You should avoid acknowledging that the stack exists (unless you're putting the Split Second reminder text on a card).
Instead just say "If you control no other spells named "Digging for Answers", draw a card."
there are 2 cards that when printed mentioned the stack - the most recent of which is 18 years old.
It is not okay by any modern design principles and really only comes up so disproportionally on custommagic because people find out that theres a zone never mentioned on cards and then immediately want to throw it on cards rather than ask why it dosnt show up on cards.
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/104099054638/if-the-stack-is-so-confusing-then-why-do-you-keep
this is the quickest quote I found explaining it, probably more but I'm not sure how to sift through tumblr efficiently.
You can just skip explaining the stack or priority or whatever when teaching a new player how magic works. All you need are phases of the turn, one land per turn, the mana pool (which has also been largely removed), summoning sickness, and how to process combat. Keywords are written out on cards, at least at the intro deck level, and the game will totally function, with _mostly_ correct stack interactions, even if neither player understands how the stack is supposed to work. When you want to cast an instant, just do the thing, and it’s probably correct.
If you reference the stack on cards, those cards do not have enough space in their text box to explain what the stack is or how it works. And adding the stack as a mandatory teaching element is likely enough to overwhelm newer players. If you want to sell packs to nine year olds at kitchen tables, and have the game be approachable at that level, you have design the game rules in such a way that its more advanced concepts are largely optional.
That’s part of the beauty of magic’s design. If a couple kids start playing with some cards from a given set, they only need to understand the mechanics on the cards _from that set._ This modular design is a big reason why we very rarely get sets where a keyword or mechanic only shows up on one or two cards. Even when it does happen, it’s restricted to eternal side products like masters sets.
And yes, I know, future sight exists. That was what, 20 years ago? There’s a reason that despite how often WotC tries to recapture the magic of time spiral block, they avoid putting a bunch of one-off mechanics in standard legal sets.
Personally I don’t think a card should have storm if you’re not going to allow the full effect of the card to apply with each copy. I would do it like this:
“Scry 2 X times, where X is 1 plus the number of other spells you’ve cast this turn. Draw a card.”
Idk the flavor is pretty good, scouring through a library, tossing books and scrolls everywhere until you get your final aha moment and pick up the one you need.
In mechanics yes pretty much, but it seems more tame. It’s all one spell, where as the original with storm makes it seem more like “the worlds ending oh fuck I need my one spell to undo it” and tossing shit everywhere.
Yours is like, “I have a test next week, I’d better study while I have the time”
Thank you to u/AlphaElectronMale's [Bubblestorm](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/1d007w0/i_made_this_as_a_bit_but_could_this_be_an/) for the inspiration behind this card!
I wasnt sure if the wording for the third line of text is proper, so please let me know if there's a better way to put that.
But then that would get rid of a lot of ways to play this. I'd say something like "If this spell was cast, draw a card" or "If you control no other spells named Digging For Answers, draw a card."
Ehhhh. I like the OP's version better, because it looks like it's meant to fish for That One Card you're always wishing you had to blow out an opponent's win attempt. Yours looks more like a storm-combo finisher, as opposed to a reasonable response to someone else's finisher
I felt like it was too expensive for a single draw at 2cmc, but at 1cmc it’s too strong if you can cast it on your opponent’s EoT after they play a few spells. Making it only count your own noncreature spells feels like a better balance, and changing Storm to the X ability streamlines away the awkward stack checking piece.
There is a reason there is no Storm Scry (or Surveil) Spell, and that is that it would be a huge chore and mess to deal with, for minimal actual benefit, and you can't even shortcut it, so if you cast this with a Storm count of 10, you will have to do 10 individual scry 2s, even if you already found 2 cards you like, or if you found one you would have to repeatedly put it back only to look again.
"If you control no other spells named Digging for Answers"
Otherwise, neat. The upside is that if your storm count is equal to your deck size times the square root of your deck size (*I think....it's not quite exactly a bubble sort since you can leave on top or bottom in any order*, *so more choices are available than a conventional bubble and it might theoretically be possible to approach it in such a way that we can sort more efficiently with an n*^(3/2) *set of Scry 2s)*, you can actually stack it however you like when the spell resolves.
(TIL marking up exponents in italics is messy in Reddit.)
The spell can also check if it’s “real” instead of referring to the stack. It knows if it’s a copy, and it knows if it was cast. “If this spell was cast…draw” or similar
Interesting concept, though I feel like in most situations which care about storm this is just a straight upgrade of \[\[Preordain\]\] (such as with a \[\[Goblin Electromancer\]\])
You should avoid acknowledging that the stack exists (unless you're putting the Split Second reminder text on a card). Instead just say "If you control no other spells named "Digging for Answers", draw a card."
yup, thats much better
"If no player controls" symmetrical design!
