So I've noticed there's a lot of old mechanics that seem simple enough for people to understand as if they were Evergreen mechanics. Something like Frenzy, for example Frenzy Sliver seems like it could easily be brought back as a Evergreen keyword. I'd drop the variable number and keep it a standard +1/+0 bonus to simply it.
Anyhow, my question is how many of these "deciduous" mechanics could I incorporate into a set without overdoing it on top of other mechanics? Surely these don't have the complexity to impact the set in a negative way?
The reason I ask is because I'd like to have an ability for each tribe that's a returning old, simple mechanic.
So I've noticed there's a lot of old mechanics that seem simple enough for people to understand as if they were Evergreen mechanics. Something like Frenzy, for example Frenzy Sliver seems like it could easily be brought back as a Evergreen keyword. I'd drop the variable number and keep it a standard +1/+0 bonus to simply it.
Anyhow, my question is how many of these "deciduous" mechanics could I incorporate into a set without overdoing it on top of other mechanics? Surely these don't have the complexity to impact the set in a negative way?
The reason I ask is because I'd like to have an ability for each tribe that's a returning old, simple mechanic.
The answer depends on what exactly you are doing. But before I go into the questin you asked, I want to point out that the term "deciduous" does not exactly mean "returning old mechanic". "Deciduous" refers specifically to mechanics that you expect to return to often, but won't generally be expected to be in a set at least once or twice like an evergreen mechanic. The difference is best illustrated with the returning mechanic bloodthirst in Magic 2012 or recently madness in Shadows over Innistrad - the mechanics are old and returning, but their inclusion in those sets does not mean they are part of the general toolbox yet like hybrid mana or protection. There is obviously no hard line as scry went from being an "old returning mechanic" to evergreen quite quickly, but it's worth pointing out since the answer how many of each are appropriate can differ based on what kind of old mechanics you return.
In general there is less an upper limit on "old returning mechanics" than there is an upper limit on complexity - and each mechanic including old ones will add to the complexity. At the same time you will want to not rely on old mechanics entirely - players have come to expect new mechanics. In general truly "deciduous" mechanics can be used in any set if they are useful - they should have little impact on the general complexity, but likely are not the kind of mechanics that would shape the identity of a tribe like you intend.
You usually would not want more than one or two old mechanics in the precious space of "named mechanics" since this is where you introduce your new keywords and ability words. If half of your named mechanics are old mechanics you risk the impression of bringing not enough new stuff to the table.
Now, this is a general rule and one place where I see room for exceptions are "concept theme", where returning multiple old mechanics is part of the sets structure. In canon Magic we have seen this in Time Spiral-block, I myself work on something like this with for my "Old Ravnica" custom set - in which each Ravnican guild uses a mechanic printed before Ravnica: City of Guilds -, and if you strictly adhere to a rule like you are suggesting for your set, that sounds to me like a "concept theme" as well that encourages being more loose with the numbers.
With that in mind you should not feel like limiting yourself on that front. While e. g. Shadows over Innistrad has officially three new mechanics (delirium, investigate, skulk) and two returning mechanics (DFC/transform, madness), it also has unannounced callbacks to morbid, flashback, the slith/vampire mechanic of original Innistrad and features a Curse; further it has five tribal themes (though two of them overlap with the named mechanics mentioned). In a way using an old returning named mechanic can be preferable to using an unnamed mechanic to tie your tribe together - as long as the mechanics and theme fit well together to create a distinct feel for the tribe.
I'd say there is nothing speaking against e. g. four to six tribes with a distinct old returning mechanic each supported by one or two new mechanics - as long as you keep overall complexity in mind (and you pointing out "a returning old, simple mechanic" for each tribe makes me think you have that covered. I would probably be worried if you would have to correct up the total number of named mechanics by too much, but custom card sets can carry more of them than canon releases.
