An all-in card for three wishes decks:
And of course you could have similar cards for two color decks.
1 Like
The Color of Magic seems very awkward. How do you even deckbuild with that in mind?
Playing it means you can no longer use Three Wishes as wellâŠ
I had a somewhat related idea - on my âneeds a rethinkâ list:
Itâs probably a bit too powerful. Even without the land conversion it might be worth it for some decks.
For instance, you could dual-color and have say all early green and late blue cards. You reroll for early greens, keep using your greens, wait till your hand is full of blues, then switch.
Yeah, it has a lot of possibilities.
This card below was purely designed to synergize with Illusion of Grandeur, without being restricted to them.
Leap: This creature can jump over friendly creatures on adjacent hexagons, provided the hexagon behind it is empty.
Leap only works in straight lines, like Charge 2.
Edit: A green card with event synergy, but not to the extent you see on blue or yellow.
Edit:
A control card for Green, even if nowhere near as potent as the options for other colours. Its Last Word ability uses some mechanics similar to the multicoloured elementals Serrakura posted a month ago, so if it dies on a desert that becomes a Savannah, if on a mountain it becomes a Taiga and if on a Lake it becomes a Rainforest. If the Blooming Treant dies on a forest, it remains a single forest.
I hope these mechanics will make it into the game somehow.
Also, first time posting something online ever.
Hope you guys can see it and like it 
.
Fun with custom tiles. Probably a tad strong with that secondary effect, though.
Apex Predator and Wish decks love it, not to mention Azuria I created earlier.
Add âmust be created on a forest or lakeâ and it might be balanced. As it is I agree itâs really powerful.
Aside: Iâm actually wanting a negative tile of some sort - like a wasteland or something where you canât summon or convert to another type. Or maybe it deals damage.
That was actually the original idea; creatures from your opponent take 1 damage when on a Glade, but I thought that didnât really fit the idea of a magical glade.
I also played with the idea of friendly creatures gaining +1 HP when summoned on that tile.
Some cards you seriously need to be careful in playing. This is one of them. Sure itâs bulky and can take a hit and protect you for cheap, but do you really want to hand your opponent all that Faeria?
It may need to hit harder to be worth it, and I donât know if it should be Epic or less rare. Maybe this card is better off as Common or Uncommon?
Edit: Now weâre at it, converted four old ideas to something for Faeria:
And then I was playing around with the idea of rekindling:
I like the idea of adding cards to your hand, or opponentâs hand. This is not really a card that should be allowed to be put in a deck, being like Explore in that sense. Similarly, it can be tied to a Gift or Last Word ability.
Iâd like to be more original than with Bringer of Dread above, though, or even Intrepid Explorer and Yakkapult, and I have a concept in mind.
Since battles are no place for children to be:
Picture by Anastasiya Sparrow.
In regards to the concept; something like this, though Iâm not quite happy with it:
We donât have a creature that has a negative effect every turn, except for Shaytan Demon. It also has a brutal first effect that requires you to be careful when playing it. It may need to be Legendary rank so you canât put 3 in a deck, too.
Edit: Talking about destructive characters, hereâs another one.
Maybe donât burn witches?
1 Like
My old cards are in here too for the sake of completion. Some are reworked or re-rated, but more rarity changes than anything else. Strangely, the lower the rarity the lower the percentage of cards I already posted here (most of the cards I posted here are Epics).
It may be a bit small for a full card set (53 cards excluding the orphan).
Maybe because lower rarity cards tend to have less flashy effects?
What do you guys think?
What does armor mean? I was actually playing with it in my own cards, my definition was basically subtract X from each combat damage taken. So it doesnât affect spell damage, only combat.
- Canopy Stalker - Fine.
- Highwayman - Somewhat UP IMHO. Similar to Deepwood Grizzly after 1 combat, worse from there on. Could be used simply as a feed-the-forest alternative if youâve already got 3 willows.
- Auroraâs Jellyfish - Seems fine, but doesnât seem Aurora-ish as it doesnât have anything unusual.
- Furry Demon - Fine.
- Flower of Health - Very slightly OP IMHO, with the divine. However itâs hard to figure out how Iâd see it balanced (due to discreteness). Maybe 3 faeria 5 health?
- Armored Tortoise - Seems fine using armor as described above.
- Spikadillo - Seems fine using armor as described above.
- Seiferâs Brigadier - Personally I donât like cards that directly reference other cards. Balance seems OK though.
- Macho Frog - Not sure if itâs a bit UP. Is it meant to have Jump?
- Cover of Rain - Slightly OP I think. Also, the name doesnât seem to fit the effect IMHO.
- Tiki Witch Doctor - A bit OP I think. Willow is -1f -1 health and doesnât have the heals.
