I'm tempted to steal that land. I'll use both.

I need some thought on some of these lately I have been sick so its hard to focus on my set, but I had done almost half and just need to render it here are the cards I need some 2nd opinions on

Enslaved - I think it should be blue or black. Otherwise, it's good.
Expedition - Okay.
Track Finder - I don't get it flavor-wise.
Sprouting Seeds - What's mirage?
Great Wall of Fire - A white variant would be nice.
Flickering Flames - Mirage?
Rotting Abomination - Okay.
Wall of Darkness - Hey, that's my desktop background! Anyway, why does it have deathtouch?
Blitz Thunderspear - Cool card. I like it.
Dream Reality - Interesting.

Now here are some of my cards.

Enslaved: I think this is a bit off color, and off flavor. White doesn't "enslave" creatures. Blue or black do.
Track Finder: not broken, I suppose.
Great Wall of Fire: too powerful. Needs a cost increase; how can you summon a wall of fire that splits the battlefield in half with only RR? "Block any number of creatures" is usually a white effect. In this case it's justified by flavor, but would probably require higher cost, or a "must block each creature it can blocks" drawback. And higher toughness, I suppose.
Rotting Abomination: looks "good".
Wall of Darkness: deathtouch is very useful . I would remove it, as it makes the other ability useless. Or you can keep both abilities, but that makes your creature look weird...
Blitz Thunderspear: I used the same art for an equipment XD it doesn't look overpowered (Palinchron).
Dream Reality: animated enchantments are cool, but I think they should belong to white.

I need suggestions about the mana costs of the following three cards:

Deconcentrate
Enchantment (R)
Whenever a player is dealt damage, you may counter target spell that player controls unless that player pays , where X is equal to the amount of damage dealt to that player.
(everyone would like to add a mana leak effect to a lightning bolt! XD)

Simplification (or ?)
Sorcery (U)
Put target nonbasic land on top of its owner’s library. That player searches his or her library for a basic land card and puts that card onto the battlefield tapped. Then that player shuffles his or her library.

Living Nightmares
Enchantment (U)
Whenever an opponent discards a card, you may put a 2/2 black Horror creature card onto the battlefield.

That Blitz Thunderspear along with the other "free spells" from Urza Block are overpowered (Even Cloud of Faeries). Think of it like a big fat air elemental for free on turn six, that can keep coming back. On turn six that pretty much gives you two CMC 6 spells, putting you a turn ahead of your opponent's play.

Oy, it's been a while since I've posted anywhere except the creature type game. I have a question, but first the answers.

Enslaved: Don't see any problem with balance or cost-wise, but the name is not white. I can see white being oppressive in terms of military rule of law, but not in such a blunt way as slavery. I'd go with something more akin to indentured servant, or maybe something along the lines of religious or state devotion. should be uncommon.
Expedition: I don't see any issues with it, but it may be a tad nuts with tokens... couldn't find much precedent for it except for Perilous Forays, and it's not very close. Should be fine. should be unconnon?
Track Finder: oy, wording issues... not sure how to word it. Something like "with a converted mana cost less than..." or something. Looks fine, though powerful. You may want to bump it up to .
Great Wall of Fire: Too powerful. Not red enough. Bump the cost to at least and/or remove the all-block. still not sure about it then.
Rotting Abomination: I'm fine with it. Very black.
Wall of Darkness: This isn't a card name yet? Odd... May be to strong for a black wall... maybe a 0/3? Remove Deathtouch unless you want it to be like Defiant Elf XD
Blitz Thunderspear: Why is it an illusion? (don't ask, I have an issue with creatures that are needlessly Illusions (see Amugaba, Cloudskate, Draining Whelk, etc.)) Looks good on the surface, but be careful about the untap part. They ran into issues lat time they did that, though it looks like you knew that.
Dream Reality: Can this enchant itself? (prolly not) Anyway, it seems rather weak... and clunky as far as auras go. you may want to scrap this one or rework it a lot.

Not sure how to evaluate the mirage ones.

Now my turn.
Two questions:
1) Would it be fair game to make cards (permanents and/or instants/sorceries) that make use of the command zone? (where generals, planes, and emblems exist) Either effecting the zone itself or putting otherwise normal cards into the zone?
2) Would a set be fine if all creatures shared a creature type? (example: a set where all creatures are at least goblins... hey that sounds fun...)

