Okay, I think I've come up with the cleanest way to do Contraptions. Here goes:
"T: This creature assembles a contraption. (Sacrifice two or more artifacts. If you do, create a colorless Contraption artifact token.)"
Wait, but there's nothing here about what Contraptions are? What do they do?
Well, that is determined by the Rigger that assembles them. Let me explain.
Say you have a Rigger that specializes in making contraptions that are dangerous or harmful. That card will look something like:
"Reckless Rigger2R
Creature - Goblin Rigger
Haste T: ~ assembles a Contraption.
Whenever ~ assembles a Contraption, it deals X damage to target creature, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble that Contraption.
2/2"
So that's pretty neat, but that ability could be on any artifact-producing ability. How about something more in-depth?
How about an Rigger that wants to make something a bit more interesting?
"Assembly Automator1U
Creature - Vedalken Rigger 1, T: ~ assembles a Contraption.
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "T: Add X colorless mana to your mana pool, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption."
1/3"
So let's break down what goes into this mechanic, starting from the card that started it all: Steamflogger Boss.
Most of that card doesn't matter much. What we really care about is the following ability:
"If a Rigger you control would assemble a Contraption, it assembles two Contraptions instead."
This tells us everything that "assemble" needs.
1. "Assemble" is an action performed by a creature, like "fight." This needs to be mechanically relevant, otherwise it simply makes more sense to have the player do the assembling.
2. "Assemble" is an action that is in some way directed towards a Contraption, a type of artifact. Here, we're still in line with "fight" technology ("This creature fights target creature.")
3. "Assemble," specifically "assembling a Contraption" is an action that can be doubled. It's still technically possible with "fight," but it isn't nearly as clean in its execution. This is where "assemble" and "fight" need to diverge in how they work.
4. Contraption is a new type of artifact. This needs to be mechanically relevant.
5. The flavor implies putting things together. This is the most challenging aspect of making the mechanic work.
Okay, so how does that inform my execution? I'll explain:
1. The creatures do the assembling. This is the core of the ability, as it opens up space for "assemble" to work uniquely to any other token-producing ability. Because the creature assembles the Contraption, that creature defines what that Contraption does. This does lead to memory issues, but I'll get to why that won't be as big of a problem as one may think or how we can address that.
2. I was thinking about how having assemble would interact with Contraptions. Are Contraptions cards that are played somehow through the "assemble" ability? If so, how does Steamflogger Boss double that? Are they like meld cards? Does that mean you need two whole pairs of artifacts with the required ability for Steamflogger Boss to even be relevant? All of these questions lead to one conclusion: This is way too many hoops to jump through. It will end up being more than just an A+B mechanic, but something more like an A+B+C+D-and-so-on mechanic, because there are just so many factors needed to make it work. I decided that it needs to be simpler, and that means just making tokens. But how do we differentiate "assemble" from every other token-making mechanic. I decided to come back to this after working out how the tokens will be made and work.
3. "Assemble" needs to be something you can double. Now that we know it will be tokens, this works fine.
4. Contraption is a unique type of artifact. This is where point 1 comes back in. The mechanical identity of a token needs to be consistent. Take Clues for example. They all have "T, Sacrifice: draw a card." The issue is that, flavorfully, Contraptions don't imply anything uniform. In fact, it implies the opposite. Contraptions come off as make-shift machines, each with a unique purpose and function. So how do we represent that on a token? Well, here, Contraptions don't have any inherant abilities. The mechanical identity of Contraptions is that they do what their Rigger designed them to do. Basically, it's the same sort of mechanical identity as Deserts, and pretty similar to the Golem Splicers from Scars of Mirrodin. The main difference here is that Contraptions are noncreature tokens with unique abilities based on the artifacts used to assemble them.
5. Contraptions are the sum of their parts. This is what ties everything together. The Riggers look at what was sacrificed to assemble the Contraptions to determine what the Contraptios do.
So that's what lead me to this final design. Now lets look at the concerns:
1. Memory issues. Whenever a mechanic revolves around creating unique tokens, there are memory issues, especially when those tokens have the same name or origionate from the same mechanic. Embalm works around this by forcing you to exile the creature that gives it its identity, letting you use the creature card to track what the token is. I'm considering exiling the artifacts rather than sacrificing them for this very reason, but I also want a lot of ways to put artifacts into the graveyard for whatever set this goes into. There are also a few other things that can be done to keep track of the abilities. Imagine pop-out markers like the ones in Amonkhet, except woth the name of the Rigger that made the token. That way the player knows what determines the abilities. Conspiracy has also had players use notes to keep track of certain things, and that's worked out fairly well. The point is, we have options here.
