Obligatory shitty card creation thread

[Phoenix Ignition]

So at EOT what do I do with the 8th card in my hand?

Not discard it.

[quicksilver]

Not discard it.

Ya that seems pretty obvious. Clearly this card you make no maximum hand size.

[umbowta]

Whenever an opponent discards a card, exile it instead of putting into it's owner's graveyard.

Is that better?

No that's not better at all. The act of discarding is part of the activation cost of Survival of the Fittest, which is one of the things we're trying to nerf.

[umbowta]

To the best of my knowledge, "players can't discard cards" works fine as a wording, just like "players can't gain life" (Sulfuric Vortex) or "players can't search their library" (Mindlock Orb).

In all of those cases, effects that cause those actions instead do nothing, and costs involving those actions can't be paid.

For balancing purposes, I'd just add the ability: "Players* can't draw more than one card each turn", unless there is some cheap pseudo-drawing + discard spell I forgot about.

* Could be "you", but the symmetry is more elegant.

@the bolded portion which I just fully read and comprehended(i'm supposed to be working on a program in CIS lab right now instead of reading the source;-)

Without the second ability, Careful Study and Cephalid Coliseum would be busted in half for sure

[Nonex]

Costs that would cause a player to discard cards can't be paid.
Effects that would cause a player to discard cards don't apply unless they would cause that player to draw cards.

How does that look?

[Phoenix Ignition]

Costs that would cause a player to discard cards can't be paid.
Effects that would cause a player to discard cards don't apply unless they would cause that player to draw cards.

How does that look?

Second line looks ambiguous. Does this stop Cephalid Looter from drawing you cards? I don't know if magic cards really check the future for whether you are going to discard after you draw.

[Nihil Credo]

@the bolded portion which I just fully read and comprehended(i'm supposed to be working on a program in CIS lab right now instead of reading the source;-)

Careful Study and Cephalid Coliseum would be busted in half for sure

No, they wouldn't. Careful Study would do nothing (you can't draw because you already drew once in your draw step, and you can't discard), and Coliseum would at best cycle if activated during an opponent's turn.

Costs that would cause a player to discard cards can't be paid.
Effects that would cause a player to discard cards don't apply unless they would cause that player to draw cards.

How does that look?

Second line would lead to some guru-type questions (eg. what if the effect has a conditional draw) and possibly contradictions too, but it doesn't matter because that text is too cumbersome to see print anyway.

[Barook]

For balancing purposes, I'd just add the ability: "Players* can't draw more than one card each turn", unless there is some cheap pseudo-drawing + discard spell I forgot about.

I still have yet to see a blue draw spell that would break the card (e.g. Breakthrough) and doesn't suck on its own in a deck that mustn't rely on the graveyard because you would screw yourself over once the Anti-Discard hits the table. Gaining +2 CA instead +1 CA from stuff like Thirst for Knowledge or turning Merfolk Looter into Archivist doesn't sound exactly broken to me. Making it to a pseudo-Chains of Mephistopheles would be even a buff to it (and self-restriction only is just plain dumb).

No that's not better at all. The act of discarding is part of the activation cost of Survival of the Fittest, which is one of the things we're trying to nerf.

Why would you nerf one of the two main aspects the card is intended to hose?

[Pastorofmuppets]

I still have yet to see a blue draw spell that would break the card (e.g. Breakthrough) and doesn't suck on its own in a deck that mustn't rely on the graveyard because you would screw yourself over once the Anti-Discard hits the table. Gaining +2 CA instead +1 CA from stuff like Thirst for Knowledge or turning Merfolk Looter into Archivist doesn't sound exactly broken to me. Making it to a pseudo-Chains of Mephistopheles would be even a buff to it (and self-restriction only is just plain dumb).

It makes Telling Time really good.

[Barook]

It makes Telling Time really good.

Now you're just trolling.

Edit: A try to fix the 'broken':

Players can't discard cards.
Spells and abilities which would cause a player to discard can't be played.

Are there any (static) effects that wouldn't be covered with the second sentence? I think with this (or a similar wording), it would come closer to the original intend of the card.

[Nonex]

I just realized that not all effects limit themselves to discard or discard and draw. I guess something like "Effects that would only cause a player to discard cards don't apply" would be more appropiate.

[umbowta]

Why would you nerf one of the two main aspects the card is intended to hose?

