A proactive plan for reactive decks

39 posts / 0 new
Last post
Futility
Enchantment

At end of turn, if it isn't your turn and the active player resolved no spells, put a Tranquil counter on Futility.
If there are four or more Tranquil counters on Futility, you win the game.
Tranquil counters cannot be proliferated.

When confronting a blue archmage, one does not go through all five stages of grief.
I like this a lot. I'm curious if you thought about making it 'cast a spell' rather than resolve one? Otherwise, seems like a fun alt win con in the right deck, although it could be a pretty unhappy time for your opponent.
I like this a lot. I'm curious if you thought about making it 'cast a spell' rather than resolve one? Otherwise, seems like a fun alt win con in the right deck, although it could be a pretty unhappy time for your opponent.



They can cast as many spells as they want. I'll still be countering or exiling them on the stack. Which was pretty much the point of the card.
Might be too good in a control mirror when the opponent is drawing lands or counter spells and removal with no targets
Might be too good in a control mirror when the opponent is drawing lands or counter spells and removal with no targets



Too good? It's a four turn clock. At least. Which you drop on turn 3.
Gilder Bairn
All it takes is one counter...

A typical   trying to get somewhere in the Multiverse, allons-y?

DOCTOR WHO OOOOOOOOEEOOOOOOOO OOOOOOEEOOOOOOO (I'm weird, cant help it)

Famous Quotes:

144543765 wrote:
I was browsing through some cards in gatherer and I noticed something really odd - the transforming cards from Innistrad like Mayor of Avabruck have separate comments and ratings for each side. Isn't that totally stupid? It feels as senseless as having two different pages for each side of a split card or having different pages for Nimble Mongoose with and without threshold.

56965528 wrote:
*mutters under his breath* Squinty's Wife: "What was that!?!?" Umm, I said.... umm..... ahhh.... *another smack upside the head* Squinty's Wife: "Care to try again?" *shakes head vigerously* Squinty's Wife: "That's better." ~SE++ *whimpering*

Current deck goals:

NON-AGGRO, NON-MONO RED deck (Not getting very far with it though)

Standard mono red deck for FNM next Friday

3 turn clocks don't cost 3, they need to cost 5.
Also this card is monoblue.
Also this card is monoblue.

I don't know. There's no mechanical precedent so the natural reaction is to put it in blue like everything else, but with good flavor this would be cool in white or something.

Barren Glory, etc.

http://nogoblinsallowed.com/

Blue is the only color mechanically that can stop them from casting spells, but it could certainly be mono white as well I guesss. Cause stuff like silence and the white angel quest thing.
Yeah, I was thinking of silence, but discard can do it too (or LD, actually).

I actually like the nonblue version more. Caring about spells resolving rather than being cast is pretty heavy-handed (and overpowered).

http://nogoblinsallowed.com/

You should probably not even say resolve, just cast. It seems like one of those things wizards will never reference like the stack.
Real men hold shift. If everyone has their fingers in the pie, then someone is eating fingers.
BOOM CHAOS>
Real men hold shift. If everyone has their fingers in the pie, then someone is eating fingers.
The stack is referneced in keywords too. They don't count.
The stack is referneced in keywords too. They don't count.

All cards I make have artists credited in the appropriate places. Artist names in "quotes" are DeviantArt usernames unless otherwise mentioned.

"I play a Grave Betrayal. I get all your dead things now, mwahahahaha!"
"Okay. I play a Phage the Untouchable. Piss me off and I will sac it."
"... ... ... so guys, remind me again how to sac my own enchantments?"

Why don't those cards just say "if this is the third time you've activated this ability this turn," anyway?

http://nogoblinsallowed.com/

Not a spell, its a rare and a legend, and not the same at all.
In my opinion, this card needs one or more of the following to be even remotely balanced:

- An increase in the mana cost and/or the number of turns required to trigger the victory condition. 

- A requirement for some kind of action/investment/set-up on the part of its controller. If you want to reward the player for countering spells, then make it trigger off countering spells. If you want to reward land or hand destruction, make it trigget on dying lands and discarded cards. A win condition that can go off by the virtue of one's opponent getting mana flooded is not "proactive" by any reasonable stretch.

-  A way to set it back. If I'm at 49 life with a Test of Endurance on the table, or if I've got Azor's Elocutors filibustering away, you can fling some damage my way and negate some of my progress. If I have a bunch of creatures and an Epic Struggle (or just three Biovisionaries), you can kill off some of them. Futility's progress is a one-way track; once a turn has passed with no resolved spells, there's no way to turn it back. Yes, Helix Pinnacle and Darksteel Reactor work that way as well, but those two are glacially slowly for exactly that reason.

(Alternatively, you could keep the card as it is, and simply replace "you win the game" with "sacrifice Futility and draw five cards")
From nothing came teeth.
-  A way to set it back. If I'm at 49 life with a Test of Endurance on the table, or if I've got Azor's Elocutors filibustering away, you can fling some damage my way and negate some of my progress. If I have a bunch of creatures and an Epic Struggle (or just three Biovisionaries), you can kill off some of them. Futility's progress is a one-way track; once a turn has passed with no resolved spells, there's no way to turn it back. Yes, Helix Pinnacle and Darksteel Reactor work that way as well, but those two are glacially slowly for exactly that reason.


You could say it's futile.
If your opponents went a full 4 turns without resolving anything, they deserve to lose.

The three color cost represents the three ways in which they're prevented: counters, discard and silence-like effects.

