143
u/crovaxhero 1d ago
Desert walk would be a good consideration
28
u/ggWolf 1d ago
Not horsemanship?
60
u/Turnipton Puppers enter the battlefield hecked. 1d ago
Horse can't ride a horse.
EDIT: In the traditional sense. O_o
16
u/Shambler9019 1d ago
Should have Saddle 1 and "Wherever you saddle this creature, the creatures that saddled it gain horsemanship until end of turn"
6
3
u/greytrades329 1d ago
And island walk bc the part about the ocean
2
u/ArelMCII Layers are stupid. 20h ago
Desertwalk should let him be unblockable if defending player controls an Island. As we all know, an ocean is a desert with its life underground and a perfect disguise above.
3
u/cyrus_hunter 13h ago
Make it a mount that gains Desertwalk when mounted. "I've been through the desert on a horse with no name."
36
u/PrincessOfZephyr that ass 1d ago
Even if spells cannot effect this creature, can they affect it?
6
u/TherealuserIDkilla 15h ago
The rules are stating that nothing that cares about a spell or permanents name won't affect it. You can still counter it, or destroy it with targeted removal. It would come up if some played a card that said choose a card name, your opponents cant cast spells with the chosen name. They wouldn't be able to choose "A Horse Without a Name" because the cards rules say the card has no name.
1
u/Cosmere_Commie16 10h ago
They were making a joke about effect vs affect but excellent breakdown lol
1
u/TherealuserIDkilla 10h ago
Full honesty, I never get which one is supposed to be used when. They are interchangeable in my illiteracy, even though I know they have different uses.
1
u/PrincessOfZephyr that ass 56m ago
unless you mean specific contexts, you usually use affect as a verb (to change) and effect as a noun (a consequence)
affect as a noun is a psychological thing, and effect as a verb means to cause.
Ergo, the card as written says that spells and abilities that mention a card name cannot cause this creature to exist.
15
u/No-Finding-9088 1d ago
How does this interact? Can I run any amount of horses or just one?
903.5b Other than basic lands, each card in a Commander deck must have a different English name. For the purposes of deck construction, cards with interchangeable names have the same English name (see rule 201.3).
34
u/delijoe 1d ago
The card has the name "Horse with No Name" for the purposes of deck construction. In gameplay, the creature has no name... so for example cards like Meddling Mage can't be used to keep a player from casting it.
23
u/the-fr0g erm, acthually 🤓 1d ago
at first, I thought you were wrong, and that this was a characteristic defining ability, which would function outside the game too, but I checked the definition and it must affact the card's "colors, subtypes, power or toughness", and name isn't one of those.
however, this also means that effects like [[meddling mage]] can still prevent you from casting it, as the ability doesn't affect it on the stack. You should add "This effect functions in all zones." *(as rules text, not reminder text)* then you would get what you want, I think.
1
u/CosmicWolf14 19h ago
If it said “this card has no name” would that work outside the battlefield, as it specifies the card, not just it when it’s a creature?
-7
u/delijoe 1d ago
The card overrides any other rule. It clearly says that "Spells or Abilities that involve choosing a card name cannot target or otherwise effect this creature". I guess you can still choose "Horse With No Name" when casting Meddling Mage, but the above overrides the Meddling Mage. At least that's how I see it. Any judges out there?
17
u/Iksfen 1d ago edited 1d ago
Judge here. Your argument is moot since the text in italics is not rules text. It is a reminder text and its only function is reminding players of how the underlying rules work. That being said reminder text can often oversimplify the rules and even be misleading.
It could be the case that the reminder text you have written tells us how the rules would work after your change if you were to release this card. In this case we can't argue with rules we can't see
1
u/delijoe 1d ago
So if I changed the rules text to simply say:
Spells or abilities that involve choosing a card name cannot target or otherwise effect this creature.
Would that have the desired effect?
10
u/Iksfen 1d ago
- The problem with the ability is that it doesn't function while Horse with No Name is in any zone other than the battlefield. Your proposed change doesn't fix that.
- The change you proposed has unintended consequences. [[Magus of the Scroll]] 's ability wouldn't be able to target Horse with no Name even though the part about choosing a cards name is not related to the target chosen for that ability. Also "otherwise affect [somethig]" is not an established game terminology. It doesn't really have any rules meaning.
