tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post729833468663993693..comments2024-03-11T02:32:15.295-04:00Comments on Goblin Artisans: Weekend Art Challenge 022318 - Most Expensive Common InstantUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger149125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-54701964652779292192018-02-27T23:27:32.411-05:002018-02-27T23:27:32.411-05:00Yeah, haste would probably be the least-chosen opt...Yeah, haste would probably be the least-chosen option, but I visualized that it's a way of getting value out of drawing a cheap creature later in the game. And I felt other potential choices would push it out of common.Larcenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02637510675812632748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-2406283734422092822018-02-27T14:22:31.942-05:002018-02-27T14:22:31.942-05:00Listen to Drive to Work:
Designing Uncommons
Desig...Listen to Drive to Work:<br /><a href="http://podbay.fm/show/580709168/e/1481907600" rel="nofollow">Designing Uncommons</a><br /><a href="http://podbay.fm/show/580709168/e/1403280900" rel="nofollow">Designing Commons</a><br />Jay Treathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09428861685923241850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-64955754356303510652018-02-27T14:15:06.808-05:002018-02-27T14:15:06.808-05:00Too swingy for common, agreed.Too swingy for common, agreed.Jay Treathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09428861685923241850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-31765939293203763802018-02-27T14:06:57.889-05:002018-02-27T14:06:57.889-05:00I like a lot about this design. Doubling-down on a...I like a lot about this design. Doubling-down on a mistake R&D once made is not worth the cleverness or nostalgia.<br /><br />It surely eats up some common complexity, but I think choose-2-of-4 isn't too confusing to be common. Jay Treathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09428861685923241850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-4188831317413403592018-02-27T14:01:27.976-05:002018-02-27T14:01:27.976-05:00Split cards have been done, what, 3 or 4 times now...Split cards have been done, what, 3 or 4 times now? They're no longer radical, but I wouldn't call them ubiquitous.Jay Treathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09428861685923241850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-81206401171502764442018-02-27T13:58:32.136-05:002018-02-27T13:58:32.136-05:00I'm not sure it's a problem unique to gree...I'm not sure it's a problem unique to green. I just wouldn't put "make your next 10 turns deterministic" on any common.Jay Treathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09428861685923241850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-45857680667284020352018-02-26T21:51:49.782-05:002018-02-26T21:51:49.782-05:00I assume that one would be uncommon for as-played ...I assume that one would be uncommon for as-played complexity, and also that I should cost it based on the double-Regathan-Firecat mode rather than the Immolating Glare mode. It adds 8 power to the board on an opponent's turn, so 3RW is about the lowest I'd go (cf. Regisaur Alpha).lpaulsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07772860908442278112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-11167245483846408012018-02-26T21:36:54.281-05:002018-02-26T21:36:54.281-05:00This is just a weak Sarkhan's rage but that ca...This is just a weak Sarkhan's rage but that caed was good.Doug Kenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11099708938705613144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-36276163524487648302018-02-26T21:02:22.737-05:002018-02-26T21:02:22.737-05:00Good argument. I would be surprised to see Trostan...Good argument. I would be surprised to see <a rel="nofollow">Trostani's Judgment</a> printed at common today, but RtR wasn't that long ago, so maybe.zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-86373576463844671912018-02-26T21:00:22.105-05:002018-02-26T21:00:22.105-05:00I agree with Jay that the first line isn't doi...I agree with Jay that the first line isn't doing the card any favors, especially if the goal is Common. 6 for 3 is exceptionally high. Current 6CMC damage spells at common: <a rel="nofollow">Fiery Fall</a>, <a rel="nofollow">Blastfire Bolt</a>, <a rel="nofollow">Morgue Burst</a>, <a rel="nofollow">Explosive Impact</a>. If it just did 5 damage and nothing else, it would be justified at that cost. <br /><br />What would 5 damage to a creature and 5 damage to its controller cost? 5RR? 6RR? Would it still be rare? Lava axe is common, and 5 damage to a single creature can be done at common. I'd think it's still fair game.zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-26098563218480122092018-02-26T20:51:42.431-05:002018-02-26T20:51:42.431-05:00As discussed above, the last time we had a common ...As discussed above, the last time we had a common charm, or anything that had more than two choices, was Planar Chaos. Make of that what you will. <br /><br />Also discussed above, counterspells not requiring CU in their mana cost. <br /><br />That said, I think the cost is about right for this, and reasonable for common in an Eldrazi set. Well done.zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-63743534242468626322018-02-26T20:47:26.515-05:002018-02-26T20:47:26.515-05:00I kind of love this take on Eldrazi - sideboard ma...I kind of love this take on Eldrazi - sideboard matters. Very cool. So we reward drafting multiple copies, but discourage you from running all of them, turning the common into a de facto uncommon. Excellent solution. As always, PD would have to balance all the assorted knobs on this, but that's what they're there for.zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-3842659822808104312018-02-26T20:39:48.006-05:002018-02-26T20:39:48.006-05:00Horncaller's Chant is okay for common.
