Mox Machine

[asmoranomardicodais]

So, here's a midsized creature with what I think is a cool ability. What do you think?

Mox Machine
4
Whenever an artifact goes to the graveyard, you may pay 2. If you do, put an artifact into play that reads "Tap: Add one colorless mana to your mana pool."
3/4

Manakin Engine
5
Artifact Creature
Whenever a non-token artifact goes to the graveyard, you may pay 1. If you do, put a 0/1 Manakin artifact creature token into play.
Sacrifice a manakin token: Add 1 mana to your mana pool.
2/3

[Matt]

1. This is probably stupidly broken.
2. I don't like the idea of making tokens that aren't creatures.

[Nibble]

2. I don't like the idea of making tokens that aren't creatures.

Agreed, especially tokens that have abilities other than a simple keyword. I'm probably missing some, but the only tokens I can think of in recent print that have anything more than Flying are possibly Kiki-Jiki tokens, and those are temporary so memory issues aren't as much of a concern.

I'm also not sure of the power level here, but if this still warrants development, I could see the triggered ability adding charge counters, and the creature getting ": Add to your mana pool for each charge counter on ~this~." Also, the p/t should definitely be bumped down. for a 4/4 comes with drawbacks ([card]Synod Centurion[/card]), so a 3/4 with a solid ability seems too strong.

[Jacques]

This gives you infinite mana with Krark Clan Ironworks.  I mean, I know there are like a hundred other things that do too, but this would basically make a cheap two card combo for infinite mana.  Nibble's idea seems fine, or you could go with "non-token artifact".

[Ephraim]

Why does it need to produce little mox tokens? Couldn't it just accrue charge counters, ala Gemstone Array, whenever an artifact goes to the graveyard?

[combo_dude]

Or, to go with Matt's second objection, couldn't you make it create 0/1 Manakins instead? Probably best if it's a 3/3 for 5, too - but this makes it a lot less broken as you have to at least wait a turn before putting them to use.

[asmoranomardicodais]

First, your probably right, it is too powerful power/toughness wise. I'll change it to a 2/3 for five.

Secondly, I forgot to put "non-token artifact" on it. I'll fix that too.

Thirdly, I don't think artifacts that tap for one colorless mana would create memory issues. It doesn't see to complicated; Just accumulate tokens next to your lands and use them appropriately. Also, Manakin 0/1's might work, but I only want to do that as a last resort.

Fourthly, I either want to make this a medium size creature at the four-five mana range, or make it a big creature at the eight nine range. Which do you think would fit better?

[Jacob Orlove]

I also don't see why this has to generate moxes, or why this is a creature.

[combo_dude]

Well, Matt's objection to the non-creature tokens is valid, since a brief look at a Gatherer search for "token" reveals a total of ZERO non-creature tokens. Not that there aren't plenty of non-creatures that generate creature tokens, but it's not about a memory issue, it's the fact that Mox tokens just aren't made.

As for Jacob's objection, I also don't think that this should necessarily be a creature - but if you want it to make Moxen, then either way mini-Manakins are the only reasonable way to do it.

[asmoranomardicodais]

Fine, I'll have it make manakins. Will that fix most of the objections?

[combo_dude]

All but two:

1) The wording is wrong - nowadays it's "put a 0/1 Manakin token into play", although I'm not entirely sure where you get the "artifact creature" bit into it.

2) This is still horribly broken. That's why I was going for the Manakin ability of tapping to use it, it doesn't lend itself to infinite combos the turn it comes down.

[Nibble]

1) The wording is wrong - nowadays it's "put a 0/1 Manakin token into play", although I'm not entirely sure where you get the "artifact creature" bit into it.

[card]Genesis Chamber[/card]. It would be "put a 0/1 Manakin artifact creature token into play".

I like the sacrificing, because it makes for much cleaner wording - the effect is on the card itself, not the tokens. The issue of it being too goo to be able to get your mana same-turn, well, I don't know. The only thing I don't like is that a single token can cycle itself inifinitely, which could be harmless, but I'm wary.

[wonkey_donkey]

1) The wording is wrong - nowadays it's "put a 0/1 Manakin token into play", although I'm not entirely sure where you get the "artifact creature" bit into it.

[card]Genesis Chamber[/card]. It would be "put a 0/1 Manakin artifact creature token into play".

I like the sacrificing, because it makes for much cleaner wording - the effect is on the card itself, not the tokens. The issue of it being too goo to be able to get your mana same-turn, well, I don't know. The only thing I don't like is that a single token can cycle itself inifinitely, which could be harmless, but I'm wary.

