Writes a post about why Magic sucks. Doesn't mention Magic Online .
PV wrote an article where he voiced his negative opinion on the design of Battle for Zendikar. He made some interesting points I didn't even consider yet.
Writes a post about why Magic sucks. Doesn't mention Magic Online .
PV wrote an article where he voiced his negative opinion on the design of Battle for Zendikar. He made some interesting points I didn't even consider yet.
One of his complaints in that article was that wizards printed too many sweet lands. He honestly, somehow, considers that to be something wrong with BFZ. The article is pretty dumb if you ask me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
One of his complaints in that article was that wizards printed too many sweet lands. He honestly, somehow, considers that to be something wrong with BFZ. The article is pretty dumb if you ask me.
While I agree that "too many sweet lands" isn't a reason to say the BFZ design was "bad," I do think it's a perfectly good bullet point on a list pointing to why a set is someone's least favorite in a while. The article is couched in enough "my personal opinion/feelings/experiences" that I won't take it at the same seriousness as hard-and-fast statistics, but I'd hesitate to call the article dumb. His strongest point I think is regarding the mechanics - he dances all around the idea that the mechanics don't have a strongly defined identity but doesn't quite get there. Overall I think a lot of his criticisms are due to the set being "two faction" when the sets we've been getting lately have been "many faction" in nature. Tarkir had 5 clans/dragons, and Theros had 15 gods all vying for play. Even Origins had 10 planes to draw from. After getting spoilt with all these sets, having just two factions (which necessitates mechanics blurring between colors more) feels less cohesive.
On the topic of the podcast itself, I look forward to listening later today.
Edit: Having not yet listened, I think it might be fun to pre-emptively join in on the critique-a-card section.
Psychic Guard gets a 7/7.5 from me as-is. I like what it's doing in general. A 1/1 prowess for U seems fine with a bit of upside, and this upside is really clever. Things I would change - remove Soldier from the type line so it's just a Human Wizard, and give it a more appropriate name. I'd expect a Guard to protect my psyche, not to invade someone else's. These changes would bump it to around an 8.5, which is damn good for a common.
One of his complaints in that article was that wizards printed too many sweet lands. He honestly, somehow, considers that to be something wrong with BFZ. The article is pretty dumb if you ask me.
If the great appeal of the set are supposed to be its lands, but you can't play any of them realistically, isn't that a problem?
One of his complaints in that article was that wizards printed too many sweet lands. He honestly, somehow, considers that to be something wrong with BFZ. The article is pretty dumb if you ask me.
If the great appeal of the set are supposed to be its lands, but you can't play any of them realistically, isn't that a problem?
Except that wasn't the complaint. The article openly states that the lands are cool and playable. The authors stated problem is that because there were so many, they individually wouldn't see as much play as if they had printed fewer. The complaint had nothing to do with power level or design. The author just things there were too many.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
[quote from="harlannowick »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/creativity/custom-card-creation/635251-podcast-re-making-magic-episode-37-why-magic?comment=3"]
Psychic Guard gets a 7/7.5 from me as-is. I like what it's doing in general. A 1/1 prowess for U seems fine with a bit of upside, and this upside is really clever. Things I would change - remove Soldier from the type line so it's just a Human Wizard, and give it a more appropriate name. I'd expect a Guard to protect my psyche, not to invade someone else's. These changes would bump it to around an 8.5, which is damn good for a common.
I haven't listened yet either, but am with you here. Except it should be Psychic Spy, Human Rogue
PV wrote an article where he voiced his negative opinion on the design of Battle for Zendikar. He made some interesting points I didn't even consider yet.
Tbh I'm not a fan of that article. Especially after re-reading it when it wasn't 2am.
The Set Transitions Badly from Previous Sets: I think this is by far his weakest argument. There are a large number of synergies that I've seen so far between the two sets from discussing and playtesting new standard decks etc. Processing/Obvlivion Sower stuff makes evaluation of old mechanics like delve in the environment constantly ebb back and forth as those mechanics see more or less play. The mana base we have is amazing, fitting into the constructed playable converge cards incredibly well, and finally landfall is obviously amazing with fetches.