As a closing note I want to point out that frenzy may be simple, but is not a very good mechanic when it comes to design space and ease of development. I suspect though that you go for "small" mechanics that don't need much design space for your returning choices, so you migt be fine there, too.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Planar Chaos was not a mistake neither was it random. You might want to look at it again.
[thread=239793][Game] Level Up - Creature[/thread]
Anyhow, my question is how many of these "deciduous" mechanics could I incorporate into a set without overdoing it on top of other mechanics? Surely these don't have the complexity to impact the set in a negative way?
The reason I ask is because I'd like to have an ability for each tribe that's a returning old, simple mechanic.
Dunes of Zairo
SHANDALAR
Innistrad - The Darkest Night
~THE RAVNICAN CONSORTIUM~
A Community Set
Commander: Allies & Adversaries
The answer depends on what exactly you are doing. But before I go into the questin you asked, I want to point out that the term "deciduous" does not exactly mean "returning old mechanic". "Deciduous" refers specifically to mechanics that you expect to return to often, but won't generally be expected to be in a set at least once or twice like an evergreen mechanic. The difference is best illustrated with the returning mechanic bloodthirst in Magic 2012 or recently madness in Shadows over Innistrad - the mechanics are old and returning, but their inclusion in those sets does not mean they are part of the general toolbox yet like hybrid mana or protection. There is obviously no hard line as scry went from being an "old returning mechanic" to evergreen quite quickly, but it's worth pointing out since the answer how many of each are appropriate can differ based on what kind of old mechanics you return.
In general there is less an upper limit on "old returning mechanics" than there is an upper limit on complexity - and each mechanic including old ones will add to the complexity. At the same time you will want to not rely on old mechanics entirely - players have come to expect new mechanics. In general truly "deciduous" mechanics can be used in any set if they are useful - they should have little impact on the general complexity, but likely are not the kind of mechanics that would shape the identity of a tribe like you intend.
You usually would not want more than one or two old mechanics in the precious space of "named mechanics" since this is where you introduce your new keywords and ability words. If half of your named mechanics are old mechanics you risk the impression of bringing not enough new stuff to the table.
Now, this is a general rule and one place where I see room for exceptions are "concept theme", where returning multiple old mechanics is part of the sets structure. In canon Magic we have seen this in Time Spiral-block, I myself work on something like this with for my "Old Ravnica" custom set - in which each Ravnican guild uses a mechanic printed before Ravnica: City of Guilds -, and if you strictly adhere to a rule like you are suggesting for your set, that sounds to me like a "concept theme" as well that encourages being more loose with the numbers.
With that in mind you should not feel like limiting yourself on that front. While e. g. Shadows over Innistrad has officially three new mechanics (delirium, investigate, skulk) and two returning mechanics (DFC/transform, madness), it also has unannounced callbacks to morbid, flashback, the slith/vampire mechanic of original Innistrad and features a Curse; further it has five tribal themes (though two of them overlap with the named mechanics mentioned). In a way using an old returning named mechanic can be preferable to using an unnamed mechanic to tie your tribe together - as long as the mechanics and theme fit well together to create a distinct feel for the tribe.
I'd say there is nothing speaking against e. g. four to six tribes with a distinct old returning mechanic each supported by one or two new mechanics - as long as you keep overall complexity in mind (and you pointing out "a returning old, simple mechanic" for each tribe makes me think you have that covered. I would probably be worried if you would have to correct up the total number of named mechanics by too much, but custom card sets can carry more of them than canon releases.
As a closing note I want to point out that frenzy may be simple, but is not a very good mechanic when it comes to design space and ease of development. I suspect though that you go for "small" mechanics that don't need much design space for your returning choices, so you migt be fine there, too.
Finally a good white villain quote: "So, do I ever re-evaluate my life choices? Never, because I know what I'm doing is a righteous cause."
Factions: Sleeping
Remnants: Valheim
Legendary Journey: Heroes & Planeswalkers
Saga: Shards of Rabiah
Legends: The Elder Dragons
Read up on Red Flags & NWO