2. Design space. Let's be honest. It's very shallow with this mechanic. But if this is the mest we can get to finally execute Contraptions, I think we can squeeze enough designs out for one set. If necessary, having this mechanic only show up at uncommon to reduce the number of necessary designs is something I would be willing to do. That also helps with the memory issues, as the fewer different riggers are in your deck, the less you have to keep track of.
3. Support. This set would need some really heavy artifact support to create the sheer quantity of artifacts needed to make this mechanic relevant. It's not impossible, as Kaladesh/Aether Revolt have accomplished exactly this. It's just that Contraptions would be the central pillar that the entire set is built around because of how demanding it is.
4. It's complex. Yup. More complex things have happened though.
Anyway, what do you guys think? Have I done it? how can this be better?
This is frighteningly complex, maybe not too complex. But it is the best attempt at contraptions I've seen here. It is relevant with Steamflogger Boss without requiring far more pieces than a player should be expected to assemble, and honestly that's all anyone can hope for with this mechanic. I like that previously assembled contraptions can be scrapped for new ones, this is very useful for any of your designs that don't actual give an ability to the contraption.
It should definitely be sacrifice rather than exile. This is for several reasons. First you aren't using the whole original artifact so you should be able to get it back with the help of other cards. Second Embalm exiles so you can use the exiled card as the token, this doesn't help with Contraptions. Third on a world with contraptions salvaging artifacts should be a major theme so putting them into the graveyard would play to that theme.
Design space shouldn't be a issue, not because you could find more but because you don't need more. This mechanic needs its one day in the sun and then never be spoken of again.
I'm not 100% sure that's how the ability is supposed to be worded but it seems functional at first glance so it should be enough.
So here's a list of potential effects I've come up with using this mechanic so far. Obviously there will usually be mana costs associated with assembling the Contraptions and activating their abilities, and I tried to weigh them most heavily into red/blue effects, with every other color getting a bit of love.
Common
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: This artifact deals X damage to target creature, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Scry X, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Creatures with power X or less can't block this turn, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Return target card with converted mana cost X or less from your graveyard to your hand, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Target creature gets +X/+X until end of turn, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Exile up to X target cards from your graveyards and you gain X life, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Put a +1/+1 counter on each of up to X target creatures, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Target creature gets -X/-0 until end of turn, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Uncommon
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "T: Add X colorless mana to your mana pool, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Return target nonland permanent with converted mana cost X or less to its owner's hand, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Counter target spell unless its controller pays X, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ is an Equipment in addition to its other types and has "Equipped creature gets +X/+X, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption," and equip 1.
Each Contraption assembled by ~ is an X/X creature in addition to its other types, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble that Contraption.
Rare
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has all activated abilities of artifacts sacrificed to assemble that Contraption.
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Draw X cards, where X is the total converted mana cost of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption."
Whenever a creature you control assembles a Contraption, you may have that Contraption enter the battlefield as a copy of an artifact sacrificed to assemble that Contraption, except it's a Contraption in addition to its other types.
For each Contraption you control, you may tap that Contraption rather than pay the cost to activate abilities of that Contraption.
Whenever you sacrifice a nontoken artifact or a Contraption, create a colorless Scrap artifact token with "Sactifice this artifact: Add C to your mana pool."
Pros: creating a token works well with a double effect.
Cons:
1. no substantive interaction with prior cards
2. At least the present version is confusing, as all contraptions have the same name, but different text.
(Fix by making all contraption riggers make unique contraption tokens).
3. That's a lot of memory issues (fixed by having unique tokens).
4. Sac 2 or more has to go; make each have a different cost. I.e., "[cost]: assemble a contraption artifact token named "name" with "contraption text". Mind you, this is just create. But yours is just create with an arbitrary cost tacked on.
5. Flavor fail - I cobble a black lotus and bonesplitter to get... whatever my rigger's specialization is? Boring. I cobble 2 contraptions into a contraption and it does less than the previous versions?
Final thought - this effect is doubleable like all token creation effects. But it's not *new*. I proposed assembling a contraption was cobbling a vehicle and equipment to create a contraption artifact creature. It does something *new*. It works with existing cards. It creates new design space.
This doesn't create any new design space. I think we all have ugly baby syndrome with our assemble concepts. So we have to judge it by objective means. Fun? New? Opens design space? Opens deck archetypes?
