Not sure on exact wording for the granted ability.
Simon O'Keeffe · 2014-04-15 14:06:35
YMTS 8 · C
Not sure on exact wording for the granted ability.
Simon O'Keeffe · 2014-04-15 14:06:35
I like that you can use this as a removal spell if they only have one creature. This might be a good place for Reform - I wanted to make a cool green enchantment to put it on and this fits the bill.
Kieran Symington · 2014-04-15 15:47:16
Oh and I think the sacrifice is an ability that would go on the enchantment not the creature.
Kieran Symington · 2014-04-15 15:49:28
Like that?
Simon O'Keeffe · 2014-04-15 16:10:07
That seems right.
Kieran Symington · 2014-04-16 08:14:52
We were going to give this card reform. Certainly helps put the game away if they have one blocker but might be too good/too many words for a common.
Thomas Baker · 2014-05-24 16:17:22
This is a B card, isn't it?
Thomas Baker · 2014-05-26 11:36:45
I don't think so. I basically borrowed the ability from Emperor Crocodile.
Simon O'Keeffe · 2014-05-26 11:53:00
Should it be "Enchant creature you control" then?
Thomas Baker · 2014-05-26 21:29:43
But then it loses the cool play of enchanting your opponents only creature! Is conditional green removal too far out of the colour pie?
Simon O'Keeffe · 2014-05-26 21:35:22
There is a good chance this is stone terrible. The fact it can be used as a removal spell is good, but it's super expensive for a worse Oakenform that could end up killing your own creature!
Kieran Symington · 2014-05-26 21:37:22
Been playing with it a bit. It's actually kind of good in URG where you put it on your flier and/or kill something with it. But I think it's pretty much definitely a color pie violation if it can be put on opponent's creatures.
Thomas Baker · 2014-05-27 13:55:58
And, obviously not very good if you can't.
Thomas Baker · 2014-05-27 13:56:14
I'm pretty sure that this just isn't very good at all. Uber conditional removal, and not enough bang for your buck to justify the possible 2 4 1 for your opponent.
Paul Hodgson · 2014-05-27 15:02:59
Maybe : Enchanted creature gets +2/+2 and trample. When ~ ETB enchanted creature fights another target creature. - could set up some spicy situations?
Paul Hodgson · 2014-05-27 15:04:11
Paul's version catapults this to very good, especially with trample, but 3G Sorcery speed removal conditional on having a creature probably isn't going to break the universe.
Thomas Baker · 2014-05-28 07:34:26
Maybe trample is pushing it too far? Isn't there a similar sorcery for 3G that puts a +1/+1 counter on your dude?
Paul Hodgson · 2014-05-28 08:22:15
Nobody ever wanted to play this. It is just super bad.
Kieran Symington · 2014-06-08 10:17:53
Rob played this in UGr aggro.
Thomas Baker · 2014-06-29 22:16:59
I was amazed.
Kieran Symington · 2014-06-30 17:05:46
Vindication
Simon O'Keeffe · 2014-06-30 21:13:54
| Date | Person | Name | Cost | Type | Rules |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014-04-15 16:10:29 | Simon O'Keeffe | Hubris Cloak | 3G | Enchantment - Aura | Enchant creature Enchanted creature gets +2/+2 and trample. When enchanted creatures controller controls no other creatures, its controller sacrifices it. |
| 2014-04-15 16:10:07 | Simon O'Keeffe | Hubris Cloak | 3G | Enchantment - Aura | Enchant creature Enchanted creature gets+2/+2 and trample. When enchanted creatures controller controls no other creatures, its controller sacrifices it. |
| 2014-04-15 14:06:35 | Simon O'Keeffe | Hubris Cloak | 3G | Enchantment - Aura | Enchant creature Enchanted creature has +2/+2 and trample, and "When you control no other creatures, sacrifice this." |
| 2014-04-15 14:06:10 | Simon O'Keeffe | Hubris Cloak | 3G | Enchantment - Auru | Enchant creature Enchanted creature has +2/+2 and trample, and "When you control no other creatures, sacrifice this." |