General Custom Cards: The Lab

I dunno about the last two (master, cruddy); also why is the kung fu master shopping?

Completely unrelatedly, thoughts on this shiny new mechanic?

Devils Jester.jpg
Relentless Demon.jpgSparkwraith.jpg
Intended to be a scaling Hellbent effect (hellbent's a threshold mechanic so it has lots of problems) but I don't know how many issues this causes.
 
I dunno about the last two (master, cruddy); also why is the kung fu master shopping?

Completely unrelatedly, thoughts on this shiny new mechanic?

View attachment 991
View attachment 992View attachment 993
Intended to be a scaling Hellbent effect (hellbent's a threshold mechanic so it has lots of problems) but I don't know how many issues this causes.
Those are all ludicrously powerful. They all probably have to cost at least 1 more, if not 2, and they'd still be really strong at that price.
 

James Stevenson

Steamflogger Boss
Staff member
I like them when they make you discard cards. It's way more interesting and interactive. Maybe just change the P/Ts?
 
Probably OK as a 6/2 that makes you discard, maybe a 6/3. Not sure.

But I don't think they should ALL make you discard anyways.
 

James Stevenson

Steamflogger Boss
Staff member
Hmm. If you play devils jester on turn one with a GB dual, then next turn discard 5 cards and berserk it, that should kill them, right?
Ah wait, doesn't work if it has the discard clause. And anyway, I think berserk is the real problem here.
 

Onderzeeboot

Ecstatic Orb
Hmm. If you play devils jester on turn one with a GB dual, then next turn discard 5 cards and berserk it, that should kill them, right?
Ah wait, doesn't work if it has the discard clause. And anyway, I think berserk is the real problem here.
Name one other creature that can (almost) kill on turn two with Berserk as your only other play. I don't think Berserk is the problem here.
 
Also I don't agree that hellbent has a lot of problems. Binary threshold mechanics are much easier to balance than ones that scale. Almost every broken mechanic scales - storm, affinity, and delve.
 
Also I don't agree that hellbent has a lot of problems. Binary threshold mechanics are much easier to balance than ones that scale. Almost every broken mechanic scales - storm, affinity, and delve.

Hellbent being a threshold mechanic really limits what you can and can't do in terms of play patterns. In particular, Hellbent rewards you for emptying your hand quickly and then just keeping it that way. Also hard to balance; the difference between on and off is typically so large that you don't have very many design decisions that make sense: see Demon's Jester, Gobhobbler Rats, Hellhole Bouncer... basically most of the cards with Hellbent.

None of that makes sense, but I'm rather tired right now so that's the best I can muster.

Also, Channel + Emrakul is ostensibly a turn 2 kill. The issue is probably the enabler, not the creature? Thus Berserk being a problem (it's not going to be in my cube). But yea, I haven't really balanced the PT that well, but I also haven't tested it; it's all just theory atm.

Also, want to keep costs as low as possible but colour requirements high as I want these to function as madness enablers as well.

Furthermore, I assume most peoples' cubes are littered with really strong 1-for-1 removal (Swords, Paths, Dismembers, whatever) so I wanted to push the toughness a little to compensate for the inherent card disadvantage these imply. Basically don't want to remake Avatar of Discord in Rav/Kami standard.
 
I think you kind of dig yourself into the same hole by making them all require a discard on ETB. They then have to be so powerful, to justify the cost, that they are broken.
 
Oh, I just thought I might as well show what could be done; the mechanic I was wanting feedback on was Mindless, not the rest of it.

It's probably possible to make a common that just has that mechanic.
 
I think the mechanic is cool, but I don't think its easier to balance than hellbent. Easier to make a playable card maybe, but I think any playable card is probably broken.
 
Sigil of Seclusion {G}{W/U}
Enchantment — Aura
Flash
Enchant player or permanent
Enchanted player or permanent has shroud.
 

Chris Taylor

Contributor
First one. Like looking at that in a lack, it's difficult to parse how big they'll be.

Hell I have this problem with graft with my drafters.
 
It requires more mental circuitry to value the creature properly when its final board presense is reliant on other moving parts. Newer Drafters can have this problem with, say, Tarmogoyf.

Also, lots of people don't actually like the idea of purposely wanting fewer cards. It's pretty nonintuitive in some ways. Odyssey block was an experiment in "card disadvantage = success", and MaRo finds the experiment to be largely failed. Can't fight what the players expect.
 

Chris Taylor

Contributor
People have issues with graft? I can't really imagine that... can you elaborate?

If you look at a graft creature, it's a 0/0. And while everyone knows that means "look at the rules text dummy", it's still another jump they need to make in the middle of a pack with 10 unfamailiar cards, 5 of which are probably shit I made up :p

It doesn't help that often I need a 2/1, so you get stuff like Experiment Two (See link in my sig) who's a 1/0 with graft 1 AND an activated ability.
 
Dumb Blue Enabler {U}
Instant
Investigate
Flashback {U}
"I heard you like durdly synergies, so I put durdly synergies in your durdly synergies." Xhibit, Planeswalker

Alternatively...

You Call That A Brainstorm?!? {1}{U}
Instant
Investigate
Storm

No idea what the right mana cost would be for this, but it seems like a fun time.
 
It requires more mental circuitry to value the creature properly when its final board presense is reliant on other moving parts. Newer Drafters can have this problem with, say, Tarmogoyf.

Also, lots of people don't actually like the idea of purposely wanting fewer cards. It's pretty nonintuitive in some ways. Odyssey block was an experiment in "card disadvantage = success", and MaRo finds the experiment to be largely failed. Can't fight what the players expect.

Funny you should mention Odyssey. One of my friends who would be playing this cube adores that format (3xODY, that is). But yea, these designs are pretty experimental and strange.
 
i'm not sure i would automatically mention odyssey as a failure, like yes, it was a failure with the magic audience at large, but with more spikey players or just more invested players in general it was incredibly well liked

and only you can know the audience of your cube
 
Top