I am trying to decide whether my set "Rainbowopolis" should have a dual cycle in it. (approx. 175 card set) The cycle would be 10 cards in all, for each color pairing. For a while now the mechanic I was going to use for the cycle is this:
Pressure Steamworks
Land
:symtap:: Add to your mana pool.
:symtap:, Reveal a blue or red card in your hand: Add or to your mana pool.
I wasn't sure about this mechanic for some reason. It could be the fact that most of the time you'd be casting the very card you just revealed. I thought about scrapping the dual cycle from the set altogether, but then I came up with this revision:
Pressure Steamworks
Land
When Cardname enters the battlefield, sacrifice it unless you exile a blue or red card from your hand.
:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.
When you have no cards in hand or when Cardname leaves the battlefield, return the exiled card to your hand.
Any thoughts? Is it a keeper?
A cool thing about it: If the last card in your hand is another Pressure Steamworks (or another land from the cycle) then you can play it and successfully switch the exiled card from one to the other, thus being able to keep both lands, as well as getting the card back. (Please correct me if I'm wrong on this!)
One other thing. Should you be allowed to exile any card from your hand? (meaning you could exile lands and artifacts as well as cards in unrelated colors) I mean does it really matter whether you exile an on-color card or not. Plus it would be cool to be able to exile another land. (though, wait, it could result in confusion since it could look like the land is on the battlefield..)
edit: New revision:
Cardname
Land - Island Mountain (:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.)
Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
* or *
Cardname
Land
Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.
Looks good if you get rid of the first part of the last ability. Just give back the card when the land leaves play.
Problem is the card doesn't come with a way to sacrifice itself. So normally the exiled card could just sit in exile forever, which is too much of a drawback. (see also: Chrome Mox)
Even if the card let you sac itself, it means that you have to set yourself back a land just to get the exiled card back. The "no cards in hand" part means you can eventually get your card back all on its own. At the same thing it leaves open the possibility of sacrificing/bouncing the lands through external means, as well as removing your hand on purpose through external means.
Chrome Mox is actually a great and powerful card. It's not always optimal, due to the lost card advantage, but plenty of decks have used it to great effect.
I dislike when a card has a built-in failsafe for its own drawbacks. You should have to use other cards to offset a drawback, or even use it as an advantage. Stampeding Wildebeests sucks on its own, but is awesome when you also play Elvish Visionary.
If you're going to keep the "when you have no cards in hand, you get the card back", I'd restrict the exiled card to basic lands of the appropriate types instead - for example, with Pressure Steamworks, you'd exile either a Mountain or an Island.
If you're going to keep the "when you have no cards in hand, you get the card back", I'd restrict the exiled card to basic lands of the appropriate types instead - for example, with Pressure Steamworks, you'd exile either a Mountain or an Island.
It's common for players to stack their lands. The exiled card could look like another land on the battlefield.
Not sure why you would suggest this change, though. Is it meant to make the card more restricting / make the drawback more difficult? Well actually you're right, it would, since by exiling a land it becomes more likely to get stuck with high mana cost spells you wouldn't be able to empty out. Note however that by exiling a spell, you're giving your opponent more information on your deck than you would by exiling a land. I think that's an exciting element, personally.
Chrome Mox is actually a great and powerful card. It's not always optimal, due to the lost card advantage, but plenty of decks have used it to great effect.
I know Chrome Mox a good card. But I'm saying that without the "failsafe" the land's drawback is about as severe as Chrome Mox, which isn't really warranted considering all it does is fix colors.
I dislike when a card has a built-in failsafe for its own drawbacks.
Temporarily exiling a card is the drawback. (And note that the original version of the land had you reveal a card rather than exiling it!)
You should have to use other cards to offset a drawback, or even use it as an advantage. Stampeding Wildebeests sucks on its own, but is awesome when you also play Elvish Visionary.
With the change you proposed to the land, there is no way to offset the drawback and no way to use it as an advantage. At best you can sacrifice the land to get your card back. Either way you're down a land card, or a nonland card. If anything the land I posted is more interesting, since it invites more ways to deal with the drawback, such as playing with your hand size. (discarding your hand, temporarily removing your hand, discarding cards while a draw spell is on the stack, etc) While still allowing player to sacrifice/bounce their own land, of course.
