Search results

Common design tactic is to start strong, see if there is fun potential then scale back as needed. I'd write more but I'm on a phone. More rigorous testing is obviously needed for non patchable environments. Wizard's need to design bad cards is profit driven, but perhaps skimming on...

I wouldn't do many of those types of cards, but one or two in the set as a fetchland interaction is possible.

:1::u:, Panamana, Instant Counter target spell unless its controller pays :2:. Landstorm. Mechanic: CARDNAME gets BONUS if you control no untapped lands. It's kind of a blue combat mechanic that plays with deckbuilding, instants, flash, counterspells, and can be interacted with from...

I like this idea, but I'd probably price it at :1::u: and have it just draw a card.

Okay, so here's what I've come to realize about cards like Ion Storm. You can get them to work, but given a cube with high removal density (which I personally advocate for), Ion Storm has to compete with other cards on efficiency terms. Ion Storm costs a card, a +1/+1 counter and five mana to...

Anotak: I do love me some Cascade. Landstorm excites me more at the moment, and they're both competing for the maximal "one free-spell mechanic per set" slot.

I think the correct conclusion is "this is why we playtest".

I'd jam Sundering Growth in a mono section. Artifacts and Enchantments rarely need to be killed on Turn 2, making the card fairly easily castable in decks without both Selesnya colors.

Sometimes less is more. If people aren't engaging with your content it's because you didn't tickle their fancy. None of the designs really inspired me, but I'm not going to make a post dissecting why because that feels like work and leads the thread in a direction I don't want to take it. Not...

It's well possible. I just got tired of watching CFB people draft storm and lose to "the battle screech deck".

I don't think repeated begging is the answer here.