There are considerably better candidates for guild mechanics that I have in reserve. Just wanted to get those that clearly don't qualify out of the way first. I'll post "the contenders" at a later date, just wanted to get the others one last chance in the light and show the latest mechanics list.
Austere is indeed an iffy mechanic, but it's the one I like the best for Azorius atm, especially out of the ones in the reject thread. It could get bumped by one of its contenders though. The idea behind it is to reward a conservative play style in limited (if not constructed). The white side doesn't jive perfectly with Selesnya's and Boros' wide strategy, but I think that's okay, it just means Orzhov and Azorius drafters will be contending for white Austere cards. The blue side of Austere would probably be quite loved by all of the blue guilds. The flavor is drawn from this quote from the mother ship "Isperia, Law Incarnate. Sphinxes are aloof beings that value solitude above all."
Vex would indeed make a nice tax flavored Azorius mechanic. I'm certainly not averse to that idea if it could be executed properly. The main mechanical and philosophical idea behind Vex is to leave your opponents wondering how they lost, which is what MaRo says the Dimir (and its mechanic) should do. A subtle tempo shift here, a life payment there, will "vex" your opponents.
Swarm does have limited design space on it surface. But it offers a good deal of design space "synergy?" that would be present on other cards, as well as some inherent strategic elements.
Impulse definitely poses some developmental hurdles. I think it's worth giving a chance though. If it isn't workable, then it'll get trashed. But it's just too good to throw away without giving it a shot. It's so perfectly Izzet. You even said it yourself -
"They are famously shortsighted and erratic in their pursuit of knowledge."
Warcraft could indeed use more design space. Perhaps offer one static mode (the 1/1 token) and one variable mode (EFFECT until end of turn) depending on the card? For example:
Boros Recruiter (Common) [Designed by Bravelion] 1(R/W)
Creature - Human Soldier
1/2 Warcraft - When Boros Recruiter enters the battlefield, choose one -
Put a 1/1 red and white Soldier creature token onto the battlefield.
Creatures you control get +1/+0 until end of turn.
Boros Tactician (Uncommon) RW
Creature - Human Knight
2/2
First Strike Warcraft - When Boros Tactician enters the battlefield, choose one -
Put a 1/1 red and white Soldier creature token onto the battlefield.
Creatures you control gain first strike until end of turn.
Refresh is an obvious and very nice idea that must be limited to basic lands as long as there are lands capable of producing more than 1 mana. Just because there probably won't be such lands in standard at the same time is no reason to recreate the "free" mechanic that was a major element of the great combo winter!
I like the idea behind Austere, but I don't think Guilty Verdict is such a good idea. Giving U/W creatureless control a 2 mana Unmake seems overboard...
Refresh is an obvious and very nice idea that must be limited to basic lands as long as there are lands capable of producing more than 1 mana. Just because there probably won't be such lands in standard at the same time is no reason to recreate the "free" mechanic that was a major element of the great combo winter!
I think you are being far too conservative. Forcing a basic land restriction would just completely Neuter any and all constructed applications for refresh spells. Needless to say, there will be (probably) no free refresh spells in standard.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
I can't say having too many options to untap whatever Nykthos the format may have seems like a good idea. Actually, though, my biggest concern is that the mechanic has no clear plan. Sure, it makes extra mana, but if the mechanic only works when it simultaneously draws extra spell to cast with that mana, it seems like it's just durdling around instead of being a strong, driving guild mechanic (or a strong, driving mechanic at all).
...if the mechanic only works when it simultaneously draws extra spell to cast with that mana, it seems like it's just durdling around instead of being a strong, driving guild mechanic (or a strong, driving mechanic at all).
"Strong"and "driving" are not required of guild mechanics. They don't serve as the mechanical backbone of a block like Morph or get the lion's share like Kicker. They have to share a lot of space equally and not objectively outshine or overpower the other nine.
...if the mechanic only works when it simultaneously draws extra spell to cast with that mana, it seems like it's just durdling around instead of being a strong, driving guild mechanic (or a strong, driving mechanic at all).
"Strong"and "driving" are not required of guild mechanics. They don't serve as the mechanical backbone of a block like Morph or get the lion's share like Kicker. They have to share a lot of space equally and not objectively outshine or overpower the other nine.
Actually, I'm voicing that this mechanic is (in my opinion) at odds with a number of important criteria you cite in your other tread:
Good guild mechanics...
...mustn't be parasitic.
...should encourage drafters to draft/play two colors.
...should showcase its guild's intended primary archetype.
...must be proactive.
...must have its own unique way of winning.
You have brought up some valid concerns. Some are easily answered, so I'll start with those.
As far as I can tell, Refresh isn't in anyway parasitic. I don't even think its linear. Every refresh instance will always have the same impact regardless of how many refresh cards you run. Refresh instances all have synergy with the same things, such as lands/enchant lands with tap abilities, small mana sinks, low curves, etc but that is only because they are fundamentally the same ability. Why do you see refresh as parasitic?
While I agree that refresh cards don't really force you into simic, I don't see that as an inherent problem. What I'm very confused by is how you can simultaneously say that refresh is parasitic and say that refresh doesn't encourage playing Simic. I don't think these two claims are reconcilable. For something to be parasitic, it must encourage play with similar cards. So if refresh cards are parasitic, then they must encourage you to run more refresh cards, encouraging you to play Simic. Perhaps you could offer some explanation for your claims?
Once again, I agree that refresh doesn't force its users into any one archetype, I don't see this as an inherent problem. I also have no idea what simic's intended primary archetype should even be. If we are using the precedent of rtr block, then Simics principle play style is efficiently curving out, as this was the best way to maximize the utility of Evolve. If you play bigger creatures every turn, then your creatures evolve, become quite large and scary, and you end up with a far more well developed board than your opponents. RTR Simic was ultimately trying to Tempo opponents out of the game. Refresh plays similarly. Your goal is to curve out your plays in such a way that your board develops faster than your opponent's. Refresh won't typically ramp you and it doesn't give you bigger stuff, but curving a refresh bear on turn two into two centaurs on turn 3 may be reasonable and would be exceptionally powerful in limited. Once again, Refresh-Simic's goal is to develop faster than opponents. Instead of using hyperefficent creatures for this, refresh just grans simic access to more mana.
