As I've started continued designing custom cards I've noticed that the learning curve and barrier of entry to the community is really steep. Designing magic cards is really hard yet we get a constant influx of new faces that want to showoff their ideas. However far too often I see them getting dissuaded or finding it difficult to build up the knowledge base required to improve the quality of their work. Things like Bravelion's series of articles I think are good resources for these moderate level designers to improve.
But I still feel that we can do more to get more players involved so I'm starting a bi-weekly series of articles to act as stepping stones to mtg players who know nothing about custom card creation to act as a definitive guide on how to get started.
Though I'm not the target audience, I think this does a great job of introducing people to what custom mtg design is all about. One thing I noticed is that each/most sections began with "So" or "Now", when (in my opinion) the sentences would do better starting with the next word. Was there intention behind that?
Granted, this is only an introductory article, but articles pertaining to custom card creation should not over-cite things said by MaRo, especially when it comes to the more creative aspects of custom card creation. The more MaRo articles that are included, the more that connotes to readers that custom card creation is really more limited than they might think. It causes them to believe that when designing custom cards, they must abide by the vast majority of the guidelines already set by Wizards, which is definitely not the case when it comes to custom card creation's creative aspects.
Custom card creation is not about "creating cards that obey pre-existing standards (and therefore could be printed today)", it's about "creating cards whose standards are derived from pre-existing standards that fit some sort of overarching idea that you come up with". Relying on MaRo's words too much shifts the focus of custom card creation too much toward the first and not enough toward the second.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How to use card tags (please use them for everybody's sanity)
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format Minimum deck size: 60 Maximum number of identical cards: 4 Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
Granted, this is only an introductory article, but articles pertaining to custom card creation should not over-cite things said by MaRo.
For the purposes of this article I'd have to disagree.
This is supposed to introduce people who have no custom card creation experience to what we do and the resources and communities that they can use.
They need a foundation to use as a starting point. Considering that this article is aimed at magic players, having the well defined conventions that Wotc R&D uses act as that baseline is a good choice.
This also allows for shared expectations and knowledge base when receiving feedback about their designs.
As they design they will naturally want to push limits to do their own thing but it isn't something we should be encouraging if they have no previous experience.
Basically I'm in no way saying that there isn't alternative "standards" as you put it but that they are not a good fit for introducing the newest members of the community if they have no previous design experience.
One thing I noticed is that each/most sections began with "So" or "Now", when (in my opinion) the sentences would do better starting with the next word. Was there intention behind that?
That was a style choice of using a more conversational and casual tone as I kinda walk you through the process.
Was it too distracting? Would you prefer the drier more textbook approach? This kind of feedback is good.
One thing I noticed is that each/most sections began with "So" or "Now", when (in my opinion) the sentences would do better starting with the next word. Was there intention behind that?
That was a style choice of using a more conversational and casual tone as I kinda walk you through the process.
Was it too distracting? Would you prefer the drier more textbook approach? This kind of feedback is good.
I personally would, but I've been known to read textbooks in my spare time so I may not be the best one to edit your articles toward. A conversational approach is a justifiable reason for this style. Maybe just don't use it for every intro sentence?
Textbook writing is also known as bad writing. There's a reason they have to force you to buy them.
Conversational tone is important here for two reasons. First, you're trying to make the article and subject feel approachable. A formal tone subverts that element of your goal. Second, it just reads better. Conversational tone has fewer natural stopping points. It gives you more control over the flow, which also allows players to see how ideas connect more easily.
Usually this ends up in a lot of "So" and "Now" and, "However" starting points on the first draft. However, You don't need to keep them. It will often read cleaner once you remove those in the second draft and still maintain the initial tone.
Just wanted to leave my replies to the challenge here since the formatting is cleaner.
Lonesome DoveW
Creature - Bird {R}
Flying
A deck can have only one card named ~.
2/2
Issues: too high variance / too splashy a clause to use here / cheating?
Duck DynastyW
Creature - Bird {U}
Flying
~ can't attack or block alone.
