One-drop for black

[Mindstab_Thrull]

OK, haven't got any names yet but I came up with an idea a couple days ago..

B
Creature - Horror
As an additional cost to play ~, pay 3 life X times.
~ comes into play with X +1/+1 counters on it.
First strike, trample
0/0

After a little discussion in the TMD chat room (#themanadrain on Efnet, obv) we came up with this (dicemanxx's idea, if memory serves me right):

B
Creature - Horror
As an additional cost to play ~, pay 3 life X times.
~ comes into play with X +1/+1 counters on it.
~ has first strike and trample if any life was paid to play it.
1/1

.. as that way it's a playable one-drop even without paying life for it. Alternatively, is it possible to turn this into a Shade of some sort? Such as taking dicemanxx's idea and replacing giving it first strike and trample if you paid life with 'B: +1/+1 until end of turn', ie:

B
Creature - Shade
As an additional cost to play ~, pay 3 life X times.
~ comes into play with X +1/+1 counters on it.
~ has 'B: ~ gets +1/+1 until end of turn' if any life was paid to play it.
1/1

One-drops are fun!

[The Atog Lord]

~ has first strike and trample if any life was paid to play it.

I'd check if there any +1/+1 counters on it rather than if life was paid to play it. Paying life isn't something the game easily can "remember." Checking if there are any counters is done easily. And it might even make for an interesting trick or two.

The creature with a base one power seems a bit strong. Perhaps a base 0/1 might be more fairly costed.

I like the idea a lot.

[Mindstab_Thrull]

~ has first strike and trample if any life was paid to play it.

I'd check if there any +1/+1 counters on it rather than if life was paid to play it. Paying life isn't something the game easily can "remember." Checking if there are any counters is done easily. And it might even make for an interesting trick or two.

The creature with a base one power seems a bit strong. Perhaps a base 0/1 might be more fairly costed.

I like the idea a lot.

It's about as easy to remember as finding out whether another colour of mana was used to play a spell So just match the wording up with that. Or if you really want, put a {randomname} counter on it, and it has those abilities so long as it has that kind of counter on it. IE:

If you paid life to play ~, it comes into play with a headbutt counter on it.
~ has first strike and trample as long as it has a headbutt counter on it.

Something like that

As for making it a 0/1, I'd thought about that.. is B too much for a vanilla 1/1, B+3 life too much for 2/2, B+6 life too much for 3/3, and so forth?

[LordHomerCat]

The thing about the "enhanced" cards, where you get an extra effect if you pay a specific color, is that they don't have to remember.  In guildpact, they all had comes-into-play abilites, so you only need to check when you cast the thing, which is easy since you just paid the mana for it.  With Dissenssion, its the same thing, they only check when they come into play (whether they stay there or not), so its easy to tell.  With your guy, 15 turns down the line you're gonna have to look and think "Was this the one I paid life for?  Or was it that other one that died last turn...", and there is just no good way to remember it.

Shay's idea of having it based on +1/+1 counters seems fine to me, I mean, if you're gonna go to the trouble of loading this thing up with counters from some other source just so you don't have to pay life, I don't think that its going to break the card to give it trample and (99% of the time useless, if you dont pay life) haste.

Also, putting multiple different kinds of counters on cards is really ugly and a huuuuge pain in the butt to remember, so if you can possibly avoid it, you should.

[dandan]

Lots of decks can't deal with an early 4/4 or 5/5 First striking Tramplers, especially in Limited. I favour the 0/0 dude. If you choose not to play life, you have no right to be plating Black in the first place (even if you are low on life, don't go down playing a vanilla 1/1!!).

[Mindstab_Thrull]

OK.. So it sounds like the general consensus here so far is B for a 0/0. I guess the next question is which ability to give it: inflatability ('B: ~ gets +1/+1 until end of turn') or the fun combo of first strike and trample? Either way it gets +1/+1 counters if you play its additional cost. (Sounds like a Kicker that can be paid X times instead of just once.) And the reason I haven't gone by seeing if there are 'any +1/+1 counters on ~' is there's enough ways - especially in the last three or four years - to put +1/+1 counters on creatures. Battlegrowth on Isochron Scepter, Thrive, or Dragon Blood, for example. That being said, is that such a bad idea? Play it as is and use another means to put a counter on it to give it an additional ability as well?

[LordHomerCat]

I don't really see whats so awful about having the ability activate on any +1/+1 counter.  All it does is save you 3 life if you have another counter source; this isn't some huge drawback or something, you aren't untapping 7 lands or doing something abusive that needs to be carefully regulated.  He's just gaining a couple combat abilities.  Any counters seems just fine.

