Neo-STP

[zimagic]

While discussing white's place in the colour pie and the types of cards that it has been receiving lately we discussed the possibilities of a Neo-STP.

Obviously  , gain Life to RFG any creature is considered above acceptable power levels now.

I'd like to suggest the following:
Neo-Swords
 
Instant
Remove target creature an opponent controls from the game. Its controller gains life equal to its power.
While Neo-Swords is in your graveyard, spells that share a name with a card in the removed from game zone cannot be played.

This is a mix of two effects I feel White needs at the moment:
1. the ability to permantly remove a creature from play that is not attacking or blocking without resorting to mass removal and
2. the ability to set new game rules pertaining to which cards can or cannot be played.

The second option when designing this card was taxing playing cards with the same name however I'll start at the top in terms of power and work down as usual. It's also a restriction that can be turned off once the Neo-Swords is removed from the Graveyard so it's a soft lock at best.

Comments, suggestions etc.

[MishraTron]

This is basically just a really complicated Eradicate.

[zimagic]

This is basically just a really complicated Eradicate.

Not really. A lot more cards can hate this from your graveyard than can return multiple copies of a card from the RFG zone.

Secondly, it's unconditional spot removal in a colour that doesn't have much in the way of spot removal. Eradicate is slightly similiar but not the same card by any means.

Edit: Forget to mention: it also stops cards from unsuspending if there is a second copy suspended.  It also plays with any of the 'RFG cards face up' effects that may turn over a second copy of a card. It may also have rules implications regarding cards RFG'ed face down allowing you to verify whether a card being played doesn't have a copy in the RFG zone. There's a lot of other stuff involved apart from Suspend: Slide, Imprint, Flashback, Ichorid costs, FOW costs etc and that's even before you get into the question of verifying face down cards (Hideaway, Shared Fate etc)

Not really Eradicate.

[Matt]

The last ability seems really tacked-on. If I wanted to fix STP, I would do it simply and cleanly:

W
Sorcery
Destroy target creature. It can't be regenerated.

It's slower speed and doesn't RFG but it still gives white a cheap way to remove an attacker* (which it's always been good at), a blocker* (which white has rarely been good at), or a utility creature (which it's been terrible at ever since Pacifism was printed).

*well not WHILE it's attacking or blocking but it can stop a creature that is mainly there to attack and block, i.e. a dragon or goyf or wall or Erhnam or whatever. Kind of sucks vs. manlands but what are you going to do.

That last ability is actually pretty cool, it just doesn't belong here. I'd put it on its own card. Maybe:

Planar Prison
1W
Enchantment
While Planar Prison is in play or in your graveyard, cards that share a name with a card in the removed from game zone cannot be played.
At the beginning of your upkeep, if Planar Prison is in play or in your graveyard, pay or remove Planar Prison from the game.

The extra cost gives it a nice tension.

[Anusien]

Arrest was {W} to hit any creature, although it could also remove Indestructables.  Any Neo-StP that isn't conditional has to be at least {W}.

[zimagic]

Thanks for your ideas.

First: The idea of adding the two abilities together was to give you something to ban straight away rather than a narrow ability that you'd have to build into a deck or was metagame dependant. The STP effect is always useful in a white deck. The "tagged on" ability makes it useful off the bat and usefull ongoing in one card rather than two seperate cards, one of which was very narrow.

Regarding the costing, I wanted it to be aggressively priced, very white but still not overpowered. I think the 1 keeps it playable (as 4cc sorceries generally have bigger effects) and it's not undercosted at that cc.)

Moving it to sorcery speed to keep the cost would be very acceptable.

[latviathan]

I think an exact Swords to Plowshares reprint could be done for 1WW. White's been getting better at proactively dealing with non-attacking or blocking creatures lately. (Exactly the direction they moved a million miles away from after taking Swords out of the picture.)

[Anusien]

I think the reason white's StP effects have been affecting attacking/blocking creatures only is not as much power reasons as because it separates the design space between Condemn and Terror.  Things like Gilded Shackles and Weight on Conscience perfectly illustrate White's aims.

Not sure what that says about fixing the card.

[Ephraim]

If life gain is not considered a worthwhile boon to your opponent for removing one of their creatures, why not instead give the opponent something comparable to the effect of the spell.

Sabres to Scythes
W
Sorcery
Remove target creature from the game.  That creature's controller may draw a card.

