Last week we voted on which mechanics to keep pursuing for
Tesla. The results are in, here’s what’s staying:
(Note, we’ll be testing plenty of implementations for the
mechanics, these particular ones are just intended to give you an idea of the
space.)
A set can only fit so many major mechanics, generally four
or five. Clearly we’re already pretty close to the limit, but there’s always a
chance that something doesn’t pan out as well as we hope, or preferably, we
find something even better.
Now that we have a better idea of where Tesla’s headed, it’s
time to narrow our focus a bit and design to that. For this week's exercise, suggest some
space that complements the areas we’re playing with (for instance, something that wants a full graveyard to complement Scrounge). In the interest of pursuing new areas, please don't suggest anything in the same space as the mechanics that didn’t get enough votes. We may revisit those later if they fit perfectly, but first we need to reevaluate what target we're trying to hit.
What about converted mana cost? It's directly related to Iteration, and I know we were considering a version of Cogwork that read something like, "Whenever this becomes tapped, you may untap target artifact that costs less." Additionally, I know the CMC of combined cards hasn't really been defined (or is assumed to be 0), but it could be the sum of the components' CMCs, as is the case with split cards.
ReplyDeleteI know "converted mana cost" is kind of an ugly thing to be designing around, but there are possibilities for re-templating it, and it could make for a very interesting mechanical sub-theme. For example:
Spark Eater 1R
Creature- Elemental (Common)
1/1
Whenever an opponent casts a spell that costs 2 or fewer mana, put a +1/+1 counter on CARDNAME.
Finally, for what it's worth, I'd like to mention again that dominance ("if you control a creature with the most power...") interacts very nicely with both Iteration and Combine.
There's certainly plenty of room to play around (look how much Scourge did working with just CMC 6+ matters). That said, I really want to see that we have a good way to make CMC intuitive first. If it were trivial R&D would have done it already.
DeleteI've thought it through a bit, and most cases work just fine (and, typically, better) if you use predicates like "costs 2 mana", "costs 6 or more mana", and so on. Reminder texts like cascade and the proposed Iterate already do something like this.
DeleteThe one truly hard case that I've found is Mistmeadow Skulk. Since CMC is no longer worded as an attribute, it's hard to grant protection from it-- the grammar doesn't work out well. The best solution I came up with based on Progenitus: "protection from everything that costs 4 or more mana". Stuff like Food Chain can also get awkward, since in that case you would have to say "where X is the number of mana the exiled card costs, plus one."
The "costs less" phrasing on cascade is encouraging.
DeleteCombined artifacts will have to cost 0, because we can't hide a characteristic on the other side of the card, especially not one the set particularly cares about (and we can't print the cost on the back, or players will think they can cast it on that side).
Point taken on combined artifacts. Now that you mention it, there's no good way to show a combined CMC on the back. Oh well.
DeleteI don't think it's a problem that combined artifacts will have a converted mana cost of 0. My understanding is that we are exploring the mechanics that have a chance of leading the set to a good place, and we shouldn't assume all these mechanics will be together in the final set.
Delete@Jules
DeleteI feel that there has got to be a way to word converted mana cost without requiring players to learn a new game term like "Converted Mana Cost" does.
I have a feeling that the answer is going to be something very trivial once it's found, although the act of finding that trivial answer is very difficult and un-trivial like you say. (Kind of like figuring out "How should the Legend rule work?" or "What removal should Green get for Limited?")
This is a wording/player communication problem and not a problem of reworking how the rules work, so the answer doesn't need to be very complex.
It is quite possible that WotC forgets to ask a particular question despite how brilliant they are, due to working so closely with the game. We've seen numerous cases where a fan asks, "I've always wondered about thing A. Why does it have to be that way?" and WotC responds, "You know, we've never considered that before, but you're right it doesn't have to be that way" and they make the change.
Bog Hoodlums 5B
DeleteCreature — Goblin Warrior (4/1)
Bog Hoodlums can't block.
