Skateboard

[Limbo]

How about developing equipment just for walls? Oh sorry, creatures with the defender ability...

Skateboard
2
Artifact - Equipment
~This~ can only target creatures with defender.
Equipped creature loses defender.
Equipped creature gets +3/+0.
Equip 1
I knew you could do a Bigspin Kickflip on a wall, but never heard of a wall that can do a Bigspin Kickflip on you...

This obviously needs a new name / flavourtext, and maybe even an added ability (first strike, haste?), but besides that, I like it. Thoughts?

Current wording:
Animating Gem
2
Artifact - Equipment
Equipped creature gains trample.
If equipped creature is a wall, it loses defender and gets +X/+0, where X is its toughness.
Equip 2
For thousands of years, the wall protected the city. Suddenly it started protecting itself.

[Slay]

It needs trample. If a wall is rolling at you, chances are you're not going to stop it.
-Slay

[Limbo]

It needs trample. If a wall is rolling at you, chances are you're not going to stop it.
-Slay

Good point. Added.

I think there is a small flavorissue. This is meant for walls, but since CHK there are also non-walls that have defender, which just means they don't attack, but stay home. I think this should only be able to target Walls, since that's what it is meant to do, and it makes sense.

Good point. Changed.

[rvs]

I think there is a small flavorissue. This is meant for walls, but since CHK there are also non-walls that have defender, which just means they don't attack, but stay home. I think this should only be able to target Walls, since that's what it is meant to do, and it makes sense.

[Machinus]

They are the same thing now. Creatures with defender = walls. They are replacing it functionally. The creature type wall is now totally meaningless.

[Limbo]

They are the same thing now. Creatures with defender = walls. They are replacing it functionally. The creature type wall is now totally meaningless.

Traproot kami is a spirit with "defender". Wizards disconnected wall and defender for designpurposes (and preventing rules shiznit, like with legends).

[rvs]

They are the same thing now. Creatures with defender = walls. They are replacing it functionally. The creature type wall is now totally meaningless.

Incorrect. This being able to only help out Walls makes sense from a flavor standpoint, and I guess you don't know many CHK, since there are a few non-wall Defenders in there.

[Nibble]

I like the idea, but I'm concerned that this is a terrible, terrible limited card. What about having some minor effect, and then the main effect if the creature's a Wall? This may be troublesome from a flavor standpoint, but at least then it's not completely dead 90% of the time.

I'm talking about something like:

Equipped creature gets +1/+0 and trample.
If equipped creature is a Wall, it gets an additional +2/+0 and loses Defender.

[Limbo]

The problem is that that would add to the casting cost and equipcost. At the moment, it is a highly improved rolling stones (which I realize is unplayable), and that was my intention.

And for wall.dec, this is actually quite nice

[Nibble]

You wouldn't necessarily have to up the cost. If you make it 1 to cast and 1 to equip, as it is now, and gave +1/+0 to non-Walls, it's strictly worse than Shuko, but at least it can do something without a Wall. As it stands, situational or not, is 1 cast/1 equip a fair enough cost for +3/+0 and trample, especially considering most walls have pretty nice stats?

[Machinus]

They are the same thing now. Creatures with defender = walls. They are replacing it functionally. The creature type wall is now totally meaningless.

Traproot kami is a spirit with "defender". Wizards disconnected wall and defender for designpurposes (and preventing rules shiznit, like with legends).

They are the same thing now. Creatures with defender = walls. They are replacing it functionally. The creature type wall is now totally meaningless.

Incorrect. This being able to only help out Walls makes sense from a flavor standpoint, and I guess you don't know many CHK, since there are a few non-wall Defenders in there.

You guys didn't understand what I said at all. Those creatures in CHK don't have to SAY "wall" on then for them to actually be walls. As I said in my first post, the type "wall" doesn't mean anything anymore; it doesn't matter if it's put on a creature or not. And as I also said before, defender has replaced wall. All creatures with defender ARE walls. "Wall" is only used to help people who don't understand defender to make sense of it from a flavor point of view.

Even all the old "walls" have been errata'ed to use defender. The wording on this card needs to change.

[Limbo]

Even all the old "walls" have been errata'ed to use defender. The wording on this card needs to change.

The entire flavour of this card is "to put a wall on wheels". The creature type wall still exists, so that shouldn't be a problem. My point is, that there are creatures with defender that are not walls. Flavourwise, it is ugly to set that traproot kami on wheels (even if you made him hydraulics a la Pimp My Ride, it would still be ugly).

Its like in mathematics. All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. All walls have defender, but not all defender creatures are walls. Ergo, I want it to target walls, not creatures with defender.

@Nibble: See my reply to Machinus. I want it to target walls only. If that means we can get away with more abilities / power / toughness, let me know what you think is fair at certain cc / equipcost.

