MTG Share your Card Designs II

[-D-]

That says removing counters, not preventing counters...

Just because black can remove counters doesn't mean it can prevent it.

It's also worth noting as I think it has been before that white is not noted as removing or preventing counters

They could have removed it, but I'm not sure how that helps your case, that just means only white us allowed to prevent counters

That's not an assumption you can make. Preventing and removing counters are two different things.

How many times did I link Blightbeetle? Twice, thrice? Four times? On this page alone, I mean.

It's a Black card from M20 that prevents counters on creatures... And it is newer than any other card that prevents counters... And it is close to what's Black's specialty... Removing counters from permanents... Hm.

None of them.

Ouch. Dunno. It seems that they are moving towards a point where some colors will get some kind of other answers. Maybe white will get a ramp that works with sideboard.

Funny enough I had a card similar to Waste Land

Encroaching Desert
Land - Desert
T: Add C.
T, Sacrifice CARDNAME: Put a desert counter on target non-basic land your opponent controls (Land with desert counters lose all abilities and become a land of type Desert with the ability "T: Add C".)

Slightly different than their token lands.

Corruption counters don't do anything.

I was with you until this part. I think I like corruption counters that raise your life floor. I.e. work as a more permanent form of damage while giving white and black options to tweak it or remove it.

[Tvtyrant]

Ouroboros - B
Creature- Snake
At the beginning of your upkeep tap Ouroboros and put a 1/1 counter on it.
"No food was more nutritious then its own flesh."
1/1

[Ninjaman]

How many times did I link Blightbeetle? Twice, thrice? Four times? On this page alone, I mean.

It's a Black card from M20 that prevents counters on creatures... And it is newer than any other card that prevents counters... And it is close to what's Black's specialty... Removing counters from permanents... Hm.

How many times must I explain why it doesn't count before you stop mentioning it?

That's +1/+1 counters, which are positive. +1/+1 counters can be negated with -1/-1 counters. The card could have said "whenever a +1/+1 counter is put on a creature an opponent controls, put -1/-1 counter on that creature." and it would undoubtedly be black. Preventing counters isn't black, but preventing +1/+1 counters is.

Ouch. Dunno. It seems that they are moving towards a point where some colors will get some kind of other answers. Maybe white will get a ramp that works with sideboard.

Why would ramp be white just because it used the sideboard?
White already has catch-up ramp.

I can see ransom being a thing in some form.
Xyru Specter I could kinda see happening.
Lightning Colt obviously functions, so I can see it being printed without the pun name.
Generated Horizons I don't think, but I do think land tokens would be cool.
Growth Charm that wrote out the effects.
Zyym I could see getting printed.
Unicycle's mechanics I can see.
Enchanted Prairie could maybe happen.

I was with you until this part. I think I like corruption counters that raise your life floor. I.e. work as a more permanent form of damage while giving white and black options to tweak it or remove it.

How would that even work? I die when I have 5 life and 5 corruption? How is that different from having 0 life and corruption not doing anything?

Your mechanic shouldn't have very much specific hate. You won't be able to remove your corruption, there would be maybe a white rare that prevents counters on you and maybe your creatures, and maybe one that prevents counters this turn. There is no need for more hate.

[noob]

Ouroboros - B
Creature- Snake
At the beginning of your upkeep tap Ouroboros and put a 1/1 counter on it.
"No food was more nutritious then its own flesh."
1/1

The most directly comparable card I know is the steel overseer.
It costs 1 less than steel overseer but is coloured and works only on itself and it can not take the decision to not tap.

[-D-]

Ouroboros - B
Creature- Snake
At the beginning of your upkeep tap Ouroboros and put a 1/1 counter on it.
"No food was more nutritious than[fix] its own flesh."
1/1

Interesting design. Although not sure if that's common or uncommon. It's an interesting idea anyway. Could see it in some black/blue untap shenanigans, it's probably too slow for Modern though. Turn 3 3/3 is meh.

How many times must I explain why it doesn't count before you stop mentioning it?

That's +1/+1 counters, which are positive. +1/+1 counters can be negated with -1/-1 counters. The card could have said "whenever a +1/+1 counter is put on a creature an opponent controls, put -1/-1 counter on that creature." and it would undoubtedly be black. Preventing counters isn't black, but preventing +1/+1 counters is.

And I disregarded it because it's logically inconsistent, with what you said before.

By your logic.
Since every color has Wither/Infect, every color can place -1/-1 on a creature. Since every color can negate +1/+1 counters, every color should have ability to prevent +1/+1 counters. This is counters both you listing White and Green, as counter negating colors, the Magic Color pie and the cards they printed in general.

Furthermore, there is a mechanical difference between placing a +1/+1 counter and negating with a -1/-1 counter and just preventing counters from being placed. Things that trigger when placing counters or removing counters, would respond to placing removing either of those counters. If counter is negated nothing is added/removed, ergo nothing will be triggered.

Why would ramp be white just because it used the sideboard?
White already has a catch-up ramp.

Hey man, I didn't come up with that Cat card. As for reasons well, it's a bit crippling. You waste sideboard slots for ramp. The idea is interesting, even if it leads nowhere.

Catch up ramp, is not as good as a ramp. You can't play catch up from the front, only from behind.

Lightning Colt obviously functions, so I can see it being printed without the pun name.

The funny thing about that card is that it's an Instant Creature. MaRo talked that one of his largest regrets is that they should have made Flash into a supertype vs a keyword, and then just have "Sorceries" and "Instant/Flash Sorceries", then there would be no need to list Instant and Sorcery on things like Spellmastery or Snapcaster mage, etc. But it's probably too late to rename them to "Magic/Spell/Instant Sorceries", at this point.

Generated Horizons I don't think, but I do think land tokens would be cool.

Oh the card is super busted. Forest each turn? I don't even need to play that many forests.

I do like idea of unsleeved lands as "tokens". For all purposes, they are visually distinguishable.

On the opposite side, I also liked Wrath of Sod that used manabound tokens, although the fact that it's a counter means it affects playability, since you could have +1/+1 counters and those manabound counters. That's why I used artifact to exile a creature. Since you can tap a them.

Zyym I could see getting printed.

Zyym is one of the few cards, that will probably see print at some point. Him and that Innocous Insect. Although Insect is Buyback and that's high on Storm scale.

Enchanted Prairie could maybe happen.

Ewww. Enchantments that tap (yes, I know Enchantment Creatures exist. I don't like them). And yes, I kinda dislike Enchantmentize for that reason. Interesting wording thought.

How would that even work? I die when I have 5 life and 5 corruption? How is that different from having 0 life and corruption not doing anything?

If your life is lower than your corruption you die. If your corruption goes over starting life, you die.

If Wizards ever decide to print things like Ral's Vanguard it could make corruption easier to scale, compared to poison. I mean, I forget how much poison it is in EDH vs 2HG.


------

Thoughts on this card


Turn to Stone - 1W
Enchantment - Aura - Uncommon
Enchant creature or land.
Enchanted permanent is a Plains.(it becomes a Plains and loses all other abilities and types)

It's a somewhat worse version of Path of Exile (easier to remove and not as enduring) on the other hand, it's ramp and land destruction. That said, it's a very white sort of land destruction (and white theoretically has land destruction). I'm thinking od moving it to W and adding the clause "Enchant creature or land you control".

[Androgeus]

I do like idea of unsleeved lands as "tokens". For all purposes, they are visually distinguishable.

