Key word discussion
Custom Cards forum
Posted on May 13, 2010, 3:53 p.m. by Xander574
We need to get this done diffinitivly i think. Once we get a defined balanced group of say 10-15 different keywords we can post a voting htread to the tapped out community at large here are what we had when tama posted the last thread Keywords for the supposed set are as stands (so far):
Convoke: (Each creature you tap while casting this spell reduces its cost by or by 1 mana of that creature's color.)
Poisonous X: (Whenever CARDNAME deals combat damage to a player, that player gets X poison counters. A player with ten or more poison counters loses the game.)
Wither: (It deals damage to creatures in the form of -1/-1 counters.)
Flow (cost): (Whenever you would draw a card you may instead reveal the top card of your library. If you do, you may cast it for its flow cost and then draw a card, otherwise draw a card.)
Render: (Each life you pay while casting this spell reduces its cost by 1.)
Revenge X: (At the end step of each turn, is this creature was in combat this turn, it deals X damage to the creature/s it was in combat with.)
Infection: (If a creature dealt damage by CARDNAME this turn was put into a graveyard, put that card onto the battlefield under your control at the beginning of the end step.)
Precision: (Damage dealt by CARDNAME cannot be prevented.)
Impervious: (Prevent all damage that would be dealt to this creature.)
Clamp: (This creature's power and toughness are each equal to their printed value and cannot be changed.
Bloodletting/Cleave: (Damage dealt by this creature to other creatures also causes those creature's controllers to lose that much life.)
Meld (When you cast this spell, you may cast a spell from your hand that costs less without paying its mana cost.)
Infection should be changed to one of these options in my opinion.
Infection: Creature does damage in -1/-1 infection counters. If a creature would be put into a graveyard by infection counters put it into play under your control.
and/or
infection: Creature does damage in -1/-1 infection counters. If a creature with a -1/-1 infection counter would be put into a graveyard from play, put it under your control instead.
Impervious just seems like a poor man's Indestructible. Negative counters aren't damage and will still remove it, so will exile removal or bounce; same as indestructible. Only difference is that Impervious things can be whacked by Destroy effects. It doesn't seem worth it to use over Indestructible, but that's just me. Anyone else?
May 14, 2010 2:13 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #4
Here are my thoughts:
Convoke: Someone else (don't remember who) expressed that they see convoke as a "win more" ability. I tend to agree. The only Wizards cards with convoke that I've ever used have been Devouring Light , Scatter the Seeds , and Sprout Swarm , all of which have appeal to me because they aren't ridiculously expensive and are instants. I just don't think it's that fun of an ability. I vote against using convoke in our set.
Poisonous: I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only one who finds appeal in poison. It seems to fit in well with our shards, possibly being in Avora (GBU) or Irindu (URG). I vote for using poisonous in our set.
Wither: Another mechanic that seems to fit well with our shards. It's relatively simplistic, but a lot of neat tricks can be done with it. I vote for using wither in our set.
Flow: As of now, I'm on the fence with this one. Mechanically, I think it could use some work. Its main problem is that you have to already know whether or not the top card of your library has flow, since you are activating the flow cost instead of drawing the card. Basically, you're activating an ability from a hidden zone. I keep thinking to myself, "if only we could word it more like kinship, it could work. Unfortunately, kinship requires a permanent on the board. It's the permanent that has the ability, not the card on top of the library. I think the best wording might be: "Flow
Render: I think this ability has the potential to be too overpowered. It could work if used only with spells with lower casting costs (see Rouse and Snuff Out . However, I'd almost prefer that you instead HAVE to pay life (like Withering Boon . That way, you get an advantage early game by having cheaper spells that cost you life, but are at a disadvantage late game when you suddenly can't play your own spells because they will kill you. Currently though, I vote against using render in our set.
May 14, 2010 2:50 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #5
Revenge: I like how this is kind of similar to double strike, but that it gives us more control. A creature with a small power could have a large revenge number. The creature still has to survive the combat though, which almost makes it counter-intuitive (you want the creature to be in combat to implement the revenge ability, but putting it in combat could result it in dying, meaning the ability is never used). I'm still willing to give this ability a chance. I would change a couple of things though. I'd prefer it if it said "Revenge X: At the end of combat, if
Infection: I'm not a fan of the original version because it seems to difficult to achieve. I'm not a fan of the changed versions because it's too similar to wither. I vote against using infection for our set (however, I have an alternate idea that I'll describe below).