Watch wolf' designs are FUN! But they're not new, and the contraption deck runs artifacts that cantrip and nothing else. Their card text is irrelevant to the assembly. Final worry - odd cost aside, these create repetitive game play. Your token generators assemble the same thing time and again. They're odd spellshapers. I love spellshapers. But just make a black lotus spellshaper that costs like 3GG and be done with it. No assembly required.
Pros: creating a token works well with a double effect.
Cons:
1. no substantive interaction with prior cards
2. At least the present version is confusing, as all contraptions have the same name, but different text.
(Fix by making all contraption riggers make unique contraption tokens).
3. That's a lot of memory issues (fixed by having unique tokens).
4. Sac 2 or more has to go; make each have a different cost. I.e., "[cost]: assemble a contraption artifact token named "name" with "contraption text". Mind you, this is just create. But yours is just create with an arbitrary cost tacked on.
5. Flavor fail - I cobble a black lotus and bonesplitter to get... whatever my rigger's specialization is? Boring. I cobble 2 contraptions into a contraption and it does less than the previous versions?
Final thought - this effect is doubleable like all token creation effects. But it's not *new*. I proposed assembling a contraption was cobbling a vehicle and equipment to create a contraption artifact creature. It does something *new*. It works with existing cards. It creates new design space.
This doesn't create any new design space. I think we all have ugly baby syndrome with our assemble concepts. So we have to judge it by objective means. Fun? New? Opens design space? Opens deck archetypes?
Watch wolf' designs are FUN! But they're not new, and the contraption deck runs artifacts that cantrip and nothing else. Their card text is irrelevant to the assembly. Final worry - odd cost aside, these create repetitive game play. Your token generators assemble the same thing time and again. They're odd spellshapers. I love spellshapers. But just make a black lotus spellshaper that costs like 3GG and be done with it. No assembly required.
I see your concerns, but there are a few points I disagree with. The first is that it my version of "assemble" is just "create" with a cost tacked onto it. There is actually a bit more to it than that. "Assemble" allows you to create a token, but trace that token's origin to the Rigger (or creature) that assembled it.
The second is that it's not "new." Sure there are plenty of effects that make tokens, even ones with unique effects, but there are no cards that determine the effects of the tokens this way.
Look, I see the problems with this mechanic the same as you, but the truth is that Steamflogger Boss backs us into a corner. It has some mechanical requirements that define what it does in the game AND it sets flavor expectations that are nearly impossible to meet together.
I'd be happy to hear your suggestions as to how it could be done better.
I always the main issue with Steamflogger is that "Assemble" is not a magic word and it means nothing.
Substituting it for token making feels like a cop out to me.
I always pictured Assemble being part of a building process.
for example the set would need cards that assemble some kind of resource - perhaps in the form of non-creature artifact tokens, something like;
Scrap ScavengeR
Sorcery
<> deals 1 damage to target creature.
Recycle three times. (To Recycle, create a colorless Scrap artifact token with "1,Sacrifice this artifact: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool.")
and then the card we would want is:
Forge SupervisorRR
Creature - Goblin Rigger T: Assemble (to Assemble, Sacrifice 2 artifacts named Scrap and create a colorless Contraption artifact token with "At the beginning of the combat phase on any players turn you may sacrifice this permanent to give target creature you control your choice of Flying, First Strike, Trample, Deathtouch or Haste until end of turn."
1/1
As the definition of Contraption explains - overly complicated machine.
So then a spell like Junk Wave3BB
Sorcery
As an additional cost to cast Junk Wave, sacrifice any number of artifacts.
Creatures get +X/-X until end of turn where X is the number of artifacts you sacrificed as you cast Junk Wave.
and critters like
Junk Feeder1G
Creature - Badger
Whenever a player sacrifice an Artifact, Junk Feeder gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
2/2
And I picture the plane being something like the world Wall-E lives on.
I agree tokens, although easily doubled, aren't the way to go.
And red should be # 1 at contraptions.
But btg, contraptions need to be assembled. Flip cards aren't that.
For all intents and purposes, we all know what a contraption has to do. It needs to out two or more artifacts together to create a new artifact - contraption. This can be sac to create a combined contraption token. But, that's putting eggs into one basket. It can be attaching one to the other, with the base gaining the contraption subtype. But which is is base seems artbitrary if any 2 can be attached.
Thus, my version takes vehicles and equipment - 2 artifact types tat work poorly together - and assembles them into a contraption (artifact type) artifact creature. I.e. A vehicle animated as long as it's equipped. It turns antisynergy into synergy. But most of all... pretty much any vehicle can benefit from pretty much any equipment. Both cards matter - the text on them matters - and it lets you revisit old cards to discover something new.
