10/10 would art again
General Custom Cards: The Lab
- Thread starter anotak
- Start date
I feel like I need high res versions of those arts in my life
Ask and you shall recieve:
It's a lot of text but in a cube situation where you're playing either of these two cards, the complexity is really really not an issue. All this does is support two narrow archetypes with one card, saving space and adding depth. I will concede that it still says Prized Amalgam.
Chris Taylor
Contributor
Alright, so we have the baseline idea for a card, imagine for an environment where doom blade is standard:
Instant
Destroy target creature with CMC 2 or less
But this is a really narrow, essentially anti aggro card. Let's make it broadly more applicable in the easiest possible way with kicker.
But what to add?
Kicker
instead doom blade
Well I don't love the nonblack clause. Since you essentially never have control over the cards your opponent plays, doom blade in draft can be annoying for the same reasons something like Chill can be. Let's change that.
Kicker
Instead Murder
This card isn't particularly interesting since the kicked version is something we'd already play, so this feels less like kicker and more like evoke: the spell feels more like the full price version and you occasionally get a discount. As well, a lot of these arguments apply to the doom blade example as well.
(There's arguments here that the card is overpowered that I'd rather not get into in this excercise)
Kicker
Instead Murder
Alright, we're getting warmer. Murder is quickly becoming the black cancel anyways (Not quite good enough on it's own, but a fine addition when a little something is tacked on like hero's downfall or dissipate. "Slightly easier to cast" is a nice enough upside on this case, but not enough that I think I'd just run the card on it's own)
But again, I'm getting the creeping feeling that I'm not much making a choice here, my actions are being dictated by the game situation almost entirely. Perhaps another:
Kicker, pay 2 life
(I'm just going to skip over the partial evolution here of just kicker: Pay 2 life which is more unacceptably powerful, while doom blade without a targeting restriction is powerful, but I feel more acceptably so)
Alright, interesting. Now the player has to weigh the value of life paid now to destroy a threat that might cost them more if left unremoved. As well, unlike cards like dismember (played where it always is, in decks without access to black mana) there is another viable option if you can't spare 2 life: kill something smaller. It won't always have a target but on a more or less stalled board it'll still help.
It's still not perfect. I've long lamented players being forced to board out thoughtseize in matchups where it might otherwise have helped because they couldn't spare the 2 life, and would have happily kept in a narrower card like duress. Certainly won't make or break the card (It didn't thoughtseize, after all), but maybe we can do better:
Kicker: Sacrifice a creature
Alright, this is definitely weaker. Having a spare creature lying around is a tough sell sometimes, as bone splinters has demonstrated in many limited formats. It's not an impossible sell, since things like threatens, unearth creatures, and disposable tokens can all make the price more manageable, but all of those things make the card more narrow again, which was the problem we were trying to solve with this kicker. Maybe something simpler?
Kicker:
murder is probably strong an uninteresting, but murder might be a more interesting restriction. However, it does run counter to a lot of pretty core cube design principals, though it does dodge the issue of being a tough goal in the early turns, since that's usually when you could cast it unkicked (Unless your opponent just reanimated a 7 drop or something)
Kicker or
Alright now you're trying too hard, this card is losing focus. Phyrexian mana won't work either, 3 ways to cast a single simple kill spell is too many when one of those ways targets different things.
Kicker: discard a card (Assuming no madness theme in the cube)
Assuming there's not some hardcore good reasons to just be throwing stuff away, this is going to feel AWFUL to kick, and like an absolute blowout if the downside is mitigated in any way (Playing this to discard your reanimation target AND kill an important creature is a lot going on for a single mana instant)
Alight, I can keep inner monologuing in circles forever about something like this. Hopefully the sheer number of variations and their progression to one another is insightful rather than confusing. What do you think is the better designed card?
Instant
Destroy target creature with CMC 2 or less
But this is a really narrow, essentially anti aggro card. Let's make it broadly more applicable in the easiest possible way with kicker.
But what to add?
Kicker
instead doom blade
Well I don't love the nonblack clause. Since you essentially never have control over the cards your opponent plays, doom blade in draft can be annoying for the same reasons something like Chill can be. Let's change that.
