Blast of Will

[jro]

I know that suggesting pitch spell counterspell variants is somewhat tedious, but this struck me as an interesting variant.  For one thing, it's not ever really free.

Blast of Will
XU
Instant
You may remove a card in your hand from the game rather than paying X in Blast of Will's mana cost.  If you do, X is that card's converted mana cost.
Counter target mana spell with converted mana cost X.

So the idea is that countering a 3cc spell either costs 3U or U and a 3 cost card from your hand.  If anyone has a better idea of how to word this it would be much appreciated.  So it's not ever a "free" counterspell.

There are three cards that I think this is worth comparing to: Spell Blast, Spell Burst, and Disrupting Shoal.  Spell Burst is strictly better than Spell Blast, and more recent, so I think that's a better point of comparison.  The "non-pitch" mode of this is just a non-buyback Spell Burst.  The pitch mode is a little more flexible than Disrupting Shoal.  Significantly, you can pitch a non-blue card.  That makes this card playable in Xu decks, whereas other pitch spells demand Ux.  I think that's probably okay.

Current Wording:
Blast of Will
U
Instant
As an additional cost to cast Blast of Will, pay X mana or discard a card with converted mana cost X.
Counter target spell with converted mana cost X.

[zeus-online]

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=74128

Check it out, it's called disrupting shoal

[Chill79]

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=74128

Check it out, it's called disrupting shoal

So it's not ever a "free" counterspell.

The pitch mode is a little more flexible than Disrupting Shoal.  Significantly, you can pitch a non-blue card.  

Reading is tech but seriously what he is trying is sort counter that cost's atleast U+another card when cast in pitch mode.

[zeus-online]

Well it is very similar. But i guess the difference is big enough to justify making the card.

[Anusien]

Why are you suggesting a strictly better version of Disrupting Shoal? This part is not made clear.

[jro]

Why are you suggesting a strictly better version of Disrupting Shoal? This part is not made clear.

It is not strictly better than Disrupting Shoal.  You can play Disrupting Shoal with zero mana available.  You cannot play this with zero mana available.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

Reading is tech I fail.

[Matt]

Reading is tech I fail.

At least you're not alone!

[Anusien]

If this many people didn't notice the distinction between this and Disrupting Shoal, it's not printable.

[jro]

If this many people didn't notice the distinction between this and Disrupting Shoal, it's not printable.

As always, context is everything.  If there were a cycle of "almost free" pitch spells so that the alternate cost mechanic was something players could see in other ways, I think it could get printed.  Additionally, if anyone has suggestions to make the functionality clearer (and seem less like Disrupting Shoal), I would be glad to hear them.

For example:

Blast of Will
U
Instant
As an additional cost to cast Blast of Will, pay X mana or discard a card with converted mana cost X.
Counter target spell with converted mana cost X.

In fact, I think I like this wording better.  I'm not sure if it works in the rules, or if the templating is proper, but I'm going to update the current wording to reflect this change.

[smasher]

I like the idea of more free or almost free alternate costs.

I think we got some decent trap cards already from the past couple sets but it seems like something with room to expand upon. Seems like the best way to give a card multiple casting costs. It also allows each card in the cycle to have a different alternate cost based on its intended use and strength as a card.

[Darkenslight]

What about this card?

Dispelling Trap   
Instant - Trap
If more than one spell was cast this turn, you may discard a nonland card with converted mana cost X instead of paying its X cost.
Counter target spell with converted mana cost X.