Lumehaven community set

continued...
Fri, 2010-10-01 17:28
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

@Nutty - Did you see that cards I posted above. They fill in most of those slots you are filling. I think that we should take advantage of the replicate mechanic for both the damage prevention and lifegain.

I am actually especially proud of my damage prevention card. Maybe it is just me though...

Can you post the set file? It is really difficult to organize everything mentally to gather what we already have for ideas. We also need to have some common places and groups that show up to give continuity. We already have Ota and I have been referring to Elhav as an Elven city. Also, who thinks that Elek Longbeard is a dwarf? The name sounds like a dwarf to me...

Check out my updated set hub.

Fri, 2010-10-01 17:48
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

Remember, we're trying to get different ideas for each part, aren't we? We can use some of them in the next sets, if not here.
I shall post the set file, check my signature in 5 minutes or so.
Elek Longbeard couldn't possibly be anything else but a dwarf!

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Sat, 2010-10-02 21:03
theonlyjett
theonlyjett's picture

Does the set file represent cards that are final in their slots, or is it only the cards that are contenders and you don't like the rest?

Not that it's not a good mental exercise for the heck of it, but I don't feel too fond of making a bunch of cards to have them be mostly all rejected in their spots off the bat. Also, I'm not specifically sure of what you're looking for all the time. That is, why did one card make it and not another, or why was one changed. That sort of thing. If you are already making decisions for each spot, which is fine with me, at least help point us in the right direction more specifically so we can waste less time.

I do realize it's kinda hard to keep track of. The only real idea I had was to make a set skeleton and specify which cards are competing for each spot. Maybe keep all the cards so far in the set file and then just refer to them by name on a skeleton on the first post or something. If you aren't interested in this, then that's cool, I'm just trying to be helpful. A happy smile As long as there's a method to your madness, it helps us out a lot to know what it is.

Sat, 2010-10-02 21:23
lord_joakim
lord_joakim's picture

Random card submission:

Mold Mauler 3GG
Creature - Elemental
Trample, haste
Whenever ~ deals combat damage to a player, you may return an aura card from your graveyard to the battlefield.
5/3

Sat, 2010-10-02 21:57
theonlyjett
theonlyjett's picture

What's your thoughts on using say, Moonfolk rather than Merfolk for blue? Does it fit into the story? Should I use Vedelkan? Speak up, man!

Sat, 2010-10-02 22:33
lord_joakim
lord_joakim's picture

An additional card submission:

Chant Technician 2UU
Creature - Vedalken Wizard
Whenever you cast an aura spell, you may draw a card.
Auras you control have aura swap 2UU
2/2

(If we did aura swap, of course.)

Sun, 2010-10-03 00:58
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

Stick out your tongue Gimme a chance.

All of the cards in the set file are questionable. If you feel there's something in there that you feel shouldn't be, then say so, and we'll sort through it.
To make things easier for people, I'm going to make a dichotomous key, and post it on the front sheet. This could take a while, so please be patient. All will become clear then. Also, I'll post a simpler version, so you know whether something is definitely not worth making up.

If you feel it would be better to show all the cards on the front post, and what place they're contending for, I will do just that. However, there are multiple slots that haven't been asked for that still need filling. The ones on the front are just common/uncommon slots for now. I can expand it if you want?

On race, I quite like the idea of Moonfolk, however I'm not sure they fit in well. Elementals seem like the most likely for enchantment creatures, though if other people like Moonfolk, I'd enjoy using them. How about Liminid?. Not Vedalken, however, as they're artifact creatures. Also, in the same way there are Artificier creature classes, should we make an enchantment version? Enchanter?

Thanks, Joakim for posting some cards.

Mold Mauler is a little powerful, returning Auras upon damage, and with trample. It might need some revision, but for now I think just removing trample and haste would do, maybe at uncommon make it a 3/3?

Chant Technician seems like a good card. I'm happy to include it, although the first ability is generally white, so might make it two colours, and make the cost White mana symbolBlue mana symbol, and at rare. Sound agreeable?

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Sun, 2010-10-03 02:13
theonlyjett
theonlyjett's picture

Really, I enjoy being somewhat organized and think that you should make definite steps toward that end. The problem that will come up is if we have a ton of cards, then go over them and weed out a bunch and then go again, but the weeded out cards are still up for grabs, then it gets really, really repetitive and can bog this whole thing down.

