Then, you throw all that out, change a plus (+) to a minus (-), "push equipment", lower the cost and you have Skullclamp.Welcome to WotC, please leave your integrity about following a process at the door.
Creator of the Multiverse database for custom sets, the Magic Turing machine (proving Magic Turing-complete) and the random Magic card generator.
Instead of WotCs overall strategy to estimate the rarity by effectiveness - which can result in overpowered mythic rares - I categorize cards by game impact or game-shifting capabilities.
"We also tend to scale creature size based on rarity." - That's not an issue for me. A vanilla 9/9 only has an impact, if your opponent can't block it and even then it's dependant on how much lifepoints your opponent has and/or how easy it is to prevent the loss of life.
"two-for-one the opponent by destroying something while also providing you with a resource" - It's especially about 'enters the battlefield' effects. I won't have a problem with a creature that kills another creature when it comes into play. A spell hat let's your opponent discard two cards; a bounce effect that returns multiple creatures or a search spell that finds two land cards could be all common in my opinion. As usual, it depends on the fact whether or not your opponent can handle this easily. Even a kill spell that destroys two creatures could be common (see Ashes to Ashes), if it's situational or more restricted instead.
I greatly enjoyed this article. I find it a great shame that this is only a yearly series.I'd also be interested in a series that is about what article 1 said the series would be about - the nitty gritty that we haven't hear about. Maybe this could be twice-yearly, with an article aimed at amateur designers in February and an article following the idea of the original 'nuts & bolts' in August/September.I'd just like to reiterate how useful this article was to me. I'm starting work on a board game and though it's not much like MtG, there's a lot of cross-transferrable info in this article. I'll be referring back to it a few times, I'm sure.Just in case you, Maro, aren't sure whether this is worth continuing, I would honestly state that this and State of Design are regularly my 2 favourites of the year. I notice a lack of responses on this forum but I imagine that's simply because there's nothing to dispute - not because people aren't reading and finding this useful.