Make your own Magic card!

No, it was just one persistent dispute between me and a friend.

Wait, what card is it that turns a forest into something like a 6/5 treefolk creature?

edited 17th Mar '10 12:47:46 AM by GlennMagusHarvey

Living Terrain?

Yep, that's the one.

Mapi, what program do you use to make your own cards?

Not sure what she uses but I've got Magic Set Editor. That's pretty helpful.

Ooh, sweet. I'll check it out later.

That's the one.

Awesome, thanks! I was wondering how you did better than what was offerred on the various make-your-own-card websites I dug up, especially with all that text on some of your cards.

edited 4th Apr '10 12:47:28 AM by GlennMagusHarvey

Make your own card websites suck compared to MSE.

So I posted this last night: http://glennmagusharvey.deviantart.com/art/Ridley-MtG-card-159740721

What do y'all think?

It's nowhere near perfect. Right now, I'm making a mental list of what changes I should make for version 2.1. So far they are:

• adding the line "Ridley is black."
• Changing the first activated ability to have a cost of just half any-color mana.
• Replacing the third activated ability to be something like the following: "[mana cost]: Target permanent that would be sent to the graveyard cannot be regenerated, and the actions that would send it to the graveyard cannot be countered." I know this rulestext is not worded correctly, but I think you see what I mean. What's a correct wording?

How about this wording:

Tap: Choose a permanent that you already target this turn. Counter all spells and abilities of your opponent(s) that target that permanent. Until end of turn, that permanent cannot be targeted by your opponent(s), and cannot be regenerated.

Now I'm just wondering if this ability itself can be countered, and whether it should be counterable.

Huh? That's weird. How did you make a B/R card that wasn't gold?

This is really damn late, but I'd give Ridley at least one blue, seeing as how intelligent he is. He'd seem really at home in Grixis.

Ridley is Nicol Bolas

I like the idea of Ridley being Red/Black with sneaky blue abilities, but does he really need to be so huge? Look at these 4/4s, for instance. Heck, this guy is only 10/10.

I would recommend making him about 5/5 or 6/6, with just two or three abilities (not counting flying.) You could make his cost more manageable that way, too.

EDIT: That's a cool idea for an ability. Here's my crack at wording it: "If target creature has been targeted by an ability that would send it to the graveyard this turn, destroy it. This ability cannot be countered."

edited 7th Apr '10 3:38:51 AM by Durazno

adding the line "Ridley is black."

HE HAS BLACK IN HIS MANA COST THEREFORE HE IS ALREADY BLACK AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY IT AGAIN SAHASUGHAGJFNG

On top of that, I glanced over your Ridley card and it's less "Ridley" and more just "a bunch of awesome badass abilities for a really badass creature who should win the game the second you play him because he's amazing". God, I don't know what it is but some people just have problems making Magic cards that seem like they would be ACTUAL MAGIC CARDS. And that's not even considering the fact that if he requires multiple colors to cast he should have a gold frame.

edited 7th Apr '10 7:12:22 AM by StarkMaximum

@Stark Maximum: In that case, would you please go to my contributor page and check whether or not the cards I created are fairly decent for power and manacost?

I had to factor in in-universe Power Levels, so don't be surprised if Reinforce is a Game-Breaker.

edited 7th Apr '10 7:15:39 AM by Mapi

Stark, I think the "Ridley is black" thing might've meant to say "Ridley is only black".

But yeah... just looking at it, I see "Tap: 10 damage to target player". That's already too much and it just gets worse from there...

A member of my school's D&D club made some Magic cards based on the club members and locations related to the club. This inspired me to write some related fiction. Anyone interested in seeing it?

Responses to various things:

1. @Stark Maximum: I know "Ridley is black" sounds funny, but what's the correct way of specifying the color of a card?
   1. @Catch The Sun: And if you specify a new color, would those cards normally have a color corresponding to that? If the card were declared to be black, would it normally get a black background regardless of its cost?
   2. @Catch The Sun: Magic Set Editor tries to automatically change the color for you, but you can change it.
2. @Durazno, @Catch The Sun I am concerned about the general stats of this card; it does seem to be way over anything that usually gets played in MTG. In my defence, I made it a few years ago. I am open to changing it to something more realistic—I notice that Mapi's Nanoha characters are only around 3-4 in terms of power and toughness, and my later card designs are actually all around 1-2 in mana cost generally (with the exception of Kraid) and also relatively low-powered. Perhaps I'll redeem myself later.
3. @Canondorf: Version 1 of the card, apart from being text-constrained and having a more pixelated picture, actually had it costing blue mana. It went like this: "Ridley, 5URBBBB, Creature - Ninja Space Pirate Legend, Flying, If any spell or ability normally forces you to reveal any card(s) from your hand without it entering play or being removed or discarded, you do not need to reveal any card(s), B/2 Look at the top card of your library, BB Look at the top card of target player's library, T: destroy target enchantment, T: Ridley deals 6 damage distributable over up to six targets". I think the current card is an improvement at least.

