Spelltrap

[Ephraim]

Spelltrap

Artifact

Imprint -- When Spelltrap comes into play, you may remove a card in a graveyard from the game.

When a player plays a spell that shares a card type with the imprinted card, sacrifice Spelltrap. If you do, counter that spell.

***

How does an artifact get to counter spells?
1. It can't get every spell every time.
2. It gives plenty of advance warning about what kind of spell it will counter.
3. It prevents its own controller from playing spells of the associated type.
4. It uses an artifact-typical mechanic (Imprint) to help establish the card firmly as an artifact.

I'm wary of one idea in particular -- I'd like to include the boilerplate reminder text concerning card types, but it includes "land" in the list. I don't want to imply that this can counter a land, but I also don't want to imply that land isn't a card type by leaving it off the list.

[Ephraim]

Current Wording:

Spelltrap
{2}
Artifact

Imprint -- When Spelltrap comes into play, you may remove a nonland card in a graveyard from the game.

When a player plays a spell that shares a card type with the imprinted card, sacrifice Spelltrap. If you do, counter that spell. (The card types are artifact, creature, enchantment, instant, land, and sorcery.)

[Jacob Orlove]

Just make it "remove a nonland card".

[Ephraim]

Good call. That way, I can still include the full reminder text. The rules text will prevent the problem with lands from ever arising.

[xthexpunisherx]

Just a few things.  Is this too powerful?  I understand that it only counters a 'certain' type of spell.  But think about it annull is costed U.  So you have to at least play some type of U producing land/mox.  What happends if someone playing Affinity used this card.  They can play 2 ditch an ornithopter and counter either trinispher, welder, sundering titan etc etc for 2 colorless mana.  And god forbid it goes to another counterspell deck.  Or what about a tendrils deck.  imprint a cabaal ritual and now you are safe against stifle, fow etc etc etc.  Way to powerful unless...

the whole point of this was card was that you have to counter your OWN Spells (ie first turn you play this card imprint ornithopter then on your turn play ravager and you must counter it).  If you allow the card to say "may sacrifice" i feel it might be a little to powerful because Giant Growth shouldn't = Counterspell.

[Jacob Orlove]

Right now, the sacrifice is not optional. I don't see what you're complaining about.

It would be really good if you removed, say, a creature from their graveyard, when your deck only ran like 2-3 creatures, but since they choose what it counters, I think it's fine even then. It's also nice how this can combine being a graveyard hoser with doing something useful.

[Ephraim]

24 Hour Clock

[dandan]

I am a little wary of giving all colours, counterspell-capability.

Despite this I think the card would be fine if you could only Imprint a card from your graveyard. If your deck has few creatures, it'll be tough to use this to counter your opponent's creatures. It also stops the trick of using it to deplete an opponent's graveyard (I'll Imprint your Ancestral please or respond to your Animate Dead by Welding in this and taking your Dragon)

[rvs]

I am a little wary of giving all colours, counterspell-capability.

This is not counterspell-capability at all. It's punishing decks playing similar types of spells (like, only instants, or, only creatures), and it only helps with the first type of that spell played after this thing has trapped it.

I like the idea a lot Ephraim, and I think you executed it perfectly.

[dandan]

The phrase 'counter that spell' suggests that it is a counterspell ability.

Note that although I am not fond of this step outside the colour pie, that is not my main objection. My objection is on two fronts (other than the colour pie issue).

1. Power level.
Artifacts can do things that are trademark coloured abilities but should be weaker than the strong colours are at that ability. An artifact flying creature should be weaker than a White/Blue flying creature of the same cost. Blue gets to counter stuff for 1-5 mana with most counters costing 2 although Wizards seems to have shifted this to 3 mana. Hesitation costs 1U and has the same effect except you can't choose the type of spell it 'will counter. Should Artifacts gets a 2cc counterspell (Seal of Countering if you prefer)? No
2. Utility use - graveyard stripping
The ability to RFG a card in an opponent's graveyard is a significant ability. As well as the ability to hose an opponent in this way (in addition to the 2cc counterspell ability), it also allows a far higher chance of selecting the type of card your opponent is playing the most and offers you the chance of choosing card types that you don't have in your deck, which makes the 'Hesitation' effect non-symmetrical.

The solution I suggested affects the power level to a certain extent (especially in the early game) and removes the additional utility ability of graveyard stripping. As a welcome side-effect it makes it harder for decks to go outside the colour pie as black would need to run artifacts in order to stop them, Green would need to run Instants if it wanted to protect against counterspells, etc.

I'd have no problems with this as a 1U Enchantment but I think the aim is to have an Artifact.

[Ephraim]

What about Null Brooch, Dandan? Granted, the cost of using it is steep, but it can be used multiple times and it can be used to counter different types of spells on subsequent uses. This card does have nominal graveyard hate, but it takes special circumstances to use that hate at instant speed (the only way graveyard hate is really useful.) However, it can only be used once and can only counter a type of spell that you select in advance -- that means it's only going to be really effective against certain types of decks and that it will be easy to play around. I certainly think this is less powerful than Null Brooch, which, despite being an artifact with a counterspell ability, does not see play.

[dandan]

What about Null Brooch?
I agree that card is a precedent for Artifact counterspelling. My objection wasn't to an Artifact countering things. My objection was to an Artifact countering things for a mana cost that would be associated with Blue rather than Green or Red. Do you think you could make a Green or Red Enchantment with the same effect for 2 mana? Well you just did (OK I'll accept that an Artifact is currently more vulnerable than an Enchantment but then again 2 is easier to get than 1G or 1R).

Would my suggestion of only allowing Imprints from your graveyard be so bad? It clearly weakens the card but still allows a 2cc Artifact counterspell.

[Puschkin]

Dandan, since this one can counter your own stuff combined with the fact that you first need to imprint something useful (useful for that opponent) I think its okay. The casting cost of 2 mana seems low compared to usual blue stuff but if you play it first or second turn, you probably don't have anything in the gaves to imprint.

And although graveyard stripping HAS become important by now, I dont see any problem if it stayed like it is, being able to remove from opposing graveyards. I mean, using your graveyard as a resource is optional and much like using non-basics includes the risk of running into non-basic-hate you run the risk of running into graveyard-hate. Thats fine with me, especially since Wizards is printing more and more really stupid graveyard-cards like Squee and Wonder.
Also, let's not the first graveyard-removing card ever, Tormod's Crypt! It's an artifact, costs zero mana and removing  single card from the game looks pretty tame compared to the Crypt.

[Ephraim]

Dandan, I'm afraid that the line between this being pretty good (too good, by your estimation) and unplayable is razor thin. I'd rather it be playable, so I'll settle for too good. Sorry. 24 Hour Clock.

[dandan]

Sorry for the late reply, having kids tends to reduce your Magic time!

I have been thinking about this card and although I don't like giving other colours such a 'blue' artifact, the restrictions on use are actually pretty restricting (so can be overcome by good deck design, which I view as a plus). I tend to agree that my suggestion of allowing only imprints from your own graveyard would lower the card's playability and although such a card would be more in flavour it would probably be too weak to play. If we compare Spelltrap to Engineered Explosives or Powder Keg, we clearly see that it is by no means an extreme breach of the colour pie in comparison with cards that Wizards considers printable.

As such, consider the current version to have the Dandan seal of approval (albeit a bit begrudgingly)

[Matt]

Closed and added.[/color]