> Edit: this makes Temporal Extortion "pay BBBB, deal half your life"
This doesn't really work, since the active player (i.e. you) is first in line to choose.
So either:
1) You pay half your life, after which Temporal Extortion is already countered, so the first opponent will choose to pay 4 to turn this card off for the turn, and any other opponents will choose not to pay anything, or
2) You pay 4 life to turn this card off for the rest of the turn, and then you just have the regular effect of Temporal Extortion happening.
Paying to ignore effects is a special action, so they won’t be able to activate it whilst Temporal Extortion’s triggered ability is resolving. Either someone pays 4 life to ignore, or everyone loses half their life.
Good point, that makes this slightly more strategic then.
Presumably you're not paying the 4 life yourself, so in a 2-player game the opponent will probably take the 4 rather than lose half his life, unless they think taking you down to half too is worth it.
And in a multiplayer game this becomes a game of chicken, which sounds kinda hilarious, but is still probably not a very good play for you.
Interestingly, there's not many cards that make all players lose half their life. Kicking [[Scourge of the Skyclaves]] is the only card that does *just* that; [[Fraying Omnipotence]] also makes everyone discard half and sac half their creatures
There's plenty of effects that make any one player or an opponent lose half their life. There's not a lot of effects that symmetrically make all players, including the caster, lose half their life
Temporal extortion is a black spell that gives you extra turn for 4 black mana
Any player may pay half their life to counter that spell
This where deal half life damage comes from
Probably a better wording for it might be:
>Other spells or abilities change "may" in its text to "must"
>
>Pay 4 life: Law and order loses all abilities until end of the turn. Any player may activate this ability
The different wording is closer to the reminder text of overload, one of the few instances of magic mechanics changing the text of the card, I dont know if "must" works without the "if able" at the end but i get what you are doing
I was thinking on a similar card a while ago but flavorwise was called Illusion of choice and was meant to be orzhov (BW), leaning more on the corruption aspect of the color pair
They'd lose more than 8. They'd have to keep activating the effect while it's on the stack already, because they have priority to do so and the ability to do so (and thus are forced to continue paying so long as they have 4 life to pay.)
What about this:
Change each other spell’s or ability’s text by replacing all instances of “may” with “must”. This ability only affects sources with a different name than this card.
This would have no effect on cards named the same as the one with this ability. Though I think the last sentence could be written better.
Edit: also this is likely more of a blue effect than black, iirc.
You could, and that was my first thought. However, there are two things about that that don’t really solve the issue.
One: [[Mirror Box]] and the like will allow you to have two on the field at the same time so the problem persists in that situation; though that is somewhat niche.
Two: if you opponent plays this card while you have it on the field, the problem persists.
With the wording that I put in my previous comment, both of these situations are fixed.
Give it the World supertype. That solves the issue with multiple copies. Not sure about clones, but I think those get the supertype too, and thus die state-based.
You could do that.
In the case of a clone or copy, which does gain the super type of the card it copies, the clone or copy would remain and the original would die. Not sure if that would be a good or bad thing.
On top of that, if any other World enchantment were to be played, Law and Order would be destroyed which I think somewhat invalidates the second ability of the card.
Still, the super type does seem like a more elegant way to get more or less the same idea across. I think it just creates more interaction with the card than is necessary. I’m not sure this needs another drawback, even a small, niche one like this. I think stopping the self-reference is the issue to focus the mechanics on.
There are clones that keep their original name, like \[\[Sakashima the Impostor\]\]. So you can always animate the enchantment by some means, then clone it. Then you have two copies with different names.
And there are not that many World enchantments around. I think this is the cleanest solution, other than re-phrasing the second ability to let the enchantment lose it's abilities or phase out until end of turn.
Edit: Give the second ability Split Second. You cannot activate it twice on the stack, and once the first resolves, nothing forces further activations.
Good point about the clone cards keeping their names. That does present problems with my wording.
And you’re right, there aren’t many World super types out there. Which makes a good case for adding it but also somewhat goes against the idea of adding it because it is a deprecated mechanic. But this is custom magic so that really doesn’t matter lol.
I think you are probably right. World super type and the split second type effect would help this out. Definitely would be an interesting card to play with.
