Pianissimo

[Ephraim]

Pianissimo

Instant

Counter target spell with converted mana cost 4 or greater.

Flowing mana reverberates as the thrum of a harp or the clap of a gong. When the cosmos direct that the notes be subdued, it is folly to try to play loudly.

***

Just a novel approach to an analogue to Thoughtbind. I thought it would be neat to have a card named "Pianissimo," so I built an appropriate idea around that. I want this card to be an exercise in flavour. I think that the current ability is adequate, but if somebody things of a better one, let me know! I'm also going to design this with really good flavour text. Of course, as the ability changes, the flavour text may also need to change.

Mechanically, this is probably a little bit more useful than Thoughtbind. It's definitely a counter oriented at the lategame, but that's all right, since cards like Mana Leak adequately cover the early game.

The current piece of flavour text is written in free verse, so don't casually suggest changes to it unless they enhance the tempo that the words establish (or unless you have some other, equally themely flavour text to go with whatever direction the card has taken.)

[Ephraim]

Current Wording:

Pianissimo
{2}{U}
Instant

Counter target spell with converted mana cost 4 or greater.

Flowing mana reverberates as the thrum of a harp or the clap of a gong. When the cosmos direct that the notes be subdued, it is folly to try to play fiercely.

[asmoranomardicodais]

I know your trying to make it parallel to thoughtbind, but I feel this would be fair at 1U. Just a suggestion. Of course, its not horrible at 2U, I just feel that big spells are going to be much less frequent than small ones, which means that I'd rather have a thoughtbind in my hand any day than this. On the other hand, this is probably still strong in limited, so whatever you choose works just fine.

[Matt]

That flavor text is awesome. Awesome.

[LordHomerCat]

I had always thought that the idea behind thoughtbind though, was that wizards didnt like cheap counters for big spells (paying 2 mana to counter a T&N or something of that caliber).  This seems like the opposite, you're always going to come out ahead on the mana spent with this.  Is that really the direction they seem to be going?  Good hard counters are difficult to find nowadays (Hinder, but thats about it below 4 mana), especially ones that counter big effects.

[Ephraim]

I think that because Hinder exists, it is okay to make a counter that targets expensive cards. It's limited in its application, so it is clearly worse than Hinder. As previously noted, I think it has a slightly higher power level than Thoughtbind, just because Thoughtbind exists in a design space crowded by the likes of Mana Leak. On the other hand, I think that this has fewer applications. There aren't many decks that don't run any inexpensive cards. On the other hand, there are plenty of decks whose mana curves almost never break 4.

[asmoranomardicodais]

On the other hand, I think that this has fewer applications. There aren't many decks that don't run any inexpensive cards. On the other hand, there are plenty of decks whose mana curves almost never break 4.

My point exactly. That's why I find this card only playable in limited as it is, unless your making a card to weed out newbs. Either of those aren't bad things, I just want to tell you the conclusions I draw from the card. At 1U, it would find sideboards slots in Standard, depending on the metagame.

[Ephraim]

I think it's well-balanced, at present, Asmoranomardicodais. I think that LordHomerCat is correct that any counterspell that goes after high-mana-cost spells is more powerful, when applicable, than other counterspells. Although you and I agree that this has fewer applications, I think that the tradeoff filling a more pristine niche in the design space gives this card reason to be moderated. Unlike many other counters, whenever this is applicable, as LordHomerCat noted, it's going to yield mana advantage in your favour. Making it cheaper is only going to make it more splashy.

[asmoranomardicodais]

Okay, I agree. I have no objections, and I like the card.

[Ephraim]

24 Hour Clock

[Jacob Orlove]

I figured out why that flavor text didn't feel quite right. Could you change it to "folly to try to play fiercely"?

[Matt]

Or "strongly".

[Ephraim]

I am wary of using "strongly" or "fiercely." The reason being, Pianissimo means to play very quietly or softly. Strongly is a suitable opposite, but I think that it's a weak adjective. Fiercely is a stronger adjective, but I don't think it is a suitable opposite. If you guys are opposed to "loudly," the one other word I would seriously consider is "forte," which is the musical opposite of pianissimo (it's actually the musical opposite of "piano;" fortissimo is the opposite of pianissimo.)

[Jacob Orlove]

Subdued, not Pianissimo, is the word we're trying to come up with an opposite for, though. That and the alliteration were my reasons for suggesting "fiercely'.

[Ephraim]

Good point, regarding "subdued" vs. "pianissimo." I need to think about it a little while longer. After I suggested "forte," I saw the alliteration, myself, and I'm actually not sure whether or not I like it. The rest of the poem is mostly discordant with regard to consonance and alliteration. It feels awkward to me to introduce a single alliterative element at the end.

[Ephraim]

I will go with "fiercly" and begin the 24 hour clock.

[Matt]

Closed and added.[/color]