ACG's Custom Spells and Mages

[Zuberi]

These cards raise a couple of questions for me. First, with command post would the mage be able to make up the difference in cost using their own mana like is normal for familiars, spawnpoints, and other such objects requiring mana expenditure?

Second, I am unsure how snatch would work originating from a wall with danglevine, and thus not coming from an actual zone to be pushed toward. With a range of 0-0 it can't target anything outside of its zone, but it's not in a zone, so can it not target anything? And if it does target something, say in one of the bordering zones, where does it push it towards? I could understand bashing it into the wall, but if the wall doesn't block passage it would be snatching the target over to the other side of the wall which involves moving away from the wall, which snatch can't do. You can't just push it into the walls space though because the wall is not in a space. And the vine can not target anything outside of the walls space anyways...just kinda confusing.

[Zuberi]

Also, how does zone exclusive work on something that isn't occupying a zone? Seems a little meaningless to me.

[ACG]

First, with command post would the mage be able to make up the difference in cost using their own mana like is normal for familiars, spawnpoints, and other such objects requiring mana expenditure?

Yes. I am using the precedent of Gray Wraith, which pays for its own teleportation (but the mage pays in practice since it has no channeling).

Second, I am unsure how snatch would work originating from a wall with danglevine, and thus not coming from an actual zone to be pushed toward. With a range of 0-0 it can't target anything outside of its zone, but it's not in a zone, so can it not target anything?

My intention was that the Danglevine is considered to be in both zones, but looking more carefully at the rules for walls, it looks like I need to make that more explicit. Thus, it pulls the thing from one zone into the other.

Also, how does zone exclusive work on something that isn't occupying a zone? Seems a little meaningless to me.

You're right; that was a typo. Zone exclusive is meaningless in this context, and was not intended.

Here is an updated Danglevine with these issues clarified.

[Zuberi]

The update on danglevine helps a lot. It still feels a little messy to me, but it gets everything across and the concept of improving your walls is one I like. Overall nice job with all the new concepts, as usual.

[Sailor Vulcan]

Can a creature with climbing use the Danglevine to climb faster?

[ACG]

Can a creature with climbing use the Danglevine to climb faster?

No - I don't think the Danglevine would like that.



Edit: I updated the first page to include a list of all cards as of now.

[ACG]

[DeckBuilder]

Hi ACG, long time no speak about your cards. We used to chat alot early in this thread (I encouraged you) then life got a bit busy.

As you know, I think you have incredible creativity and you come up with awesome off-the-wall ideas.
The only issue I have sometimes is balance in your great ideas.
Among playtesters, I'm the one who comes up with "too risky" or overpowered ideas that need curbing.
So when I find some of your ideas a bit extreme, imagine how it's taken in a more conservative setting!

Nevertheless, I'm a firm believer that the IDEA is what's priceless, the details can always be fine-tuned.
And you are full of innovative new mechanics that never ceases to amaze.

That said, some of these ideas are not as polished as some of prior work (a high standard to emulate).
You post these to collect feedback and there is nothing worse than nobody commenting so here's mine.
You know that I don't pull my punches so please don't take anything too personal (nothing harsh really).

(Caveat: I'm visiting family, no rulebook, bored hence feedback on your thread as the most interesting new one, so may be rules errors.)

Orb of Obsession
I love the idea, having to block LOS before moving etc. I would make it "non-mage enemy creature" else you are design restricting the Siren creature base. It's as wordy as one of my posts so I'd delete the last line of text. It's Psychic so most Nonliving (not Elementals) and Insects will be immune to it according the subtextual science behind Mage Wars (when they keep consistency). I would also make it Incorporeal as we need greater relevance for Ethereal (we have 3 creatures + 5 conjurations that are Incorporeal, we have at least 23 spells with Ethereal).

Reflection
Light is already the weakest damage type so it doesn't need this. It is also too situational, like Mind Shield, to be ever useful. This also does not add new mechanic, just an optional Reverse Attack for Light. If it was an optional redirect any attack to a friendly creature in your zone (Dark 1) which is funny ("what else are minions for?") then it would be more worthy of your usual creativity. Sorry but a miss in my books.

