Design Born of Diagramming / Breeding a Better Limited

Limited formats (draft, sealed, and variants thereof) have long been one of the most popular ways to play Magic, as they sit in the interstice of casual and tournament interests, blending the simple pleasure of cracking packs with the skill-intensive process of card selection and spontaneous deck building. As Magic has progressed, significant care has been taken to ensure that each block brings with it a unique and balanced limited format capable of properly representing the various mechanical themes concocted by R&D. And because a successful limited format promotes the purchasing of sealed product ($$$), many of modern design's greatest lessons can be understood through the careful study of what makes a good limited format, as design's primary goal is "how do I make this a thing people want to buy?"


The lesson pertinent to today's article is one of diversification and layering, a concept quickly demonstrated via this handy Arcana about Shadowmoor. The core theory is that while modern design dictates a conservative approach to the introduction of new mechanical concepts, each set should layer in sub-themes built on pre-existing mechanical devices to support those new concepts, allowing players to more comfortably process the format while still perceiving it as a unique and exciting experience. Though not every format should be quite as dense as Shadowmoor, a review of each set since Shards of Alara (i.e. Post-Shadowmoor) reveals that each color-grouping has at least 50% of its commons devoted to one theme or another. This is nothing to scoff at when you consider that the "on-theme" qualifier can't simply be met by throwing a keyword on a creature, as the premature dilution of mechanical innovation should rightfully be a concern during set development.

Applying this idea of thematic nesting is as simple as constructing your own mechanical web, one that I typically start by noting core keywords and the basic functions that those keywords demand and produce. In the case of "Melody", both of my keywords are dependent on the player having a sufficiently well-stocked hand, as well as the means and willingness to cast their spells in quick succession. This overlapping dependence is defined by two simple desires: access to cheap spells and the ability to maintain the aforementioned well-stocked hand. With those desires in mind, the next step is to solve how to satisfy those desires, and then see how those solutions connect with other potential and/or known thematic elements.

In the above diagram I've sketched out the developing web, visually representing the thought process that lead to incorporating Gating and alternative costs as familiar sub-concepts that support and complement the primary mechanical identity of the set. For those not entirely clear on what "Gating" is, Gating presents the player with creatures slightly above the curve in exchange for a knock in tempo by requiring that the controlling player return another creature to hand. Most widely explored in Planeshift, Gating has many parallels to Lorwyn's Champion mechanic, but Champion negates the ability to re-cast the bounced creature, problematic when considering the intended mechanical interactions with Melody and Rhythm. You'll notice that I then marked a connection from Gating to "ETB Abilities", which is hopefully a relationship that I don't need to explain.

The next step (as shown above) is to introduce other intended primary themes into your diagram, in this case an emphasis on modality and multicolor (through a lens of "enemy pairs and their mutual ally"). By doing so, you can start developing designs that bridge these theoretical connections and bring into focus a cohesive, yet diverse, mechanical identity for your set. In my exploration of the possible interactions between my multicolor theme and the two complementary mechanics, I developed an additional sub-theme of "secretly" multicolor cards, cards that are in some respects hybrid designs with monocolored costs.

» Click to Reveal «

---
Prison of Silence (U)
2W
Enchantment - Aura
If you control an Island and a Forest, you may tap an untapped creature you control rather than pay Prison of Silence's mana cost.
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature doesn't untap.

Prison of Silence connects many elements within the structure of the set: alternative costs; Rhythm, both as anti-rhythm removal and possible rhythm tricks when cast via alternate cost; emphasis on land types; and an abstraction of multicolor. This last element brings me back to my statement about what I meant regarding "secret" multicolor cards that are effectively hybrid designs. In order to comfortably justify allowing a monowhite card be cast for free by GU decks, I needed to find effects that fit across all three colors. Each of these colors (even green) has dabbled with "doesn't untap during your untap step" and "tap this during your upkeep" during the last two years, and while blue might seem to be the best primary candidate for the effect, I've made this a white card for two reasons:

• Mechanically, tapping as removal is a common function of white cards, a mechanical identity being emphasized in the upcoming M12 by Gideon and his League of Lawmen.
• The flavor of the set dictates that the oppressive white-centered organization, the Vastal, possess the greatest amount of cards dedicated to shutting down the music-related mechanics.

Though I've used this process to showcase a single design, diagramming your design structure is useful for both revision and expansion, as it strips away much of the artifice and subjective assumptions we make about our work as we create. Oftentimes we see connections that don't really exist, our vision corrupted by flavor or an obstinate desire to keep a card in the file. And while not everything need connect, it's important to keep an eye on the truth of what is being made. When I decided in my last design article to accept the obvious solution and embrace multicolor, I spent a number of hours churning out cards that were interesting (maybe even good), but when I sat down and began to diagram I saw that many of them were wholly tangential to every other aspect of the set. They were just multicolored cards for the sake of multicolor.

To wrap things up, I'm just going to leave a chunk of text-based designs to show other cards derived from this process and hopefully inspire some good discussion.

» Click to Reveal «

Crown of Gluttony (R)
3
Artifact
If a spell would cause you to make a choice, you may make an additional choice if possible.
---
Sanguine Surrakar (U)
1B
Creature - Surrakar Shaman
2/1
When Sanguine Surrakar enters the battlefield, sacrifice it unless you return a blue or red creature you control to its owner's hand.
Whenever you cast an instant or a sorcery spell, draw a card, then lose 2 life.
---
Pelora's Circle (U)
1GW
Enchantment
3, Tap an untapped creature you control: Gain life equal to its toughness.
---
Ferocity Charm (C)
R
Instant
Choose one — Target creature gains first strike until end of turn; or damage dealt by target creature can't be prevented this turn; or destroy target creature with power 1 or less.
---
Burnwillow Rondo (U)
3RG
Sorcery
Choose one — Burnwillow Rondo deals 3 damage to each creature; or add one mana of any color to your mana pool for each land you control.
---
Tremulous Aquamoeba (C)
2UU
Creature - Elemental Beast
1/5
Rhythm (Whenever you cast a spell, you may untap this creature.)
Whenever Tremulous Aquamoeba becomes untapped, you may switch its power and toughness until end of turn.
---
Cursed Machinist (U)
2BR
Creature - Zombie Artificer
4/3
Whenever an artifact enters the battlefield, Cursed Machinist and target creature an opponent controls get +1/-1 until end of turn.