Unfortunately not all players play with sleeves, so any solution needs to work for sleeveless players (see checklist cards)

Thoughts on this card


Turn to Stone - 1W
Enchantment - Aura - Uncommon
Enchant creature or land.
Enchanted permanent is a Plains.(it becomes a Plains and loses all other abilities and types).

Not sure I’m allowed to comment on this card as I basically made the same card earlier in the thread.

Here’s my lazy 5 minute white mana ramp idea.

Spears to Pruning Hooks 1W
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant Creature
Enchanted creature has base power and toughness 0/1 and has “{t}: add {W}”, and it loses all other abilities.

Not entirely sold on your name from a flavour perspective, how does becoming a statue make one a plain? Or is the creature turning in to a massive amount of stone?

[Ninjaman]

And I disregarded it because it's logically inconsistent, with what you said before.

It's quite annoying how you consistently miss the point.

By your logic.
Since every color has Wither/Infect, every color can place -1/-1 on a creature. Since every color can negate +1/+1 counters, every color should have ability to prevent +1/+1 counters. This is counters both you listing White and Green, as counter negating colors, the Magic Color pie and the cards they printed in general.

Every color gets wither or infect, but every color doesn't get -1/-1 counters in general, only black does. The only blue cards that can remove counters from a permanent do so by dealing combat damage to it. They are not allowed to do it on some other trigger, which is what I said the ability was like.
"Whenever a +1/+1 counter is put on a creature an opponent controls, put -1/-1 counter on that creature."
This is effectively what Blightbeetle does, and black is allowed to do that while blue isn't.

You focused on a single sentence of my argument while ignoring the rest.

Set mechanics are allowed a little more room with what the colors are allowed to do, see Unearth and Eternalize in blue. You wouldn't say reanimation was blue just because there are blue cards with unearth.

Furthermore, there is a mechanical difference between placing a +1/+1 counter and negating with a -1/-1 counter and just preventing counters from being placed.

Yes of course there is a slight difference, but 95% of the time that difference isn't going to be relevant. If instead of a trigger it just placed the -1/-1 counter along with the +1/+1 counter then the difference wouldn't be relevant 99%

Things that trigger when placing counters or removing counters, would respond to placing removing either of those counters. If counter is negated nothing is added/removed, ergo nothing will be triggered.

They're not exactly the same, but the cover the same utility in the majority of cases.
It's also relevant to point out that the version I wrote couldn't get printed, as Wizards stick to either +1/+1 or -1/-1 counters in each set, so if they wanted that effect they would need to make it counter prevention.

A blue card is allowed to do nonblue things if they somehow function blue. Similarly it isn't allowed to do blue things in a non blue way. Twisted Reflection for instance does two blue things, but combined they become a black thing. Bonded Fetch is a blue card with haste, which shouldn't happen, but it's a defender with a loot ability, so the haste doesn't let it attack right away, making it oka

Hey man, I didn't come up with that Cat card. As for reasons well, it's a bit crippling. You waste sideboard slots for ramp. The idea is interesting, even if it leads nowhere.

It was you who argued for it, I don't know why you're suddenly all defensive.

Catch up ramp, is not as good as a ramp. You can't play catch up from the front, only from behind.

Yes, that's the definition of catch up ramp. Every color has things they can do and things they can't do.
We had a discussion about ramp in white s

The funny thing about that card is that it's an Instant Creature. MaRo talked that one of his largest regrets is that they should have made Flash into a supertype vs a keyword, and then just have "Sorceries" and "Instant/Flash Sorceries", then there would be no need to list Instant and Sorcery on things like Spellmastery or Snapcaster mage, etc. But it's probably too late to rename them to "Magic/Spell/Instant Sorceries", at this point.

I hadn't noticed it was an instant. Not gonna happen then.

Oh the card is super busted. Forest each turn? I don't even need to play that many forests.

It's pretty slow, but it's probably undercosted.

I do like idea of unsleeved lands as "tokens". For all purposes, they are visually distinguishable.

They would need to print the land tokens if they ever did it.

On the opposite side, I also liked Wrath of Sod that used manabound tokens, although the fact that it's a counter means it affects playability, since you could have +1/+1 counters and those manabound counters. That's why I used artifact to exile a creature. Since you can tap a them.

I'm just not convinced there is any way to do it this way instead of Settle the Wreckage.

Zyym is one of the few cards, that will probably see print at some point. Him and that Innocous Insect. Although Insect is Buyback and that's high on Storm scale.

A permanent with buyback I don't see happening.

If your life is lower than your corruption you die.

That's not different than just dealing an extra damage.

If your corruption goes over starting life, you die.

I want it to be difficult enough to get corruption that it's not going to matter pretty much ever.
It's just not worth the use of design space, as it's only ever going to matter against life gain, and since most corruption cards also deal damage it's only going to matter against heavy life gain.

If every corruption counter also deals 1 damage then they're just going to be more difficult to get.

I'm not sure how difficult I want it to be to get corruption, I think my current design makes it too hard, but gettng 20 should definitely be something that almost never happens.

If Wizards ever decide to print things like Ral's Vanguard it could make corruption easier to scale, compared to poison.

Are you aware Vanguards are already a thing?

I mean, I forget how much poison it is in EDH vs 2HG.

10

Turn to Stone - 1W
Enchantment - Aura - Uncommon
Enchant creature or land.
Enchanted permanent is a Plains.(it becomes a Plains and loses all other abilities and types)

It shouldn't be able to target a land, I don't think white gets to strip lands of abilities.
Otherwise it's fine, though I would probably make you unable to target your own stuff with it.

It's a somewhat worse version of Path of Exile (easier to remove and not as enduring) on the other hand, it's ramp and land destruction. That said, it's a very white sort of land destruction (and white theoretically has land destruction).

White only gets mass land destruction, they don't get single target and they don't get Spreading Seas effects IIRC.

I'm thinking od moving it to W and adding the clause "Enchant creature or land you control".

The removal feel very white, the ramp part not so much.


Infected Cutthroat - 1B
Creature - Human Rogue - U
Infected Cutthroat has menace as long defending player has a corruption counter.
Infected Cutthroat has deathtouch as long as defending player has three or more corruption counters.
2/1

Pox Drone - 1B
Creature - Drone - C
Flying
Whenever Pox Drone deals combat damage to an opponent, you may sacrifice it. If you do, that play loses 2 life and gains a corruption counter.
1/1

Scorching Lacerator - 3RR
Creature - Elemental - U
Trample
When Scorching Lacerator enters the battlefield, target opponent gains a corruption counter.
Scorching Lacerator gains +1/+0 for each corruption counter on defending player.
4/4

Foul Cur - 2R
Creature - Hound - C
2R: Foul Cur gets +3/+3 and trample until end of turn. Activate this ability no more than once each turn, and only if an opponent has five or more corruption counters.
3/2

Spreading Infection - 1B
Instant - C
Exile target creature card from a graveyard. Put a corruption counter on that creature's controller.
Draw a card.

[-D-]

Unfortunately not all players play with sleeves, so any solution needs to work for sleeveless players (see checklist cards)

I didn't mean as opposed to regular tokens. Anything can in theory be a token. Piece of Paper with "Plains" written on it, or a piece of uneaten pizza (my friend once did it as a joke to represent a goblin token) or your spare basic lands.

Not sure I’m allowed to comment on this card as I basically made the same card earlier in the thread.

I think your card is sufficiently different, since it turns a creature into a land creature.

Not entirely sold on your name from a flavour perspective, how does becoming a statue make one a plain? Or is the creature turning in to a massive amount of stone?