Getting contraptions to work isn't about opening new design space, and if that's your goal you probably want something completely different. The one and only point of contractions is to work well with steamflogger boss. If you miss this goal but hit a bunch of other goals you assigned yourself then you didn't solve contraptions, though you may have discovered a completely different interesting mechanic.
That's wrong. The entire reason Steamlogger Boss got so much attention despite being a throw-away pseudo-joke card was because it promised new design space for red.
This does not fit with my own experience. The color of the card for example is in no way related to my interest - and previous threads on the topic by other custom card creators don't seem to have taken special care to expand red's design space (e. g. many of them use tokens). Do you have data to support this claim in a general sense or are you just projecting your own ideas?
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]
Getting contraptions to work isn't about opening new design space, and if that's your goal you probably want something completely different. The one and only point of contractions is to work well with steamflogger boss. If you miss this goal but hit a bunch of other goals you assigned yourself then you didn't solve contraptions, though you may have discovered a completely different interesting mechanic.
That's wrong. The entire reason Steamlogger Boss got so much attention despite being a throw-away pseudo-joke card was because it promised new design space for red.
This is literally the first time I've ever heard of contraptions being linked to an expansion of red's design space. In fact this is the only time I've ever seen it linked directly to red.
Getting contraptions to work isn't about opening new design space, and if that's your goal you probably want something completely different. The one and only point of contractions is to work well with steamflogger boss. If you miss this goal but hit a bunch of other goals you assigned yourself then you didn't solve contraptions, though you may have discovered a completely different interesting mechanic.
That's wrong. The entire reason Steamlogger Boss got so much attention despite being a throw-away pseudo-joke card was because it promised new design space for red.
This is literally the first time I've ever heard of contraptions being linked to an expansion of red's design space. In fact this is the only time I've ever seen it linked directly to red.
You must not visit many contraptions threads.
No I don't look at a lot of contraption threads, I have seen enough to say that if there is some secret unspoken understanding that people trying to solve contraptions are trying to make a permanent expansion to reds space they are hiding it very well. Though its far more likely you are projecting this desire.
Of 12 threads pulled up in a simple search on this forum about contraptions six of them include red cards, none mention expanding red design space(not even your own). So it seems there 'might' be a minority out that that sees contraptions as a way to expand red's design space but with the only card caring about contraptions being a red goblin, if you're making contraptions they would probably involve red riggers. So that makes it seem less likely that those who had red cards in their contraption designs were intending to expand reds space.
It's a fallacy to think that being clever or complex will open new or widen design space. In fact, the opposite tends to hold true: the simpler the design, the more variations can be performed on that design. Look at the designs that are reused over and over: multicolor, cycling, kicker.
So the best way to make assemble viable is to keep it as simple as possible so that one can impose variations and situations on top of it naturally.
So assemble simply means "Create a colorless artifact token of some type." From Steamflogger Boss, we know that one of those artifact types that can be assembled is Contraption.
So let's define what a Contraption is that befits red:
Contraption is colorless artifact token that has "{2}, Sacrifice this artifact: It deals 1 damage to target creature or player."
Yeah no brainer, right? Too simple? The design space lies on the environment. so let's make some Goblin Riggers to play with Steamflogger Boss.
Goblin Alchemist
T, Discard a card: ~ assembles a Contraption.
Goblin Recycler
T, Exile an artifact card from any graveyard: ~ assembles a Contraption.
Goblin Engineer
R, T, Sacrifice an artifact: ~ assembles a Contraption.
RRR, T, Sacrifice three Contraptions: ~ deals 5 damage to target creature or player.
Want something fancier?
Goblin Bomber
RR, T, Sacrifice ~: Exile the top card of your library. ~ assembles X contraptions, where X is the converted mana cost of the exiled card.
Big Bang
Destroy all creatures and artifacts. ~ deals X damage to target player, where X is the number of artifacts destroyed this way.
How about Non-red assemblers:
Vampire Soul Collector
Whenever a creature controlled by an opponent dies, ~ assembles a Contraption.
Why stop there? Can we assemble more than Contraptions?
Assemble a Clue.
Assemble a Gold.
Assemble an Elixir.
Assemble a Weapon.
Some of these artifact types haven't been invented in this game. The last one looks mighty interesting, though:
Goblin Weaponsmith
When ~ enters the battlefield, it assembles a Weapon and equips it.
Hey is that new design space for red that we stumbled on? Albeit the details need to be ironed out. It might even deserve its own keyword. Without even over-complicating things. Just like cycling and kicker, we used the simplest idea to expand into new design space.
