My Own Set and Mechanics
Challenges and Articles forum
Posted on Oct. 18, 2012, 12:43 p.m. by Absinthman
Hi everybody. This is rather a long post, but I hope it will be interesting enough to keep your attention.
I'm a big fan of creating custom cards and maybe even a bigger fan of creating custom mechanics (keyworded abilities) for the game. I'm currently working on a custom set of mine and I thought that I would share a glimpse of what I currently have in mind. Please, feel free to comment, evaluate, contemplate, disregard, ignore or hate.
First of all, let me tell you that neither of the two abilities that I'm introducing here is brand new. Both are actually inspired by cards with similar effects. The first one is called Donate (based on its namesake Donate card form Urza's Destiny). The ability simply allows you to cast a spell for an alternate cost, so that it doesn't enter the game under your control, but under your opponent's control. Naturally, the ability can't exist all by itself, and must be combined with something else to make sense. You'll find more information in the examples below. Please note that those examples only serve to show possible options for the ability. They may be under/overpowered or elsewise broken but that's not the point here. The point is to show how the ability works and what can be done with it.
 |  | |
| Note: This is a familiar concept of an overpowered card that has a drawback. Thanks to the Donate ability, you're now able to bestow its drawback on your opponent (if you think you can deal prevent the 4/4 flyer from killing you). | Note: An example of a card that you may either use to hinder you own attacks in exchange for life and card draw, or hinder your opponent's attacks (saving you from losing maybe), while giving him or her the opportunity to gain life and cards. | |
 |  | |
| Note: Boring while played regularly, but allows you to give your opponent a creature for free while forcing him to sacrifice some other, probably better creature. | Note: Another example of giving your opponent a free creature and gaining something else for it. | |
 |  | |
| Note: Make your own weenie stronger or reduce your opponent's weenie to dust. | Note: Get an early fatty but suffer the drawback, or give your opponent a fatty and let him deal with the consequences. |
The second ability is not an ability, strictly speaking. It's more like a pair of keywords that label abilities that could be written on cards without them, but since they are to be one of the dominant mechanics, I felt that labeling them with keywords was appropriate. Those keywords are Chronic and Anachronic, and the only thing in general that can be said about them, is that Chronic ability is somehow associated with your turn, while Anachronic is related to when it's not your turn (the details of this connection are always described on the card itself). The inspiration for this one came from cards like Angry Mob and Wildwood Geist . Again, I've included examples for you to get better idea.
 |  | |
| Note: Pretty straightforward. The abilities alternate based on whose turn it is. | Note: Same principle as with previous card, only this time it's an aura. | |
 |  | |
| Note: Another example of an enchantment with alternating effects, this time on global level. | Note: This is a concept that I came to like pretty much. We're all used to play card drawing instants at end of opponent's turn. Now this gives you one more reason to consider playing it during your own turn. This example also is to make it clear that a card does not necessarily need to have both Chronic and Anachronic effects. | |
 |  | |
| Note: This card sets an example of a "comes into play" effect that varies depending on whose turn it is, in contrast to the above Quicksilver Knight whose abilities just switch between turns. | Note: This is an example of a card with two possible abilities. Which one of them is active is decided based on whose turn it was when it entered the battlefield. | |
 |  | |
| Note: Another example of a card that only has one of the introduced effects which adds more power to it when played at the right time. | Note: The last example presents a card with two activated abilities with restricted use based on whose turn it currently is. |
As a final step, I've decided to try and make a few cards that would utilize both of my new mechanics. Although I don't actually think it is a good idea, since I was unable to make those cards look quite reasonable. Though I think it would be an interesting concept because if you donate a card with Chronic and Anachronic, the effects of that card would be reversed as opposed to the normal behavior of that card (because your opponent would be the controller of that card, the Chronic ability would be active during your turns, while the Anachronic ability would be in effect during your opponent's turns. Please explore the examples below, but as I've said, I haven't been able to come up with something that would be worth playing regularly and worth donating at the same time.
 |  | |
| Note: The combination of the two mechanics here allows you to choose whether you'd rather have a new 4/4 dragon each turn while periodically getting blasted for some amount of damage by your opponent. | Note: This lets you choose to either sacrifice more life per turn than your opponent, but inflict the pain of discarding a card each turn on him or her, or sacrifice cards in your hand to send your opponent's life total down the drain. |
This is all I've got for you, friends. Thank you very much for your attention. I understand this post is long, but I hope you've managed to read through all of it. I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this, so I'm looking forward to your comments and remarks.
