Ultimatum

[Marco]

From serracollector's Blazing Innuendo thread:

Ultimatum
1R
Sorcery
Unless a player has Ultimatum deal 5 damage to him or her, you may search your library for a card and put that card into your hand. If you do, shuffle your library.

I think 5 damage is the right amount, between 4 damage from Skullscorch for discarding two cards at random and 6 damage from Breaking Point for destroying all creatures.

[Marco]

Current Wording:

Ultimatum
1RR
Sorcery
Unless a player has Ultimatum deal 5 damage to him or her, you may search your library for a card and put that card into your hand. If you do, shuffle your library.

[Ephraim]

I think the damage cost is right on, but I would cost this at {R}. Notice that both of the examples you gave have double red in their mana costs? I think it is appropriate that when red gets a big effect that it wouldn't normally get, coupled with optional damage, it shouldn't be splashable.

Also, note:

Skullscorch: {R}
Hymn to Tourach: {B}

Breaking Point: {R}
Wrath of God: {W}{W}

Ultimatum:
Diabolic Tutor: {B}

I'd like to see a mana cost more reflective of the card this mimics. Yes, I realize it also mimics Demonic Tutor, but WotC has shown that they find Diabolic Tutor to be a much more appropriately costed card. In fact, using Hymn to Tourach may not have been totally appropriate either, since Wizards has also clearly indicated that the appropriate cost for two non-random discards is . {R} would be tolerable. {R} would be more appropriate. I doubt anybody's ever going to let you search for a card unless they have no choice, so I would see this typically as a cheap 5 damage, for which {R} is not quite enough.

[dandan]

I thought that 5 damage was too much at first (indeed Lava axe costs 5 not 2) but past experience has shown that giving an opponent a choice severely weaks a card. Against combo or control you pay, against aggro you let them have a card. I expect opposition for this card at 5 damage but I think 4 is too little although 5 is actually pretty good.

Maybe it should get Sorceries or Instants as Red insn't into Enchantments, Artifacts or Lands. I guess there is little harm in letting it fetch creatures too.

[Matt]

Or it could search for only red cards, but of all types (including a red land if ever one was made!).

[Marco]

Change made.

I think that if 1RR for a "punisher" Wrath of God is fair, then 1RR for a "punisher" Diabolic Tutor is more than fair.

As for the 5 damage, also compare with Blazing Salvo, 5 damage for R and Lava Blister, 6 damage for 1R. (Although, these need a legal target to be cast: a creature or a nonbasic land, respectively.)

[Upinthe]

I don't like this card. The whole point of a "punisher" card  is that you get the least favorable of two strong effects in the current situation. That's not the case here. If your opponent can't take the damage, then they are screwed because you can just go get something like Fireblast with the tutor and kill them anyway.

[Norm4eva]

I don't like this card. The whole point of a "punisher" card is that you get the least favorable of two strong effects in the current situation. That's not the case here. If your opponent can't take the damage, then they are screwed because you can just go get something like Fireblast with the tutor and kill them anyway.

If target opponent is in Fireblast range it doesn't matter which tutor you use (short of Gamble); you get the 'blast and win.  By the time you could Fireblast for the W it doesn't matter either way; any point prior to makes this tutor a lot worse and a 3cc tutor in Sligh will suck anyway.

[Marco]

I am unconvinced that this card should not be made. Any other thoughts?

[Jacob Orlove]

This card is fine, because it's a tutor that can't be used in the decks that abuse tutors.

[Marco]

Amen.

[Marco]

24 hour clock?

[Matt]

Closed and added.[/color]