Alternate Pact costs

[Jaynel]

I'm sure we're all familiar with the new Pact cycle from Future Sight. 0cc spell that requires payment upon upkeep. What if you had to pay something other than mana?

Vampiric Pact
0
Instant
Search your library for a card, then shuffle your library and put that card on top of it. You lose 2 life.
At the beginning of your next upkeep, shuffle your library. If you don't, you lose the game.

I know it's pretty nuts with Brainstorm (U, pay 2 life: Demonic Tutor). I'm just trying to create a Pact (or Pacts) that require payment to "undo" the spell. Like casting the spell disrupts equilibrium, and the payment creates equilibrium again.

Does this idea make sense? Is it interesting design space? What effects are fair, and how can those effects be "undone"?

Updated card:
Name
B
Sorcery
Search your library for a card, then shuffle your library and put that card on top of it. You lose 2 life.
At the beginning of your next upkeep, shuffle your library.

[Ephraim]

I don't think that there's any reason to have a "lose the game" clause on this card.  I can't easily think of anything that would prevent you from shuffling your library.  Furthermore, even if you could prevent needing to shuffle, I imagine that drawing a card is so much easier that there's no reason to pursue another means of getting at that card on top of the library.  If somebody's willing to go to that much trouble to turn this card into Vampiric Tutor, I say, "Power to them!"

If you're really worried about this being nuts with Brainstorm, you could give it a mana cost.  Being strictly worse than Vampiric Tutor hardly disqualifies it from being really good anyways.

For whatever it is worth, this is the direction that I would take with this card:

Tainted Mentor
B
Instant

Search your library for a card, then shuffle your library and put that card on top of it. You lose 2 life.
At the beginning of your next upkeep, shuffle your library.

[netherspirit]

I really like it! A very conditional tutor that can be broken in some cases. I think it needs to be a sorcery, though. So you can't play it during your upkeep.

[Ephraim]

I really like it! A very conditional tutor that can be broken in some cases. I think it needs to be a sorcery, though. So you can't play it during your upkeep.

That's a very good point.  If it's a sorcery, I don't see any problem with costing it at 0.

[Titanium Dragon]

I'm pretty sure this card is horribly broken. All you're really using it for is to go off, and it has absolutely no cost whatsoever. You're just going to win the turn you play this, or at worst get the card into your hand, thus making it a free tutor which is even more broken with brainstorm effects.

It needs a real drawback. Pay 2 life to tutor for any card is inherently broken. Setting this card up is way too easy. It would be extremely good even if it cost B, and it still might be a problem at that cost.

[Anusien]

I don't think you cost this at even as a Sorcery.  I think at the very least you cost it at .  Imperial Seal is pretty ridiculous; so what if it requires a two card combo?  It's a two card combo with EVERYTHING.

[Jaynel]

What if the "lose the game clause" was kept, but was something like getting Hellbent or Threshold (a little bit easier) or some other gamestate? If the card is ridiculously broken and beyond repair, then I have no qualms about this being locked and going back to the drawing board.

[Ephraim]

What if the "lose the game clause" was kept, but was something like getting Hellbent or Threshold (a little bit easier) or some other gamestate? If the card is ridiculously broken and beyond repair, then I have no qualms about this being locked and going back to the drawing board.

The "lose the game" clause doesn't mean anything.  Nobody's going to find a way not to shuffle their library.  Instead, they're going to find a way to draw a card.  As you suggested, they'll try to use this frequently with Brainstorm so that they can not only get the card they want but they can shuffle away two cards that they don't want.

I don't really have my finger on the pulse of any format where tutors are potent anymore, so I will defer to Anusien's judgment regarding this card.  If he says that it ought to cost and be a sorcery, I'll trust that he knows what he's saying.

I don't think that you need to lock this up and go back to the drawing board, though.  The concept is sound even if the execution is flawed.  I think you may be hung up on the idea that a "pact" card needs to cost .  I think that design space is razor thin.  On the other hand, if you're open to developing this card, like we're trying to do, I think that it has good potential.