I think Blitz Thunderspear is fine. It's just a 4/4 flier. Baneslayer it is not. Also interesting how it only untaps Islands.

Note how not all of the free spells were banned. I think whether or not a free spell is a problem card is largely dependent on the cost, effect, and whether they are instant. A simple creature Palinchron, Great Whale is the least broken way to use this mechanic, especially at such high mana costs.

thanx for the feedbacks,
Blitz Thunderspear -had alot of issues that is why I specifically put in untap upto six Islands
rather than just lands, I might rework this a tad bit.
Wall of Darkness -yes I specifically want it to have deathtouch even at 0 power just like that Defiant Elf, and yes this is still not a name of a legal card.
Great wall of fire - I personally like this one, I just wanted that flavor text in this creature, Upping the cost.
Track finder -I really am lost for words about this.
Expedition- might change to non-token creatures or up rarity.
Enslaved- Just can't seem to have a name for it (rethinking name but not changing color) Like Rescue from Slavery..?? or something like that.

As for Mirage <number>(Enters the battlefield with <number> mirage counters on it. If there are no mirage counters on it, return it to its owners hand at end of turn.

@ElmdorMesdoram
Simplification is a neat effect, and it seems like it can work in any color, particularly green, white, or blue. I might put it in blue because it would stand out the most in blue. By the way, you sure the card shouldn't be able to target any land, not just nonbasics?

Living Nightmares clearly compares to Megrim. I am guessing Living Nightmares is better so maybe it should cost 2B or 1BB minimum.

@Elmdor
mana leak to a lightning bolt I guess rewording it a bit its kinda confusing.
"Whenever a spell would deal damage to a player, counter that spell unless that spells controller pays , where X is the amount of damage it would deal.

Simplification I vote green, I am more on modifications for blue ^^

and yes Living nightmare Up the cost

@vergalon
I do not know about the 1st question since i'm more like a classic gamer than with twists,

On 2nd question however, sure a Goblin Treefolk wouldn't hurt ^^

@Vergalon

Now my turn.
Two questions:
1) Would it be fair game to make cards (permanents and/or instants/sorceries) that make use of the command zone? (where generals, planes, and emblems exist) Either effecting the zone itself or putting otherwise normal cards into the zone?
2) Would a set be fine if all creatures shared a creature type? (example: a set where all creatures are at least goblins... hey that sounds fun...)

I think the idea behind the command zone is mainly to make a place that cards can't really disturb (kinda like what exiled used to be). That said, cards utilizing the zone in a non-obtrusive way (cards that care about how many things are in the zone for instance, vs. things that pull or put cards in the zone) would probably be safe. Might want to start with some emblem makers to begin though.

A mono-tribal set? It's an interesting idea. You might want to be careful, as not everyone loves every creature type (except Homarid!). Probably be interesting as a collection of small (45-80) card sets each featuring a different tribe. I say try something and go for it.

@Rasz: Your rewording is not what I want to do XD
And I don't want a replacement, I want damage AND counterspell.

However:
Simplification
Instant (was sorcery)
Put target land on top of its owner’s library. That player searches his or her library for a basic land card and puts that card onto the battlefield. Then that player shuffles his or her library. (now targets any land, and the searched land enters the battlefield untapped. A variation of Harrow and Rampant Growth. Can fix your mana at instant speed, or block your opponent's nonbasic lands. Is it possible to put this at common? Or make it cost ?)

Living Nightmares
(rest is the same)
Remember that black has Liliana's Caress, that is almost always strictly better than Megrim (unless you have Pain Magnification and Furnace of Rath...). And it costs . I think my card is good at .

@Sewn-Eyes:
Elspiran Dragonmaster: quite wordy. I would prefer an aura with totem armor and "Enchant Dragon Creature".
Steadfast Immortal: I think that the two abilities combine to cancel all damage. And they are very confusing! I would remove the second ability and use an activated ability to prevent all damage.
Nightsky Incinerator: maybe it needs restrictions about the targeted creature, like "nonblack" or something like that. Remember that Visara the Dreadful can't attack if it destroys a creature. (and it's legendary) (and has one more black mana in its cost)

I have a more general problem relating to some custom keywords in general rather than specific cards.
I wanted to come up with a way to represent the concept of giant mecha. I could just use an artifact creature with "Champion a creature", but I felt that didn't quite capture the flavor of a pilotable war machine. Thus I invented a new keyword, "Pilot", which would go on a new subtype of (noncreature) artifacts, "Mecha".