Yours truly,
Absinthman.
P.S.: I apologize for any language mistakes. English is not my native language. Thank you.
Absinthman says... #3
@Epochalyptik: Thank you for the comment. I totally agree with you on not packing too much on one card. My idea was to introduce all the possibilities I came up with together with the mechanics themselves. I took the liberty of presuming that most people here were experienced players and could handle a bit of complexity. :-)) But generally, you're right. It's a kind of mental condition of mine, that I always try to make thing as complicated as possible. :-D
And by the way, the final stage, where I combine the two mechanics, is more or less meant for fun. I don't think that's a good idea either.
May I ask you though, what do you think about the abilities themselves?
Also, thank you for your compliment. :-)
October 18, 2012 1:14 p.m.
SandyDufresne says... #4
I like that you made Goblin Sparklighter 2/1. It'll make you think twice about giving your opponent a 2/1 or two to attack on their first turn. I love the donate ability and the chronic/anachronic ability and I agree with Epochalyptik about putting too many abilities on one card.
October 18, 2012 1:18 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #5
I like the mechanics themselves; they seem both practical and creative. There would be some interesting interactions here.
October 18, 2012 1:28 p.m.
Absinthman says... #6
@Geoff_of_Biscuits: Thanks for the comment. I was thinking exactly the same way when creating Goblin Sparklighter.
@Epochalyptik: Thank you. I'd really like to test this some day. The administrator of this site told me that we might get a functionality here at TappedOut some day soon, that would allow us to create custom sets and then draft sim them here. Of course, the schedule for this is not specified, but I'm really looking forward to it. Meanwhile, I'll try and make more cards.
October 18, 2012 1:44 p.m.
Yeah I love donate. Really cool ability. I think it needs to really stay in blue for the most part though. Some bleed makes sense.
Avatar of Might might have issues with Goblin Sparklighter, and it could be huge in storm.
October 18, 2012 1:59 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #8
I have to be honest, I was expecting a bunch of the usual nonsense that usually comprises a custom cards article, but these mechanics are actually good. The way you implemented Donate especially on the examples provided shows that you know how the game works and how to properly balance different effects against each other.
My one real criticism is that the Chronic and Anachronic ability words show up in pairs as often as they do, as it adds a ton of text to the cards they appear on. Would a full set have more cards with only one or the other? (Also, Knowledge Blast should probably be Anachronic)
October 18, 2012 2:12 p.m.
Absinthman says... #10
@squire1 : Thank you for your comment. An interesting point about Donate and the blue color. It indeed seems rather blueish (and the original Donate card adds to that). Also thank you for pointing out the Avatar of Might . Cards like that would really make the ability broken. Let's hope they won't reprint it. :-D
I'll think on what you said. Also thank you for following me. :-)
@Rhadamanthus: Thank you too for the comment and even more for the criticism. It really makes me happy to hear that what I came up with isn't total crap. It's invigorating.
To answer your question about only one ability appearing on cards... yes. I'm planing to make more cards that have only one of those. In fact, I just came up with one (or rather a set od cards). See below. About the Knowledge Blast, my idea there was to make the card worth playing during your turn (thus tapping yourself out). If it were anachronic, it would be too powerful at end of your opponent's turn in my opinion. But as I said before, these cards aren't final. More like illustrations of possibilities. But I welcome all kind of comments and criticism, and I like to hear what people think of particular examples I put here.
Now for the promised example (there would be a full set of, let's say, 5 lands like this one):
Also, I've thought of another ability, which again is more like a keyword for something that's not exactly new. I call it Linger. See for yourself in the examples below.
I'll have to think about something completely new next time. :-))
October 18, 2012 3:01 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #11
The text says "if it isn't your turn", that's why I asked.
October 18, 2012 4:07 p.m.
Ohthenoises says... #12
Tthe first thing I think of when I see chronic is well... You know... Anyways maybe a slight change of name? Roll everything into a single ability called timespinning or timespun or something then say "as long as it's your turn do x, as long as it's not your turn do y"
Really cool and well thought out abilities.
October 18, 2012 4:23 p.m.
Ohthenoises says... #13
Also, for the "as long as its your turn" only abilities just write that only. I don't think you need to split it into seperate abilities.
October 18, 2012 4:25 p.m.
Absinthman says... #14
@Rhadamanthus Oh my, you're right. I didn't notice that! The card should read "If it's your turn...". My mistake. I've also found a mistake in the text I wrote about the combination of donate and (ana)chronic. It shoud say that it's reversed, chronic abilities being active in your opponents' turns and anachronic in your turns. But that's obvious from the cards anyway.