To me, having a skeleton takes much of the work out. Just read up on how they work here in case you don't know what I'm talking about. Basically, take each color and break it down about how many creatures, noncreature enchantments, sorceries, and instants there should be, then about how many multicolors, artifacts, and nonbasic lands there should be as well. Then put all the submitted cards about where they go. When we have several cards going for one slot, then you either just pick a somewhat obvious better pick or we can take a couple posts to vote or just give feedback so you can pick. It will also help to design cards just cause you know that you still need a green trampler for example. When the slots are all filled, we're done. I know it seems pretty complicated, but I certainly mean for you to just take the basic idea and simplify it to your preference. Then just fudge the numbers to include cards you don't want to leave out till you get the set you want. Anyhow, one pass through the set, two tops to be done, otherwise we'll be making this set for quite a long time, and honestly, I don't think I could pay attention that long. Stick out your tongue

Another question I have is do you want about the usual number of noncreature enchantments and how many creatures are going to be enchantment creatures?

Sun, 2010-10-03 06:27
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

I noticed that there are a lot of submitted cards that are not in the set file. Was that on purpose or a mistake?

I think a skeleton is good, we have an incomplete one so far in the first post and it does help. To make it easier you can have some slots be "up for grabs" meaning they can be any card in the color. Or you could be general like "green creature". It does help us when making cards and it helps to ensure we have a good mana curve. You can let us know if you need some assistance. If we have every card specifically... uh... skeletoned.... then we might miss out on great ideas that come later just because they don't fit a slot. But I guess Wizards uses it so it must work.

Check out my updated set hub.

Sun, 2010-10-03 08:51
lord_joakim
lord_joakim's picture

Quote:
Thanks, Joakim for posting some cards.

No problem.

Quote:
Mold Mauler is a little powerful, returning Auras upon damage, and with trample. It might need some revision, but for now I think just removing trample and haste would do, maybe at uncommon make it a 3/3?

Well, other than completely missing the point of the card/revising it into not being the intent anymore, it would work. Stick out your tongue I thought of it as a rare; you can make it an uncommon like that if you want. I made it powerful by purpose, but I have no direct expectations for it. Remember, we should both have bad cards and pushed cards. I tried pushing one. Do remember, that it has to deal damage to return an aura, I'd rather playtest before fixing it. If revising it, you could make it a 3/3 uncommon, but then it should cost much less. If balancing it, just removing haste or trample would do. I'm just one of the people who actually think green should have a ball lightning each set. Remember that WotC makes creatures that generate card advantage today. Compare it to Baneslayer Angel or any of the titans. Winking smiley

Quote:
Chant Technician seems like a good card. I'm happy to include it, although the first ability is generally white, so might make it two colours, and make the cost WU, and at rare. Sound agreeable?

Much better design than mine. Make it a bear as well, then. What about the Aura Swap cost? Should that be WU as well? I think that might be a little problematic. But try that for starters. I'm a Melvin like that.

Sun, 2010-10-03 13:16
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

How does this sound?
I'll do a much grander skeleton like on the front page, not as succinct as the one on the page you linked to, but it will encompass all the "cards every set should have" fully, and "cards this set should have" just as fully. There will then be maybe 25-75 spare slots, depending on how big the set is, that we can put those good extra cards in. If you want I can put the cards in the format Wizards have used, but I think most people would find it easier if I just wrote the colour, type, etc.

In the same way that Mirrodin and Scars have unusually large numbers of artifacts (1/3 of the sets), we'll have about the same, meaning roughly 1/6 enchantment creatures and 1/6 nonceature enchantments. Then many more of the cards will utilise echantments in one way or another.

Guitarweeps, which set file? If there are some cards missing from both files, the can you point me to them, so I can put them in whichever.

Joakim, on Mold Mauler, how about same as before, but make it sacrifice at end of turn and cost 4C, so that it's easily splashable? The effect seems like one you'd want in different colours. Maybe a 6/1 instead of 5/3 as well?
Chant Technician's Aura Swapping can stay at 4 mana, otherwise it might be a little too powerful.

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Sun, 2010-10-03 15:26
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

Sounds good to me.

There is def cards missing from both files. I'll work on pointing them out later. How did you get the link to just pull up the set file?
I always have to link to mediafire ot something.

Check out my updated set hub.

Sun, 2010-10-03 15:37
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

I put them up on Pifro. If you right click the link that then appears on Pifro, you can "Copy Link Location". That link location is the download.

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Sun, 2010-10-03 20:46
lord_joakim
lord_joakim's picture

Making it sacrifice itself sounds more decent, but what about making it cost 3C and then returning the aura to your hand instead? It'll only return one aura then anyways, not exactly worth five mana in my eyes, even though some damage goes through.

To put it bluntly, I'd rather up the original cost by 1 and otherwise keep it the same. That would slow it down terribly.

Chant Technician's aura swapping should cost 2WU then. A happy smile

Sun, 2010-10-03 21:18
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

Chant Technician could perhaps get away with 1WU, but we can sort that out in playtesting.
Mold Mauler I would prefer as a Ball Lightning creature. I think it's about as good as Putrefax, but with returning the aura to the battlefield, rather than poison and -1/-1 counters. So swap Infect for "Whenever this creature deals combat damage to a player, you may return an Aura you control from your graveyard to the battlefield attached to target permanent."

