ACG's Custom Spells and Mages

[ACG]

Currently in the process of making modifications to many spells. A few specific responses:

Orb of Immolation. Nice idea but needs to be better? Burn is not meant to be burst but unreliable persistent damage. So I would make it more reliable, go as far as "when rolling for Burn, re-roll all blanks once". My main worry is Burn is going to be far better with the new set (Plants and Resilient Zombies). Still, this is a pricey Epic conjuration that can be destroyed. You forgot to add "Flame Immunity Hydro+3".

Currently, burns will on average go away after a while, since each burn has a 1/3 chance of disappearing on a given round. What Orb of Immolation does is to make burns stay, on average, indefinitely, since there is now a 1/3 chance of a new burn replacing one that was lost. Of course, at low numbers of burns luck still plays a significant role. If you think this needs to be better, rather than re-rolling blanks (which might be too powerful), what if it gave creatures an extra burn each time they received one from an attack (only from attacks though, or it might get out of hand)?

Dreamwalker v2. Indestructible is "the object cannot be damaged" so the convert damage to mana ability won't trigger.

Somehow, I missed that clause in indestructible. Not sure why they included that, since "cannot be destroyed by damage" is sufficient and this wording prevents a lot of cool possibilities. I will have to look back over my indestructible cards and make some adjustments, then.

Magisbane, the Purifier. Wow, this is the Warlord's totemic one-handed weapon! I'd remove Upkeep +2, change Mana Drain 2 to Mana Transfer 1 and give it free Dispel (pay X = full cost) or Seeking Dispel (pay 2) ability when it damages a creature as currently it's dispelling far too cheaply, even with its upkeep. An alternate way of removing enchantments as a free action is powerful. I'd also make it a Cantrip. It's an appropriate Dispelling weapon worthy of a Warlord!

My thought was that the upkeep cost would make up for the cheap dispel, but I can modify it as you describe. However, I don't want to remove its upkeep cost, because thematically I think it ought to drain its wielder. Also, Mana Transfer, while cool, does not make sense in this context because the weapon is obliterating the magical energies, not merely stealing them. Cantrip is a good idea, but to make the weapon more in line with the Magisbane Golem (which presumably uses similar anti-magical principles) I think it might be better to simply make it immune to magic (making it nearly invulnerable, though the Druid's new dissolving plant can still get at it).

New equipment enchantment, with a new possible way to avoid the "2-for-1" problem with dissolve:



Keyword: Enhancement - this enchantment increases the printed cost of the card to which it is attached by mana equal to the enchantment's full casting cost.

[ACG]

Some adjustments to old cards:




Some new cards:



Prophet to follow as soon as I nail down his abilities.

[DeckBuilder]

Or do you want me to foresee what The Prophet can do? (Sorry, I couldn't resist)

Bit tumultuous here but feedback soon, but good work though ACG! Hope they are studying some of these ideas.

[ACG]

Or do you want me to foresee what The Prophet can do?

Ha ha. No need to make a prediction now; the first draft of the Prophet is below. I realize that many of the prophecy mechanics are worded ambiguously or in an unusual way, but it turns out to be difficult to articulate the sort of mechanics that I am going for using the current vocabulary, grammar, and style of mage wars, so this will have to do.

Some altered cards:



Your comment about clockwork programming gave me an idea - clearly, Magisbane Golems (and other such "Magisbane" artifacts) are designed for the purpose of killing mages (especially wizards), so why not bring that out a bit more in their behavior? The new Magisbane Golem relentlessly seeks out objects with the channeling trait and destroys them. At the same time, he draws magical attacks to himself. (I want him to still be targetable by conjurations, though). Note that he is perfectly suited to demolishing the dread Wizard's tower, although he is considerably more expensive than the tower. I think this is probably what Murkh had in mind when he made them. Given its limitations, I made it lumbering, rather than slow. I'm unsure how best to price it.



Good idea for the artificer; bonding with a weapon seems more like something for a weapons specialist like the Paladin (also forthcoming, BTW). I adjusted your suggestion slightly; now he can simply swap in equipment that he has already cast for a small cost. Thinking about some of the mage-specific equipment that I have been making lately, I think his broad expertise will probably be a substantial enough advantage that he needs nothing else.

New Cards:

Hope they are studying some of these ideas.