@Ohthenoises: Thank you for your reply. I underdstand what you mean. In cases where both variations are present, it really could be consolidated into one "Timespinning" ability. But it would look a bit weird in cases where there only one of them.
Is there a way to edit my already posted article? I'd like to update the link, so that Knowledge Blast shows correct text, and also fix some mistakes in the article itself.
October 18, 2012 5:13 p.m.
UniTheDino says... #15
The Donate and Chronic/Anachronic mechanics look quite good and offer an interesting risk vs reward with each card (especially Donate). The Chonic/Anachronic counters seem like they may be hard to keep track of, but that isn't a huge issue.
However, the Linger ability should probably be reworked. Having cards in a certain order in graveyards is not done in Magic anymore. Since graveyards are public zones, your opponent could simply rearrange your graveyard and you would lose out on the ability. (Not to mention you could keep putting it on top). Just something to think about.
Lastly, on Thuun's Herald, the Chronic ability should specify that you reveal the land to your opponent.
October 18, 2012 8:31 p.m.
Absinthman says... #16
@UniTheDino: Hi, thank you for remarks. Didn't know that the order of cards in a graveyard can be rearranged any time. If it is so, then Linger goes down the drain :-D But if what you say is true, how does Death Spark work, I wonder?
You're right about the Herald. Forgot about revealing.
October 18, 2012 9:06 p.m.
UniTheDino says... #17
In older formats, that do have cards that require certain graveyard orders, you cannot rearrange the graveyard, but now, since it doesn't really matter, you can (at least to my knowledge).
October 18, 2012 9:16 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #18
Rearranging cards in a graveyard is only allowed in sanctioned tournament events where "order matters" cards aren't legal in the format. The base rules of the game don't allow you to change the order.
October 18, 2012 11:48 p.m.
Absinthman says... #19
I've thought about a way of rewriting the Linger ability to work the same way while not being connected with the graveyard in the way it previously had been. As a side-effect, I've actually upgraded the ability from simply being a keyword for something that does not necessarily need a name to a full scale mechanic. I'm not exacly sure about the wording though. Please, see the examples below of the redesigned cards from the previous example.
There are few things I need to work out though. Here are questions for you:
Is it obvious, that while a card is lingering, its Linger effect (e.g. +1/+1 and vigilance to all creatures) is active, or should the reminer text specify that?
Is it obvious, that the previously lingering cards that return to one's graveyard when a new card begins to linger, stop lingering from that moment? Or should it be expressively stated in the reminder text?
Thank you for your time and comments.
October 19, 2012 10:43 a.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #20
I think the word "Linger" should be standing by itself as a keyword ability with reminder text explaining the triggered ability. The continuous effect that gets turned on while lingering should be a separate ability reading "As long as thisguy is lingering..." or "As long as thisguy is exiled..." This suggestion is inspired by the implementation of the Haunt ability.
October 19, 2012 11:18 a.m.
I really like your ideas and mechanics. I'm pretty sure some cards with Donate would get rather broken.
I'd like to let you know what I think about when I see the word "Chronic." Repeating over and over again with regularity or lasting a very long time. I understand some people think about drugs, which may be another reason to change your mechanic name. For your Chronic and Anachronic, you've got things that change with whose turn it is. The mechanic itself is great, but I feel like the word "Chronic" suggests a triggered ability that happens each upkeep or a spell that gets copied over and over again like the Epic spells. Anachronic then to me seems like something that would happen just once or for a brief time.
This mechanic to me almost seems like Seasons. In your set's storyline it could involve a people who benefit greatly from spring or summer and have terrible things happen to them each fall or winter...etc. So maybe you could call it "Seasonal", "Timebound," "Turnbound" or "Winterbound" and "Summerbound" etc.
October 19, 2012 12:05 p.m.
Absinthman says... #22
To all: Please disregard the two new examples of Linger posted above. I realized like 15 minutes after posting them, that current wording of Linger makes the lingering effect virtually infinite (if no other permanent with linger owned by same player is destroyed during the game), and that could be easily exploited.
@Rhadamanthus: Thank you for your suggestion. Actually, I've come to the same conclusion after thinking it over, and redesigned Linger as seen in the examples below. This should work pretty well I think.
@SGB517: Thank you very much for your comment. As I've said, English is not my native language, so I was prepared for the possibility that a particular keyword could be problematic. Thank you for pointing it out. Your idea about seasons seems nice. I'll try and come of with something.