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Sun, 2010-10-03 21:34
lord_joakim
lord_joakim's picture

Let's try Putrefaxing it then. A happy smile

Wed, 2010-10-06 19:11
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

Right, I've added a much better version of the cards we need, and a fairly rubbish checklist that I wouldn't actually suggest using unless you think you're a complete noob. The cards we need part will have contending cards added to it in a couple days, I hope. As you were!

Oh, and Joakim... Putrefaxed. Stick out your tongue

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Wed, 2010-10-06 20:30
lord_joakim
lord_joakim's picture

White damage prevention

Holy Prevention 3W
Instant
Prevent all damage that would be dealt to up to three target creatures this turn.
Draw a card.

Wed, 2010-10-06 20:44
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

Thanks for that, Joakim. That's gone up on the front with the rest of the contending cards that I've just put up.
Feel free to point one out to go through if you like it.

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Wed, 2010-10-06 22:56
theonlyjett
theonlyjett's picture

Isn't there some sort of limit for characters in one post? Would it be easier to use a wiki or something? Something like this as an example? http://lumehaven.wikispaces.com

You could take submissions here and put them there yourself and then link to the site in your sig. Also we won't have to download a set file a bunch of times when you may not have made any changes. We could catch up how it's going over there and then come here and submit a bunch of cards and have some idea of what slots they are going to.

It's just a thought for you before you try to fit several sets worth of cards into one post. A happy smile

Edit: Btw, wikispaces is neater looking, but I actually think wetpaint is easier to use overall.

Thu, 2010-10-07 08:51
lord_joakim
lord_joakim's picture

More cards. For an "aura matters" set, we could just have some powerful auras with no set-specific abilities beyond being iconic.

Will Infusion 3UR
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant creature
You control enchanted creature. It has haste.

Blanchwood Ascension 2GW
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 for each Plains you control.
Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 for each Forest you control.
Enchanted creature has flying and trample. (and "GW: Regenerate this creature."?)

Flying Crab Aura GU
Enchantment - Aura
Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 and has flying.
G: Regenerate enchanted creature.
U: Untap enchanted creature.

Actually, we could make a cycle akin to the Blanchwood Ascension above.

Fri, 2010-10-08 01:26
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

I like that idea jett. It would be much easier to use this forum for dicussion only and have somewhere else to post the story, cards, skeleton, and such.

I just had some ideas come to me. These are more so examples to show off the idea rather than actual cards.

Instilled Growth Green mana symbol
Instant - U
Target creature gets +2/+2 until end of turn.
Ambience - If that creature is enchanted, it gets two +1/+1 counters instead.

Reflexive Defense White mana symbol
Instant - U
You may cast ~ only during your opponent's attack step.
Target creature gets +3/+3 until end of turn.
Ambience - If that creature is enchanted, untap it and it gains first strike until end of turn.

Wrecked Existance 2 mana symbolBlack mana symbolBlack mana symbol
Sorcery - U
Destroy target creature.
Ambience - If that creature is enchanted, its controller loses life equal to its power.

Turned Rage 2 mana symbolRed mana symbol
Sorcery - U
Gain control of target creature until end of turn. Untap that creature. It gains haste until end of turn.
Ambience - If that creature is enchanted, it gets +2/+0 and gains intimidate until end of turn.

The first two show how you can get more mileage out of your auras with these cards while the last two show how you can punish them without actually being "anti-enchantement" which I think is really flavorful and a cool way to give black and red some tricks that are in color.

So, what do ya think?

Check out my updated set hub.

Fri, 2010-10-08 08:11
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

Joakim, nice cards, however we're trying to keep the set as monocolour as possible, really, with only the occasional multicolour mythic, such as planeswalkers or Novablast Wurm, or something. But the ideas can be used on cards later on, so don't think it's completely nulled.

Guitarweeps, I like the idea of Ambience on instants/sorceries, though maybe we could do like what was done with Zendikar, and have these in the second set? I see what you mean about not being actually anti-enchantment, but still punishing the enchantment user, and I do wish to keep the idea, so we'll definitely use it at some point. Sound good?

And to Jett, I definitely agree, although I'm not sure how to work it. I will give it a go though, so gimme a day or two, or seven, to get them up there, and we'll see how it goes.

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Fri, 2010-10-08 11:10
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

I thought about that too but we are already doing that with replicate. Also, ambience as a mechanic is a little... well... unexciting so I thought this might boost it up a little. Not saying it isn't good, it just doesn't jump out and say "I can't wait for Lumehaven to release so I can use ambience!!!" if you know what I mean.

Also, didn't you say you wouldn't mind a single allied color uncommon cycle or something? If the flavor is there?

No rush on the wiki. I personally am really busy so there is no rush! Stick out your tongue

Check out my updated set hub.