Depending on the exact refresh ability, they can be proative or reactive, For example, "Whenever an opponent casts a spell, Refresh 2." is very reactive while "Whenever a creature you control attacks, Refresh 1." is very proactive. Why do you think refresh must be Reactive?
As discussed in my response to "lack of archetype" claims, refresh does provide Simic with a unique way to win. Refresh powered simic gets to attempt to out tempo opponents in a way that no other mechanic really allows. Refresh may not force players into that play style, but it certainly makes it available as a unique way to play.
You did bring up one concern that I share. My biggest concern, and apparently yours as well, "is that the mechanic has no clear plan." While I have argued in this post that refresh does offer unique playstyles and fits into the general strategy of Simic, it is also so open ended that I fear it will be difficult to create an actual Simic archetype in limited. I have some ideas for build around uncommons, along with ideas for cards to include in the block that should help to maintain Simic's limited cohesiveness, but may ideas may be insufficient. The only way to know for certain is to try.
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
Unless we are using radically different meanings of "tempo", untapping lands does not involve tempo gains.
I can suggest a small change: make refresh "untap N creatures or lands" instead? With that, it doesn't take a lot of cards that want to tap (e.g. a creature with something like "1ug, T: put a +1/+1 counter on this") before the effects actually becomes a clear plan, plus you get a versatile mechanic that is hardly ever a whiff (especially since it doesn't target as currently written).
Actually, I'm voicing that this mechanic is (in my opinion) at odds with a number of important criteria you cite in your other tread:
Good guild mechanics...
...mustn't be parasitic.
...should encourage drafters to draft/play two colors.
...should showcase its guild's intended primary archetype.
...must be proactive.
...must have its own unique way of winning.
Cool! I'm glad it's being read
Proactive simply means creating or controlling a situation by causing something to happen rather than responding to it after it has happened. It isn't intended to imply aggro, combat, or attacking etc. in case that's what you were thinking.
A unique way of winning doesn't mean it must have a kill mechanism built into it - like, I dunno "pinging" opponents to death. But after a game has been won, you should be able to look back on it and point to the mvp mechanic that tipped the scales to victory. One that is distinct from all the other guild mechanics. One that does something the other guild mechanics couldn't do. For example, Gigadrowse doesn't deal any damage and therefore doesn't kill my opponents. Tapping a permanent can be a neat trick. But tapping out your opponent at the end of his turn can pave your path to victory in a way that no other guild mechanic can. That is an example of how just one guild mechanic, in this case Replicate, can have a unique way of winning. (I hope that makes sense. I'm not very good at explaining this stuff.)
Unless we are using radically different meanings of "tempo", untapping lands does not involve tempo gains.
Untapping lands doesn't explicitly gain tempo, but if the mana from those lands can be used to develop your board state or interrupt your opponents boards state, then you very much are gaining tempo. If you would like to read more about tempo, here is a good article. The central premise of the article is that Tempo should be measured in Beats. You gain beats on opponents when you deploy more beats in a turn than your opponent. If refresh enables you to cast both a bear and a centaur on turn three, while your opponent, who doesn't have refresh, can only deploy a single centaur, then you have effectively gained a beat on your opponent putting you ahead in Tempo.
As to your suggestion of adding creature untaps, I don't think its a good idea. The point of Refresh is to show the side of simic that cares about the environment. Simic is the steward of the land, and refresh is meant to show how Simic looks after the natural world. Untapping creatures distracts from the flavor. (It may still be a good idea though. Thoey only gets so far here.)
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
A unique way of winning doesn't mean it must have a kill mechanism built into it - like, I dunno "pinging" opponents to death. But after a game has been won, you should be able to look back on it and point to the mvp mechanic that tipped the scales to victory. One that is distinct from all the other guild mechanics. One that does something the other guild mechanics couldn't do. For example, Gigadrowse doesn't deal any damage and therefore doesn't kill my opponents. Tapping a permanent can be a neat trick. But tapping out your opponent at the end of his turn can pave your path to victory in a way that no other guild mechanic can. That is an example of how just one guild mechanic, in this case Replicate, can have a unique way of winning. (I hope that makes sense. I'm not very good at explaining this stuff.)
I got that. And honestly I don't think a mechanic that amounts to "the next spell you cast costs N less" (with N usually 1 or 2) is going to do all that much in that regard, especially in limited. Admittedly I may be overlooking something, but I can't think of much common cards where refresh (at elast the original version) is going to make a huge difference without feeling overpowered.
Let's put it a little differently: on permanents, there have been multiple triggered "untap target creature/permanent" or "twiddle target creature/permanent", and there have been multiple trigger "you gain 1-2 life" effect. But there has never been a triggered effect that untaps only lands. What this tells me is that an incidental land untapping effect is probably less valuable overall than an incidental lifegain effect. Given how poorly lifegain tends to be viewed by players despite repeated gain consistently overachieving in limited (Student of Ojutai, Soul Warden, and even Sungrace Pegasus come to mind), especially in limited, I find it quite telling, hence why I suggested the tiny "land or creature" adjustment. It still has much of the same flavor in Simic, plus much of the same function as "untap target permanent", but has far greater overall flexibility.
[quote from="Legend »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/creativity/custom-card-creation/601943-the-final-guild-mechanic-thread?comment=38"]It still has much of the same flavor in Simic, plus much of the same function as "untap target permanent", but has far greater overall flexibility.
It effectively gives Vigilance to GU. Not Simic imo.
Also, as a side note not directed at anyone in particular, I'd like to clarify what I think a Magic archetype is.
In Magic, an archetype is a typical strategy, a series of actions, or board state that is represented and/or was facilitated by prototypical elements of Magic’s mechanics – in the case of Refresh, untapping lands.
An archetype may be identified by a defining mechanic, card, theme, guild/tribe/faction, or even a setting. Archetypes, which have a common and recurring representation in Magic, shape the structure and function of metagames and, over time, the game itself.
