I really like this initiative to interview higher-profile custom designers. It would be neat to talk to ex-Magic designers like Brian Tinsdale or something, although I don't know how much info they can legally share. I'm going to have to check out the Goblin Artisans community. Until very recently the only custom Magic community I'd had any experience with was reddit.com/r/custommagic, and I'm finding MTG Salvation to be a great custom community. I didn't realize there were so many good spaces for this.
Worst fears is pretty fancy on a certain helix. But I've definitely seen people play Mindslaver for the fun of it. Especially in free-for-all formats - even without a lock in sight. Very popular with the style-points crowd.
There's an interesting phenomenon around extremely cool cards that do unusual things. Some players react to them by saying "It's not a great design, because anyone can pull it off if they pay the mana - there's nothing clever about it". There's also nothing clever about Akroma, Angel of Wrath. I hear she's a popular card.
Many limited bombs are simple "Cast and win" deals. If they were all bad designs, magic's set designers would have to be utterly incompetent - considering how they just keep insisting on putting in bomby cards that anyone in noncompetiive environments can play.
I find this interesting. It's sort of the design-side version of, "it dies to removal".
Have you ever seen anyone play Worst Fears? There is no combo potential with it, hence nobody cares.
Personally, once I get my hands on a particular elder dragon, I'm planning to build a deck based around the combo of Worst Fears + Dragonlord Kolaghan.
That said: it's better to have a game that is loved/hated than just tolerated, right? Or so the conventional wisdom goes.
Indeed! They actually mention that exact pearl of wisdom in their previous episode. I think you have a great point about the subtle differences between what is acceptable in online play versus tabletop. That's a good thought to reflect on.
That's exactly it. I have no issue with players not enjoying Mindslaver. Where Jay and I disagree is the claim that it should never have been printed. I feel like it's pretty clear that it's been a net positive for a larger chunk of players than those that have disliked it, certainly moreso than other big cards. Counterspell effects, for example, suck fun out of the game for a larger chunk of players and don't even lead to great stories the way Mindslaver does. The same goes for discard effects. I have no doubt that many players dislike Mindslaver in their games, but the great thing about a customizable game like Magic is that players can choose which cards they want to play with. Mindslaver isn't strong enough to be an endless threat on its own, and Mindslaver locks are the same as having an instant win combo - just with more flavor than most of those.
I do think, however, that Jay was brilliant to go after Mindslaver the way he did in his essay. His perspective is well-reasoned and shows a deep understanding of player psychology. I do think Mindslaver has a larger cost than most consider. That said, I think it's hyperbolic to claim it never should have been printed. For cards that never should be printed, I expect them to have made the game worse for their presence for more people than enjoy them... And I don't think you can say that about Mindslaver. Even if you prove that it's getting played way too much against people that dislike it, all you'd have to do would be increase the cost (or make it exile itself instead of sacrifice) in order to make it less competitive; so only the true believers play with it.
That said: it's better to have a game that is loved/hated than just tolerated, right? Or so the conventional wisdom goes.
I believe the source of the conventional wisdom you mention is a statement made by Maro (Mark Rosewater, the Head Designer of Magic) multiple times on his podcast. Dan and Reuben have alluded to/paraphrased this statement in some of the Remaking Magic episodes.
Basically what Maro said goes like this (and this is paraphrased from my memory, so it's probably not a direct quote):
"If you make a game that everybody likes but no one loves, then your game will fail"
And he further elaborated by saying that, to be successful, a game needs to evoke strong emotional responses and that it is O. K. if some of those are negative or even very negative as long as the positive responses are much stronger than the negative ones. (I believe the specific podcast I'm thinking about is called "Ten Things Every Game Needs", but I'm not sure.)
So, you don't want to try to make a game that tries to satisfy all types of players all of the time, or no one will love it and it will fail. You want to make a game that gives each type of player positive and strong emotional highs- even if those highs come at different times/places for different types of players or at the cost of some negative emotional lows.
A brief aside regarding sources of design knowledge:
As a general rule, any sort of design "conventional wisdom", "truisms", etc. referred to by custom card designers (especially those haven't had professional/paid game design experience) are probably concepts that they learned from Maro (either directly or indirectly.) While some of this is because he has invented or contributed to the invention of many of these concepts, I think it's mainly just because he is astoundingly prolific- both in terms of the number of cards/sets he has designed and in the amount of content he has created and distributed about Magic the Gathering card design and about game design in general (He currently publishes a lengthy weekly column, a weekly 30-minute (or more) podcast, and answers player submitted questions via email, Twitter, Tumblr, Google+. He probably also does some other stuff that I'm forgetting about right now. ).
