@LSK: On the subject of 31, which I didn't really make clear (I kind of buried it), my major line of thinking was that I interpretted "upcoming set" to potentially mean part of Scars of Mirrodin block. The potential presence of Infect changes that question a great deal, I think. I think we can rule out pinging and first strike no matter what, B I misread as the standard Healer ability (which I crossed out because they put Abuna Acolyte at uncommon, suggesting not wanting repeatable prevention much), and then fussed over C and E. I think that you're right that it's probably C, as I answered it under a fallacious line of thinking (the assumption Infect might be here rather than it meaning "ANY upcoming set") but in the end I veered away from it largely because the tappers in Scars were not necessarily repeatable (Certarch requires metalcraft; Tumble Magnet is charged).
Solmancer: I passed, and I know which I got wrong. I'm going to respond to some of your answers.
It's C, tapping, with Ballynock Trapper and Blinding Mage as precedents. Plus, tapping is the most straightforward of these abilities and the easiest to use.
Blinding Mage isn't a good example, as the ability is different (activation cost). I think Trapper is the single examples of the ability without a restriction or activation cost. That said, I could see you being right on this.
While this is true, I answered B because it was true - you can't give flanking to a creature without it being concepted as such. It's the same problem they had with Bushido... a great generic ability, but they can't put bushido on a frog, which makes it very limited. Similarly, you can't give (for example) a fire elemental flanking without a very good explanation.
Sidewinder Sliver is a counterexample to B. Note the use of the word "all", so a single counterexample disproves it.
Solmancer:
While this is true, I answered B because it was true - you can't give flanking to a creature without it being concepted as such. It's the same problem they had with Bushido... a great generic ability, but they can't put bushido on a frog, which makes it very limited. Similarly, you can't give (for example) a fire elemental flanking without a very good explanation.
Flanking seems far more generic than bushido. Therefore, flanking can easily be adapted to other creatures and concepts.
Raptor Pack :xmana::symg::symg: Creature - Dinosaur
Put X 1/1 green Dinosaur creature tokens with banding and flanking onto the battlefield.
It took me 30 seconds to make this card. Here's another:
I care less about us making mistakes that lead to degenerate environments than I am when we donβt push ourselves and make something thatβs boring to play. - MaRo
While this is true, I answered B because it was true - you can't give flanking to a creature without it being concepted as such. It's the same problem they had with Bushido... a great generic ability, but they can't put bushido on a frog, which makes it very limited. Similarly, you can't give (for example) a fire elemental flanking without a very good explanation.
Generally agree with you except here; Flanking creatures are concepted generally as guys on horses because it's a visual cue that makes it clearer who has flanking, like how all the guys with "2: Move a +1/+1 counter from this creature to another creature" were concepted as spiked worm things. You certainly can print a flanking creature that's not a guy on a horse, by making it some sort of skirmisher-looking dude, or really basically anything that can use its mobility to gain an advantage in combat. Sidewinder Sliver isn't a guy on a horse. Like, a "weakness" of flying is that any creature you give flying to has to be concepted as something that can travel through the air, but that's not really an important weakness of the ability from a design standpoint.
Is there a link to the correct answers or just speculation?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I care less about us making mistakes that lead to degenerate environments than I am when we donβt push ourselves and make something thatβs boring to play. - MaRo
So, just food for thought, I figured I'd toss this out since I haven't heard anyone else mention it:
For #6 (the flash question), I choose d) Prevent all combat damage that would be dealt this turn.
Why? Because a creature with JUST flash and a fog effect is anti-synergistic. The only reason to play a creature with flash if it doesn't have an ETB ability is to make a surprise blocker. While it's true that a creature with a fog can block anything with impunity, it just feels off. You'll note that Haze Frog prevents damage OTHER creatures deal, which feels cooler and more synergistic.
(For what it's worth, I did pass the MC test. I wouldn't be surprised if I did get this one wrong, but just thought I would throw it out there.)
So, just food for thought, I figured I'd toss this out since I haven't heard anyone else mention it:
For #6 (the flash question), I choose d) Prevent all combat damage that would be dealt this turn.
Why? Because a creature with JUST flash and a fog effect is anti-synergistic. The only reason to play a creature with flash if it doesn't have an ETB ability is to make a surprise blocker. While it's true that a creature with a fog can block anything with impunity, it just feels off. You'll note that Haze Frog prevents damage OTHER creatures deal, which feels cooler and more synergistic.