In the case of Refresh, these are the prototypical precedents I found for it from Magic's 20th century years:
For now, Refresh will remain the Simic mechanic of choice especially in the absence of a better option. That could change after I post "the contenders". (But I highly doubt it.)
Let's put it a little differently: on permanents, there have been multiple triggered "untap target creature/permanent" or "twiddle target creature/permanent", and there have been multiple trigger "you gain 1-2 life" effect. But there has never been a triggered effect that untaps only lands. What this tells me is that an incidental land untapping effect is probably less valuable overall than an incidental lifegain effect. Given how poorly lifegain tends to be viewed by players despite repeated gain consistently overachieving in limited (Student of Ojutai, Soul Warden, and even Sungrace Pegasus come to mind), especially in limited, I find it quite telling, hence why I suggested the tiny "land or creature" adjustment. It still has much of the same flavor in Simic, plus much of the same function as "untap target permanent", but has far greater overall flexibility.
Valid concerns. Refresh may not be generally impactful enough to warrant being a mechanic. I obviously think that it can be, but only through designing and playtesting some commons can we see if the mechanic is fun or interesting.
Perhaps our conversation would benefit from seeing some potential commons.
Refresh Drake 2U
Creature - Drake Mutant Insect (C)
Flying
When Refresh Drake enters the battlefield, Refresh 1.
2/2
Refresh Bounce 4U
Instant (C)
Return target permanent to its owner's hand. Refresh 3.
Fertile Valley 4G
Enchantment - Aura (C)
Enchant land
When Fertile Valley enters the battlefield, Refresh 1.
Enchanted land gains "t : Put a +1/+1 counter on target creature. Activate this ability only anytime you could cast a sorcery."
Natural Snow XUU
Instant [U]
Tap X target creatures. They don't untap during their controllers next untap step. Refresh X.
Giant Rootwalla 2GG
Creature - Lizard Ape Bird[U] 4UG : Giant Rootwalla gets +3/+3 and gains Flying until end of turn. Refresh 5. Activate this ability only once each turn.
3/3
Conservation 1UG
Enchantment [U]
At the beginning of each opponents upkeep, refresh 3.
...These designs are merely meant to showcase Refresh. These are not finalized designs.
EDIT: I've noticed many people seem to think that Refresh doesn't feel very simic. I agree, but only becuase Wizards totally failed to express the shift in Simic that occurred between Ravnica and RTR in RTR's cards. Refresh plays with simics flavor as stewards of nature and the environment. This aspect of simic flavor, while clearly expressed in literature, has been very poorly expressed in Simic's cards and mechanics. If you haven't actually read Wizards article on simic flavor, found here, then you probably aren't familiar with Simic's current flavor. The guild has changed dramatically since the days when Momir Vig ruled.
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
[quote from="Legend »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/creativity/custom-card-creation/601943-the-final-guild-mechanic-thread?comment=38"]It still has much of the same flavor in Simic, plus much of the same function as "untap target permanent", but has far greater overall flexibility.
It effectively gives Vigilance to GU. Not Simic imo.
I don't see what vigilance has to do with it: it's the same principle as red having "creatures can't block" and blue having "creatures can't be blocked". Both green and blue are very well established as having untap abilities (to name only cards in standard: Ruthless Instincts, Dragonscale Boon, Pine Walker, Colossal Heroics, Zephyr Scribe, Refocus, crypsis, Kiora's Follower, Breaching Hippocamp, Prophet of Kruphix, Triton tactics...), even more so than white in fact. If you don't want a mechanics that deals with creature, say so, but I utterly fail to see where flavor is supposed to be problematic.
I never argued that U/G didn't get to untap lands. I argued there is a word of difference between an activated ability (that can be repeated) and a keyword action that is added to other spells (mind you I've been mostly assuming the effect would be one-shots, regardless of whether it's on permanents or spells). Refresh is no scry nor is it Overload. At the best it's a haunt or a clash (or a weird kind of ritual). I can't imagine casting a refresh spell because I need to untap lands, and if the card is designed to force me to wait just so I can take advantage of the untapping, I consider it a poor design. Because Refresh will tend to be an incidental mechanic added to other effects (rather than being a driving part of the spell itself), I thought it would bear comparing to incidental triggered abilities on creatures, where you'll find "untap target permanent" and "twiddle target permanent", but never "untap target land" (though you'll see "untap all lands" on rares).
Anyway. I've voiced my issue and proposed a fix. I'm not gonna argue it any further. Ultimately it's not really any skin off my nose.
I don't see what vigilance has to do with it: it's the same principle as red having "creatures can't block" and blue having "creatures can't be blocked".
But not in the context of a guild mechanic. In my opinion, there shouldn't be the vigilance guild, the haste guild, the indestructible guild, etc. even if the colors are appropriate and the archetype could be extracted and assembled from the eternal card pool because if nothing else it lacks distinction.
Anyway. I've voiced my issue and proposed a fix. I'm not gonna argue it any further. Ultimately it's not really any skin off my nose.
Your/all input is appreciated and weighs in. I hope I'm not invalidating anyone. I just discus mechanics, design principals, goals, etc. I'm not interested in "winning" arguments. So no bad vibes I hope
Vex
Not entirely sure this is really a Dimir mechanic. Especially with that name it might be a better fit for the Lorwyn Faeries.
Yeah, this is so true. It has a perfect needling, Faerie flavor about it that isn't quite right for Dimir. I have a feeling that Vex won't make the final cut. Good thing it has a couple of strong contenders.
Warcraft
I also like the idea of the Boros being the one with a token mechanic for once, but I don't think two Guilds should have one in the same block.
Yeah, I was afraid of that, but was thinking it might be okay as long as they aren't in the same set.
I'm not sure how productive this thread is. People just throwing in ideas, but none getting unanimous acceptance. Probably because there is no such thing as a perfect mechanic, and going back and forth over that is counterproductive. Even the second coming of Ravnica, the mechanics were still flawed despite the designers' experience since the first Ravnica.
Anyway, Simic version of mega-soulbond could be something like this:
Symbiosis (When this or another creature enters the battlefield, if this doesn't have a +1/+1 counter on it, you may put a +1/+1 counter on both creatures and pair them. They remain paired for as long as you control both of them.)
