Community

Oct 8, 2012 -- 6:49AM, ReaderAt2046 wrote:

I would like to say that I do not want a big massive flame war, and I don't think anyone else does. However, this set, and particularly the "evolve" keyword, come within an inch of starting such a war. Please bear that in mind.  

If someone chooses to start a flamewar due to their hatred of pokemon, they can feel free to get themselves banned.
Fortunately the only person who would do such a thing on this forum... just got himself banned. And then came back as a sockpuppet. Which got banned. So if he decides to return again, I'm sure he'll do just fine at getting banned.


 
Questions: 1) @dudibus: why is carnivore worded the way it is? I mean, as it's worded it doesn't work (you need to reveal a card in your hand before you can use an ability on it), and even if it did it would allow you to randomly sacrifice a creature, then do nothing. Why not just sacrifice as an alternative cost? 

2) @Lancerrex8: Are you sure you want to split dinosaurs up into seperate types? If you do, dinosaur tribal will forever remain essentially impossible (there won't be enough of any single type of dinosaur to make a good tribal deck) whereas if you don't split them dinosaur tribal could work well after this block.
However, the reproduce mechanic would work best if based on type, and that would probably require the types to be split (otherwise you get raptors mating with t-rex's) 

Oct 8, 2012 -- 8:09AM, ReaderAt2046 wrote:

I'm confused. Who are you saying would be getting banned? And I would like it noted that I'm trying to prevent a flamewar by noting a line of discussion that must be watched, or someone is going to seriously insult someone else.

I'm saying that if someone started a flamewar, they would get banned. In Other Words: The person causing the flamewar would get banned.

And please, don't try and explain why you think this might start a flamewar, because by doing so you might start a flamewar, which would result in you getting banned.
Just accept that magic is a fantasy multiverse, with plenty of room for everything. 


Now, some card ideas:

Venomous Meganeura
Creature - Insect (uncommon)
Flying, Deathtouch
2/3

Giant Bear
Creature - Bear (common)
4/4

Imperiosaur  :p

Oct 8, 2012 -- 7:10AM, Kingreaper wrote:

Oct 8, 2012 -- 6:49AM, ReaderAt2046 wrote:

I would like to say that I do not want a big massive flame war, and I don't think anyone else does. However, this set, and particularly the "evolve" keyword, come within an inch of starting such a war. Please bear that in mind.  

If someone chooses to start a flamewar due to their hatred of pokemon, they can feel free to get themselves banned.
Fortunately the only person who would do such a thing on this forum... just got himself banned. And then came back as a sockpuppet. Which got banned. So if he decides to return again, I'm sure he'll do just fine at getting banned.


 
Questions: 1) @dudibus: why is carnivore worded the way it is? I mean, as it's worded it doesn't work (you need to reveal a card in your hand before you can use an ability on it), and even if it did it would allow you to randomly sacrifice a creature, then do nothing. Why not just sacrifice as an alternative cost? 

2) @Lancerrex8: Are you sure you want to split dinosaurs up into seperate types? If you do, dinosaur tribal will forever remain essentially impossible (there won't be enough of any single type of dinosaur to make a good tribal deck) whereas if you don't split them dinosaur tribal could work well after this block.
However, the reproduce mechanic would work best if based on type, and that would probably require the types to be split (otherwise you get raptors mating with t-rex's) 

I was not aware you had to reveal a card before you could use an ability on that card.  Wouldn't it work like Flash?  The point of the ability was for you to sacrfice a creature (not just any creature, I put the 'must cost one less' ability to make it less powerful, and to try to follow the idea of a Food Chain .  Maybe it would be better to say something like "Sacrifice a creature to reduce the cost of this creatures casting cost by the casting cost of the sacrificed creature?".  What do you think would be a better wording?

As much as I would like to comment on Evolution, I am now worried that I might get banned if I attempt any clarification.  Feel free to PM about what I was going for if you are interested in intellectual conversation on the subject.

That being said, my ideas were rough ones I worked on for a bit that do not necessarily reflect any personal feelings.  I am not surprised there might be issues with some of the wording.  I can send anyone that wants it the MSE file, there is 74 cards (not all have images), or I can post a bunch more here.