Volcanic Behemoth
Custom Cards forum
Posted on Oct. 9, 2019, 3:37 p.m. by Benthehen333
Custom card I designed today:
What do you guys think of it? Is is too overpowered, or underpowered? Suggestions to improve it? I think it's a pretty cool card, and might make a cycle of them, one for each color.
EDIT: I revamped the design and made it slightly different, and less clunky.
EDIT 2: I took suggestions into consideration and got rid of the untap ability, and replaced it with something more red-appropriate.
Being able to create links and images isn't enabled by default. You'd have to talk to one of our Mods to get permission.
October 9, 2019 3:41 p.m.
Benthehen333 says... #5
Thanks guys, I didn't know that! I was just confused because the preview contained the image, but it didn't transfer over to the actual thing.
October 9, 2019 3:46 p.m.
As for the card itself, I have a couple issues with it.
My biggest issue is the ability to untap lands. Even though it is limited to mountains, that's a fairly firmly Blue, not Red ability. It also feels a bit clunky--you have a cost reduction ability, followed by something that is effectively a second cost reduction ability.
I would also decrease the P/T on the card - that mountain ability is what you want, and is where the card shines. A 9/7 without any combat keywords is a bit awkward, and means you are going to overpay for the ability you actually want to use. 5/4 allows this to survive Lightning Bolt while also keeping in-line with your more aggressive goals.
So, assuming we dump the untap ability and reduce it to a 5/4, I think , with a cost reduction of seems quite reasonable. That's a very similar effect to what you initially had--both versions leave you with the creature and 3 untapped lands--but I think this version seems a bit more in-line with what Red does.
October 9, 2019 4:16 p.m.
Caerwyn 4 mana for this ability is completely unreasonable under any circumstances. The guy is a living Koth emblem. He has to be pretty high in mana cost. Likewise the untap ability guarantees you'll get SOME use out of him before he's shot down by a rogue kill spell. There's really nothing wrong with the card.
October 9, 2019 5:09 p.m.
Falcoshin - There are two rather glaring issues with your response, that somewhat indicate you did not actually think through how the two different rules texts would play in effect.
Let's start with your statement that 4 mana is too low for this kind of card. First, you would only be able to cast for 4 if you already controlled 7 lands--no easy feat in a lot of formats. Further, the card you said is fine as-is? That's also effectively a 4 mana spell, so you kind of contradict yourself.
Under my proposal, upon resolution you are left with 7 mountains (4 tapped; 3 untapped) and a 5/4.
Under the initial proposal, you're left with... 7 mountains (all of which are tapped, but, upon resolution of the ETB, will turn into 4 tapped; 3 untapped) and a 9/7.
So, that card that you said was "too powerful"? The end result is the same boardstate with a weaker creature.
Your second argument is also flawed, and actually makes it more susceptible to a rogue kill spell. All your opponent would have to do is fire off a kill spell while the untap ability is on the stack. Your creature dies, your lands untap, but now you can't get some use out of them because the elemental is gone.
That's not a problem with my formatting of the card - your creature resolves, your lands are already untapped since you did not have to tap them for mana, and you now have priority and can start to ping with your lands.
Plus, again, the original card ignores the colour pie, which is a pretty large issue.
October 9, 2019 5:55 p.m. Edited.
"Let's start with your statement that 4 mana is too low for this kind of card. First, you would only be able to cast for 4 if you already controlled 7 lands--no easy feat in a lot of formats. Further, the card you said is fine as-is? That's also effectively a 4 mana spell, so you kind of contradict yourself."
Because it sounded like you were saying it should be castable on turn 4.
"Your second argument is also flawed, and actually makes it more susceptible to a rogue kill spell. All your opponent would have to do is fire off a kill spell while the untap ability is on the stack. Your creature dies, your lands untap, but now you can't get some use out of them because the elemental is gone."
You still get the triggers. That's the point.
October 9, 2019 6:01 p.m.