Symbiosis can only pair once to prevent repetitive soulbond shenanigans. Instead rewards the creatures with +1/+1 counters upon pairing. Of course, you may append other benefits for being paired just like soulbond.
Austere is not a good mechanic. Caring about opponent is an automatic warning alarm in mechanics and this is in perhaps the worst possible way. This is unreliable, swingy, feel-bad, limiting strategically, meta damaging, constructed-level undevelopable, the list goes on. In no way do I think this mechanic is at all printable, and I strongly advise removing it.
Refresh is a good mechanic, but I agree with Circeus that having nothing to do with creatures is unsuitable for a creature focused guild. Now this isn't necessarily true, there is the option to actually change the guilds whilst still keeping their identities that could be done, but otherwise this doesn't tie well enough into the Simic in particular.
Thrive has the same problem. It makes perfect sense for GW, but Selesyna has a strong token theme, so this is counter to their identity.
Austere is not a good mechanic. Caring about opponent is an automatic warning alarm in mechanics and this is in perhaps the worst possible way. This is unreliable, swingy, feel-bad, limiting strategically, meta damaging, constructed-level undevelopable, the list goes on. In no way do I think this mechanic is at all printable, and I strongly advise removing it.
Refresh is a good mechanic, but I agree with Circeus that having nothing to do with creatures is unsuitable for a creature focused guild. Now this isn't necessarily true, there is the option to actually change the guilds whilst still keeping their identities that could be done, but otherwise this doesn't tie well enough into the Simic in particular.
Thrive has the same problem. It makes perfect sense for GW, but Selesyna has a strong token theme, so this is counter to their identity.
Austere won't make the cut for all the reasons you stated. It'll be replaced as soon as there's a suitable mechanic.
Refresh does reflect the new Simic. You may have missed some of the discussions about it. Mechanics should when possible reflect the current state of things, not just what we're used to. The op has a link to each of the current guild descriptions for reference.
Thrive is very Selesnyan if you ask me. Are you saying that it is not Selesnyan because it has a "nontoken" clause or because it doesn't produce tokens? Yes, Selesnya does have a strong token theme that has been thoroughly explored by WotC. One of the goals here is to make ten custom mechanics that are (among other things) distinct from their predecessors so Populate 2.0 isn't an option.
Austere: Glad you agree
Refresh: I've heard them, it doesn't change Simic caring about creatures. Simic are a creature based guild, that can change, but that's the way it is now. Even if you look at just the creative, they are creature focused, but more importantly that's what they are by design.
Thrive: The nontoken part is feel-bad for Selesyna fans. That's not necessarily bad provided you give reason why the anti-synergy is there. I don't see any currently, so unless you provide reason for it, I would definitely change this in some way (tweaking it, changing it, replacing it, whatever).
Ultimately, I think the flaw with designing new Ravnica mechanics is that you end up either designing the same sort of mechanics in a boring way or you end up changing things. My #1 suggestion by far with this set is to add something besides execution (do you have already have something like this? IDK). Change the guilds (whilst keeping the essence of their identity) or change something else and reflect that in the guilds to some degree. Give players something legitimately new to be excited about, that way you don't rely on people wanting same Ravnica again, which I can assure you, many don't. I'm not saying you should remake Ravnica, or you should shake up everything, but adding A major element to go alongside everything people know to expect. If larger appeal isn't something you're interested and you are doing this more from a pure design reasoning, do it anyway. I am doubtful that this project would produce any satisfying, interesting result unless you are willing to work really hard on it and just want to see what you can do.
This isn't the first time I have made this argument and I doubt it will be the last. It just seems like CCC designers are overly willing to be uncreative when it comes to Ravnica sequels. Maybe this is reflective of RTR's design, which is thought of by much of R&D as being a little too conservative even for a set that wants to be conservative, and people don't realise (or agree) that the flaw in the original becomes so much worse when repeated. Ultimately, people can do what they want with their sets, and if truly think that what they are doing is what they really want to be doing in the end, then I respect that. But creativity should be a core tenant of CCC designers, there isn't much point to doing this whole thing unless you are doing something interesting and challenging.
Refresh: I've heard them, it doesn't change Simic caring about creatures. Simic are a creature based guild, that can change, but that's the way it is now. Even if you look at just the creative, they are creature focused, but more importantly that's what they are by design.
Have you read the Fathom Edict? Have you checked the summary article on RTR Simic? How about the guide to RTR? What in any of these would lead you to believe that Simic is 'creature focused' anymore? The Simic are still biomancers, but they changed dramatically post-Vig. They aren't mad scientists anymore. This change wasn't reflected in Simic's mechanics or cards in RTR. Refresh is an attempt at showing this change in Simic. While I agree that it goes against players expectations of Simic, these expectations are simply a result of Wizards failure. I also feel that giving players exactly what they expect is boring and leads to stagnation in design. Refresh keeps Simic interesting. I also don't think Simic should have to be creature focussed. Green is the creature color. Blue is the non-creature color. why should Green-Blue be creature focused?
Ultimately, I think the flaw with designing new Ravnica mechanics is that you end up either designing the same sort of mechanics in a boring way or you end up changing things. My #1 suggestion by far with this set is to add something besides execution (do you have already have something like this? IDK). Change the guilds (whilst keeping the essence of their identity) or change something else and reflect that in the guilds to some degree. Give players something legitimately new to be excited about, that way you don't rely on people wanting same Ravnica again, which I can assure you, many don't. I'm not saying you should remake Ravnica, or you should shake up everything, but adding A major element to go alongside everything people know to expect. If larger appeal isn't something you're interested and you are doing this more from a pure design reasoning, do it anyway. I am doubtful that this project would produce any satisfying, interesting result unless you are willing to work really hard on it and just want to see what you can do.
This isn't the first time I have made this argument and I doubt it will be the last. It just seems like CCC designers are overly willing to be uncreative when it comes to Ravnica sequels. Maybe this is reflective of RTR's design, which is thought of by much of R&D as being a little too conservative even for a set that wants to be conservative, and people don't realise (or agree) that the flaw in the original becomes so much worse when repeated. Ultimately, people can do what they want with their sets, and if truly think that what they are doing is what they really want to be doing in the end, then I respect that. But creativity should be a core tenant of CCC designers, there isn't much point to doing this whole thing unless you are doing something interesting and challenging.
