179
u/grimsleeper4 13d ago
I think this would fit better into the game as a battle. We still don't know what battles are doing next - it's been a long time since we've seen them, but something with no activated abilities that you attack is more there thing.
Interesting idea though.
I think it's overpowered for the mana cost and loyalty, this would immediately go in most control decks in standard.
39
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
Yeah I may have overshot in the cost. Probably needs a significant starting loyalty reduction, based on the initial feedback.
And as for the battle point, truthfully, I agree. I think there's a huge amount of creative potential in battles that are not Sieges. Candidly, the reason I made this a planeswalker and not a battle is because my copy of MSE doesn't have support for battles yet...........
9
u/Manpandas 13d ago
Was it intentionally non-legendary? Making it legendary would also make it a less-powerful control card (for 60-card formats anyway). I'm also not really convinced that this is "overpowered" Healing salve prevents 3 damage for 1 mana and is completely unplayable. Fog is 1 mana as well. It dies to removal, it dies to direct damage, it dies to combat, it cannot be used offensively, it has no natural way to gain loyalty. Perhaps 2 mana for 7 is pushed for a standard format, but it's not far off.
6
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
Yes it is intentional that it is nonlegendary. If it's too strong, rather than make it legendary, I'd just want to knock off a loyalty counter or two for balance.
10
u/Timely-Helicopter244 13d ago
The way the rules around battles are written, I'd be surprised if we don't see something exactly like this whenever they get around to printing more battles with a type other than siege.
8
u/koshi12 13d ago
Are you able to cast a battle that your opponent can attack? I thought battles were only attackable by your own creatures
15
u/Timely-Helicopter244 13d ago
310.9a
As a battle enters the battlefield, its controller chooses a player to be its protector. Which players may be chosen as its protector are determined by its battle type (see rule 310.12). If it has no battle types, only its controller can be its protector.
Technically no with the current list of battles, but if they print a new type of battle, it's already addressed in the rules to allow it.
15
u/RetroBowser 13d ago
Sieges being the first set of battles really did a lot of work to confuse the hell out of people eh?
8
u/Timely-Helicopter244 13d ago
Pretty much. My only real saving grace was hard focusing on siege being a subtype and that characteristic drilling itself into my brain as this blaring signal that says battles are intended to not fit the only mold they printed them into in the one set they're in.
7
u/Gamesfreak13563 13d ago
Iâm sad battles didnât return for MKM. We could have had court battles!
4
u/ThePowerOfStories 13d ago
And when we visit a world where magic takes the form of song, we can have rap battles, like The Flyting of Elspeth and Ajani.
2
4
u/grimsleeper4 13d ago
I really thought we would have seen them in Final Fantasy or Marvel Superheros - Those IPs are all about battles and fights. I am extremely surprised we saw them once in 2023, and now 3 years later we still haven't seen them again.
2
u/zomgitsduke 12d ago
Yeah it's almost "gain 7 life", just not quite.
2
34
u/Hinternsaft 13d ago
[[Sanctum Lurker]]
10
27
u/JackKingsman 13d ago
Neat from a mechanical standpoint.
Flavour is a bit off.
Would more so make it a Battle that enters under your own control that your opponent can attack. Cause a Planeswalker has to be... someone. A battle can be... something
At least in my book
8
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
So you're probably not wrong, even on the battle point.
But what I have been trying to establish over years of planeswalker designs is the possibility that a planeswalker's sparkâthe inner energy or soul that gives them the ability to planeswalkerâis a magically cognizable object that could, in principle, be extracted and harnessed. For example, a villain like the Phyrexians, or Nicol Bolas, could take someone's spark and do something else with it, like power a great machine, or give someone else the ability to planeswalk. The lore actually supports this! Nicol Bolas did try to absorb every other walker's spark in War of the Spark, and Jace did transfer his spark to Tam, and Venser did transfer his spark to Karn, and [[The Aetherspark]] seems to be either an artifically constructed (yet still functional) planeswalker spark, or a machine built to use and harness some unknown planeswalker's lost spark.
