Defender of the Heart, revised
Custom Cards forum
Posted on Feb. 25, 2020, 6:37 p.m. by DemonDragonJ
Defense of the Heart is a very awesome card, but it is very overpowered and/or under costed for its effect, especially since the conditions under which its ability triggers are extremely easy to meet.
Therefore, I wish to create a new version of that card, a version that I hope shall be more balanced.
Defender of the Heart Show
Being a creature means that this card is easier to put onto the battlefield (and also return to the battlefield from the graveyard) than is defense of the heart, but, in exchange, it has a higher mana cost and its ability does not trigger as easily.
What does everyone else say about this card? How do you like it?
DemonDragonJ says... #3
RNR_Gaming, Bloodgift Demon has a higher mana cost than does Phyrexian Arena, Archfiend of Despair has a higher mana cost than does Wound Reflection, and Butcher of Malakir has a higher mana cost than does Grave Pact, but Rhox Faithmender has a lower converted mana cost than does Boon Reflection, but that may be because BR's mana cost is (in my mind) too high for its effect.
February 25, 2020 8:06 p.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #5
maxon, does the addition of flying really make that much of a difference?
February 25, 2020 10:07 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #6
Yes. Its usually the difference between a filler card and a bomb in limited.
February 25, 2020 10:49 p.m.
DemonDragonJ: Yes it does, very much so. Not to mention, all of those creatures have a persisent effect. The card you designed requires you to sacrifice the creature to get a one off (abelit very powerful) effect.
I kind of want to say 5 mana for a 2/2 with trample sounds like the right balance here. It's basically a tooth and nail if you can connect it, so making it small but cheap to cast would be the go.
But the problem is that you've changed the fundamental parameters. The whole point of Defense of the Heart was that you could play around it by not playing creatures. But this one here is designed so that to play around it, you have to play creatures of your own to hold up as blockers. Yes, I'm aware that reomval is a thing but it's the same for the OG card too, so I'm moving past that fact.
Personally I would say thath you should either try to stick to the card more closely or not try to make a creature version. But what you have here is more akin to Tooth and Nail than it is DotH.
February 25, 2020 11:04 p.m.
enpc I very much doubt a 5 CMC 2/2 trampler is going to connect on anything. I don't think that's good balance. At least a beefy 6/6 trampler has a chance to connect AND survive to see its trigger go off.
That being said, Defense of the Heart was a very strong card, and in eternal formats the fetch of two creatures to drop right on the board would often result in infinite combos. Legacy and Vintage are way faster formats than the DotH can keep up with, so it never really became much of a problem. However in multiplayer formats like Commander, the pace is generally slower (depending what pace the players have designed their decks for) and the Defense of the Heart is easier to trigger and will often end games on its own.
A creature variant is much easier to deal with in general, but I wont look forward to seeing a new variant of DotH, even if it does look more like an entwined Tooth and Nail. A creature is also way easier to cheat the mana cost on and to recur.
If you were to make a more direct creature version of Defense of the Heart I would change the trigger to be about evening the odds more than the old trigger that just saw a group of creatures on an opponent's side and decided to respond by grabbing the two meanest creatures you have in your deck.
So instead of "At the beginning of the upkeep, if an opponent controls three or more creatures, sacrifice ~
It would be "At the beginning of the upkeep, if an opponent controls at least two more creatures than you, sacrifice ~
Seeing as the legs is itself a creature and you replace it with 2, I decreased the excess needed for the trigger to just 2. By having the condition be about being outnumbered, it feels more fair and earned to grab the two best creatures from your library and toss them on the board. It also makes it easier to actually play around - making the trigger less likely to go off and would more easily balance out the cost-to-effect.
Under the old Defense of the Heart I never understood why, if you have a large army and your opponent has 3 creatures, you get to find even more creatures. That trigger was never about evening the odds (which I think was the intended concept) but rather, "the opponent has multiple creatures, lets find some better creatures to beat their brains in."
It might even be a better concept if it counted total power among creatures your opponents control, compared to yours. That way, if an opponent went more Voltron on single creatures, the effect would still have a place, and not punish wheenie strategies (going wide) unnecessarily.
February 26, 2020 5:29 a.m.
Tzefick: That was the point. Having a 2/2 with trample means that you can't just throw a 1/1 at it to chump block, however by itself it's not super easy to connect with. 5 mana is in the realms of turn 3 play, hoever the creature isn't huge by itself. But funnily enough green is excellent at making creatures bigger. I mean theoretically you could make it a 3/3 but the point of my fix was deliberate in making it a smaller creature.