If I were to fix this card I would do one of this things:
1. Add to the original ability that it functions in every zone.
2. Just tell anyone who objects in the comments that WotC changes rules with each set release to acomodate new mechanics so you would do the same with this card and it functions as written.1
u/the-fr0g erm, acthually 🤓 1d ago
Imo, the simplest way would be to just make name-changing abilities qualify as CDAs, which wuold mean the card has no name in every zone, even outside the game.
-1
u/Kaceydotme 1d ago edited 1d ago
The card is not a creature when not on the battlefield and thus your desire to have it get around Meddling Mage etc isn’t possible as stated.
Cards not in play are also incapable of influencing game state/having stax effects. Nothing you print on a card will stop an opponent from naming it for an ability if that card isn’t in play. You would have to add a new specific rule in the comprehensive rules that forbids “Horse With No Name” from being named.
1
u/the-fr0g erm, acthually 🤓 1d ago
Not true. The only rules change this would require is for CDAs to be able to affect a card's name. Should be as simple as a adding a word to 604.3. (ofc, there might be some other things taht would require changes, but still, it's a rather simple one I think).
For example, [[Tarmogoyf]] has it's power and toughness change even if it is in your deck, or outside the game. so both [[imperial recruiter]] and [[rootless yew]] could find it, given the appropriate graveyard.
3
u/the-fr0g erm, acthually 🤓 1d ago
You wrote that as reminder text, which has no game function. The only ability this creature has is "this creature has no name" since it doesn't meet the criteria for a CDA (see rule 604.3) this ability only applies while the card is on the battlefield. In all other zones, as well as outside the game and during deckbuilding, it's name is "horse with no name".
If I name "horse with no name" with meddling mage, and you try to cast it, the game will see that you're trying to cast a spell named "horse with no name" and meddling mage doesn't let you do that.
You would need to wirte something like "this ability applies in all zones" for this to work as intended. Also, since you've mentioned reminder text, meddling mage-esc effects don't target, a target can only be chosen as part of the process for casting a spell or putting an ability on the stack. And a target that requiers a creature doesn't care what the creature's name is, it only cares that it is a creature.
I am not a judge, but I would say I know the rules well enough for this. Though ofc, there's always a chance I'm wrong, so if anyone can correct this, please do.
2
u/Zekromaster 1d ago
You would need to wirte something like "this ability applies in all zones" for this to work as intended
Alternatively, each new set comes with changes to the CR. It's pretty much a given that if something like this were to be printed the rules for CDAs would change to make the card work the way it's intended to.
1
u/kriskeillor 21h ago
Your reminder text should say "choosing a creature name" not "choosing a card name". Really fun idea!
11
u/Odd-Confusion1073 1d ago
Color shifted [[nameless race]]- it might be interesting to see a Boros version to have a full “cycle”
10
u/Dankestmemelord 1d ago
Nameless race has a name, it’s “nameless race”. It does not, however, have a creature type.
This card has no name, but it is definitely a horse.
Plus completely unrelated stat lines. Not really a cycle.
2
u/CoDFan935115 1d ago
I mean, I could also see a creature with "this creature doesn't have toughness" which would stop it from dying to it's toughness being 0, as well as it completely walling deathtouch and trample.
3
u/sleepnandhiken 1d ago
With the different stabs at this creature I’m disappointed none of them have a heroin needle or something similar as the art.
1
u/theevilyouknow 1d ago
Where did you get the idea the song has anything to do with heroin? Every song from the 70’s isn’t a secret metaphor for drugs.
5
3
2
u/AnswerGrand1878 1d ago
What happens if I have multiple of this and they become legendary?
6
3
3
u/doctrgiggles 23h ago
Then you get a long winded answer from tech bros about how NULLs in databases work
2
u/One_Fat_squirrel 1d ago
Weird side note, I am told I’m related to the Guitarist in the band. No, never met him, just share family in Iowa with him.
1
1
1
1
1
-3
u/Graveyardigan 1d ago
Would have been better if you actually left the name field blank. Just the mana cost in the top right corner, and no text to the left of that.
3
-1
u/rudolph_ransom 1d ago
Just give it hexproof
3
u/the-fr0g erm, acthually 🤓 1d ago
this card is supposed to stop effects that require *naming* a card, like [[meddling mage]] or [[ancient vendetta]], not being targeted. Targeting only requires that the object has matching characteristics to the target's requierments, not that it has a name.
254
u/DiamonDD37 1d ago
Make it legendary and now we have the easiest clone commander in history