wordy enchantment

[Liam-K]

I was thinking about the Izzet concept of UR being good at creatively using the same concept in many applications via replicate and their guildmage.  I wanted a different way to make the same sort of action do something different, through a replacement effect rather than repetition.  This is the basic idea I came up with; sort of a disabling strike type option.  It is worded really badly... pretty much in a way that will make sense to you guys so you know what it does and can help me template it properly.


~this~  (cost)
Enchantment

Any time a source you control would deal damage to an opponent, you may prevent any amount of that damage.  For each point of damage prevented in this way, add a something counter to ~this~.

remove some something counters from ~this~: the next time target opponent would draw a card, instead he does not.
remove some something counters from ~this~: the next time target permanent would untap, instead it does not.


Obviously I haven't decided on either activation or casting costs.  Input?  I have the feeling this might be a terrible idea.

[parallax]

You're kidding, right? This is incredibly overpowered. Prodigal Pyromancer -> draw lock?

[Liam-K]

note that "some" != "1"

I was thinking more like 4-5 for the draw effect and 2-3 for the untap effect.

[Malakai]

The wording really isn't that bad once you substitute in the necessary words.

Using Jayemdae Tome and Icy Manipulator as the traditional prices for recurring draw and tap effects, respectively, I'd say:
4 counters for the draw
2 counters for the untap effect

Are you sure you want it to only trigger on damage to an opponent?  If it's all players then this is a house with cards like flame rift, but probably too overpowered with pain lands.  I think most cards these days are templated to have you paying life instead of taking damage, but I'm not sure.

How much would this cost to play?  I'm thinking 2UR, as the cost of the artifacts it mirrors (somewhat) are both 4.

[jro]

I don't like the idea of this denying card draws.  Assuming you could find a fair cost (which would be more in mana than what Jayemdae costs, since denying a draw is stronger than drawing an extra card), the fact that you could lock down the game with it just seems very unfun.

[Malakai]

Honestly I blanked out and assumed the proposed enchantment drew a card when I posted that.

However, you're wrong, I think; at least historically speaking.  Disrupting scepter is one mana less on both cost and activation.  I'm not sure which is more powerful; denying the draw certainly wins out for aggro, which is where this would go.  This brings up another issue, though; I don't think there is a historical precedent for denying a draw, but there is for discarding a card, which this is similar to, but it's in black.  Perhaps UB?

My recommendation:
<Name> 
Enchantment
Any time a source you control deals damage to an opponent, you may prevent any amount of that damage.  For each point of damage prevented this way, add a Weight counter to this.
Remove 4 Weight counters from this: The next time target player would draw a card, instead he or she puts that card into his or her graveyard.
Remove 2 Weight counters from this: Target permanent does not untap during its controller's next untap step.

The name of the counters (Weight) is only temporary.  I'm happy as long is it's not charge or divinity or poison counters.  Also, there's really a lot of ways this card to go; maybe remove 3 to tap or untap target permanent, or perhaps some clause to allow instants to be played, or something. 

It still doesn't seem that great to me.  Would it be too good at  ?

[jro]

However, you're wrong, I think; at least historically speaking.  Disrupting scepter is one mana less on both cost and activation.

You're right that resuable discard exists, but have left out an essential detail.  The only reusable instant speed discard that can be used on an opponent's turn is Nezumi Shortfang, and that can't be used as a lock because it flips and loses the ability when the opponent has zero cards.

The fundamental problem with the idea of turning damage into denies card draws is that it's a "one and a half" card combo* that can easily lock the game.  It's like an asymmetrical Zur's Weirding.

* By which I mean it takes one particular card plus any combination of numerous other cards.

[Venven]

The cost associated with putting counters on the artifact is cumbersome. I'd suggest a change to a functionally similar yet cleaner mechanism, for instance: "3, T: Target opponent gains 3 life. Put a hug counter on ~this~."

The other two abilities are also cumbersome, because replacement effects can be easy to forget about, especially when they don't state "until EOT" like these. Even changing the second ability to "Target permanent doesn't untap during its controller's next untap phase.", like the Kamigawa snakes, annoys me. Additionally, the two abilities seem powerful alone, let alone on the same card, especially without requiring tap.

The costs of the second and third abilities rely largely on the cost of the first ability, but the interesting interaction is in which of the three abilities tapping is part of the cost. It boils down to a card that exchanges different resources, which is a very general statement, but the specific type and value of those resources will define the cards niche as well as the relative worth of the resources in the cards environment. There's room to cue the player in on the importance or relative worth of the resources within the environment the card was developed, so if you want to communicate that this card is intended for a Type 1 set, this is a good chance to say something more general about the set and Type 1 in general... but that doesn't seem like your particular goal with this card.

Just some ideas to chew.