Tcafitra Mage- A new way to look at artifacts

[johnstown713]

Ok, I read what Matt said about designing cards for the set and hope I am following the rules here.  I also apologize in advance if this is the wrong place for the card.  I am following the criteria for a blue common that is a creature.  I am not totally sure if this card has already been created because I just scanned the forum briefly.  Also sorry about the name, I know it is wierd.  Here it is:

Tcafitra Mage
2U
Creature--Mage
1/1
When Tcafitra Mage comes into play return target artifact from your graveyard to your hand if it shares the same name with an artifact that is already in play.
Your nightmares will come back to haunt you.

So I would appreciate any criticism so lets have it.[/i]

[johnstown713]

Current Wording:

Redemption Mage
1UU
Creature--Mage
1/1
When Redemption Mage comes into play return target artifact from your graveyard to play if it shares the same name with an artifact that is already in play.
Your nightmares will come back to haunt you.

Edit:  Changed the casting cost to 1U and changed the name to Redemption Mage.  I am still working on the Flavor Text but was thinking something like:  It leaves but only for a short while

[Matt]

Since this is dependent on drawing two out of at most four cards, I think it's narrow enough to cost 1U, or be a 2/1 for 2U. I like this card, it is definitely more along the lines of what we're looking for, and Wizards' new ideas about the various colors' relation to artifacts is one of the best things to come out of their new color pie scheme. Specifically, blue is artifacts' best friend.

Of course the name will have to change, and the flavor text seems kind of weird (but new FT will come more easily when we have a good name).

[johnstown713]

I agree that the power or cost could change but I wanted try and stay away from copying the regrowth on a stick card that will be released with Fifth Dawn.  I wouldn't mind the lower casting cost as appose to the power increase.  I am having trouble with names for it but the latest one I came up with was Redemption Mage.  What do you guys think?

[brendan]

There is nothing wrong with the original name. Also, redemption mage is really boring.

[dandan]

I know this is a touch wacky but why not keep it at 1/1 for U2 but allow it to put the artifact back INTO PLAY!!

This actually isn't as daft as it appears. You rarely need 2 Mindslavers, Angels, Trikes, Karns (LOL), etc. and I would be surprised if you are lucky enough to retrieve a Lotus/Memory Jar in this way. This makes is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay cooler than Mr. Regrowth on a stick, this more like a Tinker on a stick but of course strongly limited by the fact that you require an artifact in the graveyard that matches one in play. It also limits your ability to choose COTV X costs.

Look! I made you an ashtray.

[johnstown713]

Ok, I'll admit that I do like the original name and Redemption mage is extremely boring.  I like the fact that we could leave it at three casting cost and bring the card back to play.  It seems like a better idea and is not extremely powerful because it requires a card to be in play.  If I change it so it brings it to play then the power/toughness stays the same.

Johnstown713

[Jacob Orlove]

If the card's coming in to play, I think I'd be happier with 1UU than with 2U.

[Matt]

There is nothing wrong with the original name. Also, redemption mage is really boring.

I assume you had recently ingested a large amount of something illegal or three weeks past its prime - or both! - because just anagramming the word "artifact" into some incomprehensible gibberish is a horrible name.

[Jacob Orlove]

There is nothing wrong with the original name. Also, redemption mage is really boring.

I assume you had recently ingested a large amount of something illegal or three weeks past its prime - or both! - because just anagramming the word "artifact" into some incomprehensible gibberish is a horrible name.

It wasn't really an anagram. He just reversed the letters.

[Matt]

That is, technically, a type of anagram. You might even consider putting the letters back into their original configuration a degenerate form of anagram.

[johnstown713]

Ok, I am sorry I reversed the letters to form a name but can we at least just discuss the card itself so I can get more critism?

Johnstown713

[brendan]

There is nothing wrong with the original name. Also, redemption mage is really boring.

I assume you had recently ingested a large amount of something illegal or three weeks past its prime - or both! - because just anagramming the word "artifact" into some incomprehensible gibberish is a horrible name.

Incomprehensible gibberish? You mean, a proper noun? Tcafitra is both pronouncable, and interesting.

"horrible" is what I would describe the quantity of arrogance you use when you make statements like 'obviously such and such needs to change' when it is only obvious to you. *I* don't think it's obvious. In fact, it's obvious to *me* that the name needs to stay.

[johnstown713]

Ok, well now that evryone has bickered over the name can we make overall changes to the card?  And to settle it once and for all I couldn't think of a name at the moment so I spelled artifact backwards.  I admit it was stupid.  Now to respond to Jacob Orloves post I think if I did double blue it would decrease the overall usability of the card.  The double blue means that you have to be very committed to blue.  It may not be a bad thing since blue is an artifacts best friend but then it is unsplashable.  Although the double blue does balance the card more I am not sure if I would be satisfied with it.  Now does anyone else have ACTUAL name suggestions?

Johnstown713

[johnstown713]

Ok the 24h. clock has started

[johnstown713]

Ok the 24h. clock is up

[Matt]

Closed and added.[/color]