Hello Artisans, Anastase here, with yet another WAC. This time we are diving into politics. Will of the Council was an interesting idea during Conspiracy and that set had enough success to warrant an expansion.
This week I would like you to design two multiplayer mechanics that:
- are fun!
- still work in duels.
- can be used in a cycle spanning all colors (or 5 color combinations).
The first mechanic must involve combat, the second one must be more tied to main phases.
Here are the pictures I had in mind, but you can suggest other pictures and I will incorporate them in the renders.
 |
| RalphHorsley |
 |
| alexstoneart |
Each player is limited to two card submissions to illustrate his/her mechanics, one per mechanic. You can update your submissions any number of times based on feedback. Review will be up on Monday!
Now this is a challenge!
ReplyDeleteImplying the others were not challenging enough? Ts ts ts... I will have to up the ante even more it seems.
DeleteImplying this sounds really hard.
DeleteI need to work on making the delivery of my friendly japes less deadpan. I now noticed the elegance of using italics to stress the word challenge. I should have emulated it.
DeleteI agree it is a hard challenge but I have yet to give a challenge which I did not answer on my own before posting it. Did you?
Not at first. But then I grew complacent after seeing this community slam every challenge I posed.
DeleteI generally say something like "Did you SEE me display my 'not being sarcastic' sign?" :)
DeleteAnd yeah, this challenge is a bit more difficult and open ended, but I think that's good to try.
I'm actually quite enjoying this challenge. My favorite of Anastase's so far.
DeleteValiant Warmonger 2W
ReplyDeleteCreature-Human Soldier (cmn)
Warmonger — Whenever Valiant Warmonger attacks, each other player may give it +1/+0 until end of turn. Each player that does adds 1 to his or her mana pool at the beginning of their next main phase.
2/3
This is a general question/remark:
DeleteAfter Oath of the Gatewatch, are we going to see any more the {1} symbol as opposed to the {C} symbol?
Only in costs.
DeleteWarmonger — Whenever Valiant Warmonger attacks, each other player may give it +1/+0 until end of turn. Each player that does adds C to his or her mana pool at the beginning of their next main phase.
How does this mechanic translate in other colors, color combinations? Do all of them add {C} to the mana pool?
DeleteThis might lead some players into not attacking to not give mana to other players. How about a smaller effect, like scry 1?
Made it an ability word so it could do bigger things at higher rarities.
DeleteWarmonger — Whenever Beastly Warmonger attacks, each other player may give it +2/+2 and trample until end of turn. Each player that does adds 2 to his or her mana pool at the beginning of their next main phase.
Smaller effects work too. (Though scry 1 is sometimes rather better than {C}.)
You have to think both in multi-player and in duels in this case:
DeleteGiving {C}{C} to each opponent on turn 4 to cast their bombs on turn 5 instead of 7 can be intimidating...
You are attacking with the vigilant warmonger (that has no vigilance?) in a 4 people game. Each opponent minus the one you attack gives it +2/+2, it becomes a 6/7 with trample on turn 4, that will penalize one opponent a bit, while help 2 others get ahead.
In total you helped one person get ahead of you.
I agree that multiplayer games sometime take some time to get rolling and need some acceleration, but this will often generate feel-bad moments for the player casting this and probably be in the similar spot with join forces or the offerings.
You wouldn't put the two-mana warmonger effect on a three-mana creature. (I changed the name to Beastly Warmonger to imply that, but not including a mana cost and P/T clearly confused things.)
DeleteBeastly Warmonger {3}{G}{G}
Creature-Beast
Whenever ~ deals combat damage to a player, draw a card.
Warmonger — Whenever Beastly Warmonger attacks, each other player may give it +2/+2 and trample until end of turn. Each player that does adds 2 to his or her mana pool at the beginning of their next main phase.
4/4
It's still definitely much riskier than a single {C}.
The benefit and reward have to be delicately balanced so that sometimes it'll be correct for your opponent in a duel to choose to do it.
My first (and still official) warmonger is Valiant, not Vigilant.
Sorry about the valiant/vigilant issue, I misread.
DeleteI like the design in general, I just fear that players would not really go for giving opponents the opportunity to get mana all that often, thereby discouraging combat instead of encouraging it.
One alternative I got however was what if it was each player, including yourself?
Then you would attack, always give it the +1/+1 and gain {C} during your next main phase, which would entice you to attack even if it benefits some opponent(s).
Also scry in multiplayer protects players from being mana-screwed without exploding the mana development. My commander games have been miserable for a player or another due to mana-screw have been quite sad.
