Fading Golem

[Slay]

Fading Golem
X

Artifact Creature - Golem

Fading X
3/4

*****

What do you think?
-Slay

[Upinthe]

I don't like how you can get a 3/4 for 0 mana, even if it is only for the turn. There are so many ways you could abuse that.

[Jacob Orlove]

Didn't we already make a card a lot like this?

[Komatteru]

I don't like how you can get a 3/4 for 0 mana, even if it is only for the turn. There are so many ways you could abuse that.

Like?

Getting a one turn blocker that can fight back isn't too outrageous.  Your opponent can avoid it by not attacking at all, or by holding back a little bit.  I mean, Shield Sphere is a free blocker for multiple turns (although it can't fight back), and that's clearly not a problem.

I don't recall if there's anything like this.  I'm too lazy to look.

[stolen]

I'd be more worried about it being played for 2-4 mana, where it's a big, fat, undercosted body that sticks around for quite a while.

[fattzzach]

Well, is a 3/4 for two mana that can attack only once that good? For three mana it can attack twice and for four...why arent we playing juggernaut?
Personally i just dont thnk the cc on this is that outrageous.

[stolen]

A creature with fading dies when a fading counter cannot be removed.  For two mana, it attacks twice--down to 1 counter, attack, down to 0 counters, attack, dies.

(This creature comes into play with x fade counters on it. At the beginning of your upkeep, remove a fade counter from it. If you can't, sacrifice it.)

Juggernaut must attack each turn.  This can be a cheap wall that can hold off weenies for a couple turns while you gain board control.

[Slay]

The card itself is a very flexible device. It can hold off a weenie swarm that's threatening you, until you gain board control, or against more controlling decks, it can deal 9-15 damage and force the controlling player to not sit back.

It is, however, an artifact and a creature, making it extremely vulnerable to lots of different stuff.
-Slay

[Godder]

It reminded me of Rust Golem, but in reverse. Perhaps if power and toughness were somehow linked to X?

For example:

Fading Golem
X
Artifact Creature - Golem

Fading X (This creature comes into play with X fade counters on it. At the beginning of your upkeep, remove a fade counter from it. If you can’t, sacrifice it.)

X/X

[Nibble]

Godder: Interesting idea, but it makes it pretty terrible. Let's even assume you improved it so that p/t didn't reduce as it faded - so it'd be a 0/0 with 'When this comes into play, put X +1/+1 counters on it.'

0 mana for.. well, nothing.
1 for a 1/1 is standard, actually subpar. Fading 1 makes it worthless.
2 for a 2/2 is again subpar, Fading just makes it worse.
3 for a 3/3 is potentially decent. Fading limits it to 9 damage, though. Still, very usable.
4 for a 4/4 is solid, though Juggernaut and Su-Chi are probably stronger in older formats, and Myr Enforcer and Synod Centurion can often be better as well.
5 for a 5/5 is actually good for an artifact, and it sticks around plenty long.

I guess it could be good, because it's useful enough at higher costs and has the flexibility of being able to be played at whatever you can afford.

However, I still like the original idea a lot.. although I do agree it might be a tad too good. Perhaps costing it at {1} would make it more fair? Although... that means for 3 mana you get two attacks max, and for 4 (where there are better artifact creatures) you get three swings. Maybe just is fine after all.

[Matt]

Godder's idea would be playably good if it had some ability. Maybe like Mindless Automaton?

[Godder]

In artifacts, 2/2 for 2 is as good as it gets, although fading makes it bad, as mentioned. Bear in mind that X is set when the card is cast, and doesn't change as it fades. For that, instead of X/X, it would have */* and 'Fading Golem has power and toughness equal to the number of fading counters on it' or something like that. That would be terrible, so I didn't bother.

That was what I originally wanted, but having more than one type of counter on a permanent is considered bad design, so I just posted the above as something to tweak. Thinking about it, however, it can be done like this:

Fading Golem
X
Artifact Creature - Golem

This comes into play with X +1/+1 counters on it.
During your upkeep, remove a +1/+1 counter from Fading Golem. If you can't, sacrifice it.

1/2

Functional fading, but without the actual fading counters. It also can't be used as a Kobold with Skullclamp (probably not a concern, I suppose, but I did worry about it when I was considering different versions).

[Slay]

Thanks for the ideas, all. I think that making the P/T malleable as well makes it a much more interesting idea. But I think it should be done in a much more interesting way, like this:

Fading Golem
X
Fading X
This comes into play with X +1/+1 counters on it.
Remove a fading counter from This: Put a +1/+1 counter on This.
0/0

Is it too strong? I think it's kind of a mix of Archbound Ravager and Sawtooth Thresher.
-Slay

[Godder]

Removing a Fade counter to do stuff was a cool idea, so that could be revisited in some way, especially if the creature reverts to X/X instead of having +1/+1 AND Fade counters on it.

Some ideas - remove one or more counters to:

Draw a card
Gain +n/+n till EOT
Deal damage
Gain some ability (flying, trample, haste etc)

For example:

Fading Golem
X
Artifact creature - Golem
*/*

Fading X (This creature comes into play with X fade counters on it. At the beginning of your upkeep, remove a fade counter from it. If you can’t, sacrifice it.)
Fading Golem's power and toughness are each equal to the number of fade counters on it.
Remove a fade counter: Fading Golem has +3/+3 till end of turn.