White is the color that turns your stuff into stone (like Declaration in Stone), that isn't Gorgons.

It's quite annoying how you consistently miss the point.

Every color gets wither or infect, but every color doesn't get -1/-1 counters in general, only Black does. The only blue cards that can remove counters from a permanent do so by dealing combat damage to it. They are not allowed to do it on some other trigger, which is what I said the ability was like.

Even if you exclude Wither because it's not -1/-1 counters (Somehow). Colors other than white/green still have access to placing -1/-1 counters. Blue has it, Red has it.

How does this goes with your claim that green and white can prevent counters on creatures?

"Whenever a +1/+1 counter is put on a creature an opponent controls, put -1/-1 counter on that creature."

Yes, of course, there is a slight difference, but 95% of the time that difference isn't going to be relevant. If instead of a trigger it just placed the -1/-1 counter along with the +1/+1 counter then the difference wouldn't be relevant 99%

This is not mechanically the same and I explained why. By your "fuzzy logic" a "Creature dies" and "Creature is put into a graveyard" are also functionally the same, right...

It's not the same if you take damage and heal and if you prevent damage. If you prevent damage from death toucher is not 95% the same as if you add +0/+X to creature...

Set mechanics are allowed a little more room with what the colors are allowed to do, see Unearth and Eternalize in blue. You wouldn't say reanimation was blue just because there are blue cards with unearth.

That would be valid, if Red and Blue didn't get -1/-1 counters outside of that edition. They did. Because, -1/-1 like +1/+1 counters are evergreen and available in all colors.

--------------

Just because you get life gain (black, green and white). Doesn't mean you get prevent damage (white, green). Bottom line there is a finer granularity to giving colors ability than just + and - negate themselves to be prevention 0. Sure it sometimes works. But it's not really a rule.

It was you who argued for it, I don't know why you're suddenly all defensive.

IMO, it was more of a joke, because you did come off as too aggressive. Any way, the thing that was interesting was the sideboard (or outside of game) ramp. I clarified I liked it for idea, of using sideboard for ramp, for a color that gets no other way to ramp. A green cat, like that would see no play. A white cat, that does something similar... maybe yes, maybe no.

They would need to print the land tokens if they ever did it.

Eh, not really, you can respresent token by "markers". Anything can be a marker. Of course they would print land tokens, if they did it. I like that you can do it right now. Without them printing much support.

I'm just not convinced there is any way to do it this way instead of Settle the Wreckage.

Obviously you can do it, like manabound counters or land tokens.

That's not different than just dealing an extra damage.

Well, yeah, it is essentially a form of more permanent damage.

Are you aware Vanguards are already a thing?

I saw them in Custom Magic Discord but I thought they were some thing community came up. I don't play much outside of Standard/Modern.

10

See?! No one can bother to remember this.

From the Comprehensive Rules (October 4, 2019—Throne of Eldraine)

704.5u In a Two-Headed Giant game, if a team has fifteen or more poison counters, that team loses the game. See rule 810, “Two-Headed Giant Variant.”

Source.

It shouldn't be able to target a land, I don't think white gets to strip lands of abilities.
Otherwise it's fine, though I would probably make you unable to target your own stuff with it.

White only gets mass land destruction, they don't get single target and they don't get Spreading Seas effects IIRC.

The removal feel very white, the ramp part not so much.

It has to enchant a land (more specifically the type of permanent it transforms the target), otherwise, it does nothing.

If you cast on a creature, creature becomes a land and it falls off, since it's "enchant a creature" aura is enchanting a land. Alternatively, it could be "Enchant creature or basic land (your opponent controls)", to make it pointless as ramp.

I want it to be difficult enough to get corruption that it's not going to matter pretty much ever.
It's just not worth the use of design space, as it's only ever going to matter against life gain, and since most corruption cards also deal damage it's only going to matter against heavy life gain.

If every corruption counter also deals 1 damage then they're just going to be more difficult to get.

I'm not sure how difficult I want it to be to get corruption, I think my current design makes it too hard, but gettng 20 should definitely be something that almost never happens.

Well first, you do you man. If you like concept of generic counters that don't do anything, use them. But why are they corruption and not some kind of "tick" or "ch(m)arge" counter?

Will one tick of more permanent damage going to matter much more than one tick of healable damage?

I like that one corruption counter is essentially whatever. It feels flavorfull that you would accept that one tick of corruption. I mean, what's the big deal. One poison is much more harsh. But then you get like a ton of them, and it suddenly is much more painful.

Infected Cutthroat - 1B
Creature - Human Rogue - U
Infected Cutthroat has menace as long defending player has a corruption counter.
Infected Cutthroat has deathtouch as long as defending player has three or more corruption counters.
2/1

Pox Drone - 1B
Creature - Drone - C
Flying
Whenever Pox Drone deals combat damage to an opponent, you may sacrifice it. If you do, that play loses 2 life and gains a corruption counter.
1/1

Scorching Lacerator - 3RR
Creature - Elemental - U
Trample
When Scorching Lacerator enters the battlefield, target opponent gains a corruption counter.
Scorching Lacerator gains +1/+0 for each corruption counter on defending player.
4/4

Foul Cur - 2R
Creature - Hound - C
2R: Foul Cur gets +3/+3 and trample until end of turn. Activate this ability no more than once each turn, and only if an opponent has five or more corruption counters.
3/2

Spreading Infection - 1B
Instant - C
Exile target creature card from a graveyard. Put a corruption counter on that creature's controller.
Draw a card.

Interesting designs.

I quite like the Infected Cutthroat. It seems balanced for both corruption as damage and generic corruption. Same with Scorching Lacetator.

Pox Drone is interesting. I could see even doing some kind of mini proliferate "If you do, choose a kind of counter on that player and give them an additional one of that kind", it would probably be blue though.

Foul Cur. Not too great fan of a Rootwalla abilities, myself. They are kind of hard to keep track off.

I do like Spreading Infection really much.

Here is one of colored cards that used in my causes corruption in white.

Inquisitorial Purge - 4W
Sorcery
Exile target creature or artifact. Its controller gains a corruption counter.

[Ninjaman]

Even if you exclude Wither because it's not -1/-1 counters (Somehow).

Having access to wither does not mean having a general access to -1/-1 counters.

Colors other than white/green still have access to placing -1/-1 counters. Blue has it, Red has it.

The blue one puts it on your own creature as a downside, that's not the same. The red one gives your burnspells wither. It means red can get wither effects outside of sets where it's a mechanic, but it doesn't mean red gets the same access to -1/-1 counters as

How does this goes with your claim that green and white can prevent counters on creatures?

They have abilities with it? I'm not sure what you mean.

Black is allowed to prevent +1/+1 counters because it is the color that can dish out -1/-1 counters. White and black can prevent counters because it is part of their share of the color pie, (white definitely, green maybe).

This is not mechanically the same and I explained why.

And I explain why it was only destinct in a very small amount of cases. Why are you ignoring this?
Both fulfill the same design space. Preventing counters is a lot nicer, hence why that is the ability picked, but canceling out +1/+1 counters was always in black's pie.
In the same vein even in preventing counters in general wasn't a green ability it would still be green to prevent -1/-1 counters, since they're the color that gets to play a lot with +1/+1 counters.

By your "fuzzy logic" a "Creature dies" and "Creature is put into a graveyard" are also functionally the same, right...

It is the same.
"Whenever a creature is put into a graveyard from a battlefield" was errataed into "Whenever a creature dies".