In the end I decided to add a cost to activate Linger and to limit its duration to a specified number of turns. I felt that adding the cost helps create more ballanced cards.
Somebody could say that there is too much text on the cards and the font gets too tiny (especially in case of the Specter), but the fact is that in cases where this happens, the reminder text can be omited, and that saves a great lot of space. I kept the reminder text in all examples here only to make the conditions for Linger transparent.
Please, let me know what you think of this change.
October 19, 2012 9:17 p.m.
Mizraboy15 says... #23
I like it it would be cool to mak a donate card with similar abilities to Abyssal Persecutor make it mythic and awesome.
October 21, 2012 3:09 p.m.
Absinthman says... #25
@Mizraboy15: Thank you for your comment, your suggestion is pretty interesting. But I have to say, that I personally dislike cards that directly forbid winning or losing.
@Rhadamanthus I'm not sure whether your comment was referring to my new version of Linger, or to Mizraboy15's comment. :-)
By the way, I've thought about all that was said here about Chronic and Anachronic abilities, and I decided to consolidate them into one keyword and rename it. The new name is Seasonal. It's not final yet, it may be subject to further renaming if there happens to be a suggestion that will be considered better by general public. This consolidation also allowed for shorter rules text on the cards and maybe even increased the transparency of how it works. Inspect the reimagined orignal examples below, if it please you. Thank you all for lasting attention and invaluable cooperation.
I also have a few more new abilities in various stages of development, but I thought it a bad idea to post too much at once here. But if you feel ready for one or two more (and are still interested in my inventions), let me know and I'll introduce something new. I'd also appreciate more feedback on the latest version of Linger, if you find the time to check it out. Again, thank you all guys for your help and thoughtful remarks.
October 22, 2012 10:38 a.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #26
That's a really amazing improvement. You get everything you want, and it reads a whole lot better.
October 22, 2012 7:11 p.m.
Linger would be better without a cost. I think that Linger X as a death trigger is fine. You can just use the X to balance the cards.
Seasonal is way cleaner as a mechanic than chronic and anachronic were. I like it now. I don't love the word seasonal for it just because seasons seem longer than a turn.
October 23, 2012 2:45 p.m.
Absinthman says... #29
Hello guys, sorry for the delay, but I also have other things to do beside this :-)
According to your suggestion, I've removed the cost from linger to make it automatic. Here are some examples of cards, some of them redesigned, some new.
I have one more non-combat ability that I'm currently working on, but I'm not satisfied with it yet, so I'll have you wait a bit longer. I'll introduce it once I deem it worthy of your attention.
As to combat abilities, I've also thought of creating those and I have come up with one or two. I'll put them here a bit later for your consideration.
Though this may be an obvious thing, I want to make it clear that what I'm introducing here is not to be all included in one custom set that I plan to create. I'm merely trying to fish for ideas and see what people like the best. I think I'll make some kind of a poll in the end here to let you all decide what the set should work with. Thank you for your cooperation, please stay true to me (because subscribing is too mainstream).
November 1, 2012 4:29 p.m.
Absinthman says... #30
Hello guys. As I've promised, I come to you with yet another ability, this one is also my own original I believe. In fact, I have two versions of it and I'd like to hear your opinion on which of them you like better. The names Unstable and Destabilize are only temporary names (I made them different in both versions for easier distinction), though I think that one of them will be applied to the final wording of this ability. The idea in question is a downside ability that makes particular spells more vulnerable to countering, allowing players to counter them virtually by anything. This makes room for more powerful effects on said cards. You'll get the idea from the example below.
Please let me know whether you like this idea or not, or whether you consider it overpowered (my main concerns are that it may prove too strong in situations where your opponents tap themselves out or are left with no cards in their hands and no sources of abilities on the battlefield). Thank you for your ongoing support.
November 5, 2012 4:54 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #31
I don't know whether I like it better as an alternative mode or being always on. Either way is very swingy, and has great potential for both awesome and "feel bad" moments.
Regardless of which way is the better choice, I think you'll have a problem with player reaction to the mechanic. Having a card say "oh yeah, and sometimes I do nothing except leave you tapped out and get you killed" means it has to have a strong enough upside to be worth the risk. Balancing that is going to be tough without making things too swingy.
Also, such a mechanic would have to be designed within a set that can both enable it and have some way to keep it from getting out of hand in Limited play (Sealed Deck and Draft). Lorwyn and Shadowmoor blocks were known for getting bogged down in on-board complexity with the way everything interacted with each other, and I'd be concerned that a set where every Shock and Master Decoy was also potential countermagic would get frustrating.
