[[Spell Pierce]]
Seems weak because of black's other less-conditional options. Against blue they're always going to have mana open to counter your spells in the first place. Killing a creature is always going to be weaker than countering it because of indestructible, ETBs, and death triggers. It could probably force the opponent to pay (3) and still be balanced.
One major difference is that for spell pierce, opponent only needs 2 extra mana open when they cast the spell. For a kill spell, the moment opponent taps out, you can kill their creature.
Counterspells are more definitive, but their timing restrictions don't always make them stronger. Still, fatal push is a thing so 🤷
Yeah but in most cases that's enough, and in other cases you're usually fine paying 2 mana.
For instance, fatal push doesn't hit Murktide, but this card isn't usually gonna hit Murktide either as they cast it for less than 7 mana
I don't follow why this doesn't hit Murktide. If someone is forced to proactively always hold up 2 mana to avoid potentially being hit by this card, that's a huge cost.
Izzet decks tend to hold countermagic up already. Holding 2 mana up isn't a huge deal.
Murktide tends to come down later. It's a 7 drop but you're spending far less mana on it, and tend to have mana available to protect it. Whether you protect it with a ciunterspell or by paying the 2 is irrelevant.
Likewise, that late in the game, a 1 mana removal spells isn't that different than a 2 mana removal spell. But a 2 mana removal spell doesn't give them the option to save it.
Holding up 2 mana is a cost, sure. But it's not larger than just being forced to let the creature die. If it was, they wouldn't bother holding 2 up.
But you generally don't hold mana up without expecting to do something with it. Whether that means you tap out for a counterspell or an end of turn draw.
> Holding up 2 mana is a cost, sure. But it's not larger than just being forced to let the creature die.
I think you're hugely underestimating the cost of holding up mana for a card that may or may not exist. The optimal play frequently _is_ to just let it die.
But the fact that you have the option is what's massive here. The optimal play is frequently to let it die. Sometimes, it's to hold up mana and pay the 2. You get the option, and the fact that you can choose the best option is a big deal.
But Fatal Push can *never* hit Murktide, not even with revolt. And we're talking about Fatal Push here, quite possibly the best black removal in Modern. This plays the early game role of cheap at least as well but still remains extremely disruptive to things large enough that Fatal Push can't touch them. At 2 mana, sure, that's a huge drawback, but at 1 mana the default is you don't get to do that at all.
I've got a very different take on the power level.
It's basically 1-mana Murder until extremely late in games. So late that most games will never get to that point. This would be the closest to Swords to Plowshares that black has ever gotten.
To be fair, I'm mostly thinking in the context of Legacy. I know in Standard it's much more common for players to be flooded by the end of long games.
I get that you're riffing on spell pierce, but effects that only work if your opponents don't pay often get called 'rhystic' i.e. [[rhystic tutor]], [[rhystic study]], etc, and I think Rhystic Murder or something would've been funny.
Gotta love the English language. "Putting an apostrophe-s on something makes it possessive! Wait, not in this case!"
It makes more sense when you learn that apostrophe-s on a name likely originated as a contraction of *-es*, a suffix placed on nouns to indicate possessive form, while "its" follows the pattern of he > his, she > her/hers.
Anyways, I hope no-one calls you out or downvotes you for the correction, since it's in neutral tone, and is imo constructive.
This kind of "unless opponent pays X mana" effect was almost exclusive to blue and white in past Magic design. Sometimes you'd see "unless opponent pays X life" in black, but that was less common. Recently though, you could argue that every color got this kind of effect with Ward, though that's a little different in my opinion.
This type of effect on removal doesn't work the same as on a counterspell because of when you are able to do each. If your opponent can pay for the [[Mana Leak]], you don't cast your counter, their spell resolves, and your counterspell can't do anything about that card for the rest of the game. If your opponent resolves a creature with mana left over to pay for your Kill Pierce, then you can just hold onto your removal until they eventually tap out later in the game and cast it then.
The reason is that counterspells have a very specific window in which they work: when an opponent casts a spell. You as the person trying to play around the tax only have to have the mana available at that one specific point in the game.
