Recent updates to Silly String: (Generated at 2013-12-09 19:39:42)
Page 1 - Older activity
This was an actual item in a Pathfinder game I played. Whenever the key's holder used it he went slightly insane (why I chose to have cards discarded in order to activate the card's ability). Remove curse had to be cast on the item three times in immediate succession for the curse to break the curse (hence the three curse counters).
The rarity was a mistake. I meant this to be a rare as the rest of the cycle is.
Edit: I also questioned the popularity of this supposed cycle in Lumegrind's Vault.
Because it would just become the norm. Why wouldn't everyone play this card if they were allowed to? With very short order, everyone at the table will just quasi-cheat and play with 12x dual lands. Why not just have your entire play group print and proxy 20x Moxen for their decks? What's the difference?
"should be the majority of them"? Whyso? I'd guess more than 50% of Magic players worldwide are in the kitchen table silent majority and would happily accept silver-bordered cards.
At common, too, eh? I don't know. You're right that it doesn't matter if the card is silver-borderd. But it will be frustrating for a lot players who's play group wouldn't allow them to use it... which should be the majority of them. Why print great cards that players can't play?
Now if this card said "Your opponent may treat this land as if it were an artifact" I think we'd be in business. All the down-side of artifact lands, with no upside. And since it's an un-set, the pseudo-rules language would be fine.
Is Prime Realestate a new land type?
"Mountain Lair" would be such an awesome type for a land to have. It needs to happen!
The dual lands everyone forgot about.
[Edit: My apologies Sorrow. Sometimes I just start typing and forget to stop. By the time I got down to the end of my comment (which I had to abruptly stop myself from continuing), I realized that I was writing an article. Most of what's here has more to do with the subject of drawbacks on Magic cards... a subject that I do find interesting, so you got me talking. Feel free to disregard anything in there. I won't be insulted.]
You know, I do like this card, but it does such a great job showing why we don't use cards with drawbacks as much anymore. Some players will never play it, because they wouldn't want the bad stuff to happen, no matter what the good stuff is. Some players will just get a +5/+0 doublestrike on the cheap, because their opponent doesn't play red. In the end, most everyone will be unhappy with it.
That said, this iteration is at least flavorful. I give a lot of points for flavor... it helps give players a reason for why we're doing what we're doing. I like the idea behind cursed artifacts... it's a tough bugger to crack, I know.
The three biggest problems I see with this card right now is:
I think the reason why these problems are all adding up is because you're trying to design a rare, and rare cursed equipment is going to come with all this baggage that makes them exciting (like Phyrexian Negator), but not fun to play. Miss your target and you end up with cards that are not fun to play, and are actively bad (Morinfen, for example). The line between the two is tragically difficult to find.
There's certainly plenty of room for goofy and cursed. Roughly everything with the word 'Jinxed' in it is fun (most recently, Jinxed Idol) even when it isn't neccessarily good. I'm pretty sure there's plenty of room for effecient with a drawback, too. An uncommon that's slightly better than a common, but can be turned against you, but you have an escape clause is great.
Ok, so this is now a Medicine Bag, which also gains you a bit of life (but costs two discards instead of one) that can be levelled up by paying voer multiple turns to remove the usage cost?
That's probably fair. I'd class it as a junk-rare; very rarely worth using. But with other tricks to remove counters, maybe occasionally useful?
It is stretching arbitrary regeneration outside of the colours it usually lives in; but as such a high cost, you can probably get away with it.
I adjusted the cost. My goal with this and Sword of Epic Rage is to emulate cursed items you find in d&d games.
In this instance, the enchantment part is used to show that it's cursed.
This attempt #2 at representing a cursed artifact.
Mmmm... Frankly, there's no reason for the downside. This costs six. It could probably be ": Regenerate all creatures you control" and no one would flinch.
This is my first attempt at designing a cursed artifact.
This made me laugh :)
It's a pity that artifact lands get hammered for how abusive affinity is. Had there been no 'affinity' keyword mechanic stating, roughly, "In this block, some lands produce .", the artifact lands would have been welcome additions to the set.
But, you know, now that I think about it, artifact lands are still nuts with Atog and cards like Cranial Plating, which are fair cards without art.lands around. I guess the take away is that when you add something to a card, deciding that 'because it makes it vulnerable to certain cards that hate it' isn't good enough to make up for whatever bonus you gave it. You still need to take something away.