Precision: I like it and I am starting to get an overall theme in my head. I vote for using precision in our set.
Impervious: I can speak from experience that having a Glorious Anthem and a Phantom Nomad is amazing (see my Phantoms deck. Putting that combo on a single card would just be over powered. Plus, impervious can't be present if precision is in. I vote against using impervious in our set.
Clamp: Interesting idea, but I don't like how this one is worded either. It's best not to cause any confusion. If a 2/2 creature with clamp gets Disfigure
d, does it die? One card says to lower it's toughness and the other says not to. See how it can be confusing? Maybe if we're working with wither, it could be changed to say: "Clamp (If a counter would be placed on
May 14, 2010 2:51 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #6
Bloodletting/Cleave: I like this one too, but would make one change. I would have that creature's controller take damage instead of lose life. That way, we could include cards that prevent damage to a player and that would be able to help stop the damage. I vote in favor of using bloodletting/cleave.
Meld: I know this was meant to be a lesser version of cascade, but I think meld is too powerful too. With cascade, you get card advantage because you get to cast a card that's not in your hand. However, this means there is some level of unknown on the spell you will cascade into. With meld, you get to choose the spell in your hand that you cast. I think this will make it too easy to do combos. I also think it might be too similar to splice (although splice is admittedly much worse). I vote against using meld in our set.
Lifetouch: I'm a little confused on the wording here, but from my understanding, it would be the opponents creature getting the +1/+1 counter right? Otherwise, it would just be the old vampire ability (Sengir Vampire ). The problem is that both creature have to survive combat. Then, your opponent gets the better deal? What advantage would it have for the player? I vote against using lifetouch in our set.
Alright, so the keywords I vote for using are poisonous, wither, revenge, precision, clamp, and bloodletting/cleave. Notice a theme here? They are all related to damage dealt by creature. We could go for some kind of combat theme here. All the shards are at war or something?
Oh and my alternative to infection: "Syphon X: At the beginning of your upkeep, you may put an infection counter on
This makes my votes for using up to seven. I think this is still too high. I think our maximum should be five. So, can everyone please vote for, against, or don't care for all of the keywords on this thread please?
May 14, 2010 2:51 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #7
Crap, some of my text got deleted because I used bad brackets. It got rid of whenever I put CARDNAME when describing an ability. This is how I meant for these three abilities to be seen:
Revenge: "Revenge X: At the end of combat, if CARDNAME dealt combat damage to a creature, deals X damage to that creature."
Clamp: "If a counter would be placed on CARDNAME, instead put no counter on it."
Syphon: "Syphon X: At the beginning of your upkeep, you may put an infection counter on CARDNAME. If you do, you lose one poison counter. If CARDNAME has X or more infection counters on it, remove all infection counters from it and have target opponent gains control of it.
May 14, 2010 2:57 a.m.
I'm not sure about Syphon; for players to actually make use of syphon cards, there'd really have to be a huge presence of Poisonous cards (and good ones at that), elsewise people are more likely to just run removal to prevent getting poisoned. Maybe a land that had syphon on it or something, and when it gets too many counters on it, it goes to the graveyard? Dunno.
May 14, 2010 3:04 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #9
Yeah, I'm not really sure either. I was looking for a way to fight against poison while keeping the seemingly popular infection idea. I was thinking that if one shard's keyword is going to be poison, that's probably already enough of a presence for us to find someway to counteract it. You're right though, having prevent damage effects would be able to counteract poison and help against most of the other keywords too, so that's probably a better way to go.
It might just be better to have a couple zombies in the set that have abilities similar to infection without making it a keyword.
May 14, 2010 3:13 a.m.
Syphon might be pretty cool if it could suck MORE than poison. Like if it could syphon any kind of counter off, be it a -1/-1 from a creature, a poison counter from you, a +1/+1 from your opponent's creature, or even a loyalty counter off a planeswalker. Then people would definitely consider using it.