I agree with you completely. Keeping Ravnica fresh and interesting is difficult. Perhaps we could develop the Guildless movement more?
How can we even pull off a Ravnica block anymore given the two set structure?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
Refresh: I've heard them, it doesn't change Simic caring about creatures. Simic are a creature based guild, that can change, but that's the way it is now. Even if you look at just the creative, they are creature focused, but more importantly that's what they are by design.
Have you read the Fathom Edict? Have you checked the summary article on RTR Simic? How about the guide to RTR? What in any of these would lead you to believe that Simic is 'creature focused' anymore? The Simic are still biomancers, but they changed dramatically post-Vig. They aren't mad scientists anymore. This change wasn't reflected in Simic's mechanics or cards in RTR. Refresh is an attempt at showing this change in Simic. While I agree that it goes against players expectations of Simic, these expectations are simply a result of Wizards failure. I also feel that giving players exactly what they expect is boring and leads to stagnation in design. Refresh keeps Simic interesting. I also don't think Simic should have to be creature focussed. Green is the creature color. Blue is the non-creature color. why should Green-Blue be creature focused?
The Simic try to adapt Ravnica's wildlife to the urban environment. This is still true for the new Simic. That seems very creature-centric to me. Plus you don't need to be overly smart about it. The design of the Simic is and always was focused on creatures. If you make the Simic care about something else they stop being Simic. You essentially replace them with a different G/U guild. People should remember that the guilds of Ravnica are more than just their colour combinations.
@harlannowick.
As I said, "...but more importantly that's what they are by design" The Simic strategy is creatures, the Simic mechanics are on creatures and benefit playing creatures, the Simic main theme so far (+1/+1 counters) supports creatures, individual cards support a creature strategy. The Simic are just as much about creature strategies and +1/+1 counters even as anything flavour related. Deviating more from the +1/+1 counter theme, as long as you still support it somewhat, is staying true to the Simic as they are now, but shifting away from creatures is changing too much to be considered the same. Simic is not by creative or design, only an aspect of it, and that aspect is all about creatures.
What to do to make the set new is Legend's decision but my suggestion would be either expanding the Guildless as you said and have a theme of Guilds vs Guildless or to introduce some plot change to the world that causes the guilds to change in some way and have the theme of 'same same guilds but different'. The only real reason to choose either of these in particular though is because they are very natural extensions of the world, there is plenty of weird and wonderful things to do to make Ravnica fresh yet familiar. I'd say Apoquallyp's Siege of Ravnica is a good example of a more extreme change versus the Guildless conflict being the opposite.
How can we even pull off a Ravnica block anymore given the two set structure?
I've been asking myself this question since the day they announced it. In terms of color split, I was thinking possibly ally colors in first set and enemy colors in second set simply because it hasn't been done before.
I agree with you completely. Keeping Ravnica fresh and interesting is difficult. Perhaps we could develop the Guildless movement more?
Some storyline consideration may be in order at this point. It might even help us nail down the last few mechanics. One thing I have considered is a transfer/distribution of (guildpact) power from Jace to ten planeswalkers, each representative of its guild colors. So the current guild leaders would either have to be replaced or ascend somehow. In the first set, there would be all ten Legendary guild leaders and one planeswalker - Jace. In the second set Lords of Ravnica, there would be ten planeswalkers - a mix of usurpers and ascenders. Such a shift might make an ability such as Refresh more palatable for some who are stuck on +1/+1 counters for Simic. Set name: Lords of Ravnica. This could be in addition to playing up the restless guildless. Would the guildless be represented with an ability or two or by mono/five color strategy somehow? I have two shelved mechanics that could work:
Alliance - As long as you control an ally1 or ally2 color permanent, EFFECT. (Present in first ally color set.)
Defiance - As long as you control an enemy1 or enemy2 color permanent, EFFECT. (Present in second enemy color set.)
There are considerably better candidates for guild mechanics that I have in reserve. Just wanted to get those that clearly don't qualify out of the way first. I'll post "the contenders" at a later date, just wanted to get the others one last chance in the light and show the latest mechanics list.
Austere is indeed an iffy mechanic, but it's the one I like the best for Azorius atm, especially out of the ones in the reject thread. It could get bumped by one of its contenders though. The idea behind it is to reward a conservative play style in limited (if not constructed). The white side doesn't jive perfectly with Selesnya's and Boros' wide strategy, but I think that's okay, it just means Orzhov and Azorius drafters will be contending for white Austere cards. The blue side of Austere would probably be quite loved by all of the blue guilds. The flavor is drawn from this quote from the mother ship "Isperia, Law Incarnate. Sphinxes are aloof beings that value solitude above all."
Vex would indeed make a nice tax flavored Azorius mechanic. I'm certainly not averse to that idea if it could be executed properly. The main mechanical and philosophical idea behind Vex is to leave your opponents wondering how they lost, which is what MaRo says the Dimir (and its mechanic) should do. A subtle tempo shift here, a life payment there, will "vex" your opponents.
Swarm does have limited design space on it surface. But it offers a good deal of design space "synergy?" that would be present on other cards, as well as some inherent strategic elements.
Impulse definitely poses some developmental hurdles. I think it's worth giving a chance though. If it isn't workable, then it'll get trashed. But it's just too good to throw away without giving it a shot. It's so perfectly Izzet. You even said it yourself -
Warcraft could indeed use more design space. Perhaps offer one static mode (the 1/1 token) and one variable mode (EFFECT until end of turn) depending on the card? For example:
Boros Recruiter (Common) [Designed by Bravelion]
1(R/W)
Creature - Human Soldier
1/2
Warcraft - When Boros Recruiter enters the battlefield, choose one -
RW
Creature - Human Knight
2/2
First Strike
Warcraft - When Boros Tactician enters the battlefield, choose one -
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
I like the idea behind Austere, but I don't think Guilty Verdict is such a good idea. Giving U/W creatureless control a 2 mana Unmake seems overboard...