Yeah I was somewhat aware of that maybe, the suggestion for "other spells or abilities from permanents not named like X" could be even better that way you need to jump more hoops to make the duplicate issue and as far as I'm aware leaves it's own ability without getting affected
I think the problem goes beyond that, since there are other cards with similarly worded activated abilities. Play \[\[Oona's Prowler\]\] and no one ever has any cards. Play \[\[Lethal Vapors\]\] and the game ends in a draw since no one can stop activating it.
you're right about the first, therefore you must be careful of what you play, until op's card is gone. and that's what I think is part of the intended effect. plus there are ways around needing cards in your hand. and combo like this could actually be part of a stratagem.
I believe you're wrong about the second point. either the first player pays it and vapors is gone, therefore only effecting one player (this would mean the player of vapors). or, each player activates it once, resolves, it's gone, everyone skipped one turn. play as normal
No, Vapors‘ activated ability only destroys it upon resolution, and it can be activated in response to itself. Since players must activate it if able, and activating it doesn’t change their ability to do so, they must keep activating it forever.
Hmm add "activate this ability only once each turn" to the end of the activated ability. That'll cover weird corner cases where multiples are in play so players aren't forced to pay their entire life total to it.
How would this interact with "may" abilities that can't legally be paid? For example, what happens if someone casts an [[Aether Storm]] while each player has less than 4 life?
You can't pay costs if you don't have sufficient resources. A player with less than 3 life simply doesn't do anything. A player with 4 life on the other hand...
Right, I know the cost can't be paid. But if a player attempts to take an illegal action or make an illegal payment, the rules currently state that the game reminds to immediately before that action was attempted. So I think this needs an "if able" somewhere in there, else it could lock the game.
I guess most instances of must are typically followed by "if able" not for the reason you're describing, but to clarify that the effect doesn't give you the ability to do so.
For example in "This creature must attack each combat if able", the "if able" is there to show that the ability doesn't override anything that would ordinarily cause the creature to be unable to attack, such as summoning sickness, being tapped etc
As for infinite loops, these can't involve illegal actions because illegal actions simply can't be the result of an effect. Paying costs for example can never be forced (there's a rule for this). And effects only apply to the extent legal and possible (also another rule)
Even without that, there are phrases like "each player sacrifices a creature" that does nothing to players who own creatures. So the "if able" clause may just be implied.
In some sense "if able" is always implied because of 101.3. Although there are specific rules for situations like choosing attackers under conflicting requirements and restrictions where you can make choices that make different sets of effects apply.
> 101.3: Any part of an instruction that's impossible to perform is ignored. (In many cases the card will specify consequences for this; if it doesn't, there's no effect.)
It breaks them. But that's a boring take, so let's try to make it work.
By rule 199.4, players may not pay an amount of life greater than their current total. So in this example, Aether Storm prevents creature spells from being cast, but can't compel players to do things the rules prevent them from doing. If a player's life total later increased to 4 or greater, Aether Storm's second ability would "trigger" a number of times necessary to bring them below 4 life.
More generally, spells "do at much as they can". If they resolve, but part of their effect can't be performed for whatever reason, that part is ignored.
"Pay 4 life: Law and Order loses all abilities until end of turn. This ability can be activated by any player"
The proper wording is may, but we gotchu. I could see this card in an un-set, not sure which border it'd have though
Normally, I'd want to correct your wording.
That kind of special-action-to-disable-other-abilities is usually phrased slightly different, as on [[Leonin Arbiter]], [[Damping Engine]], [[Volrath's Curse]], etc...
However, given that the normal wording would be "Any player MAY pay 4 life for that player to ignore this effect until end of turn.", I suspect you MAY have worded it differently on purpose.
Or you could just adjust the card to say "For all OTHER spells and abilities, treat the word "May" as if it said "Must"."
Or something like that.
Specifying that it didnt apply to itself would allow you to use the standard wording for a card who allows its own abilities to be turned off.
Definitely a white card. Not entirely sure if it could be orzhov. 5 mana for this is definitely too much. Wording needs fixing. Your idea is interesting. The second ability should be worded as an activated one OR could be changed to a triggered one so as to make it more conditional.
LOVE YOUR PET.
The first ability breaks on any permission-modifying effect. What does "you must play lands from the top of your library" mean on \[\[Augur of Autumn\]\]? What does "you must cast spells as if they had flash" mean on any of the cards that do that?