However if I do what you proposed and remove the "no cards in hand" part then I think I would still have to include a way for the card to sacrifice itself. Otherwise it would seem like a loose end.
Cardname
Land
When Cardname enters the battlefield, sacrifice it unless you exile a blue or red card from your hand.
:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.
Return Cardname to your hand: Return the exiled card to your hand.
Hey, that's actually not so bad! What would you say to this card?
nevermind! See the proper version below!
Hey, that's actually not so bad! What would you say to this card?
Turns fastbond into channel. Immune to wasteland and nearly every form of land destruction (making it better than the colorless darksteel citadel). Bypasses winter orb and back to basics. Produces 2 mana if you don't have a land drop that turn; given that it produces kinds of colored mana, probably worth the loss of a land drop in cases where you just have a basic land in hand; double triggers landfall. Great against early game discard effects (duress and the like), letting you hide a card from discard until such time as you build the mana to cast the exiled card, making it a boon for combo and control, although any deck can use it against discarder decks.
This is basically a land that produces 2 kinds of mana with no real drawback, plus a few more abilities tacked on. Eat your heart out volcanic island, this land is better in so many ways it isn't funny.
Produces 2 mana if you don't have a land drop that turn
oh no no, that's not right at all. That was not intentional.
I guess while writing the card I changed from "sacrifice Cardname" to "Return Cardname to your hand" too quickly, without realizing what I was doing.
Cardname
Land
When Cardname enters the battlefield, sacrifice it unless you exile a blue or red card from your hand.
:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.
Sacrifice Cardname: Return the exiled card to your hand.
By the way, I realized this mechanic potentially does not have to be a cycle at all, but a single card:
A: (sac version)
Cardname
Land
When Cardname enters the battlefield, sacrifice it or exile a card from your hand.
:symtap:: Add one mana to your mana pool of one of the exiled card’s colors.
Sacrifice Cardname: Return the exiled card to your hand.
B: (wickerman version)
Cardname
Land
When Cardname enters the battlefield, sacrifice it or exile a card from your hand.
:symtap:: Add one mana to your mana pool of one of the exiled card’s colors.
When you have no cards in hand or when Cardname leaves the battlefield, return the exiled card to your hand.
This may not even be the first time I realized this. However the drawback to this idea is that it becomes more dependent on multicolor spells. On the other hand there is more relevance to what card you exile, whereas the dual land cycle raises the question of why not be able to exile any card. (such as artifacts or off color cards)
It shouldn't - you should be keeping your exiled cards separate from your cards on the battlefield. Even in casual games.
People seriously don't stack their imprinted cards? (Isochron Scepter, etc) Even if you don't stack, it creates memory issues. (well assuming more than one card is exiled)
The only problem here is imo, you are making a worse chrome mox. Especially in the first version. I think the only redeeming part of the land is the ability to eventually get your card back for free. Saccing the land is a huge drawback...
I realized two things
1) What if the exile wasn't mandatory
2) What if the exiled card returned to you on your next upkeep?
with basic land types:
Cardname
Land - Island Mountain (:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.)
Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
without basic land types:
Cardname
Land
Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.
Though now it looks like a lot like the Ravnica cycle of duals. :i
Is that ok?
If it's ok then I'd like to use this version. A huge plus is that it's short, and only 2 abilities, meaning there's room for flavor text.
Also want to make sure this sentence is ok:
"When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it."
Would this sentence work better instead?
"When it does, you may untap it and exile a nonland card from your hand."
As ~ enters the battlefield, you may exile a <Quality> card from your hand. If you don't ~ enters the battlefield tapped. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Hey, the templates already half there, why not just adapt it?
As ~ enters the battlefield, you may exile a <Quality> card from your hand. If you don't ~ enters the battlefield tapped. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Hey, the templates already half there, why not just adapt it?
Thanks, but yours is a tad longer, and has two instances of Cardname.
As Cardname enters the battlefield, you may exile a nonland card from your hand. If you don't, Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Either one works, right?
