CPA Set - Modification/Delete/Add

Discussion in 'Home Made Cards' started by Mooseman, Jan 15, 2007.

  1. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    Let's list the changes we think should be made to the set.


    Fluttering Butterflies (2/2 "Flying. Prevent all combat damage attacking creatures would deal to <THIS>. Whenever <THIS> blocks, lose life equal to it's power.")

    Change to 1BG and 2/1 as a common or uncommon?

    I think the added mana cost (1BG) and that it only works as a blocker may keep it common, but the 2/1 change makes it to vulnerable to Tims.
  2. DarthFerret Evil Sith Weasel

    ok...my opinion....1BG and 2/2 = uncommon.

    1BG and 2/1 = common.

    It all really depends on which way you want to go. Who was the originator of this card?
  3. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    Me. :eek:
  4. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    I vote 1BG and 2/1 = uncommon :D
  5. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    I'd go with 1GB and 2/2 as an uncommon
    or GB and 2/1 as a common.
  6. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    I think, independent of its manacost, the ability makes it an uncommon. He can block anything without dying, and might kill the attacker as well. This costs you two life each time, but you are probably preventing more by blocking.

    Considering that it is a flyer in green/black (both colors not renowed for their efficient small flying creatures) I think that being very susceptable to removal isn't that odd. And 2/1 or 2/2 doesn't make a lot of difference to most removal anyway (it might prove a bit more important in limited play).

    So why 2/1? It feels more like an insect that way. An annoying bug that would be very easy to swat, but for now its annoying the hell out of you and your Blastoderm.

    So why 1BG? I think that paying less for such a great blocker is just unbalanced.
  7. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    On the Lumonias, Propitious Angel:

    She's too good. The drawback seems nicely balanced, but having a 6/6 flying on the board is really good. Perhaps her mana cost should be 5WW? 5WWW?
  8. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    She is a legend so only 1 at a time, but I can see changing something on her.
    Maybe 4WWW or make her a 6/5 @ 3WWW, but it has to be less than the Avatars, since it has no alternate casting cost.
  9. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    Good point about the Avatars.

    So, 4WWW it is?
  10. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    I'd say so. A 6/6 flying vigilant for 6 is a bit low.
  11. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    I thought the drawback of having opponents gain three life would balance it somehow, but vigilance makes sure the Angel does double duty.. 4WWW is more fair.
  12. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    I think removing the must block/attack would be the best.
  13. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    Unarmored Combat

    If it would be "Enchanted creature loses all activated abilities. It must attack each turn if able", the creature have to attack on its next turn and it be a great card to get rid of cards like Minister of Impediments..

    "Enchanted creature must block" turns it into a too reliable removal spell, and "loses all abilities" might be too good at common.
  14. DarthFerret Evil Sith Weasel

    Ok, If you leave it as is then I would say it would have to be a rare. If you want it to be uncommon, then I think you should lose the forced blocking. If you want it to be a common, then it would cost an additional 2 colorless and lose the forced blocking.

    Once again, I am no expert here, but I think this keeps it game balanced. Now I would like to see which way the originator of this card would take it. Or even a different way to fix it.
  15. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    Then make it uncommon or rare, with just "creature loses all abilities and must attack each turn if able"
    The activated ability thing is just a local cursed totem.... I want static, triggered and activated abilities to be turned off, so it's a vanilla creature.
    Maybe up the cost.
  16. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    Unarmored Combat 1GW
    Enchantment - Aura
    Uncommon
    "Enchantend creature loses all abilities and must attack each turn if able"

    This I'd be willing to try.

    (It reminds me of Pillory of the Sleepless now, only instead of neutralizing big attackers it neutralizes utility creatures.
  17. DarthFerret Evil Sith Weasel

    Seems balanced so far, but would still like to see this modified version in action.
  18. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    Why is this way too good?
    As a blocker it's a 0/5 wall with no special abilities.
    As an attacker it needs to have RFG lands or it deals no combat damage to a player.
    IF it is blocked then it's ability kicks in. For example:
    Dark Guard attacks
    Wandering Knight and Sack of Bones are assigned as blockers
    Target blocker is given first strike......hmmmmm say Knight
    Knight does 2 damage to Guard
    Guard get +2/+0
    Guard and Sack assign damage ..... hmmm Guard assigns 2 to knight
    Guard and Knight both die and Sack is still alive.....


    Now Brunting Wurm is way too good, needs to be a 1/1 or 2/1
    Brunting Wurm (4/4, Brunting Wurm gets +X/+X, where X is the total converted mana cost of all creatures blocking it)
  19. Ransac CPA Trash Man

    I don't see Brunting Wurm as TOO good. He doesn't have trample and a simple 1/1 can fend it off. Additionally, he's a non-black creature, so basic removal can kill him. His Toughness of 4 does put him out of most burn range, but still.

    I'd suggest him to be a 4/3 before we do anything big.

    Ransac, cpa trash man
  20. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    Maybe 2/3 would be better, since it's ability only kicks in when it attacks......
    It's ability would let it walk through some times.

Share This Page