Kicker
Instead Murder
This card isn't particularly interesting since the kicked version is something we'd already play, so this feels less like kicker and more like evoke: the spell feels more like the full price version and you occasionally get a discount. As well, a lot of these arguments apply to the doom blade example as well.
(There's arguments here that the card is overpowered that I'd rather not get into in this excercise)
Kicker
Instead Murder
Alright, we're getting warmer. Murder is quickly becoming the black cancel anyways (Not quite good enough on it's own, but a fine addition when a little something is tacked on like hero's downfall or dissipate. "Slightly easier to cast" is a nice enough upside on this case, but not enough that I think I'd just run the card on it's own)
But again, I'm getting the creeping feeling that I'm not much making a choice here, my actions are being dictated by the game situation almost entirely. Perhaps another:
Kicker
, pay 2 life(I'm just going to skip over the partial evolution here of just kicker: Pay 2 life which is more unacceptably powerful, while doom blade without a targeting restriction is powerful, but I feel more acceptably so)
Alright, interesting. Now the player has to weigh the value of life paid now to destroy a threat that might cost them more if left unremoved. As well, unlike cards like dismember (played where it always is, in decks without access to black mana) there is another viable option if you can't spare 2 life: kill something smaller. It won't always have a target but on a more or less stalled board it'll still help.
It's still not perfect. I've long lamented players being forced to board out thoughtseize in matchups where it might otherwise have helped because they couldn't spare the 2 life, and would have happily kept in a narrower card like duress. Certainly won't make or break the card (It didn't thoughtseize, after all), but maybe we can do better:
Kicker: Sacrifice a creature
Alright, this is definitely weaker. Having a spare creature lying around is a tough sell sometimes, as bone splinters has demonstrated in many limited formats. It's not an impossible sell, since things like threatens, unearth creatures, and disposable tokens can all make the price more manageable, but all of those things make the card more narrow again, which was the problem we were trying to solve with this kicker. Maybe something simpler?
Kicker:
murder is probably strong an uninteresting, but murder might be a more interesting restriction. However, it does run counter to a lot of pretty core cube design principals, though it does dodge the issue of being a tough goal in the early turns, since that's usually when you could cast it unkicked (Unless your opponent just reanimated a 7 drop or something)Kicker
or Alright now you're trying too hard, this card is losing focus. Phyrexian mana won't work either, 3 ways to cast a single simple kill spell is too many when one of those ways targets different things.
Kicker: discard a card (Assuming no madness theme in the cube)
Assuming there's not some hardcore good reasons to just be throwing stuff away, this is going to feel AWFUL to kick, and like an absolute blowout if the downside is mitigated in any way (Playing this to discard your reanimation target AND kill an important creature is a lot going on for a single mana instant)
Alight, I can keep inner monologuing in circles forever about something like this. Hopefully the sheer number of variations and their progression to one another is insightful rather than confusing. What do you think is the better designed card?
I think my favorite iteration here is Kicker: Sacrifice a creature. One-shot creature sacrifice effects are cool, and an instant-speed Bone Splinters is nothing to sneeze at, since it means sacrificing creatures that are about to die anyway (the ultimate in disposability). Besides, the added versatility to cast it unkicked means it doesn't have the Bone Splinters problem to anywhere near the same degree.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Is kicker -- sacrifice a land an option?
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
So, Glare of Subdual is not universally loved. I kinda like it, but a lot of people apparently don't. Is it worth it to replace it with this?
I misread the name as Memetic Genesis.
I think the card is cool and worth trying. It's a lot easier for the opponent to get out of the 'softlock' with a sweeper than it is against Glare. I like that in a big board stall it's more challenging to play than Glare is; rather than tapping their team on their upkeep and slamming in for lethal next turn, you have to set up unfavorable blocks, probably over the course of multiple turns. Maybe as a result of these things it's less miserable to lose to it? It's still good against every deck that is trying to win with combat damage.
It may or may not still be worth building around? I think I'd want to have some token spells before taking this one. It's more reliant on having a ton of creatures in play, whereas you can just slam Glare in a midrange deck and get medium-to-great value out of it. Could this possibly make three tokens, or is that too insane?
In a format with more spell-based finishers (or even just more enchantment removal) Glare isn't particularly oppressive and this card is, like, moderately playable.
