Click through to see this weekend's design challenge. Your single, final submission is due by Monday morning. Every submission warrants feedback, which I will try to provide, and which everyone is encouraged to provide as well. You may use that feedback to revise your submission any number of times. If and only if you provide a direct link to art for your submission, and the artist's name, will I mock it up and include it in a follow-up review.
Friday, April 18, 2014
Weekend [Art] Challenge 041814—Journey into Nyx
Weekend Art Challenge
Click through to see this weekend's design challenge. Your single, final submission is due by Monday morning. Every submission warrants feedback, which I will try to provide, and which everyone is encouraged to provide as well. You may use that feedback to revise your submission any number of times. If and only if you provide a direct link to art for your submission, and the artist's name, will I mock it up and include it in a follow-up review.
Design a card for Journey into Nyx that features a new mechanic. This needn't be a keyword or even a named mechanic, but it's purpose is to replace one of the major mechanics in Journey entirely. Briefly explain with your submission which mechanic you're replacing and why. If you replace a mechanic that appears at common, design a common.
Click through to see this weekend's design challenge. Your single, final submission is due by Monday morning. Every submission warrants feedback, which I will try to provide, and which everyone is encouraged to provide as well. You may use that feedback to revise your submission any number of times. If and only if you provide a direct link to art for your submission, and the artist's name, will I mock it up and include it in a follow-up review.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I would have liked to see a cycle of lands representing Nyx, maybe something like:
ReplyDeleteForests of Nyx
Enchantment Land
(Forest of Nyx isn't a spell)
T: add G to your mana pool. This mana can only be used to play enchantments.
one for each color.
Im not sure what I would take out? Maybe 5 uncommons that were not pulling their weight to add this cycle at uncommon.
Not worried that these will be broken like the artifact lands were?
DeleteThe only thing I can think of that these would do is be Constellation enablers.
DeleteThat doesn't seem compelling enough to print, and it would tie development's hands if they ever want to do something that cared about how many enchantments you have in play. I'm not sure these are worth the risk.
Also, if you're going to have an enchantment land, make it feel enchantmenty - give it a board changing effect of some kind. Lucent Liminid was a design failure because it was only an enchantment because the type line told you so.
DeleteI agree with zefferal in principle, but I think there are far too many lands that do things besides make mana while they're on the board. Alleviating mana flood is a noble goal, but I don't think it's worth the enormous hit to board complexity. Teetering Peaks style triggers and cycling are definitely better ways to go.
Deletegreat comments guys thanks. These would definitely need to feel more like enchantments. The goal was to try and capture the lands of the gods. I tried to get something really simple. what about something like:
DeleteStars of Nyx
Legendary Enchantment Land
CARDNAME enters the battlefield tapped.
When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, pick a color.
T: add 1 mana of the chosen color to your mana pool
CARDNAME counts toward your devotion to the chosen color.
too weird/ crazy?
The last line probably isn't possible, and even if it is, it's got to be a bad idea. That this is unique and will have the starry border might be enough to remind players to look for it when checking enchantments, but devotion-counting only happens based on symbols in the top-right of cards.
DeleteThe only real space I see for enchantment lands is with effects like Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth (but only affecting your cards) that your opponents can completely ignore. That said, frankly I just don't think having enchantment lands adds anything. Constellation and similar effects have to be balanced around their existence which leads them to be smaller effects (to avoid the feel bad of making them too expensive and players mana screwing themselves in an effort to get triggers). That in turn makes it harder to build around them so the constellation decks end up with less variety than if lands simply never trigger it.
DeleteI'm torn between these two ideas as a replacement for Strive (because we already have multi-targeting spells, and experience plays well with both heroes and monsters).
ReplyDeleteBarrage of Some Sort {R}
Sorcery (cmn)
Experience—Concerted Barrage deals X damage to target creature, where X is the number of +1/+1 counters among creatures you control.
Another Barrage {6}{R}
Sorcery (cmn)
Experience (Concerted Barrage costs 1 less to cast for each +1/+1 counter among permanents you control.)
Concerted Barrage deals 6 damage to target creature.
Barrage of Some Sort can hit players too.
DeleteI don't like the first one as it does nothing if you have no creatures out. Feels bad too much of the time.
DeleteI like the second verson.
But I think the biggest reason they had strive in the set is that heroic needed a bit of help to get triggered in the first place. Is this a fine replacement?
I prefer the second one too.
DeleteIt feels weird to tie cost reduction to counters which only appear in the very late game when Monstrosity makes them, but I agree that version 1 is dead too often. My vote would be to try some sort of threshold like Metalcraft to allow for late game relevance. Perhaps "If you control two or more creatures with +1/+1 counters on them, EFFECT."
DeleteWhy is counter-threshold better than counter-counting?
DeleteIt gives the spells more room to be decent when you don't have many/any counters. If you did that with a counter counting spell if would become hard to develop because there aren't many effects you can scale safely and you lose the balancing factor of sometimes being bad.
DeleteThis is what sets Cranial Plating apart from, say, Nim Shrieker. Bonesplitter is good, Millenial Gargoyle is not.