(For what it's worth, I did pass the MC test. I wouldn't be surprised if I did get this one wrong, but just thought I would throw it out there.)
The problem is that it's an ability that's absolutely worthless on your own turn.
Well, for 2 I said common, on the basis of Blackcleave Goblin, but uncommon seems like the better answer now.
For question 6, I went E for the stated reasons; the other ones just don't work without flash. I read it as, "If we were to print all these abilities, which would we least likely pair with flash?", and then the answer is clear. But that might not have been the question asked, so I could have easily missed this one.
I answered A for 31, on the basis of Vithian Stinger, for instance. They almost never print a tapper without an activation cost, which was my rationale for eliminating that answer, and a little Gatherer work ruled out all the others.
For 33, I answered white but I think the answer is green. I was tricked by the use of the words 'harmony' and 'pattern', which are super white, but not as used here. I would accept either answer, though; this was really tricky.
For 41, my rationale was this: which of these effects is least relevant to Limited? Commonality is a means to control the mix of cards present in draft and sealed, and that should be its chief purpose. Mass enchantment destruction is not something that needs to be common, so that's what I chose. Tel Jilad Defiance rules out protection as the right answer, I think.
To restate my previous question: how do you think I should arrange the cards on my wiki? Giant list? By color? By theme? I'm planning to do this soon, and I'd like to know what people think is most useful.
Do you have a citation for that? I'm genuinely curious and suspect you're right, but I'm not sure that a common tapper with no activation cost is any better for Limited purposes.
I think I explained this point (forget, didn't look, etc. etc.) but for #2, I used both Blackcleave Goblin and the fact that haste and 1 toughness really keep the power level of the lifelinky guy down. That, plus the fact it would probably be 4B (my guess) means that this could arguably be a "Douse in Gloom +1" effect in disguise. If a creature with 3 toughness or less blocks him, he'll basically kill it and net you three life.
Now, let's try a different approach here:
Tendril Guy
?B
Creature - Vampire?
*/1
Defender, lifelink
Tendril Guy has power equal to the number of Swamps you control.
^ This guy won't hit players (hence the defender), but he's basically Tendrils of Corruption on a creature. I don't think this is an uncommon, do you? Note the 1 toughness; he's not going to walk away from the fight without "help", much like our contentious black creature with lifelink and haste. It was the 1 toughness and the fact it could probably be 5CC that convinced me to do common.
I answered A for 31, on the basis of Vithian Stinger, for instance.
This is a good example of the problem with intuiting design principles from recently printed cards.
Does the existence of Stinger mean that common pingers are now acceptable?
Or does the lack of any since then mean that they've learned their lesson that common pingers are too swingy in limited?
I think I explained this point (forget, didn't look, etc. etc.) but for #2, I used both Blackcleave Goblin and the fact that haste and 1 toughness really keep the power level of the lifelinky guy down.
That's your first mistake. From the answers for the GDS1 test:
#22) Which of the following five descriptions is the most acceptable at common?
a) The card is excessively complicated
b) The card is a βflavor bleedβ (it is a flavor stretch for that color)
c) The card is βtier oneβ (among the highest powered cards in the set)
d) The card has to drop font size because it has so many lines of text.
e) The card is too swingy in limited.
The answer is c) The card is βtier oneβ (among the highest powered cards in the set). The most interesting thing about this question is that it was the best indicator of whether youβd advance to the next round. Almost all of the applicants who advanced got this question right, and the vast majority of the people who got this question wrong didnβt advance. The reason c) is the right answer is that all three rarities are given βTier 1β (i.e., powerful) cards, including common. Common βTier 1β cards tend to be the basic utility cards (such as Naturalize or Shock).
The other four answers are all reasons we would move a card from common. Common is meant to be simple, thus we move off complicated cards. Common is supposed to set examples, thus we rarely do color bleeds in it. Having to drop a font size is one of the signs of complexity, and thus commons avoid it. Finally, because common cards show up the most and thus have the biggest impact on limited, we try to keep swingy limited cards out of common.
They have recently kept pingers out of common because they are too swingy in Limited. Just look at Tim. Vithian Stingers was the top common in the set, wasn't it?
Tapping to pump, give first strike, or prevent one damage are abilities that appear at common. But they make for boring and irrelevant cards. Those are not abilities that are used often.
