Counter Spells vs. the fizzle

>Counter Spells vs. the *fizzle*
I've never liked counter spells. I understand why they're in the game. I understand their use in tournament play. But they just leave a bad taste in almost every person's mouth when talking about casual play. This is a casual set. And I have no intention of every making any card that uses the words "counter target spell."

Part of the reason I dislike them is the lack of interaction it creates. Others may argue the opposite. That there is nothing that creates more interaction! (they say). I disagree. The way I see it is this. In a generic game of the magic: the gathering you have creatures, instants, sorceries, enchantments, artifacts all with their own card text interacting with the other cards' card text. When you introduce counter spells, you sweep all of that away and it becomes counter spells vs. everything else. One player hoping to get a spell through the web of counters, the other timing and converving their mana so they can counter opposing spells.

This is where I introduced the *fizzle* mechanic. And while the mechanics work well, giving a player to "counter" opposing spells, but only if they first take care of the opposing spellcasters so there are spells available to be fizzled. Putting that aside, I like how it works flavor-wise. The foundation of dueling in UO is based on timing. With suspend vs. *fizzle* brings this into Magic.

Every single instant or sorcery in Unintentionally Sexual will have suspend casting on it.

The Card Game

Decklists

Errata

Rules

Credits