What about this?
DeleteBarrage of a Third Type 1R
Sorcery (cmn)
Put a +1/+1 counter on target creature. It deals damage equal to the number of +1/+1 counters on it to target creature or player.
Ooh, I hadn't considered of that solution. I'm in!
DeleteI like it, but I'm a little uncomfortable with this being mono-red, especially when all the counter stuff is in non-red colors anyway. Could we make this GR or WR?
DeleteRed gets +1/+1 heroic in this set (which grumble grumble), and has had +1/+1 counters from monsters and auras.
DeleteJust to clarify, it gets a single +1/+1 Heroic total in the block, right? (Which is super weird).
DeleteOne of my biggest pet peeves with the block is that they made white's premier common in THS and BNG basically the same card (Wingsteed Rider and Akroan Skyguard) and they never even made a 1W 2/2 Heroic with "gets a +1/+1 counter"). Yeah, yeah, it is would be strictly worse than that one rare, but who cares?
It is weird.
DeleteStrive seems like the best mechanic to replace. It's essentially a remake of replicate, except that it's narrower, reads worse, has less flavor, and is more vulnerable to counterspells. Besides, Maro pretty much admitted that it was a last-minute replacement for a cooler mechanic (proliferate?!) involving +1/+1 counters.
ReplyDeleteWith that in mind-- and riffing on Jay's excellent suggestions-- here are some possibilities:
Akroan Advance R
Instant (Common)
Target creature you control gets +1/+0 and gains first strike until end of turn.
Unify (When you cast this, you may replace "target creature" with "each creature with a +1/+1 counter on it".)
Akroan Vengeance 3R
Instant (Common)
CARDNAME deals 4 damage to target creature or player.
Invoke (Colorless mana in this spell's cost can be paid by removing that many +1/+1 counters from creatures you control.)
"Each creature you control…" right?
DeletePaying counters is sad because having counters is fun.
I like Unify better.
Good point... Invoke is a bit too Spikish, probably.
DeleteCurrently the +1/+1 mode of Akroan Advance reads, "each creature with a +1/+1 counter on it you control", which I agree is a bit stilted-- but then, players never actually 'read' it. I'm very much open to re-templating suggestions. One possibility:
Unify (You may target any number of creatures with +1/+1 counters on them instead. If you do, this spell's effects apply to each.)
"Target creature and any number of target creatures you control with +1/+1 counters on them"?
DeleteThat's excellent! I'll go with that and make Unify into an ability word. (Four ability words in a block is kind of a lot, but hey-- there's no law against it.)
DeleteAkroan Advance R
Instant (Common)
Unify-- Target creature and any number of other target creatures with +1/+1 counters on them get +1/+0 and gain first strike until end of turn.
Art: http://media.wizards.com/images/magic/tcg/products/jou/aasd7y23m34co/AVcXkI501e_EN.jpg
This is better than Coordinated Assault most of the time, which is too good for common. What about…
DeleteUnify—Target creature and each other creature you control with +1/+1 counters on them get +1/+0 and gain first strike until end of turn.
Yes, you're right-- the not-targeting version is better. And now that it's templated as an ability word anyway, there's no particular reason to be afraid of the "you control" language.
DeleteAkroan Advance R
Instant (Common)
Unify-- Up to one target creature and all creatures you control with +1/+1 counters on them each get +1/+0 and gain first strike until end of turn.
This doesn't nerf targeting too much either, since you can still target one heroic creature to grow it if you wish. I added "up to one" as a way to make "Voyage's End in response" less good, but I could go either way on that. (Rules question on 'up to one': If you choose a target and it gets Voyage's Ended, does the spell still resolve?)
How many players aren't going to realize that they can target a creature that has a +1/+1 counter on it for double the effect?
DeleteThey can't get a second instance of the effect... at least I don't think they can. I don't have enough rules knowledge to know, but that certainly wasn't the intention (although it *was* my intention to let you trigger anyone's heroic ability while pumping the team).
DeleteOn second reading I think you're right, but it'll certainly cause questions (case in point). One option for clarification is "and all other" but that might lead some people to mistakenly assume it has to target something with a counter. My gut says its a smaller group, but I don't have any real numbers.
DeleteI'm not sure if "up to one" keeps it from being countered for lack of targets when you choose one and it goes away. Itchy.
DeleteYeah, I'm not sure there's a concise way to word this without a little ambiguity one way or the other.
Gluttonous Cyclops [5R]
ReplyDeleteCreature — Cyclops [common]
Tyrannical might — At the beginning of your upkeep, CARDNAME fights another target creature with less power than it.
5/4
Grim Guardian [2B]
Enchantment Creature — Zombie [common]
Tyrannical might — At the beginning of your upkeep, each creature with less power than CARDNAME gets -1/-1 until end of turn.
1/4
Trying to think of a new monster mechanic that works with Gods...
But it doesn't...
How about...
Grim Guardian [2B]
Enchantment Creature — Zombie
Divine might — When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, each opponent loses 1 life for each enchantment you control. (This includes CARDNAME.)