[Matt]

All creatures with defender ARE walls. "Wall" is only used to help people who don't understand defender to make sense of it from a flavor point of view.

Even all the old "walls" have been errata'ed to use defender.

Wrong. The creature type "wall" still has meaning, because you can't [card]Tunnel[/card] through a Taproot Kami. Furthermore, Rolling Stones says "All Walls lose defender" not "Creatures with defender may attack as though they didn't have defender".

You can't Animate Wall just any old creature with defender, because they are thematicaly different from walls. The CHK block guys with defender aren't walls, they're merely creatures which do not attack (see the flavor text on [card]Minamo Scrollkeeper[/card] for further explanation).

[Limbo]

Ok, so now we agree on the wall-thing. How about powerlevel of the card? Still too low? I would like to push the powerlevel, as we already have enough sucky cards concerning walls.

[Godder]

To use an example from Standard... T1 Steel Wall, T2 play and equip this, attack with a 3/4 trampler, on turn 2. Granted, not amazingly broken like Arcbound Ravager and co, but not too bad.

If you're looking to boost it, try making the power boost equal to the creature's toughness, so the bigger the wall, the more powerful it is (something that makes sense).

[Machinus]

This is sooooo good with the stronghold walls, especially the red one.

[Jacob Orlove]

This is sooooo good with the stronghold walls, especially the red one.

That's fine, because those cards are terrible otherwise (except wall of blossoms).

[Matt]

This seems rather complicated. Also, the name cannot at all work.

[Limbo]

This seems rather complicated. Also, the name cannot at all work.

How is this complicated? And of course the name needs work, its just slapped on because I want to put the wall "on wheels" to make it able to attack, so it fits as a working name.

If you're looking to boost it, try making the power boost equal to the creature's toughness, so the bigger the wall, the more powerful it is (something that makes sense).

Awesome idea, changed. What will the casting cost / equip need to be now? 2/2?

[Jacob Orlove]

This seems rather complicated. Also, the name cannot at all work.

How is this complicated?

It has four different parts: the targeting restriction, the losing defender, the power bonus and trample, and the equip cost.If you could cut it down to three, that'd be a lot better.

In fact, since all walls have defender, you could do:

Equipped creature gains trample.
If equipped creature is a wall, it loses defender and gets +X/+0, where X is its toughness.
Equip 2

[Limbo]

This seems rather complicated. Also, the name cannot at all work.

How is this complicated?

It has four different parts: the targeting restriction, the losing defender, the power bonus and trample, and the equip cost.If you could cut it down to three, that'd be a lot better.

In fact, since all walls have defender, you could do:

Equipped creature gains trample.
If equipped creature is a wall, it loses defender and gets +X/+0, where X is its toughness.
Equip 2

Close, but I don't want it to do anything for non-walls, so little editing from my part.

Do we have room for flavour now? Cut down to two/three lines of text I think we do. Also need a name for this buddy.

[Jacob Orlove]

Without the targeting restriction, though, you can equip it to non-walls, where it really should do something. Giving Trample is weak enough that no one will play the card just for that, but it makes the card much easier for new players to understand.

[Limbo]

Without the targeting restriction, though, you can equip it to non-walls, where it really should do something. Giving Trample is weak enough that no one will play the card just for that, but it makes the card much easier for new players to understand.

Ok, accepted.

[Godder]

I was wondering why this card should give trample to a random creature... Then I saw, in my mind's eye, a creature skateboarding toward the opponent, a creature stepping in the way (blocking) and the skateboarding creature just flipping up and over the blocker while bouncing off its head (hence the 1 damage), and then continuing on its way...

[Limbo]

Ok, this puppy still needs a cool name and a flavourtext (a short one). Something witty with the chinese wall jumping dude anyone? (Sorry, I am not that familiar with the skateboard scene...).

[asmoranomardicodais]

How about:

"The walls may have ears around here, yes, but who has heard of a wall with feet too?"
-Some Guy, possibly last words

Or:

"Ogg hit the wall, yes. But Ogg really didn't expect it to hit back."

Or:

"The main road had been stepped on for generations. Now it was the road's turn to do the stepping."

Sorry, I'm getting carried away with puns, I'll stop now before its too late.

[Limbo]

How about:

"The walls may have ears around here, yes, but who has heard of a wall with feet too?"
-Some Guy, possibly last words

Or:

"Ogg hit the wall, yes. But Ogg really didn't expect it to hit back."

Or:

"The main road had been stepped on for generations. Now it was the road's turn to do the stepping."

Sorry, I'm getting carried away with puns, I'll stop now before its too late.

Hmm, this made me think of:

For thousands of years, the wall protected the city. Suddenly it started protecting itself.

[Limbo]

Returned from vacation, so 24H clock thingy.

[rvs]

Why is this an Amulet? Have you ever seen a wall wearing an Amulet? It doesn't make sense!

[Matt]

I can see embedding a gem in a wall though.