>>92512905
>Makings cards of your own characters
kys and save us the trouble.

Not really related, but is there a general for making/playtesting/ looking for help/feedback on anon-made card games? I'm trying to make a card game and I want to see peoples opinions on how certain mechanics should work.

>>92543867
>TQ
A card with dash that has an ETB trigger.

>>92548794
Surely there's at least one Dash card with an ETB? It seems like such obvious design space. Even if it would be something hard to balance since you'd need to assume that people would easily be playing it turn after turn

>>92551404
There is one that was made in the lotr set, but that's it.

File: dtk-87-ambuscade-shaman.jpg (123 KB, 488x680)

123 KB JPG

>>92551404
Three. This one, one from lotr, one with back up from MoM commander.

>>92548777
Feel free to post here. I can review it for you (eventually)

>>92548777
Not a dedicated one. There are some game design and homebrew threads that rarely crop up. CCG is slow enough though where it probably wouldn't be an issue. I would expect somewhat mtg-centric feedback just because that's what gets focused on the most here, but technically any card game is allowed.

>>92553474
At least right now I jist wanted to discuss a specific idea. Within a resource system like lorcana of Kaijudo where you can put any card from your hand down as a resource to use brings with it the problem of deciding which card to put down. Could that problem be alieviated by being able to pick your resource cards back up? If so, should there be an additional drawback to it like skipping your draw phase or skipping your resource drop for the turn? Or do you think that your opponent knowing the card abd losing it as a resource is enough of a drawback?

>>92555068
>you can put any card from your hand down as a resource to use brings with it the problem of deciding which card to put down
For starters, I don't think that premise is necessarily true. Using cards as a resource gives you some interesting mechanics/advantages. One particular aspect I like about it is that it gives you the ability of maindecking very specific cards, because you can simply turn them into resource most games (then use them on the few where their specific effect is relevant)

I have designed a card game that strongly rely on discarding cards as resources and it does open up a lot of possibility (such as the one mentioned above, among many others)

>Could that problem be alieviated by being able to pick your resource cards back up?
Sure

>should there be an additional drawback to it like skipping your draw phase or skipping your resource drop for the turn?
It really depends on the game and the mathematics behind card draw/advantage

In almost all card games, cards in hand are one of the main currency. Games like MtG & Pokemon starts with 7 cards and you draw 1 each turn - this already sets a baseline for cards as a currency. If you were for instance, to start with 14 cards and draw 2 each turn, then that currency would be worth only half. And so on

Back to your question, you need to understand/establish what resource "putting a card down" gives you, and what is the conversion rate of that resource to card draw. Depending where you land, simply revealing your card (and maybe not being able to put it down & play it on the same turn) might be enough. Depending on your game's economy, not. That is hard for me to tell without knowing more details about your game's economy

But overall, you gotta first figure out your game's economy, starting with how much 1 card in hand is worth

>>92555543
>I don't think that's necessarily true
Right, but for more casual play, it very likely is.

>But overall, you gotta first figure out your game's economy, starting with how much 1 card in hand is worth
For the sake of argument, let's just say it has the economy of mtg with regards to costs, hand size, and drawing one card per turn, with some potential for draw effects, but not tons. I want to say think pioneer, but I don't really know the format well enough to say.

>>92555068
From what I recall of how Kaijudo/Duel Masters works, it does seem as though being able to reclaim the cards you play for mana would have some solid downsides already in the sense that you're slowing down your curve.

If you're at 3 and about to play a 4th, and you really need one of your 3 cards back, then you'd still be at 3 even if you were able to replace it.
It does seem like it could be more forgiving to early-game decisions, though optimally speaking you probably wouldn't want to rely on that unless you were playing some very particular low-cost deck deck.
>>92556838
With extra card draw, I could see that strategy working out even more, where a deck focuses on stabilizing around 4-5 mana and then uses cheap cards and extra draw to answer specific threats.

The opponent knowing about the card wouldn't really be a factor in that case, since you're only pulling the cards to your hand as needed, but if your opponent avoids playing a monster because you have a kill spell that's serving as a resource, then that's just even more benefit to you.

In some ways, that feels like it adds far more complexity than it removes. Rather than just having to decide which card in your hand is the least useful, you also have to constantly look over the board and consider how likely your opponent is to pull back a resource. Then you're left holding onto your good cards and playing around phantom threats.
I'm not sure how much adding drawbacks addresses that. An inefficient spell can still win you the game if it's exactly what you need in the moment.