It's a card meant for Canonist-Isochron lockdown, mainly.
Seems more like a card intended to hose reactive decks than benefit them.

Yxoque wrote:
This forum can't even ****ing self-destruct properly.

IMAGE(http://img.pokemondb.net/sprites/black-white/anim/normal/plusle.gif)

If your opponents went a full 4 turns without resolving anything, they deserve to lose.


Well, I disagree with that notion. Not resolving anything for 4 turns throughout the entirety of the game is very common even in a normal match without countermagic/disruption (the most common cause being topdecking lands to a spell-less hand later in the game).

And if it's meant to be three-color, why does the flavor text explicitly reference blue archmages? 

Anyway, there are a couple more ways to make it more balanced: put it on legs or make it symmetrical. Or both!

Lawmage of Thermodynamics -
Creature - Elemental Wizard
At end of each player's turns, if he or she did not resolve spells this turn, he or she gains three poison counters.
"TL;DR:  Entropy wins."
0/2
From nothing came teeth.

And if it's meant to be three-color, why does the flavor text explicitly reference blue archmages?



Esper mages are blue mages.

Anyway, there are a couple more ways to make it more balanced: put it on legs or make it symmetrical. Or both!

Lawmage of Thermodynamics -
Creature - Elemental Wizard
At end of each player's turns, if he or she did not resolve spells this turn, he or she gains three poison counters.
"TL;DR:  Entropy wins."
0/2



That is better than my card. If it's "on legs", that only matters if they resolve a removal. Resolve a removal, you know? It's also not redundant if you draw multiples, unlike mine.

@Mown: It is both good IN and AGAINST reactive decks.
@Mown: It is both good IN and AGAINST reactive decks.


It strikes me as much better in proactive decks though.

Like "Jokulhaups, go."

Yxoque wrote:
This forum can't even ****ing self-destruct properly.

IMAGE(http://img.pokemondb.net/sprites/black-white/anim/normal/plusle.gif)

So what does Jokulhaups do for you, specifically?


The card is also easy to sideboard against. I mean, Boseiju, Caverns, Wear // Tear, gl? 
what do you think the existence of this card would contribute to Magic?

or, put another way: Imagine the effects the existence of this card would have on Magic. 
So what does Jokulhaups do for you, specifically?


Destroy all artifacts, creatures and lands?

Yxoque wrote:
This forum can't even ****ing self-destruct properly.

IMAGE(http://img.pokemondb.net/sprites/black-white/anim/normal/plusle.gif)

I think its UB. The W is sort of random. B because it works with discard, U because it works with counterspells. White... what are they going to do, Meddling Mage everything in your hand? 
White has counterspells and silence effects. It also encourages running blue or black without requiring that mana, leaving you more open to actually do things the turn you cast it, it makes it more elegant and etc.
I think its UB. The W is sort of random. B because it works with discard, U because it works with counterspells. White... what are they going to do, Meddling Mage everything in your hand? 

It works with land destruction too but it'd make no sense in red. Warped Devotion is black, not blue, because it has a black effect. This card isn't so obvious but it's the same kind of thing.

http://nogoblinsallowed.com/

White has counterspells and silence effects. It also encourages running blue or black without requiring that mana, leaving you more open to actually do things the turn you cast it, it makes it more elegant and etc.



But that's the thing. It should be color intensive and not let you do things the turn you cast it to be balanced.
Well it still shouldn't cost three, nor exist, and isn't a three color card.
Why don't those cards just say "if this is the third time you've activated this ability this turn," anyway?


since no one answered this, it's so you can't activate it twice, get the counters, then activate it a third time and, in response, activate it a bunch more times to get more counters. of course, this only matters for ashling. the other two, inner-flame igniter and litebrite flamekin, don't care about the order, but in order to make ashling work and keep the wording consistent, they all got resolve. plus I guess they can remove things in response to soulbright's ability to make it fizzle, stopping you from getting mana. 

 

120.6. Some effects replace card draws.

 

why are you here when NGA exists and is just better

This is beside the point, but wouldn't making the ability fizzle work to stop you from getting the mana even if was about activation, since it's an effect embedded in the ability and not a separate triggered ability?
That's how I see it.

As for the card in question, I agree with Eph on it being more interesting to let the card gain and lose counters. Your goal with the card is to set up some series of plays where you stop everything the opposition is doing for some short span of time, and I think their being rewarded for sneaking through the wall just adds to the card.

"At the beginning of each player's end step, if that player resolved a spell this turn, remove a tranquil counter from Futility. Otherwise, put a tranquil counter on Futility.
When five or more tranquil counters are on Futility, you win the game."

I also like Eph's idea about changing it from a direct win card to something that is good enough to win. Something like:

Repurposed Intellect
Enchantment
Whenever you counter a spell, exile it. Then if three or more cards are exiled by Repurposed Intellect, sacrifice it. If you do, cast each of those cards without paying its casting cost.
"Such clever ideas need not be wasted by such simple minds."
-  Volrath
That is better than my card. If it's "on legs", that only matters if they resolve a removal. Resolve a removal, you know? It's also not redundant if you draw multiples, unlike mine.

@Mown: It is both good IN and AGAINST reactive decks.

But it being on legs makes them more likely to resolve a removal spell because it is a target for those removal spells, whereas an enchantment version makes Dreadbore uncastable.

I also think an Azor's Elocutors-like clause is necessary here. 
Sign In to post comments