The color wheel went on vacation!

Killer Joe

New member
Card Name: Sarcromantic Destruction
Casting Cost: 5B
Rarity: Rare
Spell Type: Instant
Card text: In addition to paying Sarcromantic Destruction's mana cost, pay 3 life: Destroy Target Artifact or Enchantment. It can't be regenerated.

Card name: Flamming Tornado
Casting Cost:4R
Rarity: Rare
Spell Type: Sorcery
Card text: Return target permanant to owner's hand. ~This~ deals two damage to you.

Card name: Dark Foilage
Casting Cost: 4G
Rarity: Rare
Spell Type: Sorcery
Card text: Target creature gets -2/-2 until end of turn. Put a 2/2 Black Zombie creature into play.

Card name: Angelic Fury
Casting Cost: 4W
Rarity: Rare
Spell Type: Instant
Card text: Destroy target land. You gain 2 life.

Card Name: Wizard's Mana Growth
Casting Cost: 4U
Rarity: Rare
Spell Type: Sorcery
Card text: Target player adds X mana of any color to their mana pool where X equals the number of green creatures in play.


I have NO idea what's gotten into me lately. I CAN'T make cards, but I'm gonna try. :rolleyes:
 

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
The first one is not so sexy. I would either lower slightly the mana cost or the life payment...
 
I

Istanbul

Guest
These are "bus" cards. Especially the first one.
What is a "bus" card, you ask?
Several of the more broken cards ever printed, WotC has acknowledged as such. Masticore, Morphling, Yawgmoth's Will, that sort of thing. And when asked about them, they said that R&D would have to be hit by a bus before they would be reprinted.

R&D would have to be hit by a bus...six, maybe seven dozen times...before any of these ever saw print. The first one in particular would break black wide open.
 

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
You really think so? They don't look so broken compared to the charms he made earlier (but those were fixed).

How are any of these bus cards?

The first one costs a full six mana (and three life) for a disenchant effect. Black would LOVE a disenchant effect, but if it has six mana lying around, then Yawgmoth's Bargain comes to mind. I don't think that black would ever get a disenchant effect anyway, but black decks would probably rather color splash for Vindicate or something than run this massively costed guy. Still, giving black artifact/enchantment destruction, even if it's horrible, is tempting fate...

I've played monored decks and sometimes multicolored decks with red a lot and I don't particularly remember games where I was like, "wow, I could sure use a red Boomerang right about now. Even if it costed five mana I wouldn't mind..."

I can't continue along that trend with the green one, since it actually is good. It would be playable even if it were black instead of green.

Black LD decks don't even use Despoil. Despoil is way better than the white card (although the instant speed is highly desirable). I can't see red, green, or multicolored LD really trying to splash white for an inefficient spell such as this one. Monowhite could play it if it wanted, but what would be the point? White has no other LD except stuff that takes a massive effect like Armageddon or Balance. I don't think this would see play anywhere. That's pretty far from being a bus card.

The last one is blue and relies on your having green creatures unless it's to be used as a whacky sideboard card. In order to produce even a single mana, there need to be six green creatures in play. It could act as a way to convert mana into mana of any color also, but that's less scary than something like Yawgmoth's Will.

Comparing any of these to Yawgmoth's Will (or Morphling or Masticore, although as far as creatures go, I would think Goblin Welder or Academy Rector a better example of a "bus" card) is quite an exaggeration. I see your point, which I considered myself before my first post (but not definitely not enough). Giving off color capabilities to something is dangerous.

I mean, look at what happened when Green stole Disenchant. Green became much more versatile. These cards aren't quite the same, since they all cost quite a bit, but it is still an important consideration.

Realistically, well my first bit of advice would be to just ditch the whole concept altogether. I mean these five cards, that is. They are all effects that, were the costs lowered too much, would be far too good. And the way they are now, most of them are pretty useless.

If you want to make cards following this concept though, my suggestion would be to create cards with less dramatic effects. A black disenchant is right out. But what about a black counterspell? Withering Boon was pretty crummy. But something similar to that could be viable, yet balanced. Obviously BB to counter target spell is right out. But remember that black would rather strike proactively with something like Duress or Hymn to Tourach or ruin the opponent's plans with destructive spells like Sinkhole or Diabolic Edict. This could be a little something to tie up loose ends...

Same deal for the other colors. White has little use for an LD spell. It could use some card advantage though...
 
