I voted 2, and think allowing your opponent to control your side would allow a cost less than 10 mana.

I never thought of Dogs as so defensive in nature they merited a p/t like 2/5  That's close to the defensive end of Angels and closing in on Walls.  I vote 2/3 for 1WW because the 4 mana creatures white gets are just so much better than this would ever be.

EDIT: my bad I missed some posts.
EDIT2: Apparently not, the circle of life continues.

Puck, we simply can't give feedback on the mechanic until you define what it can DO.  Right now it makes sense to you alone and only in some situations can everyone agree that this card "covers it".  Define the rules first, then we will be happy to go to step 2 which is "is this card good for the game, balanced, etc."  How could we tell if the card would be appropriately costed if we don't know what it will do?

I like this idea much better but does this allow a player to attack themself?

Tell me again why paying 3 mana to stop 3 of your opponent's creatures from attacking you is better than paying one to stop all of them?

Well colors aside is this too much better than concentrate or ambition's cost?

But there are many cards which regen artifacts only and he was going for a macine that can heal biological creatures as well as repair machines.

I'm slightly concerned that a 1 mana creature allows you in combat to trade your worst cards for your opponents creatures.  Need more opinions on power I think.

My god man that's vicious card disadvantage.  Discarding might be a good idea to lower the cost from 6 and provide an interesting twist though!

NAME
2UU  (3UU?)
As an additional cost to play ~this~ discard a card from your hand.
Remove target (an?) instant or sorcery card in any graveyard from the game and put a copy of that spell on the stack.  If the spell has X in its mana cost, X is 0.

Idea is to be able to discard an instant or sorcery and play it with this as well as just the cards already in graves.  Since the RFG is on resolution the bomb you just laid down could be stopped too.  I just think it's good to have options like "do I play this now with the removal card in the grave or do I wait to draw my bomb sorcery?"

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but didn't you wanted to make a card that would help Nightmare?  How does a card that has only a single ability which, if played, permanently weakens Nightmare help it?  I think this familiar is working for the enemy or something.

I wanted to suggest something that would bring swamps back from the grave at upkeep but that's like 1/5 a crucible of worlds.  Maybe you can make it repeat by adding a mana cost or something.  But at least explain why Nightmare's familiar is like his worst enemy, capable of killing him instantly for 0 mana.

If you read this a few times you realize the problems ^^;  I don't know if we can make a crypt with milling (especially Whetstone like) and mana production and uncounterability without giving it too high an ability cost to be viable.  In my opinion you'd be better off with a crypt-land and a whetstone-land or a crypt/whetstone artifact.

I thought I'd throw a few cents out there into the storm.  What I'd like people to remember is that although the consequences of varying paths of actions may yield the same end result, the means are ultimately important.

@mykeatog:  selling a real card for what an informed buyer is willing to pay is fundamentally different than intentionally defrauding an unsuspecting person EVEN IF the net result is the same ($ to your bank).  The means are morally repugnant in the latter case.

@HIV thing:  I'm glad we have laws here that require disclosure of HIV status.  In the news recently the USA reached a milestone of 1 million people living with HIV/AIDS.  That's out of 300 million.  And a big part of the reason the onus falls on those WITH the disease to disclose rather than the innocent bystander is because of this SMALL percentage.  It's not like some parts of sub-saharan Africa where the infection rate is 40% or higher.  It's also part of our legal tradition that the "seller" gives the "buyer" informed consent, whether that be an actual transaction, agreeing to take part in medical research, or contracting a deadly virus.

I can understand if your culture doesn't value this very much, though.  I mean, why not take advantage of people by spinning half truths and omitting information crucial to the decision?  Perfectly acceptable!  /half-hearted tongue in cheek

@The initial dilemma:  Of course he should try to get his money back, and selling it as a high quality proxy is a great idea (I wouldn't even have thought of that, good one).  And if at the end he gets a new, real card instead of the tainted one he has then I'm sure he'll be happy AND have learned a lesson. 

If he wants to do the absolute "rightest" thing the owner would have to stop playing with it in tournaments too (except as a proxy) because then he'd be taking advantage of the fake as a chance to win $$$.  I'm surprised that even some of the "do the right thing" crowd said to keep playing it until he can buy a new one. Come on people, right is right is right, amirite? :/ Taking the *known* fake to a tournament under that situation would be attemping to gain money or property under false pretenses

And as much as I'd like to say I'm the good little boy, I'd be tempted to keep playing with it too.  But I definitely wouldn't bilk someone out of hundreds of dollars, that's too far over my moral line.  I do not think 80% of the "do the right thing" posters would steal $300 like that.  No way in hell, yo.  I've had this opportunity (ok, it was ~$200) before and passed, and I didn't find it isn't so hard to spend a few hours getting back my money the right way instead of bending over some random stranger and making him take it up the ass.

And just remember to any more hypocrite talk, the credibility of the speaker has nothing at all to do with the logic and pure truth of the statements themselves.  It's the definition of a hypocrite to pronounce a principle and not follow it, but that doesn't lower the weight of the statement ^^;  It can be, and often is, still true regardless of the speaker's character. 

There's no logic in dismissing someone's argument because they are bad or would act bad, the argument itself must be attacked.

P.S. As much as I disagree with what Bram would do, I still think it's virtuous to be honest about it.  I do suspect there are some of us, for all the moral indignation, that would indeed resort to fraud to recover that $300.  It's easy to armchair quarterback when it's not your money   So, in closing, props to Bram for his Ginormous Man-Balls.

P.P.S. Lied about the closing, sorry.  Wish me luck on the MS 150 Bike Tour this weekend.  Two days to beat the hell out of my body to raise money for multiple sclerosis research (my aunt has MS).  If I don't make it back to the forums, you may assume I died on the road.  GL HF GG.