1/4
Divine might is interesting... kind of like constellation in reverse. Would it be exclusively on enchantments as well?
DeleteDivine Might seems much more appropriate to Theros than Tyrannical Might. Would this exist alongside constellation, though?
DeleteDivine might would replace Constellation. I think it would probably be only on enchantments (gods) and monsters.
DeleteWhy on monsters?
DeleteBecause monsters and gods hooking up makes sense? :/
DeleteStrive is a nice, clean mechanic for the mortals, but it doesn't really tie them together. It only works with Heroic. Alliance isn't a good enough mechanic to replace it, but at least it's in the right vein: helping all your mortals with Heroic, Monstrosity, Tribute, and Inspired. Of course, it doesn't support the other goal of going wide...
ReplyDeleteChampion of the People 1W
Creature-Human Soldier (C)
Alliance (Whenever CARDNAME attacks, you may tap any number of untapped creatures you control and move any number of +1/+1 counters from among them onto CARDNAME.)
2/2
Oh, and Strive also fulfilled the goal of adding an instant/sorcery mechanic because the block only had scry.
DeleteI'm not down on this. It could work in Theros block environment. Here are a few concerns:
Delete1) +1/+1 counters are used as a reminder on Monstrosity.
2) It requires a critical mass of +1/+1 counters to use, but doesn't provide any of its own.
These aren't deal breakers. I totally see it it in a vertical cycle, with or without a keyword.
The Ordeals spoiled the purity of monstrosity counters at launch.
DeleteI'm more concerned that Alliance doesn't look fun. I can move counters around, but I have to tap my guys to do it, and all before blockers, so what's the point? I can get more counters out of Ordeals, but that's about it.
You're right, I got too caught up trying to satisfy constraints and lost the fun. Thanks for giving me some perspective. I'll come up with something else to submit later.
DeleteReplacing Strive is all the rage so:
ReplyDeleteColossal Heroics 2G
Instant (U)
Ideal GGG (You may cast this spell for its ideal cost instead.)
Target creature gains +2/+2 until end of turn. Untap it.
If this spell was ideal, up to three target creature gain +2/+2 until end of turn. Untap them.
Sounds reasonable and reads well. How about
DeleteTarget creature gets blah
Ideal- If only G was used to cast CARDNAME, blahx3 instead.
Ideal is a great concept for Greek World, and its nice how it ties in with Devotion. I'm less convinced it makes sense in this set, since the mortals have abandoned their devotion to the gods. You could argue that this is what they did with that devotion, though. I like that.
DeleteI like the idea that if you pay only one colour to pay the card, you get a big bonus.
DeleteStrive sucks, let's get rid of that. What JOU needs is a mechanic that enables inspired.
ReplyDeleteSince we don't need Strive anymore, we can reuse some existing art from a Strive card (http://mythicspoiler.com/nyx/cards/solidarityofheroes.html, Eric Deschamps).
Shared Vocation (common)
1G
Instant
Solidarity (As you cast this spell, you may tap any number of untapped creatures you control.)
Target creature gets +3/+3 until end of turn. It gets an additional +3/+3 for each creature in solidarity with this spell.
I'd take Solidarity over Strive, sure.
DeleteSolidarity is to Conspire as Strive is to Multikicker. They aren't dead on, but not very dissimilar either.
Would you also be increasing the number of cards with Inspired in the set? Otherwise I don't see much point in replacing Strive with an Inspired-enabler.
DeleteAnd if so, are there any slots in which you might put additional Inspired cards?
I think it needs to get an additional +1/+1 for each creature in solidarity with the spell, because otherwise this card is just nuts.
DeleteI admit I expected Journey to have more inspired cards so that, when drafting the block, inspired would matter (since it didn't really matter in BTT). Instead they seem to have chosen to go in yet another direction that probably won't matter (but we'll see). It will be disappointing if it is never correct to play that cycle of auras that grant a tap ability.
Developing this a bit:
DeleteShared Vocation (common)
G
Instant
Solidarity (As you cast this spell, you may tap any number of untapped creatures you control.)
Target creature gets +2/+2 until end of turn. It gets an additional +2/+2 for each creature in solidarity with this spell.
So now if you tap one more creature you're basically convoking out a Titanic Growth, and it goes uphill from there.
I considered suggesting the +2/+2 / +2/+2 version, but I wasn't sure it wasn't too powerful even at 1G.
DeleteOne of the things people most hated in Scars of Mirrodin draft was when someone would attack with a Plague Stinger and then play a huge Untamed Might to win out of nowhere. I feel Shared Vocation is likely to lead to that kind of game ending a lot. I'm uncomfortable with a super efficient Green pump spell that is so clearly intended to go to someone's face.
On the other hand, I think the block is really well set up to optimize this card in a UG deck, with stuff like Satyr Wayfinder and Omenspeaker that just sit around waiting to activate your Solidarity abilities.
(BTW, I think Solidarity is a very cool ability, I just think development has to be really careful of the power level, because it won't be particularly hard to activate it 4 times.)
