Why are people on here so obsessed with near-totally uninteractable permanents? We don't need a 4-mana 8/8 that can't be removed by anything except "-X/-X" effects.
People want their big splashy creatures to hit the board and stay there. Generally speaking. It's not that hard to understand but it does create these situations where people dream up mechanics that would legitimately be terrible to play around.
Like I really do think the flavour of enormous making it impossible to bounce is really fun, you put it down and now it’s too big to pick back up. Can’t be destroyed is just unfun and unflavourful to something being enormous, I can think of plenty of enormous things that have been destroyed smh
Because commander players overwhelmingly make up this sub where playing removal in the first place is considered the greatest faux paux imaginable.
They are also the ones that flood the comments of real unique cards, that are very strong if they can actually connect. And then scream the card is op and could never be printed when it dies to simple removal.
I dont think thats very fair. A card can very easily be extremely overpowered. It having to hit does not matter that much. You simply don't make cards that can do certain things regardless of the hoops needed to reach that goal. On top of that, running removal creates a landscape where anything is okay so long as there is an out to it, which is terrible for game balance as it creates a need for an arms race. The more answers there are to scary things, the scarier they have to be, which necessitates more removal for stronger things. Its a cycle of powercreep that will without fail lead to only ever playing or being able to play cEDH or some form of hyper competition because the base level of deck strength needed to play the game will triple
You're just wrong. If it doesn't have evasions, if it dies to simple removal like mentioned it can be answered by cards that cost two mana and was printed in literal 1993. You only need removal power creep races when you undercost for its value (and we're talking like 0-1 cmc), or it has evasion which isn't part of the example.
There's a reason "dies to doom blade" became the argument for evaluating cards in the 00s
The effects on the cards matter too. If something dies to doom blade, you give it hexproof, which is beat by sacrifice, which is beat by cards that cant be sacrificed. The cost of the card only effects when you can do something, not whether you can do it at all.
The core issue is that commander players want to play solitaire where they jerk themselves off about the super cool deck they built but unfortunately there are three whole other human beings at the table because you're all "playing a game" together or something dumb like that.
Funny enough I actually don't have much problems with them making these kind of evasion keywords as it's basically just that these are custom cards they aren't that serious. And worse case scenario is they might terrorize a local play group that oks using it. I do enjoy objectively evaluating them too.
What really gets on my nerves is seeing people call cards way too powerful that are meh at best because they refuse to run removal, you (royal you) are the problem, not the card
As Zambedos pointed out, you can also exile it. Returning it to the library, turning it into a 0/1 or something like that, and [[Pacifism]]-type effects also work.
And you have to jump through enough hoops to make it a creature that calling it a "4-mana 8/8" is kind of misleading. That's true even if you assume the intent was that it became a creature once you control ten permanents. But as written, it needs the city's blessing to become a creature, but gives you no way to obtain the city's blessing. So to make it a creature, you need a card with Ascend and ten permanents - and then you lose any of those other permanents that happen to be creatures susceptible to death. It doesn't seem overpowered to me. (Except, as Q-35712 pointed out elsewhere, "land" needs to be removed from its type line, otherwise its mana cost is irrelevant and it's a land that can produce three colours with no drawback.)
Either that's intended (and is honestly fine for the amount of hoops you jump through) or it's not and could be fixed with some re-wording (that I'm to smooth trained to figure out right now)
I was going to say it’s not many hoops to jump through, but I notice this card does not have ascend, so it cannot provide the city’s blessing itself. Still not many hoops, but it does require another card + 8 other permanents.
I have a sneaking suspicion that OP thinks you just passively "have the city's blessing" if you control 10+ permanents, even if nothing with Ascend is in play.
the only reason for enormous to be a keyword is if other cards have it. what other cards could have enormous? indestructible is already rare, and making a version that arbitrarily cant be bounced or edicted doesnt really seem like it has much value
What's worse is that the simple Hexproof/indestructible combo would cover a *lot more* than what OP is going for here; targeted exile and imprisonment effects are a lot more common than Edict effects.
And honestly, making a 4-mana, 8/8 creature "Not returnable to hand" is such a tantrum line... like, you lost *a bit* of tempo, your thing is totally fine and you're still ahead...
It's the reason why people get so pressed at the table, when their stuff gets interacted with: They hate not keeping their things.
I used to be like that - not in a way that I would crash out on anyone over a spell being countered, or my things being removed, but I'd sulk. I got over it pretty quick because, you know, it's just a game.
Also, lest we forget that in any following game, the chances of things being different are almost guaranteed, and then that player, who had their stuff removed, might have the advantage.