Desola...<a rel="nofollow">Horncaller's Chant</a> is okay for common. <br /><a rel="nofollow">Desolation Twin</a> belongs at rare. <br />The only functional difference between these two cards is one of scale. Even if the Twins cost 20 instead of 10, they would still be a rare. <br /><br />I'll do my lawyer thing for a minute. "Too impactful for common" is #mtgdesign's <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it" rel="nofollow">"I know it when I see it."</a> I, along with many of the Artisans, have been doing this a long time. We can intuit with semi-reasonable accuracy the rarity of a card. For me, I usually figure out a few things. First, assuming I play this card optimally, how much different does the board look after I've cast this? If this single card is making a massive impact, it probably doesn't belong at common. Likewise, if I was facing down this card, how unfair would I find it that my opponent had easy access to two or maybe even three of it in the draft? If I would seethe at my opponent for simply being able to draft two copies and play one each game, it's probably too impactful for common. <br /><br />But again, there's no set definition. It's highly subjective and much more a matter of feel than hard numbers. We know it when we see it. And the 96 that made it through the multiple choice test for the most part knew it when they saw it. zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-25888158952737408012018-02-26T19:52:55.439-05:002018-02-26T19:52:55.439-05:00Tidal Surge
Other than misappropriating a title, ...<a rel="nofollow">Tidal Surge</a><br /><br />Other than misappropriating a title, good job. <a rel="nofollow">Whiplash Trap</a> plus <a rel="nofollow">Cancel</a>. The math checks out. Jenesis' point of not forcing the counter is well made, although being able to cast this without targets is weird. zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-65677592550596376822018-02-26T19:47:52.166-05:002018-02-26T19:47:52.166-05:00X spells are rarely common anymore, but fine.
Th...X spells are rarely common anymore, but fine. <br /><br />The point of the exercise is more to illustrate GDS question 68. The band of Costs 7+ and isn't too impactful for common is absurdly narrow. Scalable X spells like this are fine (other than wanting to keep X out of common in general), but kind of miss the point. zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-11597083908247916162018-02-26T19:32:30.591-05:002018-02-26T19:32:30.591-05:00That's still a pretty potent spell. If I attac...That's still a pretty potent spell. If I attack with a 3/3 and a 2/2 into it, I've lost both, you've gained a lifelinking vampire and 2 life. <br /><br />Simply too swingy for common. You can mitigate it a bit by only allowing the tokens to ETBT or at end of turn, but even then you're probably netting 3+ creatures. XLN/RIX limited is a good indicator of how overwhelming lifelinking vampires in multiples can be. <br /><br />As a Golgari/Selesnya card, I'd be a lot less concerned about this at common if it <a rel="nofollow">Murder</a>ed an attacking creature and created 0/1 plant tokens.zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-83283224055330799412018-02-26T19:12:09.820-05:002018-02-26T19:12:09.820-05:00Sick-2BB
Instant
Put two -1/-1 counters on target ...Sick-2BB<br />Instant<br />Put two -1/-1 counters on target creature.<br />///<br />Tired-2BB<br />Instant<br />Target player discards a card for each counter on the battlefield.