I've seen a card in one of the more recent sets with the phrase:
"Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does.."
which I think works well here
That is the reminder text of Mosswort Bridge and its ilk. The actual rules text is written out in full.
702.72. Hideaway
702.72a Hideaway represents a static ability and a triggered ability. “Hideaway” means “This permanent enters the battlefield tapped” and “When this permanent enters the battlefield, look at the top four cards of your library. Exile one of them face down and put the rest on the bottom of your library in any order. The exiled card gains ‘Any player who has controlled the permanent that exiled this card may look at this card in the exile zone.’”
As CARDNAME enters the battlefield, you may exile a nonland card from your hand. If you don't, CARDNAME enters the battlefield tapped. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
CARDNAME enters the battlefield tapped. When it enters the battlefield, you may exile a nonland card from your hand. If you do, untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Technically the second one should also have a paragraph break after the enters tapped sentence. But really, either way you have managed to take a drawback, make it wordier and almost completely removed the drawback: You play this, exile a card that you can't use this turn anyway, then you get it back next turn. How is that a drawback? Why not just reveal a card from your hand and say that you can't cast that card until your next turn? At least that would have less triggers.
CARDNAME enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
As CARDNAME enters the battlefield, you may exile a nonland card from your hand. If you don't, CARDNAME enters the battlefield tapped. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
CARDNAME enters the battlefield tapped. When it enters the battlefield, you may exile a nonland card from your hand. If you do, untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Keyword (This enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.)
When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, sacrifice it or exile a nonland card from your hand. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
As CARDNAME enters the battlefield, instead put it into your graveyard unless you exile a nonland card from your hand. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
one of those then
Thanks for replying, if it weren't for you I wouldn't have changed it.
But really, either way you have managed to take a drawback, make it wordier and almost completely removed the drawback: You play this, exile a card that you can't use this turn anyway, then you get it back next turn. How is that a drawback?
The drawback is two things, 1) Giving information to your opponent, and 2) Not being able to cast the exiled card until next turn, which would be an issue if you have only 1-3 cards left in your hand, or wanted to cast 2 or more spells that turn.
Though it's also a question of how big the drawback has to be. Ok the drawback here is mild. It's a mild drawback, that's the point. But it serves its purpose, plus it looks fun.
Why not just reveal a card from your hand and say that you can't cast that card until your next turn?
How would that be any less wordier? I'd have to replace "exile a nonland card from your hand" with "reveal a nonland card from your hand", and I'd have to replace "return the exiled card at the beginning of your next upkeep" with "you can't cast spells with that name until your next turn". The resulting card would the exact same length. -_-
anyway, I might with go with:
"When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, sacrifice it or exile a nonland card from your hand. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep."
Problem is the card doesn't come with a way to sacrifice itself. So normally the exiled card could just sit in exile forever, which is too much of a drawback. (see also: Chrome Mox)
Even if the card let you sac itself, it means that you have to set yourself back a land just to get the exiled card back. The "no cards in hand" part means you can eventually get your card back all on its own. At the same thing it leaves open the possibility of sacrificing/bouncing the lands through external means, as well as removing your hand on purpose through external means.
I don't know what the rest of this set (I'm guessing there's a set here) looks like, but with the Imprint version of your duals, if you really want to offset the drawback, have an exile subtheme. Cards that can be cast from exile perhaps, or cards that interact with already exiled cards. Honestly, Imprint was rather good. Look at Chrome Mox and Isochron Scepter. Both very powerful cards, even without the exiled cards having any more interaction.
But then you can't play lands if you don't have any cards in your hand... with the other template, you just had to play it tapped.
And besides, these lands need like what? 1 line other than this? Space isn't going to be an issue on them.
first the drawback is too little, now it's too much!
anyway 9 of of 10 cards in the cycle have flavor text, so it gets a little crowded with all three things on there. (ability, mana ability, and flavor text)
Question is:
- Is it ok to make it a sac clause for no reason other than to shorten the text?