Fri, 2010-10-08 11:33
theonlyjett
theonlyjett's picture

Lord Joakim: Just some flavor feedback. Will Infusion is certainly the right cost and color mechanics wise, but I feel that the name doesn't match up to it's colors. Blue compels creatures to attack their masters through mind control while red does so through inciting rage in the creature towards the mage who dared try to control it, or something similar. One controls, and the other frees the creature. At least, that's what I tend to get from the flavor on preexisting cards. The problem I have is that if you free a creature, you cannot also compel it and vice versa. The haste and red mana in the cost suggest rage but the name and blue mana in the cost suggest compulsion. This makes the flavor of the card hard for me to understand. Perhaps a thought on what exactly this spell is doing in "real life" and then a name change would fix the issue, idk. Let's say that the spell is planting a presumably false thought in the creature causing it to fly off it's handle. I'd say that's a UR thing to do. Traitorous Compulsion or Infusion of Betrayal are a couple of more serious suggestions. False Assumption, Wrong Idea, or Hasty Conclusion are good, if not a bit too real world, though that makes them kind of humorous in flavor to me and may actually be a good thing for the card. Don't mind me, I'm just rattling on.

Guitarweeps: I really like what you did there with those cards. Punishing enchantment users without yet another variation on enchantment destruction is really nice and opens up a lot more space for us to make cards.

As far as the first or second set questions, I think that we could probably aim for a bit more multicolor in the second set. Also might be possible to integrate multicolor into the story. Alliances and whatnot. Ambiance on sorceries and instants is something that we should do right now, though, imho. It really does give that extra punch to take Ambiance to the next level and make it enticing to play. Even just a sorcery and an instant in each color in the first set makes all the difference in the world in my mind.

Take some time to figure out what you like best. Like I already said, wikispaces is much neater looking, but wetpaint is somewhat easier to organize and use. Mostly in terms of being able to configure the left side navigation panel. I can help by playing around to find an easy to read format if you like. In the example I posted above, there's already blue and white started in two different formats.

Fri, 2010-10-08 13:02
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

Alright got an idea. Since Elek Longbeard is Dwarven then I would assume we will have some Dwarves in the set. Being that Dwarves love stonebuilding and weaponry I would deduce that they may not be too keen on enchantmal enhancements like other Lumehavians. Not sure if this is worded correctly, but got an idea...

Dwarven Naturalist 1 mana symbolRed mana symbolRed mana symbol
Creature - Dwarf Warrior - R
First strike, protection from white
Enchantments cannot raise creatures power or toughness.
Why would you rely on anything but yourself?
3/3

The first strike was to help make him useful without the enchantment clause. With white being the most enchantment using I felt it appropriate that he was powerful against it and white does not have an in color answer to him.

If the instant/sorcery ambience is a hit then I want to begin making actual cards.

Check out my updated set hub.

Fri, 2010-10-08 16:12
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

I suppose the push for Ambience might just be on instants and sorceries, so go ahead, and make as many as you want.

I like the idea of Dwarven Naturalist (name's a bit dodgy Stick out your tongue) although I think simply protection from enchantments (or Auras) would do a bit better, and I don't know how effective the second half would be, so I think maybe just a 2/2 for now?
With the wording, there are various different ways, just thinking about the right one, I cycle through a load of ways. How about: "Enchantments can't change a creature's power or toughness." Just to be a bit simpler.
Also, maybe this ability would be more worth Elek Longbeard himself? Elek the Preserver as a name? Or something synonymous with unchanging?

I've 'joined' the Lumehaven wiki page, dunno if I need to wait for you to accept, and give administrative flexibility to let me change and arrange the page, though.

Oh, and on multicolour, I don't think there's currently any flavour for two colour groups, unless I overlooked something. If there is something in the set that would require/deserve two+ colours, please tell me. But I don't think we have a strong enough flavour reason yet.
However, I would like to introduce a two colour culture or group in the final (third?) set, so we can save up the idea ideas for then, yeah?

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Fri, 2010-10-08 16:28
lord_joakim
lord_joakim's picture

I actually thought a good deal about the name Will Infusion, which was why I arrived at that. First, to your suggestions: Traitorous Compulsion and Infusion of Betrayal don't sound blue at all, they sound purely red - or black. The remainder would need some rework - I like False Assumption and Hasty Conclusion, but I think Will Infusion sounds powerful and is right to its colors. Remember what it represents... I don't really see where you are unable to connect the name with its colors. Stick out your tongue I'm actually in the situation that there are so many options to make this work flavorfully to me that I have difficulties writing it down...

1) Will - willpower, drive, need, mental dedication. Remember, will is both impulsive and considering. A powerful will isn't necessarily either, it just has a larger drive. A strong willpower/drive is very valued in the Izzet, you know...
2) Infusion - Insertion, really. I don't know many synonyms to this.
Where is the problem? Rage Infusion would be red. Will Control would be blue. But this is neither. It's using something that both red and blue values, drive, will, mental strength, and uses it both ways. The blue mage infuses his will because it allows him to control. The red mage infuses his will because it will bring the subject into impulse. Combined, you have an impulsive entity under your control. Red and blue combined.