"Assemble" being synonymous with "put a token onto the battlefield" has had a long tradition, but I think with "create" and "investigate" one has to take into consideration how redundant your new term can be. Your own keyword example shows that you did not choose to make Weapon a keyword, but a name. Hence the different abilities and tzheir reading and underlying rules are inconsistent with each other.
That said I have no problem with "assemble" being just another specialized version of "create" similar to "investigate". I just am not that enamored with Contraptions being direct damage Clues.
Also you will note that the ability of the Clue token is inherent to the action "investigate" and not inherent to the action "create" nor the subtype "Clue". Assemble would take on quiet a load of different meanings depending on the parameter alone. That way the one word "assemble" would hide a lot of different abilities. I think it's interesting for CCC but seems like an unlikely solution for canon Magicat this point of time.
My main concerns with the OP suggestion are (a) turning two artifacts into one artifact token smells like extremely unappealing card disadvantage - and to such a high degree that SFB itself wouldn't even be useful unless you can consistently guarantee having four or more artifacts (excluding those Contraptions that would be redundant with the ones you would assemble); and (b) the OP suggests that the abilities of the Contraptions are tied to the pairing of Rigger and Contraption and worded in such a way that the ability disappears entirely when the Rigger is gone.
Preferable modes include making abilities inherent to the token ("Contraptions assembled by ~ are created with *foo*.") or abilities that are granted to all Contraptions disregarding their source ("Contraptions you control have *foo*."). OP's version has the worst of both worlds.
If the first option is chosen I would probably still prefer (in reference to problem (a)) if "assemble" meant "Sacrifice an artifact. If you do, create a Contraption token." to avoid card advantage. Here you could convert one Contraption into another to adapt to situations.
[/stream of consciousness]
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]
Pasting 2 things together to form a new, super artifact is a cool concept. Tokens... not so much.
You want your contraption to "survive" (or at least part of it), even if one of it's parts are destroyed.
You want to be able to assemble ever increasing bizarre and complex contraptions that have neat synergies.
And most of all, you want this to feel red. I like the idea of red experimenting by putting things together that don't belong.
Best thing about atog's design is that you can use existing cards to assemble a new contraption. You cannot ignore that feeling of digging through your old cards to give them new life.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
"T: This creature assembles a contraption. (Sacrifice two or more artifacts. If you do, create a colorless Contraption artifact token.)"
Wait, but there's nothing here about what Contraptions are? What do they do?
Well, that is determined by the Rigger that assembles them. Let me explain.
Say you have a Rigger that specializes in making contraptions that are dangerous or harmful. That card will look something like:
"Reckless Rigger 2R
Creature - Goblin Rigger
Haste
T: ~ assembles a Contraption.
Whenever ~ assembles a Contraption, it deals X damage to target creature, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble that Contraption.
2/2"
So that's pretty neat, but that ability could be on any artifact-producing ability. How about something more in-depth?
How about an Rigger that wants to make something a bit more interesting?
"Assembly Automator 1U
Creature - Vedalken Rigger
1, T: ~ assembles a Contraption.
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "T: Add X colorless mana to your mana pool, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption."
1/3"
So let's break down what goes into this mechanic, starting from the card that started it all: Steamflogger Boss.
Most of that card doesn't matter much. What we really care about is the following ability:
"If a Rigger you control would assemble a Contraption, it assembles two Contraptions instead."
This tells us everything that "assemble" needs.
1. "Assemble" is an action performed by a creature, like "fight." This needs to be mechanically relevant, otherwise it simply makes more sense to have the player do the assembling.
2. "Assemble" is an action that is in some way directed towards a Contraption, a type of artifact. Here, we're still in line with "fight" technology ("This creature fights target creature.")
3. "Assemble," specifically "assembling a Contraption" is an action that can be doubled. It's still technically possible with "fight," but it isn't nearly as clean in its execution. This is where "assemble" and "fight" need to diverge in how they work.
4. Contraption is a new type of artifact. This needs to be mechanically relevant.
5. The flavor implies putting things together. This is the most challenging aspect of making the mechanic work.
Okay, so how does that inform my execution? I'll explain:
1. The creatures do the assembling. This is the core of the ability, as it opens up space for "assemble" to work uniquely to any other token-producing ability. Because the creature assembles the Contraption, that creature defines what that Contraption does. This does lead to memory issues, but I'll get to why that won't be as big of a problem as one may think or how we can address that.