- Does the sac clause make the card too weak?
edit: I think I'm going with this. Just now punched it in MSE and it works out.
edit again: Though the keyword version is good too. Maybe I should go with that. It makes sense considering the ability is the same on every land in the cycle. (you can exile a card of any color regardless of land) It also has the illusion of making the card feel shorter because most of the text is reminder text, while still being almost as short as the sac clause version. Not to mention I don't have to gimp the card this way. (that's always a plus)
Question is, what should the keyword's name be..
maybe "Awe"
or "Marvel"
edit: definitely Marvel
Marvel (This enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.)
But it's not really a drawback, especially in the early turns of the game. It seems far too powerful; the Ravnica duals were considered the best since the originals, and these seem just as good, if not better. How about
Cardname
Land
~ Doesn't untap during your untap phase.
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may exile a card from your hand. If you do, untap ~. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
T: Add R or U to your mana pool.
This way its not too overpowered and you can choose to stop feeding it cards if you don't need the mana anymore, and its really bad in multiples. I like this design, I might have to use it for my custom set now...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
T2:
UR Ascension
Mono-U Birthing Pod
This is great news. First the McRib now Time Spiral!
I am ok with making this cycle a bit over the curve.
The main problem with your suggestion is that it's too long.
Because through the course of this thread I found at least two ways to do this mechanic while keeping it short enough for flavor text. So if one of those ways is overpowered, I'd just do it the other way.
If this is overpowered:
Keyword (This enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.)
Then what would you say to this:
When Cardname enters the battlefield, sacrifice it unless you exile a nonland card from your hand. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Same as above:
Keyword - When Cardname enters the battlefield, sacrifice it unless you exile a nonland card from your hand. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Pressure Steamworks
Land
:symtap:: Add to your mana pool.
:symtap:, Reveal a blue or red card in your hand: Add or to your mana pool.
I wasn't sure about this mechanic for some reason. It could be the fact that most of the time you'd be casting the very card you just revealed. I thought about scrapping the dual cycle from the set altogether, but then I came up with this revision:
Land
When Cardname enters the battlefield, sacrifice it unless you exile a blue or red card from your hand.
:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.
When you have no cards in hand or when Cardname leaves the battlefield, return the exiled card to your hand.
Any thoughts? Is it a keeper?
A cool thing about it: If the last card in your hand is another Pressure Steamworks (or another land from the cycle) then you can play it and successfully switch the exiled card from one to the other, thus being able to keep both lands, as well as getting the card back. (Please correct me if I'm wrong on this!)
One other thing. Should you be allowed to exile any card from your hand? (meaning you could exile lands and artifacts as well as cards in unrelated colors) I mean does it really matter whether you exile an on-color card or not. Plus it would be cool to be able to exile another land. (though, wait, it could result in confusion since it could look like the land is on the battlefield..)
edit: New revision:
Cardname
Land - Island Mountain
(:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.)
Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
* or *
Cardname
Land
Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
Problem is the card doesn't come with a way to sacrifice itself. So normally the exiled card could just sit in exile forever, which is too much of a drawback. (see also: Chrome Mox)
Even if the card let you sac itself, it means that you have to set yourself back a land just to get the exiled card back. The "no cards in hand" part means you can eventually get your card back all on its own. At the same thing it leaves open the possibility of sacrificing/bouncing the lands through external means, as well as removing your hand on purpose through external means.
I dislike when a card has a built-in failsafe for its own drawbacks. You should have to use other cards to offset a drawback, or even use it as an advantage. Stampeding Wildebeests sucks on its own, but is awesome when you also play Elvish Visionary.
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
It's common for players to stack their lands. The exiled card could look like another land on the battlefield.
Not sure why you would suggest this change, though. Is it meant to make the card more restricting / make the drawback more difficult? Well actually you're right, it would, since by exiling a land it becomes more likely to get stuck with high mana cost spells you wouldn't be able to empty out. Note however that by exiling a spell, you're giving your opponent more information on your deck than you would by exiling a land. I think that's an exciting element, personally.
I know Chrome Mox a good card. But I'm saying that without the "failsafe" the land's drawback is about as severe as Chrome Mox, which isn't really warranted considering all it does is fix colors.
Temporarily exiling a card is the drawback. (And note that the original version of the land had you reveal a card rather than exiling it!)