To recap, I really like the part of getting people interested and invested in your attack phases, but I worry about giving mana the way it is worded right now. It would need playtest either way.
I had defaulted to there being no point in giving the owner the choice since they always would, but I quite like your argument that it sounds and feels better.
DeleteValiant Warmonger 2W
Creature-Human Soldier (cmn)
Warmonger — Whenever Valiant Warmonger attacks, each player may scry 1. It gets +1/+0 until end of turn for each player that does.
1/3
You'll only take the scry deal once per round after you keep a card on top, making multiples weaker, but rarer/larger cards can offer incentives other than scrying.
Hm. In multiplayer I think this might work better without any bribe. Just "each player may have this get +2/+2" or whatever other combination. People will usually pile on as long as it's not attacking them/you're not winning.
DeleteAnd giving the bonus to the player who's the greatest danger can be a trap, you can end up not wanting to attack with it at all, which feels bad. Can you just say "each player it's not attacking"?
I wasn't sure that works in a duel, but I guess, it still gives/gets the benefit for/from you.
The problem I am seeing is that you want a big enough reward that a player might choose to hurt themselves for it but not too big for the players who aren't risking anything.
DeleteWould this be more fun if opponents had to decide before you declared who you were attacking? That way people will be less willing to jump on while players are on equal footing. The wording is a little weird if you want to controller to be able to choose not to give the option on turns he is not attacking, but it is doable.
Or you could let any opponent boost it but then let the player being attacked decide which of those players get the mana? This could lead to some deals of "If you give me the mana this time I won't boost it against you for the rest of the game"
Is this for free for all multiplayer such as conspiracy was, or for all kinds like 2HG?
ReplyDeleteThis is for a multiplayer only format, preferably like conspiracy, but it could potentially be 2HG if you feel you have an interesting design for 2HG.
DeleteOkay, so this one doesn't explicitly call out the main phase (but it only goes on sorceries, so kinda) (and my combat one did call out the main phase, so)…
ReplyDeleteRighteous Outcry B
Sorcery (cmn)
Each player discards a card.
Precedent 3 (Another player may cast this card from your graveyard for its precedent cost. Then exile it.)
“My lord, have you heard the spells the youth are casting these days?!”
Maybe:
DeletePrecedent 3 (Another player may cast this card from your graveyard for its precedent cost. Then exile it. You draw a card.)
Seems particularly relevant for Outcry, which is card disadvantage to start with.
I like precedent with that addition.
DeleteOutcry is not card disadvantage in multiplayer, but it is in duels. If you changed it to each opponent, it would probably be better.
How does it translate in other colors?
Blue card draw, white life gain, green token generation, red direct damage?
My instinct tells me that letting this be colourless will generally favour the next player in the turn order too much in multiplayer. It might be better if it uses coloured or hybrid costs.
Without precedent, Outcry is card disadvantage, because you paid a card to make everyone discard a card, including yourself. With the original precedent, it's the same. You paid a card, an opponent didn't, and all players discarded two. But the new precedent does even that out.
DeleteIt can really go on any sorcery effect, but is best on global / symmetrical ones.
I thought about a twobrid precedent cost, but it's not really necessary. {2} accomplishes the same does-this-keyword-matter goal as {2B} but vastly less complicated. I see no issue with the player to your left being the one to follow your precedent.
Not that I'd be opposed to using twobrid costs for precedent, if the set were using them anyhow.
DeleteStill, {2/B}{2/B}{2/B} is different from {6}. I like the general idea however, it is basically flashback for your opponents.
DeleteIt is basically flashback for your opponents. Multiplayer is what makes that worth considering.
DeleteA card that shows off the mechanic better (but doesn't fit this art):
Execution {B}
Sorcery (unc)
Destroy target nonblack creature.
Precedent {2} (Another player may cast this card from your graveyard for its precedent cost. Then exile it. You draw a card.)
Can't really think of that many multiplayer focussed mechanics that wouldn't require either special frames or potentially busted interactions outside of multiplayer, but THIS one certainly came to mind.
ReplyDelete(second art)
Grim Masquerade 2UB
Sorcery
Crux - As you cast this spell, target opponent chooses one. Replace each instance of target in that mode with each.
- Target player discards two cards.
- Target player draws two cards.
Wording could potentially be improved to show that, yes, the intention is that both modes are always happening, it's just that one of them will be targeted and the other will be symmetrical.
Argument could be made that this doesn't really satisfy the main phase requirement of the challenge outside of 'sorcery speed' - I was considering maybe using a pseudo kicker a la Might of Old Krosa and the like - problem with this is how potentially unbalanced hamfisted solutions like, in this example, "Target/each player discards two cards, then you draw a card if this spell was cast during your main phase.", or "If this spell was cast during another player's main phase, do X." I can accept this being off theme if it's a useful first iteration for someone else, though.