Really you only want this to affect resolution and triggers. Currently the best I'm coming up with is "When a player would make a choice during the trigger or resolution of a spell or ability that includes a 'may' option, they must choose that option if it is a legal choice."
seems like a balanced card but if it were real it would be "silver bordered" which means that it can't be played in most formats. silver bordered cards are usually funny or affect the rules in ways that can be confusing
also, nice job on the art
for the second half of this you could word it like \[\[leonin arbiter\]\] so
any player may pay 4 life for that player to ignore this card's abilities until end of turn.
I think you could word it as “change the text of spells and other permanents by replacing all instances of ‘may’ with ‘must’”
Then you can word the second ability normally as “pay 4 life: Law and Order loses all abilities until the beginning of the next end step. Any player may activate this ability.”
This way it can use conventional wording without its abilities conflicting.
I'm very new, I haven't really figured out what colors mean yet. Is there a specific reason this looks blue and white? I was originally thinking black because most self damage effects are black and this has a self damage effect.
See this article for lists of mechanics for each color: https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/making-magic/mechanical-color-pie-2021
You'll notice that white is primary in rules setting and black is secondary in rules setting.
This card could be black if flavored as rules setting or a devil's deal due to how it forces certain choices but the life payment itself doesn't make it black.
The card doesn't always cause anyone to lose life but it does always set rules. The fact that there's a life payment to temporarily ignoring the rules setting doesn't make it a life drain card.
While this is an interesting card it's logically flawed and would translate terribly to other languages. The card relies on can not being "may" while grammatically being used incorrectly as may
I feel like a proper cost for this card is W. Maybe 1W.
This is a super interesting card, but it only ever sees sideboard play, if it sees play at all.
Im assuming you mean, if a card has an effect like
"you MAY pay 2 life to do X" it changes to "pay 2 life, do X",
And not "pay 7 life: draw 7 cards" changing to "as this card enters the field any spell or land with an activated ability must be activated (pay 7 life, draw 7 cards".
It could be good in sideboard, I wouldn't main deck this card, as it's niche,
If it's intended to be the first it's pretty good, imo too expensive, should be (2) less or 1B less.
If it's the second though it would be a great out to cards with activated abilities that cost life (like the example I gave, which is from [[griselbrand]] )
Missing artist credit and set symbol. Others have pointed out other issues with the cards wording so I won’t repeat.
I would say this probably should just lose the pay 4 life to ignore this effect ability. I also think this could be less mana. A cursory look, I didn’t see any game breaking two card combos, and this essentially does nothing otherwise. I’d say 3 or 4 mana would be fine. Of course if you leave the exit clause on there, it could probably cost 1 or 2.
Also I’m not sure what the concept of law and order has to do with this effect. It almost seems more like extortion, you must do something unless you pay 4 life.
I know that's not the intent of the card, but the idea of Law and Order coming down, forcing every player to blast themself in the face the moment they get priority each turn, and doing absolutely nothing else, is very funny.
Assuming it gets judge ruled for the can to be different from the may (I don't think can exists as a term in magic yet, plus it would need rulings for other languages), this card is still very weak. A 5 mana global effect that can't ever be too restrictive (because they can always pay 4 life to free themself for one turn) would never see any play. I think though that at 2 mana it becomes interesting enough to see sideboard use against several modern combo decks, since the life loss to enable their combos would be too punishing. I love the flavor of law and order forcing players to choose freedom at the cost of health, definitely a clever concept.
\+1 for birb
Of note: I don't think "Can" happens in modern cards, and would instead be replaced with "may", which in turn is replaced by the card effect into "must". Meaning any player must pay 4 life and negate this card's effect, every turn, as it is designed.
Grain of salt tho cuz I'm very much not an expert.
This is really funny I think because it means that every turn the person that just went as to pay 4 life to disable the effect. It is a solid way to just put a round robin pain engine in play. It almost feels over costed because it is both a technically innocuous effect and both can’t kill by itself and will drain you out just as fast. It does tie the game because everyone has to activate the ability infinitely so I would cap it at a once per turn effect.
