Dueling Grounds says that no more than one creature may attack per turn, while Finest Hour gives you multiple attack phases. Does Dueling Grounds mean "No more than one creature may attack each turn (but the same one may attack multiple times)" or "No more than one creature may attack each turn (and the same 'one' creature that attacked the first time counts as a second creature for the second attack phase)". I can't seem to find info on this in rulings, and maybe I'm reading the card wrong, but what does the wording actually mean? Does Finest hour and dueling grounds work well together?

Ah, missed that. However, there's nothing about this card that's much more interesting than Wheel and Deal.

Has anyone read what Wheel and Deal does recently?

Plus Two!

I agree with paralax. Your making morphing instants, and the idea is very intuitive; why muss it up by making the instants 0/0 creatures? I think morphing instants are aethetically far more pleasing, far less clunky, and much more elegant than 0/0 creatures.

The RU one needs some sort of evasion. If they have any creatures at all, then they'll block, so you'll never get to use this guys ability, which is sad, since it'sa cool ability.

Why not make it "Any number of players shuffle their library"? That way, if you simply want to cantrip it, then you don't have to annoy everyone by shuffling their library. Also, it would allow you to shuffle, which would up the power level of the card.

It should be "when ~this~ comes into play, If ~this~ is played from your hand, gain 20 life". I don't like the horrible reamination enabling this does.

Or, even cooler, add "When this leaves play, lose 20 life", and make it Illusions of Grandeur the creature. That would be awesome.

They made a gush-guy very similar to this, why all the hate against the "free" morph mechanic?

Wasn't there a thread about this awhile back where most people agreed that I win should not be on a card for any price? Even forgetting that thread, I think 9 mana, monocolored, is a little bit cheap for something like this. I mean, why play anything that costs more than nine mana ever? Why even try to damamge the opponent? Why not just rush to nine mana, and hope your not playing against blue?

Why not red? Red had domain cards, and all this is is a backwards Tribal Flames.

Not really. This was a block mechanic that was shared among all the colors. Blue were actually the strongest and best known of that mechanic. This is certainly in flavor as far as the color pie goes.

I also just like the card in general. Thumbs up

The only problem with that wording is that DanLand should be able to be searched for by stuff that gets basic lands. Otherwise, I see nothing wrong with it.

I have the most amazing enter the dungeon deck, incredibly fun for everyone involved. I've always thought that if you took out the under the table part of that card, it would create a very neat, non-unhinged, tutor.

Why are we making YAwgmoth a card? Firstly, he seems to close to a planeswalker for this to be possible. Secondly, any card we make of Yawgmoth is automatically not going to be as cool as he is. I just wanted to voice my opposition to this card being created.

Any Dwarf can already kill Goblin's of the Flarg. Do you really want to overpower this tribe THAT much?

Can't we just say that "while highland is in play or in a library, it counts as a basic land"? That would keep us away from blowing the fabric of space time.

I beleive I designed it, or at least I made a cycle of these. Anyways, yayay cookie for me!

You can give it haunt, and say that the land haunted by this is indestructable

Don't close it, because I'll take it over if Dandan gives up. Doesn't anyone want six basic lands in their domain deck? I loved the idea of Barry's Land that Mark Rosewater has talked about, and I would love to see a sixth basic in our master list.

Make it a sliver and have it read "All Slivers are are Bugs (they are no longer slivers)". I would love to see the rules problems that card would create.

Make it non-basic perhaps? It's way to powerful this way. My other concern is that I thought they said things that bounce lands should have two U in there mana cost, but I don't remember for sure. As it is though, it makes it far to easy to gain massive turn advantage over someone.

It's a different card, but if your going for the flavor of a strict tutor, why not do the exact opposite:

Strict Tutor
1B
Sorcery

Search your library for a card and remove it from the game. Until end of turn, you may play that card as though it were in your hand as long as it is the second spell you have played this turn.

This version means that you can demonic tutor up anything, but you had better play that, and you had better play it immiatly. It also has a nice contrast to Vampiric tutor, who makes you wait a turn for the card you want.

But Mark Rosewater said on one of his articles that he pushed really hard ot get hydropon to have the text I proposed, and they decided against it. I just feel that this text is far cooler, and given another card that could potentially have this text, that we take the opportunity.

I think that this card should read "Defender, ~this~ cannot block" instead ofhow you wrote it. That way it combos with rolling boulders, and its a much cuter wording.

Okay, well, even if the mechanic was on this creature:

Dude
B
Creature-Skeleton

Seclude 9

1/1


Why would the opponent ever give you extra 1/1's? One card out of the library is not worth giving the opponent card advantage. The cards with seclude would have to be incredibly weak, and even then the opponent would never choose to search with the seclude cost. It just doesn't make sense. Why give the opponent a free creature/spell so that you can lower the chances of them drawing a certain card (which are already not that high in a 60 card deck)?

But the opponent can mana burn themself, making you auto lose

except its not a jeter's cap for free, its a jester's cap at the expense of giving them multiple 4/3's. Who would ever pay that price for a jester's cap?

And what's stopping the opponent from mana burning themself?

Why would an opponent ever search your library for cards? I'm not giving my opponent an extra 4/3, especially not for free.