I think you are being far too conservative. Forcing a basic land restriction would just completely Neuter any and all constructed applications for refresh spells. Needless to say, there will be (probably) no free refresh spells in standard.
- Manite
"Strong"and "driving" are not required of guild mechanics. They don't serve as the mechanical backbone of a block like Morph or get the lion's share like Kicker. They have to share a lot of space equally and not objectively outshine or overpower the other nine.
Actually, I'm voicing that this mechanic is (in my opinion) at odds with a number of important criteria you cite in your other tread:
Good guild mechanics...
...mustn't be parasitic.
...should encourage drafters to draft/play two colors.
...should showcase its guild's intended primary archetype.
...must be proactive.
...must have its own unique way of winning.
You have brought up some valid concerns. Some are easily answered, so I'll start with those.
As far as I can tell, Refresh isn't in anyway parasitic. I don't even think its linear. Every refresh instance will always have the same impact regardless of how many refresh cards you run. Refresh instances all have synergy with the same things, such as lands/enchant lands with tap abilities, small mana sinks, low curves, etc but that is only because they are fundamentally the same ability. Why do you see refresh as parasitic?
While I agree that refresh cards don't really force you into simic, I don't see that as an inherent problem. What I'm very confused by is how you can simultaneously say that refresh is parasitic and say that refresh doesn't encourage playing Simic. I don't think these two claims are reconcilable. For something to be parasitic, it must encourage play with similar cards. So if refresh cards are parasitic, then they must encourage you to run more refresh cards, encouraging you to play Simic. Perhaps you could offer some explanation for your claims?
Once again, I agree that refresh doesn't force its users into any one archetype, I don't see this as an inherent problem. I also have no idea what simic's intended primary archetype should even be. If we are using the precedent of rtr block, then Simics principle play style is efficiently curving out, as this was the best way to maximize the utility of Evolve. If you play bigger creatures every turn, then your creatures evolve, become quite large and scary, and you end up with a far more well developed board than your opponents. RTR Simic was ultimately trying to Tempo opponents out of the game. Refresh plays similarly. Your goal is to curve out your plays in such a way that your board develops faster than your opponent's. Refresh won't typically ramp you and it doesn't give you bigger stuff, but curving a refresh bear on turn two into two centaurs on turn 3 may be reasonable and would be exceptionally powerful in limited. Once again, Refresh-Simic's goal is to develop faster than opponents. Instead of using hyperefficent creatures for this, refresh just grans simic access to more mana.
Depending on the exact refresh ability, they can be proative or reactive, For example, "Whenever an opponent casts a spell, Refresh 2." is very reactive while "Whenever a creature you control attacks, Refresh 1." is very proactive. Why do you think refresh must be Reactive?
As discussed in my response to "lack of archetype" claims, refresh does provide Simic with a unique way to win. Refresh powered simic gets to attempt to out tempo opponents in a way that no other mechanic really allows. Refresh may not force players into that play style, but it certainly makes it available as a unique way to play.
You did bring up one concern that I share. My biggest concern, and apparently yours as well, "is that the mechanic has no clear plan." While I have argued in this post that refresh does offer unique playstyles and fits into the general strategy of Simic, it is also so open ended that I fear it will be difficult to create an actual Simic archetype in limited. I have some ideas for build around uncommons, along with ideas for cards to include in the block that should help to maintain Simic's limited cohesiveness, but may ideas may be insufficient. The only way to know for certain is to try.
- Manite
I can suggest a small change: make refresh "untap N creatures or lands" instead? With that, it doesn't take a lot of cards that want to tap (e.g. a creature with something like "1ug, T: put a +1/+1 counter on this") before the effects actually becomes a clear plan, plus you get a versatile mechanic that is hardly ever a whiff (especially since it doesn't target as currently written).
Cool! I'm glad it's being read
Proactive simply means creating or controlling a situation by causing something to happen rather than responding to it after it has happened. It isn't intended to imply aggro, combat, or attacking etc. in case that's what you were thinking.
A unique way of winning doesn't mean it must have a kill mechanism built into it - like, I dunno "pinging" opponents to death. But after a game has been won, you should be able to look back on it and point to the mvp mechanic that tipped the scales to victory. One that is distinct from all the other guild mechanics. One that does something the other guild mechanics couldn't do. For example, Gigadrowse doesn't deal any damage and therefore doesn't kill my opponents. Tapping a permanent can be a neat trick. But tapping out your opponent at the end of his turn can pave your path to victory in a way that no other guild mechanic can. That is an example of how just one guild mechanic, in this case Replicate, can have a unique way of winning. (I hope that makes sense. I'm not very good at explaining this stuff.)
Untapping lands doesn't explicitly gain tempo, but if the mana from those lands can be used to develop your board state or interrupt your opponents boards state, then you very much are gaining tempo. If you would like to read more about tempo, here is a good article. The central premise of the article is that Tempo should be measured in Beats. You gain beats on opponents when you deploy more beats in a turn than your opponent. If refresh enables you to cast both a bear and a centaur on turn three, while your opponent, who doesn't have refresh, can only deploy a single centaur, then you have effectively gained a beat on your opponent putting you ahead in Tempo.
As to your suggestion of adding creature untaps, I don't think its a good idea. The point of Refresh is to show the side of simic that cares about the environment. Simic is the steward of the land, and refresh is meant to show how Simic looks after the natural world. Untapping creatures distracts from the flavor. (It may still be a good idea though. Thoey only gets so far here.)
- Manite
I got that. And honestly I don't think a mechanic that amounts to "the next spell you cast costs N less" (with N usually 1 or 2) is going to do all that much in that regard, especially in limited. Admittedly I may be overlooking something, but I can't think of much common cards where refresh (at elast the original version) is going to make a huge difference without feeling overpowered.
Let's put it a little differently: on permanents, there have been multiple triggered "untap target creature/permanent" or "twiddle target creature/permanent", and there have been multiple trigger "you gain 1-2 life" effect. But there has never been a triggered effect that untaps only lands. What this tells me is that an incidental land untapping effect is probably less valuable overall than an incidental lifegain effect. Given how poorly lifegain tends to be viewed by players despite repeated gain consistently overachieving in limited (Student of Ojutai, Soul Warden, and even Sungrace Pegasus come to mind), especially in limited, I find it quite telling, hence why I suggested the tiny "land or creature" adjustment. It still has much of the same flavor in Simic, plus much of the same function as "untap target permanent", but has far greater overall flexibility.