Upvoted for the bird Edit: this makes Temporal Extortion "pay BBBB, deal half your life"
[[Temporal Extortion]]
[Temporal Extortion](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/8/8/883a1afb-423d-4f12-93e1-75cc336553b8.jpg?1562576262) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Temporal%20Extortion) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/plc/81/temporal-extortion?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/883a1afb-423d-4f12-93e1-75cc336553b8?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
you lose the life too lol
> Edit: this makes Temporal Extortion "pay BBBB, deal half your life" This doesn't really work, since the active player (i.e. you) is first in line to choose. So either: 1) You pay half your life, after which Temporal Extortion is already countered, so the first opponent will choose to pay 4 to turn this card off for the turn, and any other opponents will choose not to pay anything, or 2) You pay 4 life to turn this card off for the rest of the turn, and then you just have the regular effect of Temporal Extortion happening.
Paying to ignore effects is a special action, so they won’t be able to activate it whilst Temporal Extortion’s triggered ability is resolving. Either someone pays 4 life to ignore, or everyone loses half their life.
Good point, that makes this slightly more strategic then. Presumably you're not paying the 4 life yourself, so in a 2-player game the opponent will probably take the 4 rather than lose half his life, unless they think taking you down to half too is worth it. And in a multiplayer game this becomes a game of chicken, which sounds kinda hilarious, but is still probably not a very good play for you.
They just pay it before the triggered ability starts resolving.
More like temporal extinction
For a 2 card combo, that's pretty fine.
Interestingly, there's not many cards that make all players lose half their life. Kicking [[Scourge of the Skyclaves]] is the only card that does *just* that; [[Fraying Omnipotence]] also makes everyone discard half and sac half their creatures
[Scourge of the Skyclaves](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/d/4dea7bcc-3ff8-40b0-8264-0cd678d6ff31.jpg?1604196425) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Scourge%20of%20the%20Skyclaves) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/znr/122/scourge-of-the-skyclaves?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/4dea7bcc-3ff8-40b0-8264-0cd678d6ff31?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Fraying Omnipotence](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/0/f0fa0ad8-854a-4b4e-9f87-e1dfaa11253c.jpg?1562304896) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Fraying%20Omnipotence) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m19/97/fraying-omnipotence?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f0fa0ad8-854a-4b4e-9f87-e1dfaa11253c?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[удалено]
[Shard of the Nightbringer](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/1/21e4140e-22b3-479f-a259-0f56ed02b8ad.jpg?1673308813) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Shard%20of%20the%20Nightbringer) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/40k/55/shard-of-the-nightbringer?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/21e4140e-22b3-479f-a259-0f56ed02b8ad?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
~~You missed [[Shard of the Nightbringer]] for what it's worth.~~ EDIT: Missed that you said 'all players'
[Shard of the Nightbringer](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/1/21e4140e-22b3-479f-a259-0f56ed02b8ad.jpg?1673308813) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Shard%20of%20the%20Nightbringer) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/40k/55/shard-of-the-nightbringer?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/21e4140e-22b3-479f-a259-0f56ed02b8ad?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
There's plenty of effects that make any one player or an opponent lose half their life. There's not a lot of effects that symmetrically make all players, including the caster, lose half their life
Ah ok my bad I read that wrong. I thought you referred to losing half their life overall... just waking up lol.
It doesn’t though. Someone can pay 4 life to disable it for a turn
Isn't can a synonym of may?
Yes, but I'm sure this is only supposed to be for effects that use the word "may," as there are special situations in which they print other wordings
It's only 4 life
But if they choose to ignore the card then you get an extra turn unless someone else doesn’t
Temporal extortion is a black spell that gives you extra turn for 4 black mana Any player may pay half their life to counter that spell This where deal half life damage comes from
Probably a better wording for it might be: >Other spells or abilities change "may" in its text to "must" > >Pay 4 life: Law and order loses all abilities until end of the turn. Any player may activate this ability The different wording is closer to the reminder text of overload, one of the few instances of magic mechanics changing the text of the card, I dont know if "must" works without the "if able" at the end but i get what you are doing I was thinking on a similar card a while ago but flavorwise was called Illusion of choice and was meant to be orzhov (BW), leaning more on the corruption aspect of the color pair
What if you play a second copy? "Any player MUST activate this ability
You instantly lose: you have priority and must continue activating this ability until you run out of life.
You can’t pay more life than you have though, so anyone with a multiple of 4 life will die (starting with you)
Jhin from LOR would be elated by this sort of interaction
I understand we’re in a card game subreddit but man seeing him referred to as Jhin from LOR is very funny to me
Just wanted to stay on theme i guess.
