To be more on flavor, it would be cool if Harry cost less and he had the same hexproof ability but only when you sacrifice him. Just having a permanent commander thatll give everyone hexproof might be a bit too strong; he'd be countered every time you attempt to cast him imo
Thank you for your comment. I tried to make the wording as simple and clear as possible. "Target creature detaches target equipment" seems clear enough to me. But how would you word it?
What did you want me to do, hand paint the cards? You are the worst of RUclips! We are two mates being creative by using ai only to mockup some images in which we use to try and imagine some sets which we would love to see. What are you doing to be creative? I would love to hear it.
@@UNIVERSESBEYOND Yes. If you cared enough to imagine the cards, we wanted you to TRY to make something with your own skills - so that what you're making has real meaning, and so that art doesn't become a dead, disposable commodity, losing all its soul in the process. If you'd bothered to click their channel, you'd see that they WERE making things. And if you wanted to grow as a game developer, you wouldn't say "are you high" in response to critique. These designs feel uninspired. It feels like you spent all of ten minutes designing each card, and like you're not thinking of them cohesively. 1. Hagrid's design feels generic. "Can't be blocked by three or more creatures" is not a flavor win. For seven mana, nobody's playing a creature with no real ETB, whose design feels like it came out of 2013. That's not even getting into the use of AI or the choice of IP. Hagrid is not a general. He would not be attacking with beasts - he STUDIES and CARES FOR them. If anything, Hagrid would fetch your library or look at the top cards for beasts (or put them on battlefield) not give them +5 bonuses. Those colors also don't make a ton of sense for him. 2. "Detaches" is redundant. The word is "remove," as in "remove target equipment from target creature". But this needed work too, because who would play this? It might be off-color pie, but paying two mana to have an opponent discard a card is not worth it. And removing an equipment is too specific. Why not have creatures lose hexproof, or have it remove evergreen abilities? That's a small design space that hasn't been focused on much. White can already destroy artifacts for a single mana, and black can already discard a card for a black (less than that, even). Card should have been white-black, and wouldn't have been good even then. 3. Sirius Black is practically a vanilla Innistrad werewolf on his front, and Padfoot does little that other werewolves don't do better. Sirius could get a whole lot more flavor than this. He's a major character. Think. When you're designing cards, think of who they're for. Think of how the design fits your flavor. "He cares for people" is not characterization. He does a lot more than care for people. 4. There's no reason to design the "muggle" type when you have "human" already. If you really want to differentiate non-wizards from wizards, give them an ability keyword that sets them apart. Also, having a player become the "Chosen One" makes little sense. The creature, Harry Potter, is the "Chosen One," not the player. It's like how in LOTR, your creatures became the ringbearer. It didn't make you, the player, the ringbearer - that would have made no sense. Giving permanent hexproof to creatures as basically an emblem is also a really bad idea.
@@UNIVERSESBEYOND Nobody's trying to stop you from being creative. We just wish, if you cared enough about your ideas, that you'd take the time to see them through and develop them, using more ethical means. And that you'd be receptive to criticism. Because these designs needed a lot more thought. (But using AI almost invalidates expression - it tells artists that art isn't worth time or effort, and that you see them as entirely expendable).
@@gannonkendrick9343I disagree. Neither of us are artists nor are we English scholars. We are doing this for fun. The card text, flavour, concept, and how it works within MTG is all conceptualised by us. When we need an image to go with it, what do you expect us to do? Reach out to artists and spend money and take huge lead time in the process to create artwork?
@@gannonkendrick9343 The comment above is literally not constructive criticism by any means. They literally just trashed our channel “AI and UB man this is the worst of You Tube right here.” Hmm. Wonderful criticism, thank you for the words of wisdom right there. However, @Gannon, your feedback is welcome. There are some fantastic points you make and we are taking this on board. I particularly agree with Muggles not being necessarily the only type and the usage of Humans would be more fitting with MTG on a wider scale. So thank you for your criticism.
YES! YES! YES! Playing Hagrid as a Commander with a deck full of beasts would be so much fun!
It would go so hard!