There are a lot of cases where sacrificing a land to tutor a specific card instead of gambling on a draw could just win you the game.

>1 mana artifact (any color)
>if you control a specific planeswalker (4 mana, two colors), you can look at the top card of your deck
>sacrifice to make a clue token
1 to 10, how bad would this be?

File: The Journey.png (278 KB, 375x523)

278 KB PNG

I wouldn't pay 3 mana (1 to play and 2 to crack the Clue) to Consider, even if I was playing the planeswalker in question, I don't think such a card would serve any purpose if that's all it did.

File: The Puzzle.png (262 KB, 375x523)

262 KB PNG

>>92557958
Whoops, forgot to quote >>92558145

>>92558175
>>92558145
It’s an artifact, so the looking stays as long as you have the planeswalker, not just the one time. That’s on me for forgetting the “any any time clause”

If it’s still shit even with that, would just directly drawing a card be better or is that a bit too blue for a colorless artifact?

>>92556838
>for more casual play, it very likely is
Again, I don't think that is necessarily true. As I mentioned, I've designed my own card game which sort of relies heavily on disposing cards in hand as resource, it works even better on the most casual format (which is a format I call "Monolith", where you just shuffle all cards you have together and play with whatever you got lol)

If you are giving your players the choice to play cards as either "lands" or as their own effects, you are already giving players A LOT more flexibility than MtG does. Sure, you can let the players get those cards back later on, but then you are diminishing the player's choices

>the economy of mtg with regards to costs, hand size, and drawing one card per turn
As mentioned above, if you're making a not-MtG but with the mechanic that you can put down any card as land (rather than rely on land cards), you are already making the game infinitely more flexible/friendly for the player (and IMO as a designer, solving MtG's top design 1 problem). So you don't really need to give players the option to get cards back, because if you remember your own experience on MtG, what most suck is not the lands you played early game, but the lands you get later on that flood you and don't give you anything useful. So just by letting the player choose to play the card as land or not already fixes that. Therefore, getting the card back afterwards is completely arbitrary and kinda meh / diminishes the decision making

But you can do whatever you want. Personally, I don't think that should be a core mechanic, but I wouldn't mind seeing that effect (of getting lands back as cards) in a couple of cards/side mechanic

IF you want to help out beginners choose what card to play as land, you can make some sort of indication on the cards to inform whether the card is better as land or as a card/play

TLDR -> you can get cards back after you put them down as resource , but that is really not necessary

File: Bijoux.png (272 KB, 375x523)

272 KB PNG

>>92558254
Just looking at the top card of your own library isn't a super useful effect by itself, which is why it gets thrown in to all sorts of random effects since it's usually done only to facilitate another gimmick.
Without the Planeswalker check gimmick, I'd call it an okay Common card, it's similar to a lot of generic artifact 1 drops that draw you a card like the Spellbombs—that is to say, you can probably tack on a few more bells and whistles to give it some pizzazz and still be totally in line power-wise.

>>92556838
Just wanted to point out I do agree with >>92556966 on this quote:
>Rather than just having to decide which card in your hand is the least useful, you also have to constantly look over the board and consider how likely your opponent is to pull back a resource

Letting players get their cards back like this is very unfriendly to new players, because as anon mentioned, you will overwhelm them with information/choices. For new players, it is easier to just put down cards as resources and let that be it

So it's actually the other way around - you are not solving a problem to new players, but creating one. That don't necessarily means it's a *bad* idea, but it definitely increases the complexity of your game

>>92558363
>Spellbombs
Never seen thos before, neat.

I like having the information advantage because it lets me plan ahead, but on it's own yeah I suppose it's not that good. Would 'and play that card' be too much for a 1, even with the planeswalker check, or should I look for something else to tack on there? I could say only do that once per turn, or maybe just say something like 'scry 1 during upkeep.

