Three-card cycle (White, Blue, Black)

[Marco]

These were originally created before the Onslaught expansion and the Chain of Acid/Chain of Plasma/Chain of Silence/Chain of Smog/Chain of Vapor cycle. They were also created when white had good creature removal (Swords to Plowshares):

Revanche
W
Instant
Destroy target creature. It can't be regenerated. Then that creature's controller may pay 1. If the player does, he or she may copy this spell and may choose a new target for that copy.

Card Name
U
Instant
Return target artifact, enchantment, or land to its owner's hand. Then that player may pay 1. If the player does, he or she may copy this spell and may choose a new target for that copy.

Usurp
B
Sorcery
Look at target opponent's hand and choose a card from it. That player discards that card. Then that player may pay 1. If the player does, he or she may copy this spell and may choose a new target for that copy.

[Marco]

Current Wordings:

Revanche
W
Instant
Destroy target creature. It can't be regenerated. Then that creature's controller may pay 1. If the player does, he or she may copy this spell and may choose a new target for that copy.

Card Name
U
Instant
Return target artifact, enchantment, or land to its owner's hand. Then that player may pay 1. If the player does, he or she may copy this spell and may choose a new target for that copy.

Usurp
B
Sorcery
Look at target opponent's hand and choose a card from it. That player discards that card. Then that player may pay 1. If the player does, he or she may copy this spell and may choose a new target for that copy.

[rvs]

I don't think these cards are unique enough. There's a few 'Chain' cards in the past sets, and they are all very similar to these. I also think the white one is really, really strong.
The black one should at least say non-land card. The same is actually true for the blue one.

[Marco]

The other "Chain" cards are Chain Lightning from Legends and Chain Stasis from Homelands. Have I missed any?

You say that the white one is really, really strong, and then you propose that I weaken the black one and the blue one.

[Sheera]

As MoreFling already has pointed out, each one of those spells is far too powerful. Reasons:

Revanche would be a natural fit in any control deck employing white. In T1 these could be StP 5-8 with actually no drawback at all as long as you don't control a creature. Revanche therefore is a) too cheap and needs b) some kind of targeting restriction or another drawback.

Your blue chain is very similar to [Card]Chain of Vapor[/Card] from Onslaught* except for the extremely important exclusion of "nonland". This would easily hand any LD strategy a method to cut the opponent's mana development from the very beginning. Wizards has been sensitive to this problem for years and did not print any 1-cc or 2-cc bounce spells that could touch land except for Hoodwink and Boomerang.
The same problem is true for the black chain. Mana development is the most crucial element in our game. Therefore most spells that nowadays can force the discard of a land, cost three or more mana (e.g. [Card]Coercion[/Card]) or at least let their victims an out (e.g. [Card]Blackmail[/Card] forces the opponent to only reveal three cards from which to choose). Hymn to Tourach is not representative!

*There actually was an uncommon chain cycle in Onslaught consisting of [Card]Chain of Silence[/Card], [Card]Chain of Vapor[/Card], [Card]Chain of Smog[/Card], [Card]Chain of Plasma[/Card] and [Card]Chain of Acid[/Card] that might render your efforts obsolete.

[Marco]

In case you missed it, I referenced the Onslaught "Chain" cycle in my original post.

I don't see a problem with Revanche being Swords to Plowshares 5-8, if a Type 1 Control deck wants to devote 8 slots to targeted creature removal. Of course Revanche can be one-side if the caster does not control creatures; however, short of removing the "It can't be regenerated" (which isn't much of a fix), I don't know how this can be fixed, other than raising the casting cost. "Destroy target attacking creature" is not an option, for obvious reasons.