On the other hand, tappers are very relevant in Limited. They appear consistently at common. I'm quite confident that this is the answer to 31.
For completeness, the list of cards with "old lifelink" - the triggered ability - that have 3+ power and are common is also empty. (Although only four cards of any rarity with that property were every printed.) Only ONE common creature was ever printed with the ability at all - the 1/1 Mourning Thrull. (Although there are three enchantments that grant the ability.) Since they've keyworded lifelink, they've put it on one common creature in each block. (Although there's been multiple common enchantments that grant it.)
Do you think pingers are swingier than no-mana-cost trappers? Blinding Mage is a good card, but it's really kept down by the fact that it slows down your development to lock down a guy. If it didn't have the activation cost, it's blanks the best creature your opponent has all the time; this doesn't seem much less swingy than Prodigal Pyromancer. Mind you, I could go either way on this, but I wonder if this was a question to test whether you were repeating exactly what was said or internalizing the main message--i.e. swingy effects should not be common. Then again, I'm not sure whether we were supposed to even consider the manaless activation. The right answer here was either pinging or tapping, and I wouldn't be too surprised by either.
It'll be interesting to actually see the answers. I've mulled these questions over enough that I'm not sure I can think about them rationally now, and it will be very instructive to read Mark Rosewater's explanations.
Do you think pingers are swingier than no-mana-cost trappers? Blinding Mage is a good card, but it's really kept down by the fact that it slows down your development to lock down a guy. If it didn't have the activation cost, it's blanks the best creature your opponent has all the time; this doesn't seem much less swingy than Prodigal Pyromancer. Mind you, I could go either way on this, but I wonder if this was a question to test whether you were repeating exactly what was said or internalizing the main message--i.e. swingy effects should not be common. Then again, I'm not sure whether we were supposed to even consider the manaless activation. The right answer here was either pinging or tapping, and I wouldn't be too surprised by either.
@fnord - Just so I'm clear, was your point to me that you were telling me that our 3/1 lifelink haste was too swingy? If so, then this really depends on its mana cost. I don't see a five-drop, for example, as overkill in Limited. Obnoxious, maybe, but again, this has neither evasion nor will it generally live through combat if it's ever blocked. The life gain might matter, but this can assume the two of you were at a roughly equal life.
Iunno; it's just hard for me to quantify why I went with common. I think it was the power level of our 2/1 infector (which I'll note arguably says 4/1 vs. players if it didn't give poison out). I just don't see how a 5-drop 3/1 lifelink haste is out of the question. It seriously made me think Douse in Gloom equivalent on a creature. Needless to say, I'm seriously expecting MaRo to say #2 was one of the most missed or divisive (like 31 and 48).
@fnord - Just so I'm clear, was your point to me that you were telling me that our 3/1 lifelink haste was too swingy? If so, then this really depends on its mana cost. I don't see a five-drop, for example, as overkill in Limited. Obnoxious, maybe, but again, this has neither evasion nor will it generally live through combat if it's ever blocked. The life gain might matter, but this can assume the two of you were at a roughly equal life.
Iunno; it's just hard for me to quantify why I went with common. I think it was the power level of our 2/1 infector (which I'll note arguably says 4/1 vs. players if it didn't give poison out). I just don't see how a 5-drop 3/1 lifelink haste is out of the question. It seriously made me think Douse in Gloom equivalent on a creature. Needless to say, I'm seriously expecting MaRo to say #2 was one of the most missed or divisive (like 31 and 48).
My point is that you shouldn't be arguing from power level, since that isn't how they determine rarity. The exact costing is Development's job at any rate.
My own reasoning was that since haste and lifelink are both secondary in black, I don't think they would put both on a common. Note how this differs from Blackcleave, which has only 1 ability which is secondary in black.
Maybe I'm missing something, but where is lifelink stated as secondary in black? It's primary in white, and we aren't exactly swimming in lifelink for either color, as has been stated.
Maybe I'm missing something, but where is lifelink stated as secondary in black? It's primary in white, and we aren't exactly swimming in lifelink for either color, as has been stated.
While not that recent an article, it's the most recent I found on the current state of the color pie, so I think they haven't made major changes since then. Note that lifelink is still fairly rare in black (once per block or so).
