I had planned for people to do this in in the General Discussion and Planning thread, but it didn't really happen that way.

This is the thread specifically for Starstill mechanics. If you've got a cool idea for a mechanic, post it here and see what people think!

We also need to decide upon an old mechanic to bring back. Ideas so far include rebound, [cardtype]fall, [card type] offering, and affinity for [card type]s.

I like morph on noncreatures here. It gives you two types of permanents to choose from.

Just wanted to gather all the keywords submitted so far together into one post.

I think Morph's been experimented with enough, don't you?

Then again, maybe I'm just thinking of that BCP with Morph in it. I guess that's beyond most people's memory-range.

This is offering, as seen on Patron of the Akki. "goblin" can be replaced with a card type. Tribute is from BNG.

I already pointed out in the general discussion and planning thread that it needed a new name, and it's actually offering in reverse: Instead of the ability being on the card in your hand, and you sacrifice any [card type], the ability is on a card on the battlefield, and is used to reduce the cost of any [card type] in your hand. More powerful this way, I think. But yes, I listed offering, too, as one of the ideas for a recurring mechanic. I'd say the use of the two is mutually exclusive.

Ah. I suggest a new temporary name, gnireffo.
I feel like this is focusing on a different aspect of morph.

Two more mechanics fo everyone's consideration. Sorry for complicating things Parad.

Enliven target ____ (It becomes a 2/2 creature until end of turn. It retains all other types and abilities)
Animate would maybe be a better name, but if the animate proposal dies, then we can always snag the name.

This one competes directly with animate, so I think we could start off with a vote between the two so they don't undermine each other in the final vote. That or if everyone can vote for multiple mechanics it's not so bad.
Awaken (as long as ~ has a +1/+1 counter on it, it is a creature with power and toughness equal to its converted mana cost)

What are you apologizing for? You're all supposed to be posting mechanics!

I like Enliven.

He suggested we make a new thread is what he meant.

Not exactly a keyword, but a mechanical twist...

"Can't untap until" versus "doesn't untap during"

Oh, I thought we might have already been at the voting stage. Apology retracted.

Emphasizes the religious undertones, plays into temporary aspect, makes non-aura enchantments more feasible at common because they don't clutter, makes Mown happy because it's his pet type.


Gives you cards that can turn into both sorceries and creatures, but is overall highly wacky. Also needs special rules for Twincast etc, probably.
I realize that it's probably better to just use "Cost, discard ~: Put token into play."


Taken from Steinhauser. Slightly modified to work better with toughness modifiers by not having them expire before damage does. Temporary, can go on any permanent, fits in many colors.


Well, I don't know really. I would have called it Animate, but that was already taken for this discussion.

We could bring back Transmute as a way to make one card type into another.

I like Essentia - lets cards be different types to different players.

We should also settle the set's rules on coloured artifacts and enchantment creatures. Forbidden? All over the place? Only in small doses?

I guess I'm fine with enchantment creatures because everyone seems to be submitting them for some reason but can we come up with some kind of identity for them so it's not just arbitrary? Like they have to have some kind of "global" triggered or static ability?

Also are we going to do snow? The only reason I care about this is the possibility of snow.

Enchantment creatures - I don't see us not doing these. I would keep their numbers small though, and we need some kind unifying criteria. How about they all have to have static abilities (ones that are always on)?

Snow - Maybe we could do snowbrid mana? Like costs that have to be payed with a mana of a specific colour or snow mana? That would be a good thing to put on coloured artifacts to keep them pseudocolourless (like what they did in New Phyrexia with the Phyrexian mana).
I do worry though that snow is one layer of complication too many.

Coloured artifacts - Against them unless we can find some new twist on the idea. They've done whole artifact sets without them, so we can certainly do a type matters set without them too.

I like Snow too, Lily, but what does it offer to the set mechanically? We need to answer that before we randomly include it.

I don't like snow. It doesn't add anything.

Champion a [type] could also be an interesting mechanic to bring back.

Snow should only be included if we add something similar for the opposite side.
Then we could have certain spells have specific effects based on Snow or [Illpyre side].

Like a fire spell that deals 4 damage to target snow creature, or 2 damage to target [Illpyre side] creature.

If that's the case, I'd be okay with snow, and if we did that, I think Tempered could be the opposite of it?