OR

Sabres to Scythes
W
Instant
Remove target creature from the game.  That creature's controller may search his or her library for a creature card, reveal it, and put it into his or her hand.  If that player does, then that player shuffles his or her library.

[+t]

With regards to tournament play, doesn't the original version technically shut off the ability to play creatures that are in the RFG Zone because they're in the sideboard (that haven't necessarily been RFG'd with this spell)?  Say, for instance, I'm playing three gaddock teeg in the maindeck and one in the board, and you rfg a tarmogoyf with this spell.  Since ~this card~ is in the graveyard, can I not play gaddock teeg?

[zimagic]

With regards to tournament play, doesn't the original version technically shut off the ability to play creatures that are in the RFG Zone because they're in the sideboard (that haven't necessarily been RFG'd with this spell)?  Say, for instance, I'm playing three gaddock teeg in the maindeck and one in the board, and you rfg a tarmogoyf with this spell.  Since ~this card~ is in the graveyard, can I not play gaddock teeg?

If that becomes a problem (and that interaction was not intended) the wording can be changed to "card RFGed during this game" or somesuch.

[Anusien]

Cards can be in the RFG zone in one of two ways: face up and face down.  You might want to find some way of specifying "Cards face-up in the RFG Zone".
That said, cards in the sideboard are not in the Removed From Game Zone.  They're outside the game.

[Matt]

Arrest was {W} to hit any creature, although it could also remove Indestructables.  Any Neo-StP that isn't conditional has to be at least {W}.

No it doesn't. There's no power-level problem with letting white remove creatures for 1 mana (assuming this is a rare so as to not mess up draft), and destroying creatures is not outside white's slice of the color pie either.

The major obstacle is flavor: white is not a color that just straight-up kills a guy. White prefers life without parole (Arrest, Prison Term) to death row. White needs to have a reason for killing somebody, usually "because he attacked me" (Condemn, Chastise, Reciprocate) but sometimes "he isn't white" (Sunlance) will do for an excuse.

[Vicotnic]

To simply destroy a creature and preventing it to be regenerated is both unwhite and too good to be printed. See for example Purge.

The "Neo-Swords" as I see it has two problems. First of the name is horrible, but I guess it is just a placeholder. Second of the two card ideas (at least to me) does not seem to fit on a single card. If you remove the second function you got a good card imo.

While I don't think it would be a good idea to put the two functions on the same card I could imagine some kind of Oblivion Ring (maybe for 2WW) with the second function, or possible a high cost sorcery permanent removal (probably around 3WW).

[zimagic]

To simply destroy a creature and preventing it to be regenerated is both unwhite and too good to be printed. See for example Purge.

The "Neo-Swords" as I see it has two problems. First of the name is horrible, but I guess it is just a placeholder. Second of the two card ideas (at least to me) does not seem to fit on a single card. If you remove the second function you got a good card imo.

While I don't think it would be a good idea to put the two functions on the same card I could imagine some kind of Oblivion Ring (maybe for 2WW) with the second function, or possible a high cost sorcery permanent removal (probably around 3WW).

The name is a placeholder and really only there to evoke a white RFG spell.

There seems to be two objections to the card:
1.) the flavour of the effect in white (or lack of it) and
2.) the dual effects

1.) White does have a non-swords RFG spell though it has been mixed with B to create Unmake. There's nothing Black about RFGing a creature at instant speed so there's a huge precent there for both the effect in Black and here in white as a follow-up from STP. My issue would be with the necessary cost should the card be white only becasue for WWW or similiar, it would lose a lot of it's appeal (and playability, let's face it the more playable Unmake is not getting a lot of love outside block)

2.) I want the second effect. I want white to say set the rules and say "No". I have to find a way to stop people playing spell X and have a playabe card that defines what X is. White needs, among other things, cheap, non-conditional (or low-conditional), pinpoint removal. This is currently the only reason that the card has both abilities together on it.

I'll be happy to change the idea if an elegant solution can me found to address both these areas (and I'm not so vain as to require that both be on the same card! )

[Vicotnic]

If you want it cheap it need some serious draw back, now we're talking something along the lines of Ephraim's second suggestion or draw 3 cards (probobly not any of those since they seem more green/blue then white but something around that magnitude).

If you can live with it costing a bit, maybe this could work:

[Name]
2WW
Enchantment
When [Name] comes into play, remove another target nonland permanent from the game.
Spells that share the name with the removed card can't be played.