You raise interesting points about the other two cards, but I think you put too much stock in LD strategy. Dedicated land destruction decks, with the possible exception of Ponza, have not been a viable strategy since the restriction of Strip Mine and Black Vice. (My very first competitive deck was a Black/Red land destruction deck with Black Vices, Strip Mines, Sinkholes, and Stone Rains). Mana denial, on the other hand, is a viable strategy seen in Type 1 decks that pack Gorilla Shaman, Stifle, Strip Mine, and Wasteland. Returning a land to its owner's hand, if that is what you would chose to return with the blue chain, is more of a tempo change than mana denial. You're not denying them mana, you're just setting them back a turn. However, if you play second, and return your opponent's land (or Mox) to their hand, they can return your land (or Mox) to your hand for 1. (Unless of course, they used their mana, in which case they should at least have something on the board.) Again, a fix for the blue chain would involve making it more like Chain of Vapor (nonland) or raising the casting cost.

For the black chain, Usurp, I could probably add nonland; however I think this is really only an issue on the first turn, before your opponent has had a chance to play. I think that's the only time (other than when your opponent is tapped out) that this is not a symmetrical card, and the opponent can't do the same to you (look at your hand and snag your best card). There's a danger of keeping a hand with only Land Grant and no land versus Duress. Why not a danger of keeping a one land hand versus a card like Usurp? Also, the card Encroach, though considerably weaker than Usurp, should be referenced.

As always, I would like to have more than two opinions on my cards.

[Sheera]

In case you missed it, I referenced the Onslaught "Chain" cycle in my original post.

Shame on me, that somehow passed me by.  

I don't see a problem with Revanche being Swords to Plowshares 5-8, if a Type 1 Control deck wants to devote 8 slots to targeted creature removal. Of course Revanche can be one-side if the caster does not control creatures; however, short of removing the "It can't be regenerated" (which isn't much of a fix), I don't know how this can be fixed, other than raising the casting cost.

Then you really should raise the casting cost. Otherwise this won't be a balanced card. White usually does not get targeted spot-removal whithout a drawback and the chain-mechanic just isn't enough of a DB here. Look at cards like [Card]Afterlife[/Card] and [Card]Reprisal[/Card] for comparison.

As always, I would like to have more than two opinions on my cards.

Guess, I'm not much of a help here.  

[Marco]

Well, anyone else have anything to say about these cards, or should I close this thread? I don't mind not adding my cards to the master thread, and I don't want to leave a thread open that isn't generating any discussion...

[Jebus]

White card is too powerful and out of flavor for white.

[skecreatoR]

How about making the white more like Swords, just with the replayable function. "That player gains life equal to its toughness(and/or power / combined?)."

It seems to easy to destroy a creature for 1 without drawback. If it were combined, it would probably just be mad. Let's remove Sundering, thats 17 life I might not die, but you probably won't either. But then again, the player is playing white, so that player is weak to begin with. And who play StP in 4ofs?

[Ephraim]

There is also the question of how a card like this would affect Limited and non-Type 1 constructed format. Although there's a strong possibility that the card will never actually see print, part of the card creation process is an exercise in taking those things into account. I've often heard Swords to Plowshares touted as the best spot-removal card ever. That means the life gain is pretty inconsequential. Having the creature's controller gain life equal to the sum of the creature's power and toughness might make a big difference, as in the case of Sundering Titan, but you might also wish to remove your opponent's Disciple of the Vault (2 life), Leonin Abunas (6 life), or Platinum Angel (8 life). You're still getting an incredibly good removal spell and the life gain still isn't the biggest drawback ever. If you're playing a W/* control deck with this, even the bounce ability might not be sufficient drawback, in addition to the large life gain. If your kill is something untargetable, like Gigapede or Troll Ascetic (rules question: Is it actually untargetabe by a copy of a spell, like this?) then you've diffused the biggest danger - having your spell backfire on you.

[Jebus]

rules question: Is it actually untargetabe by a copy of a spell, like this?

Here's how these things work.

You put a copy on the stack.  You are the controller of the copy.  The copy targets the same thing as the original, but you have the option of changing that target (probably a good idea since the original may not be available to target any more).  When chosing a new target, you still have to pick a legal target.

Since you control this copy, you can't target your opponent's Ascetic.

[Matt]

Closed by request.[/color]