Thanks for your support. I don't know whether "they" actually look for ideas in this Custom Cards forum (I've read that some companies avoid looking at fan creations to avoid accusations of "stealing ideas"); it would certainly be neat if they did, though.




Edit: I also feel like I should give a deeper thematic explanation of The Book of Secrets.

The idea is that it is an artifact of ancient and terrible power (as such artifacts often tend to be). To most readers, the pages appear blank. Any magical knowledge written in this book is erased from the minds of all and immediately forgotten if it is ever rediscovered or read in some arcane text. Presumably, there will one day be a young mage who discovers that he has the power to read the secrets that have been written in the book, setting him off on an epic quest (probably a trilogy at the very least).

For the mage fortunate enough to have The Book of Secrets (for there is only one), he can stop to write down a spell in the book in order to erase it from the minds of both himself and his competitor(s). In practice, only the Archivist knows where this rare book may be found (and the Artificer, obviously).

[DeckBuilder]

Quiet moment for more catch-up feedback.

Runic Haste. I like Enhancement as your solution to 2-for-1 loss of Enchant Equipment. I appreciate that a quick action Hunting Bow could not be used twice (only quick spells may be cast with QC marker). However, I am  wary of enablers like this. A future full action ability could become broken with this so its existence restricts future design.

Archivist v2. Looks good. I like this feeble old man challenging: "I shall defeat you with my extensive knowledge of mainly level 1 spells".

Magisbane, the Purifier v2. It's now too expensive. I like Magisbane as a "mana magnet" idea of Upkeep +1 and this cost is countered by its Mana Drain 2 of opponent. As it is, I would reduce its cost to 10 (same as level 3 Sectarus, its opposite).

The Book of Secrets. I love it's concept. However, even once Dissolved, its damage is done, the spells are obliterated. Also the first spell may be Dissolve (especially as equipment is low level Archivist-friendly). I would not make it permanent but more synergetic with Archivist abilities. Something like "Opponents cannot cast the same spell as those at the top of all discard piles. Discard piles cannot be shuffled. When an opponent casts a spell, during Counter Spell step, if you have the same spell in hand, you may reveal it, discard it and pay mana equal to its level to counter that spell." Opponents have to work around a changing temporary spells injunction but also a cheap anticipate to counter benefit. Also, as an Archivist Only item, I would make it Arcane 1 (1 spell point, not 4).

Crystal Ball. I'd make it Planning Phase so you can use the information. I don't normally like memory mechanics but this is manageable.

Prophet. As you know, I dislike memory mechanics. Precognition should just be "When you have Initiative, your opponent must reveal 2 choices during Planning before you choose your spells". In the same vein, I think Anticipate should be "When you don't have Initiative, at the end of Planning, name 1 spell. Opponents may not cast that spell this round." The On/Off mechanic is to allow mirror matches and both mechanics are information based, not mechanical which seems too corporeal for a divination-based mage. I'd give him 32 life. Also Prophet is Holy, not Arcane. I'd make him or her a Seer or a Soothsayer or some other divination-based mage subclass. Prophets don't carry a Crystal Ball, they are divine messengers. I'm sorry that, unlike Archivist and Dreamwalker, I'm not a great fan as it is. However, a divination-based mage is a great idea and I urge you to rethink.

Predict Fate. I love the flavour text! As for the effect, I think you have got a typo as it doesn't make sense as is (24 mana?). I would make it target "Any object" for total versatility and "Reveal only during Deployment. Name any card (including a mage). If an opponent destroys this object with that named card while this enchantment is attached, gain 10 mana. Destroy this enchantment at the end of the round." I think it's currently very fiddly with all those Fate counters on enchantment and its creature etc. The concept of Predict Fate is hard to execute.

Artificer v2. I like. I think this Dwarf artificer from Ivarium (love the choice) would simply be trained in War and Arcane 1, Nature triple, he is neutral and Arcane is always better (e.g. equipment). I like the new mechanic but the package is bit weak for a 9 mana mage as it triggers on duplicates after you wasted mana. How about his second ability as "Gadgeteer. Each Deployment, you may replace 1 equipment with new equipment in the same location by paying mana equal to its extra cost or the replacing equipment's spell level, whichever is greater." He is still reliant on Battle Forge for quick equipment deployment but this is neater and does not leave him at a huge mana disadvantage when switching items around. Which is his "shtick".