The card is intended to nerf Survival. If the controller of Survival can't activate it because discard is replaced with exile then Survival has been efectively nerfed...or hosed, whatever word you want to use. They pay green, exile a card, and don't get to search...does that work with the rules? Would the card be exiled or could they even attempt to activate it all with the exile replacment efect in all instances of discard? I'm no Judge.

No, they wouldn't. Careful Study would do nothing (you can't draw because you already drew once in your draw step, and you can't discard), and Coliseum would at best cycle if activated during an opponent's turn.

You must have replied before I edited my post mere minutes later. see underlined below

@the bolded portion which I just fully read and comprehended(i'm supposed to be working on a program in CIS lab right now instead of reading the source;-)

Without the second ability, Careful Study and Cephalid Coliseum would be busted in half for sure

[EDIT]

Spells and abilities which would cause a player to discard can't be played.

Ooohh. I think you might have it there.

[umbowta]

With Barook's improved wording...and sans the no max handsize thing.

Eternal Shepherd
Legendary Creature - Human Cleric

Spells and abilities which would cause a player to discard can't be played.

At the beginning of your upkeep, if Eternal Shepherd is in your graveyard, you may pay to return Eternal Shepherd to your hand.
2/2

[Nonex]

The way Eternal Shepherd is written right now applies only to effects (by forbidding to pay their costs), while saying nothing about costs that imply discarding. Survival of the Fittest is unaffected.

[Barook]

The way Eternal Shepherd is written right now applies only to effects (by forbidding to pay their costs), while saying nothing about costs that imply discarding. Survival of the Fittest is unaffected.

This. You would be still able to to discard cards to pay costs which shouldn't work under the intended use.

Besides, white utility bears don't have recurring abilities, legendary or not.

To update the old thing:

Noble Mindguard
Creature - Human Cleric
Players can't discard cards.
Spells and abilities which would cause a player to discard one or more cards can't be played.
2/2

[Nihil Credo]

I don't think that second ability can be printed under the rules: using the effects of a spell or ability as a condition for playing it leads to trouble. Consider this card:

Ad Hoc
Sorcery
Reveal the top card of your library. Discard cards equal to its converted mana cost.

If the top card of your library has CMC zero, Ad Hoc can be played. If not, it can't. But since the library is not a public zone, this can't be determined until Ad Hoc resolves. There is no way to know if playing Ad Hoc is a legal action.

Something that would definitely work is "Spells or ability with the word 'discard' in their text can't be played", but that's ugly as hell.

[Barook]

The question is how to word it to make it work under the rules. I just added the "one or more cards" to match the wording with other cards. Would the more general wording work?

Something that would definitely work is "Spells or ability with the word 'discard' in their text can't be played", but that's ugly as hell.

The problem with this wording is that it even prevents cards like Wild Mongrel from being played.

[Nihil Credo]

The question is how to word it to make it work under the rules. I just added the "one or more cards" to match the wording with other cards. Would the more general wording work?

No, because discarding zero cards does not count as discarding (like a BoP dealing 0 damage does not deal any damage and charge up Jitte), thus Ad Hoc should still be legal to play if and only if the top card has CMC zero.

The problem with this wording is that it even prevents cards like Wild Mongrel from being played.

Good point. It would have to be 'Instants, sorceries, and abilities', I guess - wouldn't cover replacement effects like Chains of Mephistopheles, but the first ability takes care of them. Still unprintably ugly, though.

[umbowta]

The way Eternal Shepherd is written right now applies only to effects (by forbidding to pay their costs), while saying nothing about costs that imply discarding. Survival of the Fittest is unaffected.

Yeah, you're right. I'm out of ideas for that one.

[Barook]

The main question remains if blue draw would be really that powerful to screw over a simple and elegant design.

You could also try to make it simply unattractive by a adding some kind of retarded drawback like:

If an effect would cause a player to discard a card, each opponent of the effect's controller may draw a card.

Something like this would open some interesting design space, similar to Aven Mindcensor, too:

'Insert fancy name here', the Mindguard
Legendary Creature - Human Cleric
Flash
Players can't discard cards.
If an effect would cause a player to discard a card, each opponent of the effect's controller may draw a card.
2/2

This way, it would punish discard spells even more, e.g.:

Opponent: Hymn
You: Response, Mindguard, drawing 2 cards.