With the change you proposed to the land, there is no way to offset the drawback and no way to use it as an advantage. At best you can sacrifice the land to get your card back. Either way you're down a land card, or a nonland card. If anything the land I posted is more interesting, since it invites more ways to deal with the drawback, such as playing with your hand size. (discarding your hand, temporarily removing your hand, discarding cards while a draw spell is on the stack, etc) While still allowing player to sacrifice/bounce their own land, of course.
However if I do what you proposed and remove the "no cards in hand" part then I think I would still have to include a way for the card to sacrifice itself. Otherwise it would seem like a loose end.
Hey, that's actually not so bad! What would you say to this card?nevermind! See the proper version below!
Turns fastbond into channel. Immune to wasteland and nearly every form of land destruction (making it better than the colorless darksteel citadel). Bypasses winter orb and back to basics. Produces 2 mana if you don't have a land drop that turn; given that it produces kinds of colored mana, probably worth the loss of a land drop in cases where you just have a basic land in hand; double triggers landfall. Great against early game discard effects (duress and the like), letting you hide a card from discard until such time as you build the mana to cast the exiled card, making it a boon for combo and control, although any deck can use it against discarder decks.
This is basically a land that produces 2 kinds of mana with no real drawback, plus a few more abilities tacked on. Eat your heart out volcanic island, this land is better in so many ways it isn't funny.
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
oh no no, that's not right at all. That was not intentional.
I guess while writing the card I changed from "sacrifice Cardname" to "Return Cardname to your hand" too quickly, without realizing what I was doing.
What about now?
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
A: (sac version)
Cardname
Land
When Cardname enters the battlefield, sacrifice it or exile a card from your hand.
:symtap:: Add one mana to your mana pool of one of the exiled card’s colors.
Sacrifice Cardname: Return the exiled card to your hand.
B: (wickerman version)
Cardname
Land
When Cardname enters the battlefield, sacrifice it or exile a card from your hand.
:symtap:: Add one mana to your mana pool of one of the exiled card’s colors.
When you have no cards in hand or when Cardname leaves the battlefield, return the exiled card to your hand.
This may not even be the first time I realized this. However the drawback to this idea is that it becomes more dependent on multicolor spells. On the other hand there is more relevance to what card you exile, whereas the dual land cycle raises the question of why not be able to exile any card. (such as artifacts or off color cards)
People seriously don't stack their imprinted cards? (Isochron Scepter, etc) Even if you don't stack, it creates memory issues. (well assuming more than one card is exiled)
My Trading Post
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=226506
1) What if the exile wasn't mandatory
2) What if the exiled card returned to you on your next upkeep?
with basic land types:
Cardname
Land - Island Mountain
(:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.)
Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
without basic land types:
Cardname
Land
Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.
Though now it looks like a lot like the Ravnica cycle of duals. :i
Is that ok?
If it's ok then I'd like to use this version. A huge plus is that it's short, and only 2 abilities, meaning there's room for flavor text.
Also want to make sure this sentence is ok:
"When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it."
Would this sentence work better instead?
"When it does, you may untap it and exile a nonland card from your hand."
Hey, the templates already half there, why not just adapt it?
Lyzolda, the Blood Witch | Maga, Traitor to Mortals | Mayael the Anima | Rafiq of the Many | Rhys the Redeemed
Sasaya, Oorochi Ascendant | Sygg, River Cutthroat | Thada Adel, Acquisitor | Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre
Thanks, but yours is a tad longer, and has two instances of Cardname.
As Cardname enters the battlefield, you may exile a nonland card from your hand. If you don't, Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does, you may exile a nonland card from your hand to untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Either one works, right?
I've seen a card in one of the more recent sets with the phrase:
"Cardname enters the battlefield tapped. When it does.."
which I think works well here
702.72. Hideaway
702.72a Hideaway represents a static ability and a triggered ability. “Hideaway” means “This permanent enters the battlefield tapped” and “When this permanent enters the battlefield, look at the top four cards of your library. Exile one of them face down and put the rest on the bottom of your library in any order. The exiled card gains ‘Any player who has controlled the permanent that exiled this card may look at this card in the exile zone.’”