Magisbane Golem v2. I like the Lumbering upgrade on an Iron Golem. I like the concept of an Attack Spell magnet but it's too powerful as a nullifier. It's made out of Magisbane, this anti-magic matter. I think you should remove "Lightning +2, Acid +2, Tough -6" and the middle sentence of the text, instead add "Enchantment Immunity. Incantation Immunity. Attack Spells -2" as keywords. Attack spells can damage it but lose 2 attack dice and -2 effect die. Currently, it's a bit broken. I really like your anti-channeling and attack spell magnet mechanics.

[ACG]

Will need some time to consider some of these comments. Immediate responses:

The Book of Secrets. I love it's concept. However, even once Dissolved, its damage is done, the spells are obliterated. Also the first spell may be Dissolve (especially as equipment is low level Archivist-friendly). I would not make it permanent but more synergetic with Archivist abilities. Something like "Opponents cannot cast the same spell as those at the top of all discard piles. Discard piles cannot be shuffled. When an opponent casts a spell, during Counter Spell step, if you have the same spell in hand, you may reveal it, discard it and pay mana equal to its level to counter that spell." Opponents have to work around a changing temporary spells injunction but also a cheap anticipate to counter benefit. Also, as an Archivist Only item, I would make it Arcane 1 (1 spell point, not 4).

Good point about permanence of obliteration; I just thought of a different implementation that seems (to me) more interesting than its current one:


So the magic of the book only lasts as long as it does, and when it is destroyed all spells hidden within are released again. Note that the only way to unbind spells is to destroy the book. Also more likely to be used. Regarding the spell point cost, it will cost the archivist 2, not 4, because he is trained in level one of each of the requisite schools. In general, the archivist gets multi-school spells more cheaply than other mages.

Predict Fate. I love the flavour text! As for the effect, I think you have got a typo as it doesn't make sense as is (24 mana?). I would make it target "Any object" for total versatility and "Reveal only during Deployment. Name any card (including a mage). If an opponent destroys this object with that named card while this enchantment is attached, gain 10 mana. Destroy this enchantment at the end of the round." I think it's currently very fiddly with all those Fate counters on enchantment and its creature etc. The concept of Predict Fate is hard to execute.

No typo; the further in the future your prediction is, the more mana you get. If your opponent actually allows you to fulfill a 7 turn prediction, you deserve the mana. I'll think about your other suggestions; I agree that its current wording is rather fiddly.

Regarding the Prophet's school choice: I had a Sword-of-Truth-like prophet in mind when designing it, i.e. a prophet whose predictions come from highly complicated arcane magics, rather than divine revelation. Holy might be a better fit though (maybe even Holy-Arcane). Actually, I kind of want to create a new school (Time magic), but I am not sure if that is a good idea.

Standing Orders v2. I've had a rethink on this. It seems far too expensive. What's the benefit of having Evade bound to this over Mongoose Agility? Charge over Cheetah Speed? Yes, you get a tiny benefit but you spend more mana and risk 2 spells to a single Dispel! I think you can promote long-term planning by giving it a specific timing reveal cost of X and no Channeling (too fiddly for an enchantment). "May only be revealed during Upkeep. Bind a level 1 Command Incantation to it. X = casting cost of the Command. The enchanted Soldier is treated as permanently targeted by that Command". It's powerful but it is deferred benefit, also revealed before Planning and you pay 2 extra over the single use cost, 1 extra spell point and only affects soldiers. I feel you can make it a free repeat use persistent Command on Soldiers.

As fiddly as enchantments with channeling may be, I feel that "permanent targeting" by an incantation is more fiddly, mechanics-wise. It also means we have to be careful what sorts of commands we make in the future - so far, most commands give an enchantment-like benefit for one attack. What about a command like rally that causes creatures to teleport, or a command that heals creatures, though? I believe the current wording is the most elegant mechanical way to implement this. I do see your point about the expense and risk. I think it would be reasonable to drop the reveal cost to 0, all things considered.

Another possibility is to give some way to cheaply change the bound spell, which would be an advantage over an enchantment. Figuring out how to do this without ruining the theme or being broken will take some thought, though.
 
Here are some (often minor or cosmetic) changes to old spells:








And here are some new cards:

[DeckBuilder]

ACG, you come up with some really interesting "outside the box" ideas! Like...