When ~ enters the battlefield, you may search your library for up to three cards named ~, reveal them, put them into your hand, then shuffle your library.
1/1
Issues: needed in multiples so not good for rare, but probably too wordy / complex for common
Was there something I didn't see about the challenge? The only problem with the first is that it should say "legendary" instead of writing it out. The question is purely whether it's too good to print ever, which I'm not sure I can answer (although obviously Isamaru was fine!).
The other one is literally the common Squadron Hawk made worse, so I can't see what concerns you have.
As I've started continued designing custom cards I've noticed that the learning curve and barrier of entry to the community is really steep. Designing magic cards is really hard yet we get a constant influx of new faces that want to showoff their ideas. However far too often I see them getting dissuaded or finding it difficult to build up the knowledge base required to improve the quality of their work. Things like Bravelion's series of articles I think are good resources for these moderate level designers to improve.
But I still feel that we can do more to get more players involved so I'm starting a bi-weekly series of articles to act as stepping stones to mtg players who know nothing about custom card creation to act as a definitive guide on how to get started.
As always I'd love feedback (and participation if you like), keeping in mind this is supposed to be a low level tutorial to help get people started.
Also if anyone else has ideas on how we can make the community more accessible I'd love to hear them.
I've thought many of the same things myself. I've got a lot of suggestions/ideas to throw your way. I don't have the time/focus to type them all out that the moment (as I am actually chatting with you and some of our colleagues on Mibbit as I type this ), but I will certainly give you a detailed outline of my ideas in the very near future.
As I've started continued designing custom cards I've noticed that the learning curve and barrier of entry to the community is really steep. Designing magic cards is really hard yet we get a constant influx of new faces that want to showoff their ideas. However far too often I see them getting dissuaded or finding it difficult to build up the knowledge base required to improve the quality of their work. Things like Bravelion's series of articles I think are good resources for these moderate level designers to improve.
But I still feel that we can do more to get more players involved so I'm starting a bi-weekly series of articles to act as stepping stones to mtg players who know nothing about custom card creation to act as a definitive guide on how to get started.
As always I'd love feedback (and participation if you like), keeping in mind this is supposed to be a low level tutorial to help get people started.
Also if anyone else has ideas on how we can make the community more accessible I'd love to hear them.
I've thought many of the same things myself. I've got a lot of suggestions/ideas to throw your way. I don't have the time/focus to type them all out that the moment (as I am actually chatting with you and some of our colleagues on Mibbit as I type this ), but I will certainly give you a detailed outline of my ideas in the very near future.
O. K. I've finally gotten the time to get back to this. What I was originally planning to do was to write one of the those massive and detailed walls of text that I like making so much, but it occurred to me that it probably would be better for everyone involved (including me) if I just concisely summarized what I was thinking. So, here goes:
(Sorry if this is a bit hard on the eyes. Formatting tags (like bold text and such) don't seem to be working for me right now. I tried to do my best to work around that and I think I mostly succeeded.)
Problem that We Are Trying to Solve- The steep learning curve faced by new and aspiring CC designers
Proposed Solution- Rather than just providing informational resources (guides, primers, podcasts, etc.), we should also focus our efforts on providing teaching tools and software that allow new designers to as quickly and easily as possible absorb and assimilate pre-existing resources, while at the same time providing a connected conceptual framework for those resources and creating additional/missing informational resources as needed.
Example Resources- "Creative Platforms" (CP's)- Creative concepts such as world or set descriptions that can easily be expanded upon, riffed on, or used a a basis for different projects. Existing examples that I believe meet this description are "Remastered" Sets ([TPR]/[MQR]) and [M250].
My Same Proposed Solution, filtered through some widely accepted and useful conceptual frameworks and lenses- Our design goal (see RM, Episode 1) should be to make the MTGS Community an "Open Source Learning Resource" that allows for and facilitates "Multi-Level Learning" (MLL) of MTGS custom card design as well as game design in general. (I'm defining an MLL system as one where the instructors, as a natural part of the teaching process, not only teach students skills, they also teach them how to teach other students those same skills. Martial Arts Instruction is very much an MLL system. This concept borrows it's name/some of it's framework from Multi-Level Marketing.)