It's a tad wordy, but I feel like it's generally fairly intuitive. The piloting cost would usually be pretty low, around or . The restrictions on when and how often were added to limit potential abuse of the mechanic to trigger ETB abilities. I added the terminology of "pilot" to enable some interaction between the exiled creature and the mech. For instance, a creature might have the following ability:

But anyway, I'm pretty happy with pilots and piloting; the bigger problem I'm running into is how to represent the concept of combining mecha. At first all I could think of was banding, which is not a very well-liked mechanic and doesn't really capture the flavor right to boot. But then somebody suggested I make a keyword that functions something like the abilities of the [url=http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=+[licid]]licids[/url] from Tempest block, turning the Mecha creature into an equipment that attaches itself to another Mecha. I like the idea flavor-wise, but I'm having trouble figuring out how to make it work with piloting without needing a god-awful wall of microscopic text.
Here's my current attempt:

It's...ugly. Having so many type-changing effects is a bit confusing, but I think it works. Except maybe the clause for adding the combining mech's pilot to the mech it's attaching to, I don't think that's quite right. But it's just so horrendously wordy. Maybe I could drop the attachment restriction, since it doesn't gain any equip ability? There'd be some potential for abuse with stuff like Auriok Windwalker, but that's probably not something that really needs to be worried about.
But anyway, yeah, how can I clean up this whole "combining mecha" concept?

like the Idea, though I like the Pilot keyword better, more flavorful than combine

some cards made :3 i would love some critiques

gather the citizens 4WW
Sorcery (R)
convoke
each player puts X 1/1 human citizen tokens onto, where X is 3 plus the number of creatures tapped to play gather the citizens.
Shout 4 — You gain control off all humans on the battlefield. (when you cast This spell, you may tap 4 creatures. if you do, it has its shout effect)

Carnage BBB
Instant (U)
destroy target creature. it can’t be regenerated.
shout 3 — Destroy another target creature (when you cast This spell, you may tap 3 creatures. if you do, it has its shout effect)
one on one the slaying usually is anough to statisfy their needs, but when more people join in, the killing goes on.

The Holly Jolly Inn
Legendary Land (U)
T: Add W to your mana pool
1WW: Put a 1/1 citizen token into play tapped.

Shout should probably specify creatures your control. For that matter it should probably also specific untapped creatures as well. (as in Glare of Subdual and Opposition)

that asides, here are entirely alternate ways to word Shout

keyword:

non-keyword:

non-keyword without number:

The Holly Jolly Inn is pretty cool, might be too good.
I wanna gonna reference Mobilization, but I just realized the card is basically the same as Vitu-Ghazi, The City Tree. (same but better, but legendary) Your call.

for 2WW i think its doable then, as saproling is a more commonly use subtype, and because its legendary :3

and i think the first one is quite doable (it does feels like kicker this way but hey, can't have everything in the world)

Yep, though personally I like the third one. (well at least for its conciseness)

wavy: do you know how to let it say "creature" instead of "creatures" when you set it to shout 1 ?

no idea (I do all my keywords manually)

@TKDB
maybe what you could do is have two mechas combine to reveal from outside the game a card named _____ and put it onto the battlefield.
(or like a version of Champion but from outside the game?)

or you could make it so you could combine two mecha to create any artifact creature with their combined power (or toughness) or less.

Note that you could make it search from the library rather than outside the game. (I just like the idea of outside the game. No shuffling.)

As for pilots, you could just remove them from the equation. Question is, if you already have a mecha card why do you need a card to pilot them, and what would pilot cards really do if they're on the battlefield by themselves without a mecha to pilot. What you also could do is have any creature be able to pilot a mecha (again, making it less insular) or limit it to certain a creature type or certain creature types. (such as Human, Soldier, Warrior)

@Rasz: Yeah, I like Pilot better too ^_^

@copapoc: If you're doing Shout as a kicker-style keyword it'd look something like this:

You may tap {english_number_a(param1)} untapped {if match(param1.value, match: "1") then "creature" else "creatures"} you control as you cast this spell.