[Mindstab_Thrull]

OK.. So then, if it's going to be based on counters, why not just have a vanilla 1/1 for B? Kinda like:

B
Creature - Horror
As an additional cost to play ~, you may pay 3 life X times.
~ comes into play with X +1/+1 counters on it.
~ has first strike and trample as long as it has at least one +1/+1 counter on it.
1/1

Better? The other question, of course, is whether to give it the shade ability instead of first strike and trample. Thoughts on that?

[Harlequin]

I'm on the fense about this guy.  I feel like he should have a cap at 4/4... something like

"Pay 3 life up to 3 times ... comes in to play with a +1/+1 counter for each time 3 life was paid"

I'm a bit apprehensive of makeing a turn one 7/7 First strike trampler that requires 1 card, a land... but with the drawback of being at 2 life.  If your on the play, your opponent only has 3 turns before you've swing for 21.  It would make a game UBER one sided, and very un-eventful.  either your oppoent shocks you for 2, and you loose, or you trample the everloving crap outa them before they play thier 4th land.

If you packed this guy into a deck full of Duress, FOW, MisD, Daze, and dare i say... Spirit link.  You'd have one savage Control Speed deck.

Its a bit like a card that said "Flip a coin, if you loose the flip you loose the game, otherwise you win the game"  Ultimately its a realatively "fair" card, but it would not be "fun" card.  EDIT - Actually this is a HORIBLY unfair card because you could play it while you were looseing... so just imagine it has the clause "if your both at 20 life."  At any rate, I'm trying to make a point not a card.

[Mindstab_Thrull]

That's why I was going to make him 0/0 initially. Then you'd be at 2 life and 'only' have a 6/6 on the board, which would of course require four turns to win. Hmm.. Maybe 0/1 is the best option after all.. though it still requires seven power to kill off.

[Harlequin]

Its not nessisarily his toughness I'm concerned with... lets face it, if you have the option to deal 7 damage to a creature, then its likely you can burn your opponent for 2.  Its the fact that this guy + land in your opening hand is a turn 4-5 kill, granted its at a risk.  Not to complicate him too much:

"As ~ comes into play, you may pay up to 3 life for each swamp you control, for each time you play 3 life ~ comes into play with a +1/+1 counter on it."

This is again limiting him based on what turn it is, and doesn't allow for him to get too strong too early.  A 2/2 FS trample is pretty awsome on turn 1 with no additional accelleration.  Similarly a turn two 3/3 FS Trample is also very strong.  If you put this Swamp restriction on, maybe you can lower the life cost to 2 life per pump.

[Matt]

I'm on the fense about this guy.  I feel like he should have a cap at 4/4... something like

"Pay 3 life up to 3 times ... comes in to play with a +1/+1 counter for each time 3 life was paid"

I'm a bit apprehensive of makeing a turn one 7/7 First strike trampler that requires 1 card, a land... but with the drawback of being at 2 life.  If your on the play, your opponent only has 3 turns before you've swing for 21.  It would make a game UBER one sided, and very un-eventful.  either your oppoent shocks you for 2, and you loose, or you trample the everloving crap outa them before they play thier 4th land.

If you packed this guy into a deck full of Duress, FOW, MisD, Daze, and dare i say... Spirit link.  You'd have one savage Control Speed deck.

Its a bit like a card that said "Flip a coin, if you loose the flip you loose the game, otherwise you win the game"  Ultimately its a realatively "fair" card, but it would not be "fun" card.  EDIT - Actually this is a HORIBLY unfair card because you could play it while you were looseing... so just imagine it has the clause "if your both at 20 life."  At any rate, I'm trying to make a point not a card.

In other words, this card is Hatred.

[Mindstab_Thrull]

Its not nessisarily his toughness I'm concerned with... lets face it, if you have the option to deal 7 damage to a creature, then its likely you can burn your opponent for 2.  Its the fact that this guy + land in your opening hand is a turn 4-5 kill, granted its at a risk.  Not to complicate him too much:

As an additional cost to play ~, you may pay 3 life X times. X can't be greater than the number of swamps you control.
~ comes into play with X +1/+1 counters.

That might be a better way to word it.

This is again limiting him based on what turn it is, and doesn't allow for him to get too strong too early.  A 2/2 FS trample is pretty awsome on turn 1 with no additional accelleration.  Similarly a turn two 3/3 FS Trample is also very strong.  If you put this Swamp restriction on, maybe you can lower the life cost to 2 life per pump.

Perhaps, but even so I'd be likely to make it a 0/0 base - one mana and 3 life I'd still say is solid for a 1/1 first strike trampler, or one mana and 6 life for a 2/2 FS/Trample.

And Harlequin is almost right. Hatred might be a good comparison to this, since both let you pay life to win the game quickly.

Mind you, I should also point out - I've been pondering a cycle of these, one for every colour. I'll toss the entire cycle on another thread later. They all let you pay one mana for a creature and give up some resource to make it big - and at this point, only the Green one doesn't start off as a 0/0 (it's actually a 1/1). I'll have them up by tomorrow