Well, here's the thing: they've been using lifelink roughly at the same power level between white and black, with a smidgen more in white lately. The ZEN-to-SOM Standard has this breakdown for lifelink between white and black at a given rarity (Note: I'm not counting Sejiri Merfolk here, and Basilisk Collar and Wurmcoil Engine are DQ'd for obvious reasons). X/Y means X white Y black.
Common - 2/2 -- ZEN 1/1 -- WWK 0 -- ROE 0 -- M11 0/1 -- SOM 1/0 Uncommon - 0/2 -- ZEN 0/1 -- WWK 0 -- ROE 0/1 -- M11 0 -- SOM 0 Rare - 3/0 -- ZEN 0 -- WWK 1/0 -- ROE 0 -- M11 1/0 -- SOM 1/0 Mythic - 3/0 -- ZEN 1/0 -- WWK 0 -- ROE 1/0 -- M11 1/0 -- SOM 0
My argument is that they've been suggesting lately (see above breakdown) lifelink is primary in black as well, even if they haven't done it with rares/mythics, which veers it closer to common than uncommon. White has the majority share, sure, but black's been getting it the most in Limited. I find this interesting, personally.
Past Ruminations
Links are broken, will fix in near future.
- Kaladesh
- Zendikar
- Rise of the Eldrazi
- Alara Reborn
- Innistrad <- Personal Favorite
- Dark Ascension
- Avacyn Restored
- Theros
- Return to Ravnica
- Tarkir
Blinding Mage isn't a good example, as the ability is different (activation cost). I think Trapper is the single examples of the ability without a restriction or activation cost. That said, I could see you being right on this.
Sidewinder Sliver is a counterexample to B. Note the use of the word "all", so a single counterexample disproves it.
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
Flanking seems far more generic than bushido. Therefore, flanking can easily be adapted to other creatures and concepts.
Raptor Pack :xmana::symg::symg:
Creature - Dinosaur
Put X 1/1 green Dinosaur creature tokens with banding and flanking onto the battlefield.
It took me 30 seconds to make this card. Here's another:
Flanking Sliver :symw::symu::symr:
Creature - Sliver
Sliver creatures have flanking.
3/3
That one took longer to type than to think of. One more real quick:
Tactical Maneuver :xmana::symr:
Instant
X target creatures have flanking until end of turn.
Again with the quickness.
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/114
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
For #6 (the flash question), I choose d) Prevent all combat damage that would be dealt this turn.
Why? Because a creature with JUST flash and a fog effect is anti-synergistic. The only reason to play a creature with flash if it doesn't have an ETB ability is to make a surprise blocker. While it's true that a creature with a fog can block anything with impunity, it just feels off. You'll note that Haze Frog prevents damage OTHER creatures deal, which feels cooler and more synergistic.
(For what it's worth, I did pass the MC test. I wouldn't be surprised if I did get this one wrong, but just thought I would throw it out there.)
The problem is that it's an ability that's absolutely worthless on your own turn.
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
For question 6, I went E for the stated reasons; the other ones just don't work without flash. I read it as, "If we were to print all these abilities, which would we least likely pair with flash?", and then the answer is clear. But that might not have been the question asked, so I could have easily missed this one.
I answered A for 31, on the basis of Vithian Stinger, for instance. They almost never print a tapper without an activation cost, which was my rationale for eliminating that answer, and a little Gatherer work ruled out all the others.
For 33, I answered white but I think the answer is green. I was tricked by the use of the words 'harmony' and 'pattern', which are super white, but not as used here. I would accept either answer, though; this was really tricky.
For 41, my rationale was this: which of these effects is least relevant to Limited? Commonality is a means to control the mix of cards present in draft and sealed, and that should be its chief purpose. Mass enchantment destruction is not something that needs to be common, so that's what I chose. Tel Jilad Defiance rules out protection as the right answer, I think.
To restate my previous question: how do you think I should arrange the cards on my wiki? Giant list? By color? By theme? I'm planning to do this soon, and I'd like to know what people think is most useful.
Past Ruminations
Links are broken, will fix in near future.
- Kaladesh
- Zendikar
- Rise of the Eldrazi
- Alara Reborn
- Innistrad <- Personal Favorite
- Dark Ascension
- Avacyn Restored
- Theros
- Return to Ravnica
- Tarkir
A 3/1 hasty lifelinker certainly doesn't feel like an uncommon, especially since it's probably costed at 3B.