File: The Web.png (291 KB, 375x523)

291 KB PNG

>>92558490
Playing cards from the top of your library is more powerful, for example Augur of Autumn lets you do most of the things that you're looking for in this card, which has its own limitations. I'd say triggering Coven is about as difficult as checking for a Planeswalker type, so I'd probably increase the CMC of the artifact to (3) just to be safe. Something like
Artifact (3) / You may look at the top card of your library any time. If you control a [name] planeswalker, you may play cards from the top of your library. (2), Sacrifice Artifact: Draw a card.
This would be a solid card. If you're more into keeping the mana cost a 1, Scry 2 at your upkeep might be decent enough. You should always be careful with very low mana value cards, it's extremely easy to make something balls-overtuned when its cheap, as WOTC has done many many times in the past.

>>92558649
Scry 2 works better for what I have in mind, I think. Just out of curiosity, how well does "if planeswalker, pick a creature type, opponents spells of that type cost 1 more" and "if planeswalker, tap (one of five creature types), it doesn't untap" measure up?

I'm kind of going for a theme, which for these cards specifically is magic books. If you've got the planeswalker then they actually do stuff, otherwise they're basically just a clue token.

File: Costly Curio.png (249 KB, 375x523)

249 KB PNG

>>92558707
The first one seems innocuous enough, maybe a little too narrow in scope to be useful. However, the second one is in a bad spot where 70% of the time it's okay-ish but 30% of the time it's completely game-destroying vs certain decks. I would veer away from subtype-specific effects (for enemies) because its power level is highly lopsided and matchup dependent, not good things for design.

>>92558804
Would two creature types, or by two, be too much or is it better at one?

Possibly I missopke again - it's one creature, of those 5 types. Not all creatures of those types.

File: Prosperity.png (252 KB, 375x523)

252 KB PNG

>>92558838
I'd say 2 extra cost could be fair since checking for a planeswalker is a fairly substantial conditional. If the other one will only be tapping and stunning one creature at a time, then that's fair I suppose. Personally I'd still avoid tribe hate, and focus on making the effects generic; the one that lets you Scry is always working well, whereas one that taps/stuns one target Merfolk is going to feel hit or miss, and if I have to go to the trouble of synergizing two cards, I'd like the effect to be consistent (since I already fought through the 1st layer of inconsistency).

>>92559014
That’s understandable, if you aren’t playing against those tribes then the only real use is to sac it for a card.

For a one cost artifact that’s searching for a planeswalker, can I get away with making/maintaining a 4/4 token? Ie if you have the planeswalker, make a token? Not more than one at a time, but if it dies then it gets replaced during your next upkeep. Possibly your pick of two or three, I’d need to double check some things.

File: attractions.jpg (576 KB, 1076x1550)

576 KB JPG

>>92543867
>Thread Challenge: Design a card utilizing a mechanic you dislike, but see potential in.
This is a tough one, since the mechanics I dislike are usually ones that I dislike because I don't think they have any potential.

That said, Attractions did come to mind as one that I dislike due to the gimmicky nature and randomness that's inherent to the cards, although I think having a singleton deck of artifacts with repeatable effects is a neat idea.
I just set the attraction rolls here from 2-6, since while I could adjust them to be more or less likely, I'd really rather you only whiff on a 1. In some ways I was tempted to just have it be a successful visit on any number, but that felt like it strayed from the spirits.
Other than that, the idea was to focus less on theme park attractions and instead on a variety of landmarks. Museum displays, historical sites, natural wonders, national parks, that sort of thing.
I did notice that most cards that could open attractions were either Blue or Black, secondary in Green, and only a handful across White and Red, so I tried to lean towards UBG for the effects.

Balance-wise these are no doubt still a mess, purely because no matter what you're still basically drawing a random card off of the effect of a handful of other specific cards.

>>92559014
Feels a little odd for a White card to remove the lifegain aspect entirely. Especially since there are also non-token Food cards that have other beneficial abilities.
It almost feels like it wants to be more symmetrical, where you could use it to shut down an opponent's food cards from doing anything other than actually being used as food.

File: cards.jpg (276 KB, 1500x523)

276 KB JPG

>>92559096
That token idea sounds cool, it'd totally work and be thematic.
>>92563009
I ended up reworking it a bit, the restriction did feel unnecessary and a Food hate card sounds kinda silly

>>92563440
Having them also count as treasures and simply gain the treasure ability does seem cleaner. Still a bit odd for White perhaps, though it requires you to really build around a token type that encourages lifegain normally, so it feels like it works.