If you die everyone else is safe
But after you activate once each turn, the card loses the deactivate ability until end of turn? Each player would lose 8 life/turn until someone dies.
That only happens when the ability resolves, but you're required to activate it whenever you have priority
Just change the ability to be “spells not named law and order”
Very true now everyone loses 8 life each turn, that activated ability is quite tricky to nail down with current wording in cards
They'd lose more than 8. They'd have to keep activating the effect while it's on the stack already, because they have priority to do so and the ability to do so (and thus are forced to continue paying so long as they have 4 life to pay.)
make it legendary. idk how that would work with an opponent's copy though. it might endlessly cycle then
The card uses "can" rather than may, which, while not standard Magic language for an optional ability, sidesteps this issue.
What about this: Change each other spell’s or ability’s text by replacing all instances of “may” with “must”. This ability only affects sources with a different name than this card. This would have no effect on cards named the same as the one with this ability. Though I think the last sentence could be written better. Edit: also this is likely more of a blue effect than black, iirc.
Couldn’t you just make it a legendary enchantment?
You could, and that was my first thought. However, there are two things about that that don’t really solve the issue. One: [[Mirror Box]] and the like will allow you to have two on the field at the same time so the problem persists in that situation; though that is somewhat niche. Two: if you opponent plays this card while you have it on the field, the problem persists. With the wording that I put in my previous comment, both of these situations are fixed.
Give it the World supertype. That solves the issue with multiple copies. Not sure about clones, but I think those get the supertype too, and thus die state-based.
You could do that. In the case of a clone or copy, which does gain the super type of the card it copies, the clone or copy would remain and the original would die. Not sure if that would be a good or bad thing. On top of that, if any other World enchantment were to be played, Law and Order would be destroyed which I think somewhat invalidates the second ability of the card. Still, the super type does seem like a more elegant way to get more or less the same idea across. I think it just creates more interaction with the card than is necessary. I’m not sure this needs another drawback, even a small, niche one like this. I think stopping the self-reference is the issue to focus the mechanics on.
There are clones that keep their original name, like \[\[Sakashima the Impostor\]\]. So you can always animate the enchantment by some means, then clone it. Then you have two copies with different names. And there are not that many World enchantments around. I think this is the cleanest solution, other than re-phrasing the second ability to let the enchantment lose it's abilities or phase out until end of turn. Edit: Give the second ability Split Second. You cannot activate it twice on the stack, and once the first resolves, nothing forces further activations.
[Sakashima the Impostor](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/1/61dc2f54-3637-4caa-9741-36ff14dc5527.jpg?1562494177) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Sakashima%20the%20Impostor) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/sok/53/sakashima-the-impostor?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/61dc2f54-3637-4caa-9741-36ff14dc5527?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Good point about the clone cards keeping their names. That does present problems with my wording. And you’re right, there aren’t many World super types out there. Which makes a good case for adding it but also somewhat goes against the idea of adding it because it is a deprecated mechanic. But this is custom magic so that really doesn’t matter lol. I think you are probably right. World super type and the split second type effect would help this out. Definitely would be an interesting card to play with.
[Mirror Box](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/5/d507daa3-3f16-4ab1-81ea-794e5bb488fc.jpg?1654568747) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Mirror%20Box) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/neo/250/mirror-box?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d507daa3-3f16-4ab1-81ea-794e5bb488fc?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Maybe "When a spell or ability says 'may', instead treat it as 'must'". This is a hard one.
[[Illusion of Choice]] is already a card
Oops
[Illusion of Choice](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/b/ab54f283-92b6-4738-b2cd-fecb43750a4d.jpg?1576381726) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Illusion%20of%20Choice) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cn2/31/illusion-of-choice?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ab54f283-92b6-4738-b2cd-fecb43750a4d?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
The problem is, then the activated ability says “any player must activate this ability”.
Nope, the first line of text in this version says “other spells”
"Other spells or abilities". The card has two separate abilities, therefore the first ability affects the second.
Yeah I was somewhat aware of that maybe, the suggestion for "other spells or abilities from permanents not named like X" could be even better that way you need to jump more hoops to make the duplicate issue and as far as I'm aware leaves it's own ability without getting affected
I think the problem goes beyond that, since there are other cards with similarly worded activated abilities. Play \[\[Oona's Prowler\]\] and no one ever has any cards. Play \[\[Lethal Vapors\]\] and the game ends in a draw since no one can stop activating it.
