Community

A long time ago, I was drawn to the Magic boards by the YMtC forum. Now, three years later, I frequent several different forums here, but every once in a while I get the urge to return to my roots and I go on a card-designing rampage. With summer fast approaching, along with the prospect of oodles of free time, I'm hoping to design a lot of cards and (hopefully) become a better designer by getting feedback from all of you. I'll start with 2 cards, the first of which I think is simple but elegant, and the second is a bit more interesting.

Mischievous Pixies
Creature - Faerie
Flying
Sacrifice Mischievous Pixies: Until end of turn, permanents come into play tapped.
1/1

Destructive Artificer
Artifact Creature - Mech
, : Put a colorless Bomb artifact token into play.
, Sacrifice a Bomb: Destructive Artificer deals 3 damage to target creature or player.
1/1

i like the first one.

compare the second one to aladdin's ring to see how far off the costing is.

Lord Cyrus wrote:

I think I remember you.

I think I was in one of your contests. Or maybe yours was the one I helped judge... *shrug*

Conall wrote:

This needs in one of its costs, probably the last one.

I think this would be fine if the bomb did 2 damage, like a Seal of Fire or Pyrite Spellbomb variant or you could keep it as three if the second activated ability also had a in the mana cost.

The card's original design required you to tap for both abilities, but I wasn't sure if 3 damage every other turn was too weak. Thinking about it again now, I think you're right and I should have kept it as is. I'll update it.
As for the lack of in the cost, I want the flavor of the card to be that it is a machine operating another machine without the use of magic. The use of colored mana, to me, implies a use of red magic to power the machine. This is actually only one card in a cycle. Perhaps I will post the others as the next cards here.

EDIT: Changed it slightly, so the first ability costs 1 more and the second ability has no mana cost. I think this is more flavorful, and allows for slightly better synergy with cards like Magewright's Stone .

Here are two cards that stemmed from the same concept, but turned into almost exact opposites. I'm not entirely sure on the wording, so some help there would be appreciated. I finally decided to learn how to put card images on here, so there are pictures to go along with them. :D



Aleatory
Enchantment
If a spell or ability would affect a permanent without targetting it, that spell or ability affects a random permanent it can affect instead.



Astaroth's Binding
Enchantment
All noncreature spells have "As an additional cost to play this spell, choose target creature."

Libe wrote:

@Astaroth's Binding: Works fine with instants and sorceries, to my knowledge, but not with creatures, artifacts and enchantments. Why not "Spells have 'As an additional cost to play this, choose target creature'"?

That makes sense. I will update the wording.

Heck, why not just keep it simple and have it say "If there are no creatures in play, players can't play spells." It's functionally identical as far as I can tell, barring creatures with shroud.

You answered your own question. I want it to have interactions with shroud creatures, or things like Kira, Great Glass-Spinner . I think it would make for more creative deck building.

Though I'd only have it work on noncreatures, since otherwise a wrath completely locks the game.

Oops. Good call.