It's not the same if you take damage and heal and if you prevent damage. If you prevent damage from death toucher is not 95% the same as if you add +0/+X to creature...

Deathtouch is part of the 5% where it makes a difference.
"When this creature blocks, it gets +0/+3 until end of turn" and "When this creature blocks, prevent the next 3 damage dealt to it this turn" is the same in 95% of cases.
They fill the same design space. You wouldn't see both those abilities in the same set.

That would be valid, if Red and Blue didn't get -1/-1 counters outside of that edition. They

Scars block did bleed some black effects into other colors, it's a pretty poor example, especially because it hasn't
been done since.

Do you also think Blue gets life loss and discard?

Do you also think White gets onesided boardwide -X/-X, Targeted -1/-1 counters and life loss?

did. Because, -1/-1 like +1/+1 counters are evergreen and available in all colors.

They're not available to the same extend in all colors though. All colors get to have creature that put +1/+1 counter on themselves, but effects that put +1/+1 counters on other stuff is way more limited.
Searching for "+1/+1 counter" and a color nets:
416 green cards
205 black cards
183 white cards
131 red cards
118 blue cards

So green gets it twice as much as the next color.
When restricting it to only looking at instants and sorceries we get:
63 green cards
26 white cards
15 black cards
10 red cards
10 blue cards

I didn't remove multicolored cards and I didn't check if the card put counters on something or only mentioned it, but I think it clearly shows that green by far gets to play with +1/+1 counters the most, and white also gets to do so more than the others, and that these differences are much larger than when we looked at all card types.

Also -X/-X is more restricted than +X/+X, for instance all colors get mass +X/+X in the form of lords, but the same can't be said for -X/-X, so the comparison doesn't hold. All colors also get +X/+X on enchanments and combat tricks, but the same isn't true for -X/-X

Just because you get life gain (black, green and white). Doesn't mean you get prevent damage (white, green). Bottom line there is a finer granularity to giving colors ability than just + and - negate themselves to be prevention 0. Sure it sometimes works. But it's not really a rule.

Black doesn't get unconditional lifegain though, it needs to deal damage/life loss, sacrifice creatures, kill creatures, or exile creatures from graveyards. Green and White both get effects that just gain life.

You have one black creature that prevents only one type of counter, that wouldn't be difficult for black to remove in the first place, and you're then extrapolating that black is allowed to prevent all kinds of counters. That is what I am disagreeing with.

Eh, not really, you can respresent token by "markers". Anything can be a marker. Of course they would print land tokens, if they did it. I like that you can do it right now. Without them printing much support.

You don't need land token cards to play with land tokens, but wizards would need to make land token cards if they ever implemented land tokens.

Obviously you can do it, like manabound counters or land tokens.

Sorry I wrote that wrong, it was supposed to be "I'm just not convinced there is any reason to"

Well, yeah, it is essentially a form of more permanent damage.

But permanent damage to players doesn't matter when you can heal above your starting life.

I saw them in Custom Magic Discord but I thought they were some thing community came up. I don't play much outside of Standard/Modern.

Nope, they're legit, one of them, Momir Vig, even has his own format.

Source.

Fair, I just remembered it was the same in commander.

It has to enchant a land (more specifically the type of permanent it transforms the target), otherwise, it does nothing.

I know, but I think you can make restrictions on what card it can target, not that this happens very often.

If you cast on a creature, creature becomes a land and it falls off, since it's "enchant a creature" aura is enchanting a land. Alternatively, it could be "Enchant creature or basic land (your opponent controls)", to make it pointless as ramp.

It actually couldn't mention basic land, since the creature will turn into a land, but not a basic land, see Song of Dryads, Spreading Seas and Blood Moon

Well first, you do you man. If you like concept of generic counters that don't do anything, use them. But why are they corruption and not some kind of "tick" or "ch(m)arge" counter?

Flavor. It depends on what you synergize it with. Energy counters don't do anything by themselves either, they are energy because that makes sense with how other cards use them.

Will one tick of more permanent damage going to matter much more than one tick of healable damage?

Not everything that grants corruption counters will deal damage though.

I like that one corruption counter is essentially whatever. It feels flavorfull that you would accept that one tick of corruption. I mean, what's the big deal. One poison is much more harsh. But then you get like a ton of them, and it suddenly is much more painful.

I was thinking of making them easier to get and then upping the restrictions for the synergy cards. That also makes it easier to make cards that give them on etb or combat damage.

I quite like the Infected Cutthroat. It seems balanced for both corruption as damage and generic corruption. Same with Scorching Lacetator.

I'm not sure what you mean, since Cutthroat don't dish out corruption itself. Scorching Lacerator wouldn't work if corruption was much easier to get, as the power pump would be too large.

Pox Drone is interesting. I could see even doing some kind of mini proliferate "If you do, choose a kind of counter on that player and give them an additional one of that kind", it would probably be blue though.

With corruption being this difficult to get I wouldn't put proliferate in the set, but if it is easier then it could work. I'm not sure if I would use +1/+1 or -1/-1 counters in the set.

Foul Cur. Not too great fan of a Rootwalla abilities, myself. They are kind of hard to keep track off.

How are they harder to keep track of that any other pump effect?

I do like Spreading Infection really much.

I thought there needed to be a easier effect for applying corruption at common, though it will be less important if it becomes easier to give corruption.

Here is one of colored cards that used in my causes corruption in white.

Inquisitorial Purge - 4W
Sorcery
Exile target creature or artifact. Its controller gains a corruption counter.

I would make it enchantment instead of artifact, as white rarely gets artifact hate that doesn't also get enchantments. For common it might be too strong, for uncommon it could probably get both artifacts, creatures and enchantments

Also why does an inquisitorial purge give corruption, it seems like inquisitors would be against it.


If it was easier to get corruption:

Gelean Traitor - G
Creature - Elf Warrior U
Gelean Traitor gets +1/+1 as long as defending player has three or more corruption counters.
1/1

Bilemaw - 2GG
Creature - Beast - C
Whenever a creature dealt combat damage by Bilemaw this turn dies, that creature's controller gets a corruption counter.
4/3

Festering Oak - 3G
Creature - Mutant Treefolk - C
When Festering Oak enters the battlefield, target player gets a corruption counter.
2/4

Sickened Raider - 2R
Creature - Orc Warrior - C
Sickened raider can't block.
Sickened Raider has trample if defending player has three or more corruption counters
3/3

Ailed Merchant - 2R
Creature - Human - U
T: Draw a card, then discards a card. If you discarded a creature card, target opponent gains a corruption counter.
1/1

Twisted Herd - 3GG
Creature - Elk - U
Trample
When Twisted Herd deals combat damage to an opponent, that player gains a corruption counter.
Twisted Herd gets +3/+3 as long as an opponent has six or more corruption counters.
5/5

[Tvtyrant]

The most directly comparable card I know is the steel overseer.
It costs 1 less than steel overseer but is coloured and works only on itself and it can not take the decision to not tap.

Interesting design. Although not sure if that's common or uncommon. It's an interesting idea anyway. Could see it in some black/blue untap shenanigans, it's probably too slow for Modern though. Turn 3 3/3 is meh.

Currently I think a common if there are cards like mobilize to untap all of your creatures. Good common in draft, not good enough for constructed.

How strong would it have to be to be ok in constructed? If the ability read "each upkeep tap and add a +1/+1 counter" it would still require an untapping card, would that be too strong or about right? (It would be a rare then.)