Sunflower
Ok, I know you like the Defensive Samara Tree Conjurations Druid build. But there is a reason why Flowers are all range 0-0 as they want to avoid Ballistas concentrating on 1 zone, giving you ready marker action firepower. This falls prey to the design flaw of Ballista (which is at least Zone Exclusive). If you made it Nature 3 range 0 then I think this may be more possible. However I really hate ready marker attacks, I think they made a huge error with Flowers because the issue of Temple of Light, Hand of Bim-Shalla and Wizard's Tower (not Sacrificial Altar as they nerfed recursion in Obliterate's wording) was down to having extra QC markers that are ready marker attacks. This was highlighted long before Flowers (even my Resources article highlighted ready marker attacks were incredibly valuable for flexibility and action burst). I was proposing solutions (like Winter Orb's 1 reset) to curb them so as to remove the ugly erratas (and hurt Wizard's Tower) then Flowers came out to legitimise this mechanic. So I am incredibly biased against these mechanics, as I was when I reviewed Ballista. So sorry again, ACG old chap, but this is plain broken as is and needs to be range 0-0 so at least you are limited to 3 Flower attacks max in each zone (due to the Highlander rule) - even then, that's potentially 6 Flowers attacking with a Snatch (non-futureproofed name for Siren's Pull) through Bloodspine all in 1 action burst. Just feel they opened Pandora's Box with Flowers (there are other ways to bypass Nullify to kill Teleport Wands) and this is Ballista-broken.

Blood Pact Robe
I like it. I would nerf it a bit but also make it more flexible. "The first time each round that this Mage takes damage from an enemy attack, place mana equal to that damage on Blood Pact Robe. Blood Pact Robe may summon a Demon whose level is less than the mana on it." Spawnpoints only summon in Deployment anyway, right? Also, I assume Spawnpoints must spend all mana on them? (I always do but is it compulsory?) If not, the Robes needs to stipulate this. The first time gives opponent tactical options and enemy ensures no cheesy self-attacks. Finally I think Enhancement is unnecessary, just give it the 3 Life cantrip effect of Libro Mortis. I'm starting to feel we should minimise new keywords unless they really add to the game and Enhance was added for Enchant Equipment to avoid 2-for-1 which I was never hugely taken with. It's personal prejudice. Overall though, a typical ACG nice idea.

Cursed
Too good. And you know what I think about fiddly mana on enchantments from your Spirit spawnpoint. So it will come as no surprise that I would remove the 1 Channeling, then it's definitely an interesting idea. Probably would be considered "too risky" though sadly. Another nice ACG idea, though its derivative of your Spirit spawnpoint.

Gate of Eternity
I love some of the mechanics (Suspend in Magic). My main issues is it doesn't get Passage Attacks trait so a Push cost 3 kills a mage! The game is totally against kill spells (Drain Soul closest) which I fully support. Also it should be Incorporeal (for reasons given above) and never gain Indestructible, another game principle (objects can be removed). So I'd rechrome it as (a) Incorporeal, (b) Blocks LOS, Passage Attacks and (c) "During each Upkeep, place a Time Token on Gate of Eternity. If a creature whose level is lower than the number of Time Tokens on it passes through it, move all Time Tokens to that creature and remove it from the arena, removing 1 Time Token each Upkeep until it has 0 Time Tokens when it reappears in a random zone (assign and roll a d12)." This is to prevent it being constantly pushed through if it always appeared in an adjoing zone. Because it's mandatory, this gives the opponent tactical plays to send sacrificial minions through allowing safe passage for others. Such a Wall need not be Epic Legendary, could be Extendable and unfortunately would need to be Arcane for Banish consistency. It still is your Time Token Wall idea, but applied to Banish. Clever cards like this would only work if Arcane 1 was the Universal school. Currently the version I've adapted would be an innovative but sadly meta-unbalanced idea. I like your thinking though.

Mycticore
I see no problem with Fungus growing on Golems. Just has to be "Corporeal Creature". I appreciate creature subtype is to provoke Wounded Prey but also create some other unwanted interactions like Rhino Hide and Bull's Endurance and Regrowth. You know how much I hated Plants being given Animal characteristics (as it moves an intuitive RPG skirmish simulation closer to Magic's ridiculous Loxodon Warhammer-wielding Birds of Paradise). So again this is personal taste. However, I like your idea of a Fungus that does damage to you if you fail to kill it in 1 round. It's a bit niche currently, just for Jokhtari Wounded Prey and even then not that good. I'd just change the wordy text to "During upkeep, remove all damage on Mycticore and place it on attached target.". I'd also add Cantrip or tone down level as it will be easy to overdo damage and kill it (aided by opponent) or to Teleport away, destroying it (don't clunkily nerf this as opponent used up a valuable Teleport). This version works well with Flame attacks too so not just for 1 function. It's a good idea but it feels extremely engineered, a bit more elegance is required in my books.

Riftmeister's Mantle
I've already suggested a similar cloak (not in Arcane, we can't give a school its own counters) and sadly, that did not fly. I appreciate competing with 2 great Cloaks has Opportunity Cost and as the first power is situational, you need to give a second power that will be always useful but feel giving a Mage Uncontainable and move action Climbing may be too much so I would add "Unless Restrained" to the second ability, else you are really hurting Nature and Mind which Restrain. You need re-chrome it to not be Arcane. Anyway, my similar idea didn't make it so this is a nice idea that's sadly ahead of its time. I suspect we may see something similar sometime in the future for whoever's still playing a cheesy-Teleport unbalanced game then.

