/+1\: Target player loses 1 life and you put a 1/1 colorless Myr artifact creature token onto the battlefield.
\-X/: Target creature gets +X/+X until end of turn if it's an artifact or black creature. Otherwise, it gets -X/-X until end of turn.
\-9/: Target player gets an emblem with "At the beginning of each end step, your life total becomes the number of artifact and/or black permanents you control."
Starting at 5 feels like way too high. I'd set it at 3 and I'd say you're golden. Nice design on the ultimate; feels very splashy and I love how it doubles as a kill and a benefit, so there's a reason to use it multiple times.
I wanted to evoke both Dismember and the 5/5 abilities of previousTezzerets in the cost / starting loyalty ratio, but I agree that the starting loyalty is pushed.
In the end, maybe I want it pushed. (?) But, I will keep in mind the idea that lowering the starting loyalty may be a good angle to take in development.
Woah, Jesus Christ. A +1 that's better than Chandra Nalaar's and Elspeth, Knight-Errant's!? A -X that's better than Chandra Nalaar's!? At three cmc this easily beats out EKE and LotV and it doesn't seem to be clearly worse than Jace.
If you want this card to be pushed, you can make it 2BB and keep everything else the same, but 2BB with 4 or 3 starting loyalty is probably more reasonable.
Edit: I realize that there's some room to obsolete older planeswalker abilities on lower cost ones, it's just that Chandra 1.0 was playable and EKE was really good. When I say it might be "better" than Jace and Liliana, I mean on overall power, likely seeing more play in block/standard/modern (if Jace was even legal). It's abilities aren't as good vs. combo, so it would probably see less maindeck legacy play.
I misread the +1 at first and thought that it gave the Myr to the player losing the life. Rereading it, this 'walker is really more appropriate at 5cmc.
Have we gotten to the point in design where a 'walker ultimate should just say "At opponent's eot, win the game"?
I misread the +1 at first and thought that it gave the Myr to the player losing the life. Rereading it, this 'walker is really more appropriate at 5cmc.
Have we gotten to the point in design where a 'walker ultimate should just say "At opponent's eot, win the game"?
I misread it the same way at first, which would certainly be a more fair ability. I agree it would be fine at 5cmc, but probably worse than Garruk 3 or Gideon.
The ult is even worse than you think, it wins on your eot. I actually am fine with that though. So many ults are a variant of "you win" that I don't really mind having it written another way.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I primarily play limited, so most of my spoiler season comments view cards through that lens.
On the contrary, when you consider that a 3cmc 'walker can sneak under Cancel, the incidental life loss and creature-pump abilities are useless to control decks, and his minus is good at killing off cheap blockers, I'd say you helped out aggro even more
Purge seems like premium removal in draft. Harvester is a little harder to evaluate. I'd put it at around Drudge Skeletons in pick order, since less can attack into it, but it's rather slow and has a real cost to repeatedly chump.
Pushing MBC is one thing, but the current version would probably lead to Cawblade/affinity levels of degeneracy, followed by a banning in standard. I guess strong hosers could prevent that, but the "deck X and deck that plays hosers to deck X" meta isn't terribly exciting.
Support cards seem to be in a good spot, you might be able to make the purge a 1 mana sorcery if you wanted to.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I primarily play limited, so most of my spoiler season comments view cards through that lens.
Isn't the whole point of Phyrexians that they can't carry a spark at all? No caveats.
Is it? My Vorthos powers are only moderate.
And even if they haven't before, does that mean they never could?
Phyrexia stands in for a rather lot of flavor concepts. Lots of cooks have seasoned that soup.
Without getting into the gritty details, I'm suggesting that Tezzeret ultimately succumbed to the Phyrexians and underwent compleation. And, the implication is that a planeswalker's spark can't arise within Phyrexia but it can be acquired. Tezzeret represents that acquisition. Does that conflict with canon?
If the Phyrexians are capable of spark-planeswalking, and not just doing stuff like sneakily hitching a ride with other planeswalkers or building big, costly, and fragile portal engines, then they kind of have story-breaking levels of power.
Like, as soon as there's a Phyrexian planeswalker, people will start asking "But why haven't the Phyrexians just 'walked to plane X or plane Y and spewed Oil everywhere?" And there will be no good answer.
A simple name change would be all it takes. Even without Phyrexian intervention, Tezzeret can be all about black and artifact stuff and go monoblack in his character.
Oh man... to me, that sounds like a great character turn for Tezzeret.
If the compleation thing is rubbing people the wrong way, I could still do something to indicate that he is Phyrexia-aligned. Let people speculate as to exactly how far-gone he is.
"Tezzeret of Phyrexia" ?? Do people prefer that name?
I agree that Tezzeret can't be compleated. Not only would that allow Phyrexia to easily destroy everything, I also doubt that Nicol Bolas would allow one of his main servants to be turned into a loyal minion of a group that could be dangerous to him.
And the card is broken. Elspeth, Knight-Errant is one of the best planeswalkers of all time. You are making a cheaper planeswalker that makes better tokens and has a better ultimate. I wouldn't just be concerned about Standard with this. Imagine this in Affinity in Modern. Getting this turn 2 off of Springleaf Drum, and then using this along with Cranial Plating or Arcbound Ravager to get a 10/10 Inkmoth Nexus on turn 3 would be a very real possibility. It needs to be 4 mana, and possibly with a lower starting loyalty too.