When Bog Hoodlums enters the battlefield, clash with an opponent. If you win, put a +1/+1 counter on Bog Hoodlums. (Each clashing player reveals the top card of his or her library, then puts that card on the top or bottom. A player wins if his or her card costs more.)
Scuttling Death 4B
Creature — Spirit (4/2)
Sacrifice Scuttling Death: Target creature gets -1/-1 until end of turn.
Soulshift 4 (When this creature dies, you may return target Spirit card that costs 4 or less from your graveyard to your hand.)
Putrid Cyclops 2B
Creature — Zombie Cyclops (3/3)
When Putrid Cyclops enters the battlefield, scry 1, then reveal the top card of your library. Putrid Cyclops gets -X/-X until end of turn, where X is how much that card costs. (To scry 1, look at the top card of your library, then you may put that card on the bottom of your library.)
Dark Confidant 1B
Creature — Human Wizard (2/1)
At the beginning of your upkeep, reveal the top card of your library and put that card into your hand. You lose as much life as that card costs.
Chalice of the Void XX
Artifact
Chalice of the Void enters the battlefield with X charge counters on it.
Whenever a player casts a spell that costs the same as the number of charge counters on Chalice of the Void, counter that spell.
Protean Hulk 5GG
Creature — Beast (6/6)
When Protean Hulk dies, search your library for any number of creature cards that cost 6 or less in total and put them onto the battlefield. Then shuffle your library.
Spell Snare B
Instant
Counter target spell that costs 2.
Can we word those better? Are any of them ambiguous?
I like these.
DeleteHowever, this wording could get confusing with cost reduction effects. Can Spell Snare counter a Stoic Rebuttal with metalcraft active?
Stoic Rebuttal 1UU
Instant
Metalcraft - Stoic Rebuttal costs 1 less if you control three or more artifacts.
Counter target spell.
With the current wording it can't, but a change of wording implies that it can. That might be a fine rules change, but it also changes a lot of card interactions.
"Stoic Rebuttal costs {1} less" is distinguishable from "Counter target spell that costs 2." based on whether the mana symbol is used or not, but I wouldn't depend on new players making the distinction. Yeah.
Delete"Counter target spell that costs 2 mana" is a little more distinct.
Delete"Counter target spell with a mana cost of 2"? That way it's distinct from how much you paid?
DeleteBen has a good point-- the simplest solution to this issue is probably just to delete "converted" everywhere it appears.
DeleteHow about:
Delete"Counter target spell with a mana cost of 2 mana"
"Counter target spell that costs 2 mana. (Use the cost before adjustments are applied.)"
Counter target spell worth 2 mana?
DeleteHere is a mechanic to play with the space of feeding the graveyard:
ReplyDeleteGnome Factory 2
Artifact
Feed the Machine (At the beginning of your upkeep, you may exile a card from your graveyard. If you don't, sacrifice ~.)
T: Put a colorless 1/1 Gnome artifact creature token onto the battlefield.
This upkeep cost makes it feel like a factory to me because factories churn things out at a regular interval and require a steady supply chain.
Also, it should shape play in an interesting way, because you have to make the call of whether to cast it early or late, and once you have these factories in play you would work to keep putting more cards into your grave. I could see people changing up their blocking and trading decisions around whether they want to keep feeding their factory until they draw their next Mine spell, or whether they want their opponent's factory to run out of resources and die.
One might ask, "Isn't it the same as 'T, exile a card from your graveyard: Make a token?' " But that wouldn't feel like a factory to me because it doesn't have that relentless driving schedule. Also, it would just be a very useful, nifty resource converter and would not shape games as much. It would sit idle for a while, then be activated when something hits the grave, then be idle for while again. It won't make you plan when to cast it or struggle to keep feeding the grave. The ability would have to be weaker as well because it doesn't have the in-built time limit.
This mechanic is kind of like Fading, a drawback mechanic. It allows more powerful abilities to be printed on the card because of the drawback, but it doesn't sound good when you explain what it is and is hard to market. So it's possible that it shouldn't be keyworded. But here I did it to better communicate the idea though.
