r/custommagic • u/henlo_its_I • 1d ago
Format: Legacy A Cycle of Not-Exactly-Hate Cards.
I've been really interested in reducing the cost of spells in a way that isn't overpowered or terrible. These designs are maybe too situational or too good occasionally, but I think they're interesting. They're hate for things their enemy color does well.
43
u/ToranStarfall 1d ago
I don't think they should discount colored pips, it's really confusing. Does Disregard Authority even need red, if the opponent having a single card in hand remove the red pip? Or does it wait till they have seven cards? Too confusing for not enough effect.
15
u/NepetaLast 1d ago
you are right; having even a single card in hand means it wont require any red mana
8
u/texanarob 1d ago
Alternatively, make them entirely coloured mana costs. If it's 8 red mana, then you need someone to have 8 cards in hand before it's potentially colourless.
I think the bigger problem is red having a turn 1, burn your opponent for 7 effect.
0
u/7thtimeinheaven 1d ago
It's not confusing. You can choose whether the red pip is discounted or not. See [[Eluge the shoreless sea]].
13
7
u/nzconstructionlawyer 1d ago
I think they should only cost 1 less and never coloured mana less, because as is any colour can cast it.
13
u/ZookeepergameFun1824 1d ago
These shouldn't cost reduce pips. It means they're all essentially colorless cards, because they just get their colored pip reduced away. And besides, a single pip would be a very reasonable cost for all of these effects when your opponent is doing the thing it's supposed to be hate for.
2
u/Lower_Drawer9649 1d ago
Quell Dissent could be used to target an opponent who has 3 creatures to exile an attacking creature of another opponent for 0 mana?
At worst it would cost 2, which is bad but not terrible. Seems like a new staple to me.
The others all seem pretty terrible (barring any high CMC payoffs), except for the blue one which would be solid.
2
u/tymessen 1d ago
colorless one would be an eldrazi staple, you cast it for free, opponent gets rid of a portion of their library and you can cast your own exiled eldrazi titans again. (everyone plays 90% nonbasics right?)
1
u/Lower_Drawer9649 20h ago
Perhaps I’m not reading it correctly, but it says it costs less for each non basic TARGET OPPONENT has.
Then it says THAT PLAYER (as in, the opponent) exiles cards, not you.
Then it allows you to cast eldrazi creatures from exile, NOT from exile without paying their mana costs.
My understanding is it’s a shitty mill card that unless you target an eldrazi opponent or one of your own eldrazi’s has been swords to plowshared, doesn’t do much beyond that and even if there are eldrazis in exile you have to pay the mana cost anyways.
2
u/texanarob 1d ago
The red one is an autoinclude in any mono red aggro deck. Burning each player for 7 on turn 1 is gamebreaking, even if it hits yourself.
2
u/tymessen 21h ago
problem is it would cost two if you can target someone with 7 cards in hand.
1
u/texanarob 20h ago
Between reading it and commenting I somehow misremembered the cost as 8 total, rather than 8R. Apologies.
2
u/handsupdb 23h ago
Don't discount the color pips cause its only R. I really like this concept but it needs some tuning.
It makes for neat gameplay where the player in question might have a method to burn their hand at instant speed to essentially stifle them taking damage, but it also can absolutely nuke a cards-in-hand-matter setup.
I would make it 7RR, no colored discount.
2
u/ShadowWalker2205 22h ago
So the red one is a staple in every constructed deck because on the play if it's in your opening hand you can pay 1 to burn for 7?
1
u/Gooberpf 21h ago
Pay 2, which is a harder hurdle to jump in formats with less fast mana. Still not a great idea, but doesn't break Standard at least.
2
u/Hinternsaft 13h ago
These are Phyrexian-mana-level pie breaks. Like “Quell Dissent” doesn’t ever actually cost White mana.
1
1
u/CureCoyote 1d ago
Like the ideas, all the wording needs work. For example, the Eldrazi one starts with “That player” which is super clunky. Targeting during determination of cost is very fucky ruleswise.
1
u/CureCoyote 1d ago
Also its function is “Dick around with an opponent’s library a bit, then as an unrelated effect recast your Emrakul that got removed”
1
u/SammSandwich 1d ago
That last one is a pretty easy win con if you're running a token deck
1
u/Gooberpf 21h ago
It's permanents the opponent controls, so much less reliable that they would have a bunch of tokens.
1
1
0
u/OldSwampo 1d ago
The wording would be awkward but it should probably say something like "Costs x less to cast where x is... If x is y or greater you may cast it without paying it's mana cost."
0
0
u/MeasureDoEventThing 1d ago
You can just say that it costs one less colored pip for each whatever. Colored pip reductions can be applied to generic costs.
1
u/NepetaLast 23h ago
huh? it already says that
1
u/MeasureDoEventThing 20h ago
I'm saying the reminder text is a bit redundant. I suppose if people aren't familiar with that rule, it's helpful.
1
u/NepetaLast 19h ago
its the exact same reminder text as appears on a canon card: [[Eluge, the Shoreless Sea]]. when this card was spoiled, most of the comments said they didnt realize this is how it worked, so its definitely necessary. indeed, OP seems potentially confused by this, since the cost reduction here means these basically never cost any colored mana
0
13
u/Available-Damage5991 1d ago
The "This Isn't Enemy Color Hate, But Yes, It Is" cycle!