I think it's a valid point being worried about the ability to replace itself. So why not make it produce colourless tokens rather than artifact tokens, a la [card]Summoning Station[/card]? Seems to solve most of the problems...

Tom

[asmoranomardicodais]

Making it only non-token artifacts ends most of the problems.

Also, I don't see how this is stupidly broken. It feels like an expensive Arcbound Ravager that doesn't power up other things, with the added bonus of generating mana. And by forcing them to pay one every time they want to use the ability, An infinite mana combo seems to hard to come by.

As an alternative, I could make it a bigger creature, and have it only trigger off artifacts it kills. That would change the flavor of the card completely, but it would still be something that would be a possibliity.

[combo_dude]

Inifinite combos: Ashnod's Altar is infinite mana, Goblin Sharpshooter is infinite damage, Summoning Station is infinite creatures, and Fecundity draws your deck. And that's straight off the top of my head.

I think that either making it only trigger on nontoken artifacts, or making the card produce colourless (rather than artifact) tokens - thank you wonkey_donkey - would make this not broken. I just don't like cards that combo with themselves, they seem too easy to break in half. Especially one that only needs things hitting the graveyard. It's too easy.

[wonkey_donkey]

Inifinite combos: Ashnod's Altar is infinite mana, Goblin Sharpshooter is infinite damage, Summoning Station is infinite creatures, and Fecundity draws your deck. And that's straight off the top of my head.

I think that either making it only trigger on nontoken artifacts, or making the card produce colourless (rather than artifact) tokens - thank you wonkey_donkey - would make this not broken. I just don't like cards that combo with themselves, they seem too easy to break in half. Especially one that only needs things hitting the graveyard. It's too easy.

Krark-Clan Ironworks, Altar of Dementia, Phyrexian Altar, Caller of the Claw, Grinding Station, Summoning Station, Goblin Bombardment, itself... as printed, it's too good. With a very small correction, such as a nontoken trigger or colourless tokens, it sinks to the levels of 'interesting' rather than 'overpowered.'

Tom

[asmoranomardicodais]

I already changed it to nontoken artifacts...

[Matt]

Wording should be:

"Whenever a non-token artifact goes to your/a graveyard from play, you may pay {1}. If you do, put a 0/1 Manakin artifact creature token into play. Treat this as a 0/1 artifact creature."

I think this is fine now. Do we want it to trigger off anyone's artifacts or just its controller's?

[asmoranomardicodais]

I like it triggering off everyone's personally. That way it can be used for more than a combo deck. Are there anymore objections before I start the 24 hour clock?

[Ephraim]

I want to know:

1. Why is this a creature? Shouldn't it just be an artifact?

2. Why does this have to create any sort of token at all? Okay, the 0/1 Manikin tokens can be used as chump blockers, but do they have any intrinsic value over "charge counters" that this card couldn't be made many times simpler just by using counters instead of tokens? Your initial suggestion didn't have them as creature tokens at all, but you could repeatedly tap them for mana -- so there was a reason for them to be tokens. Then you changed it so that they were tokens that sacrificed to the machine, but people objected to non-creature tokens, so then you made them creature tokens. Really, it seems as though charge counters are more inline with this cards roots.

Mox Engine
{4}
Artifact

Whenever an artifact is put into a graveyard from play, put a charge counter on Mox Engine.
Remove a charge counter from Mox Engine: Add {1} to your mana pool.

***

If you feel that it's necessary to have a cost associated with the addition of charge counters, then knock this card's mana cost down to {3} or {2} to better differentiate it from Gemstone Array and you ought to be fine.

[asmoranomardicodais]

Ephraim:

1. It's a creature because I imagined this card originally as a juggernaut that makes Moxes out of whatever it tramples over. That's what I was thinking flavor-wise. I also think that it is better as a creaure for the same reason that the muses and disciple of the vault are creatures; becasue even though their abilities make sense on non creature permanents, they are creatures so that they can more easily be disrupted. If this actually proved to be powerful at all, I want it to be killed quickly. Also, I feel it would be boring as a gemstone array, another reason I made it a creature. Lastly, I like the idea of a creature churning out smaller creatures while itself keeps beating up the opponent. None of these points are really all that valid, but that is my reasoning.

2. I could go two directions with this card. Although I agree with you that charge counters are more in-line with the cards original idea, I'm starting to like manakin tokens, since you can do a lot more with them, and it makes the card more original. On the other hand, depending on what other people think, I could go with the charge counters too.

[asmoranomardicodais]

I still like this card, and I want it to make it to the master list. Anybody still have problems with it? Anyone got a good name for it?