclined to try that first.
DeleteMaybe I haven't encountered this enough - if a 2/2 is equipped with this, it becomes a 3/5; if it's then targeted by a Giant Growth, does it become a 6/8? Or are there layer issues of which I have remained blissfully unaware?
DeleteYour intuition is correct, but when judging I often run across players who are unsure.
DeleteIt might be ridiculous to propose, but a counter to that could be to keep all P/T-boosting tricks at uncommon or higher for the set. Another option would be particularly clever reminder text.
DeleteTo me, one of the weirder layer interactions is that if I Giant Growth my Grizzly Bear, and then you Turn to Frog it, it becomes a 4/4 and not a 1/1. That kind of interaction is less likely to come up, since you'll generally equip before combat and before casting pump spells, but there's still plenty of opportunities for non-intuitive interactions.
DeleteI'd love to have some kind of simple reminder text for this kind of effect, but I'm not happy with what I've been able to come up with:
(Power and toughness modifications continue to apply)
(Apply new and ongoing power and toughness modifications to the 3/5 stats)
(Apply this before other changes to power and toughness.)
DeleteWhile not technically true, copy effects come up rarely enough that it would probably be helpful.
Corrupted Construct 4BB
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature - Construct (U)
Whenever Corrupted Construct is dealt damage, put that many 0/0 black Germ creature tokens onto the battlefield.
"Our sun's return has brought a resurgence of life. Send all contaminated with it to the wastes."
- Numak, machine oracle
4/4
Tres Johnny
DeleteI suggest adjusting the flavor so Tesla is distinguishable from New Phyrexia. Can you reskin this to feel Victorian Steampunk, or Anime Mech?
DeleteIf this made colorless scrap artifact tokens instead of 0/0 germs, it would fit nicely with some of the Tesla themes that were thrown around in the past.
DeleteI remain unconvinced on the Scrap front. If the tokens do absolutely nothing on their own everyone except Johnny is going to be turned away by all the scrap producing cards. It doesn't have to be a major effect, but they do need to do something without playing another card.
DeleteAgreed, most Scrap cards would need to have things like "sacrifice an artifact: effect" just as most populate cards gave you a token to work with.
DeleteI agree.
DeleteI honestly feel that mechanics such as Scrap or Operate that say "Pay this cost that we've seen before (like sacrificing an artifact or tapping a creature" and "Here's some cards to help you pay that cost (like making tokens") are not the way to go. They feel so mundane to me.
It could be a decent support mechanic. And the "require a cost on some cards, then provide other cards that help pay for that cost" method is a decent way to produce Limited archetypes. But these cost-paying schemes don't feel like it's giving players something new and exciting to proactively "do."
One test to use on our designs is a spoiler season test. If you saw this in a spoiler, would you feel, "I've got to get my hands on those. I want to see how they play!" This works when you compare it to actual things that you are currently intrigued by or excited by in new sets, such as Theros.
When we're locked in some micro-level discussion such as whether or not Operate should have a cap on how many creatures can be tapped at once, we tend to lose sight of how new and exciting set mechanics tend to be. Magic mechanics like Equipment are executed in such an elegant form that they look so natural and inevitable once we get used to them. But we can't forget how they opened up new ground.
I need to analyze why I feel these cost mechanics are unexciting and not new, because I do feel it's ok with Convoke, or building a Pyramid by tapping creatures (using token-makers to facilitate it). Those do feel like the players get to do something that's satisfying. I guess the key is that the focus needs to be on what exciting things you can do as a result of the cost. (Although the perfect flavor match is another factor that helps a lot too.)
Total conjecture, but maybe Convoke feels better than most cost-reduction because it's creature-based. It rewards you for doing something you want to do anyhow (have a lot of creatures) and I suspect optimal execution also means that you want convoke to feed directly back into that loop by almost always creating at least one new creature.
DeleteLumberboon 1 X/W X/W
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature - Construct (U)
Lumberboon enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters on it.
If WW was spent to cast Lumberboon it enters the battlefield with two +1/+1 counters on it.
0/2
I'm not sure if the result is worth confusing hybrid casting cost. Also creatures coming into play with X +1/+1 counters on them feels green to me but anywho..
Does the second line of text need to read "If 1WW was spent"?
Ow, my brain. Too much math! And arbitrariness.
DeleteFirst shot:
ReplyDeleteIncomprehensible Other 3B
Artifact Creature-Golem (C)
Intimidate
2/4
The artifact-ness allows intimidate to function against anything without any similarity to the creature it's on.
To clarify, this can be blocked by black and/or artifact creatures, right?
DeleteYeah, Intimidate just seems to gel better on colored artifact creatures for Melvin. Vorthos has the whole "you can't scare robots" thing, but Melvin is thrown off by the arbitrary artifact clause on cards like Accursed Spirit. Unrelatedly, this probably needs to cost {4}{B}.
DeleteLeukopolis Sentinel 2 (2/W)
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature - Golem (Uncommon)
As long as you control 2 artifacts, white creatures you control have vigilance.
2/2
"The sentinels stand, tireless guardians of Leukopolis, giving us the luxury of sleeping safely in this wretched land."
Two-thirds Metalcraft?
DeleteMetalcraft is at 3 because that was the best balancing point WotC could find so that it was achievable, but not always on. 2 artifacts is too easy a threshold to hit and as such the cards would have to be balanced so as to look unexciting.
DeleteCould be "as long as you control another artifact", since that's what this is anyway.
DeleteArtifact creatures you control get +0/+1
DeleteWhite creatures you control have vigilance.
Cost to 2 (2/W) (2/W)
?
I'd go ahead and make it 2/W 2/W 2/W at that point.
DeleteHere's a concept I'd like to get feedback on:
ReplyDeleteCloudbreak Sentinel 3WW
Artifact Creature-Golem (unc)
Convoke
Cloudbreak Sentinel enters the battlefield with a +1/+1 counter on it for each creature you tap while casting it.
Vigilance
1/1
or
Cloudbreak Sentry 2WW
Artifact Creature-Golem (unc)
Convoke
Vigilance
Cloudbreak Sentry gets +1/+1 for each tapped creature you control.
1/1
I like the second one more. It's more interesting to play with and against.
DeleteThe first one pushes players to wait as long as possible to cast it, which we know isn't a direction Design should push players.
Aside from the weekend challenge guidelines, I don't understand why either is an Artifact.
My issue with the wording on the Sentinel is that new players will play it and just tap all their creatures, saying "it gets a bunch of counters". Otherwise, I like it.
DeleteAs for the Sentry, I'm annoyed that it comes in as a huge guy who can't attack, and then next turn shrinks again. I wish there was more immediate payoff (but nice on giving it vigilance so that it wouldn't count itself).
Perhaps the design concept is better in green to take advantage of the Bramblesnap/Topan Ascetic/Llanowar Behemoth ability:
DeleteCloudbreak Behemoth
5GG
Artifact Creature - Golem (U)
Convoke
Vigilance
Tap an untapped creature you control: CARDNAME gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
4/4
It may not even need to be color-shifted. I'd say the key change is to accommodate what Nich is referring to and just frontload some amount of power and toughness, then evaluate what sort of flavor you're aiming for.
Is the idea that the Golem needs to be built AND manned by a competent staff? Or should it just be improved based on how many mechanics you can lend to the task?
I think the second implementation would be a pain to track with creatures dying in combat and every creature with a tap ability being a trick, but it could probably exist at uncommon if the environment demanded it. That said, I like the first version better and metaghost's version best of all. Creature-counting-Convoke is doable, but that sort of Kicker effect leads to a lot of time sitting around instead of casting spells which isn't ideal.
Delete"Whenever Cloudbreak Sentry attacks or blocks, it gets +1/+1 until EOT for each tapped creature you control"?
DeleteThat has much better gameplay imo, hopefully the blocking clause will make Convoking feel adequately rewarded.
DeleteI think for ideal "sentry" flavor, and so you can feel more comfortable boosting its initial stats, I'd suggest just making it an on-block trigger.
DeleteIt'd be like a modern Jareth, Leonine Titan and inverted Knotvine Paladin all in the same package.
I'm thinking
DeleteCloudbreak Sentry 3CC
Artifact Creature-Golem (unc)
Convoke
Whenever Cloudbreak Sentry attacks or blocks, it gets +1/+1 until end of turn for each tapped creature you control.
3/3
(Though I'm not sure whether CC should be WW, GG or what)
metaghost's idea is kinda neat too:
Cloudbreak Sentry 3CC
Artifact Creature-Golem (unc)
Convoke, Vigilance
Whenever Cloudbreak Sentry blocks, it gets +1/+1 until end of turn for each tapped creature you control.
3/3
Though I think Convoke needs reminder text at uncommon, and that's awfully wordy.
The text box of either (assuming you were to put flavor text on the first) would basically look like that of Conclave's Blessing, which actually looks rather clean compared to a lot of the other cards with Convoke.