- Cunning Explorer - Fine.
- Ancient Vulture - UP IMHO. Flying isnât worth much.
- Hammerwielding Brute - Fine.
- Sandspeaker - Close to a yellow Bloomsprite. I guess itâs not a color identity thing though. Either balanced or very slightly UP - not sure, depends on how good a random yellow card is.
- Lake Guardian - Seems very easy to meet the condition, so Iâm going to say slightly OP.
- Boisterous Pirate - Fine. 2 damage is often just not enough, but that makes it balanced I guess.
- Mountain Yak - Fine. We need some cards like this IMHO.
- Magnificent Brawler - Just OP IMHO, as itâs better than Thyrian. Maybe 7M. But Iâm not sure about color identity.
- Lucky Clover - Fine.
My favourites would be Boisterous Pirate and Mountain Yak. Cover of Rain is a nice mechanic too, although IMHO some tweaking required.
1 Like
Thanks for the comments.
I explained Armor, Leap and Amphibious alongside the Epic cards. You may want to scroll down a bit? 
Armor reduces X damage from anything - this includes Groundslinger and the likes as well. This indeed means that some cards will really struggle with that massive tortoise ^^ . Red and Green both need to get a bit more creative, which may spice things up as itâs quite the hard counter for Crackthorn. However, this may be too good, and then itâd be scaled down into combat only, as you implied.
Macho Frog: Yes, itâs meant to have Jump. I probably also should have named it Triton Macho.
Tiki Witch Doctor: Willow has Taunt though, which is very useful.
Magnificient Brawler: Oops. Thatâs meant to be 7 mountains. I even considered 8M but thought that was too much.
Boisterous Pirate: Glad you like it!
Lake Guardian: Triton Warrior has the same statline (4/4) for the same land cost, and has Jump for 1 additional Faeria cost.
Mountain Yak: Yes, I feel the same.
IMHO Triton Warrior is slightly OP already. Again, balancing is difficult due to discreteness. Maybe the warrior needs 3 lakes. I think Jump is usually worth more than 1f.
For Armor, I thought that reducing only combat seemed to increase the differences between armored and non-armored - adding a dimension where youâre better off using direct damage vs armor and combat vs non-armor. It also seems aesthetically like some magical effects (eg, soul drain) shouldnât care about armor - and all the fire ones, well itâs not nice to be inside armor in a fire.
Amphibious seems like a good one - pretty obvious.
Leap is very, um, geometric? Feels a bit like Chinese Checkers. The destination must be directly opposite, right? While it can add strategy it does add complexity and itâs a bit unintuitive. But then again, I have a much worse keyword I was wanting to add. Not sure.
One Iâm just not sure what to call it. Aterragenic. Means it doesnât help you make land if its standing on an enemy land. Not really sure if its worth it, but it lets you make wierd ultra-mobile creatures without having to worry theyâll break the balance by dropping lands right next to the enemy orb.
I can agree with that. I feel 3 Faeria for a 4/4 (usually) is fair since it does require a few lakes.
Yes. I see that logic, and I wondered for a long time whether Armored should block only combat or everything. I am really undecided on the matter and I have been for a long time - which is probably why I waited this long to post something with Armor abilities to begin with.
I think Armor 2 is a bit brutal if it reduces all damage by 2 though - whatâs Red going to do against that? Meteor?
Yes, I wondered why Amphibious was absent for the longest of times. We have aquatic and creatures that can move onto land - why not one that can do both?
No, you jump over the adjacent creature with Leap. Itâs like Charge 2 but it requires a friendly creature on the adjacent tile to work. Requires you to think about what you are doing, especially on the only creature that I currently gave that ability (as she also deals double damage on forests).
Aterragenic! That name! Otherwise I like that concept.
Though Dash and the likes already exist and already allow you to drop lands everywhere. Scourgeflame has Haste with Charge too.
I did create a creature that has both Dash and Charge, so it has some ridiculous mobility with a strong statline, but requiring four deserts and two mountains makes sure it doesnât come too early (which slightly screws the synergy with Scourgeflame, which is done on purpose).
Pretty sure I know why amphibious isnât there - itâs pretty much identical to flying.
The only difference would be on effects that relate to the âflyingâ keyword, like Golden Aviary.
One way to make it interesting would be to allow it to switch from land to water ⊠once. So if you summon an amphib on land you can move it to water where it immediately loses amphibious and becomes aquatic - and vice versa.
For leap, thatâs what I meant - destination is directly opposite (on the other side) of the creature being jumped. So my other comments related to that.
Aterragenic could be renamed: Unworldly. Unlandish. Aterric. Disgenic. Still canât think of a good one.