I know it's possibly too straightforwarrd, but I'm not sure exactly where you see the problem at first. Stick out your tongue

Also, Ambience should not go on Sorceries or Instants in the first set. Think about the reason WotC waited with plotting Landfall onto nonpermanents until their second set. It's not a good idea before the players have gotten a hold of how it feels.

Fri, 2010-10-08 17:17
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

At this rate we'll be keeping everything for the later sets. Which I suppose is good, however, I'm half afraid we'll never end up getting there. I'm not too fussed which set they go in, so maybe we'll keep them out for now, and put them in this set if we need them, which is unlikely.

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Fri, 2010-10-08 21:05
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

Yes, Wizards did that with landfall but then they put metalcraft on permanents and nonpermanents in Scars so we have a precedent either way. Now consider this:

1. Ambience is more comparable to metalcraft then landfall. Plus it is much simpler then landfall.
2. We are already planning on transferring replicate from instant/sorcery to permenents in a later set. Do we want to do the same with another mechanic?
3. Ambience really is not an exciting mechanic as is. Even though it has strong flavor and can used in interesting mechanical ways, it just is not something that seems exciting as a mechanic. I think that introducing it on permanents and non in the first set would help give it a more "exciting" introduction.
4. As I said it would give red and black ways to punish the enchantment theme without actually being anti-enchantment.

Dwarven Naturalist - placeholder name Nutty. And I did consider making it Elek Longbeard but I was going wait and see what the reaction was to the concept. I didn't think that protection from enchantments sounded like a red ability; I had considered it. It would be white or maybe blue. The reason I put 3/3 was I wanted it to be a useful card without the enchantment ability so that you could still play it when you would not know if it would meet enchantment altering effects. And your wording is fine.

Will Infusion - I could argue both sides of the name but the card itself is pretty awesome. It should untap the creature too. Although, we can't use it in the set being a UR card. Maybe in a later one.

Also, note that a cycle like Blanchwood Ascension wouldn't have to be multicolor...

Check out my updated set hub.

Fri, 2010-10-08 21:08
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

The main point shown there, is the fourth, anti-enchantment without blatant anti-enchantment cards. I think there are more people wanting it in than saved, right now.

I don't know what colour protection from enchantments is. From Azorius First-Wing and Tattoo Ward, I'm guessing white, and maybe blue. How about keeping it a 2/2 and give it protection from white and from blue, without first strike? Then it becomes a twicely good sideboard card. Possibly too good, but we'll see. Possibly CCC?

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Fri, 2010-10-08 23:16
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

Ever seen Paladin En-Vec? Hardly too good at all. Honestly, a 3/3 first strike w pro white is not overly powerful. It can be very good, and most likely ahead of the curve, but not too good. I would rather not have pro blue cause it doesn't fit the concept I had flavorwise. I guess that could change if needed, but the point was for red to have a flavorful card against enchantments that fit in color.

EDIT: We should maybe have a planeswalker whom originates from Lumehaven and is an auramancer. Working on ideas, but not sure how to best represent that on a planeswalker card.

EDIT AGAIN: Noticed that Prismatic Blast is in the first post which is way to good IMO. Plus direct damage w replicate was done before. I would like to submit:

Carnal Lightning Red mana symbol
Instant - C
~ deals 3 damage to target creature.
Ambience - ~ deals 5 damage to that creature instead if it is enchanted.
Anything can be conquered by enough raw power. - Elek Longbeard

Also, noticed that there are four equipments in the skeleton. I would say that we should go with less than that. On Lumehaven, the residents rely on aura enhancements more so than equipment and other physical things. There would be some at least for the Dwarves. Also, maybe Lumehaven might be a good chance to step away from the norm of red's main creature type being goblin and have it be dwarves instead?

Check out my updated set hub.

Fri, 2010-10-08 23:19
lord_joakim
lord_joakim's picture

I see your point about Ambience, and now I agree, since, as you say, it's more akin to Metalcraft than to Landfall.

Please do include it in this set. A happy smile

Will Infusion - I'm happy people liked the mechanic. It just occured to me how it should look like. But of course, the creature should untap.

EDIT: AND PLEASE USE DWARVES INSTEAD OF GOBLINS. Use some Goblins, of course, but mostly Dwarves. I love Dwarves.

Fri, 2010-10-08 23:49
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

Well, if you're sure stopping boosting Auras isn't too powerful an effect, then I suppose we could keep it as it is. Perhaps we could do a mirror with protection from blue and some other nonenchantment stopping ability? Something that stops token spawn, maybe? Or limits it, or something else similarly.