Also I don't think "everything" is proper templating.

Remove from the game all permanents that were tapped for mana this turn?

Anything that lets you discard cards to do damage could potentially combo with this, like seismic assault or pyromancy.  There must be a better way to abuse the draw though, right?

Epic is such a severe drawback I think this is probably ok.  It doesn't even win by itself over time like some other epic spells.  This automatically requires a combo.

Still too strong to be printed by Wizards but at least it wouldn't make Limited bend over if you did that.

It's too strong, Dandan.  At the 3 and 4 spots especially it's a beast.  Do you remember the tempo of Fallen Askari?  How a 2 mana creature could beat the common 3 mana creatures and trade with the 4 mana creatures?  That's what getting a 3/3 first striker for 3 on the play is like.  And being able to always fill in your curve puts it over the top.  We could make a 4/4 first strike for 4 on its own, but not with the option of fitting its size exactly to your mana curve.

Kicker X+1 with X as generic would be much better.  Then you get a 3/3 first strike for a hill giant's cost and have additional flexibility above and beyond that.  Alternatively, lowering the limit for the kicker or something  :shock:

Congratulations, YMTC3 is the first to be a true pile.  You would think for a people's choice trademark card they could cost the thing more aggressively at the least.  5 mana instant? NO THANK YOU.

I also like how the only cards it comboes well with are red, but the card is white or blue/white.  strike 2.  Unless they add something else on, or modify the cost DOWN this is going to be terrible.

I think Enchant World fits perfectly with the flavor of this card.  There are some old Enchant Worlds that don't fit the flavor that well and should have just been Global Enchantments (Concordant Crossroads??).  But this is perfect.  It completely changes the way the game is played, almost as if the duel were taken into another plane.

Indestructible doesn't make sense on this, though.  Spells should be able to be broken.  And from a game perspective a destructible version offers a lot more strategic possibilities in terms of disenchanting it at the right moment.

I think we should beware making any unique effect white under the new "white is the color of rule changes".  I too thought this was blue not for the reason that this is different, which it is, but because to me green is the color or making mana easier (fixing) and blue, natural enemy of green, is the color messing with mana.  Think of all the cards that are blue which change lands and colors to others.  A lot of those cards make paying colored mana requirements harder, which this does as well.

I think a good case could be made for EITHER white or blue, but you can't throw it out or rule it in with one word, even if its from a respected member like Jacob Orlove.  At least consider things carefully

Is that some kind of weird Canadien colour grey spelling?   In Magic, and I think in most of the US it's Leech.  Let's let it fall into the same spelling as the other 20 cards with the name, eh?

I agree, by focusing on one color the card is narrow enough already, adding another condition as well is not needed.  At all costs we should avoid making another Decimate 

I think as he has it now it is clear that the ability remains under the control of the player who controls the permanent.

For Mindslaver, you would get to make a choice (logical one being to have the Mindslaver control its controllers turn), but you would NOT receive the effect because the ability is controlled by the opponent.  You couldn't steal the turn of your opponent with ~this~.

There are several cards with abilities that are controlled by one player but the decisions are made by the other.  Like the triggered abilities on Smokestack/Tangle Wire.  Quite an interesting card.

I vote for orc in the hopes that they will start putting more orcs and dwarfs into magic and not make EVERY small red creature a goblin.  It's gotten to the point where we have to consider the creature type goblin as an ability :/

I think the activation cost should be 1G because one mana creatures shouldn't be able to net you significant card advantage.  Return one enchantment and this is good, 2 or more and your opponent is incredibly behind.  Even if it actually returns nothing, it could be building up quite a bit of virtual card advantage as your opponent has to hold their cards or lose their draw next turn.  At 1G you don't have as much of a tempo gain, meaning your opponent has a better opportunity to overload you or press the attack while you play for card advantage.

Also this is an incredible hoser to any sort of enchantment lock deck and is never dead as a tiny beatstick.

It really is up to the teams to decide how much to collaborate with the pros, but if they want their best chance to win they won't talk to them at all :p  Their main advantages are their newly discovered tech and intimate knowledge of deck X vs. deck Y matchups.  Like that one Pro tournament where a team discovered that you shouldn't counter card draw in the control (tog) mirror.  Some of the little tricks are advantages that would be wasted if the vintage teams let the pros test with them.

Don't let them take your knowledge and THEIR playskill to the top!  Work together to restrict dark ritual and mana drain AFTER you crush them at the SCG tournament

Nah regroup should be saved for a combat trick or healing spell I think.

A minimal cost would be appropriate (maybe 1 mana) because this will dominate the air in limited as durable 3 power flyers often do.  At least with a small mana cost it slows down your tempo and doesn't allow you to press the attack 100% by removing useless resources.

Also I don't think China's problem with skeletons should stop us from making them where the flavor is there.  Wizards has shown that it will do what it needs to fix the card in that one country and we don't need to bend over for the Chinese. 

So this is a:

6 mana 3/7 with 4 counters that produces 3/2 tokens and has islandhome, but the tokens have flying?



Sometimes flavor isn't worth making a card so incredibly overcomplicated and ugly   I think if your vision of a card has 5 unique numbers, 2 abilities, and a drawback you might trying to do too much on one card.  Perhaps you can do something where the card is big and bulky but can change to an air attacker for a turn or something similar.  Pentavus is the aircraft carrier of Magic

Yes 1/1 for 1G with this ability is severely weak.  It's printable but useless.  Here's one vote for 2/1 GG.

Personally I'd go with the "if you do" wording, which makes it stronger than Lat-Nam's Legacy (which really isn't that much of an honor) and still preserves the original intent.  It's short and sweet that way, the way a card like this should be.

Nothing exciting here but balanced and mildly useful.  I approve.