Planeswalker — Tezzeret [MR]
/+1\: Target player loses 1 life and you put a 1/1 colorless Myr artifact creature token onto the battlefield.
\-X/: Target creature gets +X/+X until end of turn if it's an artifact or black creature. Otherwise, it gets -X/-X until end of turn.
\-9/: Target player gets an emblem with "At the beginning of each end step, your life total becomes the number of artifact and/or black permanents you control."
{5}
When in doubt, call a judge.
Objectivist here. Hit me up to talk philosophy.
I wanted to evoke both Dismember and the 5/5 abilities of previous Tezzerets in the cost / starting loyalty ratio, but I agree that the starting loyalty is pushed.
In the end, maybe I want it pushed. (?) But, I will keep in mind the idea that lowering the starting loyalty may be a good angle to take in development.
If you want this card to be pushed, you can make it 2BB and keep everything else the same, but 2BB with 4 or 3 starting loyalty is probably more reasonable.
Edit: I realize that there's some room to obsolete older planeswalker abilities on lower cost ones, it's just that Chandra 1.0 was playable and EKE was really good. When I say it might be "better" than Jace and Liliana, I mean on overall power, likely seeing more play in block/standard/modern (if Jace was even legal). It's abilities aren't as good vs. combo, so it would probably see less maindeck legacy play.
Interested in Custom Card Creation.
My Cube:Cardinal Custom Cube
A custom version of a third modern masters: MM2019
(filter->rarity to see in set rarity).
Have we gotten to the point in design where a 'walker ultimate should just say "At opponent's eot, win the game"?
Avatar by Numotflame96 of Maelstrom Graphics
Sig banner thanks to DarkNightCavalier of Heroes of the Plane Studios!
[+1]: Put a 0/0 black Germ creature token onto the battlefield and attach an Equipment you control to it.
I misread it the same way at first, which would certainly be a more fair ability. I agree it would be fine at 5cmc, but probably worse than Garruk 3 or Gideon.
The ult is even worse than you think, it wins on your eot. I actually am fine with that though. So many ults are a variant of "you win" that I don't really mind having it written another way.
Interested in Custom Card Creation.
My Cube:Cardinal Custom Cube
A custom version of a third modern masters: MM2019
(filter->rarity to see in set rarity).
Anyway, I'll continue to consider costing issues with this. In the meantime, here is my first stab at Tezz's "supporting cast":
Artifact Creature — Insect [C]
Pay 1 life: Regenerate Tezzeret's Harvester.
[2/1]
Instant [U]
Exile target nonartifact, nonblack creature.
Yes, it's a better Terror.
Purge seems like premium removal in draft. Harvester is a little harder to evaluate. I'd put it at around Drudge Skeletons in pick order, since less can attack into it, but it's rather slow and has a real cost to repeatedly chump.
Avatar by Numotflame96 of Maelstrom Graphics
Sig banner thanks to DarkNightCavalier of Heroes of the Plane Studios!
Pushing MBC is one thing, but the current version would probably lead to Cawblade/affinity levels of degeneracy, followed by a banning in standard. I guess strong hosers could prevent that, but the "deck X and deck that plays hosers to deck X" meta isn't terribly exciting.
Support cards seem to be in a good spot, you might be able to make the purge a 1 mana sorcery if you wanted to.
Interested in Custom Card Creation.
My Cube:Cardinal Custom Cube
A custom version of a third modern masters: MM2019
(filter->rarity to see in set rarity).
This is my only objection, really; except for the starting loyalty definitely being a point or two too high.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Is it? My Vorthos powers are only moderate.
And even if they haven't before, does that mean they never could?
Phyrexia stands in for a rather lot of flavor concepts. Lots of cooks have seasoned that soup.
Without getting into the gritty details, I'm suggesting that Tezzeret ultimately succumbed to the Phyrexians and underwent compleation. And, the implication is that a planeswalker's spark can't arise within Phyrexia but it can be acquired. Tezzeret represents that acquisition. Does that conflict with canon?
Like, as soon as there's a Phyrexian planeswalker, people will start asking "But why haven't the Phyrexians just 'walked to plane X or plane Y and spewed Oil everywhere?" And there will be no good answer.
A simple name change would be all it takes. Even without Phyrexian intervention, Tezzeret can be all about black and artifact stuff and go monoblack in his character.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
If the compleation thing is rubbing people the wrong way, I could still do something to indicate that he is Phyrexia-aligned. Let people speculate as to exactly how far-gone he is.
"Tezzeret of Phyrexia" ?? Do people prefer that name?
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
And the card is broken. Elspeth, Knight-Errant is one of the best planeswalkers of all time. You are making a cheaper planeswalker that makes better tokens and has a better ultimate. I wouldn't just be concerned about Standard with this. Imagine this in Affinity in Modern. Getting this turn 2 off of Springleaf Drum, and then using this along with Cranial Plating or Arcbound Ravager to get a 10/10 Inkmoth Nexus on turn 3 would be a very real possibility. It needs to be 4 mana, and possibly with a lower starting loyalty too.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.