What should be the mana cost of this card? And would you play it in commander?
Custom Cards forum
Posted on Nov. 18, 2014, 10:24 a.m. by MagicalHacker
Wish Granting of the Djinn ???
Enchantment
At the beginning of each opponent's end step, search their library for a permanent card and put it onto battlefield under their control.
At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice ~.
MagicalHacker says... #3
Why does it need that? You're already not getting any permanents on your field.
November 18, 2014 10:34 a.m.
insertcleverid says... #4
I'm going to assume you mean to put it onto the battlefield under your control,
In which case It should be 2UUUBBB
I think the rules should be:
"Skip your Draw Phase. At the beginning of each opponent's end step, you may search his or her library for a creature, enchantment, artifact or land and put it into play under your control. Each player who's library is searched this way must shuffle it. If you do, sacrifice a permanent of the same type under your control at the beginning of your next upkeep."
That way its less of a 'I win' card, and requires some synergy to make it viable
Great idea, btw! I would definitely play that.
If you want to put it on a stick, I would call it "Covetous Dijnn" Flying 3/4
November 18, 2014 10:46 a.m.
MindAblaze says... #5
I like your idea here. It's not completely out of the realm of what has been done (giving opponents permanents,) but it's unique enough that it generates a different line of thinking.
As far as mana cost, I like the color scheme that rorofat chose, but I might argue that giving somebody a permanent doesn't have a very black feel to it. I see the planning and deception that comes with it though, so 
does feel ok. I'd hazard to say 
would be ok though. 6 mana is a lot for a card that doesn't do much for you on it's own.
November 18, 2014 10:49 a.m.
Or this could be a hilarious Group Hug card, if you wanted to. Something like a 4/4 flyer with hexproof for 
, but if that was the case, I'd recommend removing the sacrifice clause, simply so that it would be repeatable.
November 18, 2014 11:11 a.m.
I thought that the would add sort of a search library feel that blue lacks... Just my 2 cents! And if it was 'put it under an OPPONENT's control' then I would recommend something with a mana cost around 5 or so. That could get nasty with Dictate of Erebos. Fetch their creature, then sac one of yours to kill theirs... Nasty.
November 18, 2014 11:21 a.m.
julianjmoss says... #8
It feels very zedruu so I would make it like 4UWR at the beginning of each players end step that player searches their deck for X and puts it into play. Since it isn't black you could have players reveal the top X and put a card into play which fits the cord a little more
November 18, 2014 12:02 p.m.
MagicalHacker says... #10
So the idea behind this card is to look through each opponents decks and give them cards to either politically keep you safe or to take advantage of opponents that are playing cards that can be bad for them. The sacrifice clause is to prevent this from eating up lots of time in a game and also to make it cost less. I was envisioning 4-5 mana, and because it's only giving permanents to opponents, I don't think it's too powerful for a six drop or higher. The mana cost I anticipated was 
.
The reason I don't think it could be less mana is because of how much time it already does take. Keep in mind that you can fail to find each time.
November 18, 2014 12:31 p.m.
Teysaforever says... #11
This screams 5UU. Its effect is a better Bribery. It is also very similar to a Blatant Thievery. It will always hit unless you are up against on of the weirdest deck builders ever. it can be stopped, so you can justify having it be the same cost as Blatant Thievery. It is also not pseudo remove , as it will not alter your opponents boards in any way. In one vs one it is not the most busted thing ever. In multiplayer, You have more foes to stop it. I would play it in commander.
November 18, 2014 1:11 p.m.
Teysaforever says... #12
Scratch everything I said. It should be 3U. It will do nothing unless you win with it, but the combos make it so you do not want it too early.
November 18, 2014 1:14 p.m.
Teysaforever says... #13
I like the idea. It is very YOU DID THIS TO YOURSELF ie. Massive props.
November 18, 2014 1:16 p.m.
lothshteth says... #14
This is extremely ridiculous! You could make this thing 
, and it would be perfectly fine. It all depends on how you would abuse it. So without thinking of some ridiculous combos off the top of my head, I would say .
November 20, 2014 5:52 p.m.
OP_Magikarp says... #15
I'd say any combination that equals 8. YOU'RE GETTING RID OF THE BEST CARDS OUT OF THEIR WITHOUT THEM DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
November 20, 2014 10:07 p.m.
MagicalHacker says... #16
Well, you're not really getting rid of it since you put it in their battlefield...
November 21, 2014 7:11 a.m.
insertcleverid says... #17
Right. It was the sac line that made me think they were coming into play under your control. What are you saccing?
rorofat says... #2
I would play it, and I would think something like
And at the beginning of each player's upkeep, sacrifice a permanent.
November 18, 2014 10:29 a.m.