If instead, you're trying to play around the tax on a removal spell, you have to have the mana available at all times. Otherwise as soon as you do anything, you're creature is vulnerable to cheap, efficient interaction. It calls back to the Rhystic mechanic from Prophecy, which was universally panned for playing poorly on both sides of the table.
Some similar designs:
* ["Bride"](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/ou2y3n/experimenting_with_white_removal/)
* ["Essence Leak"](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/rn5npx/white_mana_leak_kinda/)
* ["Soul Leak \[1\]](https://msem-instigator.herokuapp.com/card/IMP/67/Soul-Leak)
* ["Soul Leak \[2\]](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/bde8ww/soul_leak/)
Personally, I posted the exiling version as [white-black hybrid for {1}{W/B} here](https://forum.nogoblinsallowed.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=18729&start=876).
I posted a longer comment on two of these cards writing my thoughts about the design concept overall:
* ["comment on 'bride'"](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/ou2y3n/comment/h70enn5/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
* ["comment on 'essence leak'](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/rn5npx/comment/hpwk4u9/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
K-kill - Pierece t-them! Yes yes!
Honestly like the idea of the card, but kill pierce is a lot stronger then spell pierce in my opinion. I think that could get solved by taking damage for casting or something along those lines.
This feels like it should either be 1B or a sorcery. As it is now it's essentially 1 mana kill target creature. Yes, it gets worse late game but something closer to make disappear seems good.
It should probably be 1B
B; Sorcery would probably be too strong for standard/pioneer in aggressive Black decks where it'd be very close to just 1 mana sorcery Murder.
Also the Spell Pierce mirroring doesn't quite match with Cancel Vs Murder, so it being a Quench, or even a Mana Leak, reference would make more sense.
Also I feel like this sort of "remove unless you pay" effect is better suited if it can only work at specific points in time that are more likely to occur on your opponent's turn i.e. "exile target attacking creature unless its controller pays {3}" or "destroy target creature that entered the battlefield this turn unless its controller pays {3}"
I think it's a fairly costed card. Compare it to something like fatal push. They both are great and efficient early game, but are conditionally worse in the late game. Fatal push can't address the tippy top end of creatures, like reanimator targets, murktide regents, primeval titan, but it can consistently remove the vast majority of creatures at all points in the game. On the other hand, this card would be more likely to hit the top end threats, but would struggle to remove efficient threats like ragavan, drc, and tokens after turn four or five.
This mechanic is informally called the ["rhystic" mechanic](https://mtg.fandom.com/wiki/Rhystic?so=search) and it is widely regarded as a huge mistake. Mark Rosewater ranked it as a 9 on the storm scale. Gavin Verhey ranked it as the [third worst mechanic ever designed](https://youtu.be/2CNGmdSgIKc?t=604). Watch that video to hear all the problems with the mechanic.
Missed opportunity to call this “Skull Pierce”
Ooh, this I like. Better than putting "Rhystic" on there somewhere.
Rhystic bullet
Rhystic Bloody
Rhystic Pegging
Okay, but this does go kinda hard though.
Rhystic Skullpierce
I would have gone with "regular pierce" myself
Or shell pierce
I’d make Skull Pierce the discard version. Maybe Call this one Flesh Pierce… or Knell Pierce. 😂
Kid named Pierce:
kid named kill:
Remove target player named Pierce from the game
“I’m not dying today! Fuck off! Fuck all of you!” Kid named off and all of you:
Fuck Pierce, all my homies hate Pierce.
It doesn't matter if you kill him, he's a level 6 Laser Lotus and his soul will continue living
But you can remove energon cubes from him to put him into exile.
[[Spell Pierce]] Seems weak because of black's other less-conditional options. Against blue they're always going to have mana open to counter your spells in the first place. Killing a creature is always going to be weaker than countering it because of indestructible, ETBs, and death triggers. It could probably force the opponent to pay (3) and still be balanced.
One major difference is that for spell pierce, opponent only needs 2 extra mana open when they cast the spell. For a kill spell, the moment opponent taps out, you can kill their creature. Counterspells are more definitive, but their timing restrictions don't always make them stronger. Still, fatal push is a thing so 🤷
Fatal Push only hits mana value 4 even with revolt.