***
What I want my role in this process to be: I firmly believe the gears have been in motion towards making this happen for a while now. (And I think we mainly have Reuben and Dan to thank for that, since Remaking Magic seems to be what got the ball rolling.) I think what I described above would have eventually happened anyway, even if I had not made this post. I do expect and hope that this post will vastly accelerate the process in a positive way, as well as making it a lot easier. That said, I'll try to keep an eye on it and post CP's and other ideas that I think are useful toward this when I have time to do so.
***
How I came up with all of this- I'm a reasonably intelligent and creative person with multi-year backgrounds in martial arts instruction, sales, game design, and custom card creation. I'd also consider myself an autodidactic (self-taught learner) and student of learning processes, such as the types of things Tim Ferriss does. Basically, I think I am a discover of a simplified learning progress that amalgamates a lot of frameworks and processes form the things I just mentioned. Since I believe this process is pre-dated my existence and is effectively a public good (a non-excludable public resource, such as clean air or a public road), I will be sharing more details regarding it recently on either a free or inexpensive basis in the near future, probably through podcasts and other media.
***
"I think this all sounds really exciting! How can I learn more?"- Just get in touch with me and I'll be happy to discuss it with you. The best way to do that right now would be by replying to this post (as long as your post relates to the main thread topic) or by PM'ing me here). Please keep your questions and feedback as concise as possible, as that's the best way to ensure a quick and comprehensive response from me.
***
Thank you all very much for reading this. I expect and hope this will really be useful to all of us. This really is a great community to be a part of and that's because of the all the hard work you guys put in. As always, your comments are much appreciated.
But I still feel that we can do more to get more players involved so I'm starting a bi-weekly series of articles to act as stepping stones to mtg players who know nothing about custom card creation to act as a definitive guide on how to get started.
The first article in this series if called:
Custom Card Creation: An introduction
http://thegraymerchants.com/?p=394
As always I'd love feedback (and participation if you like), keeping in mind this is supposed to be a low level tutorial to help get people started.
Also if anyone else has ideas on how we can make the community more accessible I'd love to hear them.
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
Custom card creation is not about "creating cards that obey pre-existing standards (and therefore could be printed today)", it's about "creating cards whose standards are derived from pre-existing standards that fit some sort of overarching idea that you come up with". Relying on MaRo's words too much shifts the focus of custom card creation too much toward the first and not enough toward the second.
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format
Minimum deck size: 60
Maximum number of identical cards: 4
Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
For the purposes of this article I'd have to disagree.
This is supposed to introduce people who have no custom card creation experience to what we do and the resources and communities that they can use.
They need a foundation to use as a starting point. Considering that this article is aimed at magic players, having the well defined conventions that Wotc R&D uses act as that baseline is a good choice.
This also allows for shared expectations and knowledge base when receiving feedback about their designs.
As they design they will naturally want to push limits to do their own thing but it isn't something we should be encouraging if they have no previous experience.
Basically I'm in no way saying that there isn't alternative "standards" as you put it but that they are not a good fit for introducing the newest members of the community if they have no previous design experience.
That was a style choice of using a more conversational and casual tone as I kinda walk you through the process.
Was it too distracting? Would you prefer the drier more textbook approach? This kind of feedback is good.
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
Conversational tone is important here for two reasons. First, you're trying to make the article and subject feel approachable. A formal tone subverts that element of your goal. Second, it just reads better. Conversational tone has fewer natural stopping points. It gives you more control over the flow, which also allows players to see how ideas connect more easily.
Usually this ends up in a lot of "So" and "Now" and, "However" starting points on the first draft.