Maybe like Syphon X : At the beginning of your upkeep, you may remove a counter from target permanent or player. If you do, put two Fill counters on CARDNAME. If CARDNAME has X or more Fill counters on it, destroy it.
Definitely too wordy right now, but something like that. That way you can't use it to pull counters off itself; it'll keep gaining them and pop.
May 14, 2010 3:21 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #12
Also, what are your thoughts on all of the other keywords? Votes for and against?
May 14, 2010 3:25 a.m.
Absolutely love Precision.
I like Meld, but I think it should be narrowed down a bit to something like Creature Meld or Spell Meld so it only works on a particular kind of card so we have more control over it.
I want a reworded Flow. I love Magus of the Future , and I love looking at the top card of a deck or revealing it to do something cool. Even the word Flow sounds great for a Magic card, I think it's just about hammering down the finer points.
I REALLY want Poisonous to be viable; alternate win conditions in Magic have only really been mill, damage, and cards that say You Win or You Lose. I always loved poison but everything that caused it generally did poison 1, or by the time you could have realistically put 10 poison counters on your opponent, they'd have been dead twice over from normal damage. If we do Poisonous, I want there to be spells that put 3 counters on, or a Planeswalker whose final ability is like 5-7 poison counters or something. I've never really felt the threat.
Lifetouch, as far as I understood, meant the creature WITH life-touch would get a +1/+1 counter on it if it survived combat. Similar to Sengir but it doesn't need to kill a creature to gain the +1/+1. I don't feel it's strong enough to be a keyword; this would most likely be better off as "Whenever this creature attacks, put a +1/+1 counter on it" or something.
Love Render, love Cleave.
Clamp doesn't seem to match between keyword and ability. When I think of Clamp, I think of Giant Oyster , clamping down on another creature.
May 14, 2010 3:37 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #14
I agree that clamp would sound better as a different keyword. Maybe Adamant or Steadfast?
So far we have (as I understand it):
Convoke: 1 vote no (mistergreen527). Poisonous: 2 votes yes (mistergreen527 and Zanven ). Wither: 1 vote yes (mistergreen527). Flow: 1 vote yes (Zanven ). Render: 1 vote yes (Zanven ), 1 vote no (mistergreen527). Revenge: 1 vote yes (mistergreen527). Infection: 1 vote no (mistergreen527). Precision: 2 votes yes (mistergreen527 and Zanven ). Impervious: 2 votes no (mistergreen527 and Zanven ). Clamp: 1 vote yes (mistergreen527). 1 vote no (Zanven )? Cleave: 2 votes yes (mistergreen527) and Zanven ). Meld: 1 vote yes (Zanven )? 1 vote no (mistergreen527). Lifetouch: 2 votes no (mistergreen527 and Zanven ). Syphon: 2 votes yes (mistergreen527 and Zanven )?
I would like everyone on the head team to vote for or against each keyword. Basically, make a list like I have and say yes or no to each one. Make it clear what your vote is. Right now, we're just voting on the idea of the keyword. If you like the idea behind it, but think it could use some development, then vote yes. For example, I like the idea of clamp, but agree that it could use a different word and some changing. So, I voted yes to clamp. After we see all of the votes, we can see if we have some definitive winners and losers.
May 14, 2010 11:46 a.m.
who posted the above comment and how the heck did you cause that error? =)
May 14, 2010 11:53 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #16
Haha. I posted it, but I have no idea how the error happened. I hit "post comment" and then it said the helicopters were being deployed. Then, it signed me off of the site and after I signed in, I couldn't access the thread. shrug No idea, sorry.
May 14, 2010 11:58 a.m.
After looking at other block outlines on the internet, I realized that each new block, not even set, only adds around four new keywords. Then they use about 1 - 4 old keywords from other sets (this does not count evergreen keywords like deathtouch or trample that make sense in any set) that would apply to the setting.
After going over it that way, we currently have 14 potentials trying to make it in, and really only 5 - 8 of them should, 4 of which are brand new, and the rest should be from elsewhere.
May 14, 2010 12:28 p.m.
mistergreen527 says... #18
I agree, it's my hopes that we can try to narrow it down after everyone votes. If we don't have any decisive winners, we'll make a list of the top contenders and have the community vote.
