Cool Card Design of the Day3/19/2015 - Dragons of Tarkir's Dragon Hunter has a lot going for it. It's an Elite Vanguard that benefits from Tarkir's warrior tribal and it can even block a dragon every turn safely. What it can't do—even if you bolster it to the size where it can deal dragons lethal damage—is hunt dragons.
You can argue the card's flavor mismatch is on the creative team who might have named it differently. After all, an Elite Vanguard is a solid card in a (tribal) aggro white deck whether you're talking Limited or Standard, and the ability to prevent a game loss if your opponent sticks a dragon. But what name would describe this?
I think we can find better flavor by changing what the card does. And ditch protection's clumsiness in the process.
If white can have dragon-reach, why not dragon-deathtouch? I can imagine the story where this Warrior bravely sacrifices himself to take out a rampaging dragon. Not so much the story where he meets the Dragon in combat once a day, every day, for the rest of their natural lives.
I think I'd prefer provoke for dragons than deathtouch for dragon. Still a color pie stretch, but less so?
ReplyDeleteEveryone knows Dragon Hunters have a *strict* catch and release policy. When Sarkhan went back in time, he changed Tarkir's Fish and Wildlife Service regulations for such things.
ReplyDeleteDragon Tracker W
ReplyDeleteCreature - Human Warrior
~ can block Dragons as though it had reach.
Prevent all damage that would be dealt to ~ by Dragon creatures.
2/1
Dragon Surveyor U
Creature - Bird Scout
Flying
Whenever ~ deals damage to a Dragon, draw a card.
1/1
Dragon Killer B
Creature - Hound Assassin
Deathtouch
~ can block Dragons as though it had reach.
1/1
Dragon Evader R
Creature - Goblin Coward
Protection from Dragons
1/1
Dragon Hunter G
Creature - Human Warrior
T: ~ gets +2/+2 and fights target Dragon creature.
1/1
I've just realized how strange it is that blue get "When ~ dies, draw a card." Should be red, philosophically.
DeleteWhy is it strange? And why should it be red? Really interested in your thoughts, not provocative.
DeleteEveryone knows that all card drawing is blue, especially when it deals with creatures.
DeleteBlue adherents don't throw away their life. They nurture it. They don't reward you for getting them killed. A blue wizard wants to build something long lasting, not cycle through cannon-fodder.
DeleteRed adherents are reckless. Dying is sad, but only if you've lived a life worth living. They're happy to die for a cause they care about. A red wizard is happy to trade permanents for fuel, anything to keep her moving forward.
Imagine Oculus as a red goblin. It would play better and fit the nearly-suicidal mania Wizards loves to give goblins.
It's funny, because I see the ability as either green or black. Black seems obvious: they reward death as a tool (hence exploit), and so I could see Youthful Scholar as black.
DeleteBut green is where it shines for me. What better way to honor your ancestors (graveyard mechanics) then to learn from their wisdom (card-drawing tied to creatures)? Works philisophically and mechanically in green already.
In a timeline where dragons have supplanted humanoids as the undisputed masters of the land, a small cheap human who can efficiently trade with a dragon feels like a flavor miss. The story where the human can only delay the dragon and never defeat it is more in line with the set's storytelling themes.
ReplyDeleteYes, this.
DeleteAlso mechanically, from the POV of the gameplay of the set, Maro said they didn't want to have one card that could trump all the opponent's dragons so easily. It's meant to be a one-drop that can give you a little breathing room against a Dragon, not meant to be a one-drop that's a complete hoser for the set's primary theme.
Jay's mainly riffing off the name being a mis-match because you'd imagine a Hunter would actually be able to kill its prey at some point.
DeleteMainly.
DeleteI personally disagree that a human who can stand against dragon attacks multiple times makes more thematic sense in a world dominated by dragons than one who can kill a dragon but can't survive the encounter. But it's very subjective, so easy to see other valid interpretations.
I'm also not convinced Dragon Hunter plays better: Dragon Warrior can't kill your dragon unless you attack with it. If you've got one dragon, you won't attack with it—the same thing that happens against a Hunter. If you've got two dragons, you attack with the worst of the two and the Warrior's player has to choose to let it through or trade and let your better dragon through next turn. That's more interesting and interactive than the Hunter scenario.
I made this card for our Fate Reforged challenge. Fate Reforged, btw is a much better set for this concept because in the story humans and dragons were battling for supremacy. Plus in a draft, you open the pack last, which is where you'd want to seed a sideboard card like this.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I say take the ability from Loyal Sentry, Defiant Vanguard, Alaborn Zealot and Abu Ja'far and add the acitvated ability from Leaping Master.
Dragon Slayer 1W (UNC)
Creature - Human Warrior 3/1
W: Dragon Slayer gains flying until end of turn.
When Dragon Slayer blocks or becomes blocked by a Dragon, destroy that creature and Dragon Slayer.
Not bad at all
Delete