2. I was thinking about how having assemble would interact with Contraptions. Are Contraptions cards that are played somehow through the "assemble" ability? If so, how does Steamflogger Boss double that? Are they like meld cards? Does that mean you need two whole pairs of artifacts with the required ability for Steamflogger Boss to even be relevant? All of these questions lead to one conclusion: This is way too many hoops to jump through. It will end up being more than just an A+B mechanic, but something more like an A+B+C+D-and-so-on mechanic, because there are just so many factors needed to make it work. I decided that it needs to be simpler, and that means just making tokens. But how do we differentiate "assemble" from every other token-making mechanic. I decided to come back to this after working out how the tokens will be made and work.
3. "Assemble" needs to be something you can double. Now that we know it will be tokens, this works fine.
4. Contraption is a unique type of artifact. This is where point 1 comes back in. The mechanical identity of a token needs to be consistent. Take Clues for example. They all have "T, Sacrifice: draw a card." The issue is that, flavorfully, Contraptions don't imply anything uniform. In fact, it implies the opposite. Contraptions come off as make-shift machines, each with a unique purpose and function. So how do we represent that on a token? Well, here, Contraptions don't have any inherant abilities. The mechanical identity of Contraptions is that they do what their Rigger designed them to do. Basically, it's the same sort of mechanical identity as Deserts, and pretty similar to the Golem Splicers from Scars of Mirrodin. The main difference here is that Contraptions are noncreature tokens with unique abilities based on the artifacts used to assemble them.
5. Contraptions are the sum of their parts. This is what ties everything together. The Riggers look at what was sacrificed to assemble the Contraptions to determine what the Contraptios do.
So that's what lead me to this final design. Now lets look at the concerns:
1. Memory issues. Whenever a mechanic revolves around creating unique tokens, there are memory issues, especially when those tokens have the same name or origionate from the same mechanic. Embalm works around this by forcing you to exile the creature that gives it its identity, letting you use the creature card to track what the token is. I'm considering exiling the artifacts rather than sacrificing them for this very reason, but I also want a lot of ways to put artifacts into the graveyard for whatever set this goes into. There are also a few other things that can be done to keep track of the abilities. Imagine pop-out markers like the ones in Amonkhet, except woth the name of the Rigger that made the token. That way the player knows what determines the abilities. Conspiracy has also had players use notes to keep track of certain things, and that's worked out fairly well. The point is, we have options here.
2. Design space. Let's be honest. It's very shallow with this mechanic. But if this is the mest we can get to finally execute Contraptions, I think we can squeeze enough designs out for one set. If necessary, having this mechanic only show up at uncommon to reduce the number of necessary designs is something I would be willing to do. That also helps with the memory issues, as the fewer different riggers are in your deck, the less you have to keep track of.
3. Support. This set would need some really heavy artifact support to create the sheer quantity of artifacts needed to make this mechanic relevant. It's not impossible, as Kaladesh/Aether Revolt have accomplished exactly this. It's just that Contraptions would be the central pillar that the entire set is built around because of how demanding it is.
4. It's complex. Yup. More complex things have happened though.
Anyway, what do you guys think? Have I done it? how can this be better?
It should definitely be sacrifice rather than exile. This is for several reasons. First you aren't using the whole original artifact so you should be able to get it back with the help of other cards. Second Embalm exiles so you can use the exiled card as the token, this doesn't help with Contraptions. Third on a world with contraptions salvaging artifacts should be a major theme so putting them into the graveyard would play to that theme.
Design space shouldn't be a issue, not because you could find more but because you don't need more. This mechanic needs its one day in the sun and then never be spoken of again.
I'm not 100% sure that's how the ability is supposed to be worded but it seems functional at first glance so it should be enough.
Common
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: This artifact deals X damage to target creature, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Scry X, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Creatures with power X or less can't block this turn, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Return target card with converted mana cost X or less from your graveyard to your hand, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Target creature gets +X/+X until end of turn, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Exile up to X target cards from your graveyards and you gain X life, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Put a +1/+1 counter on each of up to X target creatures, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Target creature gets -X/-0 until end of turn, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption. Draw a card."
Uncommon
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "T: Add X colorless mana to your mana pool, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Return target nonland permanent with converted mana cost X or less to its owner's hand, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Counter target spell unless its controller pays X, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption."
Each Contraption assembled by ~ is an Equipment in addition to its other types and has "Equipped creature gets +X/+X, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption," and equip 1.
Each Contraption assembled by ~ is an X/X creature in addition to its other types, where X is the number of artifacts sacrificed to assemble that Contraption.
Rare
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has all activated abilities of artifacts sacrificed to assemble that Contraption.