This is a really neat mechanic, and one that might be worth trying. Some thoughts:
Delete-Yes, it's a drawback mechanic, but it's using a somewhat unusual resource, so that should be fine.
-The blue Zombies in Innistrad block are a precedent for roughly this kind of drawback.
-I kind of like that it's extra-drawback-y in multiples; it discourages players from running too many of the same card.
-There's plenty of room for designs where this isn't the same as the cost. Creatures would be a natural place to start. Activated abilities that include a mana cost are also pretty interesting. Tapping works fine too, especially on context-dependent abilities.
-My main worry is whether it fits well with the mechanics we have. Scrounge feels more like a support mechanic than a set-defining mechanic; we already have a factory-themed mechanic; and I don't think we want Tesla to feel too much like a graveyard set anyway.
Thanks Ipaulsen. I didn't get what you meant with the 4th point though, could you reiterate?
DeleteI understand the concern of public eyes seeing this as a GY set, but I think the overwhelming flavor pushes people away from that line of thought. I would like to avoid keywording this idea of factory-drawback cards. That way, we can craft and stylize cards to fit certain color themes. Not all factories need to bring in their resources from the gy.
DeleteSyphon Engine 3
Artifact
At the beginning of your upkeep, discard a card from your hand or sacrifice ~.
Tap: Target creature gets -2/-2 until the end of turn.
Rough random example, but by avoiding a keyword you have the freedom to make these drawbacks fit certain designs and potentially support other keywords and/or archetypes for Tesla.
When a new/casual players open their first pack of Tesla and the first card they see is Gnome Factory, what do they make of Feed the Machine?
DeleteI like that it's a cost/drawback that is often paid for through playing the game normally, but it is still very much a drawback and will be seen as exactly that.
It's interesting that the cards are the opposite of parasitic, actively punishing you for playing too many of them. That's not a good thing, but again, that much of the cost is free mitigates that.
I appreciate the thematic reward for making the cost an upkeep trigger, but moving it to the activated ability makes the card radically safer and thus more appealing. In fact, it's not even a drawback mechanic, it's just a thematic cost.
An entire mechanic of cards that auto-lose to Tormod's Crypt doesn't seem like it'll have any impact outside of Block or Standard.
@Chah
DeleteYou mentioned worries about the mechanic being too similar to making "Exile a card from your graveyard" part of the activation cost. I'm saying that there are plenty of cases in which the gameplay is meaningfully different, as you suggest (and we could certainly design toward those cases).
This screams "third set mechanic" to me. As pointed out, the more cards you have with this mechanic, the more you hate your life, but if you put it in only the third booster you can even make a few commons with this mechanic without destroying the world.
Delete@Jay
DeleteThose are points that I mentioned when I laid out the pros and cons on the table. What I'd like to know is, how do you stack up the pros against the cons? What is your approach to comparing them and weighing them against each other?
As for constructed, a Tormod's Crypt might hose an all-in linear factory deck, but factories aren't linear and I'm not imagining the mechanic being used in that way. There could be high-impact rares (say, something like a Sphinx's Revelation in factory form) that are used in a modular way - say, with only 2-3 copies in the deck.
If your opponent has to play 2-3 Tormod's Crypt to stop them, I think your opponent is at a disadvantage for having to play such a situational card (If you draw the Crypt and the opponent doesn't draw the factory, the Crypt is useless). Also, even when the Crypt gets to do its job, the factory side gets to activate the card at least once. Finally, I could see plays like "On your upkeep, Tormod's Crypt." "After Crypt resolves, I cast this Mine spell."
I think this is significantly more appealing and loses very little gameplay or theme, if any:
DeleteGnome Factory 2
Artifact
Feed the Machine — T, Exile a card from your graveyard: Put a colorless 1/1 Gnome artifact creature token onto the battlefield.
If it loses the drawback, it will be forced to be significantly less appealing, like a Lightning Elemental (or a jacked up Rare version of that) is significantly less appealing than a Ball Lightning. It can't be strong without the drawback.