As CARDNAME enters the battlefield, you may exile a nonland card from your hand. If you don't, CARDNAME enters the battlefield tapped. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
CARDNAME enters the battlefield tapped. When it enters the battlefield, you may exile a nonland card from your hand. If you do, untap it. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
Technically the second one should also have a paragraph break after the enters tapped sentence. But really, either way you have managed to take a drawback, make it wordier and almost completely removed the drawback: You play this, exile a card that you can't use this turn anyway, then you get it back next turn. How is that a drawback? Why not just reveal a card from your hand and say that you can't cast that card until your next turn? At least that would have less triggers.
one of those then
Thanks for replying, if it weren't for you I wouldn't have changed it.
The drawback is two things, 1) Giving information to your opponent, and 2) Not being able to cast the exiled card until next turn, which would be an issue if you have only 1-3 cards left in your hand, or wanted to cast 2 or more spells that turn.
Though it's also a question of how big the drawback has to be. Ok the drawback here is mild. It's a mild drawback, that's the point. But it serves its purpose, plus it looks fun.
How would that be any less wordier? I'd have to replace "exile a nonland card from your hand" with "reveal a nonland card from your hand", and I'd have to replace "return the exiled card at the beginning of your next upkeep" with "you can't cast spells with that name until your next turn". The resulting card would the exact same length. -_-
anyway, I might with go with:
"When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, sacrifice it or exile a nonland card from your hand. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep."
just because it's the shortest.
And besides, these lands need like what? 1 line other than this? Space isn't going to be an issue on them.
Lyzolda, the Blood Witch | Maga, Traitor to Mortals | Mayael the Anima | Rafiq of the Many | Rhys the Redeemed
Sasaya, Oorochi Ascendant | Sygg, River Cutthroat | Thada Adel, Acquisitor | Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre
I don't know what the rest of this set (I'm guessing there's a set here) looks like, but with the Imprint version of your duals, if you really want to offset the drawback, have an exile subtheme. Cards that can be cast from exile perhaps, or cards that interact with already exiled cards. Honestly, Imprint was rather good. Look at Chrome Mox and Isochron Scepter. Both very powerful cards, even without the exiled cards having any more interaction.
My art blog
Claims:
The kicker variant in WWK will be "Kicker without a kicked effect." - proven wrong Jan 2010 : 2 wrongs
Decks:
:symu::symb: Bloodchief Ascension - Modern
:symb::symr: Rakdos, the Defiler - EDH
:symu::symb::symw: Sharuum the Hegemon - EDH
:symw::symu::symb: Zur the Enchanter - EDH
first the drawback is too little, now it's too much!
anyway 9 of of 10 cards in the cycle have flavor text, so it gets a little crowded with all three things on there. (ability, mana ability, and flavor text)
Question is:
- Is it ok to make it a sac clause for no reason other than to shorten the text?
- Does the sac clause make the card too weak?
edit: I think I'm going with this. Just now punched it in MSE and it works out.
edit again: Though the keyword version is good too. Maybe I should go with that. It makes sense considering the ability is the same on every land in the cycle. (you can exile a card of any color regardless of land) It also has the illusion of making the card feel shorter because most of the text is reminder text, while still being almost as short as the sac clause version. Not to mention I don't have to gimp the card this way. (that's always a plus)
Question is, what should the keyword's name be..
maybe "Awe"
or "Marvel"
edit: definitely Marvel
Cardname
Land
~ Doesn't untap during your untap phase.
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may exile a card from your hand. If you do, untap ~. Return the exiled card to your hand at the beginning of your next upkeep.
T: Add R or U to your mana pool.
This way its not too overpowered and you can choose to stop feeding it cards if you don't need the mana anymore, and its really bad in multiples. I like this design, I might have to use it for my custom set now...
UR Ascension
Mono-U Birthing Pod
The main problem with your suggestion is that it's too long.
Because through the course of this thread I found at least two ways to do this mechanic while keeping it short enough for flavor text. So if one of those ways is overpowered, I'd just do it the other way.
If this is overpowered:
Then what would you say to this:
Same as above: