I would certainly lose the "without that type," it feels very 1990s, design wise, and will certainly lead to very feel bad gameplay moments, and most of the time people won't notice. Just make it simpler.
"To target creature you don't control" also means you're not having creatures eat themselves, but possibly words for nothing (though they seem to be doing more of it these days).
"Creature you don't control" is code for "you can't accidentally misclick on Magic Online." Having accidentally Chorus of Mighted my opponent's attacking creature once, I can understand why that is good.
Speaking of MTGO implementation, you might make this a little easier by saying "Target creature you control and each other creature you control that shares a type with it does one damage to target creature you don't control." so that no one has to deal with that horrible dialogue where you pick a creature type.
I'd rather update the MTGO interface so it lists creature types on the board first, followed by those in your hand and deck, before listing every type ever. Especially while the fizzle rule looms. But until then, fair point.
Ditto to Tommy. I like the flavour, but I think the flavour is as good without it (you know, wolves could turn on another wolf), and less complication is better.
Overall I like it. It's often useful even for only 1 or 2, but it's occasionally more useful in a tribal deck.
Cool Card Design of the Day
Feels weak, even at 1 mana, and probably still red. I'd love to see a version that put a token of that type into play first.
ReplyDeleteI would certainly lose the "without that type," it feels very 1990s, design wise, and will certainly lead to very feel bad gameplay moments, and most of the time people won't notice. Just make it simpler.
ReplyDeleteI wondered about that. Thanks.
Delete"To target creature you don't control" also means you're not having creatures eat themselves, but possibly words for nothing (though they seem to be doing more of it these days).
Delete"Creature you don't control" is code for "you can't accidentally misclick on Magic Online." Having accidentally Chorus of Mighted my opponent's attacking creature once, I can understand why that is good.
DeleteSpeaking of MTGO implementation, you might make this a little easier by saying "Target creature you control and each other creature you control that shares a type with it does one damage to target creature you don't control." so that no one has to deal with that horrible dialogue where you pick a creature type.
I'd rather update the MTGO interface so it lists creature types on the board first, followed by those in your hand and deck, before listing every type ever. Especially while the fizzle rule looms. But until then, fair point.
DeleteDitto to Tommy. I like the flavour, but I think the flavour is as good without it (you know, wolves could turn on another wolf), and less complication is better.
ReplyDeleteOverall I like it. It's often useful even for only 1 or 2, but it's occasionally more useful in a tribal deck.