Unbalanced/Poorly-Designed Cards Made Better With Minor Changes
Custom Cards forum
Posted on Nov. 27, 2016, 12:22 a.m. by DemonDragonJ
In this history of this game, there have been cards that are unbalanced or otherwise poorly-designed, but that could have been better, if only minor changes had been made to them, so this thread is for users who wish to improve such cards with minor changes.
I shall start with several cards that I would redesign, if I could.
Dromar, the Banisher Show
As he is currently printed, Dromar, the Banisher affects all players with his ability, which, unfortunately, includes his controller, meaning that he affects himself three-fifths of the time, which means that he is very risky to use. My revision is very simple; he simply affects only the player to whom he deals damage, which makes him far less risky to use, which is how he should have been designed initially, in my mind.
Baneslayer Angel Show
As she is currently printed, Baneslayer Angel costs 5 mana, which would be reasonable for a 5/5 creature with one or even two abilities, but not for a creature with as many abilities as she has; she is overpowered as she currently is, so I merely increased her casing cost but otherwise left her the same, so I believe that she is better balanced, now.
What about everyone else? Are there any cards that you feel are poorly-designed but could be improved with minor changes?
Make outlast and level up instant speed abilities and reduce the power of creatures with the instant speed versions by 1.
November 27, 2016 7:37 p.m.
MagicalHacker says... #4
Are there any unfixable cards? Like any on a banlist that can't be fixed simply? Or any unplayable cards that can't be made better?
November 27, 2016 8:14 p.m.
I have to say, I dont agree with your fixes. Both of those card were designed at certain points where they were applicable and I don't think they need fixing. I get that Dromar, the Banisher isn't great but he was designed when creatures were quite underpowered by today's standards. As for Baneslayer Angel swinging the other way, I think a good indication that she's not broken is the fact that she doesn't get much play. She did see play in some modern decks at the top end of Pod, but that's not a thing now. And most of them switched to Archangel of Thune anyway.
The only cards which should be "fixed" are cards like Serra Ascendant and the like that refer to explicit starting life totals.
November 28, 2016 12:21 a.m.
Many of the Ravnica guild charms could be made playable if one word was change.
November 28, 2016 1:49 a.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #7
I cannot believe that so few other users here agree with me; surely, there must be other players of this game who believe that some cards could be great with minor changes?
enpc: I agree about Serra Ascendant, so here is my revision of it:
Serra Ascendant Show
What do you think of that? In a regular game, it has the same effect as before, but it is no longer overpowered in EDH.
Bovine073, what words would those be, for example?
December 6, 2016 4:04 p.m.
If Izzet Charm did not have 'noncreature' written on it, it would be played far more than it is now, I think. There are more examples with Dimir Charm (ie. change "sorcery" to something else or boost the power).
December 7, 2016 12:13 a.m.
DemonDragonJ: that's how the card should have been written (that or life total + 50%), but unfortunately the card was printed before EDH was adopted by WotC. it would be nice to see them errata the card, though I'm sure there would be countless arguements over what oracle says vs what the card says (even though oracle always has the definitive say, a lot of people don't know that).
December 7, 2016 12:34 a.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #10
Bovine073, I believe that Izzet Charm would be too powerful if it could counter any spell, unless it cost 3 mana, which would defeat its purpose, and the same is true of Dimir Charm, as well, although I do believe that it could counter instant as well as sorcery spells and still be balanced.
December 7, 2016 10:11 a.m.
Bovine073: Then just make Shock do 3 damage and Lightning Bolt do 4 :P
December 7, 2016 5:14 p.m.
MagicalHacker says... #14
Why don't we look at which rates and mythic are the least expensive and consider those underpowered and the ones as most expensive underpowered? For example, how can we make Captured by the Consulate a good 4-drop rare? Or how can we tone down Chandra, Torch of Defiance?
December 8, 2016 4:31 p.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #15
MagicalHacker, I would make Chandra's second ability one that decreases loyalty rather than increases it, as it can essentially provide infinite mana, if she can remain on the battlefield for a sufficient time, and I would also make it so that her third ability could target players, as well.
Having said that, why are there so many direct damage spells that can target creatures but not players? Is WotC afraid of allowing players to be able to deal large amounts of damage to each other?
December 8, 2016 9:41 p.m.
DemonDragonJ: I think part of the issue with targetting players is due to power creep. Creatures have been getting progressively more and more powerful (take Siege Rhino for example) and so burn spells to stay relevant have to keep up. But since life totals still start at 20, this would make burn spells that could hit players as well far too powerful.
Imagine if Flame Slash could also hit players? That card would be run in basically every R/X deck in most formats.
December 8, 2016 10:38 p.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #17
enpc, if Flame Slash cost 2 mana (and perhaps dealt 1 or 2 damage to its caster), I believe that it could target players and still be balanced.
With that being said, here is my revision of Char:
Char Show
I dislike how char costs 3 mana, since it already has the drawback of damaging its caster to balance its higher damage compared to Lightning Bolt; there is no need for it to have such a high casting cost for its effect.
December 9, 2016 12:01 a.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #18
Here is another card that I have modified:
Guttural Response Show
I severely dislike how Guttural Response can target only instant spells, as that severely limits its utility. I see no reason why it could not target sorcery spells, as well, which would make it much more useful.
December 27, 2016 5:04 p.m.
well to be fair the entire point of Guttural Response was to stop counter spells. which is does. I would try and keep it to its original uses. I don't think that it should be able to counter sorceries.
December 27, 2016 7:50 p.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #20
aholder7, I know that, but, as I said, above, that is far too limited a usage, so there is no reason why it could not be used to counter spells such as Divination or Concentrate.
December 27, 2016 11:04 p.m.
MagicalHacker says... #21
I think this could be another interesting fix:
Instant
Target spell gains hexproof.
Draw a card.
Is the wording weird though?
December 28, 2016 8:04 a.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #22
MagicalHacker, yes, that is very weird wording, and it still severely limits the spell usefulness.
aholder7 says... #2
a few things i would like to point out here before i get to any actual changes.
first what are we considering balanced/fair/good? are we attempting to make all card the same power level? are we making each card have potential to play a role in a deck? what is the standard that we balancing to?
second are we keeping context in mind? are we assuming any sort of format or meta that these cards belong to? are we assuming that they exist in a world of only other "balanced" cards? because some cards become better and worse depending on their surroundings. Snapcaster Mage is kind of meh if ever sorcery and instant become 5 mana and only deal 1 damage. Dark Confidant becomes a lot better if our balances shift curves downward, worse if it goes upward.
i think that most people responding this thread will come to different conclusions as to what the answers to these questions are. which means you have many people disagree with balancing (for example i completely disagree with your baneslayer nerf) and people moving cards in different directions. thats not necessarily bad. it would result in much more creative ideas perhaps. but its sometimes hard to understand a concept or point of view if you don't have some sort of common framework. for example perhaps you are balancing the cards for EDH. a format where angels and demons are far more common than in other formats like modern where i might be imagining these cards. in my mind making baneslayer an 8 drops turns it from good to garbage.
that being said i would love to see a minor change to Glistener Elf where it loses its evergreen ability. that and for all cards like it to do the same. that would be great.
November 27, 2016 2:54 a.m.