DeleteIt loses most of the gameplay and thematic elements that I mentioned.
There are pros and cons, the question is how do you stack them up against each other?
I need to re-state something from last week: There could be an overall theme of questing for artifacts, which works well with Mechas and Cogs. The quest for artifacts can represent digging up lost tech (graveyard interaction), dreaming up new inventions (getting things from the top of the library), or exploring (attacking).
ReplyDeleteUnearth is a great candidate for questing for artifacts that interacts well with Iterate and Scrounge:
DeleteUnearth Dynamo 6
Artifact
T: CARDNAME deals 1 damage to target creature.
Unearth R (R: Return this card from your graveyard to the battlefield. It gains haste. Exile it at the beginning of the next end step or if it would leave the battlefield. Unearth only as a sorcery.)
Unearthing artifacts is a cool (and very flavorful) idea. Unfortunately, unearth does not count as casting, so it wouldn't interact much with Iterate.
DeleteI only meant that it lets you put high CMC cards in your deck. But I'm now realizing that you can't really do that with Unearth and have it work as a smoothing mechanic without some other way to get the cards in your graveyard, as it'll still be stuck in your hand early game.
DeleteDelve fits this slot pretty well, no? Allows for high casting costs that can still be cast rather early in the game (with enough support) and promotes graveyard interaction.
DeleteI also love delve and have repeatedly petitioned for it to be in Tesla, so I am a bit biased on the subject.
Prototype is just evoke that lasts until end of turn, but doing so allows for prototype creatures that can attack or block (with haste or defender), and prototype Equipment or Artifacts with continuous effects. It interacts great with Iterate and feeds the graveyard, which looks like a useful quality on Tesla.
ReplyDeletePrototype Dynamo 6
Artifact
T: CARDNAME deals 1 damage to target creature.
Prototype R (You may cast this spell for its prototype cost. If you do, sacrifice it at end of turn.)
Makeshift Wall 5
Artifact Creature - Construct
Defender, Flash
Prototype 1W (You may cast this spell for its prototype cost. If you do, sacrifice it at end of turn.)
3/4
I like the core idea here, but these designs illustrate perhaps the biggest hurdle to the mechanic: If the actual card is good enough to want in play, prototyping it will feel miserable. It will often be correct, and hardcore spikes will appreciate the decision, but an awful lot of players will refuse to 'cycle' them when they should, or do it and be sad about it.
DeleteThat said, evoke saw some success and prototype has a little more potential. Maybe the difference is ETB/LTB triggers?
Outer-Flame Acolyte {4}
Artifact Creature — Elemental Construct (2/2)
When Outer-Flame Acolyte enters the battlefield, target creature gets +2/+0 and gains haste until end of turn.
Prototype {1}{R} (You may cast this spell for its prototype cost. If you do, sacrifice it at end of turn.)
Mull Fisher {3}{2U}
Artifact Creature — Construct (2/2)
Flying
When ~ dies, draw a card.
Prototype {U} (You may cast this spell for its prototype cost. If you do, sacrifice it at end of turn.)
Hmm. I think this keyword really needs to grant flash or haste every time, otherwise it's really just evoke.
We can also make prototype triggers:
Protection Shield {2}
Artifact
{2}, T: Prevent the next 2 damage target creature would deal to you this turn.
Prototype {W} (You may cast this spell for its prototype cost. If you do, sacrifice it at end of turn.)
When you prototype this, prevent the next 2 damage target creature would deal to you this turn.
I think this mechanic has lots of potential and fits the theme well.
DeleteA lot has been done in this area already (evoke, echo, unearth, bloodrush) and I have to say that I'm not sold on the flavor or thematic connection. But it does feel like something that will get printed eventually-- probably granting haste as part of the mechanic-- and may be worth trying out.
DeleteThe word 'prototype' really makes me want a kindle reward on top of the 'evoke' but that's off-task and clunky.
DeleteHow does this work with Iterate? It seems confusing to have a cost modification mechanic and a "cost matters" mechanic at the same time.