I had realised that despite changing it to creature only damage, it could still remove multiple creatures. I think yours is a fairly better card, it should work well.

I don't think four equipments is too much, really, I mean most of the sets have about 4 in them, the starting set maybe a few extra. We could take one or two out, but I don't think it will take up too much space. We'll see in the end if they're using slots.

Oh, and yeah, I think Dwarves can take over from Goblins for our block.

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Sat, 2010-10-09 04:21
theonlyjett
theonlyjett's picture

Lord Joakim: I suppose I can see it more clearly now. When I read it, I kept thinking it was infusing the creature with YOUR will rather than infusing it with A will, which would be it's own and therefore freeing it rather than compelling it. I guess that's my only issue still with it, that it may not obvious at first, as it wasn't to me. But whatever, it's your card and I still like it, just giving feedback for ya. A happy smile

About things being too good. I personally would like to push the limits about what are good cards, particularly with creatures. We can always bump up the rarity or the cost and we really wouldn't know for sure till we play with it. With Wizard's approach to making creatures better, I feel this is the right way to handle this.

About Dwarven Naturalist. All that said, at that rarity and CMC, I don't see many effects that potentially affect the whole board in red as the power to neutralize the pumping from enchantments in this block's environment. Potential power like that on a permanent seems like it should at least be a 4 drop at 1 mana symbolRed mana symbolRed mana symbolRed mana symbol maybe. This, of course, is just my most humble opinion and I think we can afford to wait to play it first.

I, too, agree that we need Dwarves!

I accepted the request anyone to be menbers of the page. All members can edit whatever. I highly suggest though, that only Anuttymous or a designated person add cards to the wiki, though. Otherwise it may get too complicated if people put cards in the wrong spot or whatever. Also, if we submitted cards there only, it would take away from the activity on this thread which shows that we're still active and working on it.

Nutty, if you like, I can draw out the basic layout in a page for each color and "other" and you can just fill in the cards. Maybe keep the card you think is the strongest contender on the top. It would give me something to do, lol.

Sat, 2010-10-09 08:05
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

Glad everyone agrees on ambience. Yea!

Dwarves it is I see. Notice that wizards has not yet actually explored the flavor and mechanic aspect of dwarves in any set so we can almost set the precedent of what a dwarf is flavorfully. Dwarves normally love stonework and ironforging so that could be a part of it.

My comments on the equipment being too much was based on the fact that this set will have more auras than usual and if we are honest, equipment is basically a reusable aura so they compete for the same design space and space in deckbuilding. Because of that we should have less equipment than in other sets IMO. On the flipside Dwarves really like equipment so I am thinking maybe common, uncommon, and rare/mythic?

We can use the wiki page as storage only and use this as discussion to keep the thread active. Maybe a post when the wiki is updated to bump it?

Out of my original ambience ideas I think I want to keep Instilled Growth (moved to common) and Wrecked Existence (w drain life instead of just lose life), although I am not convinced that Wrecked Existance should stay as is. Black doesn not often get destroy any creature althoguh it has. I don't want it to do non-black though, but maybe we should.

Spoiler:
Instilled Growth Green mana symbol
Instant - C
Target creature gets +2/+2 until end of turn.
Ambience - If that creature is enchanted, it gets two +1/+1 counters instead.

Wrecked Existance 2 mana symbolBlack mana symbolBlack mana symbol
Sorcery - U
Destroy target creature.
Ambience - If that creature is enchanted, its controller loses life equal to its power and you gain that much life.

Check out my updated set hub.

Sat, 2010-10-09 09:06
theonlyjett
theonlyjett's picture

Obviously Dwarves are red. In this set I think we should lean towards them being red. However, if we go with a classical approach to dwarves, I believe that they fit white as well. They organize and work together well and tend to take pride in their race. None of that is red. Equipment should all be dwarven in this set just so we can use those cards to help flavor the dwarves.

Warning: Cards in this post may not be properly costed.

Dwarven Hammer 3 mana symbol
Artifact -- Equipment Colorless mana symbol
Equipped creature gets +3/+2.
Equip 3
You may attach ~ to a dwarf without paying it's equip cost.

Dwarven Greaves 2 mana symbol
Artifact -- Equipment Blue mana symbol
Equipped creature has haste and mountainwalk.
Equip 1 mana symbol
If you control a mountain, equipped creature gets +0/+3.

Dwarven Aura Shatterer 2 mana symbol
Artifact -- Equipment Red mana symbol
Equipped creature gets +2/+2.
Equip 3 mana symbol
When equipped creature deals damage to a creature, destroy all Auras attached to that creature.

The rare doesn't seem too powerful at first, I might need it recosted. I'm aiming for a cheap equipment, that smashes the auras attached to the creature it does battle with. So if their toughness is boosted by an aura, the shatterer does damage and removes the boost at the same time, without actually bumping up the equipped creature too much.