@Wavy: I think you misinterpreted my post. The idea is that the Mecha on its own can't do anything (it's a vehicle, not an autonomous robot), so you need to put a creature in it to run it. The term "pilot" isn't a new creature type or anything, just a term I added to allow for more interaction between the Mecha and the creature exiled to activate it. As specified in the reminder text for the pilot keyword, the pilot can be any non-Mecha creature, and when not piloting a Mecha your creature could do whatever it is that creature does normally. And in fact I've made some creatures that are useful both in and out of mechs:

I thought of making it more restrictive in terms of which creature types could pilot a Mecha, but I figured that would just add unnecessary wordiness and complexity to an already fairly lengthy and complex ability. There are just too many creature types that would make sense, but also too many that wouldn't. I figure at least the fact that most of the ones that wouldn't make sense (eg, Dragon, Eldrazi, Leviathan, etc) are big nasties that you probably wouldn't want to be exiling to pilot a Mecha anyway would help to keep the off-flavor scenarios down. I made it non-Mecha just to keep away from possible rules headaches resulting from the interaction of multiple piloting abilities.
As for combining, I actually thought of doing something like what you suggested (my idea was to exile two or more Mecha to put a new Mecha token into play representing the combined form), but having them leave play causes issues with the piloting ability.

Can you help me with Balancing of this card and naming of it?
--------------------
Enchantment
Whenever an opponent loses life, that player puts that many cards from the top of his or her library into his or her graveyard. (Damage causes loss of life.)

You could make it like this -

Sanity Grinding
Enchantment - Aura{U}
Enchant player
[Your text]

I'm not sure what to cost it at, but 7 seems way too much. The most you'll likely get out of a player is 19 cards off.

Edit - Er, scratch the name. It's already in use. (Sanity Grinding)

is this balanced enough,

Offering to Ras
Sorcery (C)
As additional cost to cast ~, sacrifice any number of creatures you control.
Target player loses 1 life for each creature sacrificed this way.

That could be done so much easier.

You may tap {english_number_a(param1)} untapped creature(s) you control as you cast this.

Note, it automatically sifts the s on creatures if you bracket it.

Offering to Ras could probably cost , considering it's not very powerful at all, and add "Draw a card."
Or just make it 2 life for each creature, and make it cost .

Ah, I didn't know it automatically deals with the (s). I always thought only stuff in curly brackets was subject to parsing. Good to know!

time to get everyone on there toes.
some 3 color land

dreg marsh
Land (U)
dreg marsh enters the battlefield tapped.
T: Add GUB to your mana pool. dreg marsh deals 3 damage to you

murky cannopy
Land (U)
murky cannopy enters the battlefield tapped.
T: Add BGW to your mana pool. murky cannopy deals 3 damage to you

overrun feedinggrounds
Land (U)
overrun feedinggrounds enters the battlefield tapped.
T: Add URG to your mana pool. overrun feedinggrounds deals 3 damage to you

stormclouds
Land (U)
stormclouds enters the battlefield tapped.
T: Add RWU to your mana pool. stormclouds deals 3 damage to you

sulferous flats
Land (U)
sulferous flats enters the battlefield tapped.
T: Add WBR to your mana pool. sulferous flats deals 3 damage to you

its most likely too hard, as it gives 3 mana on turn 2 but :S it takes a lot of life too so <.<

4 mana, with basic land.
You could make it "When ~ enters the battlefield, sacrifice it unless you return an untapped basic land you control to its owner's hand." Then you might even get away with common.

I agree with Anuttymous that they should probably bounce a land on ETB, but I think they should probably still stay at uncommon even then. With that kind of mana accel, life can be pretty cheap.

Also, a few spelling corrections:

Murky Canopy
Overrun Feeding Grounds
Sulfurous Flats

The other two are ok...though it does bug me that the names aren't capitalized in your post. But that's just me being nitpicky xD

@Sewn-Eye You would be surprised... It would not be at one time, and you are assuming that the opponent has no life gaining... but having it effect multiple players makes it better as a rare... (Due to rares and mythics being potential game-enders...) Though I did lower it to cmc 5...

hmm, i'll get them to bounce basicland. when thinking of it, it would be something new to have an engine this powerfull at common.