DeleteI think that when you prototype/evoke a spell, it'll trigger things that care about its actual converted mana cost. So prototyping a 6-CMC card for one mana will put a counter on your 5/5 with Iterate. It's possible that interaction is too confusing and would lead to numerous misunderstandings.
DeletePrototype could return the card to your hand rather than cause it to be sacrificed.
DeleteThreshold? Probably not. Metalcraft-Threshold?
ReplyDeleteBatteries (CARDNAME has power as long as there are three or more artifact cards in your graveyard.)
Meh.
I think it would be more thematic at N=2, and that is probably where the power level is right too.
Delete(Not to say I love the idea)
Jury-Rig {2} (Cast an artifact card in your graveyard for up to {2} less. [It gains haste.] Sacrifice it at EOT.)
ReplyDeleteKick-Start {R}
Instant
~ deals 2 damage to target creature.
Jury-Rig {1}
Junkyard Duelist {3}{B}
Creature-Rogue
Whenever ~ attacks, you may Jury-Rig {1}. If you do, ~ gets +1/+1 until EOT.
2/2
MacGuyver {2}{W}
Creature-Human
Whenever ~ would die, you may Jury-Rig {2} instead.
2/2
Most of these triggers would need to happen *before* combat if we want to jury-rig artifact creatures and attack with them.
DeleteThis is a neat mechanic.
DeleteI love how it lets you bring back a Mecha piece for just one turn.
Wow, that's eye-popping and really interesting. And great for the set - it loves self-mill (mine/scrounge) and interacts with cogs and mecha too!
DeleteWhy not just have it be Jury-Rig (You may cast...) and not have a number?
DeleteWe should try that. I'm guessing the number is necessary because artifacts are priced as permanents and will likely cost too much to be worth bringing back once. It also makes the keyword more appealing. That does cost space and consistency, though, and maybe unearthing artifacts is worth full cost.
DeleteMagic should use Delve before this, buuut:
ReplyDeleteTire Fire {R}
Sorcery
Scavenge (Exile X cards from your graveyard.)
~ deals X damage to target creature.
Junk Golem {2}
Artifact Creature-Golem
Scavenge (As ~ ETB, exile X cards from your graveyard.)
~ ETB with X +1/+1 counters on it.
0/0
Trash Volley {2}{G}
Sorcery
Scavenge (Exile X cards from your graveyard.)
~ deals X damage divided as you choose among any number of target creatures with flying.
Archaelogist {2}{W}
Creature—Human Cleric
Scavenge (As ~ ETB, exile X cards from your graveyard.)
When ~ ETB, gain X life.
2/2
Bone Eater {3}{B}{B}
Creature—Demon
Scavenge (As ~ ETB, exile X cards from your graveyard.)
Flying
When ~ ETB, draw X cards and lose X life.
4/4
I'd prefer to put a fixed number or parameter on Scavenge and make it an additional cost to cast. (X could still show up at higher rarities.) Then it would be substantially cleaner, and a lot like Feed the Machine or Innistrad's blue Zombies. In any case, I definitely think that a mechanic that plays around in this space would be worth looking at.
DeleteScavenge 3 (You may exile 3 cards from your graveyard.)
DeleteIf you scavenged, get a cookie.
Both simpler and easier to develop. Makes sense.
Scavenge Artifact (You may exile an artifact card from your graveyard).
DeleteIf you scavenged, add {2} to your mana pool.
Scavenge Land (You may exile a land card from your graveyard).
If you scavenged, draw a card.
Other options (one not both).
Scavenge is already taken as a Magic word.
DeleteIf Tesla is going to be a graveyard set, we need to figure out how it can feel like a Steampunk graveyard set, rather than a regular graveyard set.
It could be a Mad Max world where people use lost technology, a Terminator world where machines are being churned out, possibly feeding on the remains of human civilization, an Exploration world where you are unearthing the wonders of a past advanced civilization, etc.
