I would say it should either have haste or make it an enters the battlefield trigger. As a creature that taps it's significantly weaker and loses a lot of the value.
I was discussing this on the multiverse website. It's an interesting idea. I thought the obvious interpretation would be a red 1/1.
And it probably shouldn't be a wasp if it can't fly.
Robert has a point that it would be more hornet-sting like if it was haste or ETB (or ETB with flash), althoug the creature obviously has the advantage that it can attack or block.
Other variants might be:
R 1/1 T: fight. 1G 1/1 flying T: fight G 1/1 flash, ETB fight
You could certainly have bigger versions as well, a green 2/1 flash ETB fight would be a green equivalent of shock.
I'm fascinated by your responses. I'm loving this card and I'll tell you why.
Ignore for a moment that Hornet Sting was ever printed. A 1/1 for G that can fight is entirely playable (at least in Limited) without being remotely overpowered.
It's 100% green both mechanically and philosophically. See Ulvenwald Tracker, Prey Upon and Pit Fight. And cards that predate fight like Krosan Vorine and Irresistable Prey. Green's removal is creature-based. Like this.
It doesn't need haste to be a guy that attacks for a few points and then trades with a 2/1.
The fact that it has only 1 power and only 1 toughness means that it can only kill the most vulnerable targets and you'll lose it when you do. Yes, you can Giant Growth it and that's kinda the point: Let the players find synergies to optimize their cards. Even then, you can't get double duty from attacking and fighting with it in the same turn.
Flower Wasp is more defensible than Ulvenwald Tracker as a card because mechanically it's not inherently repeatable and because philosophically a creature hunting down another creature is undeniably green whereas a dude telling another dude to attack an enemy is not. Ulvenwald Tracker is a coward who makes other do his dirty work.
Finally, I think giving the Wasp "T: Fight" is an elegant solution to the green flying problem. Green doesn't get flying and nongreen doesn't get bees, so you either don't make bees at all or you find another way to represent their mobility. Fight works like Flight because it lets these bees intercept any creature. That's actually how I came to this design, not by trying to fix Hornet Sting. Which it also does.
This guy essentially *feels* like a suicide bomber, though, which is very red/black. It's not a power level concern, it's about the emotions driving the card. Yes, you can use tricks to allow it to survive, but that's not the flavor coming through on the card itself.
Ahhh. Now I see what you mean. Hmm. A 3/3 version would definitely like a predator, right? And yet that could fight another 3/3 and die in the process too. I suppose being able to prey only upon Goats as a 1/1 makes for a pretty low-on-the-chain predator.
The 3/3 version could still kill small things, so that would feel much more green. Your instinct about placing predators higher than the lowest level on the food chain is a correct one, I think.
A 1/1 that can tap to fight is something I support for green. It makes me giddy because I think about Prodigal Pyromancer for red and how they both differ.
On Evan's thoughts that this feels red/black: Yes, it is a suicide mission for the wasp. This is what it FEELS like. But, when you said "philosphically," I wholeheartedly believe that this is within green's philosophy. Green fights things, even until death (potentially suicide). Red sacrifices its long-term life-span (suicide) or a short-term gain. Black sacrifices itself for benefits (suicide).
I like to think of looting in this case, which blue and red both have. Both do it, but slightly differently, which plays into their philosophies. Red throws away its stuff to get something more useful while blue looks for more things then decides which of its things is most useful.
In this case, green can have a wasp that fights a 1/1 and then dies. Red will have a goblin or something sacrifice itself to do 1 damage to a creature. Same outcome, but different ways of doing it, aligning with each of their philosophies.
But, to the player, the same thing in-game is happening: they're killing themselves to achieve something - a suicide mission.
This also reminds me of comitting seppuku versus committing suicide to end your personal troubles. Seppuku might be done out of honor. The latter is just escaping. But it's the same outcome - committing suicide. Different philosophies, though.