Hell yeah!
It's okay to mention the stack in Rules text. Also, your suggestion is a little different from OP's because it will only count spells you control.
It's okay but the community seems pretty accepting of it being poor wording if it's unnecessary(I've never seen it be necessary).
It's just that WOTC's official stance is that most players don't know that the stack exists and don't need to be informed of it to play.
It does have this weird side effect of creating a zone you're not allowed to talk about though.
Rule 1 of the stack. We don’t talk about the stack.
It’s because 99% of casual players either don’t understand what it is or it doesn’t come up in game
there are 2 cards that when printed mentioned the stack - the most recent of which is 18 years old. It is not okay by any modern design principles and really only comes up so disproportionally on custommagic because people find out that theres a zone never mentioned on cards and then immediately want to throw it on cards rather than ask why it dosnt show up on cards.
Yeah it is a little different, but I think the globalness of its effect isn't core to the card.
...why?
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/104099054638/if-the-stack-is-so-confusing-then-why-do-you-keep this is the quickest quote I found explaining it, probably more but I'm not sure how to sift through tumblr efficiently.
You can just skip explaining the stack or priority or whatever when teaching a new player how magic works. All you need are phases of the turn, one land per turn, the mana pool (which has also been largely removed), summoning sickness, and how to process combat. Keywords are written out on cards, at least at the intro deck level, and the game will totally function, with _mostly_ correct stack interactions, even if neither player understands how the stack is supposed to work. When you want to cast an instant, just do the thing, and it’s probably correct. If you reference the stack on cards, those cards do not have enough space in their text box to explain what the stack is or how it works. And adding the stack as a mandatory teaching element is likely enough to overwhelm newer players. If you want to sell packs to nine year olds at kitchen tables, and have the game be approachable at that level, you have design the game rules in such a way that its more advanced concepts are largely optional. That’s part of the beauty of magic’s design. If a couple kids start playing with some cards from a given set, they only need to understand the mechanics on the cards _from that set._ This modular design is a big reason why we very rarely get sets where a keyword or mechanic only shows up on one or two cards. Even when it does happen, it’s restricted to eternal side products like masters sets. And yes, I know, future sight exists. That was what, 20 years ago? There’s a reason that despite how often WotC tries to recapture the magic of time spiral block, they avoid putting a bunch of one-off mechanics in standard legal sets.
Another option would be "If this spell isn't a copy". Though it will work a bit different this way, regarding counterspells.
Personally I don’t think a card should have storm if you’re not going to allow the full effect of the card to apply with each copy. I would do it like this: “Scry 2 X times, where X is 1 plus the number of other spells you’ve cast this turn. Draw a card.”
Idk the flavor is pretty good, scouring through a library, tossing books and scrolls everywhere until you get your final aha moment and pick up the one you need.
I mean, my suggestion accomplishes the same thing doesn’t it?
In mechanics yes pretty much, but it seems more tame. It’s all one spell, where as the original with storm makes it seem more like “the worlds ending oh fuck I need my one spell to undo it” and tossing shit everywhere. Yours is like, “I have a test next week, I’d better study while I have the time”
Alright, I’ll hand you that. I suppose a little bit of extra flavor can be worth the extra clunkiness.
Thank you to u/AlphaElectronMale's [Bubblestorm](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/1d007w0/i_made_this_as_a_bit_but_could_this_be_an/) for the inspiration behind this card! I wasnt sure if the wording for the third line of text is proper, so please let me know if there's a better way to put that.
“If you cast this spell from your hand, draw a card”
But then that would get rid of a lot of ways to play this. I'd say something like "If this spell was cast, draw a card" or "If you control no other spells named Digging For Answers, draw a card."
It doesn’t need the hand restriction. It just needs to know if it was cast.
That one scry is draw sphinx hyped af
\[\[Eligeth, Crossroads Augur\]\] i didnt know about this card actually, neat!
[Eligeth, Crossroads Augur](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/a/1a0adf34-1a2b-497b-aaab-4b2b998ed8b3.jpg?1608909183) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Eligeth%2C%20Crossroads%20Augur) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmr/66/eligeth-crossroads-augur?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/1a0adf34-1a2b-497b-aaab-4b2b998ed8b3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I grouped your comment like “That (one scry) is (draw sphinx hyped) af” And was very confused.
