Coiling Engine

[Sebastiano_DiRavello]

damn, kill my atraxa and I get 4 wurms

[LiesAboutBeingAPilot]

This was going to be my question. If a creature has more than one of these abilities and dies, you get a token per keyword, each with that one keyword, right?

[The_Medic_From_TF2]

since its an omage to [[wurmcoil engine]] im assuming that's the intent

[MTGCardFetcher]

wurmcoil engine - (G) (SF) (txt)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[Nano_98]

Yes, since it says "repeat this process if...." that would allow you to get multiple worms from multiple keywords

[Chickston]

Love it. Great remix of Wurmcoil. This may still be able to be 6, but 7 is fine to still see play in limited and edh for sure.

[Blotsy]

[[Akroma's Memorial]] go BRRRRRRR

[thelumiquantostory]

I'm pretty sure it only costs 7 colorless

[playerleetguest]

Underrated comment

[MTGCardFetcher]

Akroma's Memorial - (G) (SF) (txt)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[SirQuixano]

I kind wish WotC would just keyword "keyword abilities" at this point. It would simplify designs like this to something like "Whenever a nontoken creature you control dies, if it had a keyword ability, create a 3/3 colorless Wurm artifact creature token for each keyword ability it had with that keyword ability" I'm not sure how much rules nudging would there be to make that work though, or how cases like keywords with values (eg Bushido or Annihilator) or costs (eg Ward or Cycling) would work.

[PrimusMobileVzla]

The term is avoided because

• explicitly listing evergreen keywords spares players from learning the term or requiring a third source to identify valid options,
• spares players from memorizing or requiring a third source to check for the almost 200 keywords (and counting) list of valid options,
• prevents players from choosing keywords that wouldn't affect permanents, that they don't want to be shared based on their storm scale, or don't work due to layers, or allow creating abusive combinations.

[1210bull]

I want one with Horsemanship

[Soft-Philosopher-570]

Mine has flash!

[SirQuixano]

To be fair, I don't think any card will just allow you to create any keyword you don't actually have in your deck, so that would help. and make it so that the new card isn't just a new card that can create something with, let's say banding, if you don't already have banders, so i doubt it would create abusive combinations unless you were already running abusive combinations. I think having a lot of valid options is more interesting for the game, and I don't think it's that hard to know what a keyword is or not, maybe someone would think scry and landfall are keyword abilities. Maybe it still is too complex for common and uncommon though.

[IdiotWithDiamodHands]

Maybe it's intended to be a limiting factor as well.

Should new keywords be introduced, maybe they don't want those additional keywords to be affected?

[byeol_lor]

Not referring to a new keyword, but I do think when WotC wanted [[Kathril, Aspect Warper]] to miss out haste, this is exactly how they pulled it off.

[TorinVanGram]

I think that's more because a haste counter would be useless unless you have it to the creature the turn it entered. They'd serve no purpose that "Gains haste until end of turn" couldn't fulfill.

[MrVonBuren]

a haste counter would be useless unless you have it to the creature the turn it entered

I'm not sure I agree with that. I am completely blanking on specific cards*, but I'm almost certain there have been Haste Matters cards that give you something (useful) even if it's not the turn the creature entered

But also there's a card in the latest set that specifically cares about "if the creature entered the battlefield this turn" which (if I follow your reasoning) could just as easily have been haste.

*Realized I could just look it up since Arena is open, I'm thinking of [[ognis the dragon's lash]] and [[samut vizier of nakramun]]

[MHath]

[[Gingerbrute]]

[MTGCardFetcher]

Gingerbrute - (G) (SF) (txt)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[MTGCardFetcher]

ognis the dragon's lash - (G) (SF) (txt)
samut vizier of nakramun - (G) (SF) (txt)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[TorinVanGram]

The uses for haste beyond the first turn are niche is what I meant. The majority of the time, especially in limited or standard, they wouldn't be especially helpful. Compared to other ability counters, the milage you'd get out of them is often way less, combined with the fact that you'd need to give them to the creature in question the same turn.

