Comments: 26
thesamuraiman [2014-04-11 03:39:09 +0000 UTC]
This is really awesome. I love artifacts. Esper all day!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
thenobletheif [2014-04-10 21:42:19 +0000 UTC]
Seeing as dream halls was completely broken, might it be a good idea to make this a bit harder to use?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RowanKeltizar In reply to thenobletheif [2014-04-11 00:41:21 +0000 UTC]
The colored cost is considerably harder to pay. Bc it's artifacts only, it's pretty niche. Dream Halls is broken but it's still legal in Commander unlike some other things XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
thenobletheif In reply to RowanKeltizar [2014-04-11 12:29:31 +0000 UTC]
Ok. For some reason I thought that Dream Halls was available in other formats and was banned in most of them. I was apparently wrong. Still seems very broken. VERY broken. At least you could naturalize a dream halls. So I would suggest adding a life payment to the dream halls effect. I think that would make it harder to use and then you can't enter the infinite into most of your deck.
Also you can toss the artifact lands from mirrodin, which seems like a big step up from dream halls to me. Especially if people use this in a casual format that isn't commander, where you could potentially turn every extra land you have into a free spell.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RowanKeltizar In reply to thenobletheif [2014-04-14 01:49:56 +0000 UTC]
Maybe I'll just take the indestructibility away. I hadn't considered the artifact land issue.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
thenobletheif In reply to RowanKeltizar [2014-04-14 02:52:23 +0000 UTC]
Also consider that dream halls could potentially be used by either player without building around it, so your opponent could benefit. With this, unless your opponent is also running esper you can dump your hand for free with the extra card draw or keep a few counter spells in hand to respond to you opponent.
The dream halls effect has no way to be non-game-breaking other than players trying to hold back and be fair. All I can see is a guy powering this out to drop a few blightsteel colosi and lightning greaves all at once. Is there any situation where letting someone play a blightsteel (or similarly evil giant robot) turn 6 or earlier fair?
So in summary I think the card draw is powerful, the indestructibility is powerful, but free spells to me is game breaking.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
thenobletheif In reply to RowanKeltizar [2014-04-14 14:57:19 +0000 UTC]
I think this works well. Kind of like a transmute artifact from your hand. It would be hilarious in casual play to see some one toss a Gleemax for this. Needs testing like how powerful it is when you toss something big for a lot of little things, but I think this should be reasonably powerful.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Paulthored [2014-02-11 00:42:38 +0000 UTC]
might I suggest, That the sacrifice Meet some extra requirement's... Mainly "sacrifice Artifacts whose combined converted mana cost is greater than or equal to Gelboros converted mana cost. You may sacrifice 2 Artifacts, with (0) or no casting cost, to per one mana of said cost."
#2: "Can't be sacrificed."
#3 "Is indestructible until end of your 2nd turn after played from hand."
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Super-Fast-Tortoise [2013-08-10 22:19:17 +0000 UTC]
should be two or three artifacts sacrificed- god know that is broken enough
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
RAV0004 [2013-02-08 08:51:15 +0000 UTC]
Undying? On an Artifact?
Flavor aside, really abusable here. I'd suggest pitching the undying for a different sort of recursion. Maybe "If Gelboros would enter the graveyard from anywhere, you may sacrifice an artifact. If you do, return Gelboros, the Golden to it's owner's hand"?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Rivenor [2013-02-03 00:35:48 +0000 UTC]
I like this one quite a bit ^_^
Ties into Esper quite well.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
DraskyVanderhoff [2013-01-29 15:34:42 +0000 UTC]
Maybe a translucid creature will be better since it combine all the elements and gold is more related with white and red IMHO
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RowanKeltizar In reply to DraskyVanderhoff [2013-01-29 20:20:14 +0000 UTC]
translucid? I'm unsure what you mean here. That's not an existing creature type. Are saying to change the name?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RowanKeltizar In reply to DraskyVanderhoff [2013-01-30 00:06:47 +0000 UTC]
oh, I see. well I try to stick to existing creature types, keywords, etc... so that's why I chose homunculus. It's alchemy related. I was trying to preserve the original concept by the artist.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
N1C0LB0L4S [2013-01-29 14:44:46 +0000 UTC]
So, its awesome. But. Isn't there a card for three mana that does this? I mean, not on a stick, of course. But. Its red, I believe, from innistrad.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RowanKeltizar In reply to N1C0LB0L4S [2013-01-29 20:17:16 +0000 UTC]
Your thinking of shattered perception. but that's a bit different: [link] I will say that I'm not completely happy with this card and would appreciate hearing any ideas.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Cpt-ExtremeKiwi [2013-01-29 01:16:21 +0000 UTC]
If you were to say, give it undying, wouldn't that just stall the game? You would just end up with an infinite pile of legendary creatures triggering each other, and that wouldn't go anywhere fast.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
RowanKeltizar In reply to Cpt-ExtremeKiwi [2013-01-29 01:23:26 +0000 UTC]
I actually just changed it so he had undying. That works I think with no infinite copies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Cpt-ExtremeKiwi In reply to Cpt-ExtremeKiwi [2013-01-29 01:18:18 +0000 UTC]
*Or really even if any other copies of him entered the battlefield from anywhere.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
notchthegreat [2013-01-28 23:40:16 +0000 UTC]
The mechanic reminds me of squee
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Tommo999 [2013-01-28 22:31:19 +0000 UTC]
you give it like when it dies it enters tapped with double power and toughtness
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
RowanKeltizar In reply to Tommo999 [2013-01-28 23:06:22 +0000 UTC]
it can't attack or block so that wouldn't be very helpful.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Tommo999 In reply to RowanKeltizar [2013-01-29 07:38:13 +0000 UTC]
it would, it would live stuff like burn. and they would only want to exile it or return it to your hand/library
👍: 0 ⏩: 0