@copa, yes I agree that even if a land deals damage to you but in turn gives sufficient mana for a normal 2/2. and take note it deals damage which you could prevent, almost like Ancient Tomb

@rasz: i'm gona see how my playgroup handles them. if they come out as BROKEN, they will be fixed and put to common
if they come out to as powerfull they'll just get fixed and stay at common (cause i hated shards sealed for not giving me enough nonbasics D:)

@Black Envy - That's why I made it an enchant player. It was, however, just a suggestion, and your fix is just as good.

alright, what about this one

Vault of Worlds
Land
Imprint - When Cardname enters the battlefield, you may exile any number of basic land cards you own from outside the game.
: Add one mana to your mana pool of any color that can be produced by a card exiled with Cardname.

@Wavy: That basically just amounts to ": Add one mana of any color to your mana pool." Cuz I'm pretty sure just about any MTG player would have at least one of each kind of basic land in their collection outside the game.

Maybe if you limited it to one land, but then you may as well just say "As ~ enters the battlefield, choose a color" and have it tap for that color.

Really, I can't think of any way of doing an imprint land like that that wouldn't be totally pointless. Maybe if you imprinted a nonland card and had it tap for one of that card's colors, but that may not be the flavor you're going for.

what if,
Worlds Paradise
Land
Enters the battlefield sacrifice ~ unless you sacrifice three basic lands you control.
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add three mana of color the sacrificed lands could produce.
"just reword this maybe"

Well if it is tournament MtG then this card require you save 2-15 slots in your sideboard for basic land to use it with. I like the ramifications of this card on tournament play and what it does to sideboard construction. (the whole idea of turning the sideboard into a "outside the game" utility rather than actual sideboarding)

But in casual the drawback of this card is virtually nonexistent, and if that's a design flaw I suppose it is a design flaw, and I suppose I should do better.

That is a good idea actually.

I had an idea for a dual-land cycle like that. Problem is the memory issue. In the case of Vault of Worlds however, what the imprint ability does in that case is solve the memory issue, so it is a necessary component, and it's basically the card you just described. (if I made it limit itself to one land, that is)

Anyway, what about this version?

Vault of Worlds
Land
Imprint - When Cardname enters the battlefield, you may exile any number of basic land cards you own from outside the game. You lose 1 life for each card exiled this way.
: Add one mana to your mana pool of any color that can be produced by a card exiled with Cardname.

I made a Genesis cycle, but a couple cards are pretty bad. Ways to even them out, or just new things I can put would be nice.

Oh, and is this too powerful:

Storm
Instant
The next instant or sorcery you cast this turn has storm. (When you cast it, copy it for each spell cast before it this turn.)

All at rare, of course.

@anutt
-glorious genesis is fair enough balanced in all aspects as I see it,
-Flaring genesis is more like this Comet Storm
but with a lesser cost.
-Seeping genesis = Drain Life without you gaining any, plus you need a creature to target,
-Mindwarp genesis = Prosperity but just a target creatures controller which is very powerful at that.

@Wavy: Being a nearly exclusively casual player, I never thought about the ramifications on tournament play. You're right, that is interesting. I like the life payment, though, I feel like that balances it nicely.

@Anuttymous: Glorious Genesis seems balanced, though personally I think it feels more green than white. Being a sorcery, it has no defensive applications -- which is very uncharacteristic (though admittedly not unheard of) for white creature-boosts -- and its effect is ultimately too similar to Gelatinous Genesis (and strictly worse to boot since the creature presence doesn't last). Perhaps make it something like "X target creatures' controllers gain twice X life" instead?

Flaring Genesis is also good; like Rasz said, it's similar to Comet Storm, but being sorcery-speed and less flexible the comparatively reduced rarity and mana cost are fine.