DeleteIf we're okay with non-Selesnya colors getting convoke, we could dangle the carrot like so:
DeleteCloudbreak Sentry 4RR
Artifact Creature-Golem (unc)
Convoke, Haste
Whenever Cloudbreak Sentry attacks or blocks, it gets +1/+1 until end of turn for each tapped creature you control.
3/3
Survivor Colossus
ReplyDeleteCreature - Golem Construct (Uncommon)
3W
~ has indestructible as long as you control another colored artifact creature.
3/4
I considered being a bit more subtle (eg. "control another white creature" or "control a white creature and an artifact creature") but decided the straight-up approach made for a better card that hints at a theme of coloured-artifact decks, without being constrained to a single colour.
However, I'm not sure if it's too board-stalling if you get two of these out at once. I want to make it legendary, but that doesn't feel uncommon, or have an activation, but that doesn't feel white. Any suggestions?
Indestructible creatures are really dangerous for limited play so without something like Infect in Scars block I don't want to see them below rare.
DeleteYeah, I think you're better off working with regenerate in some way.
DeleteColossal Mechanic
4W
Artifact Creature - Golem Artificer (U)
1W: Regenerate target artifact creature.
3/3
Tin Mound Golem (Common)
ReplyDelete(2/R)(2/R)(2/G)(2/G)
Artifact Creature - Golem
6/4
Chromaffinity (This spell costs 1 less to cast for each colored mana symbol in the mana cost of permanents you control.)
This scrapman patrols parks and sweat shops, gibbering at the boss like an excited ape.
This is really interesting space, though I'm a little bit concerned that the scaling is so bumpy since odd numbers of colored mana symbols barely make a difference from a number one lower. Worth testing.
DeleteIf I've got one Tin Mound Golem, and I want to cast another, what are all my options?
DeleteGG, RR, RG, or 4. And if you have one Tin Mound Golem and an Atog it's GG, RR, RG, or 3. Are you suggesting Chromaffinity may be too complex to be at included at common?
DeleteCombined with hybrid mana, it might be too complex at uncommon. Reminder text could help.
DeleteAffinity and Chromaffinity appeal to players because they dangle to possibility of free spells once you meet the right threshold. At the end of the day this is a vanilla creature that's free if you have 5-6 permanents with colored mana symbols. Not an exciting uncommon. But at common it is an appropriately exciting power level. If players misunderstand the math on this card the only downside is that they cast it later than they could have. But it doesn't stop the game or muck up their options. They can still play other things. If chromaffinity was a major mechanic I would use a mix of hybrid and regular mana cost spells.
DeleteOne more thing, hybrid mana will get more colored mana symbols on permanents. Normally you'll only have 1 colored mana symbol or maybe 2. And if chromaffinity only ideally reduces costs by 2-3 on average, it becomes more Spike than Timmy. Which makes it more dangerous to balance.
DeleteChromaffinity reduces costs more than Affinity (ignoring the existence of artifact lands), because you don't have to bend your deck at all to benefit from it, there are more cards that feed it, and many of them count double.
DeleteThat said, my primary concern is how clear it is that {2G} counts as "a colored mana symbol" or that you can pay {2G} with two pips of chromaffinity. I'm not convinced the two mechanics should be in the same set, much less on the same card, and I am convinced they shouldn't appear together on a common.
Oof! This is a scathing indictment of my little idea. I can't refute your gut. Outside playtesting there's no way to defend Tin Mound Golem further.
DeleteYou're right to say 'gut' because I don't *know* and may very well be wrong. You could print the card up and show it to a casual Magic player. If they totally get it, that would suggest my intuition was off. Just remember, I'm critical of this particular idea, not you or your skills.
DeleteHopebringer Golem
ReplyDelete2WW
Artifact Creature - Golem (U)
Chroma—When Hopebringer Golem enters the battlefield, you gain 2 life for for each white mana symbol in the mana costs of permanents you control.
Just when you thought all was lost.
3/4
Meant to be part of a cycle.
Feedback appreciated.
I feel like twobrid + Chroma could be interesting instead, but it would probably have to be balanced really well.
DeleteWhite's pretty lucky to get a 3/4 for 2WW before the 4 or much much more life.
DeleteI'm not sure Chroma and twobrid are friends.
That's true. White actually has a number of 4 mana 3/4s (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?output=spoiler&method=visual&action=advanced&color=+%40(+%5bW%5d)&power=+%3d%5b3%5d&tough=+%3d%5b4%5d&cmc=+%3d%5b4%5d)
Deletebut below rare, they have drawbacks.