It will be difficult to get it right, but I don't think it's impossible. You've brought up a very interesting concept.
November 5, 2012 7:51 p.m.
Absinthman says... #32
Hello again. I've been working on my set for a while and I've come to a conclusion that it would be best to include one non-combat ability in it (that would be Donate) and one combat ability, which is yet to be decided. For now, I have two adepts for my set and I'd like to know your opinions on them. They are pretty simple I think. First one, called Cleave, is an upside ability, the second, Craven is a downside one. Please check out the examples below.
In case of Craven, I was thinking about many possible effects that could trigger. Basically, this ability can be changed to Whenever a creature with power equal to or greater than this creature's tougness attacks you or a planeswalker you control, do something with this card. I just thought that returning it to one's hand better fits the flavor of being craven ("Crap, that guy looks strong enough to kill me, I better hide somewhere"), and also allows for some interaction of craven cards with enters the battlefield effects. You may have better suggestions though.
I hope you like these abilities, I'd like to include one of those in my set. Personally, I like Cleave better, but don't let it affect your views. Thank you.
November 12, 2012 4:55 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #33
Craven is another mechanic that says "half of the time, this card is blank or worse", and I think it's best to avoid such things. The reason WotC hasn't designed mechanics like this (named or unnamed) in many years is because player reaction is almost always very negative, and only the most competitive-minded players end up seeing any redeeming value in cards with the drawback. You're much better off focusing on Cleave.
November 12, 2012 5:05 p.m.
Absinthman says... #34
@Rhadamanthus: Thank you for your feedback. I understand what you mean and now that I look at it, I must admit that you're right. I need to refrain from creating such abilities as Craven. They wouldn't really work. As for Cleave, I have to say that I'm not totally happy with what it looks like now, because in my opinion it also has a rather high chance of doing nothing (if not combined with buffs). I was thinking about eliminating "lethal" from its wording but I'm not sure about it either. Wouldn't that make it too powerful? What do you think?
Anyway, thank you very much for your help. Your being faithful to this thread and providing me with feedback on everything I post has been most valuable.
November 13, 2012 8:18 a.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #35
It's rare that I pay any attention to custom cards and mechanics, but your designs are very interesting and show a lot of careful thought.
I think Cleave is pretty promising. Creatures die in combat all the time without the benefit of pump effects, so it's definitely going to do something. After thinking about it some more, it might be slightly too powerful in the initial form, as it turns so many creatures into 2-for-1 removal spells.
Maybe it can be turned into "Cleave N" instead of just being based on power, which I think would also work with your plain "damage" idea without letting the effect get too strong.
Maybe it can be turned into "Cleave N", keep the "lethal" wording, and also be allowed to hit players.
November 13, 2012 10:24 a.m.
Absinthman says... #36
@Rhadamanthus: I like your suggestions. Though I can't decide which one to use. I don't know if you're familiar with Dungeons & Dragons rules which actually inspired this ability. There is a feat there called Cleave that grants you an extra attack if your current attack sends your opponent to the ground (dead or alive, no matter). That's the reason why I included the "lethal" condition. I understand that I can't enforce these details in Magic, because it works on different mechanics, but it seemed nice to keep it there. On the other hand, the ability seems more useful without the "lethal" condition. In the end, I will most likely go for the first version without lethal. Nevertheless, adding N to it is a great idea indeed. I'll definitely use that.
Thank you for the comment.
November 14, 2012 8:20 a.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #37
Yeah, I'm familiar with the Cleave feat. I thought of it immediately when I saw your mechanic, so that means you did a good job porting it over.
November 14, 2012 9:44 a.m.
http404error says... #38
Double Kudos for many fabulous mechanics that search in new areas.
Here's something that sprang to mind:
Crossmark 1UR
Instant (R)
If it is your turn, copy target spell. You may choose new targets for the copy.
Otherwise, counter target spell.
Dire Claws is weird because Trample does nothing when it's not your turn and reach does nothing when it is. Be careful about that.
I think Cleave should be a fixed number and trigger on any combat damage. Additionally, you should let it target players, which steps on trample's toes a bit, makes it relevant more often. Many times it just won't do anything, which isn't a hallmark of a good mechanic.
November 23, 2012 8:56 p.m.
Absinthman says... #39
@http404error: Hi, thank you for the comment and appreciation. I like Crossmark very much. I would definitely add it to my Highlander deck.