And yeah, Solmancer is 100% correct about #31.
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
Now, let's try a different approach here:
Tendril Guy
?B
Creature - Vampire?
*/1
Defender, lifelink
Tendril Guy has power equal to the number of Swamps you control.
^ This guy won't hit players (hence the defender), but he's basically Tendrils of Corruption on a creature. I don't think this is an uncommon, do you? Note the 1 toughness; he's not going to walk away from the fight without "help", much like our contentious black creature with lifelink and haste. It was the 1 toughness and the fact it could probably be 5CC that convinced me to do common.
Past Ruminations
Links are broken, will fix in near future.
- Kaladesh
- Zendikar
- Rise of the Eldrazi
- Alara Reborn
- Innistrad <- Personal Favorite
- Dark Ascension
- Avacyn Restored
- Theros
- Return to Ravnica
- Tarkir
This is a good example of the problem with intuiting design principles from recently printed cards.
Does the existence of Stinger mean that common pingers are now acceptable?
Or does the lack of any since then mean that they've learned their lesson that common pingers are too swingy in limited?
That's your first mistake. From the answers for the GDS1 test:
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
Tapping to pump, give first strike, or prevent one damage are abilities that appear at common. But they make for boring and irrelevant cards. Those are not abilities that are used often.
On the other hand, tappers are very relevant in Limited. They appear consistently at common. I'm quite confident that this is the answer to 31.
Yep, that's the list.
Hey, it's not exactly like the uncommon rarity is flowing with them, either.
It'll be interesting to actually see the answers. I've mulled these questions over enough that I'm not sure I can think about them rationally now, and it will be very instructive to read Mark Rosewater's explanations.
Why can't the right answer be (e) (+1/+1)?
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
Iunno; it's just hard for me to quantify why I went with common. I think it was the power level of our 2/1 infector (which I'll note arguably says 4/1 vs. players if it didn't give poison out). I just don't see how a 5-drop 3/1 lifelink haste is out of the question. It seriously made me think Douse in Gloom equivalent on a creature. Needless to say, I'm seriously expecting MaRo to say #2 was one of the most missed or divisive (like 31 and 48).
Past Ruminations
Links are broken, will fix in near future.
- Kaladesh
- Zendikar
- Rise of the Eldrazi
- Alara Reborn
- Innistrad <- Personal Favorite
- Dark Ascension
- Avacyn Restored
- Theros
- Return to Ravnica
- Tarkir
My point is that you shouldn't be arguing from power level, since that isn't how they determine rarity. The exact costing is Development's job at any rate.
My own reasoning was that since haste and lifelink are both secondary in black, I don't think they would put both on a common. Note how this differs from Blackcleave, which has only 1 ability which is secondary in black.
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
Past Ruminations
Links are broken, will fix in near future.
- Kaladesh
- Zendikar
- Rise of the Eldrazi
- Alara Reborn
- Innistrad <- Personal Favorite
- Dark Ascension
- Avacyn Restored
- Theros
- Return to Ravnica
- Tarkir
http://www.wizards.com/magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr284
While not that recent an article, it's the most recent I found on the current state of the color pie, so I think they haven't made major changes since then. Note that lifelink is still fairly rare in black (once per block or so).
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
Common - 2/2 -- ZEN 1/1 -- WWK 0 -- ROE 0 -- M11 0/1 -- SOM 1/0
Uncommon - 0/2 -- ZEN 0/1 -- WWK 0 -- ROE 0/1 -- M11 0 -- SOM 0
Rare - 3/0 -- ZEN 0 -- WWK 1/0 -- ROE 0 -- M11 1/0 -- SOM 1/0
Mythic - 3/0 -- ZEN 1/0 -- WWK 0 -- ROE 1/0 -- M11 1/0 -- SOM 0
My argument is that they've been suggesting lately (see above breakdown) lifelink is primary in black as well, even if they haven't done it with rares/mythics, which veers it closer to common than uncommon. White has the majority share, sure, but black's been getting it the most in Limited. I find this interesting, personally.
Past Ruminations
Links are broken, will fix in near future.
- Kaladesh
- Zendikar
- Rise of the Eldrazi
- Alara Reborn
- Innistrad <- Personal Favorite
- Dark Ascension
- Avacyn Restored
- Theros
- Return to Ravnica
- Tarkir