All things considered, I'm officially changing it to a 2/4. That reads better aesthetically too I think.
I was not planning to have twobrid in this version of Tesla.
This also doesn't care that it's an artifact, but I think trying to incorporate that would just muddy the card. Unless...
How do we feel about "for each white mana symbol in the mana costs of artifacts you control."?
Gloomcloud Goliath 7B
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature - Giant Construct (U)
You may sacrifice an artifact and a black creature rather than pay CARDNAME's mana cost.
Whenever ~ attacks, defending player loses life equal to the number of swamps you control.
3/7
The gameplay might be good enough to justify it, but this feels much messier than getting +1/+0 for each Swamp you control. Also, while scaling with lands is a good way to curb the power level of alternate costs, it often leaves me feeling disappointed after cheating it in.
DeleteWhy does the creature need to be black? Are we fusing it with the artifact to form the Goliath? If so, that's neat, but let that be the story and leave swamps out. Or vice-versa.
DeleteFor what it's worth, I'm fond of the card as-is. R&D has been explicitly pushing for more toughness-oriented creatures in black, and to me, the costs seems balanced to the effects.
DeleteDesigning free creatures sure is tricky. I tried to take a cue from Allosaurus Rider and give it an effect that scaled in power over time, but I agree the card as a whole feels disjointed.
DeleteHere's my revision:
DeleteFleshgrafted Hunter 6B
Artifact Creature - Giant Construct (U)
You may sacrifice an artifact and a black creature rather than pay CARDNAME's mana cost.
When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, destroy target non-artifact creature.
"Mech pilots enlist for life--not necessarily by choice"
4/4
My first submission was clean, but doesn't do much to help figure out what Tesla is about, so here's my new submission:
ReplyDeleteSunrise Sentinel 4 2/g
Artifact Creature-Golem (C)
Harmony--CARDNAME gets +1/+1 for each color among permanents you control.
"Somebody has to watch it."
2/2
Is Harmony like Domain, where it is EFFECT:(scale 0-5), or is it always +1/+1?
DeleteLike Domain. It's a higher hoop, so I'm starting by balancing cards with 2 colors being normal (as opposed to three types for balanced domain cards).
DeleteI think Pasteur is pointing out that Sunrise Sentinel is green, and so it's Harmony ability will never grant it less than +1/+1.
DeleteNah, Jules actually answered exactly what I was wondering.
DeleteFor the card, it's clean, and evocative. There's the issue of one of your other creatures dying in combat and this dying afterwards; that happens often enough with lords, but is my only qualm with putting this at common.
And boy, if it isn't depressing with this art.
That's certainly a concern. we could avoid toughness boosts or make them trigger on attacking or blocking, but I'd like to see how often that issue arises before scrapping the cleanest version
DeleteWandering Energon 2G Uncommon
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature - Golem
Tap three untapped artifacts you control: Add 3 mana to your mana pool. If those artifacts share a color, add 3 mana of that color instead.
"They got built to churn scrap decades ago, no one knows how their still runnin'."
2/2
Alternatively:
Loping Ponderon 4U Uncommon
Artifact Creature - Golem
Whenever an artifact becomes tapped, you may pay UU. If you do, untap another target artifact.
"Ponderons do what they see... anything that they see."
3/4
As always, I would love to hear what people think. I'll pick one after I've ruminated for a day.
DeleteI don't get the Ponderon at all.
DeleteWandering Energon has potential. Not sure the color reward is worth the color hoop.
Considering the existence of Manaweft Sliver (and Springleaf Drum), I'd probably just cut out as many hoops as possible and have it:
DeleteTap an untapped artifact you control: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool.
If you were feeling extra spicy and want people to jump through hoops, you could try to appropriate the elemental clause — if this ability has been activated X times, do X — and do some fun manaburst kinda things.
Like:
1, Tap an untapped artifact you control: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool. If this is the third time you've activated this ability this turn, add an additional three mana in any combination of colors to your mana pool.
Primitive Colossus - 3GGG
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature - Golem (unc)
Trample
Spend only mana produced by basic lands to cast CARDNAME.
7/6
I like the idea of using this mechanic for the nature side of the conflict. My only concern is whether the primitive cards in the set should be artifacts.
DeleteDrudge Colossus (Uncommon)
ReplyDelete4B
*/*
* is equal to the number of artifacts in your graveyard
2B, Sacrifice a Artifact, each opponent loses one life.