For the auramancer planeswalker, maybe we can use token enchantments just this one time to good flavor effect.

Auramancer Planeswalker 2WW
Planeswalker -- Auramancer M Mana for MTG Extra
+1: Put an aura enchantment token onto the battlefield attached to target creature with "Enchanted creature gets vigilance."
+0: Attached an Aura you control to another creature you control.
-6: Enchanted creatures you control get +2/+2 and protection from the color of your choice until end of turn.
3

Lol, I don't know, something like that. I figure if we only do enchantment tokens on this one card, then we can say that our set has enchantment tokens without being ridiculous. A happy smile This is just an example, I'm not in the creative department for this project, so the name and specific color and abilities has to come from whatever hero Guitarweeps has in the story, I guess.


Fyi, I set both of you who applied at the wiki to organizer, but I honestly can't tell what the difference was, lol. As far as I can tell, all members can edit everything anyways.

Sat, 2010-10-09 21:53
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

I think maybe just 3 or 4 Equipment to reinforce the Dwarves. One that directly links to them, one that involves enchantments or Auras, and one other.
Instilled Growth is good, however Wrecked Existence I'd like to keep common, so that we have a cycle of Ambience instants/sorceries at common. So perhaps just lose life? And nonblack.

The equipments are all right, however they are indeed wildly balanced, and they seem a bit confusing. I like the idea of the first one, though. Definitely consider using that at some point.

I don't think we'll be using Aura tokens for this set, I'd like to refrain from that, as it gets a bit confusing. Unless more people want them, I think it'd be best kept out. Maybe in the final set, as a small new mechanic. Also, I'd like to wait for a while before suggesting planeswalkers.

I'll have a look at the wiki page, and if I can't manage it very well, I may need you to help. But I can't imagine it's too hard, eh?

[edit]Oh, yeah, check the Wiki page now, I put up as much as I can be bothered for now: http://lumehaven.wikispaces.com/ [/edit]

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Sat, 2010-10-09 21:53
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

I was kind of thinking that we would have a common and uncommon cycle but maybe that is too much.

What exactly is the difference between an aura token and a creature token?

Check out my updated set hub.

Sat, 2010-10-09 22:07
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

Maybe a common cycle now, and save the uncommon one for if we have space.
I suppose there isn't much difference, but Wizards haven't used Aura tokens as of yet, so there must be a reason for it.
Also, for a set based on enchantments, the ability to make tokens (which is generally a repeatable ability) would mean we have to be a lot more careful about how we do things. Not to mention, I don't know how they would work with Incessant.

Here's a moderate flier, just randomly as we have no incessant:

Otagriff 2 mana symbolWhite mana symbolWhite mana symbol
Enchantment creature - Griffin Colorless mana symbol
Flying
Incessant (When this is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, you may attach any Auras attached to it to any permanents they could enchant.)
3/3

Now, I'm still not sure as of yet whether or not we're going to make enchantment creatures somewhat more powerful than normal creatures, due to their ease of removal, or whether we're going to put in things that boost enchantment creatures in a way that cancels out the removal.

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Sun, 2010-10-10 04:28
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

I assume the reason is simply that the need has not arisen yet. With incessant, the token would go to graveyard, incessant would trigger, the token would cease to exist as a rule, and incessant would do nothing.

Check out my updated set hub.

Sun, 2010-10-10 04:34
theonlyjett
theonlyjett's picture

Nah, the creature would go to a graveyard and incessant would trigger doing exactly the same thing to a token aura as any other aura. Wizard's hasn't had an enchantment block since Urza, and let's face it, design tech is significantly better in comparison. There's no reason we couldn't do them, particularly on an already mythic planeswalker who's supposed to be an auramancer.

Sun, 2010-10-10 10:40
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

So tell me what zone the token aura would be in while incessant is on the stack? The only way it would work is if it were still on the battlefield which would be impossible since the creature it enchants is in the graveyard. As soon as a token changes zones it ceases to exist. Just like token creatures with persist still trigger persist when they go to the graveyard, but then persist does nothing because the token ceases to exist.

Check out my updated set hub.

Sun, 2010-10-10 12:12
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

So we could use token Auras as a nonincessantable Aura, meaning they can be more powerful than normal. Maybe they wouldn't be such a bad idea.
And what about power levels of enchantment creatures? Is everyone agreed that they should be particularly more powerful than others?

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Sun, 2010-10-10 19:15
theonlyjett
theonlyjett's picture

At the moment the creature leaves the battlefield for the graveyard, the aura is actually still in the graveyard and then gets sent to the graveyard by the state based effect. At the moment that the creature leaves the battlefield, incessant can move the aura attached to it. It does not bring back the aura from the graveyard. A token aura then, would not cease to exist and would be moved to another permanent just like any other aura.