>>92563440
>4/4 Green Wurm
>2/2 Blue Drake +Flying
>2/2 Red Dragon +Firebreathing
>3/3 Red Lizard +???
Keeping it only tokens that already exist, the first three work out well enough. Potential beatstick, weak but flies, and weak but buffs. Lizards aint got shit though, so I'd probably end up making that one up. Maybe give it mountainwalk?

>>92563009
Does MSE have the card type for attractions? And/or what card type is that, because I don't recognize it.

File: horizontal template.png (695 KB, 1920x588)

695 KB PNG

>>92563671
I didn't see an Attraction-specific frame in MSE, likely because it's not exactly a very popular card type, and some of them are just un-cards entirely. Though I wouldn't be too surprised if I may have missed it.
Instead I ended up using the Horizontal Futureshift frames, since they stood out. 'm fairly certain the frame is from the expanded template pack I downloaded. Its seemed like a good way to make sure the attractions wouldn't be mistaken for anything else, and it also allowed for the placement of numbers along the side, though in the end I just ended up having them all be 2-6 rather than trying to do 2 4 5 or anything like that.

File: Rebirth.png (310 KB, 375x523)

310 KB PNG

Doing a whole set based on Path of Exile's Divination Cards. The less said about this one the better...

>>92558387
>>92558355
>>92556966
Thank you for the help, guys. I think it would definitely add complexity, which can be seen as a good thing for players wanting to get more into it, but as a bad thing otherwise. I may add cards that allow you to do this as an ability/effect, though, cause yeah, that might be fun, but it being a poasibility all the time will probably be information overload for bew players.
Thank you again!

>>92565621
I was going to suggest that adding it as an effect for certain cards to bounce your resources could be interesting. Since then there would be more ways for an opponent to potentially interact with it or shut it down, and otherwise you wouldn't always need to laser-focus on what people are playing for their resources.
At that point it's more akin to recovering a card from the discard pile, which if costed/restricted properly would be a healthier place for it to be.

Is "devotion to cats" a valid way to shorthand 'the number of cats you control', or am I off my rocker?

>>92567757
Only if you are a woman who's 30+ and single

>>92567757
Rules-wise, Devotion is specifically about colors, and even more specifically about mana symbols.
That said, I don't think it'd be that big of a stretch from how WotC made some twists on old keywords. Like how Devour can now specify a card type or subtype as well.

It's slightly less fitting to use Devotion for that, but I could see it being intuitive enough. Although I don't really think you save that much text, especially if you're including any reminder text about how Devotion works.

>>92567787
...So devotion to cats would probably count all the mana symbols on all cats you controlled if it did anything, which considering I'm currently working with tokens means it would do nothing at all.

I'll just write it out normally.

File: 1712792738617120m.jpg (126 KB, 733x1024)

126 KB JPG

Reposting from last bread

File: 1712814091585383m.jpg (156 KB, 1024x715)

156 KB JPG

>>92569929

>>92569937
Cool cards, flavor is on point. One nitpick, Kira's ability should have "This ability can't be countered", since it's an activated ability and not a spell.

Rewake B
Sorcery
Return target creature card with mana value 4 or less from a graveyard onto the battlefield under your control. You lose life equal to its mana cost.

Is this too good to be made these days? A bootleg halfway between Unearth and Reanimate?

File: 1690811759443745938.jpg (205 KB, 1200x1600)

205 KB JPG

Stat me.

File: Anon, Multiple-Choice Swo(...).jpg (137 KB, 744x1039)

137 KB JPG

>>92575154

>>92575298
That was well done & done quickly (and surprisingly close to what I imagined); hearty thanks, friend!

>>92575154
That's a cool pic

>>92575298
That's a cool card

I would start it off with better stats though (probably at least 3/3)

>>92564593
lmao RIP Goddess Unleashed

>>92575590
Starting at 3/3 would probably add (1) colorless mana to the cost (total base cost of 4), and I was hoping for a little bit of Green (maybe just make the mana cost RGWU), but that card is pretty spot on as far as being cool and decent without too much powercreep or being an overpowered hatebear.

>>92575896
>also i am actually an elf but my gf thinks i am a big cat so idk have fun with teh filters

>>92575738
Needs to be enchant creature or land, otherwise it falls off.

>>92575738
Enchant creature, but then the secondary text should be "enchanted permanent." That make sure that the card it's attached to remains qualified through being a creature and then an artifact.