I'm considering the following overhaul:

Ridley (possibly with better picture)

• Legendary Creature - Ninja Space Pirate (dropping the Deity part to remove some of the influence of my alternate character interpretation)
• 3URBBB
• Flying
• Ridley is only black. (@Ezekiel for 'eir late post as I was typing this)
• 1/2: Look at the top card of your library.
• U: Look at the top card of target player's library.
• T: Choose a target permanent you are already targetting this turn. If it would take damage from any spell or ability this turn, or if any spell or ability targetting it would send it to the graveyard, this permanent may not be targetted by any players other than you until the end step. This ability cannot be countered.
• T: Ridley deals 6 damage distributed over up to 6 targets.

I see that, as badly as this card's design is, it at least spurred up conversation. Just as planned...

edited 7th Apr '10 9:10:01 AM by GlennMagusHarvey

The correct way to specify a color is to MAKE THE CARD THAT COLOR IN THE COST. There is NO REASON for why he has red in his cost if you're just going to make him black! If you think it's SO IMPORTANT to his character that he's also red and blue, then he should be red and blue as well! My point isn't "You worded this wrong", because you didn't, my point is "There's no reason for this in the slightest"!

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr68

Look what I found that anyone who wants to make cards should take the time to read! Specifically the first entry in the list, Glenn, although the entire article is important to keep in mind.

edited 7th Apr '10 9:26:46 AM by StarkMaximum

You don't have to be harsh about it, y'know.

Anyway, you might like my later cards more, as they are much simpler usually. I'm no good at coming up with a gameplay mechanic by itself, but I often take one thematic aspect and turn it into a mechanic.

And come to think of it, these abilities aren't particularly synergistic. But that's because if Ridley is off to somewhere making sure something is killed dead, he can't attack, and vice versa.

And I'm not a huge fan of a strict color wheel.

On the other hand, I am rather concerned about cost and game balance. If you can use this as a justification for me, then I'm likely all ears.

And I'm not a huge fan of a strict color wheel.

Too bad the actual color wheel is not nearly as strict as you think it is and can fit a lot more things than you think it might. Did you know red represents artistic creativity and love as well as fire and destruction? It's hard to make a card that shows that, but it does! The color wheel is deeper than you think it is, that's why the game survives so well with it as its cornerstone, and why it was one of the first things to be created for the game.

Also, I don't know what the hell you're trying to do with that "target permanent that's being targeted" ability. And what's with the 1/2 or U/2 you got going on there?

I can't even THINK about game balance for this card because it's such a freaking mess. Just trying to read it makes my brain hurt. That's not good design. It doesn't matter how "balanced" it is if no one wants to use it because they can't figure out what the hell it does!

And I'm being harsh because, well, I'm tired of this crap and it's so rare you see fan-made cards that are actually done well. I'm not asking for professional Wizards designs here, I'm asking for cards that MAKE SENSE.

Stark, you're wrong about there being no point, mechanically-speaking. A creature with RRBBBB mana cost is harder to play than a creature with BBBBBB mana cost. Meanwhile, a creature that's only black can't be affected by spells that only affect red creatures - which stops certain destructive spells, but also stops some buffs, both targeted and field. And since black is more commonly used than red, the chances of your opponent having a spell that destroys red creatures are lower than the chances that you'll include red buffs in a deck with red mana.

edited 7th Apr '10 10:03:44 AM by Ezekiel

It's eight freaking mana almost entirely in black! It's hard enough to cast it as it IS! And it being targeted by an "I hate red" spell that doesn't also happen to hate black creatures is obscure and not worth the confusing wording of having a black card that looks like it's merely reminding you that the card is, in fact, black.

edited 7th Apr '10 10:05:42 AM by StarkMaximum

Part of your frustration may be due to my intentionally wanting a card that pushes the limits of normal gameplay. Again, you might like my other card ideas more; check the first post of this thread.

(And another part may be due to your missing the MST3K Mantra, perhaps?)

I never knew that about red. That's interesting.

The look at your top card ability is to make you immune to mana burn. The 1/2 is to account for un-set players pulling a fast one on you. No, I don't have much of a concept of card legalities, if you're trying to yell at me for that, and for cards that don't conflict with each other (e.g. not Cancel vs. Counterspell), I merely see them as themed differently.

The ability that I'm having trouble wording is basically this: a "privileged attack", a la the card game Illuminati, in order to kill stuff dead. The idea was that Ridley goes off and makes sure nothing—counterspells, regeneration, life gain, etc.—interferes wih your attempt to destroy a permanent.

I think I forgot cycling, heck.

edited 7th Apr '10 10:07:31 AM by GlennMagusHarvey

...but does he really need to be so huge?

So what you're saying is Ridely is too big?