Pair 1: Dromar's Charm and Mortal Wound
 |  |  |
 |  |
Jay Treat: 7.7 (Fun: 8 Aesthetics: 7 Mechanics: 5 Bonus: 3)
Jonathan Woodward: 6
metaghost: 5
Chah: 5.3 (Fun: 6 Aesthetics: 6 Mechanics: 4 Bonus: 0)
Average: 6
Comments:
Jay Treat: Teneb's Wound is too good, especially when I cast it on myself.
Chah: This is too powerful. If your opponent is behind, s/he'll never be able to climb back out of the slippery slope. But it might be worth exploring more such cards that make a "quest" out of your combat phase.
metaghost: This is interesting, but certainly needs to be toned down a bit. More fun if it's a Grave Pact style enchantment that needs to be built around, rather than "Ha! You're screwed, I cast Umezawa's Enchantment!"
 | |  |
|  |
Jay Treat: 8 (Fun: 8 Aesthetics: 7 Mechanics: 7 Bonus: 2)
Jonathan Woodward: 8
metaghost: 7
Chah: 8 (Fun: 8 Aesthetics: 7 Mechanics: 8 Bonus: 1)
Average: 7.75
Comments:
Chah: I love how the Sage's land sacrifice works as a Serpent mechanic. It could have been bigger with trample rather than unblockable. Nevertheless, this is my favorite mashup of this pair.
metaghost: Hyper-literal interpretation that resulted in a very solid design. No real complaints, though a 4/4 Unblockable is likely to kill before the other effects matter too much.
Pair 5: Lightning Blast and Gift of the Woods
 | |  |
|  |
Jay Treat: 9.3 (Fun: 9 Aesthetics: 7 Mechanics: 8 Bonus: 4)
Jonathan Woodward: 6
metaghost: 3
Chah: 8.3 (Fun: 8 Aesthetics: 9 Mechanics: 8 Bonus: 0)
Average: 6.7
Comments:
Jay Treat: Yours is the mashiest entry, Duncan, well-played.
Chah: Great! It's like "Enchanted creature is unblockable and has shroud," but in a Red way. Your opponent can still chump block the creature or kill it with removal and take 4, in which case the caster of the Aura still gets his card's worth of burn out of it.
metaghost: Admittedly, I was being quite harsh because I was honestly just sick of seeing these Gift of Lightning auras, but the 3 shall stand in solemn judgment.
Total for all 3 cards: 20.4
I really buy the charm enchantment idea, but its effects are way off, miles and miles better than the mirrodin swords. I could see it printed at a more reasonable power level. And at a 6 mana cost.
ReplyDeleteGlacier eater is the best mashup in the contest, I really like it.
Armor of Lightning is also a good mashup, but a little too cheap for red.
Overall, you did a pretty good work.
Ugh, the Wound was clearly supposed to be Enchant opponent (See the last ability), and even then it should be "At the end of any turn enchanted player was dealt damage..." so that it doesn't trigger more than once a turn.
ReplyDeleteArmor of Lightning is too cheap. It needs to be at least 2R, and even then it should probably deal defending player 4 damage instead of slaughtering the blockers. The goal was more to say "You can kill this guy, but it's going to cost your 4 life" than to say "Oh, this creature is impossible to kill in combat."
I'm glad people like Glacier Eater, I've always enjoyed those two quirky cards.
The "sacrifice two lands" clause makes for a remarkable fit on Glacier Eater - it's quite evocative.
ReplyDeleteI think your original card is fine. I liked how the 4 damage to opponent is an "insurance effect" to an evasion Aura. (And traditionally, cards like Flight were weak without an additional ability.)
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, if it always dealt 4 damage to an opponent whether the creature got blocked or targeted, it would be a very roundabout and risky burn spell that doesn't affect combat much at all.
I don't think it's a problem to put Armor of Lightning at R or 1R - this Aura isn't strong unless you've already cast a big high-cost creature.
ReplyDeleteProtective Bubble is similar and costs 3U. But with Armor of Lightning, the creature can still be chump blocked to buy time or targeted to limit the total damage taken, so it's not nearly the "inevitable clock" that the Bubble is. (And I don't think the Bubble was played very often.)
Chah, an interesting aspect of how to cost the Armor is that by making it cheaper it becomes more of a skill-tester, in a somewhat unappealing manner.
ReplyDeleteWhat I mean is that we all know aura are typically inherent card disadvantage, but by making it cheap, less skilled players are going to be more inclined to not only play with it (bad), but they'll also play it out sooner on their weaker creatures (more bad).
In essence, yes it could be costed at R or 1R in a vacuum, but that doesn't make it an appropriate cost.