|
4 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 11:36AM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Dec 31, 2012
|
The set symbol looks terrible as mythic. I got a picture of a palm tree online and edited it in MSE. I was going for Mirage 2.0, though it looks like my theme has completely changed by now.
And how exactly would I change the effect without changing the functionality of the card. I'm terrible at this whole rulings thing.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 11:37AM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Mar 23, 2006
|
Wouldn't they have to exchange it for nothing if they played it on turn 1? "And up to one target land..."
just don't word it as an exchange and you'll be fine. "When ~ enters the battlefield, target opponent gains control of it. If they do, you gain control of up to one target land that player controls."
you might also want an EtB tapped clause.
120.6. Some effects replace card draws.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 12:44PM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Oct 12, 2010
|
If you're going to make the Gilded Drake  of lands, it needs the clause: "If you don't make an exchange, sacrifice Dragonscrag Outpost. This ability can't be countered except by spells and abilities." Otherwise, if you play this turn one on the play, you keep it. Unless that was what you wanted. As for the card, I don't think there are enough broken lands to make this good outside of Vintage, and there only as hate for dredge. The idea is nice, though. Maybe if it tapped for two colorless instead, so you could use it to color-screw people.
EDH would use it for Gaea's Cradle  , Serra's Sanctum  , and the like.
Zedruu the Greathearted  might use it.
Clever deduction Watson! Maybe you can explain why Supergirl is trying to kill me.
----
Autocard is your friend.
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] = Lightning Bolt 
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 1:39PM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Dec 31, 2012
|
Wouldn't they have to exchange it for nothing if they played it on turn 1? "And up to one target land..."
just don't word it as an exchange and you'll be fine. "When ~ enters the battlefield, target opponent gains control of it. If they do, you gain control of up to one target land that player controls."
you might also want an EtB tapped clause.
I updated it. Now it looks like the following:
What does everybody think of the Land - Haunted idea? Does it sound like people would actually use the cards against others, or would it make this specific land too key?
Also does this sound like a Common, Uncommon, Rare, or Mythic? To me, it feels a Uncommon/Rare (depending on space issues).
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 1:43PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Nov 15, 2012
|
Rare in a set that already has 10 duel land commons
TLDR
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 4:41PM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Dec 12, 2008
|
This seems... really bad. I'm trying to imagine why I would play this and nothing is springing to mind. I don't know, maybe if I could grab one of the bouncelands from the original Ravnica? It would require a pretty specific format though.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 6:00PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Dec 31, 2012
|
What do you think of ravnica bouncelands at common as a reprint? (Obviously in a non-ravnica-related set, instead in a lands matter set). That would allow ETB effects of lands to be more important, and would provide a major "WOOO, HERE ARE SOME UBER LANDS IN EVERY PACK" type message to anybody who wants a pack 
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 8:05PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Dec 12, 2008
|
That might work. I mean, I don't know a whole lot about limited so I'm not sure it would do what you want it to... but yeah, they would fit well in a lands matter set, and they would interact effectively with this card.
I just don't know that it would see play outside of that. Maybe constructed if the bouncelands were particularly prominent there for some reason.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 9:26PM
#19
|
Date Joined:
Dec 31, 2012
|
That might work. I mean, I don't know a whole lot about limited so I'm not sure it would do what you want it to... but yeah, they would fit well in a lands matter set, and they would interact effectively with this card.
I just don't know that it would see play outside of that. Maybe constructed if the bouncelands were particularly prominent there for some reason.
Bouncelands are always particularly prominent, are they not?
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 10:48PM
#20
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2010
|
That might work. I mean, I don't know a whole lot about limited so I'm not sure it would do what you want it to... but yeah, they would fit well in a lands matter set, and they would interact effectively with this card.
I just don't know that it would see play outside of that. Maybe constructed if the bouncelands were particularly prominent there for some reason.
Bouncelands are always particularly prominent, are they not?
Definately not in standard (but I guess that could change if you print some more). I'm pretty sure the only place they see play is edh where the speed isn't a huge factor. In modern and legacy they are far too slow to see much play.
|
|
|