File: download.jpg (207 KB, 1125x523)

207 KB JPG

>>92577916
>>92577883
Thank you for the catch, gentlemen.

File: custom card.png (199 KB, 375x523)

199 KB PNG

does this design suck?

Connive should be a green mechanic. It goes on creatures and it either puts +1/+1 counters on creatures or gives you land. Sounds green to me.

File: download.jpg (227 KB, 1125x523)

227 KB JPG

>>92578347
Power wise you could double the life gained I think, and it would be a decent theoretical Limited pick up.

>>92578599
i only design for limited.
i like the Bow mechanic; i created a similar one for Sword tokens and Shield tokens but i hate token spam like treasures and clues and food and whatever so i scrapped them

>>92578347
>>92578599
>>92578642
savannah lions usually get pretty decent mileage in faster limited formats, especially on the play. they're slightly better than commons but not quite pushed enough to be an uncommon, so Wizards would give them something extra. Cheeky House-Mouse from WOE and Recruitment Officer from BRO come to mind as Savannah Lions that have some late-game use so that they aren't a dead card in the behind quadrant of the game

File: download (1).jpg (377 KB, 1875x523)

377 KB JPG

>>92578642
>i hate token spam like treasures and clues and food and whatever so i scrapped them
This set is inspired by Path of Exile, a game about hoarding shitloads of random bits and bobs, so I did the exact opposite ;)

How would you word (and cost) a "all cards have Dredge equal to their CMC" effect?

>>92581789
Something like
>Each creature card in your graveyard has Dredge X, where X is it's power.
In terms of cost it gets messy. Five mana feels like the right ballpark, even in the context of using Dredge the intended way as a way to recover cards, rather than a way to fill the graveyard cheaply.

File: there_was_an_attempt.jpg (1.37 MB, 1500x2092)

1.37 MB JPG

>>92546429
Well, I still wanna know how my OCs are as cards. Any OP, any underpowered, etc.

File: download.jpg (221 KB, 1125x523)

221 KB JPG

>>92584396
>Aniyue Archon
While I get the premise, "healing" doesn't exist in MTG's rules. I would reword this card as "First strike. Whenever Aniyue deals combat damage, prevent the next X damage that would be dealt to creatures you control this turn, where X is Aniyue's power." Also I don't know her lore, but this effect is textbook white, this has no business being black/green.
>Aniyue Autarch
Minor nitpick, but "gain" is only used for temporary effects. This should read "Elf creatures you control *have*"
>D'Yanaan
Effect seems cool, but the syntax is a little off, it should be "Create a 6/8 colorless Vehicle artifact token named Enforcer Battlesuit with double strike, flying, and crew 2." I'd probably get rid of the flying of the mech, since green doesn't usually make fliers and a 6/8 double striker seems extremely scary as it is.
>Boneash
The wording of the first ability is too awkward, I recommend rewriting it like this: "Whenever another creature dies, you may pay (B)(B). If you do, create an X/X black Zombie creature token, where X is that creature's power."
>Mitsuko, Morgenneths
These all seem fine, no comments except sexo
>Nikkit Goblin Rogue
This one is probably too undercosted, if you manage to untap with it it's extremely debilitating and basically one-sidedly wipes the board for the rest of the game. I'd either make it 5-cost, OR make its ability cost 2 mana.
>Nikkit Goblin Thief
This card on the other hand seems too niche to be playable, if you care about making a lot of treasures you're gonna be facepalming very hard when she nukes them, and no deck wants to destroy their own artifacts; this all means that you would only ever cast her if the enemy is playing artifacts, and in that case a 5 cost artifact destroy is way too expensive. I'd be okay with reducing her cost down to 3.
>cont.

File: Fallen God.png (269 KB, 375x523)

269 KB PNG

How does this card look? Underpowered, overpowered, looks kinda useless, etc all?

I'm making an MGE set and am currently 110 cards in, mostly creatures.