Caerwyn did falcoshin delete one of his comments? cuz it seems like you're otherwise responding to a lot of stuff he didn't actually say. i dont see him mentioning anything to be "too powerful" anywhere.
October 9, 2019 6:04 p.m.
as for the card itself, i'd say its drastically underpowered. the mana cost alone prevents it from being modern playable. the type of shell it would require is the same shell that Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle decks are based on, but those decks wouldn't want to take anything out for this. on the turn you could play this creature, it'd just be a lot better to play Primeval Titan instead, or go for a Scapeshift and just win immediately.
October 9, 2019 6:09 p.m.
Ah, I see you misread my first post. No worries, it happens. Glad you got that cleared up. Then, I think you can probably agree that the four mana effective cost, with a seven land requirement, is a good place for this card to be.
Though, I’m still confused as to how the original proposal makes it less susceptible to a kill spell. If your Elemental is hit with a kill spell while the untap ability is on the stack, you will not be able to ping with your mountains. Keeping the untap triggered ability literally does the exact opposite of what you want, and creates the very problem you were purporting to solve.
Conversely if those lands are already untapped when it ETBs, you can fire them off before your opponent has a chance to kill your creature.
October 9, 2019 6:10 p.m.
Benthehen333 says... #15
Personally, I think the card itself is very balanced. If it was a lower CMC, it would be overpowered, and even with the P/T lowering it would still be way too good with a lower CMC.
October 9, 2019 7:12 p.m.
Benthehen333 says... #18
Liliana69Chandra - Most likely Commander, which tends to contain higher CMC cards. I just thought that 7 mana would be too easy for such a powerful creature, and there's plenty of decks in commander still capable of ramping it out.
October 10, 2019 11:29 a.m.
Benthehen333 says... #19
Hey should I make a cycle of these, one for each color? I think it would be cool.
October 10, 2019 11:33 a.m.
chandra69liliana says... #21
competitive commander decks are capable of winning turn 4 or earlier though
October 10, 2019 11:51 a.m.
Benthehen333 says... #22
chandra69liliana - Then this obviously won't be a card in cEDH, but in casual play and normal EDH, where people actually play for fun instead of combo-ing off on turn 4, it would be very powerful.
October 10, 2019 12:03 p.m.
Think of it this way--worst case scenario, this card effectively costs 6 mana as it is--you've offset the 9 mana cost by having it untap three lands. Just cut out the out-of-colour ability and reduce the cost--you get the same basic result, but without any problematic design choices.
The actual CMC rarely matters--what matters is how casting it uses your resources.
October 10, 2019 12:17 p.m.
sliver420x says... #26
Caerwyn: i don't understand how people can look at an effect like this and say "it effectively costs...". 9 mana to cast is 9 mana to cast regardless of how many lands it untaps upon entering. to me, something that "effectively costs 6" is something that can actually be cast with 6 lands. this card "effectively costs" 9, but refunds 3 mana. thats not the same as "costing 6". and the cmc definitely matters. after a certain point, a high cmc just makes cards unplayable in certain formats. the only way to reliably get those cards into play is to "cheat" them into play with things like Through the Breach , and at that point they're competing directly against Emrakul, the Aeons Torn and other eldrazi titans, and possibly Griselbrand
October 10, 2019 12:29 p.m.
Benthehen333 says... #27
Caerwyn - Check out the card at the very top. I dumped the untap ability, but I added a damage ability in its place, to keep the cost of it reasonable. I think 6 mana for these two abilities is very powerful, while still requiring you to have seven Mountains and 9 mana total.
October 10, 2019 12:32 p.m.
Benthehen333 says... #28
sliver420x - I see your point, but reducing the cost of this creature by even one or two mana would make it extremely overpowered, and I designed it to be narrow on purpose, so that not every deck in the universe could run it. You still need 7 mountains and 9 mana to cast it, even if it does give 3 back. I didn't design it to be a turn-3, game-winning play, even though cheating it into play gives you a massive advantage.
Benthehen333 says... #2
where's the image.
October 9, 2019 3:38 p.m.