Quote Originally Posted by -D- View Post
Sure, as I said, balancing AND flavor. They might add some symmetric draw, here and there. Maybe even add something that focus draws something.
Mechanical flavor, yes, not lore flavor. They can make white draw cards if the card feels like a white card mechanically, not if they just reskin a blue card to have white flavor.

Or even just a draw if they decide that white, really needs that much help (which seems unlikely, but shifts can happen).
No, not that. They can stretch white to draw cards in so many ways before going "Eh, just give them divination". Di you see the post I made a little back with ideas?

Are you still about that? I'm pretty sure I mentioned removing it, like weeks if not months ago. It didn't have the right flavor on closer inspection.
Well you didn't present any other way of making black prevent poison counters.
And it's still a design that doesn't feel black. Something doesn't become automatically black just because you sacrifice a creature or pay life.

E.g Hexproof from <<INSERT_COLOR>> does not matter approximately 80% of the time when target it. And in-game it doesn't matter 99% of the time, because you can damage it, non-selectively destroy it, or target with an artifact or a non-mentioned color.
That's just an outright lie.
It's one thing that you have bad opinions, but can you stop saying things that are just blatantly wrong? You're aware Veil of Summer is banned in Standard and Pioneer, right?
It's also worth noting that there are two creatures printed with Hexproof from [color], so it's clearly not a thing they're just doing. It's quite a lot different from being your entire set mechanic.
Fiendslayer paladin had even narrower version of hexproof from [color] and [color], since it didn't work against abilities, and that was relevant when it was in standard. He has also shown up a little in both modern and legacy.

And if Spike was the only person MtG designed for you'd be right.

As I said, it seems like CorruptionDeath™ can be useful as signpost for Johnnies, since going for it, is essentially a self-imposed challenge. I.e. kill the enemy by throwing 20 corruption counters on them.
You could make a card that had the line "Opponents with 20 or more corruptions counters on them lose the game", and that could maybe be Johnny card, but don't make it part of your entire mechanic.
I'm not even convinced that's good for Johnnys. Dealing 20 damage just isn't that exciting. It would actually be way more Johnny if corruption didn't damage, as otherwise you're just playing a regular deck that tries to deal 20 damage most of the time, and that's not what Johnnys want to do.
Something isn't Johnny just because it is janky.

I explained why this wasn't the case. On its own it's not parasitic. As a mechanic in the set with cards relying on it is. And that's ok imo. Set mechanic can be parasitic.
I agree, I didn't say it was too parasitic. Plenty mechanics are somewhat parasitic, and corruption might be a bit more to the parasitic end, but it's probably fine, as long as you don't include a "20 corruption=death" clause.

Yeah, but that's not corruption flavor. Corruption isn't about yelling that the other is the heretic. It's about accepting bargains that shouldn't be accepted.

And others calling you out on it (while considering the same deals).
What you're describing is just black in general. You can achieve that by paying life. You're not really achieving anything new.
You're allowed to call it something other than corruption. Call it torment or whatever.

Yeah, I'm probably removing corruption from it.
Good, though I'd probably still want such a universal answer at uncommon.