May 14, 2010 12:32 p.m.
Convoke: eh kinda boring so not a fan
Poisonous X: i love the counter theme we are coming up with so hell yah
Wither: I'm down i guess
Flow (cost): eh i think it could be interesting if we got it to work but otherwise not worth it.
Render: I really like it.
Revenge X: if it happens at the end of combat i for it.
Infection: (If a creature dealt damage by CARDNAME this turn was put into a graveyard, put that card onto the battlefield under your control at the beginning of the end step.)I dont like this version.
Precision: (Damage dealt by CARDNAME cannot be prevented.) im a fan.
Impervious: i mean one or two cards with this would be cool bu otherwise eh.
Clamp: In a set where +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters are a big deal this is great
Bloodletting/Cleave: love it i like the name cleave better because its less creature specific.
Meld way to powerfull unless its a random card from your hand even then its pretty crazy.
Infection: (Creature does damage in -1/-1 infection counters. If a creature would be put into a graveyard by infection counters put it into play under your control) I like this version (though its a little to close to wither...though interesting enough its kinda a combination of wither and poisonous) i had an idea though instead of making this a keyword, We could easily make a ZombIE Lord that has all zombie creatures have +1/+1 and wither. If a creature would go to the graveyard due to -1/-1 counter put it into play under your control it is no a zombie.
Syphon: awesome idea essential to this set .
Lifetouch: a better way i guess to word it would be: "if creature does damage to a creature put a plus one plus one +1/+1counter on creature for each damage done." (KINDA like a devour and life link comb =)ined. making chump blocking a bad idea. ) I think something that puts +1/+1 counters on creatures makes sense. So im saying yay! IF i had to pick five, Wither, clamp, syphon, Lifetouch, poison. (being negative, neutral, removeal, positive, and player damage.)
OUr fat pack should include like 4 ten sided die. instead of a twenty.
May 14, 2010 12:53 p.m.
Convoke works excellently with the theme of the Oturu tribes and the darkside Render. I vote YES to both.
Revenge, like infection and syphon, have the potential to get far to wordy and complex on the rules side of things. We need either a concise way of saying what we want to e.g.
Infection (If a creature dealt damage by this creature, this turn would be put into a graveyard from the battlefield instead put that card onto the battlefield under your control.)
Syphon (Not really what you guys are trying to say perhaps someone else could post this one but by the sounds of it is a broken idea in which you kill permanents, for free, a bit by bit every turn.)
Revenge X (Whenever this creature blocks or becomes blocked it deals X damage to all creatures blocking or blocked by it at end of combat.)
Or alternately just to drop those abilities entirely. In their current format I vote NO to the above three.
Flow: people enjoy it and it works well enough. I vote YES.
Meld was an idea that attempted to make our set similar enough to the Alara shards to use the skeleton. Without it I say we drop the entire skeleton of the set and start again. I vote YES. Meld is put on cards like Captured Sunlight , it needs to be limited to what would otherwise be extremely bad cards.
Impervious: basically another version of protection, I vote NO.
Clamp: The whole point of the ability is to not just stop Wither but also effects like Disfigure the ability is worded fine and rulings would be sorted out after only one or two askings in your local meta (if it were a real ability). It's basically a more common version of "what if Platinum Angel, but door to Nothingness". If it says you can't, you can't. This ability is very important to the set if wither is to exist. I vote YES.
Wither: If you drop Clamp, you drop Wither that's how I see it. I vote YES.
Cleave/Bloodletting: I must stress the balance of this ability needs to be in its limited number of uses. It is a very powerful ability not as far off the chain as the original Revenge but pretty close to Annihilator. I think Cleave is a very creature specific word and Bloodletting would be better although it is longer. Bloodletting also gives me more of a visual idea about what sort of cards would have the ability. I vote YES.
Poisonous X: needs to be controlled as much as bloodletting/cleave. Very powerful ability. You must remember that even if we print something silly like Syphon that to many OP poisonous cards will spill over in to limited, extended and legacy and pretty much destroy the game. We need to make it so that it is perhaps extended and legacy viable but not the most powerful deck ever. Don't make another Skullclamp .