I really dislike all of the etb and haste variants. It seems natural to give green real removal with immediate fighting included on creatures, but regardless of how justifiable it is philosophically, the game play is a problem: it leaves red and green removal playing exactly the same way.
On the card in question: I don't think bees are going to work. Yes, the fighting feels like mobility if you think about it, but if you don't, you automatically assume a bee has flying.
I agree that the Green version of this card should be a larger creature (a 3/3 for 4, uncommon, perhaps?). I would make this a red card (and at cost 1, uncommon too).
Red has access to fight too, but I'm curious why you feel like this should be red. I'm also not sure why you think it needs to be uncommon. You think it's too strong?
I don't think that making this a bigger creature is necessarily solving whatever problem there is with a 1/1 fighter. In fact, I think it's even worse since it discourages the opponent from casting even their 1, 2, and 3 toughness creatures (if it's a 3/3)!
Here's a comparable card that does the same thing that this green fighter does, and it's at common: http://magiccards.info/bok/en/103.html
I know it can scale with the use of a Giant Growth, but that shouldn't matter since Giant Growths are used in combat anyway to help defeat creatures.
This card is perfect as-is, no haste, no ETB effect, and green. The note about Giant Growth effects is apt--Green creature kill should get better when you play it with other Green cards.
This would have been a great card to print in Gatecrash, with all the Bloodrush running around.
I may be in the minority, but I am all for green getting insects with wings and without Flying. They may literally hover through the air, but they're still going to be within a man's grasp.
Cool Card Design of the Day
I would say it should either have haste or make it an enters the battlefield trigger. As a creature that taps it's significantly weaker and loses a lot of the value.
ReplyDeleteI was discussing this on the multiverse website. It's an interesting idea. I thought the obvious interpretation would be a red 1/1.
ReplyDeleteAnd it probably shouldn't be a wasp if it can't fly.
Robert has a point that it would be more hornet-sting like if it was haste or ETB (or ETB with flash), althoug the creature obviously has the advantage that it can attack or block.
Other variants might be:
R 1/1 T: fight.
1G 1/1 flying T: fight
G 1/1 flash, ETB fight
You could certainly have bigger versions as well, a green 2/1 flash ETB fight would be a green equivalent of shock.
Just cause you're within the color pie mechanically doesn't mean you're in the color pie philosophically.
ReplyDeleteNo flying makes me sad. Also I would not like green to have another 1/1 flying creature. Therefore I would not like to see this card printed.
ReplyDeleteAs a side note, (T):fight should not appear on any card unless that card also shas haste and acrifice it at the end of turn.
repeatable fights are very very dangerous, especially without a mana activation cost is what I mean.
DeleteNever say never however.
I'm fascinated by your responses. I'm loving this card and I'll tell you why.
ReplyDeleteIgnore for a moment that Hornet Sting was ever printed. A 1/1 for G that can fight is entirely playable (at least in Limited) without being remotely overpowered.
It's 100% green both mechanically and philosophically. See Ulvenwald Tracker, Prey Upon and Pit Fight. And cards that predate fight like Krosan Vorine and Irresistable Prey. Green's removal is creature-based. Like this.
It doesn't need haste to be a guy that attacks for a few points and then trades with a 2/1.
The fact that it has only 1 power and only 1 toughness means that it can only kill the most vulnerable targets and you'll lose it when you do. Yes, you can Giant Growth it and that's kinda the point: Let the players find synergies to optimize their cards. Even then, you can't get double duty from attacking and fighting with it in the same turn.
Flower Wasp is more defensible than Ulvenwald Tracker as a card because mechanically it's not inherently repeatable and because philosophically a creature hunting down another creature is undeniably green whereas a dude telling another dude to attack an enemy is not. Ulvenwald Tracker is a coward who makes other do his dirty work.
Finally, I think giving the Wasp "T: Fight" is an elegant solution to the green flying problem. Green doesn't get flying and nongreen doesn't get bees, so you either don't make bees at all or you find another way to represent their mobility. Fight works like Flight because it lets these bees intercept any creature. That's actually how I came to this design, not by trying to fix Hornet Sting. Which it also does.