K

Kode

Guest
Throwing off the color wheel takes away from the essence of the game. In order to have a game at all, you have to give each level or color (or whatever system used to classify) its own very unique distinctions; otherwise, like Yu Gi Oh, for example, anyone can play absolutely anything - not pretty and not intelligent when it comes to constructing a game.

Let's face few things:

Black should not be able to touch artifacts or enchantments. It deals with life-forces, not destruction. It thrives on harassing organic life force, hence its opposition to Green and White, the 2 most organic colors. It cannot destroy Artifacts because artifacts posses no life-force; enchantments are weird, but I doubt that they could count as "life-force." Thus the ability to destroy creatures and lands so easily comes natural. A player's hand is also a natural target because in Magic the player's hand represents the player's "mind" - a life-force in its own right; the one thing I would have a problem with is a player's library - in Magic, what does "the library" stand for? Is it another facet of a player's mind? Or what? Although Black would benefit greatly from having its own Disenchant, it would greatly upset the flavor of the color. I play Black, I long for a way to deal with those permanents...but I like Black because of its strengths as well as its weaknesses; in fact, its limitations make it what it is!

Now, the color of chaos and destruction is Red. Artifact, land, and creature destruction is rather easy. Countering spells is not as controversial as some people think it is: its part of Red's chaotic nature. The day they give Red a straight-out counter, we can be worried, but as long as the counter is chaotic, it's actually in tune with Red's flavor. Red is also the color of direct damage because it is the color of chaos, heat, fire...everything blunt and harsh comes natural to Red's flavor: Wildfire, Inferno, Apocalypse...just to name very few. Returning permanents back to owner's hand is too suave for Red - it simply doesn't make sense; it's orderly in so many ways; it has no bluntness, no in-your-face type of effect; it's very calm and very rational. It naturally has nothing to do with Red.

Green is nature par excellence. It is natural for disasters to happen, Green is fully capable of them. But to simply drain the life-force of an organic being, such as give a creature -2/-2 penalty? That is impossible. It has more chances of destroying a creature than simply just drain away at it. In fact, the Green card you have made here can easily be made Black; make it an Instant, have it cost 3B, and there you go. There is nothing Green about it. It’s ability to destroy artifacts and enchantments was long overdo before Naturalize came into being, being the organic color, something as inorganic as artifacts are naturally despised under Green’s law. Green’s ability to destroy enchantment is attributed to the enchantment’s being a type of a life-force, an organic one, but a one that is cast – you can call it “natural magic” if you prefer; now we all know Green loves enchantments, hence the heaps of Enchantress cards it has; a color that oh-so-loves a type of card naturally can also destroy it; the same with Red-land relationship and White-enchantment relationship. Green, of all colors, is or should be capable of handling all types of permanents simply because all type of permanents are, at least in part, natural and organic, excluding artifacts, thus a card like Desert Twister is conceivable.

Next to Red, the color of extremes, we have White, a color of extremes of its own. The difference between Red and White’s extremities is chaotic extremes for the earlier and orderly extremes for the latter. Also, next to Green, White is the second most organic of colors – its simply focused and fascinated with the more civilized and orderly parts of nature, whereas Green is primordial, mythical and ancient. In many ways, White is an extension of Green, thus they can’t oppose each other. White also is the color of developed and institutionalized religion, worship, divinity, and also pure spirituality – it can control life-forces as well as regroup and reorganize them, but it cannot drain them. White’s Circle of Protection cards, very basic and common, are a great representation of this life-force control, amongst other things. Cards like Wrath of God and Armageddon, Cataclysm and Catastrophe, are all extensions of Green’s ability to deal with anything and everything if necessary; White simply is more developed, more spiritualized, less naturalized, thus all these sweeping cards come from a more spiritual standpoint as opposed to mere “natural events.” There’s nothing more spiritually loaded, after all, then titles like “Wrath of God” or “Armageddon,” and even cards like Cataclysm and Catastrophe have some kind of “big spiritual event.” Destroying one land is not in White’ flavor: it does not imply any type of order or reorder, only destruction; Green can destroy lands because it is fully submerged in lands and, like I said, to be fully submerged and “in love” with a type of card is also to be able to manipulate that type of card; White cannot destroy only 1 land – it is disorderly; lands, to White, are the places upon which civilization, religion, and order thrives. It is different, to White at least, to be able to destroy all lands at once as opposed to simply one or two lands. White can and does pick at single creatures because a single creature can represent an anarchist who disrupts the purity and order; this is one of the reasons why White destroys only tapped or attacking creatures, and very uncommonly simply destroys a creature. Being divine, White is the color of enchantments ("natural magic"), and as easily as it can conjure enchantments, it can dismiss them. To be able to destroy artifacts can be seen, for once, as an extension of Green's hatred towards artifacts; White has nothing against artifacts and in fact can use them well (see Equipment), but also can destroy them because it is, generally, neutral to them. In my opinion, White should be able to counter something or another. It is fully in flavor because it is a part of White's ability to intervene as such; a type of divine intervention or spiritual dodging is not out of its reach. I'm not saying pure counter, just counter, perhaps things that threaten a creature or a land, or something that deals direct damage or in some way creates disorder and chaos.

