Pensate

[netherspirit]

Basically for this, I wanted a cheap and balanced counterspell. I'm wondering if it's too weak in T2 and too powerful in Vintage/Legacy combo decks though.

Pensate
U
Instant
Counter target spell an opponent controls unless its controller draws 4 cards.
Not all is as it seems....

In T2 I guess it wouldn't be too great because you don't want to give your opponent loads of cards, and there are no storm cards in T2 at the moment, so I doubt there are any horrific storm decks going about. As I'm not a T2 player though I wouldn't know.

I'm worried that this may be too strong in any combo decks in Vintage and Legacy though. Any ideas?

Current Wording:

Pensate

Instant
Counter target spell unless its controller has you draw two cards.
Not all is as it seems....

[jeek]

Uh, this is broken. "Counter target spell an opponent controls", maybe.

[netherspirit]

The idea is that it only costs to play though.

[jeek]

The idea is that it only costs to play though.

It's too nuts for combo and also too nuts in counter wars.

"Oh, you're countering my counterspell? Well, I'll counter it first, draw 4 new cards, and play another free counterspell"

[netherspirit]

Should I make it so that it can only target a spell an opponent controls?

[jeek]

Uh, this is broken. "Counter target spell an opponent controls", maybe.

Uh, that's what I suggested the first time.

[netherspirit]

Ooops, sorry, completely misread it...

[Anusien]

Does the opponent choose?  It should be worded like:
An opponent chooses: counter target spell, or that spell's controller draws 4 cards.

[netherspirit]

Well, with Mana Leak they choose whether or not they pay , so this should work the same.

[Anusien]

I guess you're right.  I just read this like 5 times and didn't get it.

[asmoranomardicodais]

I'm sorry, I know you've said you wanted a balanced counterspell, I know thats your reasons for making this card.

Still...why? I don't understand why you'd ever run this card. Ever. Even if you were trying to mill them. Are you trying to do this:


Pensate
U
Instant

An opponent chooses one-You draw a card, or counter target spell an opponent controls and that player draws four cards.

I guess I can see the use of that, is that the kinda thing you want to do? It's kinda win win for an opponet to draws for cards and fizzle your counterspell the way you have it, that's all.

[jro]

Maybe this could just be a normal counterspell with an ACC along the lines of "That spell's controller may draw up to three cards".  Here's an Un-style way of wording it:

Forgotten Ancestors
Instant
1UU
Kicker - Negative (1UU)
Counter target spell controlled by an opponent.  If you paid the kicker cost, that spell's controller may draw up to three cards.

[Venven]

"Counter target spell an opponent controls unless its controller draws 4 cards." basically reads "the controller of target spell you don't control draws 4 cards." which is almost "target opponent draws 4 cards." Just putting a "doesn't" after "controller" won't quite fix it, you need something more drastic. Maybe "The controller of target spell you don't control may draw up to 4 cards. If he or she draws 1 or more cards this way, counter that spell." Which is still messy, but it works.

Edit: Or, uh, more simple would be "Counter target spell an opponent controls. That spell's controller may draw up to 4 cards." But it loses the Mana Leak functionality.

[netherspirit]

Jeez I must have been tired when I posted this, the wording sucks! Lol, well the idea is that either the spell is countered and they draw 4 cards, or the spell resolves. Any idea what the neatest way of wording this would be?

How about:

"Target player may counter target spell, if they do its controller draws 4 cards."

It's still a bit messy though.

[parallax]

So the opponent can choose for your spell to do absolutely nothing? What's the point of casting it, then? How about just:

Counter target spell an opponent controls. If you do, that spell's controller draws four cards.

[zeus-online]

Looks like it would work better as an enchantment:

Something - Some mana
Enchantment
0: Counter target spell an opponent controls, that player may draw up to 4 cards. Play this ability only once each turn, any player may play this ability.

The wording sux, i know...

/Zeus

[netherspirit]

So the opponent can choose for your spell to do absolutely nothing?

Ermm, where did you get that idea from?

[parallax]

So the opponent can choose for your spell to do absolutely nothing?

Ermm, where did you get that idea from?

Lol, well the idea is that either the spell is countered and they draw 4 cards, or the spell resolves.

Target opponent chooses one -- Counter target spell and that spell's controller draws four cards, or the spell resolves normally (Pensate has no effect.).

[zeus-online]

"Target player may counter target spell, if they do its controller draws 4 cards."

Actually, you can target yourself, and then counter the spell

Waaay too messy anyway.

/Zeus

[netherspirit]

"Target player may counter target spell, if they do its controller draws 4 cards."

Actually, you can target yourself, and then counter the spell

Uh... So what?

@Parallax: I like your wording.

[zeus-online]

Uhm, that'd mean that your wording works, its just way too complicated.

/Zeus

[parallax]

Um. . . my wording was meant to accent my point: this card doesn't do anything. Your opponent can always just choose to let his own spell resolve. What's the point?

[zeus-online]

Okay say your opponent is casting wrath of god, you cast netherspirits card targeting yourself, and wrath of god.
Fine you say "no you can't have that WoG, here have an opportunity instead". Quite simple actually.

You realize that you dont HAVE to target the opponent? ^^

/Zeus

[chrissss]

I dont get it.

So basically; I play my loxodon Hierarch, and you give me the choice or getting 4 cards, or putting the creature in play?

So for 1 U mana, you have the chance of losing 1 card which does absolutely nothing?

Before it said that it counters the spell, and the caster draws 4 cards, but now he can choose to let the spell do nothing :S

I think the card needs some kind of cantrip or something.

[parallax]

Okay say your opponent is casting wrath of god, you cast netherspirits card targeting yourself, and wrath of god.
Fine you say "no you can't have that WoG, here have an opportunity instead". Quite simple actually.

You realize that you dont HAVE to target the opponent? ^^

/Zeus

If that's the intended functionality (which netherspirit's posts haven't made clear), then the proper wording is "Counter target spell an opponent controls. If you do, that spells controller draws four cards."

What I'm asking netherspirit is: What in the Nine Hells is this card supposed to do, because your intent is not coming out very clearly.

[netherspirit]

What I'm asking netherspirit is: What in the Nine Hells is this card supposed to do, because your intent is not coming out very clearly.

Basically, the spell's controller can choose to let it resolve as normal, or trade it (via countering) for 4 cards.

[parallax]

That spell will only ever benefit your opponent. What's the point?

[netherspirit]

It's still being developed, I can alter the amount of cards drawn so as to correct the power level (ie make it stronger.)

[Norm4eva]

This card reminds me of the 'punisher mechanic' from Odyssey.  Browbeat, Book Burning etc etc.  As with those semi-ancient cards of yesteryear, the problem exists where you allow the opponent to choose the better outcome.  Basically, as long as there's an upside to the card it'll never be awesome.

[netherspirit]

The card doesn't have to be "awesome". Every set needs it's not so good cards.