Sul Drinker- 2BB
Creature - Insect- Rare
Flying
When Sul Drinker enters the battlefield, sacrifice target creature you control. For each +1/+1 counter on that creature put a -1/-1 counter on target creature your opponent controls. For each -1/-1 counter on that creature you gain 3 life.
"It devours its victim mind and body, not even the soul escapes."
2/3

[Androgeus]

Sul Drinker- 2BB
Creature - Insect- Rare
Flying
When Sul Drinker enters the battlefield, sacrifice target creature you control. For each +1/+1 counter on that creature put a -1/-1 counter on target creature your opponent controls. For each -1/-1 counter on that creature you gain 3 life.
"It devours its victim mind and body, not even the soul escapes."
2/3

Is the final ability counting -1/-1 counters on the opponent’s creature? If so I feel most people would gain the wrong amount of life if that creature has +1/+1 counters on it. (You’d gain 3*then number of -1/-1 counters you placed. +1s and -1s don’t annihilate until state based actions are checked)

Oh also here’s a silly version of Orboros I thought up

Orboros B
Creature - Snake
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may sacrifice Orboros. If you do, create a copy of Orboros except it’s a X/X where X is Orboros’s power + 1
1/1

[Tvtyrant]

Is the final ability counting -1/-1 counters on the opponent’s creature? If so I feel most people would gain the wrong amount of life if that creature has +1/+1 counters on it. (You’d gain 3*then number of -1/-1 counters you placed. +1s and -1s don’t annihilate until state based actions are checked)

I wrote that wrong. The idea was if your creature had +1/+1 counters you could injure an enemies creature, if it has -1/-1 counters you gain life. If it was both I would write it "For each +1/+1 counter gain X life and put a -1/-1 counter on target creature." Three life is also clearly too much in that case, probably 1 life would be fair if it was both.

Sul Drinker- 2BB
Creature - Insect- Rare
Flying
When Sul Drinker enters the battlefield, sacrifice target creature you control.

For each +1/+1 counter on the creature you sacrificed put a -1/-1 counter on target creature your opponent controls.

For each -1/-1 counter on the creature you sacrificed gain 3 life.

"It devours its victim mind and body, not even the soul escapes."
2/3

[Ninjaman]

Currently I think a common if there are cards like mobilize to untap all of your creatures. Good common in draft, not good enough for constructed.

It's weird enough that it should at least be an uncommon.

strong would it have to be to be ok in constructed? If the ability read "each upkeep tap and add a +1/+1 counter" it would still require an untapping card, would that be too strong or about right? (It would be a rare then.)

That depends entirely on what support there is for it. If it's only 2 mana cantrips then it almost doesn't matter how good you'll make it, since it still dies to removal, gets chumped for days and you need to stuff your deck with bad cards to make it work.

I wrote that wrong. The idea was if your creature had +1/+1 counters you could injure an enemies creature, if it has -1/-1 counters you gain life. If it was both I would write it "For each +1/+1 counter gain X life and put a -1/-1 counter on target creature." Three life is also clearly too much in that case, probably 1 life would be fair if it was both.

I misunderstood it as well.

Sul Drinker- 2BB
Creature - Insect- Rare
Flying
When Sul Drinker enters the battlefield, sacrifice target creature you control.

For each +1/+1 counter on the creature you sacrificed put a -1/-1 counter on target creature your opponent controls.

For each -1/-1 counter on the creature you sacrificed gain 3 life.

"It devours its victim mind and body, not even the soul escapes."
2/3

The sacrifice doesn't need to target. Why don't you just write the -1/-1 counter above?
You can't use line breaks as that means it's a new ability.

When Sul Drinker enters the battlefield, sacrifice a creature. For each -1/-1 counter on that creature, you gain 3 life. For each +1/+1 counter on that creature, put a -1/-1 counter on target creature an opponent controls.

[Androgeus]

I think the best way to word Sul Drinker would be:

When ~ enters the battlefield, sacrifice a creature. When you do choose one —

• For each +1/+1 counter on that creature, gain 3 life
• For each -1/-1 counter on that creature, put a -1/-1 counter on target creature

The modal part means you don’t need a target if you sacrificed a creature with +1 counters, and the reflexive trigger means you don’t need to make that choice until you’ve actually sacrificed the creature.

[-D-]

• For each +1/+1 counter on that creature, gain 3 life
• For each -1/-1 counter on that creature, put a -1/-1 counter on target creature

There is one large problem with this. Sets (that aren't reprint or Modern/Vintage/Legacy only) don't have +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters in them. In fact it's one or the other.

You have one black creature that prevents only one type of counter, that wouldn't be difficult for black to remove in the first place, and you're then extrapolating that black is allowed to prevent all kinds of counters. That is what I am disagreeing with.

And you have two creatures from same editions Mirrodin Besieged, which was 4 months after Scars of Mirrodin, a set you gave me **** about. And Melira was given that ability so she fulfills a story purpose. Maybe she experienced bleed from black as well.

I'd take M20 or M19 as proof, over a single card that happened 8 years ago, and didn't happen since...

But permanent damage to players doesn't matter when you can heal above your starting life.

That's why it has the second clause, that once it reaches your starting life, you're dead whether at 23 or 3.000.000.

Flavor. It depends on what you synergize it with. Energy counters don't do anything by themselves either, they are energy because that makes sense with how other cards use them.

Energy counters have design limits as well. It's from what I've talked with people on discord a shared chared counters pool. It can't ever produce mana for example, and never without consuming another resource like Tap.

How are they harder to keep track of that any other pump effect?

You have to track if you used the ability or not.

I would make it enchantment instead of artifact, as white rarely gets artifact hate that doesn't also get enchantments. For common it might be too strong, for uncommon it could probably get both artifacts, creatures and enchantments

Blessed light

Replace enchantment with artifact.

Also why does an inquisitorial purge give corruption, it seems like inquisitors would be against it.

One to reprsent them blaiming you and two to show they aren't "clean" so to speak.

[Ninjaman]

There is one large problem with this. Sets (that aren't reprint or Modern/Vintage/Legacy only) don't have +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters in them. In fact it's one or the other.

That's a good point.

And you have two creatures from same editions Mirrodin Besieged, which was 4 months after Scars of Mirrodin, a set you gave me **** about. And Melira was given that ability so she fulfills a story purpose. Maybe she experienced bleed from black as well.

I'd take M20 or M19 as proof, over a single card that happened 8 years ago, and didn't happen since...

And I've said that they might have moved it and preventing counters isn't within green's color pie anymore, but that doesn't help really help your case for counter prevention in black.
But there is a huge difference between using an effect that appeared in that color on an older card, but not very old, and might not be in the pie still, and than using an effect that haven't appeared in that color.
Green prevents damage, so it makes sense that it gets to prevent infect damage. How does it make sense for black to prevent poison?

That's why it has the second clause, that once it reaches your starting life, you're dead whether at 23 or 3.000.000.

And unless all your damage is in the form of corruption that is almost never going to be relevant, so you're only either adding something pointless, or making the mechanic more parasitic. Both of those are bad designs.

Energy counters have design limits as well. It's from what I've talked with people on discord a shared chared counters pool. It can't ever produce mana for example, and never without consuming another resource like Tap.

But they still don't do anything by themselves, this is just restrictions for how you choose cards should use them.
I don't think I'd actually do anything that requires removing corruption, since that works poorly in multiplayer.
The flavor absolutely could have been something else, just like energy could have been materials and be used for building things. The counters do only what you choose to do with them.

