Luma and the Coil Inferno
Custom Cards forum
Posted on Oct. 17, 2021, 12:40 a.m. by TypicalTimmy
If anyone was wondering, not that you were, this is 100% precisely my kind of build. Massive ETBs, huge threats, uncanny plays, unheardof synergies and massive damage potential. I would build her in a heartbeat - and honestly kind of want to as a Rule: 0 deck. Wheels for days with a slog of artifacts and madness / flashback so I can use my graveyard as well. Mono-red self-mill + voltron, baby!
Wanted to really push what it means to be mythic - TOKEN COMMANDER DAMAGE!!
Some things to note:
- Coil Inferno remains on the battlefield when Luma leaves, but it loses its ability to produce commander damage until Luma returns.
- Coil Inferno is legendary, so typically you can only have one at a time.
- Helm of the Host would work to create multiple Coil Infernos, that would each independently choose their own card type in your graveyard.
- Multiple Coil Infernos track their own unique commander damage independently.
- Yes, Coil Inferno would have access to commander damage even if Luma isn't your commander; That is to say, if Luma is tucked in your +99, as long as you control her, Coil Inferno still has commander damage potential.
TypicalTimmy says... #3
Grubbernaut, honestly I like your idea of making Luma less word-soupy, but I am going off of precedent where tokens with text are created with the source also having that text. For example, look at Reef Worm, Nesting Dragon and Vraska the Unseen.
If I could get away with merely saying "Create a red X/X Snake Elemental legendary creature token named Coil Inferno." and leave it at that, I would. Then, with the extra room, I'd also say:
- Elemental creatures you control have haste.
Then Coil Inferno is much more powerful, and Luma holds tribal synergy.
October 17, 2021 1:33 a.m. Edited.
seshiro_of_the_orochi says... #4
That design is awesome, I'd totally play that!
October 17, 2021 8:19 a.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #5
I think I can shave a few words off by reworking a few sentences. Just tried it and I was able to bump the text font from 27 to 28, maybe 29.
Now I need to decide if it gets haste or not. Haste would be a massive improvement, otherwise it's just a big creature who doesn't really do anything.
I'm torn on her 7mv as well. I want the wheel effect but I also can't justify any lower since you are getting a fresh hand as well as two creatures, one of which is very large.
Feels like a trap card - imagine paying 7mv and dumping maybe 4 cards to get a 2/2 and maybe a 5/5 by the time Coil Inferno ETB, only to have the 5/5 taken out.
Then you pay 9mv to recast Luma to maybe get now an 8/8.
Not sure. I feel like this is the very tip of it's potential, but as it sits not really printable. Adhering to Mark Rosewater's philosophy of what it means to be a mythic, Luma definitely pushes the boundaries in quite a stunning fashion. However, on the terms of being "powerful", she feels incredibly weak for what a mythic traditionally is.
She feels like the kind of mythic most players would be upset with pulling. And that makes me feel bad :(
- Also updating name to Coil_ing_ Inferno. Card has room for that.
October 17, 2021 8:45 a.m.
"when X enters the battlefield" is a triggered ability that happens after the permanent enters the battlefield. Since you're using this to define a creature's power/toughness, you need to choose the card type "As X enters the battlefield".
Since you need to have Luna in play for coiling inferno to deal commander damage, why not give this as a static ability from Luna to help break up the paragraph? Something like:
Combat damage dealt from creatures you control named Coiling Inferno count towards commander damage dealt from Luna.
Or something like that. Means you don't have to have the conditional check in the ability wording.
October 17, 2021 5:44 p.m. Edited.
TypicalTimmy says... #7
What I am thinking is;
- Coiling Inferno gets +1/+1 for each card of the chosen type in your graveyard.
This way it is functionally identical without being so clunky. It gets rid of the +X/+X and X/X on the card as the token can now be a 0/0. It also makes it fluid; As your graveyard changes, so does Coiling Inferno.
I think the idea of not using Luma as a check on the commander damage is a good idea. If she leaves, then Coiling Inferno merely becomes a fluid P/T creature, which is still useful, albeit none of this is really in nature. I'm merely trying to push the boundaries of what could do.
October 17, 2021 5:51 p.m.
I would agree, using the +1/+1 method seems a lot more in line with how cards are done.
Just as a interesting thought note, you may need to tie Coiling Inferno's combat damage to Luna's as far as commander damage is concerend (as I put above). This is because of:
903.3. Each deck has a legendary creature card designated as its commander. This designation is not a characteristic of the object represented by the card; rather, it is an attribute of the card itself. The card retains this designation even when it changes zones.
Coupled with:
903.10a A player ‘who’s been dealt 21 or more combat damage by the same commander over the course of the game loses the game. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)
Since creature tokens going to exile or the graveyard cease to exist after they've entered either of those zones, technically each Coiling inferno would be a new instance, which means that each instance of the token would have to do 21 commander damage. So if you swung for 20 commander damage with the token and then it got killed, the next token would still have to do an additional 21 comamnder damage (and at that point you've swung for 40 already).
If your intention was to reset commander damage, then that's fine but if not, you'd need to tie it back to Luna.
October 17, 2021 7:09 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #9
My intention was for each Coiling Inferno to have their own Commander Damage. So if I made a 5/5 and it connects for 5, that is 5 commander damage tied to that token. Now suppose it is killed, and later in the game I make a 7/7. That new 7/7 connects for 7. That is 7 NEW Commander damage but is not in conjunction with the previous 5.
So your opponent has 5 and 7, not not a total of 12. The same way that Partner commander's must each track their own. Same concept.
October 17, 2021 7:16 p.m. Edited.
Omniscience_is_life says... #10
But... commander damage is already one of the most groaned about rules, especially when it comes to Partner. I'd try and make it as simple as possible, otherwise people would hate playing against this card.
Because here's a scenario: "hey, how much commander damage do you have?"
"5, 8, 2, 16, and 12"
"I thought it was 5, 9, 2, 17, and 12?"
"Why are you playing Luma again?"
October 17, 2021 7:50 p.m.
plakjekaas says... #11
Have you tried to Mono Red Selfmill Graveyard Voltron in the form of Neheb, Dreadhorde Champion? I know it has no flashy token commander damage, but in every other way it plays like you seem excited for. Might be a nice suggestion for an alternate commander if somehow people aren't comfortable with the Rule:0 plan.
Grubbernaut says... #2
If you were to make the token a named/legendary token, could you have the abilities-test only on the token to make Luma less word-soupy? Or is the syntax always as such that the source of the token needs to say what the token does?
I like the idea.
October 17, 2021 1:19 a.m.