Initial vein of thought for the combat mechanic, currently paired with the first piece of artwork, would be this one:
Brawl for Supremacy 3R
Enchantment
At the beginning of combat on your turn, you and any number of other players may brawl. Put four +1/+1 counters on each surviving creature. (To brawl, each brawling player secretly chooses a creature. Destroy each of those creatures that doesn’t have the greatest power amongst those creatures.)
"When the dust settles, only one can rule."
The core of this is "Fight does weird things when multiple creatures are involved at once. Why not simplify it?", combined with a little bit of Menacing Ogre action. The major fault with the mechanic is that it doesn't really fit Blue at all, given that direct confrontation doesn't really seem like its style - barring combinations like "Creatures your opponents control get -3/-0 until end of turn, then brawl." or something, where it seems more like a blue Innocent Blood if you have a decent enough board state. Red has Alpha Brawl, Green has Polukranos, Black has Wretched Banquet or Syphon Flesh, and White has Divine Reckoning.
Combat mechanics that aren't simply things like Dethrone variants - "This creature can't be blocked if you have less life than defending player.", for example - seem difficult to build for single player scenarios unless you're giving them big enough incentives to grant you the greater benefit, leaving them primarily in the house of Red and Black for the most part. Looking forward to seeing designs that prove that wrong, though.
Brawl could probably fit well in each of the enemy color pairs? That way its fight-iness could be done with the R & G in UR/UG, and it's definitely not out of the question on a WB card.
DeleteMaybe a bit clunky for a whole mechanic...
ReplyDeleteGoblin Vanguard 2RR
Creature- Goblin Warrior (Common)
3/3
Pile on-- Whenever CARDNAME attacks, target creature's controller may give you control of it until end of turn. If he or she does, that creature gains haste and comes under your control tapped and attacking. (It attacks the same player that CARDNAME is attacking.)
In two-player games the intent is that it effectively lets you attack with one creature per turn that is tapped or summoning sick.
And for main phases, um... how about myraid for spells?
Show of Fealty W
Sorcery
Target player taps an untapped creature he or she controls of his or her choice. You gain life equal to that creature's power.
Reciprocate 1W (When you cast this spell, copy it for each time you paid its reciprocate cost. You must choose a different target for each copy.)
It's intentional that you can target yourself-- that's what makes it relevant in duels.
Oops, forgot rarity on Show of Fealty. Uncommon, I suppose.
DeleteIsn't reciprocate basically just strive?
DeleteOh, I forgot about strive. Yeah, I guess it is, except that the flavor is different and it's harder to counter.
DeleteArt A - "Combat"
ReplyDeleteAgile Vanguard 2R
Creature - Ogre Warrior (C)
Haste
Maneuver 1R (1R: Assign this attacking creature to attack a different player or planeswalker. Activate this ability only if this creature isn’t blocked.)
3/2
Art B - "Main Phases"
Grand Entreaty 3U
Sorcery (C)
Target player draws a card for each player. (Players outside your range of influence don’t count toward the total.)
("For each player" is the mechanic, ala Benediction of Moons.)
I like Maneuver. What is lost if we take out its second line?
DeleteI'm pretty sure weird stuff happens if a creature is being blocked by a creature that isn't controlled by the defending player.
DeleteIt also adds a strategic/political dimension - say I want to kill player B, but he has a bunch of blockers, so I attack player C and promise to maneuver if he doesn't block. Does he trust me or does he block anyway? Maneuver will always have a mana cost, so it's never a completely free decision to make.
In 1v1, you can play head games with opponents who want to chump to protect a planeswalker, but not their life total.
Incidentally, the not-ninjutsu wording is specifically in response to critique from a couple WACs ago. You can activate it before blockers are declared, but it doesn't really do anything except against Ghostly Prison-style effects.
Would it be simpler to say "2R: The next time this would deal combat damage to a creature or planeswalker, it deals that much combat damage to a different creature or planeswalker instead" rather than trying to change who its attacking?
DeleteDid you mean "player or planeswalker"?
DeleteAside from having weird implications with effects that care about who the "defending player" is, this probably works fine, but it's wordier than I'd like and feels too red historically to be cycled out.
Respected Figure {1}{W}{W}
ReplyDeleteCreature - Human Monk
Vigilance
Blood Money: the killer skips their next attack step. (When this creature dies, the controller of the effect that destroyed it or last dealt damage to it is the killer.)