File: download (1).jpg (306 KB, 1500x523)

306 KB JPG

>>92585544
This is a very good card, though if anything it might be too slow. It's 6 CMC, so it's coming in very late, and it doesn't do anything by itself. That said, it's a very interesting combo with impulse draw and the like, so I believe you could get it down to even making it Suspend 1 the exiled creatures instead of 3 just because it is a bit of a pain in the ass to set up the cheat (as it only checks the moment the card is exiled and is not retroactive).
>>92584396
>Radim, Bodyguard
Change the wording slightly to "When (Radim) enters the battlefield, choose another creature or planeswalker. Whenever a source would deal damage to that permanent, it deals that much damage to Radim instead." Also it's way too overcosted, this could be 2WW. If you make it Indestructible it would technically make a hard lock but it's not like white doesn't have tons of those already with stuff like Unlife/Solemnity and it's easier to stop since Radim is a creature.
>Radim, Samurai
Fine card, though it's pretty busy. You could technically rewrite it to be MTG syntax compliant but it wouldn't be pretty to read and this way gets the idea across anyway.
>Radim Ulgash
Reword it as "When (Radim) enters the battlefield, create a colorless Equipment artifact token named Iron Gauntlets with "Equipped creature has double strike. The first time a source would deal damage to equipped creature each turn, prevent that damage."
>Ryrra Sootpaw, Sei-Yu
These are fine as they are. Also sexo.
>Vardakine
This one needs a rewording. Also I would make it cost 3 mana instead of 5 since it's not THAT strong. Since the servitors it makes dont have any stats I'm just going to assume they're 3/3 like Golems.
"(U/B), T, Sacrifice a creature: Create a 3/3 colorless Servitor artifact creature token with "This artifact doesn't untap during your untap step unless you control an Artificer."
(U/B)(U/B)(U/B), T: Put a +1/+1 counter on each artifact creature you control."
>Zhirrez
The Dryads need a color.

>>92585853
>>92585538
Thank you so much for the feedback! Also, thanks for calling them sexo.

>>92585853
I'm more inclined to make it so that it can pull cards out of exile instead of just interrupting them, but recycling creatures quicker is also good.

Alternately, would 3BR and Suspend 2 for the effect work?

File: The Gemcutter.png (251 KB, 375x523)

251 KB PNG

>>92586119
The effect is already so cool but technical to pull off I do think it would be at its best at Suspend 1. Having it at Suspend 2 would be too slow for all the work you needed to do, you'd be left with 2 turns of nothing waiting for your haymaker while the God herself does basically nothing else on the board. Compared to other "win the game" cards like Breach the Multiverse, this one requires more finangling (with like Cascade spells or something) and you could be put in a spot where you can't even pop off due to having too low life to cheat in your bombs.
This said, 5CMC and Suspend 2 would definitely be playable (if slightly worse for the payoff)

File: Deck of Trumparts.png (290 KB, 375x523)

290 KB PNG

>>92586282
Makes sense, I suppose. A great effect becomes less great if you have to wait for it.

How about this one?

File: download.jpg (268 KB, 1500x523)

268 KB JPG

>>92586405
Pretty neat, although you forgot to give the tokens basic stats (as in "Create X 1/1 green Trumpart creature tokens"). Maybe word it as "Each of those tokens" rather than "They" so that you can pick and mix.

>>92586468
pick and mix was the intent, yes.

...What would be the best way to phrase it so that the colors of the tokens was variable as well? Like, half of them could be black and half could be green, but they're not green/black?

>>92586537
That is VERY tricky. You could make them colorless artifact creatures, or you could make them colorless like eldrazi if you don't wanna bother making a spaghetti mess. Otherwise..
You could split it in half so that tokens of one color get half the options, and the gets the other half. This would make it easier to keep track of which token is what color, as well.
Something like:
Choose one —
• Create X 1/1 black Trumpart creature tokens. Each of those tokens enters the battlefield with a flying, first strike, deathtouch, lifelink, or menace counter.
• Create X 1/1 green Trumpart creature tokens. Each of those tokens enters the battlefield with a hexproof, reach, trample, vigilance, or +1/+1 counter.

>>92586640
Wait no, this is wrong as it'll limit your options significantly. Let me work out something else in a minute

>>92586640
>That is VERY tricky.
Ideally they could potentially be any of the five colors, or even colorless, specificially to mess with anything that actually tracks that. But if it'd be too painful to make then I'll just make them colorless by default.

File: Doedres Madness.png (284 KB, 375x523)

284 KB PNG

>>92586537>>92586640
Ok I got it, how about this:
Choose a color. Create a 1/1 Trumpart creature token of the chosen color. It enters the battlefield with a flying, first strike, deathtouch, hexproof, lifelink, menace, reach, trample, vigilance, or +1/+1 counter.
Repeat this process X times.