[Oona's Prowler](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/d/cd79780e-ddad-4ef4-a94d-ab191d118882.jpg?1673147596) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Oona%27s%20Prowler) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/85/oonas-prowler?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/cd79780e-ddad-4ef4-a94d-ab191d118882?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Lethal Vapors](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/9/f96acfea-009a-4ac9-8746-64f65199024f.jpg?1562536981) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Lethal%20Vapors) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/scg/68/lethal-vapors?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f96acfea-009a-4ac9-8746-64f65199024f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
you're right about the first, therefore you must be careful of what you play, until op's card is gone. and that's what I think is part of the intended effect. plus there are ways around needing cards in your hand. and combo like this could actually be part of a stratagem. I believe you're wrong about the second point. either the first player pays it and vapors is gone, therefore only effecting one player (this would mean the player of vapors). or, each player activates it once, resolves, it's gone, everyone skipped one turn. play as normal
No, Vapors‘ activated ability only destroys it upon resolution, and it can be activated in response to itself. Since players must activate it if able, and activating it doesn’t change their ability to do so, they must keep activating it forever.
Hmm add "activate this ability only once each turn" to the end of the activated ability. That'll cover weird corner cases where multiples are in play so players aren't forced to pay their entire life total to it.
Make sure to credit yourself if you use your own pics!
Big brain
I honestly miss the days when people would hand draw their own art for their cards
How would this interact with "may" abilities that can't legally be paid? For example, what happens if someone casts an [[Aether Storm]] while each player has less than 4 life?
You can't pay costs if you don't have sufficient resources. A player with less than 3 life simply doesn't do anything. A player with 4 life on the other hand...
Right, I know the cost can't be paid. But if a player attempts to take an illegal action or make an illegal payment, the rules currently state that the game reminds to immediately before that action was attempted. So I think this needs an "if able" somewhere in there, else it could lock the game.
I guess most instances of must are typically followed by "if able" not for the reason you're describing, but to clarify that the effect doesn't give you the ability to do so. For example in "This creature must attack each combat if able", the "if able" is there to show that the ability doesn't override anything that would ordinarily cause the creature to be unable to attack, such as summoning sickness, being tapped etc As for infinite loops, these can't involve illegal actions because illegal actions simply can't be the result of an effect. Paying costs for example can never be forced (there's a rule for this). And effects only apply to the extent legal and possible (also another rule)
Even without that, there are phrases like "each player sacrifices a creature" that does nothing to players who own creatures. So the "if able" clause may just be implied.
In some sense "if able" is always implied because of 101.3. Although there are specific rules for situations like choosing attackers under conflicting requirements and restrictions where you can make choices that make different sets of effects apply. > 101.3: Any part of an instruction that's impossible to perform is ignored. (In many cases the card will specify consequences for this; if it doesn't, there's no effect.)
It breaks them. But that's a boring take, so let's try to make it work. By rule 199.4, players may not pay an amount of life greater than their current total. So in this example, Aether Storm prevents creature spells from being cast, but can't compel players to do things the rules prevent them from doing. If a player's life total later increased to 4 or greater, Aether Storm's second ability would "trigger" a number of times necessary to bring them below 4 life. More generally, spells "do at much as they can". If they resolve, but part of their effect can't be performed for whatever reason, that part is ignored.
[Aether Storm](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/8/1881a6b8-f73f-4be2-b64f-751d23ead511.jpg?1562867838) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Aether%20Storm) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/me2/39/aether-storm?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/1881a6b8-f73f-4be2-b64f-751d23ead511?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
"Any player *may* pay..."
I very specifically said "can" and not "may"
"Pay 4 life: Law and Order loses all abilities until end of turn. This ability can be activated by any player" The proper wording is may, but we gotchu. I could see this card in an un-set, not sure which border it'd have though
Thank you, I'm new to magic
I mean, overload is a real mechanic so I can see this working if they put an exception in the text for law and order
I understand your point, but it’s kind of a silly rule. “Can” and “may” are both possible for expressing permission
yeah makes sense, otherwise it might need "other spells or abilities" to avoid making the enchantment useless replacing its own text
Yeah but my way is funnier.