I think the card is cool and worth trying. It's a lot easier for the opponent to get out of the 'softlock' with a sweeper than it is against Glare. I like that in a big board stall it's more challenging to play than Glare is; rather than tapping their team on their upkeep and slamming in for lethal next turn, you have to set up unfavorable blocks, probably over the course of multiple turns. Maybe as a result of these things it's less miserable to lose to it? It's still good against every deck that is trying to win with combat damage.
It may or may not still be worth building around? I think I'd want to have some token spells before taking this one. It's more reliant on having a ton of creatures in play, whereas you can just slam Glare in a midrange deck and get medium-to-great value out of it. Could this possibly make three tokens, or is that too insane?
In a format with more spell-based finishers (or even just more enchantment removal) Glare isn't particularly oppressive and this card is, like, moderately playable.
that card is nice. i dont have constructive thoughts because i'm a bit woozy because i had a bizarre unexpected hospitalization experience friday morning (apparently i'm okay now though)
anyway here's today's card that i thought of while laying in bed watching caleb durward play legacy because it's one of the most low effort things to do without sleeping (because i already slept like 10 hours)
Putting Y In Your Rules Text Is Always A Mistake
Instant
Converge — You draw Y cards and you lose Y life, where Y is the number of colors of mana spent to cast ~.
anyway here's today's card that i thought of while laying in bed watching caleb durward play legacy because it's one of the most low effort things to do without sleeping (because i already slept like 10 hours)
Putting Y In Your Rules Text Is Always A Mistake
Instant
Converge — You draw Y cards and you lose Y life, where Y is the number of colors of mana spent to cast ~.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
You could probably word it like this?
Ritual of Y'less
Converge — Draw cards equal to the number of colors of mana spent to cast Ritual of Y'less. You lose that much life.
Ritual of Y'less
Converge — Draw cards equal to the number of colors of mana spent to cast Ritual of Y'less. You lose that much life.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
thx for the feed back, that might be a good change. it seems still confusing perhaps though. i'm not sure which is more confusing. like i've tried some with the wording like that one and had people be confused. i noticed engineered explosives confusess
this card is really cool but, er, why is a rug card gaining life? and it just seems kind of tacked on.
would it be too absurd without the and the lifegain? though thinking about it maybe 3/4 isnt very RG though it is U
hmrmmmm i dont know sry im gonna go lay back down
this card is really cool but, er, why is a rug card gaining life? and it just seems kind of tacked on.
would it be too absurd without the
and the lifegain? though thinking about it maybe 3/4 isnt very RG though it is Uhmrmmmm i dont know sry im gonna go lay back down
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Yeah, X in the casting cost without an X in the text box can be confusing as well. I do think it's slightly clearer thoughthx for the feed back, that might be a good change. it seems still confusing perhaps though. i'm not sure which is more confusing. like i've tried some with the wording like that one and had people be confused. i noticed engineered explosives confusess
this card is really cool but, er, why is a rug card gaining life? and it just seems kind of tacked on.
would it be too absurd without the
hmrmmmm i dont know sry im gonna go lay back down
As for the life gain, I was trying to get some
in there, but I guess the regeneration already is enough! I simply dropped the life gain, and it still looks okay! Free regeneration is pretty boss!On my quest for more three color cards I made some new ones that would fit my new cube or are just generally cool to play with.
Cool or not?
I think for Raven Man's second ability you need to, like, remove all damage from that creature, or else it constantly dies again as a SBE if it still has lethal damage on it? Similarly if it has -1/-1 counters such that its toughness is 0, what should happen?
Maybe "If another creature would die, regenerate it. If it regenerates this way, its controller loses 2 life and discards a card." That way you fold all the weird edge cases into the game's existing rules. Plus bonus synergy with Incinerate!
I am not sure how Raven Man would play but my guess is that it makes having bigger creatures than your opponent really, really good. There are no profitable double blocks, and chump blocking is worse card disadvantage than usual. At the same time, if you control the edgelord, he can leave play strategically to screw up the combat step and break his own symmetry. I think he adds a huge amount of complexity to the board state, and all he asks is that you hold up some mana like your esper deck already wanted to anyway.