My instinct agrees this is still a bit too strong, but +2/+2 is a ton safer than +3/+3, and its very unlikely to be broken, so Dev concern.
DeleteWorth noting the tap requirement makes this better on defense, sort of a green Righteousness.
While Journey into Nyx looks like a super fun set, I'm not seeing its wow factor-- no Phyrexian Mana, no all-gold gimmick. I haven't yet discovered a suitable replacement though. It's hard to give a third set a unique identity!
ReplyDeleteMany Greek myths seem to end with the hero being made a constellation in the night sky after their death. That seems like a fitting idea for the final set in a block, and I like the flavor of this version. I'm not sure about the gameplay though.
Pure-Heart Leonin 3W
Creature - Cat Cleric (C)
Constellation (When this dies as a creature, return it to the battlefield as an enchantment)
At the beginning of your upkeep, gain 1 life for each enchantment you control.
2/2
I like it-- very flavorful and seems like it would play well.
DeleteQuestion: How is this meaningfully different from an enchantment that gives you the creature as a token when it enters the battlefield? Not to say that's necessarily bad, but might be worth thinking about (and makes a pretty good way to evaluate cards of this type).
Beautiful imagery. This feels like a natural fit. I'd recommend changing the life gain to a set number though. There are already memory issues as to whether or not its a creature, why add counting into the mix too?
DeleteI like this, but I almost feel like this ability wants to use double faced cards, as I can't imagine another way to clearly indicate it has come back as an enchantment.
DeleteI feel like your example is awfully complicated for a common. I don't necessarily think the creature wants the same ability the enchantment will have, as that makes the death of the creature less interesting/memorable than I feel it should be.
Here's my stab:
Faithful Companion 1W
Creature - Cat (C)
Constellation (When CARDNAME dies, return it to the battlefield transformed.)
2/2
And on the reverse:
Cat's Blessing
Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may gain 1 life.
I also really like that using DFCs means we could show the art of the cat on one side, and the art of the constellation on the other, which seems like it would really sell the theme.
DeleteI agree that my initial version looks too complicated, with all the zone changing, type changing, and bookkeeping. I like the idea of showing the actual constellation on the card somehow. DFCs are great here, but since they bring a lot of logistical baggage, I thought I'd try another take:
DeleteConstellation of the Warrior 3RR
Enchantment (C)
If a Red Creature you control died this turn, you may pay 1R rather than pay CARDNAME's mana cost.
Whenever a creature you control attacks, it deals 1 damage to defending player.
I would add that it's not clear why the gods would 'deify' even honorable warriors during Journey. Also, we already have a well-defined afterlife, so constellating would be a huge exception.
DeleteIt took me a while to figure out what you're going for with Constellation of the Warrior's first ability. That's meant to be an alternate cost for casting Constellation, right? I'd write that "You may cast ~ for 1R if a red creature you control died this turn."
Otherwise, this is much simpler than the original. Nice upgrade.
I'll be honest, I'm still not entirely clear why the gods are fighting the mortals. I get that they're mad that mortals were the catalyst for Xenagos's ascension to godhood, but why aren't the gods just fighting Xenagos? I didn't think the mortals were on Xenagos's side in this.
DeleteAnyways, I went with trap-style wording on the cost-reduction, but I guess those were mostly meant to be cast at instant speed in response to an event, which you can't do with Constellation of the Warrior. Given that, I like your templating better.
I'm not clear on that story either. Other than, the god-types /always/ end up fighting the mortal types in Magic.
DeleteHow bad is it that WE don't know what is going on in the story? I feel like the story part of creative has just taken the biggest possible nose dive since Scars of Mirrodin (when I think nearly everyone knew what was going on!)
DeleteLast year was about a maze where all the guilds were competing. What percentage of players know which guild won? (I still don't know!)
Does anyone not know who won the war over what is now called New Phyrexia?
At least this time, we know how the story ends. Well, the part about Elspeth killing one or more gods.
DeleteIt is definitely a step! They put the main plot point on a card, which is a good idea I hope they keep.
DeleteI suppose this is a cop out, but I don't think a NEW ability is necessarily needed. The point is to sell more booster packs than Strive...so the bar is pretty low...why not try a little bit of nostalgia?
ReplyDeleteSplit Second plays fantastically well with Heroic, fits on instants and sorceries, and would help shape the environment in Standard.
Pharika's Whim BG
Instant
Split Second
Target creature gets +2/+2 ueot. Another target creature gets -2/-2 ueot.
Other repeats of varying strengths:
Conspire (Works with Inspired, represents Ancient Greek politics!)
Ripple (works with Heroic, represents Nyx unraveling),
Retrace (Heroic enabler)
Offering (meh, its flavorful/pseudo-religious)
as a common, this would need to cost at least 2BG. That's development's problem. lol
DeleteConspire is an interesting idea since it also helps with Heroic triggers. The other ones just don't seem to have much to do with Ancient Greece or Theros.