Precision: could be interesting. I am not fussed.
May 16, 2010 6:50 a.m.
Lifetouch seems out of place, poorly worded and really just something to balance infection/wither. I think that if we want a way to balance wither/infection splash clamp or phantoms or something around.
In summary of the above.
Old Keywords being reused have no real effect on the new keywords we are introducing so they shouldn't count towards our total number of keywords.
Of the older keywords I think Poisonous X (Avora), Wither (Avora and maybe Sorok) and Convoke (Oturu) should see revisits.
Of the new keywords I think that Flow (Irindu), Render (Oturu), Bloodletting/Cleave (Sorok), and Precision (Kilgar and perhaps Sorok) should see play in our first set. In our second set we introduce Clamp, Wither and some sort of cycling. When we reach the third set I think the introduction of Meld would be interesting and all together balancing.
May 16, 2010 7 a.m.
Another keyword to throw in to the mix since darkness wanted to have combat tricks and Kilgar seemed to be the best option for that.
Ambush COST (Whenever one or more creatures attacks you, if this card is in your hand you may pay COST. If you do put it onto the battlefield. At the end of combat return it to your hand.)
May 16, 2010 7:57 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #23
Current votes (as I understand them):
Convoke: mistergreen527: No, Xander574: No, TAMA: Yes.
Poisonous: mistergreen527: Yes, Zanven : Yes, Xander574: Yes, TAMA: Yes?
Wither: mistergreen527: Yes, Xander574: Yes, TAMA: Yes.
Flow: Zanven : Yes, Xander574: No, TAMA: Yes.
Render: mistergreen527: No, Zanven : Yes, Xander574: Yes, TAMA: Yes.
Revenge: mistergreen527: Yes, Xander574: Yes?, TAMA: No.
Infection: mistergreen527: No, Xander574: No?, TAMA: No.
Precision: mistergreen527: Yes, Zanven : Yes, Xander574: Yes.
Impervious: mistergreen527: No, Zanven : No, Xander574: No?, TAMA: No
Clamp: mistergreen527: Yes, Zanven : No?, Xander574: Yes, TAMA: Yes
Bloodletting/Cleave: mistergreen527: Yes, Zanven : Yes, Xander574: Yes, TAMA: Yes
Meld: mistergreen527: No, Zanven : Yes?, Xander574: No?, TAMA: Yes
Lifetouch: mistergreen527: No, Zanven : No, Xander574: Yes, TAMA: No?
Syphon: mistergreen527: Yes, Zanven : Yes, Xander574: Yes, TAMA: No?
May 17, 2010 3:33 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #24
First, check your votes and tell me if I've made any errors. Based on these voting stats, here's the breakup:
Keywords with only "yes" votes: Poisonous, Wither, Precision, and Bloodletting/Cleave.
Keywords with more "yes" votes than "no" votes: Flow, Render, Revenge, Clamp, and Syphon.
Keywords with equal "yes" and "no" votes: Meld.
Keywords with more "no" votes than "yes" votes: Convoke and Lifetouch.
Keywords with only "no" votes: Infection and Impervious.
May 17, 2010 3:46 a.m.
mistergreen527 says... #25
I definitely agree. Just because we don't decide to use something as a keyword, doesn't mean that we can't put that ability on a card or two. We should all keep this in mind and I will remind the community of this in the first public post. Also, I'm a huge fan of your counter-themed keyword set.
@TAMA: I think you may be getting ahead of yourself when it comes to assigning keywords to specific shards. By saying that a certain keyword belongs on a certain shard implies that that shard has already been "built" when they haven't been.
You're right about Syphon. I didn't think about the implications it could have on the opponent's planeswalkers. It can easily be reworded to only affect players or creatures: "Syphon X: At the beginning of your upkeep, you may remove a counter from target player or creature. If you do, put a syphon counter on CARDNAME. If CARDNAME has X or more syphon counters on it, sacrifice it." This also helps avoid problems with Dark Depths .