[Anusien]

The major obstacle is flavor: white is not a color that just straight-up kills a guy. White prefers life without parole (Arrest, Prison Term) to death row. White needs to have a reason for killing somebody, usually "because he attacked me" (Condemn, Chastise, Reciprocate) but sometimes "he isn't white" (Sunlance) will do for an excuse.

Condemn, Reciprocate and Sunlance all cost and are pretty conditional (damaged you, attacking, nonwhite with toughness <= 3).  Hence my theory about needing to cost two mana.  If it wasn't conditional, it would be too huge of an upgrade over Condemn.  I also think you're making too much of White's flavor reasons for killing creatures.  Part of those conditions are just necessary power level tweaks since StP is clearly too good.

[Matt]

2.) I want the second effect. I want white to say set the rules and say "No". I have to find a way to stop people playing spell X and have a playable card that defines what X is. White needs, among other things, cheap, non-conditional (or low-conditional), pinpoint removal. This is currently the only reason that the card has both abilities together on it.

The problem is that instants and sorceries are not the place for white to be making rules. Rules come attached to permanents (usually enchantments but sometimes creatures).

(It's also very weird that this has an effect even when it goes to your graveyard without being cast, from milling or dredge or discard, yet it still affects cards RFGed by other means.)

One problem is that white (or any color) CANNOT have this strong an effect, at this price. Even assuming you kept the in-graveyard ability, it's almost strictly superior to a 4-mana spell, and needs to be costed appropriately. You've stated your goals: white can certainly get cheap removal, or it can get rule-making effects, but not both for this cheap.

[zimagic]

The problem is that instants and sorceries are not the place for white to be making rules. Rules come attached to permanents (usually enchantments but sometimes creatures).

(It's also very weird that this has an effect even when it goes to your graveyard without being cast, from milling or dredge or discard, yet it still affects cards RFGed by other means.)

One problem is that white (or any color) CANNOT have this strong an effect, at this price. Even assuming you kept the in-graveyard ability, it's almost strictly superior to a 4-mana spell, and needs to be costed appropriately. You've stated your goals: white can certainly get cheap removal, or it can get rule-making effects, but not both for this cheap.

That's a very valid point, I conceed. We've two suggestions. From Vicotnic:
[Name]
2WW
Enchantment
When [Name] comes into play, remove another target nonland permanent from the game.
Spells that share the name with the removed card can't be played.

And a creature based effect:

[Name]
2
When [Name] comes into play, remove another target nonland permanent [creature?] from the game.
Spells that share the name with the removed card can't be played.
1/4

[Vicotnic]

I think both looks good. (make the second a Human Cleric?) Two cards with same kind of function is not bad for a set either. Although they might be a bit to similarly. Maybe let the creature remove creatures only and change it to a 2/4 (or let it fly and be something else.. or even make it a wall and a 0/5 ^^)?

[MishraTron]

These should probably be using Imprint.

[zimagic]

These should probably be using Imprint.

Duplicant?

[MishraTron]

These should probably be using Imprint.

Duplicant?

Not really sure what you're asking here. I mean, sure, if you use Imprint here, it makes it easy to see how similar it is to Duplicant. But, whether you use Imprint or not, it would be functionally identical; omitting it just hides the similarities.

Imprint is a mechanic used to reference cards that are removed from the game and set some sort of characteristic of a card. It tells Chrome Mox what color it can tap for, Duplicant what it's p/t is, and what card you can copy with Isochron Scepter and Panoptic Mirror. The same thing is happening here: a card is removing something from the game, and then referencing that card to determine what card can no longer be played.

[Name]
2
When [Name] comes into play, remove another target nonland permanent [creature?] from the game.
Spells that share the name with the removed card can't be played.
1/4

Is functionally identical to:

[Name]
2 {w}{w}{w}
Imprint - When [Name] comes into play, you may remove another target non-land permanent from the game. (The removed card is imprinted on [Name].)
Spells that share a name with the imprinted card cannot be played.
1/4

Not using Imprint on it, when it is a keyworded mechanic, is akin to making Mahamoti Djinn's wording like this:

Mahamoti Djinn
4UU
Reach
Mahamoti Djinn cannot be blocked by creatures without flying.
5/6

[Anusien]

Actually, you're wrong.  Three's a functional difference between using Imprint and not; Imprint isn't a linked ability and the other wording is.  There's also a flavor difference; no non-artifacts use the imprint mechanic.