DeleteUpdated set structure: 15 Split second cards. (One cycle at each rarity.) 5 monocolored cards at common representing Theros gods, 5 uncommons representing the gods from Born, and 5 rares representing the new gods in Journey.
DeleteMy common:
Nylea's Whim 1G
Instant (Com)
Split Second
Target creature gains hexproof ueot. Untap it.
Agreed, Ipaulsen. Tapping the creatures to conspire doesn't target, but the copies certainly can. My problem is how similarly conspire and inspired sound.
DeleteI really like the idea of bringing back Split Second. It feels like a very fitting representation of divine enlightenment.
Deletebringing back Split Second is a neat idea. It's too bad the keyword is so generic for the setting, but I like tying the names to the Gods to get the flavor across.
DeleteGiven how WOTC feels about mentioning "the stack" on cards these days, I find it really hard to imagine Split Second coming back. It wasn't very popular the first time, and is one of the most complex keywords they have done from a rules perspective, and the payoff is an effect that matters 5% of the time (and the worst part is, when it actually does matter, you almost never even know it). Also keep in mind that in modern sets (unlike TSP) there are very few activated abilities on the board most of the time, so Split Second will be even more invisible.
DeleteAll that said, I do like how Split Second enables Heroic in an interesting way.
Tommy, Theros block actually has a good deal of activated abilities — a quantity that is certainly helped by Monstrosity. That doesn't entirely defuse your point, but it is worth mentioning that on-board complexity is creeping up a bit, such Split Second wouldn't be "invisible" as you say.
DeleteI have a hard time imagining "I can't monstrosity in response" would come up in practice very often, since it would matter primarily for removal spells based on toughness, which by and large cannot kill monstrous creatures (because they are big to begin with). Split Second Lightning Bolt could take out Ill-Tempered Cyclops, but that is a rare interaction.
DeleteTime Spiral block had all kinds of things like spellshapers and tims and saltfield recluses running around. At least for my tastes, even then it didn't come up often enough to justify it.
I disagree that Split Second wasn't very popular. I also, disagree with the 5% implication.
DeleteAs far as mentioning the stack, the reminder text could be changed to something less specific.
Split Second (Until this resolves, other spells and abilities can't be played unless they're mana abilities.)
Mark says "It was received okay but it confused a bunch of players. My guess is if it comes back it will fill a specific need we have." (source: http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/21557787342/how-was-split-second-received-i-liked-it-as-a-nice )
DeleteThis wasn't quite as damning as I'd remembered. He put it at a 7 on the storm scale.
Of course, your reminder text is inaccurate, but reminder text doesn't have to be 100% accurate, and I think this time they would be wise enough not to put Morph within a 2 year radius of Split Second (which was probably the biggest flaw last time they did it).
So I can understand your point of view, what is it you like about Split Second? Is it the thrill of nabbing someone's Wingsteed Rider with a Sudden Shock?
(Unrelated: Sudden Shock was in Modern Masters? How do I not remember this!)
As an experienced player, I've been waiting for Split Second to come back and I agree that it would play well wither heroic. Mentioning the stack is a sizeable no-no, so I approve exploring other reminder text options. Maybe: "Players can't respond to this spell?" It means nothing in Magic rules, but I feel like it should make perfect sense to most players.
DeleteI like hexproof with split second, but the untap feels glued on.
I'm extremely underwhelmed by the return of monstrosity. There are two Commons, three Uncommons and a Rare with monstrosity in the set, but nothing interesting about any of them, (except for the Rare, naturally.) I'd get rid of monstrosity altogether and give those 6 monsters an ability that rewards you for grabbing Tribute and Monstrosity cards in packs 2 and 3.
ReplyDeleteGluttonous Cyclops (Common)
4R
Creature - Cyclops
4/3
Whenever another creature dies, you may put any number of its +1/+1 counters on CARDNAME.
The cyclops had learned to never eat a shepherd. Instead he gently flung the “pit” aside to grow a new flock.
(FYI, the "any number" clause is so that if you have two Cyclops, you can split the +1/+1 counters from a single creature between them if you want.)
I actually designed all 6 cards with that ability. The other Common (Ravenous Leucrocota) is a 3/4 for 4G with the ability. Fleetfeather Cockatrice is mostly the same as a 3/3 for 3GU with flash, flying and deathtouch along with that ability. Swamborn Giant, Wildfire Cerberus and Broodmaster Hydra have that ability, put an activated ability which includes a cost of removing counters from it.
Do you mean "another creature you control"? Otherwise we end up with a complicated game state when both players control one that involves understanding more of the rules than I would like for situations involving same-block commons. (Even very few intermediate players could tell you the non-active player gets the counters)
DeletePerhaps one could put the "any creature" wording on the rare and have the common/uncommon just key off creatures you control.
Also, for what it's worth, I think 6 is probably making this mechanic a bit too loud. I'd be inclined towards a vertical cycle with perhaps a green common and mythic and a red uncommon and rare. As you say, there should be a hydra with this mechanic.