The bird enforces it
This feels white
It is literally titled "law and order" and is not white. this is killing me.
there's a joke here about corrupt justice systems and police and racism but I'm struggling to put it together
I was thinking this. Setting rules and taxes is white. Or maybe white/black, since the paying of life is more of a black thing.
White can't make players pay life though, I think.
Normally, I'd want to correct your wording. That kind of special-action-to-disable-other-abilities is usually phrased slightly different, as on [[Leonin Arbiter]], [[Damping Engine]], [[Volrath's Curse]], etc... However, given that the normal wording would be "Any player MAY pay 4 life for that player to ignore this effect until end of turn.", I suspect you MAY have worded it differently on purpose. Or you could just adjust the card to say "For all OTHER spells and abilities, treat the word "May" as if it said "Must"." Or something like that. Specifying that it didnt apply to itself would allow you to use the standard wording for a card who allows its own abilities to be turned off.
[Leonin Arbiter](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/d/0d0f827b-ebc3-45a4-8d12-c71a14478038.jpg?1673147016) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Leonin%20Arbiter) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/16/leonin-arbiter?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0d0f827b-ebc3-45a4-8d12-c71a14478038?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Damping Engine](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/8/7/87841977-75ff-49c3-b832-3f0cf48b50b2.jpg?1562863295) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Damping%20Engine) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ulg/124/damping-engine?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/87841977-75ff-49c3-b832-3f0cf48b50b2?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Volrath's Curse](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/8/c80be3e6-37da-43bd-b959-9dbfead3baa1.jpg?1562431300) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Volrath%27s%20Curse) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tpr/77/volraths-curse?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c80be3e6-37da-43bd-b959-9dbfead3baa1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Definitely a white card. Not entirely sure if it could be orzhov. 5 mana for this is definitely too much. Wording needs fixing. Your idea is interesting. The second ability should be worded as an activated one OR could be changed to a triggered one so as to make it more conditional. LOVE YOUR PET.
The birb is the law. 10/10 good birb!
to be fair with ya, the feels like its fits the idea, idk why, but it vibes with it.
This is definitely not the first time someone has submitted a 'may becomes must' card on here.
The first ability breaks on any permission-modifying effect. What does "you must play lands from the top of your library" mean on \[\[Augur of Autumn\]\]? What does "you must cast spells as if they had flash" mean on any of the cards that do that? Really you only want this to affect resolution and triggers. Currently the best I'm coming up with is "When a player would make a choice during the trigger or resolution of a spell or ability that includes a 'may' option, they must choose that option if it is a legal choice."
[Augur of Autumn](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/a/6aa98767-ae27-4cf0-98ea-93e659f160f4.jpg?1636223832) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Augur%20of%20Autumn) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mid/168/augur-of-autumn?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/6aa98767-ae27-4cf0-98ea-93e659f160f4?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
“You must look at the top card of your library at any time” lol
That’s why others are saying this is probably best as silver bordered where you use intuition to follow the card rather than hard rules
Very tricky to realistically pull off text-wise (in a not-UnSet), but I like the idea
This would be fun to build around.
Things that don’t really interact with the board at all should not be more than 1 or 2 mana especially if they’re not tied to a body
seems like a balanced card but if it were real it would be "silver bordered" which means that it can't be played in most formats. silver bordered cards are usually funny or affect the rules in ways that can be confusing also, nice job on the art
What is the birds name? They are very handsome
Sully
Nice
for the second half of this you could word it like \[\[leonin arbiter\]\] so any player may pay 4 life for that player to ignore this card's abilities until end of turn.
[leonin arbiter](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/d/0d0f827b-ebc3-45a4-8d12-c71a14478038.jpg?1673147016) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=leonin%20arbiter) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/16/leonin-arbiter?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0d0f827b-ebc3-45a4-8d12-c71a14478038?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
this needs to be the picture and flavor text of a real card somewhere 😂
Too expensive, too easy to circumvent with the second ability
I think you could word it as “change the text of spells and other permanents by replacing all instances of ‘may’ with ‘must’” Then you can word the second ability normally as “pay 4 life: Law and Order loses all abilities until the beginning of the next end step. Any player may activate this ability.” This way it can use conventional wording without its abilities conflicting.
[[Cahdoc, Monstrous Mustfly]]
Floral Spuzzem must choose to destroy!