February 26, 2020 6:18 a.m.
enpc I understand that was your intention, but that seems to be from a standpoint that you want to lower the CMC. My point is that the creature itself would be more whole, if you kept it expensive but viable by itself without necessarily needing additional help, unlike a 2/2 trampler. It reminds me of a similar issue with Spawnwrithe. Spawnwrithe is often too small, even in Commander pre-cons to actually be able to function and do what it wants to do. Then it just ends up being irrelevant all together.
If you consider the Magus creatures, they are often costed and stat'ed to match what they intend to do and how their counterpart functions. Magus of the Bazaar is low stat'ed and cheap to cast because its main function is a creature-version of the Bazaar of Baghdad, so it doesn't need high stats as it needs to be used early and readily. It's not there for combat, it's there for the active ability. You want it early.
In difference to Magus of the Coffers who mirrors Cabal Coffers. Here the Magus is higher stat'ed and more costly, despite the counterpart is also a land. The Cabal Coffers is usually used as a late-game tool to explode some mana advantage, and the creature reflects that.
Magus of the Arena is also a very expensive creature, that is better stat'ed to better go with the fight-ability of it's counterpart Arena. If the Magus was weak, it would need help to function - on top of being a creature, whereas Arena is a land with no further inherent cost and is much better protected than a creature.
Magus of the Mind has the CMC of its counterpart Mind's Desire but also a more fair stat'ed body with a cheap activation to get the actual spell - in many ways it is better positioned to function than Mind's Desire itself, as it is very mana cheap the turn you break it, which opens up mana to cast spells to grant its active good value. The downside is that it is a creature and has summoning sickness, so opponents can deal with it or plan accordingly.
Magus of the Balance is the most different as it carries the CMC of its counterpart Balance, but with a heavier activation cost on the ability. And all the Maguses who mirrors a sorcery can still go off at instant speed, despite WotC's ability to limit it, and without adding to the cost of the active ability compared to the cost of the original counterpart. Granted Balance is also banned in all formats and restricted in Vintage, so it speaks more volume to the wrong costing and effect of Balance than the Magus itself being an outlier.
February 26, 2020 11:18 a.m.
MindAblaze says... #11
It feels like a flavour fail to make it a combat damage trigger.
What about something like this;
Defender of the heart -
Creature - Plant Wall
Defender, Reach
Defender of the Heart can block any number of creatures. Defender of the Heart’s Toughness is equal to the number of creatures your opponents control.
When Defender of the Heart blocks three or more creatures, you may sacrifice it. If you do, search your library for up to two creature cards and put them on the battlefield under your control.
0/X
February 26, 2020 1:12 p.m.
Tzefick: The problem is that Defense of the Heart is a mid-game card. So the idea of having a creature that without ramp can't do its thing until turn 8 seems very slow, as opposed to DotH which can potentially deploy some devistating creatures on turn 5.
While I can see your comparision to Spawnwrithe here, it's not in the same boat. the problem that Spawnwrithe suffers from is that it nees to keep turning sideways to do its thing. You might connect once with it being unblocked but that's all you'll get away with. This card however only needs to connect once to do its thing, which is a fundamental difference.
I think at the end of the day though, MindAblaze hits the nail on the head. Having a creature version of the card based around YOU attacking has already failed the design brief.
The suggested card they proposed feels much more along the lines of the current design. You could create something like:
Magus of the Heart -
Creature - Human Wizard
, , Sacrifice Magus of the Heart: Search your library for up to two creatures and put them into play, then shuffle your library. Activate this ability only if a player controls three or more creatures and only in your upkeep.
2/3
Something like that might be more the go.
February 26, 2020 10:04 p.m.
If it were me, I would make the creature more akin to the actual Defense of the Heart but more in spirit of catching up rather than the current "your opponent has many creatures, you get many creatures".
Name substitute
Creature - Elemental
At the beginning of your upkeep, if the total power of creatures an opponent controls is seven or more in excess of the total power of creatures you control, you may sacrifice ~. If you do, search your library for up to two creature cards and put them onto the battlefield, then shuffle your library.
3/6
It's a defense related creature, that only gets to trigger if you are behind on the board - a catch up if you will. It could have been related to number of creatures the opponent control, but that would hit disproportionately against wheenie strategies, mana dorks, and not so much against single heavy beaters. It does miss out entirely against strategies that look to pump their creatures temporarily.
The trigger could have been when you were attacked, to grab some desperate defense measures, but that would make the trigger entirely dependent on the opponent's actions, whereas a more generic trigger in the upkeep is harder to completely work around for the opponent but also instill some dampeners on your own plays if you want it to trigger.
Hmm, it would be great in Arcades, the Strategist.
RNR_Gaming says... #2
I like existing cards with legs. I don't feel it needs a higher mana cost though. Most things that are leg versions of things have the same cmc because they're easier to remove.
February 25, 2020 6:59 p.m.