Also, I think this would require modifying the rules, because I don't think you can say "its +1/+1 counters." That said, if it requires modifying the rules to play with this kind of design space, I think it is probably worth it.
Funny, I was just imagining the scenario where each player controls a Cyclops and another creature with counters dies...
DeleteLook at the reminder text for modular to see an example of "its +1/+1 counters."
Touche! Well at least my suspicion that it was worth making the rules make it work was right!
DeleteI'm changing the card to avoid priority confusion, but allow me to get on my soap box for just a moment. I can't think of any game other than Magic that is so adverse to utilizing its own rules. Priority is a building block of the rule set and any level-1 Judge should know how to explain it. But we don't want to expose players to priority because it is so complex. How are they suppose to learn the rules, if they aren't opportunities to use them?
DeleteGluttonous Cyclops (Common)
4R
Creature - Cyclops
4/3
Whenever another creature you control dies, you may put any number of its +1/+1 counters on CARDNAME.
The cyclops had learned to never eat a shepherd. Instead he gently flung the “pit” aside to grow a new flock.
The long and short of it is there are tons of people who love Magic but would NEVER learn the game if they had to learn all of the rules intricacies. Barrier of entry is already Magic's biggest stumbling block, and I don't want to cut out people who would enjoy playing just so that the few who are left know how to deal with every possible combination of cards.
DeleteSoapbox aside, I like the new Gluttonous Cyclops, and I don't think it would be problematic at common, per se, but it feels like an uncommon to me.
DeleteAlso, it is easy to play Magic for several years without learning about priority. I did.
DeleteHavelockV, that is quite the indictment on the game.
DeleteSpecifically, the older version of this card seems pretty innocuous for new players, because we know they don't even read death triggers when making plays. So there's no way they'd expect to get the counters only to be told that the other player's trigger goes on top of the stack. The group that version of the card would most impact are player's who've played a while and never drilled down into rules cases. And I'm fine with teaching them a lesson about how to play better. Because they want to learn how to play better already.
Also, it should be noted, understanding how two of the old Cyclopses interacted required much more than understanding priority... It required understanding that when multiple things trigger simultaneously players put those abilities on the stack in AP-NAP order, which is quite technical.
DeleteYeah, I agree that it requires AP-NAP understanding, but at the same time, it presents a real-time opportunity for players to learn how AP-NAP works. I think WotC should be less shy about allowing those moments to occur. Especially when it isn't a game term issue, like the one that keeps them from using "the stack" in rules text. Having opportunities to experience these rules in a low-impact way are good for players. They could really benefit from things that can help bridge the gap when moving from FNM to an Open Series or PTQ event.
DeleteYou're clearly a rules person, and I am too. We enjoy this kind of thing.
DeleteI think you're underestimating how difficult it is for non-rules people to learn this kind of thing, and I don't see the game as being improved by having more players understand APNPAP.
What do you think is the probability that Mark Rosewater could have answered this rules question?
Cards that teach lessons about the game and its mechanics are hugely important to allow a player to naturally progress in skill and game understanding in a complex game like Magic.
DeleteI don't think the 'any creature' version of Gluttonous Cyclops presents that learning opportunity as you imagine it, however. What it does is present a problem (what do we do when we both have a Gluttonous Cyclops?) but it fails to provide an answer on the card for how to resolve the problem. Amongst two casual players, my guess is it will turn into a case of "loudest answer wins," and there is just as much a capability for learning _misinformation_ as there is learning a new rule.
Here's my threshold. If I'm teaching someone a game, and I feel bad because I have to explain a specific rule, that rule is either unnecessary (mana burn, hand limit), or critical but messy (the stack and priority). This happens when I teach Magic more than other games, and I support design that minimizes it.
DeleteI like Gluttonous Cyclops. We don't need a lot of these, but 2-3-1 is probably fair.
Other possible executions:
C, T: If target creature dies this turn, put its +1/+1 counters on ~.
If a creature dealt damage by ~ this turn dies, put its +1/+1 counters on ~.
Whenever a creature dies, put as many +1/+1 counters on this as it had. (so all gluttonous creatures enjoy).
(Or going the other way, remove "any number of" from yours, since monsters are unlikely to share a meal.)
As I understand it, Journey to Nyx is about people losing their faith in the gods, and the gods fading out of the world. As Scry represents the direct intervention of the gods to help the mortals, I think it is good to replace Scry (not that I don't like Scry mid you).
ReplyDeleteThinking carefully about what to replace it with, we still need a smoothing mechanic, and it needs to be very simple, because this block is complicated enough already. I nominate cycling. I would theme each card with cycling as some favor of the gods, so that when you cycled them, you would be throwing away the gods, just like the mortals in Theros! I don't think we need anything more than Cycling 2. With that, my design.
Blessing of Heliod W
Instant (C)
Put a +1/+1 counter on target creature.
Cycling 2
(Also, this ability is usually green. Can it be white?)
That should be totally fine as a white effect. I disagree with cycling in this context, though; scry is doing good work and has better flavor, and you don't usually change up your workhorse smoothing mechanic midway through a block.