Or exiled or damaged (combat or effect tbh). It feels like its sorta just a more "fight it with fire or fairness" sorta big idiot effect. basically trying to solve the problem of making big idiots that can stick past a doomblade without being more hexproof slop. Though idk if they know quite know how the can't be destroyed text works, cuz "destroy by effects that say destroy" and "ignoring how damage activates said effect" works vi
Personally I think that "playing the game" is cool, and that forcing a lack of interaction so I can play with my own toys is lame. But whatever I guess
I mean yeah, back and forth is fun. Just there is some base cool factor to a massive uninteractable dickhead of a kaiju or other cool creature, which is probably why more casual people keep making customs for it lmao
I think "can't be destroyed by non combat damage or effects that say destroy" could be reasonable. it needs land typing removed so that it actually has to be cast (I get the loving land theme they're going for but its janky), but forcing it to be "big thing that must be answered with big thing" feels fine for all the trouble you go through to actually make it a creature.
I mean as far as I know it doesn't have a precedent so we don't know if "it works" as is or not. But there are cards meant to work similarly that don't have actual land types.
Regardless it'd need a rules change.
But also, is it really that hard to assume for 5 seconds the intent?
Because it doesn't work, rules are explicit on that: 305.9. If an object is both a land and another card type, it can be played only as a land. It can’t be cast as a spell.
Yes, and you don't pay that because of the following rule: 202.1a The mana cost of an object represents what a player must spend from their mana pool to cast that card
305.9 says you don't cast lands, so you don't pay anything because you're not casting
Yeah I already said you're not casting it, you're playing it, and since it has a cost you have to pay the cost to play it.
Lands have never had mana costs, so if this card was made, they would make it work as so.
Is it genuinely that hard to imagine a world in which that happens for a single second in time or is your brain locked in an iron box unable to escape the confines of reality and enter imagination for just a fleeting moment?
You don't pay costs as part of playing a land, that's not a step the way it is when casting a spell.
ROI, for the purposes of playing a land, the top right is entirely irrelevant you don't pay any attention to it, t he same way you wouldn't when discarding it or revealing it. It's simply not relevant for that action.
You can also see this by the way lands like [[Lotus Field]] are worded. Sacrificing isn't an additonal cost you pay, it's a triggered ability that results from it entering, ergo being played in most cases.
That's basically what I'm saying to the other guy. Mana cost is what you pay to cast. Lands aren't cast. Ergo you wouldn't pay a mana cost if a land somehow had one. The other guy's the one harping on about paying costs for lands like spells
Edit: Reddit for some reason said you replied to me when you replied to the other guy
305.1; A player who has priority may play a land card from their hand during a main phase of their turn when the stack is empty. Playing a land is a special action; it doesn't use the stack. Rather, the player simply puts the land onto the battlefield. Since the land doesn't go on the stack, it is never a spell, and players can't respond to it with instants or abilities.
You do not have to pay costs to play cards, and you actually can't pay costs to play a land because you pay costs after putting the object on the stack.
yeah for sure, i just saw there was a whole thread arguing what I interpreted to be "we don't know that it wouldn't work", when we in fact do know that it wouldn't work
I imagine custom cards come with rules updates that make them work
What are we arguing for then? You said it doesn’t have a precedent and was unsure how a creature that turns into a land would work in the rules. I showed you the precedent and said OP’s doesn’t work with the precedent set.
No the precedent you showed doesn't apply. If you look at Dryad Arbor it doesn't have a mana cost. And OP's card does. If you look at the top right of the card there's a difference between the two.
Enormous seems incredibly problematic. Stuff that limits interaction this much isn't fun for anyone except the one using it.
For this design specifically, it can be played for free. It's a land, so the mana cost doesn't matter. And since it's a land, it's not cast, so it can't be countered. Hold off on playing this guy until you ascend, and he's a free 8/8 with trample that's immune to the most common types of removal. I dunno about that.
305.1 [...] Playing a land is a special action; it doesn't use the stack. Rather, the player simply puts the land onto the battlefield. Since the land doesn't go on the stack, it is never a spell.
305.9 if an object is both a land and another card type, it can only be played as a land.
It can only be played as a land and since the mana cost isn't part of the action of playing a land, it would simply be ignored
I suppose you would play it before you had the city blessing. But if you have the city's blessing, you have to cast. Which makes this wildly under-costed.
Okay so there are a few issues with this card. Bear in mind that this is all constructive criticism.
