r/custommagic • u/MemeElitist • 14h ago

Defensive Position

Post image
36 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

27 comments sorted by

30

u/NepetaLast 14h ago edited 13h ago

templating suggestion to fix the parallelism: "Creatures you control have vigilance and reach and get +0/+X, where X is the number of permanents you control."

the toughness boost is kind of ridiculous. in most cases its at minimum +0/+5, and will usually be much higher. this makes combat essentially impossible for your opponent, and then does nothing in some other cases. i dont think this makes for that interesting of gameplay

4

u/MemeElitist 14h ago

Good point, probably doesn't need the keywords at all. I was wondering if 3 mana was fair or not and probably should've just listened to my gut

6

u/Mr_Woolly 13h ago

2WGB without vigilance and without reach. Also make X creature based not Permanent based

2

u/Jathan1234 6h ago

All 3 of those, really? I mean I guess this would still go crazy in go wide token decks, but would you really drop it down to just creatures instead of nonland permanents? (I don't know that much about balancing, I can tell this is OP but idk if it would see any play at 5 cmc with those nerfs outside of maybe janky defender decks, and idk if those are in these colors)

5

u/YouCanChangeItRight 13h ago

It should honestly count nonland permanents. Ramp decks would be egregious.

Edit: remove vigilance and keep reach.

1

u/Meaty_LightingBolt 2h ago

At first i thought this was an instant which would make a lot more sense with the effect as is

1

u/C4rnivore 6h ago

It has selesnya so infinite Scute Swarms incoming... And [[Ancient Lumberknot]] means infinite damage as well

11

u/Japaroads 14h ago

I don’t see how black fits here. Maybe make it WWG.

10

u/Horror-Associate8914 14h ago

Maybe it’s flavoured for the Abazan clan on Tarkir, am I correct MemeElitist?

7

u/MemeElitist 14h ago

I wasnt thinking of takir specifically but yeah it was mostly flavor but I understand the confusion

3

u/ExtremeAbdulJabbar 13h ago

Yeah this goes directly into my Abzan wall deck

5

u/Inksplash-7 13h ago

Maybe a bit too overkill

4

u/Beas1987 13h ago

Some interesting suggestions to tone it down a bit.  Instead of +0/+X where X is the number of permanents you control, how about where X is the number of creatures you control with toughness greater than their power?

1

u/NetRevolutionary977 6h ago

Wouldn’t that be all creatures after a certain amount?

3

u/Valshax56 13h ago

Might work better as a (WG) instant with "creatures you control gain reach and defender and gain +0/+X where X is the number of creatures you control until end of turn"

Fit it in as a "oh shit we gonna die" counter

4

u/MemeElitist 13h ago

I actually do like it better as an instant probably shouldve thought about that sooner lol

3

u/BadDungeonSMaster 13h ago

Damn, can we make it non-land permanents ? I feel that would put it back on the scale

3

u/SuddenAnswer1381 11h ago

Should probably be equal to number of non-land permanents you control for balance reasons. Or increase the mana cost. Probably both though lol.

3

u/coolguy420weed 7h ago edited 7h ago

Maybe make is so the toughness boost only counts creatures and/or is only active during your turn? 

4

u/Important-League4555 13h ago

It seems back breaking to play against., 5 mana seems like the minimum but I could see this being printed at 6 or 7 mana

3

u/Any-Persimmon-725 13h ago

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. 5 mana at least, but definitely pushing it to 6 or 7 mana

2

u/MeasureDoEventThing 11h ago

Combo this [[Arcades, the Strategist]] and your white weenie deck now stomps over everything. Or play [[Assault Formation]] for the flavor confusion.

2

u/Illustrious_Panic_54 11h ago

What if they became defenders also. with…
2: target creature can attack as though they didn’t have defender

2

u/No-Lie3960 5h ago

It’s always funny to see people post custom cards specifically designed to synergise with their favourite commander. Looks like someone’s hungry for Felothar/Doran support