Each Contraption assembled by ~ has "Sacrifice this artifact: Draw X cards, where X is the total converted mana cost of artifacts sacrificed to assemble this Contraption."
Whenever a creature you control assembles a Contraption, you may have that Contraption enter the battlefield as a copy of an artifact sacrificed to assemble that Contraption, except it's a Contraption in addition to its other types.
For each Contraption you control, you may tap that Contraption rather than pay the cost to activate abilities of that Contraption.
Whenever you sacrifice a nontoken artifact or a Contraption, create a colorless Scrap artifact token with "Sactifice this artifact: Add C to your mana pool."
Cons:
1. no substantive interaction with prior cards
2. At least the present version is confusing, as all contraptions have the same name, but different text.
(Fix by making all contraption riggers make unique contraption tokens).
3. That's a lot of memory issues (fixed by having unique tokens).
4. Sac 2 or more has to go; make each have a different cost. I.e., "[cost]: assemble a contraption artifact token named "name" with "contraption text". Mind you, this is just create. But yours is just create with an arbitrary cost tacked on.
5. Flavor fail - I cobble a black lotus and bonesplitter to get... whatever my rigger's specialization is? Boring. I cobble 2 contraptions into a contraption and it does less than the previous versions?
Final thought - this effect is doubleable like all token creation effects. But it's not *new*. I proposed assembling a contraption was cobbling a vehicle and equipment to create a contraption artifact creature. It does something *new*. It works with existing cards. It creates new design space.
This doesn't create any new design space. I think we all have ugly baby syndrome with our assemble concepts. So we have to judge it by objective means. Fun? New? Opens design space? Opens deck archetypes?
Watch wolf' designs are FUN! But they're not new, and the contraption deck runs artifacts that cantrip and nothing else. Their card text is irrelevant to the assembly. Final worry - odd cost aside, these create repetitive game play. Your token generators assemble the same thing time and again. They're odd spellshapers. I love spellshapers. But just make a black lotus spellshaper that costs like 3GG and be done with it. No assembly required.
The second is that it's not "new." Sure there are plenty of effects that make tokens, even ones with unique effects, but there are no cards that determine the effects of the tokens this way.
Look, I see the problems with this mechanic the same as you, but the truth is that Steamflogger Boss backs us into a corner. It has some mechanical requirements that define what it does in the game AND it sets flavor expectations that are nearly impossible to meet together.
I'd be happy to hear your suggestions as to how it could be done better.
Substituting it for token making feels like a cop out to me.
I always pictured Assemble being part of a building process.
for example the set would need cards that assemble some kind of resource - perhaps in the form of non-creature artifact tokens, something like;
Scrap Scavenge R
Sorcery
<> deals 1 damage to target creature.
Recycle three times. (To Recycle, create a colorless Scrap artifact token with "1,Sacrifice this artifact: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool.")
and then the card we would want is:
Forge Supervisor RR
Creature - Goblin Rigger
T: Assemble (to Assemble, Sacrifice 2 artifacts named Scrap and create a colorless Contraption artifact token with "At the beginning of the combat phase on any players turn you may sacrifice this permanent to give target creature you control your choice of Flying, First Strike, Trample, Deathtouch or Haste until end of turn."
1/1
As the definition of Contraption explains - overly complicated machine.
So then a spell like
Junk Wave 3BB
Sorcery
As an additional cost to cast Junk Wave, sacrifice any number of artifacts.
Creatures get +X/-X until end of turn where X is the number of artifacts you sacrificed as you cast Junk Wave.
and critters like
Junk Feeder 1G
Creature - Badger
Whenever a player sacrifice an Artifact, Junk Feeder gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
2/2
And I picture the plane being something like the world Wall-E lives on.
https://archidekt.com/user/71716
And red should be # 1 at contraptions.
But btg, contraptions need to be assembled. Flip cards aren't that.
For all intents and purposes, we all know what a contraption has to do. It needs to out two or more artifacts together to create a new artifact - contraption. This can be sac to create a combined contraption token. But, that's putting eggs into one basket. It can be attaching one to the other, with the base gaining the contraption subtype. But which is is base seems artbitrary if any 2 can be attached.
Thus, my version takes vehicles and equipment - 2 artifact types tat work poorly together - and assembles them into a contraption (artifact type) artifact creature. I.e. A vehicle animated as long as it's equipped. It turns antisynergy into synergy. But most of all... pretty much any vehicle can benefit from pretty much any equipment. Both cards matter - the text on them matters - and it lets you revisit old cards to discover something new.
Ugly baby or not, that's new design space.