Mindwarp Genesis stands to be very powerful. It's weak at X=1 (same cost as Divination but draws fewer cards), but gets exponentially more powerful as you spend more mana on it. At X=2 you're spending 5 mana for 4 cards, which is really good, and X=3 nets you 9 cards for 7 mana, which is amazing. I guess it's unlikely that anyone would set X greater than 3, so beyond that it's not terribly relevant -- but if it does happen, it's going to be a very cost-efficient card draw, no doubt about that. The fact that you need creatures to target helps balance it somewhat, but even still it's almost certainly the most powerful of the cycle. You could make those players then discard a number of cards equal to the number they drew to balance it somewhat, but then that might make it too weak for rare.
Also, as a side note, the name sounds more like discard than draw to me; perhaps something more like "Mindspring Genesis" or "Inspiring Genesis"?

Similar principle for Seeping Genesis; starts weak but gets exponentially more powerful as you increase the value of X. However, one-shot life loss being worth less, point-for-point, than creature presence and card draw, I feel like this one's actually a bit weak compared to the others. Probably better to make it so you gain life equal to the life lost this way.

As for Storm, it should definitely cost more, since it would automatically contribute to the next spell's storm. seems like a reasonable cost to add storm, particularly at rare, but to account for the extra copy you're automatically getting you should probably add (compare Reverberate, Twincast, Fork), so Storm should probably cost something more like . Maybe you could get away with , but I wouldn't put it any lower than that.

Here's a much better blue one, and I think it's perfectly balanced:

Timewarp Genesis
Sorcery
Exile X target nonland permanents. Put X time counters on them, and they gain suspend.

And, would the black be good with the gain life? It seems a bit too much.
For 9 mana, X=4, that's 16 life lost and 16 gained.
Although, for 7, 9 lost and 9 gained. That also seems rather powerful. I dunno. Maybe there's a better thing.

How about "Put X -1/-1 counters on X target creatures"? That's nicely balanced, right?

[edit=1]And for the white one, how about lifelink too? Then you gain a bunch of life as well. That even it out?[/edit]

[edit=2]Oh, and I changed the storm card into a ', Sacrifice' creature, and upped the cost. That way you don't need to save 4 mana in order to give it storm.[/edit]

Ooh, I like that Timewarp Genesis!

I guess you're right about the life gain, too. The -1/-1 counters might be better.

Lifelink could help make the white one more white...or maybe, looking at the existing white creature-boost sorceries (Angelic Blessing, Windborne Charge), it looks like flying is a popular one. Maybe rename it "Angelic Genesis" and give them flying? For a one-turn boost that should be fairly balanced, and it certainly feels more white to me.

Ah, evasion, much more better. Dunno why I didn't think of that before. Right, they all seems good now. Thanks!

[edit=1]"Copy target instant or sorcery spell for each other spell cast before it this turn."

I worked out from Brain Freeze and Grapeshot, that storm was only worth or . Just 1 mana. But then, considering this can be used on any instant or sorcery, I added , thus making it . Does that seem plausible.[/edit]

[edit=2]No, that's madness, copying a spell once costs CC, Reverberate, so this would have to cost 3, or something. Maybe ?[/edit]

This might be relevant to what you're trying to do, Anuttymous. It's from my upcoming set Spirits of Giravost:

I feel like a creature with ", , sacrifice" would be fairly reasonable for adding storm to a spell.

What if a card said "copy target instant or sorcery spell for each spell cast before Cardname this turn"

when I put it that way it should probably cost more than Twincast since it's "strictly better" than Twincast

if it's an activated ability however then it depends

Cardname
Instant (Rare)
Copy target instant or sorcery spell for each spell cast before ~ this turn.

I'm liking the feel of that.

"Copy target instant or sorcery spell for each spell cast before CARDNAME this turn" isn't functionally all that different in the end than "the next instant or sorcery spell you cast this turn has storm", since the targeted spell will count toward the copies in the former case. Either way you're getting one automatic copy, which you wouldn't get if you put it as a sacrifice effect on a permanent.
I will say the former wording looks nicer, though.

[edit]For the "copy target spell" wording to function properly, though, you'd need to add "you may choose new targets for the copies". Implied with storm, but not with just "copy".[/edit]

...

...

...

...

Anyway... I think "Copy target instant or sorcery for each spell cast before it this turn. You may choose new targets for the copy." is only as powerful as any spells cast before it. If the above cost , I cast a 4 cost spell, that's 6 mana, and I still need something beforehand to build the storm. If it cost too much, it would become very hard to actually make it practical, so I think 2 mana and rare should sort it, maybe?