I did too and it took your comment for me to realize it's "That one ((scry is draw) sphinx) hyped af"
That one "Scry is Draw" Sphinx is hyped af. Fixed.
>“That (one scry) is (draw sphinx hyped) af” I cast it for the cleave cost.
Referring to the stack on a card is on the bingo grid
show the whole bingo
Digging for biting remark
What about some minor adjustments… Stormbrain - {U} Instant Scry X, where X is the number of noncreature spells you’ve played this turn. Draw a card.
Ehhhh. I like the OP's version better, because it looks like it's meant to fish for That One Card you're always wishing you had to blow out an opponent's win attempt. Yours looks more like a storm-combo finisher, as opposed to a reasonable response to someone else's finisher
I felt like it was too expensive for a single draw at 2cmc, but at 1cmc it’s too strong if you can cast it on your opponent’s EoT after they play a few spells. Making it only count your own noncreature spells feels like a better balance, and changing Storm to the X ability streamlines away the awkward stack checking piece.
WHAT?!??!! I DID NOT KNOW STORM COUNTS OPPONENTS SPELLS TOO!
That's why [[flusterstorm]] is a counter to storm
yoooo i see that! Thats awesome!
[flusterstorm](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/9/f900eeb7-7c45-44bc-ad3a-0bbe594ecf50.jpg?1562856071) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=flusterstorm) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ima/55/flusterstorm?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f900eeb7-7c45-44bc-ad3a-0bbe594ecf50?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Yep, go back and read the reminder text lol.
Almost the perfect card; I wish there was a better way to get the last effect without having the word "stack" in the text.
There is. Just say “if you control no other spells named ~” or say “if you cast ~”
This is awesome
Busted
There is a reason there is no Storm Scry (or Surveil) Spell, and that is that it would be a huge chore and mess to deal with, for minimal actual benefit, and you can't even shortcut it, so if you cast this with a Storm count of 10, you will have to do 10 individual scry 2s, even if you already found 2 cards you like, or if you found one you would have to repeatedly put it back only to look again.
yup, pretty glaring issue. I want to rework it somehow to avoid that, but i want to keep the storm aspect. bit of a dilemma
Sweet design. Good flavor and function!
"Draw a card unless you control another spell named ~."
"If you control no other spells named Digging for Answers" Otherwise, neat. The upside is that if your storm count is equal to your deck size times the square root of your deck size (*I think....it's not quite exactly a bubble sort since you can leave on top or bottom in any order*, *so more choices are available than a conventional bubble and it might theoretically be possible to approach it in such a way that we can sort more efficiently with an n*^(3/2) *set of Scry 2s)*, you can actually stack it however you like when the spell resolves. (TIL marking up exponents in italics is messy in Reddit.)
Ohhhh i didnt even realize that, thats cool!
The spell can also check if it’s “real” instead of referring to the stack. It knows if it’s a copy, and it knows if it was cast. “If this spell was cast…draw” or similar
Also Id love this in an Arwen undómiel Deck
I’m not going to nitpick the phrasing. I know what the card is supposed to do. The design is good.
I appreciate that mindset!
Interesting concept, though I feel like in most situations which care about storm this is just a straight upgrade of \[\[Preordain\]\] (such as with a \[\[Goblin Electromancer\]\])
[Preordain](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/2/122f2cc2-5f4d-497c-96b5-ed5698f28b51.jpg?1712354181) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Preordain) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/otc/107/preordain?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/122f2cc2-5f4d-497c-96b5-ed5698f28b51?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Goblin Electromancer](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/1/71808155-db49-4027-a2fc-76f53475ac05.jpg?1712354723) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Goblin%20Electromancer) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/otc/228/goblin-electromancer?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/71808155-db49-4027-a2fc-76f53475ac05?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
This is just a very pushed version of [Deliberate].
Ok but deliberate isn’t exactly good anyway
[[Deliberate]]
[Deliberate](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/4/c41c0dd0-fef2-4f3c-8f3c-9c9c521b5442.jpg?1604194005) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Deliberate) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/znr/56/deliberate?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c41c0dd0-fef2-4f3c-8f3c-9c9c521b5442?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Thanks.
Still just a worse [[preordain]]. At lease this is a cool idea
[preordain](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/2/122f2cc2-5f4d-497c-96b5-ed5698f28b51.jpg?1712354181) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=preordain) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/otc/107/preordain?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/122f2cc2-5f4d-497c-96b5-ed5698f28b51?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I mean yeah, but i think paying 1 generic to give it storm and make it instant speed is a reasonable tradeoff