Cool Card Design of the Day8/27/2012 - I'm confident this card has been designed in some form or another by several Magic designers across the Wondrous Old Web before, if not by some of our own regulars. I share it today not to claim credit or steal the limelight, but to explore the merits and flaws of the idea.
Speaking of similar designs, Wizards already printed something similar in Silence. Apart from the difference between W and UU, they do play a bit differently. Silence shuts down everything (that doesn't happen in response), but necessarily puts you down a card, where Preempt gives them the Shimmering Glasskite option to burn a spell to overcome your "shield." Yes, that's worse—and given the lack of tournament domination Silence had, I wouldn't expect Preempt to see much tournament play.The question is whether it's worth printing. Would it see Limited play? The effect falls somewhere between Time Walk and "I discard a card," since it could be an effective tempo keeper when you've got the upper hand in a fast game, or it could do next to nothing in a slow game during turns in which you're applying no real pressure.
Giving it a bit of that sweet Remand-like self-replacing action definitely pumps up its playability:
But even just being a card that people would put in their decks doesn't make it a good design. What does it do for the game? This could replace Cancel for one set, adding some variety to that slot by filling the same basic role a bit differently. You're spending three mana (but not a card) to rob your opponent of a turn of sorceries and creatures. Again, that's very conditional: It doesn't usually do enough on defense and is a bit of a durdle when nothing's happening, but could help you seal victory in a race you're already winning.I like that it doesn't necessarily leave your opponent without options, since she could waste a cheap spell she doesn't need to pave the way for a relevant spell, given enough mana. It's funny, the card is effectively a Punisher effect like Browbeat: "Target opponent chooses one—Either he or she won't cast spells this turn; or that player discards a card and pays its mana cost."
I am concerned that, like Remand, Preempt gets uglier when you pair it with more countermagic. If you do push past my Preempt to resolve something else on your turn, a Mana Leak would leave you mighty sore. Finally, is it clear enough? You and I are familiar with the stack and normal countermagic templating, so it's obvious to us what's happening, but will a new player who sees this before Cancel get that you can't respond to a spell with Preempt? That name's meant to be a clue, but I'm only 80% confident.
Even if you understand it, it's not hard to overvalue it. Preempt almost reads like Cancel with a free cantrip, which it definitely isn't. A player might see the word counter and the 1UU cost at the prerelease and put it into his deck assuming it's countermagic and be disappointed when he passes the turn thinking he's got a counter up only to have his opponent make him reread it. We can't be responsible for players not reading cards, but we are responsible for making things do what they look like they do.
For my money, I'd be quite surprised to see this outside of a third set where variety tends to trump simplicity the most, given the shift in audience expectations.
I really like it but I believe it better fits azorious philosophy than plain blue.
ReplyDeleteI could definitely see this effect as white-blue or mono-white.
DeleteTechnically, the first execution of this concept was probably Hesitation, which was a terrible card, but then that spawned Standstill, which is a borderline broken card.
ReplyDeleteIt's probably safer to leave this in the realm of "terrible" (no cantrip).
What would Hesitation be like if it was reprinted these days?
DeleteI suppose that's hard to say. Hesitation did exist at a time where The Real Counterspell and Mana Leak and Dismiss were all hanging out and being snooty about which spells got to resolve, so it being awful may have had more to do with there being no need to play it.
DeleteOne problem beyond the question of whether it's good or bad is that even if Hesitation were good, it'd be an undesirable effect due to the ease with which it can trigger those feel-bad moments where someone just walks right into the on-board Hesitation and feels like an idiot.
I don't think there's anything we can do to keep the player who would accidentally walk into an on-board Hesitation from feeling like an idiot. Including not printing Hesitation.
DeleteJust to be clear, the original version is not Hesitation, because it lasts only one turn. Which would make accidentally walking into Preempt even more embarrassing. And rightly so.
What about "counter the first spell cast next turn"?
ReplyDeleteWhy break it up into two turns?
DeleteI expect mostly if you wanted to do something tightly with mana. Cast it at the end of your opponents turn, and untap to a pre-Silenced board? Actually, there are fewer ways to exploit that than I was thinking.
DeleteMostly, this is just how I read Preempt the first time I looked at it.
UW
ReplyDeleteInstant
Counter the next spell cast unless its controller plays (2).
Or to push the power level:
UW
Instant
The next spell cast costs an additional (2).
I think the above card is likely too strong. I do think it is a unique and unexplored effect. It does function somewhat similar to land destruction however so it would probably be unprintable. Maybe as W the next spell cast costs an additional 1.
Oops published as anonymous. I would like to see white better develop it's portion of the color pie. I feel like the "taxing Law" aspect has been greatly neglected.
ReplyDeleteI can't help but think this card might not function perfectly ruleswise, or at least I'm sure anticipating a lot of arguing about it.
ReplyDeleteHow so? Can you give an example?
DeleteConfusion regarding what "cast" and "resolve" mean, especially in non-tournament contexts (some of the people I play with are very uninterested in the minutiae of the rules).
DeleteIt breaks a little bit from traditional blue counterspells in that you don't cast it in response to something, which makes it a little wonky in that regard to begin with, but here's the main issue I'm worried about.
You cast Preempt. They cast a spell in response. Is their spell in response countered? (No, but would everybody be able to figure that out?)
I dunno. Maybe it just needs "reminder" text.
Fair point.
DeleteOr could use split second... which according to the Maro 8 ball is likely to come back.
DeleteWhat do you think about adding a bit more interesting gameplay options to this one? I feel like as it stands it's a bit too weak for the caster, and doesn't really provide enough interesting decisions for the victim (this spell is never, ever going to counter something good.)
ReplyDeletePreempt (uncommon)
UU
Instant
The next time an opponent casts a spell this turn, choose one - counter that spell, or draw two cards.
This might be costed a bit too low, but it creates an interesting decision for the opponent - she *might* be able to sneak through something that's decent enough that it's not worth turning down the cards over. Throwing out a crappy spell just to "break the shield" isn't necessarily an attractive option anymore. And suddenly, not casting any spells seems like it might be a good idea.
Interesting. How about
Delete"Counter the next spell cast this turn. At end of turn, if no spells were countered this way, draw a card?"
Or two. The number of cards drawn makes for a very different choice/effect.
This is a very very interesting card, but it would need to be costed aproprietly. It is a griefer card in which both coises are problematic and you never have a reason not to cast it durring your opponent's turn. So it could be a sorcery, with a low cost, or it could be an instant and reward your opponent (or all players) if no spell is cast that turn.
DeleteChange of plans: Sorcery 2U: the first spell cast next turn is countered. If a spell is countered that way, your opponent draws a card. If no spells are cast at next players eot, you may draw 3 cards.