Removing haste or adding "must attack if able" would remove the Raging Goblin worry, but it also stops the ability from being a perfect replica of the card's text (which is neat).
Power-wise we could certainly put this in an expert set at common, but you are right that one-drops are the last bastion of power-level-integrity, and the fact that the game could sustain an increase doesn't make one wise.
The trick I'd give it would be a creature type other than Goblin, and make that type disadvantageous to have within its block. Hidden drawback keeps text clean but assuages power-guilt.
I'm not sure why we are worried about this being better than Raging Goblin. Raging Goblin, in card or close analog, hasn't been in Magic for a long time at common. He was in M10 and we had Skitter of Lizards in Worldwake which admittedly is a strictly better Raging Goblin at common.
I think we can print strictly better Raging Goblins. They just need to be within reason, and I think this card is fine and potentially playable in Limited unlike the old standby.
This creates a lot of board complexity for a common under New World Order. Could we make the second ability "Whenever another creature enters the battlefield under your control you may sacrifice ~. If you do, that creatures gets +1/+1 and gains haste until end of turn." instead?
as maro said on his most reacent podcast, granting haste is actually usually reserved for sorcery speed. this is for a number of reasons but the most standout of them being that new play might think that if you grant haste during combat you get to attack with that creature... which is false. the other concern is the on board buff that messes with the complexity of combat. this is why, not for power reasons, I would probably make the sacrifice clause at sorcery speed. other than that this looks good!
I have no trouble with this being strictly better than raging goblin though it might be better at uncommon simply for complexity issues and how it could be in limited.
If memory serves, we had a similar debate over a card in M13GA - an aura for R with "enchanted creature has haste and first strike".
The argument still stands both ways. I would argue that if you have that card in hand when you draw, say, a Rumbling Baloth on the fifth turn, you can start your creature attacking a turn early. Chah argued that if you weren't playing that aura in your deck, you would've drawn the Baloth a turn earlier anyways. The counter whether it's an aura or a goblin is that "sometimes you don't have enough fatties, and this helps (kind of) increase the density of them in your deck". It's true that removing the mana cost on the sacrifice removes the tension; but the cost also helps maintain the "shields down" timing that we always talk about.
Cool Card Design of the Day
Removing haste or adding "must attack if able" would remove the Raging Goblin worry, but it also stops the ability from being a perfect replica of the card's text (which is neat).
ReplyDeletePower-wise we could certainly put this in an expert set at common, but you are right that one-drops are the last bastion of power-level-integrity, and the fact that the game could sustain an increase doesn't make one wise.
The trick I'd give it would be a creature type other than Goblin, and make that type disadvantageous to have within its block. Hidden drawback keeps text clean but assuages power-guilt.
I'm not sure why we are worried about this being better than Raging Goblin. Raging Goblin, in card or close analog, hasn't been in Magic for a long time at common. He was in M10 and we had Skitter of Lizards in Worldwake which admittedly is a strictly better Raging Goblin at common.
ReplyDeleteI think we can print strictly better Raging Goblins. They just need to be within reason, and I think this card is fine and potentially playable in Limited unlike the old standby.
This creates a lot of board complexity for a common under New World Order. Could we make the second ability "Whenever another creature enters the battlefield under your control you may sacrifice ~. If you do, that creatures gets +1/+1 and gains haste until end of turn." instead?
ReplyDeleteYeah, I like this design a lot more when it's not an on-board combat trick.
DeleteThis is totally what I was thinking it was. I'd keep the mana cost on the ability, as well.
DeleteAgreed. Make it sorcery-speed.
Deleteas maro said on his most reacent podcast, granting haste is actually usually reserved for sorcery speed. this is for a number of reasons but the most standout of them being that new play might think that if you grant haste during combat you get to attack with that creature... which is false.
ReplyDeletethe other concern is the on board buff that messes with the complexity of combat. this is why, not for power reasons, I would probably make the sacrifice clause at sorcery speed. other than that this looks good!
also I feel that a goblin enthusiast would be really bad at being enthusiastic.
DeleteI have no trouble with this being strictly better than raging goblin though it might be better at uncommon simply for complexity issues and how it could be in limited.
ReplyDeleteCool card btw
This is similar to a card a designed a while ago, which I posted to the GDS2 wiki.
ReplyDeleteThe activation cost is like a catch 22 - "the creature can attack one turn earlier with haste - but only if you wait one extra turn to cast it."
If you cut the +1/+1 ability, you can also cut the activation cost.
If memory serves, we had a similar debate over a card in M13GA - an aura for R with "enchanted creature has haste and first strike".
DeleteThe argument still stands both ways. I would argue that if you have that card in hand when you draw, say, a Rumbling Baloth on the fifth turn, you can start your creature attacking a turn early. Chah argued that if you weren't playing that aura in your deck, you would've drawn the Baloth a turn earlier anyways. The counter whether it's an aura or a goblin is that "sometimes you don't have enough fatties, and this helps (kind of) increase the density of them in your deck". It's true that removing the mana cost on the sacrifice removes the tension; but the cost also helps maintain the "shields down" timing that we always talk about.