Now Blue is the most complicated color because essentially it can do things that all colors do. Blue is the color of the psyche, of the very mind that operates behind things, the nature behind the nature, the motive behind the action, the truth behind the appearance, the world behind the world. It is also the most "sci-fi" color, with time traveling and space manipulation; mostly, however, is connected to the mind. Blue’s relationship with White is that of order – Blue likes order, though not spiritual or governmental, but psychical order and harmony; Blue is the laziest color in so many ways, and also the most idealistic: it wants to just close its eyes and wish everything orderly; it doesn’t really want to partake in the physical process, just the mental; White is its best friend – in some ways, White is Blue’s lackey, but also Blue’s realistic counterpart: White does things, Blue wishes things to be done. White destroys all lands. Blue, no, it returns them all to owner’s hand instead. White destroys a problematic creature, Blue bounces it; White uses healing and protection to realistically deal with problems, Blue just closes its eyes and wishes everything denied: “counterspell,” “dismiss,” “thwart,” “final word.” Blue rivals Red’s egoism. Blue is subtle. Red is blunt. Blue is mentally orderly, Red is mentally chaotic. Blue's relationship with Black is the most psychological relationship in the game of Magic: Blue, being the color of the psyche, naturally has its dark side - the unconscious, the unfulfilled dreams and fantasies – Black does a lot of the things that Blue, deeply, would want to do as well: completely possessing its opponent’s mind. Blue will not admit it because in part it wants order and peace, and Black’s tendencies are very not White. Blue is the most tragic color: it is torn between darkness and light. A lazy color has no way of generating mana, although I assure you that it would love to generate mana just by “thinking” about it. If you think about it, everything is possible in Blue – a card that generates mana is actually conceivable simply because, with the appropriate drawbacks, Blue can wish anything into reality. I can see a card like this:

[Blue mana generation card][2U]
Instant
Add UUUUUU to your mana pool. Skip your next turn.

This card is legitimate, as a matter of fact. It skips time to gain everything here and now. The 6 mana is the double of 3, so it doubles its assets today by psychically manipulating and reordering the time. Legitimate enough, but still too powerful.

The bottom line is, the colors are very complex and I don’t think enough can be written about their relationships to each other and why such relationships exist; also a lot can be added or even subtracted from a color to make it more unique and distinct. I mentioned White’s ability to counter things, and that’s one of many. To “blur the lines,” so to speak, is to kill the game. The game only exists because of its distinct and limiting elements; if every color did everything, albeit for a different price, it might be interesting for a while, but in the long run it would debase the colors, eventually equalizing them, and thereby ending the game.

That. Was. Long. Sorry. :)
 

Killer Joe

New member
We ALL get the color wheel and why it's there and how it works.

If you didn't notice (which I'm sure you did), this forum is for "Home Made cards" not suggestions for Wiz Co. It's faux, false, MADE up.

Nice explanation, though. And please use it effectively for the next YAHOO who talks about bringing Armageddon back into the mix or Disenchant.

:D
 
D

DÛke

Guest
...I like the explanations. I don't think he wrote them to teach you about ths distinctions of each color, but to show you why they need to be kept in check. Actually, it gives me a good idea for an article.
We ALL get the color wheel and why it's there and how it works.
I don't think WotC does.
 
R

Rooser

Guest
Except for that WotC continues to say that Armageddon is still in flavor for white - they just don't want to reprint it until they give red something better.
 