To be more on flavor, it would be cool if Harry cost less and he had the same hexproof ability but only when you sacrifice him. Just having a permanent commander thatll give everyone hexproof might be a bit too strong; he'd be countered every time you attempt to cast him imo
These would be really fun to play with
Thank you! We would love to see Harry Potter come to magic 🔮🪄
You can't unequip swiftfoot boots and lightning greaves with expeliarmus. It targets the creature...
Thank you for your comment. I tried to make the wording as simple and clear as possible. "Target creature detaches target equipment" seems clear enough to me. But how would you word it?
The wording is fine. It just doesn't work with those two specific equipments you mentioned
I see! Thanks for the clarification!
Return to Strixhaven?
AI and UB man this is the worst of You Tube right here.
What did you want me to do, hand paint the cards? You are the worst of RUclips! We are two mates being creative by using ai only to mockup some images in which we use to try and imagine some sets which we would love to see. What are you doing to be creative? I would love to hear it.
@@UNIVERSESBEYOND Yes.
If you cared enough to imagine the cards, we wanted you to TRY to make something with your own skills - so that what you're making has real meaning, and so that art doesn't become a dead, disposable commodity, losing all its soul in the process.
If you'd bothered to click their channel, you'd see that they WERE making things.
And if you wanted to grow as a game developer, you wouldn't say "are you high" in response to critique. These designs feel uninspired. It feels like you spent all of ten minutes designing each card, and like you're not thinking of them cohesively.
1. Hagrid's design feels generic. "Can't be blocked by three or more creatures" is not a flavor win. For seven mana, nobody's playing a creature with no real ETB, whose design feels like it came out of 2013. That's not even getting into the use of AI or the choice of IP.
Hagrid is not a general. He would not be attacking with beasts - he STUDIES and CARES FOR them. If anything, Hagrid would fetch your library or look at the top cards for beasts (or put them on battlefield) not give them +5 bonuses. Those colors also don't make a ton of sense for him.
2. "Detaches" is redundant. The word is "remove," as in "remove target equipment from target creature". But this needed work too, because who would play this? It might be off-color pie, but paying two mana to have an opponent discard a card is not worth it. And removing an equipment is too specific.
Why not have creatures lose hexproof, or have it remove evergreen abilities? That's a small design space that hasn't been focused on much. White can already destroy artifacts for a single mana, and black can already discard a card for a black (less than that, even). Card should have been white-black, and wouldn't have been good even then.
3. Sirius Black is practically a vanilla Innistrad werewolf on his front, and Padfoot does little that other werewolves don't do better. Sirius could get a whole lot more flavor than this. He's a major character.
Think. When you're designing cards, think of who they're for. Think of how the design fits your flavor. "He cares for people" is not characterization. He does a lot more than care for people.
4. There's no reason to design the "muggle" type when you have "human" already. If you really want to differentiate non-wizards from wizards, give them an ability keyword that sets them apart.
Also, having a player become the "Chosen One" makes little sense. The creature, Harry Potter, is the "Chosen One," not the player.
It's like how in LOTR, your creatures became the ringbearer. It didn't make you, the player, the ringbearer - that would have made no sense.
Giving permanent hexproof to creatures as basically an emblem is also a really bad idea.
@@UNIVERSESBEYOND Nobody's trying to stop you from being creative. We just wish, if you cared enough about your ideas, that you'd take the time to see them through and develop them, using more ethical means. And that you'd be receptive to criticism. Because these designs needed a lot more thought. (But using AI almost invalidates expression - it tells artists that art isn't worth time or effort, and that you see them as entirely expendable).
@@gannonkendrick9343I disagree. Neither of us are artists nor are we English scholars. We are doing this for fun. The card text, flavour, concept, and how it works within MTG is all conceptualised by us. When we need an image to go with it, what do you expect us to do? Reach out to artists and spend money and take huge lead time in the process to create artwork?
@@gannonkendrick9343 The comment above is literally not constructive criticism by any means. They literally just trashed our channel “AI and UB man this is the worst of You Tube right here.” Hmm. Wonderful criticism, thank you for the words of wisdom right there.
However, @Gannon, your feedback is welcome. There are some fantastic points you make and we are taking this on board. I particularly agree with Muggles not being necessarily the only type and the usage of Humans would be more fitting with MTG on a wider scale. So thank you for your criticism.
man all of these are so boring my god 6 mana 5/4 with double strike so boring all of these cards lack massive amounts of flavour and unique designs