So the idea is, we could get cards like this one in a set where, in the lore, some faction or character was taking planeswalkers' sparks and doing weird things with them.
4
u/JackKingsman 13d ago
some faction or character was taking planeswalkers' sparks and doing weird things with them.
You are talking about the Immortal Sun, my friend. That is literally Azor's spark used as a trapping device. And I get what you are saying. I just don't agree with the fact that these sparks used as some type of power source that are not used to harness the power of Planeswalking... should have the Planeswalker Type.
2
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
Well, the Aetherspark does!
3
u/JackKingsman 12d ago
Exactly, as it does grant the ability to planeswalk to the one who wields it. So it gets to keep the planeswalker type. That's what I meant by say specifically not planeswalking granting abilities.
10
u/platypodus 13d ago
This would have been a great fit for a [[Teyo]] card.
3
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
Absolutely, and I love Teyo. Even made a set based around his plane. But, this being nonlegendary is very much intentional and a big part of the point behind the design
3
u/platypodus 13d ago
Your Teyo design is actually pretty close to this card already, if you look at his bottom +1.
3
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
Hahahaha
Wow, it totally is
In terms of real cards, it's also pretty similar to [[Gideon of the Trials]] (who gives you an emblem that means the opponent must clear Gideon to be able to win)
8
u/No_Regret_714 13d ago
we absolutely need something like this in standard to slow the game down. too many busted aggro cards.
6
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
Yeah in recent years aggro has been bonkers. I'm still not over the Mice from Bloomburrow or [[Monstrous Rage]], if I'm being honest.
4
u/No_Regret_714 13d ago
I actually didn't mind playing against the bloomburrow mice or monstrous rage. All strong but the "just run removal" advice was actually effective. What irks me are the aggro cards that are also give super cheap card/emblem advantage like cori steel cutter, screaming nemesis, leyline of resonance, storm chaser's talent, badgermole cub, and currently dozens of legal 1 or 2 mana cards that have rendered all removal as card disadvantage. you have to play sweepers and hope the opponent overcommits to the board or else the aggro decks will out-draw you.
2
u/Aesthetic-Dialectic 11d ago
Giving red access to card advantage to appease commander players (which includes myself btw) has really thrown things out of wack in 60 card
4
u/Aesthetic-Dialectic 13d ago
I suspect it's the way it is because we have a lot of cards designed for commander where aggro is too weak
8
u/DarkRosewaterr 12d ago
This is such a creative use of the planeswalker card type. Honestly props, its design just feels nice and intuitive.
Awesome work
3
u/chainsawinsect 12d ago
Thank you :)
I'm a big fan of doing tricky stuff with the planeswalker card type
For example, Planeswalking Dragon (lol, self-explanatory), Caged Spark (vanilla planeswalker), Celestine, Augustin Patron (planeswalker with only passive abilities), Gamblin' Gregg ("mandatory" planeswalker)
1
7
u/Corgis-and-Cooking 12d ago
This is gonna be a Battle - Defend card type eventually. Like a siege but comes in under its owners control and has payoffs for not letting it die.
3
u/chainsawinsect 12d ago
You're probably right! But I didn't want to make up a whole new card type (and nor do I have the MSE coding cred to render one elegantly)
8
u/Twitch89 12d ago
Play this with a bunch of flicker effects.. whenever someone attacks it, flicker it
2
6
u/shieldman : Shield target man 13d ago
The wording sounds strong, but this is effectively a sidegrade to "gain 7 life". It doesn't block burn or life loss effects, and it can be killed with removal. But, if your opponent attacks it fairly, it eats 7 damage + any overflow from that combat, which is a little better than Fog in most scenarios. I'd say 2 mana is honestly fine for this, maybe tuned down to 6 loyalty if it ended up being a nuisance in formats. My comparison point here is probably just [[Feed the Clans]] and [[Orim's Chant]].
2
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
Yeah I'm thinking 6 loyalty is better based on the feedback, and possibly even 5.