1/4
The mechanic fits least well in white, and especially needs a better name. (B > R > G > U > W in terms of how well it fits.)
*their next combat step, and this is probably uncommon but could be pushed to common if necessary for the needs of the set.
DeleteOh, and that's using the second art.
DeleteI have something similar to this in a set that I'm working on, except I called it Bounty. And it rewarded the player that killed it. For instance:
DeleteTreasonous Politician-1WW
Vigilance
Bounty- The player that kills CARDNAME may have all other players skip their next attack step.
3/5
I like Blood Money, a very clever and simple politic mechanic.
Delete@Zeno: Bounty is very (too much?) swingy in 1v1. Either I beat you with my undercosted big creature or you kill it and get a reward.
Both mechanics are doing 2 different things. Mine can be swingy like you said(my example wasn't quite perfect either.) Meanwhile Blood money does the exact opposite by slowing down the game. People won't want to attack you if you can just chump block and force them to receive the penalty.
DeleteBoth mechanics are doing 2 different things. Mine can be swingy like you said(my example wasn't quite perfect either.) Meanwhile Blood money does the exact opposite by slowing down the game. People won't want to attack you if you can just chump block and force them to receive the penalty.
DeleteDeclaration of War {3}{R}{R}
ReplyDeleteSorcery (rare, first art)
After this phase there is an additional combat phase followed by an additional main phase. At the beginning of that main phase, untap all creatures that attacked this turn.
At the beginning of the next turn's first main phase, that turn's controller may copy this spell.
In the vein of the Tempting Offer cycle, the Declarations all have the "At the beginning of the next turn's [something] phase, that turn's controller may copy this spell" rider, optionally with "that player may choose new targets for the copy" if necessary. Effects should be generally useful but of varying value depending on situation; ramp for basics, a Painful Truths effect, 10+ point lifegain, and making a token copy of something spring to mind. I don't think this could stretch far beyond one cycle, but it doesn't have to.
First Art
ReplyDeletePre-Battle Speech
Instant
3R
Creatures target player controls get +2/+1 and gain menace UEOT.
Finishing Blow - When an opponent falls to 5 life or below, you may return ~ from your graveyard to your hand.
Second Art
Trade Agreement
Sorcery
1U
Draw two cards.
Treaty - target other player also draws a card.
Triumph of Battle {1}{RW}
ReplyDeleteInstant (u)
Triumph — If an opponent was dealt damage this turn, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.
Retrace
"Bloodthirst for spells" should let you capitalize on cross-table attacks in multiplayer.
Bountiful Emissary {W}
Creature - Human Monk (r)
Lifelink
Tribute 5 (As this creature enters the battlefield, an opponent of your choice may put five +1/+1 counters on it.)
When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, the player who paid tribute gains 20 life. If tribute wasn’t paid, you gain 3 life.
1/1
I'm tempted to cut the last line, but playing tribute both ways should mean it plays better in duels.
I'm not convinced that giving your opponent the option of even nicer stuff is the way to make tribute less feel-bad in duels.
DeleteI like triumph, but wouldn't pair it with retrace. "Good things for me if you attack someone else" works better when everyone else can't see it coming.
I can see where you're coming from on removing the retrace. I was trying to spice it up a little, but it's better without.
DeleteTriumph of Battle {RW}
Instant (u)
Triumph — If an opponent was dealt damage this turn, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.
First art
ReplyDeleteRisen Victor {2}{R}
Creature - Human Warrior (Rare)
First strike
Rise to the Challenge — 4RR: Risen Victor deals X damage to up to three target creatures, where X is the number of creatures on the battlefield. You may only activate this ability once each game and only if Risen Victor is attacking.
3/2
This mechanic rewards having many creatures, so it can work in 1v1 but is much more powerful in multiplayer. It is restricted to single use per game to make it more dramatic and to represent the flavor "when the going gets tough, the tough get going". Memory issues should be alleviated by the great scale and memorability of the effects. Therefore, the mechanic has not a lot of design space, and I envision it as one or two cycles at mythic or rare.
First art:
ReplyDeleteWanted Warlord-3RR
Creature-Human Barbarian-Rare
Whenever a creature deals damage, it deals double that damage instead.
Bounty- The player that kills CARDNAME may have creatures they control gain double strike until end of turn.
2/4
---------------------------------
Second art:
Political Debate-3UU
Sorcery-uncommon
Target player draws three cards.
At home in the crowd (CARDNAME costs 1 less to cast for each opponent there is unless they each take two damage.)
I definitely need a better name for the mechanic, but I can't think of a good one right now.