Kon'del the Conqueror (4000th post!)

[keldon]

Ambitious Soldier - :2::w::u:
Creature - Human Soldier
Whenever you play a soldier spell, you may flip Ambitious Soldier. If you don't, put an annex counter counter on target land.
2/2
----
Kon'del the Conqueror
Legendary Creature
You control all lands with annex counters on them.
3/3

[MupHbIu AToM]

Grats. Nice card, but does it really cost 4mana ? don't think so.

[keldon]

Grats. Nice card, but does it really cost 4mana ? don't think so.

What do you mean?

[GenericKen]

4 mana for 2/2 + wild ability is good, but I think your formatting would be cleaner with a simple "Whenever *blah*, choose one - *blah1*; or *blah2*".

Also, UW land d is... slightly off the color pie. White hasn't gotten an effect like this since... balance.

[OMFG Tom]

I like it, but not UW. Just white. Or perhaps, red.

[FruitlessRoar]

white makes sense to me. I'll control your lands with my soldiers.

[Ertai_Footshove]

Congratz, and nice card.

[Drakonis Mage]

Interesting, I kind of like the reference to an existing card, and I kind of want to tear my hair out because of it.

[keldon]

Interesting, I kind of like the reference to an existing card, and I kind of want to tear my hair out because of it.

It references two cards ... Annex and Conquer...

@ GenericKen : This is not land destruction. Controlling permanents is manily blue and white is there because of the military theme. Mechanic-wise, it could have been either monoblue or, maybe, blue-red... but flavorwise it needs white IMO...

[Mana Geek]

Guess I'm way too late for congratulations...

There is another reason for the card to be white: white has most of the soldiers. However, the other colour should be red since the flavour as a conqueror does not fit blue's scheme.

[keldon]

Guess I'm way too late for congratulations...

There is another reason for the card to be white: white has most of the soldiers. However, the other colour should be red since the flavour as a conqueror does not fit blue's scheme.

The first draft for this card was W/R, but then i included blue (dropping red) because of the control mechanics...
Flavorwise i agree with you... W/R is more in theme...

[Drakonis Mage]

It references two cards ... Annex and Conquer...

@ GenericKen : This is not land destruction. Controlling permanents is manily blue and white is there because of the military theme. Mechanic-wise, it could have been either monoblue or, maybe, blue-red... but flavorwise it needs white IMO...
I see annex counters, I don't see conquer counters...

[keldon]

I see annex counters, I don't see conquer counters...

The card's name... Kon'del the Conqueror...

[Drakonis Mage]

The card's name... Kon'del the Conqueror...Pssht. That's just a generic barbarian title. Not a great reference.

[fooligan]

im not feeling the soldier/annex flavor.
but it is down right ridiculous while not exactly over the top
'gradulations

[Risky]

How the time flies. You've done a lot of good work around here.

This card strikes me as more blue. The white is only there to justify the soldier type and name, which being flavor, should probably be sacrificed to keep this a clean one-color as there is no mechanical reason for the white.

[keldon]

How the time flies. You've done a lot of good work around here.

Thanks.... :D:D:D

This card strikes me as more blue. The white is only there to justify the soldier type and name, which being flavor, should probably be sacrificed to keep this a clean one-color as there is no mechanical reason for the white.

As i wrote above, mechanically, this is mono blue. White is included for flavor reasons (military organization is strictly white)... plus making it W/U makes it more playable than making it double-U-costed (blue has many soldiers, but white has efficient ones)... I'm still thinking about the monocolor option, though...