CPA Set - Modification/Delete/Add

[Limited]

Why is this way too good?

Well, mostly because I shouldn't have trusted my memory

I thought it gained +X/+0 whenever it blocked, instead of whenever it became blocked. So I figured it could block and kill all my smaller creatures.

No change needed.

About Brunting Wurm:

At 4/4 he's a beast!

Four damage seems too much to take each turn. The fact that there aren't a lot of creatures with casting cost 4 points lower than their power means he isn't going to killed by blockers, and four tougness puts him out of range of most removal.

I was going to suggest making him 3/3. He needs 3 power to remain a threat. He doesn't get a name like Brunting Wurm if all he dies is slither by. But I think three toughness is still pretty good for a creature who won't die in combat.
Also thinking of the possible abuse if one was to combine him with some kind of Lure effect, I propose 3/2.

 

[Mooseman]

Could it be changed to:

Brunting Wurm (3/3, Brunting Wurm gets +X/+X, where X is the total non-colorless mana cost of all creatures blocking it)
This way it gets some pump, but not too much, although it is useless against artifact creatures.... Colorless mana?

 

[Ransac]

I don't like the non-colorless idea. It's too much math, if you ask me.

4/3 or 3/4 is best, but the fact that it doesn't have trample is huge.

But, you know, I do have a better solution. His casting cost is far too low. A green 4/4 for 5cc is relatively decent to begin with, the ability makes it amazing.

Shall I suggest a 4GG casting cost and keep the rest of the card the same?


Ransac, cpa trash man

 

[Limited]

I also don't like the noncolorless.. kinda dilutes the card.

Compromise: 3/3 for 4GG? (with the original ability?)

 

[Mooseman]

I also don't like the noncolorless.. kinda dilutes the card.

Compromise: 3/3 for 4GG? (with the original ability?)

I agree. Lets try it like that.

 

[Ransac]

Obviously, majority rules, but I have a problem with dumbing the card down that much. We're not trying to make absolutely broken cards, but at the same time we want to make cards that are exciting to play with. Anyway you cut it, a 3/3 for 6cc is pretty lame to me.


Ransac, cpa trash man

 

[Limited]

Perhaps later on, we'll find that green can use a little bump in power and we'll change him into a 3/3 for 3GG or a 3/2 for 2GG.

But for now, lets try to make each card decent.

 

[Mooseman]

The Jut-ve cards need fixed.

Valhall needs to at least produce 1 colorless mana.

Lumonias Propitious Angel, Root Squirrel and Dragon of Greed are really good.

 

[Ransac]

How is Dragon of Greed Really good? In all of our matches so far, all he's been is a 2/2 flyer. You can get the same for 3cc.

Ransac, cpa trash man

 

[Mooseman]

How is Dragon of Greed Really good? In all of our matches so far, all he's been is a 2/2 flyer. You can get the same for 3cc.

Of course in mindmaster format it is only ok, but in contructed it will be good.
Just my opinion.

 

[Ransac]

He shall see. The Requirement of having to draw 4 cards requires a lot of help. In current Standard, the only cards that do it by themselves are Careful Consideration and Tidings.


But, I still really liike these "Evo" creatures. I can't wait 'til Limited playtesting is over and we start building decks around these cards.


Ransac, cpa trash man

 

[Mooseman]

Some quick research finds that there are many 3cc 2/2 flyers with good abilities... Diving Griffon, Hippy, Skyknight Legionnaire...... Maybe it should be only 3cc... say 2U

 

[Mooseman]

Both cards were from the BounceAdvantageCreatures Ransac created.
The Mage Jut-ve seems over costed, maybe if it had flying or was a 1/2 creature the retreat mechanic is not enough to justify the cost.
The Townsman Jut-ve may need to be evaluated, a 1/1 for U and retreat seems ok, but may be too good if the retreat is abusable.

 

[DarthFerret]

Inspiring Altruist (7/7)
[All creatures you control have "Whenever a creature an opponent controls would be dealt damage, prevent one of that damage"]

Ok, this card seems insanely good. Should the casting cost be elevated by one? Another possibility might be "on your upkeep put a 0/1 creature token in play". That way might make it balanced, then again, maybe that would overbalance it and render the card virtually useless....

 

[Mooseman]

Inspiring Altruist (7/7)
[All creatures you control have "Whenever a creature an opponent controls would be dealt damage, prevent one of that damage"]

Ok, this card seems insanely good. Should the casting cost be elevated by one? Another possibility might be "on your upkeep put a 0/1 creature token in play". That way might make it balanced, then again, maybe that would overbalance it and render the card virtually useless....

4cc isn't too cheap, since it gets worse for every other creature you have
5cc may be ok...... hmmmm

 

[Ransac]

I vote to keep the altruist as 4cc. The only way the card is good is if it's the only creature in play (which can be abused). I say we continue to playtest it as is.


Ransac, cpa trash man

 

[Limited]

Right now, the Altruist is totally kicking ass.. but would it see constructed play?

 

[DarthFerret]

I think it would...if you designed a fetch deck that had very few creatures (or just him alone). I think it could be a very amusing idea.

 

[Mooseman]

Stirge 1BB (1/2, Flying, Whenever <THIS> deals damage to a creature, put a +1/+1 counter on it ,<THIS> loses all abilities, becomes an enchantment enchanting that creature, and "At the beginning of enchanted creature's contoller's upkeep, put a -1/-1 counter on enchanted creature ." and "When enchanted creature leaves play, end the effect that created this ability.")

How about changing it to:
Whenever <THIS> becomes blocked you may pay 1B: Put a +1/+1 counter on it ,<THIS> loses all abilities, becomes an enchantment enchanting target creature blocking <THIS>, and "At the beginning of enchanted creature's contoller's upkeep, put a -1/-1 counter on enchanted creature ." and "When enchanted creature leaves play, end the effect that created this ability.

 

[Limited]

Maybe what the Stirges need, is simplification:

Stirge 1BB 1/2
Flying.
Whenever <THIS> deals damage to a creature, <THIS> becomes an enchantment enchanting that creature, and has "At the beginning of your upkeep, put a -1/-1 counter on enchanted creature"

It still leaves a lot of room for tricks, and turns the card into conditional (and optional) removal.