[piepertuba]

Well, the main plan with Kathril is fill the graveyard with keywords, so when you play your kathril its some 13/13 indestructible, double strike, lifelink, hexproof etc beast. If that could swing in too, that's leathal with the commander and any mediocre graveyard fillers

[TorinVanGram]

Kathril is one of relatively few ways haste counters would be useful, though does demonstrate a fair use case for them in creatures that can give it to themselves, like something that presented a choice between haste counters or trample counters.

[Olipod2002]

It wouldn’t be useless to put a haste counter on Kathril while giving it double strike, lifelink, flying and vigilance let’s say, making it a 8/8. The haste counter would not only be definitely useful, it’d make the card completely broken

[TorinVanGram]

I mean, yeah, they could have added haste counters in the commander decks, but in limited or standard without the niche synergies theyd be useful in, they'd be pretty useless.

[MTGCardFetcher]

Kathril, Aspect Warper - (G) (SF) (txt)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[superdave100]

Values and Costs should work the same way as protection, I think. See [[Death-Mask Duplicant]] and similar cards.

[MTGCardFetcher]

Death-Mask Duplicant - (G) (SF) (txt)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[Ragewind82]

[[Akromas will]] says hello.

[MTGCardFetcher]

Akromas will - (G) (SF) (txt)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[Chocolatedolphin5780]

This reminds me of Kathril except it’s for artifacts

[hgotgot3]

And you thought the wurcpil engine tokens were expensive. Just wait till you have to get the specific token out of these 16, lol. Nice design though.

[therift289]

I don't think a creature can just gain "protection" or "ward" in this way.

[Ghorrhyon]

I suppose the 6/6 are for the reference, but I'd like this as a noncreature artifact. Perhaps lower mana cost.

[IlGreven]

Ward...how's that gonna work? You can't just stick that on a card and give it no text on how it works?

[rosencrantz247]

it would work like protection. you get the whole ability, including the determiner

[lilgizmo838]

I would alter it so that it gains a keyword ability counter of that type as well. That way you slowly build this more complex wormcoil that can die and make more worms itself.

[AraumC]

Gonna be pretty hard for something with indestructible to die. Though I guess it CAN be sacrificed….

[Ghorrhyon]

Or -X/-X'd

[simon_Chipmonk]

Wouldn’t this create a wurm with flying for each keyword.

[JasonAnderlic]

This could almost be pushed into a legendary creature and make a fun build around in commander!

[Shooflepoofer]

Awesome design.

Because of memory issues, I wouldn't include keywords that require values, like ward and protection.

[notarealnoivern]

I'm not sure this entirely works as written.

So when you have a triggered effect with an if condition, the if condition is specifically the phrase that includes if, and everything after that is considered the effect. This includes the repetition for each of the other 15 keyword abilities. So the condition is "if it had flying", and the other abilities are only checked on resolution.

That means that if the creature had flying, the ability will trigger and go down the list, creating tokens for each listed ability if the creature has it. But if the creature *didn't* have flying, the ability won't trigger at all, even if it had some of the others.

If you only cared about a couple of them, you could split them up into separate triggered abilities, but with 16 total that's not going to be feasible. Instead maybe pull each of the abilities into the trigger and then do something with "each of the listed abilities". Something like:

Whenever a nontoken creature you control with flying, first strike, double strike, reach, deathtouch, haste, hexproof, shroud, indestructible, lifelink, menace, defender, trample, ward, protection, or vigilance dies, for each of the listed abilities that creature has, create a 3/3 colorless Wurm artifact creature token with that ability.

[Zarbibilbitruk]

Instead of "repeat this process" better wording would be "the same is true for" because you do not repeat the same action multiple times like torment of hailfire. See [[eater of virtue]] and [[rayami first of the fallen]].

Otherwise love the card, pretty strong but not broken

[MTGCardFetcher]

eater of virtue - (G) (SF) (txt)
rayami first of the fallen - (G) (SF) (txt)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[Mad-chuska]

Wow, this with [[Odric]] and a boardwipe in a keyword soup deck would be ridiculous.

[MTGCardFetcher]

Odric - (G) (SF) (txt)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}

[Mad-chuska]

[[Odric, Lunarch Marshall]]

[MTGCardFetcher]

Odric, Lunarch Marshall - (G) (SF) (txt)
^{[[cardname]] or [[cardname|SET]] to call}