It effectively gives Vigilance to GU. Not Simic imo.
Also, as a side note not directed at anyone in particular, I'd like to clarify what I think a Magic archetype is.
In Magic, an archetype is a typical strategy, a series of actions, or board state that is represented and/or was facilitated by prototypical elements of Magic’s mechanics – in the case of Refresh, untapping lands.
An archetype may be identified by a defining mechanic, card, theme, guild/tribe/faction, or even a setting. Archetypes, which have a common and recurring representation in Magic, shape the structure and function of metagames and, over time, the game itself.
In the case of Refresh, these are the prototypical precedents I found for it from Magic's 20th century years:
Green
Ley Druid
Argothian Elder
Early Harvest
Earthcraft
Juniper Order Druid
Llanowar Druid
Blue
Reset
Cloud of Faeries
Frantic Search
Great Whale
Palinchron
Peregrine Drake
Rewind
Snap
Time Spiral
Treachery
For now, Refresh will remain the Simic mechanic of choice especially in the absence of a better option. That could change after I post "the contenders". (But I highly doubt it.)
Valid concerns. Refresh may not be generally impactful enough to warrant being a mechanic. I obviously think that it can be, but only through designing and playtesting some commons can we see if the mechanic is fun or interesting.
Perhaps our conversation would benefit from seeing some potential commons.
Refresh Elf 2G
Creature - Elf Merfolk Wizard(C)
t : Refresh 2.
1/1
Refresh Bear 1G
Creature - Bear Crocodile (C)
Whenever Refresh Bear attacks, Refresh 1.
2/2
Refresh Drake 2U
Creature - Drake Mutant Insect (C)
Flying
When Refresh Drake enters the battlefield, Refresh 1.
2/2
Refresh Bounce 4U
Instant (C)
Return target permanent to its owner's hand. Refresh 3.
Fertile Valley 4G
Enchantment - Aura (C)
Enchant land
When Fertile Valley enters the battlefield, Refresh 1.
Enchanted land gains "t : Put a +1/+1 counter on target creature. Activate this ability only anytime you could cast a sorcery."
Natural Snow XUU
Instant [U]
Tap X target creatures. They don't untap during their controllers next untap step. Refresh X.
Giant Rootwalla 2GG
Creature - Lizard Ape Bird[U]
4UG : Giant Rootwalla gets +3/+3 and gains Flying until end of turn. Refresh 5. Activate this ability only once each turn.
3/3
Conservation 1UG
Enchantment [U]
At the beginning of each opponents upkeep, refresh 3.
...These designs are merely meant to showcase Refresh. These are not finalized designs.
EDIT: I've noticed many people seem to think that Refresh doesn't feel very simic. I agree, but only becuase Wizards totally failed to express the shift in Simic that occurred between Ravnica and RTR in RTR's cards. Refresh plays with simics flavor as stewards of nature and the environment. This aspect of simic flavor, while clearly expressed in literature, has been very poorly expressed in Simic's cards and mechanics. If you haven't actually read Wizards article on simic flavor, found here, then you probably aren't familiar with Simic's current flavor. The guild has changed dramatically since the days when Momir Vig ruled.
- Manite
I don't see what vigilance has to do with it: it's the same principle as red having "creatures can't block" and blue having "creatures can't be blocked". Both green and blue are very well established as having untap abilities (to name only cards in standard: Ruthless Instincts, Dragonscale Boon, Pine Walker, Colossal Heroics, Zephyr Scribe, Refocus, crypsis, Kiora's Follower, Breaching Hippocamp, Prophet of Kruphix, Triton tactics...), even more so than white in fact. If you don't want a mechanics that deals with creature, say so, but I utterly fail to see where flavor is supposed to be problematic.
I never argued that U/G didn't get to untap lands. I argued there is a word of difference between an activated ability (that can be repeated) and a keyword action that is added to other spells (mind you I've been mostly assuming the effect would be one-shots, regardless of whether it's on permanents or spells). Refresh is no scry nor is it Overload. At the best it's a haunt or a clash (or a weird kind of ritual). I can't imagine casting a refresh spell because I need to untap lands, and if the card is designed to force me to wait just so I can take advantage of the untapping, I consider it a poor design. Because Refresh will tend to be an incidental mechanic added to other effects (rather than being a driving part of the spell itself), I thought it would bear comparing to incidental triggered abilities on creatures, where you'll find "untap target permanent" and "twiddle target permanent", but never "untap target land" (though you'll see "untap all lands" on rares).
Anyway. I've voiced my issue and proposed a fix. I'm not gonna argue it any further. Ultimately it's not really any skin off my nose.
But not in the context of a guild mechanic. In my opinion, there shouldn't be the vigilance guild, the haste guild, the indestructible guild, etc. even if the colors are appropriate and the archetype could be extracted and assembled from the eternal card pool because if nothing else it lacks distinction.
Your/all input is appreciated and weighs in. I hope I'm not invalidating anyone. I just discus mechanics, design principals, goals, etc. I'm not interested in "winning" arguments. So no bad vibes I hope
Yeah, this is so true. It has a perfect needling, Faerie flavor about it that isn't quite right for Dimir. I have a feeling that Vex won't make the final cut. Good thing it has a couple of strong contenders.
Yeah, I was afraid of that, but was thinking it might be okay as long as they aren't in the same set.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
Anyway, Simic version of mega-soulbond could be something like this:
Symbiosis (When this or another creature enters the battlefield, if this doesn't have a +1/+1 counter on it, you may put a +1/+1 counter on both creatures and pair them. They remain paired for as long as you control both of them.)
Symbiosis can only pair once to prevent repetitive soulbond shenanigans. Instead rewards the creatures with +1/+1 counters upon pairing. Of course, you may append other benefits for being paired just like soulbond.
........................
