Starstill Visual Spoiler
If anyone wants the MSE Set Editor 2 file I used to make this, PM me with your email and I'll send it to you.
White (23/39)
| No Goblins Allowed http://862838.jrbdt8wd.asia/ |
|
| Visual Spoiler (124/245) http://862838.jrbdt8wd.asia/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=4974 |
Page 1 of 4 |
| Author: | ParadOxymoron [ Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Starstill Visual Spoiler If anyone wants the MSE Set Editor 2 file I used to make this, PM me with your email and I'll send it to you.
White (23/39)
|
|
| Author: | ParadOxymoron [ Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Blue (20/39)
|
|
| Author: | ParadOxymoron [ Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Black (22/39)
|
|
| Author: | ParadOxymoron [ Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Red (20/39)
|
|
| Author: | ParadOxymoron [ Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Green (20/39)
|
|
| Author: | ParadOxymoron [ Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
15/28 Colorless Cards
4/12 Lands
|
|
| Author: | Cato [ Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Shambearer, rune-gear tinkerer, and springhaven medic need p/ts. |
|
| Author: | TPzombieW [ Wed Jul 23, 2014 10:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Yeah! |
|
| Author: | Cato [ Wed Jul 23, 2014 10:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Going through the submissions: Enchantment Bringer is on one card in the same set. We should probably cut it. Unshakable Resolve should cost  .Sunchaser Procession should make 4 tokens. You aren't going to be able to attack with them until turn 5 at the earliest, so I think it needs more upside. Apostle of Elori should be mythic. It's really complex. Solar Flare doesn't need to be rare. It could be uncommon or even common. Reification of Elori should be cheaper and have a better body. Maybe give it flying and cut the cost by 1? Ethereal Form and Steam Cloak are similar enough that they probably shouldn't be in the same set. Mist Weaver: change it to a "whenever an enchantment enters the battlefield under your control" trigger, and make it an enchantment creature. Snowblind Haint: No p/t Frostblight Foresight: Make it dependent on the number of artifacts you control so that it will work with relics, and make it x+1 so that you can always cycle it. Spellbound Serpent: should be common. Wall of Cloud: unplayably bad. Make it return to its owner's hand every upkeep instead of saccing? Cheapshot Enthusiast: should be 2/1. Instruments of Torture: maybe change it to an aura with the relic as an etb trigger? Irondeep Spelunker: maybe make it artifact or creature, so you can sac a relic? Shamebearer: I think this would be better if it triggered on your enchantments than your opponent's, so that you can build around it instead of siding it in. Icy Whisper: really weak. At best it lets you spend a card and 2 mana to get a 2 mana spell, and at worst it's an awkwardly costed card that does nothing if you don't have any instants in your 'yard. I think it would be better if it cost   , cantripped, and could hit sorceries too.Eater of Dreams: needs p/t. Fun fact: WOTC tries to make 6cmc demons 6/6s. MaRo actually said it in a podcast. Lich of Lost Treasures: to avoid confusion, we should specify that you exile the cards from a graveyard. I was showing the set to a buddy of mine and he thought it exiled cards from the board. Gravefall: I thought unconditional removal was supposed to cost  ?Magespark Elemental: Most cards with this effect have trample, and I see no reason why this one shouldn't too. Raid the Ruins: there's pretty much no reason to cast this instead of engraving it. Maybe make it a sorcery that costs  ?Sparksigil Apprentice: there is a grand total of 2 red sorceries in the set. I think this should be able to hit instants too, so that it isn't so narrow. Grove Tender: By the time you have mastery, you really don't care about them using removal on your mana dork. I think the card would be cleaner if you just took off the mastery hexproof. Tank Golem: getting enough artifacts into play to actually kill someone with this is a daunting task. How about "Tap another untapped artifact you control: untap ~"? Weathered Cloak: this card has memory issues, and protection isn't usually used at common anymore because it's hard for newer players to understand. I think this should be bumped up to uncommon. Icecore Golem: needs p/t. Shatterspear Insignia: I think this card could afford to reduce costs by .Mox Amber: a mana source that doesn't make any mana until you already have a bunch of stuff out doesn't need to be legendary. Spires: maybe make this a cycle? Black gets back instants, red gets back sorceries, and green gets back creatures? |
|
| Author: | Confused [ Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Went through the white, the mythic feels kinda underpowered to me. For 7 seven mana I would have something better to cast. |
|