You have to track if you used the ability or not.

How is this different from a pump effect you can use several times? You still have to track how many pumps are currently active.

Blessed light

Replace enchantment with artifact.

I said white rarely removes artifacts at common, and rarely removes artifacts without also removing enchantments, and your rebuttal to this was showing a common that exiled enchantments?

One to reprsent them blaiming you and two to show they aren't "clean" so to speak.

So they inquisition is actually deliberately spreading the corruption?


Shambling Silverfang - BG
Creature - Zombie Wolf - U
When Shambling Silverfang enters the battlefield, target opponent gains a corruption counter.
2: Return Shambling Silverfang from your graveyard to your hand. Activate this ability only if an opponent has six or more corruption counters.

Commander of the Damned - BB
Creature - Zombie Soldier - R
Whenever a creature you control deals combat damage to an opponent, that player gets a corruption counter.
Creatures you control get +1/+1 as long as an opponent has eight or more corruption counters.
2/2

Poxspawn - 2BB
Creature - Horror - R
Menace
When Poxspawn enters the battlefield, each opponent gains a corruption counter.
Poxspawn gets +1/+1 for each corruption counter on opponents.
0/0

Vla'drekath, Archwraith - 4RB
Creature - Spirit - M
At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep, that player gains a corruption counter, then Vla'drekath, Archwraith deals damage to that player equal to the number of corruption counters on them.
7/4

[noob]

Commander of the damned seems to be a quite strong 2/2 unit considering it more or less boosts the damage of any creature that deals damage to an opponent(the +1/+1 boosts at high corruption works only in late game so it does not matters a lot)
On the other hand double black makes it less playable out of pure black decks or double color decks(basically playing commander of the damned fast on a triple or quad color deck is probably very hard)
Also it have no defences against the megatons of removal there is in MTG apart from being black(on its own it is not enough).

[Ninjaman]

Commander of the damned seems to be a quite strong 2/2 unit considering it more or less boosts the damage of any creature that deals damage to an opponent(the +1/+1 boosts at high corruption works only in late game so it does not matters a lot)

Corruption does not deal damage/cause life loss or otherwise affect life totals in any way by ifself.

[-D-]

And I've said that they might have moved it and preventing counters isn't within green's color pie anymore, but that doesn't help really help your case for counter prevention in black.

Yeah, other than removing counters being a black thing and card that prevents counters being black there is nothing else to prove that black can prevent counters. Oh wait.

That said, people on Discord were confused and unsure. I asked MaRo, so I'll notify you if there is any updates.

How does it make sense for black to prevent poison?

Flavor mostly, if there was a color that could manipulate poison, it would be black. Especially for a price.

And unless all your damage is in the form of corruption that is almost never going to be relevant, so you're only either adding something pointless, or making the mechanic more parasitic. Both of those are bad designs.

That's a disingenuous argument. How often do you finish your game at more than 0 life? Not to mention more than 20 life. Yeah, corruption is weaker against life gain, but life gain isn't that common of a deck.

If 2 damage is corruption and 18 damage is regular damage (assuming no healing) you lose. It works together with damage, it's not a parasitic thing like poison. Granted healing mitigates it, to a degree.

But they still don't do anything by themselves, this is just restrictions for how you choose cards should use them.
I don't think I'd actually do anything that requires removing corruption, since that works poorly in multiplayer.

They were made with some design constraints, same way colors get design constraints.

I said white rarely removes artifacts at common, and rarely removes artifacts without also removing enchantments, and your rebuttal to this was showing a common that exiled enchantments?

It's white, it's common, and it exiles. It's part of white's color pie. I see no logical reason it couldn't do that at common, other than it never did it at common (it did it at uncommon - Thopter's arrest and it's uncommon probably because the text was 4+ lines).

So they inquisition is actually deliberately spreading the corruption?

To the same manner

[Ninjaman]

Yeah, other than removing counters being a black thing and card that prevents counters being black there is nothing else to prove that black can prevent counters. Oh wait.

I've explained why they don't count over and over again and you just keep asserting that they do. Preventing one type of counter is not a basis for removing every type of counter

That said, people on Discord were confused and unsure. I asked MaRo, so I'll notify you if there is any updates.

Sure.

Flavor mostly, if there was a color that could manipulate poison, it would be black. Especially for a price.

They wouldn't manipulate poison by preventing it though.

That's a disingenuous argument. How often do you finish your game at more than 0 life? Not to mention more than 20 life. Yeah, corruption is weaker against life gain, but life gain isn't that common of a deck.

I don't understand what point you're trying to make here.
My point is that if you deal 10 corruption and 10 damage the opponent will still be alive if he heals 1 life, corruption being corruption doesn't matter unless you get to 20, it could just have been regular damage.

If 2 damage is corruption and 18 damage is regular damage (assuming no healing) you lose. It works together with damage, it's not a parasitic thing like poison. Granted healing mitigates it, to a degree.

It's parasitic in that if you want to nullify your opponent's life gain you need to deal 20 corruption. If you deal less than 20 corruption then there is no difference whether you had dealt corruption damage or just regular damage. They die at twenty damage either way, and they can heal the same if they don't have twenty corruption. Having your deck reliably deal 5 points of corruption has no effect against life gain.

They were made with some design constraints, same way colors get design constraints.

And I would give corruption design restraints. I'm not sure what your point is.

It's white, it's common, and it exiles. It's part of white's color pie. I see no logical reason it couldn't do that at common, other than it never did it at common (it did it at uncommon - Thopter's arrest and it's uncommon probably because the text was 4+ lines).

I didn't say white never gets to remove artifacts without enchantments, I said it rarely does, and it rarely gets to remove artifacts at common. I has enchantment destruction as primary but artifact as secondary.
White has had more artifact removal at common than I thought at first, but the only white commons I could find that removed artifacts without also removing enchantments were Divine Offering and Topple the Statue.
Divine offering is from a very artifact heavy set, and topple the statue is more of a flavor exception.
The point still stands that if you want to create a white common that can destroy artifacts but not enchantments you need a pretty convincing reason to do so.

This is not about what you can or can't do, it's about what you should do.

After doing a search I can tell you that the amount of white cards, all rarities, that destroy or exile artifacts without mentioning enchantments is six. The other way around there are over ten times as many.

[-D-]

I've explained why they don't count over and over again and you just keep asserting that they do. Preventing one type of counter is not a basis for removing every type of counter

And I've explained, why that's not true. According to the magic pie article, black gets to remove all counters from any permanent (not players). Could that have changed in the meantime? Maybe.

Until you give substantial refutations that Black isn't the color of removing counters from permanents, according to official magic and cards they printed. Yes, you can make case that the article should have added white as well, but not that they are outright wrong.

They wouldn't manipulate poison by preventing it though.

They absolutely would. For a price. Black has even "combat damage" prevention on creatures, for a price. Oathsworn Knight.

My point is that if you deal 10 corruption and 10 damage the opponent will still be alive if he heals 1 life, corruption being corruption doesn't matter unless you get to 20, it could just have been regular damage.

Yeah and? In 95% of cases that distinction is meaningless. In 95% of cases, you heal for 1 and opponent deals 1 damage and you die. Or an opponent plays a "prevent life gain" card.

It's not parasitic, it synergistic with damage. If you are against a life gain deck, yeah you need to deal 20 corruption OR AND HEAR ME OUT - "prevent life gain". Because it's synergistic with damage.

This is not about what you can or can't do, it's about what you should do.