Works with scrap. Subtly eases the pain of losing a two-card mech. My main concern is the counting, but at uncommon, it might be okay.
DeleteI was thinking last night, one could make a reference to the old Drudge Skeletons and change the ability to 2B, Sacrifice a Artifact: Regenerate Drudge Colossus. How does that compare?
DeleteCan't believe I forgot this. But it should be a artifact creature.
DeleteJury-Rigged Colossus 7
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature - Golem
5/5
Tinker (As this creature enters the battlefield, exile any number of artifact cards from your graveyard. Attach that many Part cards you own from outside the game to this.)
(Common)
DeleteParts! We have to explore those.
DeleteIf Tinker exiled artifact cards in play (instead or as well), we could use Scrap, but I guess we don't want Scrap and Parts tokens in the same set.
I also wanted to make it "you may sacrifice any number of artifacts you control and exile any number of artifact cards from your graveyard" to make it feel like you're cobbling together a machine from salvaged parts, whether it's a working machine or scrap. But it seemed too long as text.
DeleteSack/Exile's a bit hinky too. Maybe:
DeleteTinker (As this creature enters the battlefield, exile any number of artifact cards you control or in your graveyard. Attach that many Part cards you own from outside the game to this.)
Then again, maybe the flavor of only getting parts from junked artifacts is just better.
I thought that sack/exile would be nice if there are going to be lots of artifact-repurposing cards like that, because it would be useful to sacrifice an artifact once and then exile it again later for another card.
DeleteDoom Cannon Golem 5
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature - Golem (Uncommon)
3/3
Energy Source (Whenever another artifact you control enters the battlefield, you may wire it to Doom Cannon Golem. Whenever that artifact becomes tapped, put a charge counter on Doom Cannon Golem.)
T, Remove X charge counters from Doom Cannon Golem: Doom Cannon Golem deals X damage to target creature or player.
Is the number of artifacts you can wire to DCG (and to other permanents simultaneously) intentionally unbounded?
DeleteActually, I'd like it better if it was limited to one. It would be especially important that each artifact can only feed into one artifact.
DeleteMaybe it should be:
DeleteWhenever another unwired artifact you control enters the battlefield, you may wire it to Doom Cannon Golem.
I like the build-your-own-machine concept here. It could also be:
DeleteEnergy Source 2 (2: Unwire this from all artifacts, then wire it to target artifact. Whenever the wired artifact becomes tapped, put a charge counter on this.)
This way, the Golem can only be connected to one other artifact at a time, but you could have a single 'battery' that's powering multiple Doom Golems.
Energize (You may pair this artifact with another unpaired artifact when either enters the battlefield. Whenever that artifact becomes tapped, put a charge counter on this.)
DeleteI wonder if the word "pair" might make some people expect it to work symmetrically, like "whenever either becomes tapped, untap the other."
DeleteIn my files I also have a version where whenever one artifact becomes tapped, the one feeding on it becomes untapped (rather than gaining a charge counter.) You can form a daisy chain of artifacts (but not a ring) to make a big machine.
DeleteI had a version of this that specified inputs and had a trigger to tap and do something when its input was tapped, allowing you to make a chain. Probably too hard to track and too texty, but it really felt like jury-rigging a machine.
DeleteWould this concept be better on a non-creature artifact / different art?
DeleteAlmost assuredly, but it's a useful forum to discuss Tesla in general. That said, I doubt we really want two "build your own machine" mechanics, and mechs seem more exciting to all but the most extreme Johnnies.
DeleteIt would be better with different art.
DeleteThe concept is easier to understand on a non-creature version, but is more balanced on a creature for this particular one because people will have more cards to deal with creatures in their decks.
I've been thinking that the Mechas might have the problem of not being open-ended. Rise of the Eldrazi had three different ways to make gigantic monsters, so having another machine-building mechanic might be ok for Tesla.
I don't think it's too hard to track the relationship of the artifact in a chain if you would put them on the table in a chain.
DeleteSomething like:
2
Link (Whenever another artifact enters the battlefield, attach it to the right of this card. Whenever that artifact becomes tapped, untap this artifact.)
1, T: Gain 1 life.
When someone makes a big chain and starts rippling waves of tapping and untapping, it may make players want to say, "hold on, slow down. Let me keep track of what you're doing!"
Desolation Golem 5B
ReplyDeleteCreature - Golem (U)
When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, destroy target nonblack creature.
4/6
Not an Artifact Creature?