Typing this, I really miss our chats. It's so refreshing to discuss ideas with someone where design, not theme, is the primary driver. You have a far more creative mind than me (I'm good at improving other people's spark of genius) but you need to address balance and meta as well, focus your creativity on what's needed in the game. I know that's hard when inspiration can't be channeled like mana. It's good to see you still crafting nice ideas. And some of your droll witty flavour text really appeals to me too ("the gift that keeps on giving"). I'm surprised there isn't a humorous (but subtle) STD reference for the fungus... Sadly none of my similarly droll flavour text gained favour so again it's a clash of styles I think, as I think they are aiming the game at parents playing with their children, or assume so from a lack of subtlety there.

And if I had a request, please can we have some more Murkh, the Anti-Mage? His flavour test had me in creases (he's my hero, can't wait for the Goblin Mage card) and more seriosuly, the anti-Arcane ideas are very relevant!

Keep up the good work, ACG. I may have been quiet (slightly on orders) but I do read and appreciate your posts here.

[ACG]

Hi ACG, long time no speak about your cards. We used to chat alot early in this thread (I encouraged you) then life got a bit busy.

As you know, I think you have incredible creativity and you come up with awesome off-the-wall ideas.
The only issue I have sometimes is balance in your great ideas.
Among playtesters, I'm the one who comes up with "too risky" or overpowered ideas that need curbing.
So when I find some of your ideas a bit extreme, imagine how it's taken in a more conservative setting!

Nevertheless, I'm a firm believer that the IDEA is what's priceless, the details can always be fine-tuned.
And you are full of innovative new mechanics that never ceases to amaze.

That said, some of these ideas are not as polished as some of prior work (a high standard to emulate).
You post these to collect feedback and there is nothing worse than nobody commenting so here's mine.
You know that I don't pull my punches so please don't take anything too personal (nothing bard really).

Hello, Deckbuilder,

As always, I appreciate your extraordinarily detailed comments. And thank you for the kind words. My focus is also on mechanics design rather than balance, so I recognize that many of my cards may be over/underpowered.

For the most part, I'll try to implement some of your suggestions the next time I update these cards. I don't have the time to make/post cards as often as I would like, unfortunately.

Some specifics:

Re: Reflection
I realize the mechanics are not very new; my main goal was to provide a counter to the sunflower. Probably not necessary, though.

Re: Sunflower
Point taken.

Re: Blood Pact Robe
Spawnpoints don't have to spend all of their mana. Your suggestions are probably good for balance; I wanted to make it stronger because it provides no armor and takes up a body slot. I also considered making it an amulet, but that would probably be too good.

Re: Cursed
I am thinking of maybe giving it upkeep instead of channeling and lowering the casting cost.

Re: Mycticore
I originally wanted to make it much cheaper, but couldn't think of a way to avoid it being killed off too quickly. I am hesitant to make things cantrips too casually; maybe there could be some sort of Fungal equivalent of the Samara tree to give it that trait, and just reduce it to level one (with corresponding reductions in power)

And if I had a request, please can we have some more Murkh, the Anti-Mage? His flavour test had me in creases (he's my hero, can't wait for the Goblin Mage card) and more seriosuly, the anti-Arcane ideas are very relevant!

I'll see what I can do. If you have specific design challenges, I like having a concrete problem to work on (like how to make Wounded Prey or Rage more useful), but I'll post any Murkh related cards I think of otherwise.

Nice talking to you, as always.

[DeckBuilder]

Re: Cursed
I am thinking of maybe giving it upkeep instead of channeling and lowering the casting cost.

Re: Mycticore
I originally wanted to make it much cheaper, but couldn't think of a way to avoid it being killed off too quickly. I am hesitant to make things cantrips too casually; maybe there could be some sort of Fungal equivalent of the Samara tree to give it that trait, and just reduce it to level one (with corresponding reductions in power)

I like your suggestions for Cursed
For Fungus, just make it level 1, it's niche, disposable does nothing unless attacked then you're risking opponent finishing it off.
Now if it did full damage and did not heal itself, that may interesting. Like rot markers that can be scraped off.
Which I guess is what "that nasty rash you caught from Grusilda the Troll" is actually.
You would need to parameterise carefully on Life, Level and Cost but such an evolution would be more usable.

As for Rage, let me dig up some "Resuscitating Unloved Cards" stuff I wrote.
My idea was simply to move the goalposts, rewrite the rules, so that current crap cards became playable.
Also add X cards that makes 3X existing unloved cards played - far more value than cards that don't do this.
But the game is very theme driven, only so much space in a set etc. So foiled again.
You can guess from the title what element we get alot of though instead...