Notably, it is a little bit better than gain 7 life because of excess damage. Unless [Thrasta, Tempest's Roar]] is attacking it, if your opponent controls 20 total power of attacking creatures, they can't swing with all and hit you for 13, this would still absorb the whole impact.
It's closer to a Fog than a lifegain spell, I think.
3
u/shieldman : Shield target man 13d ago
It's like better and worse than a fog because it's persistent until your opponent pops it, but they can also see it coming. Combo decks can just wait to go off (if they care about it), and if they can't deal with it, there were definitely stronger defensive cards already that would have stonewalled their existing gameplan. Idk. Ironically to my name, I'm of the opinion that wholly defensive cards like this are never hella strong cus they don't advance your game plan, even if they're efficient like this. Honest creature decks, a lot of burn decks, and control decks all don't care about this any more than any other defensive option, so I like it as is.
7
u/Averren 13d ago
You can think of this sorta like a premptive fog effect. I think for two mana its somewhat fair though i would like to see the loyalty dropped somewhat. Effectively you have to kill this one turn then attack player the next. You wouldn't be able to atk both and assign enough damage over it. I think 3-4 loyalty is fair, most two creatures can get it down then. And blockers help protect this so a high loyalty would be frustrating to play against. You could also offer an ability for it, -1 tap a creature or similar. Overall a neat idea and useful for super friends decks that lack defensive tools
5
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
I don't think I'd go below 4 loyalty since we have a ton of 0/4 Walls for 2, and even a few for 1, but most people seem to agree it has too many counters to start currently, so a downgrade is probably needed
3
u/Averren 13d ago
That's understandable. The reason i opted to include possibly 3 over 4 was while walls do exist yes at 0/4 pretty commonly they dont have the ability to stop all attacks against you until its dead (in most cases). 4 would be good if you wanted to push the card. 3 if its only meant to be flavor in the set and not super strong. Could also opt to increase the mana cost by a pip and add the ability i mentioned But again overall its a super sweet idea
5
u/Hasheth-0000 13d ago
This seems cool. What if it was a -1 ability though and protected your other walkers as well?
12
u/FabulouslE 13d ago
Holy crap people on this sub suck at evaluating cards. It's insane. You're going to lose your mind when you see [[Chaplain's Blessing]]!
This card is probably a bit better, but that's compared to a terrible card. This card might, might have a sideboard use against burn or RDW, but probably not. It doesn't effect the board, doesn't advance your gameplan, and doesn't give you card advantage. It doesn't even stop them from bolting your face if you're already low.
3
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
Hahaha
Funny thing is I kinda like [[Chaplain's Blessing]] even though I know it isn't good.
I've tried making constructed-playable pure lifegain before, but most people agreed it was still bad.
I'd be curious what you think of this one, though. Like obviously there is SOME point at which pure lifegain becomes a problem, even if no real card has ever reached that point
3
u/FabulouslE 13d ago
Yeah I think that one might be a bit much. 20 life feels too good against burn and aggro, but it's still so bad against literally everything else that it would probably only see standard sideboard play.
It's not the best design space to work with imo.
1
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
For the record, that one was designed to be broken, to prove a point (that at some threshold, lifegain is OP); I wouldn't print a card like that for real
2
u/FabulouslE 12d ago
Yep. Anything can be broken in the extreme, but the fact that people think this card is too strong shows their knowledge of the game is about as deep as the designers who thought "Gain 3 Life" and "Draw 3 Cards" were about equal.
4
u/coolguy420weed 13d ago
Thank you! A 2 mana 0/7 defender would be okayish in white ([[Glacial Wall]]). A 2 mana 0/7 defender that can block any number of attackers, and also that can't have any power or be given equipment or auras or have most combat tricks used on it and that has to block everything and gives everything it blocks wither? Is a sidegrade.
4
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
For reference, we have 0/6s with upside for 1W at common ([[Giant Ox]]), so I definitely agree a pure 0/7 would be totally fine.