This is reductionist thinking with which I heavily disagree. I mean, by your logic, before Kaladesh you'd say we shouldn't have colored artifacts, because there were like six of them.

[Gauntlet]

They absolutely would. For a price. Black has even "combat damage" prevention on creatures, for a price. Oathsworn Knight.

This is the 'chop off limbs' mechanic, because it's the Black Knight. It's a Monty Python reference.

Black gets these mechanics because it represents creatures that are able to take a beating and have bits removed without dying. It's on zombies, also. If you were creating a black card that represented ignoring corruption and keeping going anyway, it would probably be some sort of Lich effect or similar. 'Staving off corruption' isn't a very Black thing to be doing - Black would be turning the corruption to its benefit, or keeping going despite the Corruption.

Yeah and? In 95% of cases that distinction is meaningless. In 95% of cases, you heal for 1 and opponent deals 1 damage and you die. Or an opponent plays a "prevent life gain" card.

It's not parasitic, it synergistic with damage. If you are against a life gain deck, yeah you need to deal 20 corruption OR AND HEAR ME OUT - "prevent life gain". Because it's synergistic with damage.

The point Ninjaman is making is that 95% of the time the Corruption effect is completely indistinguishable from damage, which means it's probably not worth the text. The point of mechanics and rules text is to change the way the game plays in some way - if a rule or effect just doesn't do anything to change how the game plays, it's likely not necessary.

[Ninjaman]

And I've explained, why that's not true. According to the magic pie article, black gets to remove all counters from any permanent (not players). Could that have changed in the meantime? Maybe.

Congratulations, you found a misspelling. Based on context it was obviously meant to say "Preventing one type of counter is not a basis for preven every type of counter"
Removing counter =/= Preventing counters.
Also white wasn't noted as preventing or removing counters in that article.

Until you give substantial refutations that Black isn't the color of removing counters from permanents, according to official magic and cards they printed.

Please give your substantial evidence for black being able to prevent all kinds of counters.

Yes, you can make case that the article should have added white as well, but not that they are outright wrong.

I'm not saying the article is wrong. Black can remove counters, they just can't prevent them.

They absolutely would. For a price. Black has even "combat damage" prevention on creatures, for a price. Oathsworn Knight.

That's the phantom ability. Black gets that, but that doesn't mean they get damage prevention in general. We've also agreed that red gets wither outside of it being a set mechanic, but that doesn't mean they get all -1/-1 counter effects.

Yeah and? In 95% of cases that distinction is meaningless. In 95% of cases, you heal for 1 and opponent deals 1 damage and you die. Or an opponent plays a "prevent life gain" card.

Yes, in 95% of cases damage and corruption is a meaningless distinction. That's not worth the design space.
Give me an example where you don't deal 20 corruption and yet it is still relevant that the damage is corruption.

It's not parasitic, it synergistic with damage. If you are against a life gain deck, yeah you need to deal 20 corruption OR AND HEAR ME OUT - "prevent life gain". Because it's synergistic with damage.

But if you're dealing corruption damage along with regular damage then killing the opponent when you hit 20 corruption isn't going to be relevant, because unless they play heavy life gain they are going to die before. If you want the corruption to be relevant against life gain then you need to deal only, or mostly only corruption damage.

This is reductionist thinking with which I heavily disagree. I mean, by your logic, before Kaladesh you'd say we shouldn't have colored artifacts, because there were like six of them.

You shouldn't just look at the stats and make conclusions, but you should look at tendencies and try to understand them.
Most of the white cards with a purge flavor destroys creatures and/or enchantments, because that makes sense.
Don't say "can I do it this way?" ask "why am I doing it this way?"

Also you should do your research better, before Kaladesh there were still over 50.

[Androgeus]

Also you should do your research better, before Kaladesh there were still over 50.

I get 108 cards

[Ninjaman]

I get 108 cards

I didn't want to shoot too high, but suffice to say "like 6" was undershot quite badly.

[NigelWalmsley]

Under Watch
2WW
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant Creature
When ~ enters the battlefield, create two 1/1 white Soldier creature tokens.
Enchanted creature can't attack or block.

Simple Pacifism variant. Surprisingly, it doesn't seem to have been printed yet.

Radiant Grove
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
When ~ enters the battlefield, add one mana of any color.
T: Add G.

Yeah, I know it breaks the "nothing better than a basic land" rule. But it's probably not better than the duals people actually play, so I don't really care.

Avarice Druid
G
Creature - Elf Druid
T: Add one mana of any color a land an opponent controls could produce.
1/1

The Joyous Work
2UGB
Enchantment - Saga
When ~ enters the battlefield and at the beginning of your precombat main phase, put a +1/+1 counter up to one target creature.
I, II, III - Proliferate.

Not sure about this one. The extra static ability is ugly on a lot of levels, but without it I think you almost always want to burn straight through.

Ardenvale Marshal
2WW
Creature - Human Knight
Creatures you control get +1/+1.
2/2
//
Muster for Battle
2W
Instant
Create two 1/1 white Soldier creature tokens.

Re-engineer
1UR
Instant
Copy target instant or sorcery spell with converted mana cost 3 or less in your graveyard. You may cast the copy without paying its mana cost.
Jump-start

I thought of this a while ago, and at the time I had a better name. Still, a nice bit of utility for a spellslinger deck.

[-D-]

Congratulations, you found a misspelling. Based on the context it was obviously meant to say "Preventing one type of counter is not a basis for preven every type of counter"
Removing counter =/= Preventing counters.

Are you gaslighting me? This is a serious question.

That's +1/+1 counters, which are positive. +1/+1 counters can be negated with -1/-1 counters. The card [Blightbeetle] could have said "whenever a +1/+1 counter is put on a creature an opponent controls, put -1/-1 counter on that creature." and it would undoubtedly be black. Preventing counters isn't black, but preventing +1/+1 counters is.

In that post, YOU argued that REMOVING COUNTERS == PREVENTING COUNTERS... And you argued that it was functionally the same a few more posts.

Please give your substantial evidence for black being able to prevent all kinds of counters.

From a mechanical perspective, there aren't much justifications. Black can already remove any number of counters and the article notes it as sole color for removing counters. Which is flawed. R&D drifted on it, so it's hard to say where they are right now, but it seems that white can prevent counters and black can prevent some counters.

From a flavor perspective, black would be a color that would allow you to dump your poison onto others, or manipulate it in a similar fashion. Not necessarily prevention, but in essence the same or worst.

Also white wasn't noted as preventing or removing counters in that article.

And I've explained, Melira was before that article, Blightbeetle, Suncleanser, and Solemnity are after.

Yes, in 95% of cases damage and corruption is a meaningless distinction. That's not worth the design space.
Give me an example where you don't deal with 20 corruption and yet it is still relevant that the damage is corruption.

Well, here is why I did. I didn't want corruption to be parasitic, I wanted to make sure that if you are adding corruption on yourself, it's a minor tradeoff, not a 99% free tradeoff.

In my book, the damage is part of the design space. Sure I give some design space up, but it is worth it for the flavor and interactivity.

Also, I was responding to your claim "corruption=1 damage in counters" was parasitic.
It's not. Not in any sane* way of defining it.

*I could just as easily argue creatures with X is parasitic if I only insist on attacking with creatures that have X.

You shouldn't just look at the stats and make conclusions, but you should look at tendencies and try to understand them.
Most of the white cards with a purge flavor destroys creatures and/or enchantments, because that makes sense.
Don't say "can I do it this way?" ask "why am I doing it this way?"