Murkh's Acolyte. I absolutely love your flavour text! It reminds me of my D&D campaign's "Anti-Magic League", eco-terrorists who believed arcane magic was polluting the world (they were right, it was creating rifts). Back to the card. He's a saboteur of spawnpoints and mages casting full actions. Maybe slightly too good combat stats (4 life 1 attack fast goblin?) but that's just quibbling. I love it.

Scramble. It's nice to have a Psychic attack spell. I don't like poison Tainited with a Psychic attack (unless Mind Worm or similar). It's also over-costed. Because it is range 0, I'd make it 9+ Stun instead. And that mage benefit (as mages suffer less from a stun) is the obliterate effect (familiars will suffer both). It's very swingy (1 in 3 chance) which is why I don't like it. I'd rather it always returned a random uncast card to the book as the Obliterate effect can destroy strategies on a random d12. This idea may be better added to Magisbane Golem?

The Book of Secrets v2. I like the new mechanic over Obliterate but still too powerful to just growing veto spells. Starting with Dissolve to protect the book. For 2 spell points and 7 mana, this is too much. "Spells bound cost double to cast" is a more appropriate power level?

The Black Contract v2. This is well costed, simple and elegant. Does it need Magecast (as "Mage X Only" is a book inclusion condition)?

Lich's Soulstone v2. Too good, easy to abuse, too similar to "The Black Contract". Living enchantments will slip off, mage can guard his soulstone, Death Ring gives Necro discount. I'd just change benefits to just "Mage gains Indestructible, Finite Life and Pest". To become indestructible like this is a big deal, it needs nerfing. Does not need Unique if Epic. I'd allow it to be range 0-1 like other Zone Exclusives.

Orb of Immolation v2. I think the most elegant benefit would be "At the start of Upkeep, every object that has at least 1 burn marker gains an extra 1 burn marker." This is a rework of your new extra text. That's good enough to "keep the fires burning" so to speak. I'd reduce it to Cost 8 Fire 2 as it is Fire Mage Only, in line with other Epics.

Haunted v3. Looks great. Needs Spirit support. You've listed a few already (Shadow, Nightmare etc).

Standing Orders v3. It's delayed. It's telegraphed. It doesn't explain free persistent benefit of Mongoose Agility over Evade, Critical Strike over Piercing Strike, Bear Strength over Power Strike etc. And then there is the very fiddly Channel on an enchantment that doesn't work (where do you put mana?). Instead I urge you to simply rewrite the text to "You may reveal only when this creature is activated. Search your spellbook for any non-Epic Command, reveal it and pay its cost, returning it to your spellbook. This creature is considered under its effect for this action. Destroy this enchantment." So it is a very versatile one-shot Copy Command so exactly the right Command can be issued as a deferred action. It would be "Prescient Orders", new flavour text. But the game cannot accommodate channelling on an enchantment.

Dreamwalker v3. Looks awesome! My only cosmetic quibble is to maybe change "Presence" to "Touch" as it requires a melee attack?

[ACG]

The Book of Secrets v2. I like the new mechanic over Obliterate but still too powerful to just growing veto spells. Starting with Dissolve to protect the book. For 2 spell points and 7 mana, this is too much. "Spells bound cost double to cast" is a more appropriate power level?

How's this as a solution to binding Dissolve/Explode/Corrosive Orchid/etc?

Now you can bind as many defenses for the book as you like, but it will cost you. This also gives the Archivist a way to get rid of the book if he has bound a dissolve but later decides he wants it back.

Lich's Soulstone v2. Too good, easy to abuse, too similar to "The Black Contract". Living enchantments will slip off, mage can guard his soulstone, Death Ring gives Necro discount. I'd just change benefits to just "Mage gains Indestructible, Finite Life and Pest". To become indestructible like this is a big deal, it needs nerfing. Does not need Unique if Epic. I'd allow it to be range 0-1 like other Zone Exclusives.

The Nonliving aspect of Soulstone is important to its theme, and I can't think of a good explanation for the Pest trait. Here is an alternative that prevents the necromancer from guarding his soulstone and may be either an advantage or a colossal drawback, depending on his situation: Bloodthirsty +2. It makes sense, since the undead seem pretty hungry for living flesh/blood in general. Altered card:

Standing Orders v3. It's delayed. It's telegraphed. It doesn't explain free persistent benefit of Mongoose Agility over Evade, Critical Strike over Piercing Strike, Bear Strength over Power Strike etc. And then there is the very fiddly Channel on an enchantment that doesn't work (where do you put mana?). Instead I urge you to simply rewrite the text to "You may reveal only when this creature is activated. Search your spellbook for any non-Epic Command, reveal it and pay its cost, returning it to your spellbook. This creature is considered under its effect for this action. Destroy this enchantment." So it is a very versatile one-shot Copy Command so exactly the right Command can be issued as a deferred action. It would be "Prescient Orders", new flavour text. But the game cannot accommodate channelling on an enchantment.

