|
parallax
|
 |
« on: January 12, 2007, 12:43:01 am » |
|
Urza's Workshop Land - Urza's  : Add  to your mana pool. Spend this mana only to play activated abilities of artifacts. Nearly useless or completely busted? You decide. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
How about choosing a non-legend creature? Otherwise he is a UG instant Wrath of Frog. |
|
|
|
andrewpate
|
|
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2007, 10:32:44 am » |
|
Is there a flavor reason for making Urza good at using existing artifacts while Mishra is good at creating novel ones?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
chrissss
Basic User
Posts: 418
Just be yourself
|
|
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2007, 11:26:57 am » |
|
I like the card. its not too broken, because of the ability reason, but it can be a good addition to some decks.
what about making it an artifact land?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Yes,Tarmogoyf is probably better than Chameleon Colossus, but comparing it to Tarmogoyf is like comparing your girlfriend to Carmen Electra - one's versatile and reliable, the other's just big and cheap.(And you'd run both if you could get away with)
|
|
|
|
OfficeShredder
|
|
« Reply #3 on: January 15, 2007, 05:52:01 am » |
|
andrew, it should actually be the other way around (see mishra's vs. urza's factory). Storyline-wise, urza was the one better at building novel artifacts, while mishra was more of a tinkerer with existing ones. But mishra already has his workshop, so urza gets shafted there.
This land seems really useless IMO though; there aren't that many activated abilities that are good enough to use a land drop on, and most of them are on cards that cost enough that you could just pay for the ability anyway. So it's only useful on a weldered mindslaver or karn perhaps, but then you're playing with artifact mana anyway
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
andrewpate
|
|
« Reply #4 on: January 15, 2007, 11:05:43 am » |
|
It's also good with a Goblin Charbelcher. But yeah, I agree with you.
And yeah, that's what I thought in terms of the flavor. Actually putting this card next to Mishra's Workshop seemed a very counterintuitive comparison.
On the whole, I don't really like the card. I don't think it's broken, but I don't think it's interesting in the way of other "bad" lands like Scorched Ruins, etc. I don't think there's a tweak to fix it; I just don't think it's that hot a design.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
OfficeShredder
|
|
« Reply #5 on: January 17, 2007, 12:02:25 am » |
|
I think something like....
T: Add 3 mana of any color to your mana pool. This mana may only be used to play activated abilities
would still be pretty weak. And that just goes to show you people don't want mana for activated abilities.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
zimagic
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2007, 05:53:02 am » |
|
I think something like....
T: Add 3 mana of any color to your mana pool. This mana may only be used to play activated abilities
would still be pretty weak. And that just goes to show you people don't want mana for activated abilities.
Why not just make it a mirror Mishra's? Starting point: T: Add 3 colourless mana to your mana pool. This mana may not be used to cast artifact spells.You would really need a drawback to balance the power of a reusable colourless mox so I'd suggest lofe loss or similiar, though I'm sure other drawbacks could be found as life loss has been done. I thought about: T, discard an artifact card: Add 3 colourless mana to your mana pool. This mana may not be used to cast artifact spells.You can get 3 colourless that can't be used to play artifacts but to get it you need to discard an artifact. A nice contradiction and alternatively an advantage or a disadvantage given the deck you're playing. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Insert Quote here
|
|
|
|
silvernail
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2007, 09:41:46 pm » |
|
That turns any moxen or other artifact into a colorless dark ritual, which probably isnt a good thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
zimagic
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2007, 05:40:25 am » |
|
That turns any moxen or other artifact into a colorless dark ritual, which probably isnt a good thing.
True, but he is making a Workshop variant so you have to accept that he's not trying for a balanced effect. His card designs will either be excellent to broken or unplayable. It's probably not a good thing, but in a vaccum it's not all that great and, most importantly, isn't banworthy inother formats the moment it's printed (though it'd have to be watched in Ext & Leg) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Insert Quote here
|
|
|
|
parallax
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2007, 08:13:21 pm » |
|
Not every card needs to be a tournament-caliber bomb. The question isn't "Will anybody play this competetively?", it's "Will anybody play this?", and I'm sure someone would. Someone will want to use this to activate The Hive every turn as part of some nefarious Johnny five-card combo. Besides, it's actually pretty good when used to activate Signets or Basalt Monolith or some such. Besides, it can't be any worse than Untaidake, the Cloud Keeper.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
How about choosing a non-legend creature? Otherwise he is a UG instant Wrath of Frog. |
|
|
|
zimagic
|
|
« Reply #10 on: January 26, 2007, 11:15:19 am » |
|
Do we have an approach on a final wording on this?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Insert Quote here
|
|
|
|
parallax
|
|
« Reply #11 on: January 26, 2007, 03:17:36 pm » |
|
Do we have an approach on a final wording on this?
How about the wording in my first post? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
How about choosing a non-legend creature? Otherwise he is a UG instant Wrath of Frog. |
|
|
|
zimagic
|
|
« Reply #12 on: January 29, 2007, 05:18:00 am » |
|
Do we have an approach on a final wording on this?
How about the wording in my first post?  Ok, I presumed that the final wording would be put in bold like in all the other card creation threads. My bad. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Insert Quote here
|
|
|
|
Godder
|
|
« Reply #13 on: January 29, 2007, 05:43:49 am » |
|
It'll happen, but it's not so pressing currently because it hasn't changed yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
That's what I like about you, Laura - you're always willing to put my neck on the line. |
|
|
|