The Mechanics Are Random and Nonsensical: Here he is not taking into account other formats especially limited and the themes the set is trying to create. Me and Dan have mentioned multiple times the Aesthetic issues of Allies and Devoid and with this I agree to a point, however his critique of Awaken can be literally applied to nearly any mechanic, also on the more higher rarity cards the awaken is super relevant to gameplay compared to other mechanics as it allows control decks to create threats with their lands with cards like Planar Outburst or Scatter to the Winds.
The Colorless Lands Are Great—But We Might Not Get to Play with Them: Two points. Firstly not every land card needs to see constructed play. Secondly not playing these in three or four color decks doesn't mean they won't see play in potential mono or dual color decks, I mean if you don't think that Blighted Gorge isn't gonna see play in a Mono Red deck for reach your crazy. These cards don't go into the shells we already have in standard, instead they create their own shells. Thats what rotation is about, we get too see lots of new decks.
EDIT: I should re-iterate that both me and Dan think BFZ has issues, I just didn't think that PV's article was very good at hitting the arguments of what those issues are. As we said in the Playtesting episode, you often know something is wrong but rarely are you able to correctly identify what that is.
Writes a post about why Magic sucks. Doesn't mention Magic Online .
To be fair he may not of played it. I know I've only ever done like two drafts on magic online. Both of which worked perfectly though the UI and accessibility definitely leaves much to be desired.
After doing some BFZ sealed, I actually have worries about Awaken. It basically takes your lands out of play which plays poorly with trying to cast bigger stuff. It also opens your lands to removal and bounce spells. Don't get me wrong, it's funny to play Clutch of the Undercurrents or Smite the Monstrous on an opponents' land - but I'd hate to have it done to me when I'm just trying to resolve a bomb. On the one hand it's nice to have a use for excess lands, so it's great there, but I have a hunch it'll open a lot of inexperienced players to feel-bad moments. It has reasons it's great in the format (excess lands are more relevant) and reasons it sucks (plays poorly with high cmc cards). I'm interested to see how it works out. It's definitely a spike-friendly mechanic and I do love my evoke.
As for the "too many cool lands" - that's an absurd reduction of the argument. The issue is that there are a high number of exciting lands that play well in decks with low color commitments... In a constructed format with heavy color commitments. If the format doesn't support the coolness, then that's awkward development. Of course, it's not as bad as it sounds - because there are many players that don't play constructed - but these are the players that tend to find nonbasic lands like this pretty unexciting. It's hard to get a casual excited about a land that costs 6 to sacrifice and gives you three 1/1s. That's a much spikier card, so it's a shame they aren't in a format where spikes can get to play more of them.
I would normally assume R&D is going to make it fine with the next expansion significantly lowering the color commitments, so they basically "turn on" once Tarkir rotates out, but I'm questioning such comforting assumptions more with the overall mess BFZ seems to be. It really looks like and incredibly well designed custom set. It doesn't look like something professional teams have polished for years.
After doing some BFZ sealed, I actually have worries about Awaken. It basically takes your lands out of play which plays poorly with trying to cast bigger stuff. It also opens your lands to removal and bounce spells. Don't get me wrong, it's funny to play Clutch of the Undercurrents or Smite the Monstrous on an opponents' land - but I'd hate to have it done to me when I'm just trying to resolve a bomb. On the one hand it's nice to have a use for excess lands, so it's great there, but I have a hunch it'll open a lot of inexperienced players to feel-bad moments. It has reasons it's great in the format (excess lands are more relevant) and reasons it sucks (plays poorly with high cmc cards). I'm interested to see how it works out. It's definitely a spike-friendly mechanic and I do love my evoke.
Yeah, new players won't realize that Awaken isn't necesesarily a "goal". It's just the kicker/mana sink of the set and should be viewed similarly to Evoke other kicker variants. If it happens, great, but don't count on it. I think the biggest problem with Awaken for the uninitiated, is that it feels so exciting when you look at it, but when you can't play it, it's a major letdown.