DeleteOh, you definitely don't usually do it, but I think it is justified thematically here. However, Scry got added rather late, so I think it would have required some work earlier in the block to tie scry more strongly to the mortals relationship with the gods.
DeleteI don't think any block wants both scry and cycling. We've got a good smoothing mechanic. Either keep it or, iterate on it, but don't replace it.
Delete(Also, it's not clear that the power behind scrying comes from the gods. Could just be magic.)
I think the real story is that the power of scry comes from the wizards of development!
DeleteI'll make my official submission this, because it was my favorite of my designs from this challenge (although I don't necessarily think that this block needs the complexity of DFCs):
DeleteFaithful Companion 1W
Creature - Cat (C)
Constellation (When CARDNAME dies, return it to the battlefield transformed.)
2/2
And on the reverse:
Cat's Blessing
Enchantment
At the beginning of your upkeep, you may gain 1 life.
A few more potential mechanics to replace Strive. I'm not in love with any of these:
ReplyDeleteBurn the Idols 1R
Instant (C)
Champion the Meek--CARDNAME deals damage to target creature equal to the difference between the greatest and least power among creatures you control.
Mentor of Heroes 2WW
Creature-Centaur Warrior (C)
Mantle of Heroes (Whenever CARDNAME attacks, tap any number of untapped creatures you control with greater power than CARDNAME. Attacking creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn for each creature tapped this way.)
3/2
Caller of Champions 2G
Creature-Centaur Warrior
Common Cause (Whenever CARDNAME attacks, put a +1/+1 counter on it for each other attacking creature you control with one or more +1/+1 counters on it.)
2/2
Mantle of Heroes seems like it could go somewhere Exalted-like, which is exciting and flavorful and great for triggering Inspired, but right now it has too many moving parts. Some possible simpler versions:
DeleteTeam Effort (Whenever ~ attacks, you may tap any number of untapped creatures you control. ~ gets +1/+1 until end of turn for each creature tapped this way.)
Or, if you want it to be more linear/synergistic:
Team Effort (Creatures you control have "T: Attacking creatures you control with Team Effort get +1/+1 until end of turn.")
The exalted version would probably be the way to go. I was trying to get the "army of heroes" gameplay that WotC went for with Strive, but at that point the mechanic should just be Battle cry.
DeleteIn the absence of more feedback before going to sleep here's my submission:
DeleteGlory of Champions W
Instant (C)
Stand Together (You may cast CARDNAME with an additional target if all of its targets are creatures you control with +1/+1 counters on them.)
Target creature gains lifelink until end of turn.
Champion of the Meek is too mathy.
DeleteMantle of the Heroes asks you to not attack with your biggest creatures to make a smaller creature less small.
Common Cause is cool, but might be too powerful / hard to develop around.
Stand Together is a nice, simple, strive variant. (Though, it's a step-two heroic enabler, because it can't enable a hero that hasn't already been triggered while still getting full value)
Wise Crow 2U
ReplyDeleteEnchantment Creature - Bird
1/2
Flying
Constellation (When ~ dies as a creature, return it to the battlefield as a non-creature enchantment.)
At the beginning of your main phase, target creature with power 2 or less can't be blocked this turn.
Inspired by James' design earlier? Nice! I will restate my sense that these would be a lot prettier as double faced cards.
DeleteI like the idea, but I'd suggest re-wording the ability somewhat. The main phase is an odd time for something like this to be happening, and the whole ability-- though 'correct' as Magic-ese-- reads rather weirdly. What about:
DeleteAt the beginning of your upkeep, you may pay 1. If you do, target creature with power 2 or less can't be blocked this turn.
I like this implementation a lot more than the common I made above. The unblockable ability can probably take a cue from Battle-Rattle Shaman:
DeleteAt the beginning of combat on your turn, you may have target creature with power 2 or less gain "this can't be blocked" until end of turn.
I hadn't read James version, but I guess we think the same way!
DeleteI was also thinking about an ability that creates a linear enchantment theme for limited, but thought about having unkeyworded enchantmentfall on uncommons.
I know the main phase trigger sounds weird, but I keep bumping into cases where I want to phrase cards that way. Sometimes I want something to happen once on each of your turns, but I want it to happen after the draw step so you know what you want to do. In this case, I also want it to happen before the attack step so that you can make something unblockable and then pump it with bestow etc before attacking.
The real issue is that it's unclear that players will draw before resolving draw phase triggers because that leads to the same timing without the feel bad of it seeming like you should be able to do Sorcery speed things first. We could go for "Whenever you draw a card" so that it's clear that it's after, but that puts a lot of power level constraints on Divinations and cantrips.
DeleteI think these also need a visual indicator of state.
DeleteHow is this?
DeleteConstellation (When ~ dies as a creature, return it to the battlefield as a non-creature enchantment. Put a star counter on it.)
What rarity? Uncommon?
DeleteI will reiterate that my biggest complaint about this implementation is that there is no "transition" when the creature dies. I would be much happier if it only had the ability after death.
