You Make the Card TMD #1 - The Ability Vote Finale

[SpencerForHire]

The card was based off Final Fortune which IS in the color pie for red.  It might have to see an adjustment anyways for balance.  That adjustment could also be a color one, which would help both situations.

[JDawg13]

I don't see how controlling another person's turn is at ALL a red ability.  Creatures, sure, but entire turns?  That's not red's bag in any way.  That seems like a calculated assault, which is definitely blue, combined with self-sacrifice, which is definitely black.  This isn't that similar to Final Fortune, as with Fortune, you actively have to have a way to win the game, or else you lose.  This card has no requirement on your board/hand, only on the ability of your opponent to kill you, which WILL happen in the course of a game.  There's no risk involved at all, as you will almost always be able to tell when your opponent will be able to kill you in the next turn.  If there's a chance that they couldn't, you just don't play this.  No risk, high reward.  This will be impossible to cost, so I really hope it doesn't win.

[SpencerForHire]

Well then we can do one of three things.  Everyone can remove their vote to that card and choose something else, or we can vote to redo this poll with the second place card from that sub poll.  Last but not least we can continue as we are going.  Input?

Edit: My own thought process:  I really think that the final fortune aspect of this card seems plausible and red does have a bit to do with wrecklessness (losing the game if you don't win) and taking another persons turn has never really been under any colors control (only mindslaver).

[JDawg13]

The thing about the "recklessness" part of this card is that in actuality, it will NEVER be recklessly played.  You'll only ever cast this card if you know that your opponent will be able to kill you on his/her next turn.  This is more of a waiting and lurking type of card, just waiting for your opponent to make his or her final move before you strike them down.  Also, I know that taking another person's turn has never been in a color, but honestly it just doesn't feel red to me.  Red is all about its lack of control and chaotic nature.  Do you honestly think that a red mage could focus long enough to control an entire turn?  It just doesn't feel right to me.  My choice would be to take the second highest ranking card from this card's pod, and start the vote again.  I know it'll take longer, but that's what card design is all about - taking the time necessary to make sure that you don't end up with something ridiculously out of flavor, like what I think we have here.

EDIT: Could the people that voted for this card voice their opinions as to why?  I'd be interested to hear a compelling argument for this card.

[Limbo]

EDIT: Could the people that voted for this card voice their opinions as to why?  I'd be interested to hear a compelling argument for this card.

As the creator of the idea I thought it would be a good idea to respond to all the discussion.

My idea was based upon two of the basic principles in Red magic : Using all resources in one final attack in an attempt to pwn the opposing player and creating large amounts of confusion in general. After reading the comments on the card, I think it would be a good idea to refine the card into a combination of Reins of power, Mindslaver and Final Fortune. So you gain control of the opponents turn, but your opponent controls your side of the board for that same turn. If you are unable to make yourself loose during that turn, you lose the game during your next upkeep. This construction would prevent mana-burn or Necropotence shenenigans to auto-win on the spot, as the card is constructed now.

This gives it the same power as Tooth and Nail, Insurrection, Blatant Thievery or any other insanely expensive sorcery for that matter.

If a lot of people are opposed to the card, its ok if it is replaced by something else, but I really think that the ability is very Red indeed.

[SpencerForHire]

EDIT: Could the people that voted for this card voice their opinions as to why?  I'd be interested to hear a compelling argument for this card.

As the creator of the idea I thought it would be a good idea to respond to all the discussion.

My idea was based upon two of the basic principles in Red magic : Using all resources in one final attack in an attempt to pwn the opposing player and creating large amounts of confusion in general. After reading the comments on the card, I think it would be a good idea to refine the card into a combination of Reins of power, Mindslaver and Final Fortune. So you gain control of the opponents turn, but your opponent controls your side of the board for that same turn. If you are unable to make yourself loose during that turn, you lose the game during your next upkeep. This construction would prevent mana-burn or Necropotence shenenigans to auto-win on the spot, as the card is constructed now.

This gives it the same power as Tooth and Nail, Insurrection, Blatant Thievery or any other insanely expensive sorcery for that matter.

If a lot of people are opposed to the card, its ok if it is replaced by something else, but I really think that the ability is very Red indeed.

I think you just fixed it by giving your opponent control of your side of the table.

[Nova442]

I voted 2, and think allowing your opponent to control your side would allow a cost less than 10 mana.

[JDawg13]

I was talking about this card with a friend of mine, and we agreed that #2 would actually be really cool, if all it said was "You control target player's next turn.  That player controls your side of the board for that turn."  None of that "win the game" nonsense.  It's quite chaotic, as is red's wont, and it seems like a really cool way to throw a wrench into somebody's gameplan if you're skillful enough to do so.  There should probably be a clause about mana burn in there, but I think the basic idea would make for a fun card.

[Limbo]

Well, I honestly think the reversing of winning / losing makes it even more red. Especially since this will probably cost a lot of mana, the caster of this spell will probably leave no mana for the other player to cast spells with...

[Jacob Orlove]

Letting them control your side of the board after you tap out to play this isn't much of a drawback.

[SpencerForHire]

Well since quite obviously number two has won, I'm going to create a new solution to the problem.

Strawberry!