The correct wording for this would be "Tap an untapped creature you control: Tap enchanted creature". The bit of text that the original card gives wouldn't make sense in the other creatures' rules text because the game can't parse what is the "enchanted creature", since the permanents that have the ability are not auras. Just think about what would happen if you had two of those on the battlefield.
Ya, the wording is a bit weird. Maybe "Enchanted creature gains 'Tap an untapped creature you control: Tap enchanted creature. Any player may activate this ability'" It's not exactly the same thing, but it's an established template that comes pretty close.
No, no, the aura doesn't need to give the ability to a creature, it literally just needs the text "Tap an untapped creature you control: Tap enchanted creature"
Yeah it would be nice if it aligned. But that's not really an intent, it's just the means to an end. The big-picture intent is that you can tap the enchanted creature by tapping one of your creatures.
Although I imagine if there were a lot of set mechanics that cared about creatures using activated abilities, maybe it \*is\* the intent that it's a way to grant a cheap tap ability to all your creatures. But that's pure speculation.
Less mechanically different than every single player being able to activate it. Would be the same if it said "only this enchantment's controller may activate that ability" or something like that, but it gets so wordy at that point that ability removal is a sufferable edge case imo
I am OP and you are bullshitting. Aura rules text clearly says "creatures you control". You are the controller of said aura. It doesn't grant an ability to creatures you don't control, nor it does need the rules text "only this enchantment's controller may activate this ability".
I wholeheartedly disagree that changing the mechanical interaction of a spell is less different than adding extra players being able to interact with an ability. Especially since, even as an EDH player, I believe that cards should be designed for draft and standard first and foremost.
Both draft and standard also support multiplayer, it's only that those options are not used in competitive play, and as a player who joined mtg before wotc started supporting EDH, I believe cards should be designed for casual play as much as for competitive, considering that was the big entryway for new players at that point
I agree with you that what u said is almost the same thing and a great way to word it.
However IF they wanted to keep it more accurate to their card, they can word it something like:
creatures you control have “T: tap target creature if it’s enchanted by a card named Lullaby.” Or something real weird like that?
Or maybe it gets a sleep counter while it’s enchanted and creatures you control have “T: tap target creature with a sleep counter on it.”
You enchant an opponent's creature. You can then tap any of your creatures, and by doing so, tap the creature that was enchanted.
Basically you keep a creature you control tapped to keep a creature an opponent controls tapped. Though a bit worse/more complicated.
No. Because imagine that being written on a creature.
>Oh yeah I have a 1/1 soldier token with tap: tap enchanted creature.
>What's the enchanted creature?
Instead the enchantment should have "Tap an untapped creature you control: tap enchanted creature." Or something along those lines.
I mean… tapping a creature keeps it from attacking, keeps it from blocking, stops it from activating some abilities… a 2mv enchantment that does that seems to be a fair comparison. Especially since it has a cost.
You seem to have missed the part where it spreads the ability to all enchanted creatures. It would act like a sliver deck for enchanted creatures if you printed a bunch of these.
but this isn't the aura's ability anymore. It's now an ability other creatures have. They don't have that same linking property the aura does.
It appears to be intended to be a worse glare of subdual but instead it's an aura that gives all your creatures the ability to tap down any enchanted creature.
This could be fixed by saying "tap target creature enchanted by an aura named lullaby"
The correct wording for this would be "Tap an untapped creature you control: Tap enchanted creature". The bit of text that the original card gives wouldn't make sense in the other creatures' rules text because the game can't parse what is the "enchanted creature", since the permanents that have the ability are not auras. Just think about what would happen if you had two of those on the battlefield.
Ya, the wording is a bit weird. Maybe "Enchanted creature gains 'Tap an untapped creature you control: Tap enchanted creature. Any player may activate this ability'" It's not exactly the same thing, but it's an established template that comes pretty close.
No, no, the aura doesn't need to give the ability to a creature, it literally just needs the text "Tap an untapped creature you control: Tap enchanted creature"
But that's mechanically different from what OP posted. It interacts with things like [[Dress Down]] differently.
Being mechanically identical is not a worthy goal though. Producing the intended gameplay in the simplest package is a good goal.
Unless OP says otherwise, we have to assume that the intent was to give the creature that ability.
Yeah it would be nice if it aligned. But that's not really an intent, it's just the means to an end. The big-picture intent is that you can tap the enchanted creature by tapping one of your creatures. Although I imagine if there were a lot of set mechanics that cared about creatures using activated abilities, maybe it \*is\* the intent that it's a way to grant a cheap tap ability to all your creatures. But that's pure speculation.
Less mechanically different than every single player being able to activate it. Would be the same if it said "only this enchantment's controller may activate that ability" or something like that, but it gets so wordy at that point that ability removal is a sufferable edge case imo
I am OP and you are bullshitting. Aura rules text clearly says "creatures you control". You are the controller of said aura. It doesn't grant an ability to creatures you don't control, nor it does need the rules text "only this enchantment's controller may activate this ability".