It really looks like and incredibly well designed custom set. It doesn't look like something professional teams have polished for years.
Which would be easier to accept if it weren't Zendikar. Here I have to agree with the article "WotC does a fantastic job with Magic, and the only reason this set feels lackluster is that they have set such a high standard everywhere else." This is true of every profession in the world whether you're a dancer, a plumber, or a game designer - not every performance is going to top previous performances.
Agreed. It's a pretty major disappointment to see it in Zendikar. I do have hope though. RoE didn't reveal its limited brilliance until a little ways in.
Agreed. It's a pretty major disappointment to see it in Zendikar. I do have hope though. RoE didn't reveal its limited brilliance until a little ways in.
Right? Totem armor was reviled, and I heard a lot of "ugh, who wants to play defenders?" when Rise first came out.
My 2 cents. Points on "Why magic sucks - by by killing a goldfish":
"Mana Variance isn't fun": Not a valid point in and on itself. If you think randomness (variance is really not the term) is bad for a game you gotta explain the success of games like poker (and any other classic games of cards) and tabletops like Risk and Explorers of Catan and many others. The analogies with multiplayer video games is nonsensical - MTG is not a game of mechanical skill, it's a game of tactics, strategy and social interaction - and RNG are necessary to make games like that fun. Of course how randomness effects the game is a important issue, but it's one that haven't be touched by killing a goldfish's article. I for one agree the mana system in limited and standard needs adjustments but that's another topic.
"it’s horrifically expensive": It's a collectible game, that's more of a trait then anything. Pimping and managing collections with huge loads of money is something people do not only with MTG (baseball cards, etc) and MTG tries to appeal to those people. Again, it's not something that can be understood by someone who has a exclusive PC/console game background. Killing a goldfish has no financial background either if he thinks the price of a deck is what you pay for it (surprising for someone who have claimed to work in MTG's second-market for living).
Ex: Two years ago I've bought Legacy Delve for U$ 2.800,00, owned a total of 8 booster boxes playing with it in local events and now I can sell it for around the same price. If I do I spend only the interest rate of "borrowing" U$ 2.800,00 during two years while I actually gained a few dollars with prizes - I could even be gaining money by playing MTG. Some people will dismiss the financial aspect of it and assume players will buy cards a sunk costs - if they do that I wonder why they are engaging in a TRADING card game. It's a game for traders and collectors, this is the mind set of people who play this sort of game in a advanced level. Killing a goldfish is not attacking the game or it's features, he is attacking the taste of the fun base :/
"it’s old": Innistrad was the last great and novel MTG set and it's not THAT old. However I still agree with him. WotC has been pushing subpar sets on purpose in order to save juice. Which is annoying but tolerable for as long as they don't go to far. BFZ also kinda wraps up the whole "MTG is for old MTG players" reality: it has really boring design and mechanics, it doesn't use a lot of new artistic and creative resources and the main selling point of the set is pimp land cards that peaks the interest of collectors alone.
"only wizards makes magic": Factually wrong.
My points on BFZ:
BFZ is messy: 100% agree with you guys. This opinion is sort of a community consensus at this point. There's a massive failure in making the the themes and the faction mechanically distinct and organized. It's so frustrating that the most novel thing about BFZ is a unprecedented level of mechanical and thematical blending.
Allies and Devoid are not good: At the end of the day devoid is nothing but a tribal theme, which is ok, but the block already got allies right ? The two main themes (colorless eldrazi and allies) are tribal themes and they are not particularly as well executed as previous tribal themes (you guys summarized it pretty well on the podcast). They are also only two factions, which means BFZ cannot constitute a real tribal block. Those two factions take a enormous chunk of the set and they are both shallow.
Ingest/Processor are not good either: The other mechanic promoted in BFZ is Ingest/Processor mechanic which is another version of enable-outlet mechanics. They simply don't work for me and it's the single biggest failure in BFZ because of how parasitic it is. Ingest cards are useless without Processor cards and vice-versa and this level of dependency is undesirable. Take other enable-outlet mechanics from the past, like Delve. Delve enables (self milling) also enables other graveyard shenanigans, while Delve itself is enabled by just playing a grinding game. This sort of versatility is absent in Ingest/Processor which is a huge problem for me.