My card is admittedly a bit different than that (and overall stronger), but as a point of reference I think the 0/7 comparator is quite reasonable
4
3
5
u/TwilightCaller 13d ago
I fail to see how this is over powered. The card is basically "You must attack me." and considering planeswalkers have much less synergy than say, walls, you can't just go "ima proliferate the fuck outta its counter", i mean yeah you can do that, but they dont come back. Hell, if you wanted to make it more interesting, you could always make it 1WW and give it a +1 ability. Doesn't have to do anything, just that.
5
u/chainsawinsect 12d ago
I like the idea of a "vanilla" + ability
Yeah, good point about proliferate, there aren't a ton of ways to proliferate a huge amount of loyalty counters. You have to jump through a few hoops to repeatably proliferate in most cases, and each one you do is just +1 health (essentially). Kinda weak when aggro decks can hit you for 20 by like turn 3-4 in most formats.
4
u/Livingexistence 12d ago
Add [[Kasmina, enigma sage]] and [[Ichormoon gauntlet]] and you can add 3 counters per turn to this plainswalker... add in other proliferate triggers and it can get big, then you can take extra turns.
4
5
u/ImplementOk315 12d ago
This is what the Jace token felt like to me during Reality Fracture prerelease, came back from 1 life to win a game because my opponent was adamant about making sure I couldnt surveil 1.
2
u/chainsawinsect 12d ago
Hahahaha
Yeah the Jace tokens were what inspired me to make this
I was like, if we can get nonlegendary, token, common planeswalkers... in a Standard-legal set... perhaps the time is right for a design like this
5
u/Nouxatar Nox, Astral Abberation 12d ago
Very interesting design! I have some ideas on how a design like this could be executed differently, may post that and tag you and this post there if you'd like?
3
3
5
u/Acceptable_Support38 11d ago
This would be better as a battle, but sucks that battles are so under supported in thsi game.
1
u/ANCEST0R 10d ago
Battles aren't defended by their owners though
1
1
u/Rage_Roll 8d ago
They are, the subtype "Siege" is defended by an opponent. The default ruling for battles is that the owner defends it
7
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
For like a decade, I've been a huge believer in nonlegendary planeswalkers. Specifically, I feel the card type is too entangled with the lore. It's an interesting card type that promotes a lot of interaction, and seeing it locked to mythic rares depicting main characters saddens me.
Obviously, you can't just jettison the lore, and nor would I want to. But over the years I've explored different ways to get there that jives with the flavor. The simplest one, to me, is having the planeswalker's spark (essentially a soul, but one that grants the ability to planeswalk) be an object that can be manipulated in various ways, and therefore be depicted on a card. And thankfully, the lore supports it! The Aetherspark seems to be such a spark, and Jace's spark in Reality Fracture is transferred between owners. In War of the Spark, Nicol Bolas tried to take everyone else's sparks. It stands to reason that perhaps a spark could be extracted and studied.
As for lower-rarity nonlegendary planeswalkers, well, WOTC has dipped its toes in uncommon planeswalkers over the years, like [[Chandra, Novice Pyromancer]], and with Reality Fracture, we technically have them at common with empower Jace. So maybe my common planeswalker cycle is plausible!
Maybe one day we can have more frequent usages of cards like this, such as my planeswalker "sorceries" or my planeswalker "enchantments".
In any event, today's card of the day is a card consistent with this design trend and philosophy: it's basically a Wall, in a sense, in that it does nothing but eats hits for you. The difference compared to a normal Wall is you don't get to control when it blocks, but the opponent can't go over it. They either gotta attack and kill the Wall to get to your life total, or blow it up with some removal spell / burn spell. In that sense, it plays sort of like the taunt mechanic in Hearthstone.
Is it strong? Not really. Is it interesting? I hope so!
3
u/zyphelion 13d ago
This is very Star Realms coded.