This does not fit with my own experience. The color of the card for example is in no way related to my interest - and previous threads on the topic by other custom card creators don't seem to have taken special care to expand red's design space (e. g. many of them use tokens). Do you have data to support this claim in a general sense or are you just projecting your own ideas?
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
No I don't look at a lot of contraption threads, I have seen enough to say that if there is some secret unspoken understanding that people trying to solve contraptions are trying to make a permanent expansion to reds space they are hiding it very well. Though its far more likely you are projecting this desire.
Of 12 threads pulled up in a simple search on this forum about contraptions six of them include red cards, none mention expanding red design space(not even your own). So it seems there 'might' be a minority out that that sees contraptions as a way to expand red's design space but with the only card caring about contraptions being a red goblin, if you're making contraptions they would probably involve red riggers. So that makes it seem less likely that those who had red cards in their contraption designs were intending to expand reds space.
So the best way to make assemble viable is to keep it as simple as possible so that one can impose variations and situations on top of it naturally.
So assemble simply means "Create a colorless artifact token of some type." From Steamflogger Boss, we know that one of those artifact types that can be assembled is Contraption.
So let's define what a Contraption is that befits red:
Contraption is colorless artifact token that has "{2}, Sacrifice this artifact: It deals 1 damage to target creature or player."
Yeah no brainer, right? Too simple? The design space lies on the environment. so let's make some Goblin Riggers to play with Steamflogger Boss.
Goblin Alchemist
T, Discard a card: ~ assembles a Contraption.
Goblin Recycler
T, Exile an artifact card from any graveyard: ~ assembles a Contraption.
Goblin Engineer
R, T, Sacrifice an artifact: ~ assembles a Contraption.
RRR, T, Sacrifice three Contraptions: ~ deals 5 damage to target creature or player.
Want something fancier?
Goblin Bomber
RR, T, Sacrifice ~: Exile the top card of your library. ~ assembles X contraptions, where X is the converted mana cost of the exiled card.
Big Bang
Destroy all creatures and artifacts. ~ deals X damage to target player, where X is the number of artifacts destroyed this way.
How about Non-red assemblers:
Vampire Soul Collector
Whenever a creature controlled by an opponent dies, ~ assembles a Contraption.
Why stop there? Can we assemble more than Contraptions?
Assemble a Clue.
Assemble a Gold.
Assemble an Elixir.
Assemble a Weapon.
Some of these artifact types haven't been invented in this game. The last one looks mighty interesting, though:
Goblin Weaponsmith
When ~ enters the battlefield, it assembles a Weapon and equips it.
Hey is that new design space for red that we stumbled on? Albeit the details need to be ironed out. It might even deserve its own keyword. Without even over-complicating things. Just like cycling and kicker, we used the simplest idea to expand into new design space.
........................
That said I have no problem with "assemble" being just another specialized version of "create" similar to "investigate". I just am not that enamored with Contraptions being direct damage Clues.
Also you will note that the ability of the Clue token is inherent to the action "investigate" and not inherent to the action "create" nor the subtype "Clue". Assemble would take on quiet a load of different meanings depending on the parameter alone. That way the one word "assemble" would hide a lot of different abilities. I think it's interesting for CCC but seems like an unlikely solution for canon Magic at this point of time.
My main concerns with the OP suggestion are (a) turning two artifacts into one artifact token smells like extremely unappealing card disadvantage - and to such a high degree that SFB itself wouldn't even be useful unless you can consistently guarantee having four or more artifacts (excluding those Contraptions that would be redundant with the ones you would assemble); and (b) the OP suggests that the abilities of the Contraptions are tied to the pairing of Rigger and Contraption and worded in such a way that the ability disappears entirely when the Rigger is gone.
Preferable modes include making abilities inherent to the token ("Contraptions assembled by ~ are created with *foo*.") or abilities that are granted to all Contraptions disregarding their source ("Contraptions you control have *foo*."). OP's version has the worst of both worlds.
If the first option is chosen I would probably still prefer (in reference to problem (a)) if "assemble" meant "Sacrifice an artifact. If you do, create a Contraption token." to avoid card advantage. Here you could convert one Contraption into another to adapt to situations.
[/stream of consciousness]
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
You want your contraption to "survive" (or at least part of it), even if one of it's parts are destroyed.
You want to be able to assemble ever increasing bizarre and complex contraptions that have neat synergies.
And most of all, you want this to feel red. I like the idea of red experimenting by putting things together that don't belong.
Best thing about atog's design is that you can use existing cards to assemble a new contraption. You cannot ignore that feeling of digging through your old cards to give them new life.