Awaken is only ok: It's a modal variant mechanic. What's unique in this is that the mod is on instant/sorcery cards, which promotes control decks in limited (always a good thing). The other good point is it allows lands shenanigans and +1/+1 counter shenanigans but unfortunately there's nowhere near enough of these to make awaken a novel thing in limited. Awaken not interacting with Hardened Scales have to be one of the biggest design failures of recent story for casual players.
Convergence: I like this a lot. The execution weighted too much on the safe side as they did not want to promote 4 color decks in standard. Convergence cards usually does not rewards you for playing a 4c or 5c deck, they give you standard effects if you do so and punish you if you play less colors. This is the result of WotC promoting land bases too much to a point 3 color decks is the absolute norm in standard and there's no reason to promote multicoloring any further. However it works fairly well in limited as it is, I only wish there was MORE of it.
BFZ is messy: 100% agree with you guys. This opinion is sort of a community consensus at this point. There's a massive failure in making the the themes and the faction mechanically distinct and organized. It's so frustrating that the most novel thing about BFZ is a unprecedented level of mechanical and thematical blending.
In a two faction set, if the factions are very distinct, limited becomes boring because cards from different factions don't play well together. A famous example of this was Scars or Mirrodin, which forced players to pick either Mirrans or Phyrexians making drafts linear and boring. It also made sealed a terrible format because you could never actually get enough phyrexians/non-phyrexians to make a cohesive deck.
Ingest/Processor are not good either: The other mechanic promoted in BFZ is Ingest/Processor mechanic which is another version of enable-outlet mechanics. They simply don't work for me and it's the single biggest failure in BFZ because of how parasitic it is. Ingest cards are useless without Processor cards and vice-versa and this level of dependency is undesirable. Take other enable-outlet mechanics from the past, like Delve. Delve enables (self milling) also enables other graveyard shenanigans, while Delve itself is enabled by just playing a grinding game. This sort of versatility is absent in Ingest/Processor which is a huge problem for me.
Once you realize that Ingest only exists to make processor work in limited and that processor is the real mechanic, Processor becomes a bit more forgivable. The truth is that processor isn't actually parasitic as it interacts with every exile effect that has been made or ever will be made.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
I don't think Magic sucks but I DO think a number of Magic's fundamental rules and concepts show the games age. I am certainly in the camp of mana bases implemented as lands that take up a large quantity of your deck does the game more ill than good, for one.
I've mentioned other things I see as weakness of the game to people on this forum and on other magic design places, but I find it just causes more arguments with people who haven't given the topic much real thought. Not too many magic custom designers actually have experience designing with other CCGs/unique IPs in mind where there are conscious decisions to encourage different types of gameplay then Magic or to improve upon what people feel are it's errors.
The article writer, while certainly entitled to his opinions, is not a designer and makes attacks that apply to the whole TCG genre moreso then magic specifically. Minus the mana argument.
BFZ is messy: 100% agree with you guys. This opinion is sort of a community consensus at this point. There's a massive failure in making the the themes and the faction mechanically distinct and organized. It's so frustrating that the most novel thing about BFZ is a unprecedented level of mechanical and thematical blending.
In a two faction set, if the factions are very distinct, limited becomes boring because cards from different factions don't play well together. A famous example of this was Scars or Mirrodin, which forced players to pick either Mirrans or Phyrexians making drafts linear and boring. It also made sealed a terrible format because you could never actually get enough phyrexians/non-phyrexians to make a cohesive deck.
You're talking about the separation between the two main factions but I was talking about the identity within each faction. There's no blending between Allies and Eldrazi in BFZ as much as there's little blending between Phyrexians and Mirrans in scar's block.