<br />FuseDoug Kenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11099708938705613144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-14845754667783008502018-02-26T18:29:47.579-05:002018-02-26T18:29:47.579-05:00Given that Life Goes On, you'll be hard presse...Given that <a rel="nofollow">Life Goes On</a>, you'll be hard pressed to convince me that even 10 life on a <a rel="nofollow">Resupply</a> should cost more than seven or eight, and I think you could even get away with six. Still, a solid submission. zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-67880023290022795492018-02-26T18:16:40.366-05:002018-02-26T18:16:40.366-05:00Contrast with Overwhelming Positivity, above. Contrast with Overwhelming Positivity, above. zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-69443709705813421642018-02-26T18:15:05.393-05:002018-02-26T18:15:05.393-05:00That'll do the trick. I might call that a GW h...That'll do the trick. I might call that a GW hybrid or gold card, but otherwise just fine.zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-34722790195037699002018-02-26T18:13:47.251-05:002018-02-26T18:13:47.251-05:00Somehow, the only Call to Mind that exists at inst...Somehow, the only <a rel="nofollow">Call to Mind</a> that exists at instant speed is a <a rel="nofollow">Very Cryptic Command</a> option. Odd.<br /><br />The game really doesn't like returning cards from GY to hand at common, so I'm not sold at all that this effect is common-worthy, regardless of cost. <br /><br />Costing Delve cards is really a PD question, even more so than usual. Using the 5-mana bump from <a rel="nofollow">Gravedigger</a> to <a rel="nofollow">Sibsig Muckdraggers</a>, I'd hazard that 9 is just a touch high for the effect, but really it's entirely dependent on the environment and PD's whims.zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-91790593692964297532018-02-26T17:55:46.319-05:002018-02-26T17:55:46.319-05:00Havenwood Wurm (7cmc) is the biggest creature that...<a rel="nofollow">Havenwood Wurm</a> (7cmc) is the biggest creature that exists at common with flash, and it's eleven years old. I'm not sure it would be common today, but it's possible.<br /><br />On the other hand, <a rel="nofollow">Horncaller's Chant</a> is the common card closest to this, and at sorcery, it's eight mana. Ten-ish mana is the right ballpark for this card, but as Jay pointed out, as an instant, it's a frequent 4-for-one. <br /><br />This is a cool card, but you'd be hard pressed to convince me it's common.<br /><br />Cost this:<br />??RW<br />Instant<br />Create a 4/1 red and green Elemental creature token. At the beginning of the next end step, populate.zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-83905045740617934052018-02-26T17:45:56.892-05:002018-02-26T17:45:56.892-05:00Thanks Jay. I like how many hidden modes this has,...Thanks Jay. I like how many hidden modes this has, and how it changes the values of drafting walls/chumps or aggressive creatures. It can be a (very) overpriced fog or a pseudo congregate.<br /><br />I'm not sure how many people would actually like this card though. Iamnickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06584811811973863574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-74645713094559081222018-02-26T17:24:54.114-05:002018-02-26T17:24:54.114-05:00Thanks. Yeah, that's plausible.Thanks. Yeah, that's plausible.Jack (cartesiandaemon)https://www.blogger.com/profile/08258267965242039995noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5479847193762153273.post-56040981329076948592018-02-26T17:20:42.853-05:002018-02-26T17:20:42.853-05:00As Wobbles pointed out above, Gravepurge is a comm...As Wobbles pointed out above, <a rel="nofollow">Gravepurge</a> is a common instant. <br /><br />As a hypothetical, let's mash that with <a rel="nofollow">Succumb to Temptation</a>. So three creatures to hand, unlimited to the top of the library, at instant speed, for 3BBB. Maybe bump it up a mana for having it all on the same card. That all seems reasonable at uncommon. It's complex, but not especially so, and it's powerful, but not especially so. <br /><br />Yours is less complex. I could see it at common, especially with the life loss rider. Nice work.zefferalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13845251416516553492noreply@blogger.com