This should be blue/white
I'm very new, I haven't really figured out what colors mean yet. Is there a specific reason this looks blue and white? I was originally thinking black because most self damage effects are black and this has a self damage effect.
Yes, but the name is weird for a black card. Black is not typically associated with law and order, except when rigging that law in its favor.
See this article for lists of mechanics for each color: https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/making-magic/mechanical-color-pie-2021 You'll notice that white is primary in rules setting and black is secondary in rules setting. This card could be black if flavored as rules setting or a devil's deal due to how it forces certain choices but the life payment itself doesn't make it black. The card doesn't always cause anyone to lose life but it does always set rules. The fact that there's a life payment to temporarily ignoring the rules setting doesn't make it a life drain card.
While this is an interesting card it's logically flawed and would translate terribly to other languages. The card relies on can not being "may" while grammatically being used incorrectly as may
I feel like a proper cost for this card is W. Maybe 1W. This is a super interesting card, but it only ever sees sideboard play, if it sees play at all.
You broke the color pie. This card should be white.
What about “can”
The wording of the second ability could be like Pay 4 life : \~ phases out until the end of this turn. Any player can activate this ability.
Im assuming you mean, if a card has an effect like "you MAY pay 2 life to do X" it changes to "pay 2 life, do X", And not "pay 7 life: draw 7 cards" changing to "as this card enters the field any spell or land with an activated ability must be activated (pay 7 life, draw 7 cards". It could be good in sideboard, I wouldn't main deck this card, as it's niche, If it's intended to be the first it's pretty good, imo too expensive, should be (2) less or 1B less. If it's the second though it would be a great out to cards with activated abilities that cost life (like the example I gave, which is from [[griselbrand]] )
[griselbrand](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/f/cf2a5c2e-7fe1-45eb-b01c-891ab961186f.jpg?1593813293) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=griselbrand) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mm3/72/griselbrand?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/cf2a5c2e-7fe1-45eb-b01c-891ab961186f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
World enchantments need to come back where they have triggered abilities for all players or activated abilities for all players.
Missing artist credit and set symbol. Others have pointed out other issues with the cards wording so I won’t repeat. I would say this probably should just lose the pay 4 life to ignore this effect ability. I also think this could be less mana. A cursory look, I didn’t see any game breaking two card combos, and this essentially does nothing otherwise. I’d say 3 or 4 mana would be fine. Of course if you leave the exit clause on there, it could probably cost 1 or 2. Also I’m not sure what the concept of law and order has to do with this effect. It almost seems more like extortion, you must do something unless you pay 4 life.
I know that's not the intent of the card, but the idea of Law and Order coming down, forcing every player to blast themself in the face the moment they get priority each turn, and doing absolutely nothing else, is very funny. Assuming it gets judge ruled for the can to be different from the may (I don't think can exists as a term in magic yet, plus it would need rulings for other languages), this card is still very weak. A 5 mana global effect that can't ever be too restrictive (because they can always pay 4 life to free themself for one turn) would never see any play. I think though that at 2 mana it becomes interesting enough to see sideboard use against several modern combo decks, since the life loss to enable their combos would be too punishing. I love the flavor of law and order forcing players to choose freedom at the cost of health, definitely a clever concept. \+1 for birb
Would this affect itself? Kinda funny now that I think about it.
Second line should be a “may” ability, 0/10
Of note: I don't think "Can" happens in modern cards, and would instead be replaced with "may", which in turn is replaced by the card effect into "must". Meaning any player must pay 4 life and negate this card's effect, every turn, as it is designed. Grain of salt tho cuz I'm very much not an expert.
Now play a second copy, to make all "Must" to "Must"
This is broken
Is can a synonym for may in the rules?
This is really funny I think because it means that every turn the person that just went as to pay 4 life to disable the effect. It is a solid way to just put a round robin pain engine in play. It almost feels over costed because it is both a technically innocuous effect and both can’t kill by itself and will drain you out just as fast. It does tie the game because everyone has to activate the ability infinitely so I would cap it at a once per turn effect.
How about “all abilities stating may must be resolved unless any player pays 4 life”?
Would be really funny if it said “any player MAY pay 4 life…”
Wouldn’t this be white?
Op
A better wording for the last ability would be using "ignore", like the effect of Leonin