Good idea for a new card. I think standing orders can still be made to work, though. I'll think about possible revisions. Though I don't think it necessarily needs channeling, I don't in general agree that enchantments with channeling are impossible. If I understand you correctly, your objection is that there isn't space to place mana on an enchantment since it is underneath the enchanted object. I don't think this would be such an issue, though; part of the card sticks out, and there should be enough space there. Alternately, channeled mana could go on the creature (if it does not channel) or even next to it. Players should not have difficulty remembering what it means, provided there are not a lot of channeling enchantments attached to the same object.

Thinking about other suggested revisions. It may take a while to revise more of the cards. In the meantime, here are some new cards with mechanics centered around alternatives to killing monsters; specifically, returning them to players' spellbooks:

[ACG]

I thought of a more elegant way to implement prophecy mechanics.




Edit: forgot to add that spells targeting the arena are not affected by Premonition. Will add next time I update the Prophet card.

[ACG]

Been busy lately. I realize that I haven't updated many of the older cards, but right now I feel more motivated to create new ones. I'll get around to addressing concerns with the older cards eventually.

[Zuberi]

I like Painbound Link. I think the damage should round up instead of down though. Make it a direct opposite of Vampiric. I would then either remove the Daze component or increase the cost.

[Sailor Vulcan]

Pain bound link looks really cool. Have you looked at my thread about my idea for a Sympath? This spell seems quite fitting for her.

[Zuberi]

I also like the idea of "bounce" cards such as Retreat and Exodus. I think I would make the mana cost of Retreat equal half the mana cost of the target creature. Possibly more than that. Just seems more fair to me. As it is, it is cheaper to cast than sleep and more difficult to overcome.

Another solution might be for you to pay a cheap price to return the creature, but the owner of the creature receives a refund of mana.

[ACG]

I like Painbound Link. I think the damage should round up instead of down though. Make it a direct opposite of Vampiric. I would then either remove the Daze component or increase the cost.

Good suggestion. I'll do that. The Daze clause of the card was added purely for theme (for one linked psychically to his victims, death could be quite traumatic), but it may be more than the card needs.

Pain bound link looks really cool. Have you looked at my thread about my idea for a Sympath? This spell seems quite fitting for her.

I didn't have the sympath in mind, but you're right, Painbound Link does look perfect for her. It even matches her trainings.

I also like the idea of "bounce" cards such as Retreat and Exodus. I think I would make the mana cost of Retreat equal half the mana cost of the target creature. Possibly more than that. Just seems more fair to me. As it is, it is cheaper to cast than sleep and more difficult to overcome.

Another solution might be for you to pay a cheap price to return the creature, but the owner of the creature receives a refund of mana.

I should probably point out that only friendly creatures may be targeted by retreat, and only if they are soldiers. Otherwise, you are quite right that it would be far too cheap. The intent is to give a cheap way to get a valuable damaged soldier (Thorg, for instance) back into your spellbook so you can bring him out again after he has "recovered", thus saving on spellbook points (since Thorg + Retreat is cheaper than Thorg x2). My reasoning for the pricing is that Resurrecting a creature has the same cost (level + mana cost) in terms of mana. Of course, retreat has an advantage in that it is cheaper in spell points than Resurrection and can prevent a creature from being devoured or otherwise kept from the discard pile. The disadvantage is that it takes more actions and requires removing the creature yourself before it dies, rather than squeezing every last action out of it. Considering these advantages and disadvantages, I am not convinced that a mana refund is necessary.

[Zuberi]

Ah, I somehow missed the target of "friendly soldier creature". I saw the effect and immediately jumped for joy at a way to bounce my opponent's creatures back to his spellbook. I still think that bounce is a cool mechanic that should be explored. I can imagine both incantations and enchantments that could have the effect (both for friendly and/or opponent spells) as well as creatures with it built in.