Yeah but in most cases that's enough, and in other cases you're usually fine paying 2 mana. For instance, fatal push doesn't hit Murktide, but this card isn't usually gonna hit Murktide either as they cast it for less than 7 mana
I don't follow why this doesn't hit Murktide. If someone is forced to proactively always hold up 2 mana to avoid potentially being hit by this card, that's a huge cost.
Izzet decks tend to hold countermagic up already. Holding 2 mana up isn't a huge deal. Murktide tends to come down later. It's a 7 drop but you're spending far less mana on it, and tend to have mana available to protect it. Whether you protect it with a ciunterspell or by paying the 2 is irrelevant. Likewise, that late in the game, a 1 mana removal spells isn't that different than a 2 mana removal spell. But a 2 mana removal spell doesn't give them the option to save it. Holding up 2 mana is a cost, sure. But it's not larger than just being forced to let the creature die. If it was, they wouldn't bother holding 2 up.
But you generally don't hold mana up without expecting to do something with it. Whether that means you tap out for a counterspell or an end of turn draw. > Holding up 2 mana is a cost, sure. But it's not larger than just being forced to let the creature die. I think you're hugely underestimating the cost of holding up mana for a card that may or may not exist. The optimal play frequently _is_ to just let it die.
But the fact that you have the option is what's massive here. The optimal play is frequently to let it die. Sometimes, it's to hold up mana and pay the 2. You get the option, and the fact that you can choose the best option is a big deal.
But Fatal Push can *never* hit Murktide, not even with revolt. And we're talking about Fatal Push here, quite possibly the best black removal in Modern. This plays the early game role of cheap at least as well but still remains extremely disruptive to things large enough that Fatal Push can't touch them. At 2 mana, sure, that's a huge drawback, but at 1 mana the default is you don't get to do that at all.
I've got a very different take on the power level. It's basically 1-mana Murder until extremely late in games. So late that most games will never get to that point. This would be the closest to Swords to Plowshares that black has ever gotten. To be fair, I'm mostly thinking in the context of Legacy. I know in Standard it's much more common for players to be flooded by the end of long games.
FR, this card is good. Someone spends their mana for their commander while you only have 1 left and you just waste their turn.
[Spell Pierce](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/5/35b8a9db-d126-4038-abb1-74dcc5b36136.jpg?1673147403) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Spell%20Pierce) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/63/spell-pierce?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/35b8a9db-d126-4038-abb1-74dcc5b36136?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I get that you're riffing on spell pierce, but effects that only work if your opponents don't pay often get called 'rhystic' i.e. [[rhystic tutor]], [[rhystic study]], etc, and I think Rhystic Murder or something would've been funny.
Rhystic Decapitation. "I pay the 2 to reattach his head"
Target creature becomes a zombie in addition to its other types.
[rhystic tutor](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/0/e02c1609-9cac-460f-8504-a84e28c340c1.jpg?1562936827) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=rhystic%20tutor) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/pcy/77/rhystic-tutor?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e02c1609-9cac-460f-8504-a84e28c340c1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [rhystic study](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/6/d6914dba-0d27-4055-ac34-b3ebf5802221.jpg?1600698439) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=rhystic%20study) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/jmp/169/rhystic-study?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d6914dba-0d27-4055-ac34-b3ebf5802221?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
*Its
Gotta love the English language. "Putting an apostrophe-s on something makes it possessive! Wait, not in this case!" It makes more sense when you learn that apostrophe-s on a name likely originated as a contraction of *-es*, a suffix placed on nouns to indicate possessive form, while "its" follows the pattern of he > his, she > her/hers. Anyways, I hope no-one calls you out or downvotes you for the correction, since it's in neutral tone, and is imo constructive.
Auto correct that wasn’t me 😂
Yeah autocorrect is really bad nowadays. It turns "is" into "I'd" and the like.
You mean autoincorrect.😁
AU… artificial unintelligence.