To me, Jury Rig feels like a Steampunk graveyard set, but Scavenge feels like just a graveyard set.
Maybe it could be like
Improved Flames 2R
Sorcery
Research Sorceries (As an additional cost, exile any number of Sorcery cards from your graveyard.)
~ deals 3 damage to target creature, plus an additional damage for each Sorcery card you exiled.
There could be Research cards for each card type.
Whew! I was ill all last week so missed the call for votes, but I'm glad to see mecha and cogwork both made it into the "keep trying" bucket :) Bully and Price of Progress are both excellent mechanics but not necessarily a particularly good fit for Tesla, so it makes sense to let them slide.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I don't think there are very many obvious areas of interaction for mecha or cogwork beyond the, well, obvious ones that were already in the last playtest. The Invoker-style cards for the Progress take on Iteration, etc.
In particular, things that interact well with mecha will depend a great deal on what precise version of mecha we use. A Safe Passage could be great to protect a mecha that could only combine if it attacked, but has no interaction with the equip-style combine. Graveyard fillers and discard outlets work if mecha are combined from the graveyard, but have no interaction with mecha that combine from the battlefield. And so on.
Only thing I'm proposing with this model is the idea that the left is always equipment, combining is triggered by equiping.
DeleteTank Treads {1}
Artifact-Equipment (cmn)
Equipped creature has vigilance.
When ~ equips a Mecha, transform them combined.
Equip {1}
//
Tank…
Artifact Creature…
Vigilance
Whenever ~ attacks,…
If this would LTB, transform both halves.…
Boom Mecha {5}
Artifact Creature-Mecha (unc)
When ~ ETB, it deals 2 damage to target creature.
2/2
//
…Boomer
…Voltron
…
…it deals 2 damage to target creature.
…Randomly choose one half to remain on the battlefield.
4/4
We could use another creature mechanic. Can Cogwork go on creatures? Right now the trigger is Artifacts entering, and the reward is always untap. With creatures the reward could be different:
ReplyDeleteCharging Tank 3
Artifact Creature
Cogwork - Whenever an artifact enters the battlefield under your control, CARDNAME gets +2/+2 until end of turn.
2/2
Or if we go with a different implementation of Cogwork (something like soul bond or chaining) we can give static bonuses.
Little Chainer 2
Artifact Creature
CogChain - When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, chain it to another artifact. As long as CARDNAME is chained to another artifact, CARDNAME gets +2/+2.
I'd like to see a bunch of artifacts ganging up to bring down a mech.
Steam Sentry 5
DeleteArtifact Creature—Construct (cmn)
Cogwork — Whenever another artifact enters the battlefield under your control, untap this.
2/5
Support Drone 2
Artifact Creature—Construct (cmn)
Cogwork — Whenever another artifact enters the battlefield under your control, untap this.
T: Target creature gets +1/+1 until EOT. Activate this ability only as a sorcery.
1/1
War Wagon 4
Artifact Creature—Juggernaut (unc)
~ doesn't untap during your untap step.
Cogwork — Whenever another artifact enters the battlefield under your control, untap this.
5/4
Brass Tortoise 4
Artifact Creature—Turtle (unc)
~ gets +0/+3 as long as it's untapped.
Cogwork — Whenever another artifact enters the battlefield under your control, untap this.
3/3
Gearwork Automaton 2
Artifact Creature—Construct (rare)
Cogwork — Whenever another artifact enters the battlefield under your control, untap this.
Whenever ~ untaps, put a +1/+1 counter on it.
1/1
I haven't really been participating in any of the discussions regarding Tesla, so can someone explain the logic and/or flavor behind Iteration? I'm just not having an intuitive appreciation for what a comparison between CMC and a creature's power could represent. Was it conceived primarily as a mechanical concept intended to complement other mechanical ideas?
ReplyDeleteI think it's meant to represent the theme of Progress - like being rewarded for "advancing" the spells that you cast to a higher level (CMC).
DeleteI don't know if there was a flavor proposed for the creature growing in tune with that advancement, though.