Refresh is a good mechanic, but I agree with Circeus that having nothing to do with creatures is unsuitable for a creature focused guild. Now this isn't necessarily true, there is the option to actually change the guilds whilst still keeping their identities that could be done, but otherwise this doesn't tie well enough into the Simic in particular.
Thrive has the same problem. It makes perfect sense for GW, but Selesyna has a strong token theme, so this is counter to their identity.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
Austere won't make the cut for all the reasons you stated. It'll be replaced as soon as there's a suitable mechanic.
Refresh does reflect the new Simic. You may have missed some of the discussions about it. Mechanics should when possible reflect the current state of things, not just what we're used to. The op has a link to each of the current guild descriptions for reference.
Thrive is very Selesnyan if you ask me. Are you saying that it is not Selesnyan because it has a "nontoken" clause or because it doesn't produce tokens? Yes, Selesnya does have a strong token theme that has been thoroughly explored by WotC. One of the goals here is to make ten custom mechanics that are (among other things) distinct from their predecessors so Populate 2.0 isn't an option.
Refresh: I've heard them, it doesn't change Simic caring about creatures. Simic are a creature based guild, that can change, but that's the way it is now. Even if you look at just the creative, they are creature focused, but more importantly that's what they are by design.
Thrive: The nontoken part is feel-bad for Selesyna fans. That's not necessarily bad provided you give reason why the anti-synergy is there. I don't see any currently, so unless you provide reason for it, I would definitely change this in some way (tweaking it, changing it, replacing it, whatever).
Ultimately, I think the flaw with designing new Ravnica mechanics is that you end up either designing the same sort of mechanics in a boring way or you end up changing things. My #1 suggestion by far with this set is to add something besides execution (do you have already have something like this? IDK). Change the guilds (whilst keeping the essence of their identity) or change something else and reflect that in the guilds to some degree. Give players something legitimately new to be excited about, that way you don't rely on people wanting same Ravnica again, which I can assure you, many don't. I'm not saying you should remake Ravnica, or you should shake up everything, but adding A major element to go alongside everything people know to expect. If larger appeal isn't something you're interested and you are doing this more from a pure design reasoning, do it anyway. I am doubtful that this project would produce any satisfying, interesting result unless you are willing to work really hard on it and just want to see what you can do.
This isn't the first time I have made this argument and I doubt it will be the last. It just seems like CCC designers are overly willing to be uncreative when it comes to Ravnica sequels. Maybe this is reflective of RTR's design, which is thought of by much of R&D as being a little too conservative even for a set that wants to be conservative, and people don't realise (or agree) that the flaw in the original becomes so much worse when repeated. Ultimately, people can do what they want with their sets, and if truly think that what they are doing is what they really want to be doing in the end, then I respect that. But creativity should be a core tenant of CCC designers, there isn't much point to doing this whole thing unless you are doing something interesting and challenging.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
Have you read the Fathom Edict? Have you checked the summary article on RTR Simic? How about the guide to RTR? What in any of these would lead you to believe that Simic is 'creature focused' anymore? The Simic are still biomancers, but they changed dramatically post-Vig. They aren't mad scientists anymore. This change wasn't reflected in Simic's mechanics or cards in RTR. Refresh is an attempt at showing this change in Simic. While I agree that it goes against players expectations of Simic, these expectations are simply a result of Wizards failure. I also feel that giving players exactly what they expect is boring and leads to stagnation in design. Refresh keeps Simic interesting. I also don't think Simic should have to be creature focussed. Green is the creature color. Blue is the non-creature color. why should Green-Blue be creature focused?
I agree with you completely. Keeping Ravnica fresh and interesting is difficult. Perhaps we could develop the Guildless movement more?
How can we even pull off a Ravnica block anymore given the two set structure?
- Manite
The Simic try to adapt Ravnica's wildlife to the urban environment. This is still true for the new Simic. That seems very creature-centric to me. Plus you don't need to be overly smart about it. The design of the Simic is and always was focused on creatures. If you make the Simic care about something else they stop being Simic. You essentially replace them with a different G/U guild. People should remember that the guilds of Ravnica are more than just their colour combinations.
As I said, "...but more importantly that's what they are by design" The Simic strategy is creatures, the Simic mechanics are on creatures and benefit playing creatures, the Simic main theme so far (+1/+1 counters) supports creatures, individual cards support a creature strategy. The Simic are just as much about creature strategies and +1/+1 counters even as anything flavour related. Deviating more from the +1/+1 counter theme, as long as you still support it somewhat, is staying true to the Simic as they are now, but shifting away from creatures is changing too much to be considered the same. Simic is not by creative or design, only an aspect of it, and that aspect is all about creatures.
What to do to make the set new is Legend's decision but my suggestion would be either expanding the Guildless as you said and have a theme of Guilds vs Guildless or to introduce some plot change to the world that causes the guilds to change in some way and have the theme of 'same same guilds but different'. The only real reason to choose either of these in particular though is because they are very natural extensions of the world, there is plenty of weird and wonderful things to do to make Ravnica fresh yet familiar. I'd say Apoquallyp's Siege of Ravnica is a good example of a more extreme change versus the Guildless conflict being the opposite.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
I've been asking myself this question since the day they announced it. In terms of color split, I was thinking possibly ally colors in first set and enemy colors in second set simply because it hasn't been done before.
Some storyline consideration may be in order at this point. It might even help us nail down the last few mechanics. One thing I have considered is a transfer/distribution of (guildpact) power from Jace to ten planeswalkers, each representative of its guild colors. So the current guild leaders would either have to be replaced or ascend somehow. In the first set, there would be all ten Legendary guild leaders and one planeswalker - Jace. In the second set Lords of Ravnica, there would be ten planeswalkers - a mix of usurpers and ascenders. Such a shift might make an ability such as Refresh more palatable for some who are stuck on +1/+1 counters for Simic. Set name: Lords of Ravnica. This could be in addition to playing up the restless guildless. Would the guildless be represented with an ability or two or by mono/five color strategy somehow? I have two shelved mechanics that could work:
Alliance - As long as you control an ally1 or ally2 color permanent, EFFECT. (Present in first ally color set.)
Defiance - As long as you control an enemy1 or enemy2 color permanent, EFFECT. (Present in second enemy color set.)