Yeah. I know.

And I know why I'm doing it that way. Because it's meant to show how the Inquisition burns people and their instruments - that's the flavor. But even on a most basic mechanical level (modulo flavor), no one else found this problematic. Well. Almost no one

Also you should do your research better, before Kaladesh there were still over 50.

Congratulations. I wrote down Kaladesh by mistake, I meant to write Alara. In Kaladesh, they became deciduous.

I still have the problem with "They never did it, so they will never do it" mentality. R&D shifts their position all the time.

[Ninjaman]

Are you gaslighting me? This is a serious question.

No, you are consistently misrepresenting my argument.

In that post, YOU argued that REMOVING COUNTERS == PREVENTING COUNTERS... And you argued that it was functionally the same a few more posts.

I argued that black could remove +1/+1 counters by using -1/-1 counters, and I explained how this could be done in a way that functioned mostly similarly to just preventing counters.
I never argued that removing counters was the same as preventing counters, actually I've several times outright stated that it doesn't, yet you somehow choose to focus on the one place where you can kinda twist it to claim that I did.

From a mechanical perspective, there aren't much justifications. Black can already remove any number of counters and the article notes it as sole color for removing counters. Which is flawed. R&D drifted on it, so it's hard to say where they are right now, but it seems that white can prevent counters and black can prevent some counters.

Being able to prevent +1/+1 counters gives no basis for assuming they can prevent any other kind of counter. Especially not since I have already explained why it makes sense that they can prevent +1/+1 counters.

From a flavor perspective, black would be a color that would allow you to dump your poison onto others, or manipulate it in a similar fashion. Not necessarily prevention, but in essence the same or worst.

I think Gauntlet sufficiently explained how black's relation to poison would be.

And I've explained, Melira was before that article, Blightbeetle, Suncleanser, and Solemnity are after.

And whether Melira is still within the color pie of green can be discussed, but we have no evidence that she's within black just because a black creature also prevents some kind of counter.

Well, here is why I did. I didn't want corruption to be parasitic, I wanted to make sure that if you are adding corruption on yourself, it's a minor tradeoff, not a 99% free tradeoff.

Adding corruption to yourself is indistinguishable from just paying life 99% of the time, so why even use corruption on yourself as a mechanic?

In my book, the damage is part of the design space. Sure I give some design space up, but it is worth it for the flavor and interactivity.

We're not arguing against the damage, we are arguing against the "life gain prevention".
How is it more interactive?

Also, I was responding to your claim "corruption=1 damage in counters" was parasitic.
It's not. Not in any sane* way of defining it.

That's not what I ever claimed. I claimed "20 corruption=lose the game" was parasitic.

I've explained multiple times what my problem is, please address it.

And I know why I'm doing it that way. Because it's meant to show how the Inquisition burns people and their instruments - that's the flavor. But even on a most basic mechanical level (modulo flavor), no one else found this problematic. Well. Almost no one

I'm not sure why a purge can completely atomize a physical object but do nothing to a magical aura, when being anti magic is kind of what inquisitions are about.
Does your limited environment actually require this? From what I have seen it isn't a

Congratulations. I wrote down Kaladesh by mistake, I meant to write Alara. In Kaladesh, they became deciduous.

There were actually 3 before Alara, 2 of them castable with only colorless mana, and the third from time spiral. So it's safe to say that before Alara colored artifacts weren't really a thing. Then in Alara they made a decision, and they made sure to actually go by that decision, designing loads of colored artifacts because they were now able to.

This is not that, at all. You're not doing something new and interesting. You're doing something that exists already but you're doing it slightly differently than how it is ussaully done, and that is sometimes fine, but I think in this case it begs the difference, why not do it like it's usually done?
White occasionally gets exile target artifact or enchantment on common, you can do this with your set mechanic, that's a neat common to put into your set. Why do you need to shake it up more?

I still have the problem with "They never did it, so they will never do it" mentality. R&D shifts their position all the time.

I don't have that mentality. I'm saying that if you want to do something unorthodox you're gonna need to think about how you do it, and maybe more importantly, why you do it. What implications does this have? Is there maybe a reason they haven't done this?

I don't see you trying to answer these questions.

[Ninjaman]

Under Watch
2WW
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant Creature
When ~ enters the battlefield, create two 1/1 white Soldier creature tokens.
Enchanted creature can't attack or block.

This is a lot of value. It would need to be uncommon at least, but even then I might still want it bumped up to 3WW or left it at one token. It can probably work as is at rare, but it might not feel rare enough.

Simple Pacifism variant. Surprisingly, it doesn't seem to have been printed yet.

There are so many ways to combine abilities that I am not surprised this hasn't popped up yet. The flavor also kind of exists in Banisher Priest cards.

Radiant Grove
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
When ~ enters the battlefield, add one mana of any color.
T: Add G.

Yeah, I know it breaks the "nothing better than a basic land" rule. But it's probably not better than the duals people actually play, so I don't really care.

Had written about it being better than a forest before you wrote this. I hope you realize that people play basics. This rule exists for a reason.

Avarice Druid
G
Creature - Elf Druid
T: Add one mana of any color a land an opponent controls could produce.
1/1

It needs to be type, but it's fine. It's worse than a type you control, but those tend to cost 1 more, so I think this would be fine. I think I would make it uncommon.

The Joyous Work
2UGB
Enchantment - Saga
When ~ enters the battlefield and at the beginning of your precombat main phase, put a +1/+1 counter up to one target creature.
I, II, III - Proliferate.

Not sure about this one. The extra static ability is ugly on a lot of levels, but without it I think you almost always want to burn straight through.

I agree that the static is ugly, and I don't think the ability to burn straight through it is a good design. It doesn't feel like a saga.

Ardenvale Marshal
2WW
Creature - Human Knight
Creatures you control get +1/+1.
2/2
//
Muster for Battle
2W
Instant
Create two 1/1 white Soldier creature tokens.

I assume this was supposed to be an adventure?
When he hits the table turn 4 you have 6 power without any other cards, 4 of which can swing. That's very powerful, but so were some of the other adventures. My problem is that the creature is probably good enough on its own without the adventure, and the adventure just pushes it over the edge.

Re-engineer
1UR
Instant
Copy target instant or sorcery spell with converted mana cost 3 or less in your graveyard. You may cast the copy without paying its mana cost.
Jump-start

I thought of this a while ago, and at the time I had a better name. Still, a nice bit of utility for a spellslinger deck.

So it gives flashback without exiling? And it does so twice? That just might be getting too much value, especially since it doesn't put you at a mana disadvantage. I think it would at least need to say mana cost 2 or less.


You really need to add rarity to your cards.
Why do you write the mana cost under the name?

[Gauntlet]

Under Watch
2WW
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant Creature
When ~ enters the battlefield, create two 1/1 white Soldier creature tokens.
Enchanted creature can't attack or block.

Simple Pacifism variant. Surprisingly, it doesn't seem to have been printed yet.

I think the reason effects along these lines haven't been printed yet is that if your opponent sacrifices or protects their creature in response to the aura, you don't get the soldiers either, which is a major feelbad.

If I was going to design a card along these lines, I'd do it like this:


Under Watch - 2WW
Enchantment - Uncommon

When ~ enters the battlefield, create two 1/1 white Soldier creature tokens.

When ~ enters the battlefield, exile target creature an opponent controls until ~ leaves the battlefield.

At the beginning of your upkeep, if you control no creatures, sacrifice ~.