Requests? More humorous flavour test please. Even if you need to reverse engineer a witty text into a card.
I need cheering up as I'm a bit depressed at the ostriche trajectory of the game.
And the inertia of influential ultra-conservative posters I keep clashing with who prefer no change or slow change.

Wake up, the woods are burning! So instead, let's all drip-feed possible solutions that may never materialise.
I've heard of "fighting fire with fire" but fire-fighting current issues this way is like putting out fire with gasoline.
(I think I've laboured the analogy to ashes.)

We want Murkh, the Anti-Mage! (Some of your best work was there, including his Acolytes)

[ACG]

All right, some edits and some new cards:

First, the edits:


Then, the new cards:

An antimagic crusader:


Another present for the Johktari:


The enchantment version of "Foresight"

[Sailor Vulcan]

I think 38 might be too high for the Crusader. Fully trained mages are level 6 creatures and have a lot more life than a non-mage. If he does not use magic he is not a mage. Merely not being trained in a particular school of magic does not make him "antimagic", especially if he still can cast spells. If he were really against magic and those who use it he would not cast spells and could not participate in the Mage Wars without some sort of viable alternative to magic. Where does all that extra life and stat boosts come from if he's not trained in anything? Don't orcs have thick hide? Might be better with 1 innate armor and 25 life and then some other sort of edge. Or you could make him a half-giant or something, maybe big enough to be in two zones at once. That would be great for a solo position control strategy.

If they're not using mana and casting spells because they're against magic and magic users, then they need some other resource system. Otherwise I would say rework the theme of that mage to something other than an anti-magic crusader.


I came up with some ideas a while back for non-magical Arena fighters. Aside from the giant, who would probably be innately powerful and not have much need for tech, all the other ideas I came up with were for Ingeniers, who use technology to win their battles. I thought of 3 main schools of Ingeniering: Life, Chemicals, and Geography.

http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=13083.0

Also, I think the boomerang should be destroyed when its attack is cancelled by a successful defense, and should take a round to recharge after use, so that the boomerang has time to come back.

[ACG]

I think 38 might be too high for the Crusader. Fully trained mages are level 6 creatures and have a lot more life than a non-mage. If he does not use magic he is not a mage. Merely not being trained in a particular school of magic does not make him "antimagic", especially if he still can cast spells. If he were really against magic and those who use it he would not cast spells and could not participate in the Mage Wars without some sort of viable alternative to magic.

I should probably make a comment regarding the intended theme of the crusader: he is anti-magic, but this does not mean that he does not use magic. Murkh and his disciples are somewhat hypocritical; though they condemn magic in all its forms, they are willing to tolerate its use in their quest to eradicate it. Murkh in particular was one of the most powerful mages of his day, although he (presumably) hated the self contradiction in his work (I think Murkh would probably be either pure arcane or arcane/war). But to destroy something, you first have to learn how it works, and it is difficult to be anti-magical without being magical. The crusader is capable of using spells, but his magical training focuses more on the suppression of magic than its use, hence the lack of training in any school. Enchantments are the most magical thing possible (objects of pure magic), so he eschews them out of loathing and zealotry.

I came up with some ideas a while back for non-magical Arena fighters. Aside from the giant, who would probably be innately powerful and not have much need for tech, all the other ideas I came up with were for Ingeniers, who use technology to win their battles. I thought of 3 main schools of Ingeniering: Life, Chemicals, and Geography.

http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=13083.0

Good ideas. Non-mage fighters could definitely be interesting, although there are some compatibility concerns (presumably mages would not be allowed to use non-mage tech, so it would be like a spinoff of Mage Wars that was still compatible with the rest of the game, using the same mechanics).

Also, I think the boomerang should be destroyed when its attack is cancelled by a successful defense, and should take a round to recharge after use, so that the boomerang has time to come back.

An excellent suggestion, I will implement that next time I update the card (regarding destruction upon successful defense). Regarding recharging, I don't think it is justified thematically (I think the boomerang would probably return by the next round given the time units of the game), and I don't think it is necessary for balancing, so I will probably hold off on that.

[wtcannonjr]

You're right; that was a typo. Zone exclusive is meaningless in this context, and was not intended.

Here is an updated Danglevine with these issues clarified.

Two comments on Danglevine.

1. Since it can only target a Wall you may want to turn the card to Landscape mode to match the format of all the Wall Conjurations. This helps to visually identify that this spell is not placed in a zone, but rather between zones on a wall.
2. I think it would simply the rules interaction about range attacks from a wall between zones by just removing the attack bar from the spell and creating the effect you want in the text section of the card similar to many other conjurations.

[kailas]

you could use these for cards:
http://deligaris.deviantart.com/art/Mage-Wars-card-assets-374857744