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
Something Better
2RR
Sorcery
Destroy all lands

Hmm, I don't see it happening. You can print Wild Mongrel (but you shouldn't) for green. Red can't even have Grizzly Bears and has to settle for Ironclaw Orcs. Red decks would LOVE Wild Mongrel, but it's not happening. If red had Armageddon, we'd probably all be running from the horrible inferno of LD decks.

...or joining in. :rolleyes:
 
F

Force of Will Smith

Guest
I think it's true that some colors should have MORE difficulty in targeting other cards but, they should in no way be impervious.

6 and 3 life for a disenchant would not only not be broken, it wouldn't even be played.

Green can hit artifacts with verdegris, naturalize, oxidize, wear away, and probably a couple others.. Before the massive artifact destruction introduced in the mirrodin block, green was restricted to stompy and little else. It just gives you more options. Magic will never be like Yugi-Ho. *shivers*

Besides, if every color had an answer to every card with variable costs, the game would be more challenging.


say you go to play a game winning card, but your opponent has 5 swamps open... he casts a black counterspell that costs 3BBB, half their life. He counters your spell, then you burn him to death..

Or a White dark ritual that involves discarding your entire hand.

Everything has a price. The only way the color pool could be dilluted to the point where its unfair is if spells had the same or cheaper costs.. then it would be mayhem.
 
F

Force of Will Smith

Guest
Yup, it'd be terrible.. I betcha within the next 3 sets they'll attempt to make awful cross color cards..
 

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
It wouldn't surprise me. Call me crazy if you will, but I don't see harm in something like 1BB and three life to counter a spell...

And I don't think it would be out of flavour either.
 
F

Force of Will Smith

Guest
Nope. although since blue's new counterspell tend to be usually 3cc, i think the black one may be a little more..

Then again.. look and whispersm 1B for 2 cards...

lets say it'd be BBB, 4 Life or 2BB 3 life.

but i think its totally possible...

I wan't to see a green dark ritual. They'd have to make it something creature based, like..

Flourish G Instant
Add GGG to your mana pool, this may only be used to cast creature spells.
and flash the instant label so it can be countered.
 

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
Originally posted by Force of Will Smith
and flash the instant label so it can be countered.
Huh?

Anyway, I think something like this might be more appropriate for green

G
Instant
Add two mana of any single color to your mana pool.

3 for 1 had demonstrated brokenness enough times with Dark Ritual. But what about 2 for 1 with a cool bonus?
 
F

Force of Will Smith

Guest
I'd play that! Sadly, i dont think people would see the possiblities of that spell..

Sick for slivers though.
 

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
I think that good players would be trying to break it like crazy and soon other players would be using it too. I remember when Gilded Lotus came out and many players were scrambling to use it as best as they could. Chrome Mox had even more of a following. Players are starved for good mana acceleration and this thing would be as bad as, if not worse than, giving Dark Ritual back to the core set.
 
F

Force of Will Smith

Guest
dark ritual, along with spooky artwork was the main reason for me playing black... it would be that much better..

besides... even red has mana acceleration now..

blue needs a dark ritual.
 
T

Tabasco

Guest
Card Name: Touch of Poison
Casting Cost: 3B
Rarity: Rare
Spell Type: Instant
Card text: In addition to paying Touch of Poison's mana cost, pay 4 life: Destroy Target Artifact or Enchantment. It can't be regenerated.

Card name: Internal Combustion
Casting Cost:4R
Rarity: Rare
Spell Type: Sorcery
Card text: Return target permanant to owner's hand, unless that permanent's controller takes 5 damage.

Card name: Rotten Vegetation
Casting Cost: 3G
Rarity: Rare
Spell Type: Sorcery
Card text: Target creature gets -2/-2 until end of turn. If target creature is put into a graveyard from play this turn, put a 2/2 Black Zombie creature into play under your control.

Card name: Heaven's Wrath
Casting Cost: 3W
Rarity: Rare
Spell Type: Instant
Card text: Destroy target land, that lands controller may gain 3 life. If Heaven's Wrath is counter by a spell or ability, destroy all basic lands.

Card Name: Spiritual Enlightenment
Casting Cost: 2U
Rarity: Rare
Spell Type: Sorcery
Card text: Target player adds UUUUU to their mana pool and skips their next turn. If ~this~ is countered by a spell or ability, Spiritual Enlightenment's controller draws 2 cards, then discards one.
 
Top