DeleteJunkyard Behemoth 6B
ReplyDeleteCreature- Construct (U)
6/7
Artifact offering (You may cast this card any time you could cast an instant by sacrificing an artifact and paying the difference in mana costs between this and the sacrificed artifact. Mana cost includes color.)
I wonder if 6/7 is too big for something you can get on turn 4 just by casting a 3cc artifact on turn 3. Otherwise, I like it a lot.
DeleteOffgrid Explorer (2/E)(2/E)
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature- Construct (C)
(Color Indicator: Electric)
Network (Each artifact you tap while casting this spell pays for {1} or one mana of that creature's color.)
3/3
The electric color indicator stands for a non -basic color. It's symbol is a small lightning bolt and its color is a neon yellow. Network allows Electric cards to be cast for less if they were convoked by other electric artifacts.
I'm guessing by "non-basic color" you mean E is a sixth color and not one of the five standard ones; because if E is any mana produced by a non-basic land, then it's a supertype (like Snow), not a color, and things start to fall apart.
DeleteIs it worth keywording a version of Convoke that can only be used by artifact creatures?
Does anything produce E, or is that leveraged strictly through Network?
(Not even getting into the discussion of adding a sixth color to Magic yet.)
Oddly enough, I don't like twobrid and I don't like a sixth color, but the two seem to work weirdly well together, allowing cards in the sixth color to be cast without relying on a lot of basic land to exist in that color. I'm not saying I'd print it, but it's certainly worth exploring.
DeleteSorry, copy pasted from convoke. It should be
DeleteNetwork (Each artifact you tap while casting this spell pays for {1} or one mana of that artifact's color.)
Non-basic color meaning that its a color, but It's not something you can choose when a card says color. That is to say, shimmering grotto can't make electric mana. Collation victory doesn't require you to now have an electric creature. Brave the Elements can give protection from electric. Etc.
As far as things producing E, maybe. I could see electric lands that ETBT and tap for a color or E. A mana elf that might tap for E. But mostly I see E as being mostly used in hybrid costs. That way you avoid needing a basic land that produces E and the can of worms that entailes. Maybe you could get a few mono E spells by the second set.
In short, I'd let the rules guys figure out the exact implementation, I just like it as a thought experiment.
DeleteThis is a neat way to introduce an Artifact Color.
DeleteAlternatively, you can get a similar effect by having Network reduce costs by {2} (but not colored costs) and put it on regular twobrids:
Offgrid Explorer 2/R 2/R
Creature - Construct
Haste
Network (Each artifact you tap while casting this spell pays for {2})
2/2
I like that.
DeleteBleak Colossus
ReplyDelete8
Artifact Creature - Colossus - Rare
CARDNAME is all colors of mana spent to cast it.
When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, destroy all permanents that share a color with it.
8/8
Fascinating. It looks crazy strong at first, but then you realize if you're casting it when you have just 8 mana, you're destroying all of your own nonland permanents (in addition to none, some or all of your oppponent's). Not that there aren't ways to break it; Like playing an 5c all-colorless-artifact deck.
DeleteI worry that remembering which colors it is will sometimes be an issue (and rarely be important), but I also have to point out the challenge requires a common or uncommon, and you were definitely right to make Bleak Colossus rare.
As worded it destroys itself almost all the time. That can't be intended, right?
DeleteTerrifying Mecha 6B
ReplyDeleteArtifact Creature - Golem (Uncommon)
Black creatures you control have intimidate.
4/6
Color Shifted Boldwyr Intimidator:
ReplyDeleteSpotlight Monitor - 5WW
Artifact Creature - Construct Warrior
White creatures can't be blocked by black creatures.
W : Target permanent becomes white until end of turn.
2W: Target permanent becomes black until end of turn.
5/5
"He is both the Sun and the Shade."
New Card:
Staid Guardian - 3WWW
Artifact Creature - Golem Bureaucrat
Vigilance
Tapped creatures deal no damage.
2/7
Alternate take:
Staid Guardian - 3WWW
Artifact Creature - Golem Bureaucrat
Vigilance
1W, Tap an untapped artifact creature you control: target unblocked attacking creature becomes blocked.
2/7
Spotlight Guardian could be blue as well for artifact and non artifact.
Delete"Tapped creatures deal no damage" will ruin/win too many games.
Delete"Target unblocked attacking creature becomes blocked" is confusing.
Spotlight Monitor works. I like the artifact version slightly better.
Though writing out "2U: Target permanent becomes a non-artifact until end of turn." I realize this could cause a card to have no card types. I don't know that that breaks anything, but is sure is wacky.
Delete