File: Baited Expectations.png (259 KB, 375x523)

259 KB PNG

>>92586699
Ehem, that should be "Then repeat this process X more times"

>>92586699
>>92586716
X minus one, possibly, because you've already done it once. But that works and is surprisingly simple, thanks.

>>92586738
To be safe I'd have the spell cost X1GB, to keep "Then repeat this process X more times." just to make it as simple as possible.

>>92586743
Repeat this proccess until you have X trumpart tokens?

>>92586774
That won't work, it'll interfere with itself on future castings.

>>92586856
...That doesn't actually sound entirely terrible?
This is nominally a wonderland card, so a spell that only works once at full power seems almost in line with the sort of nonsense logic they tend to employ. Though it probably is bad design.

File: Tiamat the First Monster.png (256 KB, 375x523)

256 KB PNG

How's the cost on this?

File: The Tumbleweed.png (304 KB, 375x523)

304 KB PNG

>>92588273
WELL, considering this one single card puts 49 Power on the board, this card should cost aproximately fourty five mana.
Being realistic there is no way you can have those heads be threats in and of themselves. I'd suggest you make them have Defender and become, like maybe 4/4s. Then it's much fairer, it puts pressure on your opponent with a 7/7 flier that's very hard to kill, but it has counterplay; and you still have some kind of degenerate combo with High Alert

File: The Sword Kings Salute.png (230 KB, 375x523)

230 KB PNG

>>92588306
35* power, whoops, can't math too tired

>>92588306
>>92588311
Fair, I expected it to be way too much. That said, how well would 'when enter, sacrifice up to four dragons, create that many tokens' work for having more of a cost than just the casting cost? Possibly alongside dropping it to 6/6 and them to 4/4 as suggested.

>>92588321
That's a pretty cool idea, it'd totally work I think. I'd consider adding R to the mana cost in place of a B, just for thematics, since dragons are all about that fire and the mechanic sounds Jund as hell.

File: Apophis Sun Devourer.png (267 KB, 375x523)

267 KB PNG

>>92588331
I'm actually largely unfamilar with shards, I didn't pick up mtg until long after them. I'm better with the guilds, but barely.

I'm not actually against doing so, but I'm kind of trying to make a cycle of 'boss monsters', I guess. I've got a BW, a BR, a BU, a BB, and a BG. If they fit, then I can shift all but the BB to being tricolors, but like I said, I don't know the shards well enough.

This is my BR one, for the record.

File: there_was_an_attempt.jpg (1.38 MB, 1500x2092)

1.38 MB JPG

>>92585538
>>92585853

Is there a better exporter for MSE to cockatrice then the inbuilt one i can't get it export everything and its making the double faced cards squished on with both images on the front card

>>92591150
Never mind i found the issue damn ampersand was messing it up

What's the best way to phrase "return two creatures to the battlefield, but if one of them dies they both die"?

>>92592173
I'd do it with an Enchantment, unless you want to make an entire new keyword for it. Something like
When [card] enters the battlefield, put two target creature cards from graveyards onto the battlefield under your control with a soulbound counter on them.
If [card] or a creature you control with a soulbound counter would leave the battlefield, exile all creatures with a soulbound counter on them.

You could, however, in theory make a brand new counter mechanic for it, like "Soulbound counter (If a permanent with a soulbound counter on it would leave the battlefield, exile all permanents with a soulbound counter on them.)

File: Emperor of Purity.png (293 KB, 375x523)

293 KB PNG

>>92590985
Lookin' good, though few nit picks: please capitalize Bushido on Radim, Samurai. Also, the Iron Gauntlets equipment that Radim makes doesn't have an Equip (cost). Lastly, the Forest Dryads that zhirrez makes should be land creature tokens (Ref. "Awaken the Woods")

>>92594003
My first thought was the counter, yeah. something like "those creatures enter with X oath counters, where X is the number of times you've cast this spell" and then you'd sac/exile creatures with the same number. Just to prevent confusion over multiple castings. You can still probably fuck with it via proliferate, but I'm not planning on adding any cards with those so it's probably fine.

File: download.jpg (2.46 MB, 3720x3117)

2.46 MB JPG

revisiting an old thought, the Prescript mechanic.