That said, I'm sure there are plenty of other valuable design reference materials/resources that are in no way connected to the "teachings of Maro".
Also, people who do have professional game design experience (Dan, Reuben, etc.) have likely learned concepts through their work that also are not derived from Maro. (Examples from Remaking Magic- "cinematic design", "design goals", etc.)
Additionally, those of us who don't have professional game design experience (myself, etc.) can still be very competent designers and good sources of design wisdom. We just don't have as wide of a knowledge/experience base as the designers here with pro experience.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
DIRECT DOWNLOAD
Podcast archive link
RSS feed
iTunes Channel
Player.FM Channel
In this episode:
Contact details:
Reuben Covington
Twitter: @reubencovington
Email: reubencovington@gmail.com
MTGsalvation Account: Doombringer
Dan Felder
Email: minimallyexceptional@gmail.com
MTGsalvation Account: Stairc
Jay Treat
Twitter: @jtreat3
Twitter (Magic Related): @wizardsfamiliar
Website: TreatGames.com
Card Renders
None This week
Are you designing commons? Check out my primer on NWO.
Interested in making a custom set? Check out my Set skeleton and archetype primer.
I also write articles about getting started with custom card creation.
Go and PLAYTEST your designs, you will learn more in a single playtests than a dozen discussions.
My custom sets:
Dreamscape
Coins of Mercalis [COMPLETE]
Exodus of Zendikar - ON HOLD
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
Many limited bombs are simple "Cast and win" deals. If they were all bad designs, magic's set designers would have to be utterly incompetent - considering how they just keep insisting on putting in bomby cards that anyone in noncompetiive environments can play.
I find this interesting. It's sort of the design-side version of, "it dies to removal".
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
Pun intended?
Personally, once I get my hands on a particular elder dragon, I'm planning to build a deck based around the combo of Worst Fears + Dragonlord Kolaghan.
EDIT- I never said it would be good deck.
I do think, however, that Jay was brilliant to go after Mindslaver the way he did in his essay. His perspective is well-reasoned and shows a deep understanding of player psychology. I do think Mindslaver has a larger cost than most consider. That said, I think it's hyperbolic to claim it never should have been printed. For cards that never should be printed, I expect them to have made the game worse for their presence for more people than enjoy them... And I don't think you can say that about Mindslaver. Even if you prove that it's getting played way too much against people that dislike it, all you'd have to do would be increase the cost (or make it exile itself instead of sacrifice) in order to make it less competitive; so only the true believers play with it.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
I believe the source of the conventional wisdom you mention is a statement made by Maro (Mark Rosewater, the Head Designer of Magic) multiple times on his podcast. Dan and Reuben have alluded to/paraphrased this statement in some of the Remaking Magic episodes.
Basically what Maro said goes like this (and this is paraphrased from my memory, so it's probably not a direct quote):
"If you make a game that everybody likes but no one loves, then your game will fail"
And he further elaborated by saying that, to be successful, a game needs to evoke strong emotional responses and that it is O. K. if some of those are negative or even very negative as long as the positive responses are much stronger than the negative ones. (I believe the specific podcast I'm thinking about is called "Ten Things Every Game Needs", but I'm not sure.)
So, you don't want to try to make a game that tries to satisfy all types of players all of the time, or no one will love it and it will fail. You want to make a game that gives each type of player positive and strong emotional highs- even if those highs come at different times/places for different types of players or at the cost of some negative emotional lows.
A brief aside regarding sources of design knowledge:
That said, I'm sure there are plenty of other valuable design reference materials/resources that are in no way connected to the "teachings of Maro".
Also, people who do have professional game design experience (Dan, Reuben, etc.) have likely learned concepts through their work that also are not derived from Maro. (Examples from Remaking Magic- "cinematic design", "design goals", etc.)
Additionally, those of us who don't have professional game design experience (myself, etc.) can still be very competent designers and good sources of design wisdom. We just don't have as wide of a knowledge/experience base as the designers here with pro experience.