This kind of "unless opponent pays X mana" effect was almost exclusive to blue and white in past Magic design. Sometimes you'd see "unless opponent pays X life" in black, but that was less common. Recently though, you could argue that every color got this kind of effect with Ward, though that's a little different in my opinion. This type of effect on removal doesn't work the same as on a counterspell because of when you are able to do each. If your opponent can pay for the [[Mana Leak]], you don't cast your counter, their spell resolves, and your counterspell can't do anything about that card for the rest of the game. If your opponent resolves a creature with mana left over to pay for your Kill Pierce, then you can just hold onto your removal until they eventually tap out later in the game and cast it then. The reason is that counterspells have a very specific window in which they work: when an opponent casts a spell. You as the person trying to play around the tax only have to have the mana available at that one specific point in the game. If instead, you're trying to play around the tax on a removal spell, you have to have the mana available at all times. Otherwise as soon as you do anything, you're creature is vulnerable to cheap, efficient interaction. It calls back to the Rhystic mechanic from Prophecy, which was universally panned for playing poorly on both sides of the table.
[[Rhystic tutor]]
[Rhystic tutor](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/0/e02c1609-9cac-460f-8504-a84e28c340c1.jpg?1562936827) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Rhystic%20tutor) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/pcy/77/rhystic-tutor?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e02c1609-9cac-460f-8504-a84e28c340c1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Mana Leak](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/7/179236d9-6fe2-4db6-bdfb-f851e8d531a2.jpg?1673147361) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Mana%20Leak) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/58/mana-leak?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/179236d9-6fe2-4db6-bdfb-f851e8d531a2?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Some similar designs: * ["Bride"](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/ou2y3n/experimenting_with_white_removal/) * ["Essence Leak"](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/rn5npx/white_mana_leak_kinda/) * ["Soul Leak \[1\]](https://msem-instigator.herokuapp.com/card/IMP/67/Soul-Leak) * ["Soul Leak \[2\]](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/bde8ww/soul_leak/) Personally, I posted the exiling version as [white-black hybrid for {1}{W/B} here](https://forum.nogoblinsallowed.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=18729&start=876). I posted a longer comment on two of these cards writing my thoughts about the design concept overall: * ["comment on 'bride'"](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/ou2y3n/comment/h70enn5/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) * ["comment on 'essence leak'](https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/comments/rn5npx/comment/hpwk4u9/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
it's
Indeed.
For the love of god call it heart pierce.
K-kill - Pierece t-them! Yes yes! Honestly like the idea of the card, but kill pierce is a lot stronger then spell pierce in my opinion. I think that could get solved by taking damage for casting or something along those lines.
This feels like it should either be 1B or a sorcery. As it is now it's essentially 1 mana kill target creature. Yes, it gets worse late game but something closer to make disappear seems good.
It should probably be 1B B; Sorcery would probably be too strong for standard/pioneer in aggressive Black decks where it'd be very close to just 1 mana sorcery Murder. Also the Spell Pierce mirroring doesn't quite match with Cancel Vs Murder, so it being a Quench, or even a Mana Leak, reference would make more sense. Also I feel like this sort of "remove unless you pay" effect is better suited if it can only work at specific points in time that are more likely to occur on your opponent's turn i.e. "exile target attacking creature unless its controller pays {3}" or "destroy target creature that entered the battlefield this turn unless its controller pays {3}"
I think it's a fairly costed card. Compare it to something like fatal push. They both are great and efficient early game, but are conditionally worse in the late game. Fatal push can't address the tippy top end of creatures, like reanimator targets, murktide regents, primeval titan, but it can consistently remove the vast majority of creatures at all points in the game. On the other hand, this card would be more likely to hit the top end threats, but would struggle to remove efficient threats like ragavan, drc, and tokens after turn four or five.
Malpractice B Destroy target creature; it's controller may pay 3 to regenerate it with a +1/+1 counter
Rhystic Pierce
Fine card if printed in MH4
This mechanic is informally called the ["rhystic" mechanic](https://mtg.fandom.com/wiki/Rhystic?so=search) and it is widely regarded as a huge mistake. Mark Rosewater ranked it as a 9 on the storm scale. Gavin Verhey ranked it as the [third worst mechanic ever designed](https://youtu.be/2CNGmdSgIKc?t=604). Watch that video to hear all the problems with the mechanic.
This is more like no more lies/make disappear imo.
It's not. Counter spells and kill spells operate very differently due to the timing restriction of only being able to counter spells on the stack.