Cool Card Design of the Day11/12/2012 - This mechanic was inspired while reading Mark Rosewater's Designing for Izzet. I share it today not because I think it would have been a better choice than Replicate or Overload (I don't) nor even that it should be used if we come back to the Izzet in the future. Æthershift fails in one of the primary goals of an Izzet mechanic: creating variance. In fact, this keyword will create more repetitive gameplay. That said, it's kinda neat and designing it was interesting.
The wording is pretty awkward. Basically, you can cast it for its printed ability or you can Fork a spell of the same cost. There's probably a better template.
My original idea was that you'd only cast Æthershift in response to another sorcery or instant spell. You could either copy that spell or make that spell a copy of your Æthershift card. The reminder text on that was even longer:
Aethershift (When you cast this card, you may have it become a copy of target sorcery or instant. If not, you may have that spell become a copy of this card. Each spell’s controller may choose new targets.)
or
Aethershift (Choose one—Either target sorcery or instant becomes a copy of this card; or this card becomes a copy of that spell. The copy’s controller may choose new targets.)
In addition to the length, that version had two big problems: First, it was way too strong. Even if the cheapest iteration was UU or RR, it's still strictly better than Twincast and Reverberate because you can effectively counter the spell you're targeting. Second, it's confusing at best and broken at worst: Does the card you make copy your Aethershift spell get the Aethershift ability? Etc etc.
And here, I wanted to make a gold card. This art called to me and demanded something dragon-tastic. While Dragoncall is pretty neat, there's no justification to put Aethershift on it. In fact, this is a terrible use of Aethershift, because you're rarely going to want to copy another spell with it, and you won't be happy about it when you do.
I obviously haven't done it a great deal of justice. Can you find a way to make Aethershift desirable? Or is it safe to file this one under Basically Never?
Aethershif search is really smart. I like the mechanic in general.
ReplyDeleteI think the biggest weakness of this mechanic is that the rest of the text on the card is totally unaffected by the Aethershift mechanic. If you want the copy effect, you don't care what the other part of the card did. If you want the other part of the card, you don't really care that you had the option to copy.
ReplyDeleteModal stuff is cool, don't get me wrong (charms, split cards, etc.): but this is a modal mechanic where one mode is the same every single time, and that leads to less interesting gameplay. I think it's telling that the majority of the designs here are common staples with Aethershift hot-glue-gunned on. I don't know if this mechanic has more design space than a vertical cycle, honestly.
Wait, so "choose A or X" is more limiting and repetitive than "choose A or B" where A and B are what's printed on the card and X is anything you can target?
DeleteThe effects are common staples because their commons. The keyword is complicated enough that we want simple effects to pair with it.
I agree that there's no inherent synergy (mechanical or thematic) between the effects and the keyword. I think the most dooming sign is that the better the effect is, the less you want to use Aethershift which will means the best time to use Aethershift is when you won't miss the effect—"worse is better" is dangerous territory indeed.
What I'm saying is that charms are less interesting if you have a bunch of charms where the effects are "choose A or X," "choose B or X," "choose C or X," etc. Charms are interesting because you get a variety of effects out of each one of them. Same with split cards (they'd be boring if one half of the split card was always the same, which is essentially what Aethershift is.)
DeleteCopying another target spell isn't particularly lush design space. There's a reason why Wizards usually only prints one or two copy effects per *block*, usually at rare.
I'm still not following. BOTH sides of a split card are always the same.
DeleteI agree that spell copying isn't a deep well of design space.
I guess I'm not making it clear. You have cards that are essentially the following split cards:
DeleteTwiddle // Reverberate
Searing Spear // Reverberate
Inspiration // Reverberate
et cetera.
See a trend? Yes, the Reverberate is limited in CMC on each card. I wasn't trying to say that split cards/modal effects should change each time you play them. I was pointing out that if you're doing a bunch of modal cards, you probably shouldn't share an effect across all of them.
I realize that Cycling violates this rule, but Cycling is a fairly unexciting mechanic that serves a developmental niche.
Ahh. Now I get what you're saying. You were talking about the fact that every spell with this mechanic is half-Reverberate and I was focusing on the fact that Reverberate is copying a different spell each time. Thanks for clarifying.
DeleteCycling is a good analogy. Transmute too.
This seems like a cross between "Splice onto Instants", but coming from the other direction, and Transmute. I'd be inclined to just make a Reverberate with Splice or give some instants and sorceries unique Transmute costs, more than likely.
ReplyDeleteOne concern I would have with this mechanic is that I can imagine it creating a curious sort of option-paralysis in which the player holding one of these cards is constantly imagining "what if" scenarios and never actually casts the damn spell.
ReplyDeleteIn a given limited environment, each Aethershift card is likely to have between 5 and 10 other spells that it has the potential to transform into. While only a subset of those potential forms are going to be desirable, I'd still say the decision trees that this mechanic makes are rather extensive.
Excellent point. This could easily be the Kavu Titan problem x2.
DeleteTangentially, I think of Replicate and Overload as variance-reducing, like other quasi-kicker mechanics, since they allow you to get different amounts of utility at different stages of the game.
ReplyDeleteI started out making the same argument and decided to omit it since one could argue that overload spells have two modes and thus play differently more often than spells with just one mode and replicate has many modes. These two arguments are actually discussing completely different things, but neither were prerequisite to Aethershift.
DeleteTrying to work out some versions:
ReplyDeleteShifting Ray 2R
Instant
Shifting Ray deals to target creature or player damage equal to the amount of mana paid to cast Shifting Ray.
Spellshift R (You may pay R and discard this card as you cast another spell. If you do, draw a card, and that spell becomes a copy of this spell.)
Spellflux Ray R
Instant
Shifting Ray deals 2 damage to target creature or player.
Spellflux (As you cast this, you may discard a card with converted mana cost X and pay X. If you do, draw a card and replace all numbers on this card to X.)
Looks kind of clunky. Some form of looting will indirectly help Izzet players play a lot of situational spells in their deck and increase variety of play, though.
Spellshift is interesting. It's effectively cycling that you can only use on another card in your hand. While it reads oddly at first, making the spell effect dependent on characteristics of the cycled card is what makes the effect worthwhile.
DeleteSpellflux is a clever way to modify a card (I love replacing a static number with a variable), but probably not worth the mental twisting to get it.
That both act as fixing is always a plus (though you'd never want to discard an excess land to Spellflux). Thanks, Chah!
Another possible template (with slight functional tweak):
DeleteShifting Ray 2R
Instant
Shifting Ray deals X damage to target creature or player. X is 2 unless you spellshifted ~.
Spellshift XR (XR, Discard a card with CMC X: Draw a card and cast ~ from your hand without paying its mana cost.)
howabout this
ReplyDeletebouncing burn R
sorcery
deal 2 damage to target creature
spelldrain(discard any number of cards as you cast this, then copy it for each card discarded)
its a bit of a scaled down shock, but can be much more in a pickle.
What's neat about this is that it's literally just "Replicate—Discard a card," yet it feels entirely different.
Delete