Cool Card Design of the Day10/00/2014 - I've been getting déjà vu on a lot of my designs for a while. I expect some of that is because I'm inevitably returning to certain compelling ideas, and some of it is just a paranoid byproduct of having shared as many designs as I have over nearly 7 years. (!)
I couldn't find this in the archives, but if you can, let me know. This is the closest I could find.
I like the idea of appointing one creature to carry the Glorious Anthem for your team, and expect the effect could be common at the right price (though this price might well require uncommon).
I've come up with the exact same design. The only difference was that I costed it as {1}{w}.
ReplyDeleteI think at common, at that cost, I want it to say "Other creatures you control get +1/+1". I think that also makes it feel more like an aura, because it distinguishes the enchanted creature in some way.
ReplyDeleteFor what its worth, I also feel like I've seen this design before. I think you did a CCDD recently of an equipment that buffed your team when it attacked that was flavored as a banner, though maybe that was a submission in one of the art contests. That was very similar to this.
Emblem of the Warmind is certainly interesting space. My main concern is how disconnected these feel from the enchanted creature, I'd like them a lot better if they cared what it was beyond it surviving. For instance:
ReplyDeleteAura of Leadership {1}{W}
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant Creature you control
Enchanted creature and each other creature you control that shares a color with it get +1/+1.
Other easy options are sharing creature type, having a smaller CMC, or less power.
I'd avoid power comparisons on anything that affects power, but otherwise this is all gold.
DeleteIf I'm forced to do one of these at common, I definitely don't want to do "shares a creature type" because that would wreak havoc on boardstate readability in limited games. That said, I think this would be a sweet rare at some super aggressive cost like W.
DeleteI think sharing a color is more dooable, although again, if the goal is to do it at common because it will lead to an interesting set, I think "share a color" is still too hard on the board state. I think it would make a great uncommon in the (never to happen) next set with a lot of hybrid.
I think, though, that if you want this to be the defining common of a set, that Jay's original version was basically right. I suggested earlier that it feels more like an aura if it only affects other creatures you control, and I stand by that.
PS: I like "build around me commons" that significant affect the shape of a limited environment, though I think it is important they not be pushed too hard. Triplicate Spirits was too much, I think, but Undergrowth Scavenger was just right.
DeleteI read this several times and kept reading it as "Enchanted creature gets +1/+1". It wasn't until I read the description I saw it was a Glorious Anthem.
ReplyDeleteI think it's too counterintuitive. I just expect it to pump the enchanted creature.
How about, "Enchanted creature and each other creature you control each get +1/+1." I know it's wordier, but that may make it harder to misread?
Maybe it's just me.
Yeah, I've made this card for GW at rare before and worded it like that, just to make it more clear.
DeleteI agree on that one, even tough i did not misread it the first time
DeleteAs much as I love the short version, clarity is king.
Delete