Obligatory shitty card creation thread

[Aggro_zombies]

In a more compact way:
Players can't pay sacrifice costs.

In a more correctly templated way:

Players can't activate abilities that require sacrificing a permanent in their costs.

[Ectoplasm]

What? Nobody plays counterspell

Welcome

[Phoenix Ignition]

In a more correctly templated way:

Players can't activate abilities that require sacrificing a permanent in their costs.

So an easier creature to get out than Magus of the Moon (requires a mox and not a double land) that does WAYYYY more to mess with people's manabases that's in a color that already has a solid mono-colored control?

And then it even messes with combo-based strategies, ichorid, and zoo? And then it can be protected by a chalice @1 because that's the most mana anyone would ever get out if it was played first turn. No thank you.

[Barook]

So an easier creature to get out than Magus of the Moon (requires a mox and not a double land) that does WAYYYY more to mess with people's manabases that's in a color that already has a solid mono-colored control?

Double white is less splashable than MotM. And it's certainly not more powerful than Magus in terms of mana disruption because it doesn't stop Duals from producing the correct mana or takes away other abilities (e.g. Factory; Wasteland is the noteable exception) from lands.

Or to put it simply: You are only fucked if you are a fetchland whore.

In a more correctly templated way:
Players can't activate abilities that require sacrificing a permanent in their costs.

That's not the original wording. This wording would still allow spells like NO to be played.

[pi4meterftw]

Welcome

I stand corrected. No good decks play counterspell.

[Forbiddian]

Double white is less splashable than MotM. And it's certainly not more powerful than Magus in terms of mana disruption because it doesn't stop Duals from producing the correct mana or takes away other abilities (e.g. Factory; Wasteland is the noteable exception) from lands.

Or to put it simply: You are only fucked if you are a fetchland whore.

... what's your definition of "fetchland whore"? Any deck at all in Legacy?

Or to put it simply: This card is too strong.

[Tacosnape]

In a more correctly templated way:

Players can't activate abilities that require sacrificing a permanent in their costs.

Why not just "Permanents can't be sacrificed."?

This would have far more of an effect on the game, and seems more interesting to me.

[Phoenix Ignition]

Why not just "Permanents can't be sacrificed."?

This would have far more of an effect on the game, and seems more interesting to me.

How about "nonland permanents can't be sacrificed"

Wouldn't F over every deck except mono-control's lands, and still is strong enough to mess up over half the decks out there.

Cursecatcher, Warren Weirding or any other edict, Natural Order, LED, Cabal Therapy, Pridemage, Hexmage, smokestax, and Hypnotist (if you use him in Ichorid) all get screwed.

Side effects are it helps Ichorid, bloodghast (which actually hurts that deck sometimes), keldon maurauders/hellspark elemental/ball lightning creatures, Dreadnaught, all evokes (dunno if there are any powerful evoke creatures to break), ELDRAZI MONUMENT!!! etc...

Seems more balanced at least.

[Aggro_zombies]

Why not just "Permanents can't be sacrificed."?

This would have far more of an effect on the game, and seems more interesting to me.

That depends on the intention. The version you propose would cause cards with cumulative upkeep to have essentially no drawback, and the interactions with a variety of mechanics that require sacrificing things would be improved (Fading and its Planar Chaos clone). The intent of the card I was trying to reword was essentially to hose things like fetches and LED, so it was much more narrow.

And of course, there aren't even any good cumulative upkeep cards, so I guess that point it moot. I was just trying to mimic the original card idea, but with a better wording.

A smaller, cheaper version of Niv-Mizzet would be interesting.


Creature - Tiny Dragon
Flying
Whenever a player draws a card, ~ deals 1 damage to him or her.
2/1

Ancestral Recall is now a blue Lightning Bolt!

[Phoenix Ignition]

Creature - Tiny Dragon
Flying
Whenever a player draws a card, ~ deals 1 damage to him or her.
2/1

Ancestral Recall is now a blue Lightning Bolt!

Seems interesting, but I'd like to see some black in the casting cost to go with all of the other cards that have the same effect (Underworld Dreams, Kederekt Parasite), and go along with the suicide theme black has.

Anything that makes my Tefari Puzzle Box's better is fine with me though. Would be funny to burn people for 7 or so a turn on turn 4 in a casual deck (even though it's coming back to me next turn).

[rockout]

Mana Leak Sucks
Mana Cost: U
Instant
Counter target spell unless its controller pays 3.

[santeria]

Mana Leak Sucks
Mana Cost: U
Instant
Counter target spell unless its controller pays 3.

I'd run the shit out of that.

[quicksilver]

Mana Leak Sucks
Mana Cost: U
Instant
Counter target spell unless its controller pays 3.

That would be so broken.

[MMogg]

Mana Leak Sucks
Mana Cost: U
Instant
Counter target spell unless its controller pays 3.

And make it a Mythic Rare.

[Ectoplasm]

I stand corrected. No good decks play counterspell.

*The* legacy controldeck isn't a good deck?

[quicksilver]

*The* legacy controldeck isn't a good deck?

correct

[puppektion]

Mana Leak Sucks
Mana Cost: U
Instant
Counter target spell unless its controller pays 3.

So... pretty much a 1 cc hard counter?

[Maveric78f]

In a more correctly templated way:

Can you explain how my template is wrong? I'd like to understand. For memory it was:

Players can't pay sacrifice costs.

If they can't pay, thay can't play. And "players can't sacrifice creatures" is dangerous in a very few MUs: ichorid (but if they can't sacrifice, they can't get zombies, so that's not realy a problem) and dreadnought. But it's a hoser for so many interactions, even in addition to fetches and wastes. It also comboes too easily with cards that are already good in themselves: dreadnought and shriekmaw to begin with.

Off my head a deck like this would probably be too strong:

4*jotun grunt
4*confidant
4*dreadnought
4*gilded drake
4*this creature

3*daze
4*FoW
4*brainstorm
4*Stifle
4*STP
3*Spellsnare/Spell Pierce

18*lands (even fetches if you wish)

[Pastorofmuppets]

Can you explain how my template is wrong? I'd like to understand. For memory it was:

Players can't pay sacrifice costs.

If they can't pay, thay can't play. And "players can't sacrifice creatures" is dangerous in a very few MUs: ichorid (but if they can't sacrifice, they can't get zombies, so that's not realy a problem) and dreadnought. But it's a hoser for so many interactions, even in addition to fetches and wastes. It also comboes too easily with cards that are already good in themselves: dreadnought and shriekmaw to begin with.

Off my head a deck like this would probably be too strong:

4*jotun grunt
4*confidant
4*dreadnought
4*gilded drake
4*this creature

3*daze
4*FoW
4*brainstorm
4*Stifle
4*STP
3*Spellsnare/Spell Pierce

18*lands (even fetches if you wish)

Bone Splinters might be good.

[Shawn]

Saccing a creature is part of Bone Splitter's cost, wouldn't that just prevent you from casting it?