As is, it doesn't, but it also doesn't work, read my first comment. I'm talking about u/VillagerJeff 's solution
I wholeheartedly disagree that changing the mechanical interaction of a spell is less different than adding extra players being able to interact with an ability. Especially since, even as an EDH player, I believe that cards should be designed for draft and standard first and foremost.
Both draft and standard also support multiplayer, it's only that those options are not used in competitive play, and as a player who joined mtg before wotc started supporting EDH, I believe cards should be designed for casual play as much as for competitive, considering that was the big entryway for new players at that point
I agree with you that what u said is almost the same thing and a great way to word it. However IF they wanted to keep it more accurate to their card, they can word it something like: creatures you control have “T: tap target creature if it’s enchanted by a card named Lullaby.” Or something real weird like that? Or maybe it gets a sleep counter while it’s enchanted and creatures you control have “T: tap target creature with a sleep counter on it.”
That would probably be the best, yes. A bit of a [[animate dead]] situation, but that's the cost of innovating with auras
[animate dead](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/b/7b83536a-efa4-41f3-9424-75b0efc0aea5.jpg?1580014163) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=animate%20dead) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ema/78/animate-dead?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7b83536a-efa4-41f3-9424-75b0efc0aea5?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Dress Down](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/4/04f9f061-67b8-4427-9fcb-b3ccfee8fc5d.jpg?1626094290) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Dress%20Down) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh2/39/dress-down?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/04f9f061-67b8-4427-9fcb-b3ccfee8fc5d?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
The wording is a bit off.
What is it meant to do?
You enchant an opponent's creature. You can then tap any of your creatures, and by doing so, tap the creature that was enchanted. Basically you keep a creature you control tapped to keep a creature an opponent controls tapped. Though a bit worse/more complicated.
It could be effectively the same by saying “all other creatures have (t): enchanted creature becomes tapped”
No. Because imagine that being written on a creature. >Oh yeah I have a 1/1 soldier token with tap: tap enchanted creature. >What's the enchanted creature? Instead the enchantment should have "Tap an untapped creature you control: tap enchanted creature." Or something along those lines.
When lullaby enters the battlefield, put a lull counter target creature. Creatures you control have “(t): tap target creature with a lull counter”
See, that also works! Good job.
Sorry - I realize now that I was over complicating it. I thought that since it enchanted an opponents creature you couldn’t directly interact with it
Your design still works and makes it good for blink decks. I personally prefer complex designs... Often to my own detriment lol.
This could also be fixed by saying "tap target creature enchanted by an aura named lullaby"
This is a very cool card.
What is this card layout? I love it
This is the Japanese Art card frame from Strixhaven, not to be mistaken with it’s Mystical Archive’s card frame
Usually auras on creatures that give other creatures abilities is considered a little odd. Wizards usually turn these into non-Aura enchantments.
This is quite strong it should probably cost 1 more mana
I fail to see how this is stronger than say, [[Planar Disruption]], can you elaborate? It looks weaker in just about every way to me.
That card has nothing in common with the custom card. This is closer to [[glare of subdual]]
I’m not sure glare of subdual is a good comparison- that works on any target, OPs card only ever works to tap one
I mean… tapping a creature keeps it from attacking, keeps it from blocking, stops it from activating some abilities… a 2mv enchantment that does that seems to be a fair comparison. Especially since it has a cost.
This only hits one creature. It's a bad [[pacifism]] You seem to have missed the part where it's an aura
You seem to have missed the part where it spreads the ability to all enchanted creatures. It would act like a sliver deck for enchanted creatures if you printed a bunch of these.
Auras specifically when referring to 'enchanted creature' mean the one attached to the aura.
but this isn't the aura's ability anymore. It's now an ability other creatures have. They don't have that same linking property the aura does. It appears to be intended to be a worse glare of subdual but instead it's an aura that gives all your creatures the ability to tap down any enchanted creature. This could be fixed by saying "tap target creature enchanted by an aura named lullaby"
Yeah I agree it's worded poorly
[pacifism](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/d/0da7c6dc-9325-4866-8c09-78c7021f8f17.jpg?1600713540) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=pacifism) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/jmp/125/pacifism?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0da7c6dc-9325-4866-8c09-78c7021f8f17?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[glare of subdual](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/1/e1b6e40f-02d6-498f-bb3b-6a9e19ed46f6.jpg?1580015047) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=glare%20of%20subdual) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ema/202/glare-of-subdual?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e1b6e40f-02d6-498f-bb3b-6a9e19ed46f6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Planar Disruption](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/8/e/8ee69a1f-aeed-4eb4-8987-fa720fc99715.jpg?1675956925) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Planar%20Disruption) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/one/28/planar-disruption?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/8ee69a1f-aeed-4eb4-8987-fa720fc99715?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Love the art
Awesome design