Clearly, things like Persist and Undying need a visual indicator of state. But things like Bestow don't need to use counters-- attached or unattached is a fine indicator.
DeleteI wonder how necessary counters are for Constellation, where a creature comes back as a non-creature permanent, and can be set to the side with lands/enchantments/artifacts. Using counters has a non-zero cost: it's more stuff to lug around, and you bring up potential confusion like "does removing the counter turn this back into a creature?" or "is that actually a creature with a +1/+1 counter?". Star counters is still probably the way to go, but it's something worth thinking about. (also worth noting that DFCs, as suggested, sidestep all these issues, but bring along their own logistical problems).
If the ability's going to stay anyway, why not just make it stay tapped? Then nobody's tempted to attack or block, and attacking's a big enough deal that players are unlikely to mistake it for having attacked the previous turn.
DeleteThere's nothing stopping a player from keeping his enchantments next to his creatures, so we have to give the players something more concrete to rely on. My favorite suggestion is that these cards only have the enchantment ability while dead. BUT, that makes them less good as enchantment creatures, which is my favorite thing about this execution since naiads (probably) don't go to the underworld like mortals do. Everybody hates them, but I'd use a flip card.
DeleteHere's the art.
Deletehttp://maomiii.deviantart.com/art/CE-Till-Death-418897424
Wise Crow 2U
Enchantment Creature - Bird (C)
1/2
Flying
U, T: Target creature with power 2 or less can't be blocked this turn.
When ~ dies, return it to the battlefield flipped.
Constellation of the Crow 2U
Enchantment
At the beginning of your main phase, target creature with power 2 or less can't be blocked this turn.
I still don't like the main phase trigger, which is currently used exclusively on abilities that add mana to your mana pool. Triggering at the beginning of combat achieves most of the same goals, and has more precedence (Battle-Rattle Shaman, Xenagos God of Revels, Desecration Demon, Angelic Skirmisher)
DeleteI don't know if it's "right" or not, but it would play better if you can pump the creature after making it unblockable, especially in an Aura and combat trick heavy environment like Theros.
DeleteFor Xenagos's haste ability, it certainly makes sense to happen at the beginning of combat because granting haste at the beginning of the main phase won't be useful.
If there isn't a precedent, but the card wants to do it, that might be a reason to create a precedent so that future cards with that text can feel more natural due to the new precedent.
I guess the importance with precedents is thinking why it was done that way. And I guess the main phase trigger requires players to think through their turn before they begin tapping things, which can be both a pro and a con.
By pro, I mean it could be like Ulamog's Crusher "teaching" players it's ok to attack into some blockers, or Brindle Boar teaching players to think "will I have more life in the end if I use the a 1-shot life gain, or if I keep this guy on the board to hold off a 4/2?"
As for cons, some players may find planning the turn stressful, and want to make choices as they go along. Other reasons might be that less players will forget to do it if it's right before attacking + players can remember the card text without reading if they all work the same way.
I agree with all of this.
DeleteI don't think that Wise Crow gains very much at all from the main phase trigger, versus an upkeep or combat-trigger.
All this time I failed to notice that Wise Crow's ability is restricted to power 2 or less; I was thinking that you could just Bestow on your planned target first, then grant it unblockable with a beginning of combat trigger. Now I see your reasoning for the main phase trigger. In general I'd like to see triggers happening closer to when they're relevant to prevent players from skipping them, which is all too easy with things like upkeep triggers. Things are bad when there's a section in the Tournament Rules that explicitly mentions using glass beads on top of your deck as a memory aid.
DeleteDoesn't keeping all your triggers to the same phase ease memory more than splitting them up all over the place?
DeleteI personally thought Offering was going to be a shoo-in for Theros, given how much of Greek worship involved sacrifices to the gods.
ReplyDeleteI can't see it fitting anywhere into the block though, and especially not the set where ain't nobody making sacrifices to the gods.
While it's certainly thematically linked I wouldn't expect offering to come back soon. It has a lot of feel bad in giving up a creature and the flash is just weird. It's funny that it's generally neutral card advantage since you get to ambush an attacker, but to LSPs it reads as terrible.
DeleteWhile I can see that also happening, I've definitely seen players light up because "it's like Yu gi Oh."
DeleteI guess Wizards has the data, though.
Journey to the Firmament W
ReplyDeleteInstant (c)
Target creature gains indestructible until the beginning of your next turn.
Stellar (When you cast this spell, copy it for each enchantment you control. Choose a new target for each copy.)
annnnd art: http://th00.deviantart.net/fs24/PRE/i/2007/342/1/2/Constellation_Of_Time_stock_by_FractalAngel_Stock.jpg
DeleteWorth pointing out, this does not trigger Heroic for the copies.
DeleteI would not have guessed that, but apparently so:
Delete"Heroic abilities won't trigger when a copy of a spell is created on the stack or when a spell's targets are changed to include a creature with a heroic ability."
Bah, humbug! Humbug, I say.
Delete(When you cast this spell, cast a copy of it for each enchantment you control. Choose a new target for each copy.)