However,You don't need to keep them. It will often read cleaner once you remove those in the second draft and still maintain the initial tone.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
Was there something I didn't see about the challenge? The only problem with the first is that it should say "legendary" instead of writing it out. The question is purely whether it's too good to print ever, which I'm not sure I can answer (although obviously Isamaru was fine!).
The other one is literally the common Squadron Hawk made worse, so I can't see what concerns you have.
A short "dictionary" of basic design terminology, such as:
Narrow
Broad
Splashy
Linear
Archetype
Theme
Tall
Wide
I've thought many of the same things myself. I've got a lot of suggestions/ideas to throw your way. I don't have the time/focus to type them all out that the moment (as I am actually chatting with you and some of our colleagues on Mibbit as I type this ), but I will certainly give you a detailed outline of my ideas in the very near future.
O. K. I've finally gotten the time to get back to this. What I was originally planning to do was to write one of the those massive and detailed walls of text that I like making so much, but it occurred to me that it probably would be better for everyone involved (including me) if I just concisely summarized what I was thinking. So, here goes:
(Sorry if this is a bit hard on the eyes. Formatting tags (like bold text and such) don't seem to be working for me right now. I tried to do my best to work around that and I think I mostly succeeded.)
Problem that We Are Trying to Solve- The steep learning curve faced by new and aspiring CC designers
Proposed Solution- Rather than just providing informational resources (guides, primers, podcasts, etc.), we should also focus our efforts on providing teaching tools and software that allow new designers to as quickly and easily as possible absorb and assimilate pre-existing resources, while at the same time providing a connected conceptual framework for those resources and creating additional/missing informational resources as needed.
Example Resources- "Creative Platforms" (CP's)- Creative concepts such as world or set descriptions that can easily be expanded upon, riffed on, or used a a basis for different projects. Existing examples that I believe meet this description are "Remastered" Sets ([TPR]/[MQR]) and [M250].
My Same Proposed Solution, filtered through some widely accepted and useful conceptual frameworks and lenses- Our design goal (see RM, Episode 1) should be to make the MTGS Community an "Open Source Learning Resource" that allows for and facilitates "Multi-Level Learning" (MLL) of MTGS custom card design as well as game design in general. (I'm defining an MLL system as one where the instructors, as a natural part of the teaching process, not only teach students skills, they also teach them how to teach other students those same skills. Martial Arts Instruction is very much an MLL system. This concept borrows it's name/some of it's framework from Multi-Level Marketing.)
***
What I want my role in this process to be: I firmly believe the gears have been in motion towards making this happen for a while now. (And I think we mainly have Reuben and Dan to thank for that, since Remaking Magic seems to be what got the ball rolling.) I think what I described above would have eventually happened anyway, even if I had not made this post. I do expect and hope that this post will vastly accelerate the process in a positive way, as well as making it a lot easier. That said, I'll try to keep an eye on it and post CP's and other ideas that I think are useful toward this when I have time to do so.
***
How I came up with all of this- I'm a reasonably intelligent and creative person with multi-year backgrounds in martial arts instruction, sales, game design, and custom card creation. I'd also consider myself an autodidactic (self-taught learner) and student of learning processes, such as the types of things Tim Ferriss does. Basically, I think I am a discover of a simplified learning progress that amalgamates a lot of frameworks and processes form the things I just mentioned. Since I believe this process is pre-dated my existence and is effectively a public good (a non-excludable public resource, such as clean air or a public road), I will be sharing more details regarding it recently on either a free or inexpensive basis in the near future, probably through podcasts and other media.
***
"I think this all sounds really exciting! How can I learn more?"- Just get in touch with me and I'll be happy to discuss it with you. The best way to do that right now would be by replying to this post (as long as your post relates to the main thread topic) or by PM'ing me here). Please keep your questions and feedback as concise as possible, as that's the best way to ensure a quick and comprehensive response from me.
***
Thank you all very much for reading this. I expect and hope this will really be useful to all of us. This really is a great community to be a part of and that's because of the all the hard work you guys put in. As always, your comments are much appreciated.
Sincerely,
Astrolabe