I disagree that old keywords shouldn't count towards the total number. Take a look at the Alara block. Shards of Alara had Exalted, Unearth, and Devour. Conflux had Domain (used heavily in Planeshift without being a keyword) and Cycling. Alara Reborn had Cascade. This means the Alara block really only had four new keywords and two old keywords for the whole block. These are of course not counting the core keywords (deathtouch, defender, double strike, enchant, equip, fear, first strike, flash, flying, haste, intimidate, landwalk, lifelink, protection, reach, shroud, trample, and vigilance). Some blocks DO have more, such as Ravnica block having ten new keywords, and Time Spiral having a plethora of keywords, but these are not typical. I think by having five keywords in this set, it gives us a good balance and allows us to attach each keyword to a separate shard.
I'll give everyone about a day to look over the votes, make last-minute arguments, etc. Then, I'm going to ask the community to vote for five keywords out of our keywords with the most "yes"es. I'll also update the community on what has been going on behind the scenes at this time.
May 17, 2010 4:40 a.m.
I don't think that Syphon will see play if it only works on creatures or players; it'd be easier to drop in more removal to blast their critter to prevent the creature from ever damaging you in the first place, or fling direct damage at their Planeswalker. It might just not be ready at all, in which it could be dropped entirely. I like it as a concept and the flavour is awesome, but the mechanics of it are a different story.
Also, since there's been some mention of mechanics to certain shards... I'm still not even that crazy about some of the shard names and flavour, that's why I've been gingerly setting the groundwork that there should be consideration of some renames and re-writes going underway. As they stand, I find that some of the names aren't very memorable or stand out, and some of their settings/general concepts don't make a lot of sense for the colours. I've actually been working on an overview since I'm the only person in creative at the moment; I'll post it when I get in from work today to have everyone scrutinize with a fine tooth comb to see if they agree!
May 17, 2010 11:52 a.m.
I think syphon could be limited to a few cards and does not even need to be a keyword.
e.g. T: remove a poison counter from target player or a -1/-1 counter from target creature. Put a -1/-1 counter on CARDNAME.
To clear up any misunderstandings I am NO for Syphon and Lifetouch and YES to Poisonous.
I was only really mad keen on convoke for two or three cards.
I think either Clamp or Syphon need to go. Both just excrete waste in Avora's Cereal.
May 17, 2010 8:58 p.m.
The keywords I see being used (regularly throughout the block and in no particular order)
Wither, Bushido, Clamp, Meld, Cleave/Bloodletting, Flow, Render, Precision and Poisonous.
Although not how it may pan out, the way I see it is: Irindu (Flow + Precision + Meld), Avora (Wither + Poisonous + Meld), Sorok (Cleave/Bloodletting + Bushido + Clamp + Precision + Meld), Kilgar (Clamp + Precision + Meld) and Oturu (Render + Clamp + Meld).
Each wedge has a their own keyword with the exception of Avora (which gets a few instances of semi Infection type abilities) and Kilgar (which seriously needs something to make it stand out like the rest). All Wedges get a look in at Meld given its obvious power. All wedges with white in them have instances of Clamp. All wedges with Red in them have instances of precision.
May 17, 2010 8:58 p.m.
mistergreen527 you're actually forgetting the most important convoke card ever used in tournaments and competitive play, Chord of Calling
January 7, 2013 8:45 p.m.
January 11, 2013 4:01 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #33
Assuredly not. Infect is a modified version of wither+poisonous, and sets are designed years in advance anyway. WotC likely had the SOM block hashed out at least a year or two before this discussion started. The concept for infect was likely around even longer.
January 11, 2013 4:07 p.m.
Ah, I did not know that. Some threads I've read on mtgsalvation seem less impressive now.
January 11, 2013 4:30 p.m.
VinylScratch says... #35
I know the double bracket way but I see people with like a fancy link that has the decks mana pie, the deck makers name, and the deck name. Like scroll down to the bottom of the comments on
how do I link decks like that?
October 26, 2013 7:10 p.m.
VinylScratch says... #38
Pretend There Is Blue In It
I figured it out you just type [ [ deck - large : Deck Name ] ]
minus the spaces
October 26, 2013 7:13 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #39
This information is in the formatting help desk.
Xander574 says... #2
Lifetouch - if creature with life touch deals damage in combat and survives the combat, then put a +1/+1 counter on that creature
May 13, 2010 8:04 p.m.