>>92595910
Seems like basically foretell, but you have to reveal the card instead of it staying a secret?

File: Heterochromia.png (278 KB, 375x523)

278 KB PNG

Map gimmicks HO

>>92585853
There's no way you think that having a card called "THE Mountain" is an option. You can't just put a "the" in front of one of the five most fundamental cards in the game. Doing that with Web is bad enough, but at least that hasn't been in every set.

>>92594635
Actually just reusing an existing name is still worse, obviously...

>>92595910
>UW Haste
AAAHHH

File: Screenshot 2024-04-23 211248.png (510 KB, 424x659)

510 KB PNG

>>92597305
Obviously if this was a truly custom set those names would be horrible, but the premise of this is that I'm using already-existing things called Divination cards from a video game called Path of Exile.

As for cards that by pure coincidence already have another existing MTG card, well, this is just for fun anyway.

File: Malef and Sig.png (1.06 MB, 800x1090)

1.06 MB PNG

I get the feeling that my colors on this are very wrong, but eh, posting it anyways.

>>92578702
>>92578642
that's interesting. my Sword token was +1/+0 and equip 2. my Shield was +0/+1 and equip 2 as well. creating a Sword or Shield token was worth slightly less than half a mana, I think. balancing a set's stats with Sword and Shield tokens was a nightmare and i scrapped it

>>92595910
This is some panglacial wurm level of rules fuckery.

File: IMG_5218.jpg (73 KB, 744x1039)

73 KB JPG

I tried to do an upgraded Counterspell that would bypass “This spell can’t be countered” without being too broken.

File: Acropolis of Athens.jpg (114 KB, 744x1039)

114 KB JPG

What do you guys think?

>>92597363
Understood. As you were.

>>92599986
Pretty sure 'Return target spell to its owner's hand' accomplishes that by itself.

A Gavin video on ward and what wotc has learned about it and how to use it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNhYyaR-nHA

Keyword aside I think this is a good video to watch for game designers because it is a walkthrough of iteration.
Taking an original idea made for good reasons, exploring its downsides and then exploring how to mitigate those downsides.

File: ltr-26-reprieve.jpg (113 KB, 672x936)

113 KB JPG

>>92601440
>>92599986
Yep, this ignores "can't be countered" already. "Exile target spell" also bypasses it, though exactly because of that it's used sparingly.

>>92600264
Neat enough, but this should come in untapped. In 99% of cases it's functionally a land that just makes 1 colorless.

>X, tap: put a +1/+1 counter on all creatures you control, where X is the number of creatures you control
How does this sound? It's on the night side of a werewolf, if that matters.

File: The_Heroic_Shot.png (300 KB, 375x523)

300 KB PNG

>>92607528
Sounds cool, going wide is very risky with how many busted sweepers exist, and night side cards can be played around

I'm getting into design my own card game. It's a different genre (deckbuilder roguelike game that I am developing/testing in paper first), but as this is my first foray into things I was hoping I could get some help.

First, I was trying to work out the value system for MTG. It seems complex but an article I was reading seemed to indicate in the abstract sense:
>1 card = 2 life = 2 mana
There's also the concept of damage and power/toughness.

What I'm trying to figure out is if I have a system where monsters DON'T heal after rounds of combat (at least by default), how does that change their evaluation? Generally you'd want inflated stats for less mana, right?

>>92610450
>What I'm trying to figure out is if I have a system where monsters DON'T heal after rounds of combat (at least by default), how does that change their evaluation? Generally you'd want inflated stats for less mana, right?
To an extent. I recall that Hearthstone creatures actually have somewhat similar stats to MtG creatures, at least in its early days, since a 4/5 creature for 5 is still solid. And Hearthstone might be a better comparison overall, since if it's a single player Roguelike, I'd also assume you're going to avoid instant-speed spells that end up played during your opponent's turn.

A creature with high toughness still does a better job at surviving hits from smaller creatures, and will still die in one shot from a big one. Not healing after combat basically serves as sort of a safety valve, where an opponent can theoretically whittle down something large with enough smaller threats. In practice though, it's not always efficient to do so.
It does give you some more leeway to do things there, but not to an excessive degree. It isn't as though creatures need twice as much toughness to still be functional, for example.

bump? in case we're not falling off yet