About Dire Calws, I'm certain that you must have misread it. The card correctly states that the creature has trample during your turns and reach during other players' turns.
For Cleave, I've already changed it to what you and Rhadamanthus are proposing. I just haven't posted the new version of it here, because I didn't feel it was necessary.
In any case, thanks for checking my thread out. Each and every feedback is valuable.
November 24, 2012 6:54 a.m.
http404error says... #40
Trample has no effect when it's not your turn. Reach has no effect when it is your turn.
Dire Claws 1G
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature has trample and reach.
As long as it is your turn, enchanted creature gets +2/+1. Otherwise, it gets +1/+2.
Or the much more elegant version:
Dire Claws G
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 and has trample and reach.
These cards are functionally identical to the ones you have. Even Stonebrow, Krosan Hero doesn't see the difference.
November 24, 2012 2:10 p.m.
http404error says... #42
Am I missing something important here? Why does it even need to use the seasonal mechanic then?
November 24, 2012 6:55 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #43
Never mind, I guess I misunderstood what you were saying. Because of your comments, I thought you were reading the "as long as it's your turn" part as "as long as it's not your turn", and that you thought it was getting trample during opponents' turns and reach during your turn.
November 24, 2012 7:03 p.m.
Absinthman says... #44
I seem to have trouble understanding what http404error is saying too, except that there is no need to make trample and reach alternate between turns. But nevermind. In any case, cards I have put here as examples were not meant to be seen as actual cards planned for the set, merely as examples of what these mechanics could be associated with. In case of Dire Claws, its purpose was to show an aura that gives a creature different abilities based on whose turn it is. You can imagine it in a different color with other abilities printed on it. By the way, Chronic and Anachronic mechanics have been discarded from the set. Right now, I'm only working with Donate and Cleave. Although I must say that I have a really good feeling about Linger too after it was discussed here, so I guess it will make an appearance in the next set (in case the set I'm currently working on receives a stamp of approval from this community).
November 25, 2012 12:56 p.m.
Absinthman says... #45
Hello guys, I don't know if anybody is still keeping an eye on this thread, but if yes, I'd apprecieate your help. I thought about cleave over and over, and I think I won't use it after all. So I've tried to explore some other possibilities for combat related abilities and came up with this one called Enrage. Please comment on what you think of it.
During developmet of its current wording, I had following version: Enrage N (At the beginning of your upkeep, if this creature was dealt damage last turn, it gets +N/+N until end of turn.) - It seemed slow/non-aggresive which I wanted it to be, and also overall not too good forcing players to find a way do have it been dealt non-lethal damage during opponents' turns (blocking smaller creatures). So I discarded this version.
I also thought about Enrage N (At the beginning of your upkeep, you may have this creature deal N damage to target creature you control. If you do, that creature gets +N/+0 until end of turn.) - This one seems a bit too strong but maybe it's just my imagination. I still like this version, but I'd like to know what you think.
Thank you guys for your comments.
December 15, 2012 4:22 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #46
There is no reason for anyone to pay enrage's optional cost on a deathtoucher (think about that one), but the mechanic is interesting.
I'm concerned that enrage won't be used very much because it will severely weaken creatures and make them easy targets for burn spells.
December 15, 2012 4:53 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #47
*not optional cost. Rather, have enrage deal damage as part of its may trigger.
December 15, 2012 4:54 p.m.
http404error says... #48
I think you should stick with the less confusing +x/-x. Keeping track of damage is no fun.
December 15, 2012 5:06 p.m.
Absinthman says... #49
Hi Epochalyptik, thank you for your comments. You're right about the combination not making much sense. I just wanted to quickly create some kind of examples and didn't give it much thought.
Actually, I am aware that Enrage makes creatures very vulnerable, but that was kind of a point. I meant it as a red/black (partially green) ability for very aggressive gameplay. But I understand that it should be improved somehow.
Could you please clarify your second comment? I don't understand what exactly you meant. Thank you.
December 15, 2012 5:06 p.m.
Absinthman says... #50
@http404error: You're right about that. This way though, this ability would resemble so many others. It seems I've again come up with something I can't use. But that's a better result then none. Thank you guys. I'll keep thinking. Eventually, something must emerge.
Epochalyptik says... #2
Your English is actually quite good.
I would be careful about loading too many abilities on one card. Especially when you're just introducing mechanics, you don't want to pack your cards with new and sometimes confusing abilities and interactions.
October 18, 2012 12:56 p.m.