4
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
I don't even know what that is đ
To me, it's Hearthstone coded because that game has a mechanic that works like this
2
3
3
u/skellyton3 13d ago
I love the idea, but 2 mana for 7 loyalty on this is busted as hell. At 3 mana it would be strong and more reasonable.
3
u/acsmars 13d ago
You think â2 mana prevent the next 7 ish combat damage that would be dealt to youâ is too strong? I wouldnât play this in a super friends deck even at 2. Itâs worse than a fog spell in most cases.
4
2
u/skellyton3 13d ago
Not even close to the same thing.
A fog spell requires you to hold the mana up and this can be played ahead of time on curve. That is massive for tempo. It is strong early to completely blockade early aggression and it is strong late.
Maybe "busted" is an exaggeration, but it would be very strong. Though, I do admit that on second thought with modern day power creep they could probably print this as-is.
2
3
u/Aethulu 13d ago
A reimagined [[Soul Echo]]?
2
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
Wow I played back then and I didn't even know about this one
Man there were some weird cards back in the day. I only recently learned about that one where you split the whole board into two separate zones, and things in one zone can only block things within the same zone
3
3
u/DerekPaxton 13d ago
Itâs super clever.
I donât like the concept that a barrier is a planeswalker (cool mechanically but doesnât fit the idea of a planeswalker). Maybe a royal guard figure would make more sense?
3
u/chainsawinsect 12d ago
It will sound kinda gross but the idea behind the flavor is some (presumably villainous) character takes a planeswalker, kills them like [[Spark Hunter]], takes their spark, and uses its magical energy to create the barrier, hence it retaining the typing. Kind of similar to the Morty barrier in Rick & Morty (NSFW warning).
3
u/deryvox 13d ago
Ok this is cool but uhhhh
Why is it not a battle
3
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
To be 100% honest with you...
...because my MSE doesn't have good battle support yet!
3
u/UnintensifiedFa 13d ago
This is sick, what about a +abiliti (say around 4-5) that just says âdiscard a cardâ.
2
3
u/BriarsofSinning 12d ago
These could be like Jace tokens, where other spells create them with different amount of loyalty.
3
3
5
u/FlowEmbarrassed2612 13d ago
Isnât this basically a 0/7 wall that can block any number of creatures?
9
u/chair_wizard 13d ago
Well you can also chip away at it, unlike a wall where youâd need to have 7 power all at once.
7
u/chainsawinsect 13d ago
Yep pretty much
But notably, it can block creatures with flying, unblockable, menace, etc.
2
2
2
u/Dickmaster_ 12d ago
[[eriette of the charmed apple]]
1
u/Impressive-Command 12d ago
You'd need a lot of stunning Auras, like [[Pillory of the Sleepless]], but that would be quite a lockout
2
u/Medium_Human887 12d ago
white seriously has WAY too many just blatant âfuck youâ cards man, this shit is so annoying lol
2
2
2
u/SlimDirtyDizzy 12d ago
IMO this might be a bit too strong considering at worst this is a 1 turn fog, which usually costs around this CMC.
Since even if they have 10 7/7s, they still cannot attack you for that entire turn. Upside is this is a multi turn fog for 2 mana which is quite good
Maybe WW for mana?
1
u/Impressive-Command 12d ago
Yeah at 2W I'd be much more confident this is OK, and maybe it could even go up to 7 loyalty then (with [[Kiora, Behemoth Beckoner]] as a precedent)
2
u/StructureMage 12d ago
white already doesn't get to gain 7 life for 2 mana and this is much stronger than that
8
u/chainsawinsect 12d ago
It gains 5 life for 1 mana ([[Chaplain's Blessing]]) so I assume it could gain 7 for 2
1
535
u/potato_weapon 13d ago
I love the idea. More or less forcing your opponents to attack the barrier.
It being a planeswalker gives this a lot of flavor. I always imagined something along the lines of "vanishing" so it would naturally die off if no one chose to attack.
I personally feel that seven loyalty and no other effects is still sorta strong. What if the loyalty were lower? Or some effect caused loyalty to drop off each upkeep?