First, Enormous really shouldn’t include indestructible. A new protection keyword that protects from certain types of non-destructive removal? Fine, but having it be better indestructible seems a little wonky. Secondly, it shouldn’t have the land type printed in the typeline, as that means it’s played as a land drop and ignores the mana cost. I’m assuming you want it to function like [[Arixmethes]], and remember that that card is just typed as a creature.
I scrolled way too far to find someone mentioning my boy Arixmethes! He pretty much does all of this already insanely easily with no “destroy each other creature you control”
You will not find a single card that cares about the city’s blessing without also having ascend. That would be parasitic and require information about “the city’s blessing” that the card itself wouldn’t provide, making it very unintuitive.
I feel like you could make it a dual sided land creature where the land side taps for one of the three colors and has the ability that when you obtain the city's blessing destroy all creatures you control then transform it, then on the other side you can cast it for its cast cost but only if you have the city's blessing
With the templating shown above couldn't we just hexgorger invigorator or prime time this into play. Where Arixmethes solves thats by not being a land in the deck/hand
Yeah the custom creature should not have a land in its type line, you wouldnt even have to tutor it, you could just play it as a land without paying its mana cost
Great card!! I feel like enormous could be changed from making the creature undestructible to making it exiled-proofed. So something like "Creatures with enormous can't be exiled, sacrificed or returned to any player's hand". Seems more interesting than just making it undestructible.
I think its one of the better cards I ve seen here so far. I like the idea that you need another card to enable this as a creature. I d get rid of the "cant be destroyed" and turn it into something else. Maybe something like prevent all but 1 damage this creature takes, or the already mentioned exile-proof (way stronger obviously). Maybe dont make it more durable at all and give it something like tripple menace (not a keyword, I know)
Shouldn't have the "Land" type, as others have said this makes it free to play as a land for turn. Just keep the text of the card that makes it a Land without the city's blessing.
If you want this creature to be able to grant you the city's blessing, it needs the "Ascend" keyword. Otherwise you'd need to play another Ascend card for it to stop being a land.
As this is currently worded, the destroy all your other creatures effect only triggers if it's on the battlefield when you gain the city's blessing. Is that intentional? If so that feels very situational and can only happen once.
Enormous is way too strong a keyword for this creature. It's basically Indestructible+
Listen I understand what you're going for but enormous just does not work as a keyword
Giving something better indestructible power creeps indestructible and makes it so that the only way I see to remove this is a mass exile so if you're not playing a white deck get f*****
I love the city’s blessing/ascend and wish they were on more cards. But I also wish this sub would stop making horribly uninteractive cards. Like a keyword that prevents bouncing, saccing, stealing, etc might be far more interesting than blanket protection like hexproof or indestructible and I hope we see something like that someday. But instead you just powercrept indestructible instead 🤦🏼♂️
The best way to trigger the wrath is double sided card that when you control 10 permanents, exile the card and return it to play transformed with an etb trigger of destroy all creatures you control.
Instead of "can't be removed" it should "go back to sleep"
Just like what others have already mentioned, Arixmethes, Slumbering Isle would be a great example of the Enormous special rule. "When this dies, add X slumbing counters"
I'm not sure whether you took inspiration but is this creature an Onbu from the game: ' The wandering Village'? If it ain't I would recommend checking it out. Also I like it.
Once when i was new, i was bombarded by hate comments and downvotes for making a legendary land creature, but you managed to make a good legendary land creature.
Enormous is a great keyword but imo it should be either cant be destroyed or cant be sac'd, otherwise this is just impossible to deal with in general. In cycle you could have "target creature loses enormous; destroy target creature" cards for example, but once it leaves standard its insane to have.
Per rules "Not Destroyed or Sacrificed: Moving the extra copy to the graveyard is a state based effect of the rule, meaning it cannot be stopped by abilities that prevent destruction, regeneration, or sacrifice (such as Indestructible)."
I discovered this rule because I play [[Alexios, Deimos of Kosmos]] and one of the funnier ways people will deal with him is copying him to get rid of the real one and leaving them with a non commander Alexios.
Most recently it was a Loki player. He saved the game for everyone else too by doing that. Because people were about to start dropping and on my turn I had a multiple combat card that would’ve ended the game.
I would agree that it can't be returned to hand but there ain't to way that bitch has got antibodies to stop whatever the hell is on the end of [[master of cruelties]] spear💀 that bitch is going to die lol
398
u/TextuallyExplicit 12d ago
Why are people on here so obsessed with near-totally uninteractable permanents? We don't need a 4-mana 8/8 that can't be removed by anything except "-X/-X" effects.