This guy essentially *feels* like a suicide bomber, though, which is very red/black. It's not a power level concern, it's about the emotions driving the card. Yes, you can use tricks to allow it to survive, but that's not the flavor coming through on the card itself.
DeleteAhhh. Now I see what you mean. Hmm.
DeleteA 3/3 version would definitely like a predator, right? And yet that could fight another 3/3 and die in the process too. I suppose being able to prey only upon Goats as a 1/1 makes for a pretty low-on-the-chain predator.
The 3/3 version could still kill small things, so that would feel much more green. Your instinct about placing predators higher than the lowest level on the food chain is a correct one, I think.
DeleteI really enjoy this card and agree with Jay. This card seems totally within Green's color pie.
ReplyDeleteA 1/1 that can tap to fight is something I support for green. It makes me giddy because I think about Prodigal Pyromancer for red and how they both differ.
ReplyDeleteOn Evan's thoughts that this feels red/black: Yes, it is a suicide mission for the wasp. This is what it FEELS like. But, when you said "philosphically," I wholeheartedly believe that this is within green's philosophy. Green fights things, even until death (potentially suicide). Red sacrifices its long-term life-span (suicide) or a short-term gain. Black sacrifices itself for benefits (suicide).
I like to think of looting in this case, which blue and red both have. Both do it, but slightly differently, which plays into their philosophies. Red throws away its stuff to get something more useful while blue looks for more things then decides which of its things is most useful.
In this case, green can have a wasp that fights a 1/1 and then dies. Red will have a goblin or something sacrifice itself to do 1 damage to a creature. Same outcome, but different ways of doing it, aligning with each of their philosophies.
But, to the player, the same thing in-game is happening: they're killing themselves to achieve something - a suicide mission.
This also reminds me of comitting seppuku versus committing suicide to end your personal troubles. Seppuku might be done out of honor. The latter is just escaping. But it's the same outcome - committing suicide. Different philosophies, though.
I really dislike all of the etb and haste variants. It seems natural to give green real removal with immediate fighting included on creatures, but regardless of how justifiable it is philosophically, the game play is a problem: it leaves red and green removal playing exactly the same way.
ReplyDeleteOn the card in question: I don't think bees are going to work. Yes, the fighting feels like mobility if you think about it, but if you don't, you automatically assume a bee has flying.
I agree that the Green version of this card should be a larger creature (a 3/3 for 4, uncommon, perhaps?). I would make this a red card (and at cost 1, uncommon too).
ReplyDeleteRed has access to fight too, but I'm curious why you feel like this should be red.
DeleteI'm also not sure why you think it needs to be uncommon. You think it's too strong?
I don't think that making this a bigger creature is necessarily solving whatever problem there is with a 1/1 fighter. In fact, I think it's even worse since it discourages the opponent from casting even their 1, 2, and 3 toughness creatures (if it's a 3/3)!
DeleteHere's a comparable card that does the same thing that this green fighter does, and it's at common: http://magiccards.info/bok/en/103.html
I know it can scale with the use of a Giant Growth, but that shouldn't matter since Giant Growths are used in combat anyway to help defeat creatures.
This card is perfect as-is, no haste, no ETB effect, and green. The note about Giant Growth effects is apt--Green creature kill should get better when you play it with other Green cards.
ReplyDeleteThis would have been a great card to print in Gatecrash, with all the Bloodrush running around.
Nevermind, it would help if I could read the card... this obviously does not work with Bloodrush
DeleteI agree that it's the fact that it makes you want to put other Green cards like Giant Growth in the deck is what makes this Green.
DeleteSo I think the 1/1 size is important for this design.
I made a fighting guy today, too. www.madolaf.com
ReplyDeleteI may be in the minority, but I am all for green getting insects with wings and without Flying. They may literally hover through the air, but they're still going to be within a man's grasp.
ReplyDeleteI REALLY LIKE THIS CARD!
ReplyDeleteI think it should be an ant though.