Not only do the rules work like this, but from a common sense perspective, it wouldn't make sense to treat an aura token any differently than a standard aura. How would a player unversed in the rules be able to guess that aura tokens behave differently?

Now I only suggested that we use token auras just on the already mythic rare planeswalker. I do not suggest that we have any other token auras in this or any other set.

Sun, 2010-10-10 19:19
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

Well, I had planned on putting in the rules text for Incessant: "An Aura enchantment token would cease to exist before this ability resolves." Or something along those lines, at the end.
Since bringing it up, I think it might not be a bad idea, as it means we can have Auras that aren't returned by Incessant, and can thus be more powerful. However, seeing as the rules conflict, we'll have to perhaps not do that.

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Sun, 2010-10-10 19:50
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

Well unless we have a card that just needs token auras I think that the planeswalker would be the only card to generate them, at least until the next set when replicate can show up on auras...

A standard aura also goes to the graveyard as incessant triggers.

Check out my updated set hub.

Sun, 2010-10-10 19:56
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

I'm okay with having just the planeswalker generating the tokens in the first set, though it does pose on the Replicate moving to permanents, so there will probably be some then. They're copies though, so not quite the same. In fact, it might be a little harder to manage Auras with replicate, as they have to attach. Other permaments, you could use a dice, but knowing which things are attached might be tough.

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help

Mon, 2010-10-11 09:09
Guitarweeps
Friendly MSE Designer
Guitarweeps's picture

People can figure it out and it would not be on many anyways, as a rule.
Also, maybe the planeswalker should only create auras as a - ability to reduce the number that are out there.

Maybe we should determine what we want incessant to do, because right now the wording has it come back from the graveyard and it sounds like everyone does not intend for that to happen. Rules-wise it acts just like persist. The creature hits the graveyard with all auras attached, incessant triggers, upon resolution the aura is returned from the graveyard to a new target. A lot can happen here. If the aura is no longer in the graveyard, say due to Leyline of the Void or Faerie Macabre or Relic of Progenitus when incessant resolves, it does nothing. Same when a token aura is in question, it does nothing because as soon as the token enters the grave it is gone. If we want it to not hit the grave at all, and just transfer then we are talking about some type of replacement effect or something which gets overly complicated IMO. Maybe we should put it in the clinic if that is what we want.

On the enchantment creatures; although having them more powerful would support the idea that luminated beings are more powerful, it would be bad for power level concerns. Being enchantment is not enough of a "drawback" to justify that. With that said, enchantment creatures for the most part should "feel" like they are enchantments, such as static effects maybe, incessant, or something like that. Of course we will need some "plain" ones to fill in the blanks but you know.

Some possible Dwarves:

Dwarven Fireforger Red mana symbol
Creature - Dwarf Smith U
Tap symbol, sacrifice a mountain: Add Red mana symbolRed mana symbol to your mana pool.
1/1

Hammertow Crusher 2 mana symbolRed mana symbol
Creature - Dwarf Warrior C
Creatures blocking ~ have first strike.
They carry hammers that could reduce a forest troll's head to a mosspile...if they had enough time to swing it.
5/2

Check out my updated set hub.

Tue, 2010-10-12 09:29
Anuttymous
Anuttymous's picture

Hammertow Crusher needs to cost 3 mana symbolRed mana symbol really, as if itself is blocked, it becomes a 5/2 first strike, which is powerful. The static is only bad half the time. Possibly 4 mana symbolRed mana symbol, I don't know.
The Dwarven Fireforger looks alright, I don't think I can see it being abused, as it has to tap.

I like Incessant the way it is, because it basically keeps one big creature going until you have no creatures left at all. You could turn a weenie deck into a monstrosity, for as long as you have an Incessant. So for that reason, we need to make sure people can stop these things, for example using Relic of Progenitus or similar cards, and that at least some of the Auras disappear - token Auras. All it should require is adding a small line to the rules text of incessant explaining token Auras, or a rules insert for more depth.

I wasn't planning on making the creatures highly powerful, just a little bit more powerful than usual, for example a 2/2 flier for 1 mana symbolWhite mana symbol, which seems strictly better than normal, but with things like Kor Aeronaut and similar, it wouldn't be, and if we include a few mass enchantment removals, we should be alright.
For that, I'd like to suggest Nova Cleric and Tranquil Path, or something similar. I would like to return Tranquil Path, because it's like the Slice in Twain of Scars (highly costed because of cantrip). Maybe a new, weaker, white mass removal. How's this:

CARDNAME 4 mana symbolWhite mana symbolWhite mana symbol
Sorcery Blue mana symbol
Choose one - Destroy all artifacts, and you gain 3 life for each artifact destroyed this way; and/or destroy all enchantments, and you gain 3 life for each enchantment destroyed this way.

Too powerful?

Anuttymous the Gathering
Anonymous + nutty = A-nutty-mous (no mice involved)
Ask me if you need any help