Dice Storm

[zimagic]

Since the anti Storm life gain card I have been thinking a bit about trying to get around storm without a stiffle effect and had a few ideas. I wanted your opinion on these cards:

Desperate Risk

As an additional cost to playing ~this~, discard your hand.
Split Second
Roll a dice. Put copies of target spell with Storm on the stack where is the number you rolled. Choose new targets for each of those copies.

My other version was something like this:
Minimum Risk

Split Second
Roll a dice. If a spell is copied more than times this turn, where is what you rolled, counter all copies.

The second one is not exactly what I want to do but I can't get the wording right and am not sure whether it's just bad. Basically I want to put a cap on the number of copies they can make, eg: you roll a 4, you counter all copies after 4 so your opponent gets the original spell & 4 copies only.

As it reads now, if you roll a 1, all copies made will be countered so it's a Stifle which is not what I want.

So help on the wording & suggestions on the cards would be appreciated.

[Ephraim]

The singular form of 'dice' is 'die' and you'd need to specify how many sides the die should have.

That aside, Wizards has stated in the past that the cards from Unglued that required you to use dice were the least popular from the set.  If we're going to explore this avenue, I think that it ought to be with the utmost caution.

Regarding your specific implementations, I am extremely unfond of Desperate Risk.  It is a single application card with an unpopular mechanic and it doesn't really feel like a risk to me.  Do Storm decks really need any additional help to be effective?

As far as Minimum Risk goes, I don't think that there's a clean way to word it.  The best I can think of is something like this:  Roll a 6-sided die.  Until the end of turn, if a spell would be copied, if it has been copied X times this turn, where X is the number you rolled, instead it is not copied.

[Anusien]

I'm skeptical of this.  It's a avenue that can potentially be explored, but this particular avenue (Desperate Risk) is rather swingy.  It's essentially all-in, even more so than casting Tendrils for 20 with no backup.  Current thoughts on Magic design and development are moving away from the extraordinarily swingy or luck-based Magic (at least, once both players sit down.  With matchups, it's all in the air).  I'd rather see something like:

Roll a six-sided die and deal that much damage to target opponent.

For RR, that has the potential to be the most efficient burn spell ever, or an incredibly weak spell, but it's still just a spell that domes the opponent.  In other words, when I created just now I tried to focus on something where random chance determines how effective you are at doing one specific thing.  If you can target creatures it becomes pretty miserable since sometimes it's just not going to kill something.  Against creatures, you're going to randomly deal 6 to a 1/1 and feel upset when you can't deal 3 to a 3/3.  When it goes against players it's just about hitting them for some amount of damage.

[Toad]

Competitive Magic shouldnt be about being lucky with dices. Randomness is boring and most of the players do not like it in the game.

[zimagic]

Competitive Magic shouldnt be about being lucky with dices. Randomness is boring and most of the players do not like it in the game.

Ok, I think this is a pretty comprehensive thumbs down for these cards/ideas.

I’ll go back to the drawing board.

Thanks for the imput guys.