| Author: | Knifethrower [ Thu Jul 24, 2014 11:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Cato wrote: Spires: maybe make this a cycle? Black gets back instants, red gets back sorceries, and green gets back creatures? I would choose red to get an instant or sorcery, black to return a creature, and green to return anything, but with a slightly higher cost. Letting the green one be more interesting for mastery decks and a obvious homage to regrowth et al while keeping instant/sorcery together. |
|
| Author: | Shazzeh [ Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
That's a really good idea. |
|
| Author: | ParadOxymoron [ Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Didn't we decide at some point that Subterranean Scrawlings should require you exiling two instants/sorceries? Also, speaking of Subterranean Scrawlings, I'm really interested in the idea of a an underground group of spellcasters in Illpyre, and hope that setting gets expanded upon. |
|
| Author: | Cato [ Thu Jul 24, 2014 11:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Scrawlings to 2 spells: I think it's fine as is. Knife's suggestion: that's actually a good idea. |
|
| Author: | ParadOxymoron [ Thu Jul 24, 2014 11:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Cato wrote: Mist Weaver: change it to a "whenever an enchantment enters the battlefield under your control" trigger, and make it an enchantment creature. Irondeep Spelunker: maybe make it artifact or creature, so you can sac a relic? Shamebearer: I think this would be better if it triggered on your enchantments than your opponent's, so that you can build around it instead of siding it in. Icy Whisper: really weak. At best it lets you spend a card and 2 mana to get a 2 mana spell, and at worst it's an awkwardly costed card that does nothing if you don't have any instants in your 'yard. I think it would be better if it cost , cantripped, and could hit sorceries too.Mox Amber: a mana source that doesn't make any mana until you already have a bunch of stuff out doesn't need to be legendary. These are the only things you said that I disagree with. I think your suggestion for Mist Weaver would make it too powerful for a common. Irondeep Spelunker is way too elegant the way it is to mess that up by adding artifacts. Shamebearer I think is better the way it is because of the way it mirrors Lightbearer. Like, mechanically I agree with you, but I think the flavorful connection with Lightbearer (a la White Knight/Black Knight) is the only real reason it was voted in, and the best part of the card. I originally submitted Icy Whisper as a common that cost . There was some discussion in this thread over whether it bent the color pie too much, so I bumped up the cost to and the rarity to Uncommon. I'm down with reducing the cost to because that's how I originally submitted it anyway, but I think it's cooler if it only hits instants and I don't think it should cantrip.Mox Amber is a similar story. I originally submitted it as non-Legendary, but a lot of people were worried that it was OP so I changed it to Legendary. I don't think it makes much of a difference, but since all you need is a Sun Spirit to activate it, I think it's safer as a Legendary. Quote: Frostblight Foresight: ...and make it x+1 so that you can always cycle it. Instruments of Torture: maybe change it to an aura with the relic as an etb trigger? Shatterspear Insignia: I think this card could afford to reduce costs by .These I feel indifferent about. Everything else I agree with. Knifethrower wrote: I would choose red to get an instant or sorcery, black to return a creature, and green to return anything, but with a slightly higher cost. Letting the green one be more interesting for mastery decks and a obvious homage to regrowth et al while keeping instant/sorcery together. I agree that this is a really great idea. The only thing I would suggest is that maybe the green one should cost the same, but put the card on top of your library instead of into your hand? |
|
| Author: | Cato [ Sun Jul 27, 2014 3:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Should we make the cleric tokens enchantment creatures? I mean, the clergy of Elori are all about enchantments, right? |
|
| Author: | ParadOxymoron [ Sat Aug 02, 2014 4:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Cato wrote: Eater of Dreams: needs p/t. Fun fact: WOTC tries to make 6cmc demons 6/6s. MaRo actually said it in a podcast. Does anyone have a problem if I gave it flying too? I'm going to update the visual spoiler soon, with a changelog, going off of Cato's suggestions and my own intuition. If anyone has any objections to the changes I make, this will be the thread to post them in. No changes will be made official until the community approves them; I'm just getting a jump on the development process. |
|
| Author: | Cato [ Sat Aug 02, 2014 5:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Can you post the changelog before you make the changes, so we can discuss them before we finalize them? |
|
| Author: | ParadOxymoron [ Sat Aug 02, 2014 6:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
Sure thing. I won't edit the OP or anything, I'll just post the cards that I changed in an sblock. |
|
| Author: | TPzombieW [ Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Spoiler (124/245) |
YOu have the green rares posted with the uncommons. |
|
| Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|