On the other hand, he's a hill giant. If you want him to be resistant to removal, you're playing a 6 mana hill giant. Maybe it's your opponent's own fault if they can't murder you for the tempo hit.
Renegade Operative looks less powerful than EAP's nightmare, but demands a removal spell or it will automatically win a stalled game. That's well within Abzan's color pie, and the card is probably both more fun and weaker than Siege Rhino. I like it. It's a little sad by itself, but that's in-pie too.
Curse of Nightmares is pretty interesting. I think the flavor works, except if you target yourself. I would try it costing one less but not able to target its owner, because if you can target yourself it's pretty likely to be correct (it's easier to play your spells than your opponent's, typically) and the fun part of the card is trying to hit your opponents' lands to cast their spells. But if you hit their cards in the wrong order, the card does nothing. Is it too crazy to exile two cards from villain's deck per turn? That's kind of getting into some icky territory though. I think it could be fine anyway! The other two cards here are strong, let this one be stronk too!
Maybe "If another creature would die, regenerate it. If it regenerates this way, its controller loses 2 life and discards a card." That way you fold all the weird edge cases into the game's existing rules. Plus bonus synergy with Incinerate!
I am not sure how Raven Man would play but my guess is that it makes having bigger creatures than your opponent really, really good. There are no profitable double blocks, and chump blocking is worse card disadvantage than usual. At the same time, if you control the edgelord, he can leave play strategically to screw up the combat step and break his own symmetry. I think he adds a huge amount of complexity to the board state, and all he asks is that you hold up some mana like your esper deck already wanted to anyway.
On the other hand, he's a hill giant. If you want him to be resistant to removal, you're playing a 6 mana hill giant. Maybe it's your opponent's own fault if they can't murder you for the tempo hit.
Renegade Operative looks less powerful than EAP's nightmare, but demands a removal spell or it will automatically win a stalled game. That's well within Abzan's color pie, and the card is probably both more fun and weaker than Siege Rhino. I like it. It's a little sad by itself, but that's in-pie too.
Curse of Nightmares is pretty interesting. I think the flavor works, except if you target yourself. I would try it costing one less but not able to target its owner, because if you can target yourself it's pretty likely to be correct (it's easier to play your spells than your opponent's, typically) and the fun part of the card is trying to hit your opponents' lands to cast their spells. But if you hit their cards in the wrong order, the card does nothing. Is it too crazy to exile two cards from villain's deck per turn? That's kind of getting into some icky territory though. I think it could be fine anyway! The other two cards here are strong, let this one be stronk too!
Chris Taylor
Contributor
Curse of nightmares seems very weak as 3 color outpost sieges go
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Well, you get to beat them with their own bombs, that's
extra for its demoralizing powers right there!
Chris Taylor
Contributor
I suppose it does ask an interesting question: Are your cards better or are theirs.
I'm not sure the option to use theirs is worth being that much harder to cast is what I'm getting at
I'm not sure the option to use theirs is worth being that much harder to cast is what I'm getting at
Maybe add a rider so that you can use any colour of mana to play them? Like Grenzo, Havoc Raiser. Works both as fixing if your own deck is greedy, and means you can actually cast the cards you steal.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Eh, a rider may be needed, but I don't mind that you have to work for it a bit. It's been pretty good in testing, as it often allows you to fix the shortcomings of your own deck. Oooooh! I just thought of a rider!
Is that mean enough?
I would think you can make it symmetrical and "enchant player" still. Basically:
Enchant player
At beginning of upkeep, look a top card of that players deck, may bottom it.
At beg of upkeep, Exile and you may cast this turn.
This version would almost always be enchanting one's self though, which might not be bad. One cool version I thought of was:
At upkeep, Exile top of each players library, until eot, you may play up to one card exiled this turn this way.
Not sure if the cost would need to be tweaked with this effect.
Enchant player
At beginning of upkeep, look a top card of that players deck, may bottom it.
At beg of upkeep, Exile and you may cast this turn.
This version would almost always be enchanting one's self though, which might not be bad. One cool version I thought of was:
At upkeep, Exile top of each players library, until eot, you may play up to one card exiled this turn this way.
Not sure if the cost would need to be tweaked with this effect.