The blending I'm talking about is between the own factions. Some allies are allies for the sake of triggering Rally which is annoying because every creature you play you have to check the creature types instead of assume what's the creature type based solely on art, name or it's abilities which creates complexity. It also is annoying from a flavor perspective - why is Kor Castigator a ally while Shadow Glider isn't ? It's not the race, it's their class, it's not their art, it's not their name, it's not their abilities. It's arbitrary and rubs our OCD in a wrong, wrong way.
Eldrazi have similar issues. What's a Eldrazi Drone stands for ? I thought they were small ingesting little creeps but suddenly there's a 3/4 trample Drone and a (potentially) 10/5 drone while my 5/3 is not a drone. The fact they decided to classify some Eldrazi and not classify all of then is also a issue. Barrage Tyrant and Void Winnower have the same creature type while Vestige of Emrakul have a different creature type even through if someone asked me to separate then in two groups, Void Winnower would certainly be the loner based on p/t amounts and the fact he is the colorless one. Again, it just rubs our OCD in a wrong, wrong way.
Ingest/Processor are not good either: The other mechanic promoted in BFZ is Ingest/Processor mechanic which is another version of enable-outlet mechanics. They simply don't work for me and it's the single biggest failure in BFZ because of how parasitic it is. Ingest cards are useless without Processor cards and vice-versa and this level of dependency is undesirable. Take other enable-outlet mechanics from the past, like Delve. Delve enables (self milling) also enables other graveyard shenanigans, while Delve itself is enabled by just playing a grinding game. This sort of versatility is absent in Ingest/Processor which is a huge problem for me.
Once you realize that Ingest only exists to make processor work in limited and that processor is the real mechanic, Processor becomes a bit more forgivable. The truth is that processor isn't actually parasitic as it interacts with every exile effect that has been made or ever will be made.
The issue is that exile effects are not very common, interacting with it means almost nothing. By far the only reasonable case processor is being cast without the support of ingest is against a opponent playing Delve, which is sort of a "hate" interaction. If "exile mill" were more common and playable in MTG processors would be received in a different way.
The fact is, no matter the format you play, you can't play processor cards without playing some weird/useless exile shenanigans which on itself doesn't interacts with nothing else.
The issue is that exile effects are not very common, interacting with it means almost nothing. By far the only reasonable case processor is being cast without the support of ingest is against a opponent playing Delve, which is sort of a "hate" interaction. If "exile mill" were more common and playable in MTG processors would be received in a different way.
The fact is, no matter the format you play, you can't play processor cards without playing some weird/useless exile shenanigans which on itself doesn't interacts with nothing else.
There are actually a ton of exile effects in standard that are playable, many are already seeing play, and many others just need a home. In modern, virtually everyone packs ways to exile cards already. It is very easy to get opponents cards into exile.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
Standard has delve, which is an interaction with the processors I love. Though of course, not every processor is called a processor. But that's just more messy BFZ silliness.
I really enjoyed the part where you critiqued my entire ideology and belief system but I was let down that the rest of the podcast wasn't also about me
to the point that I'm an "armchair designer" that hasn't made games: I'm a writer. What I do is write. My subject is games, and specifically Magic. I'm not pretending to be a designer
re: Rosewater: you say yourselves that you have to ignore and filter out his hype about new sets. Doesn't that kind of prove my arguments that he's not relevant, if some percentage of his articles you just accept as "oh yeah this one is just ad copy"? But more fundamentally, you misunderstand what I mean about him. He is a marketing agent of the game, so even when he's speaking honestly about Tempest or whatever (and to be clear, I think he is by far at his most interesting when he's talking about the past, because he doesn't need to filter) he is still coming from the perspective of the Wizards employee. "A History of Video Games Presented by the Nintendo WiiU" is going to have certain biases that color the material, so the same applies to Rosewater
also he's not funny
on to the "why magic sucks" portion: I was disappointed you only touch on 1/4 of the points I made, but sure, price is a big one. The snowboarding analogy is well taken, but the difference I see is that there are physical objects required to be a Serious Snowboarder: you will physically go down a hill in a different way with different gear. Magic, though, only has some cards as more expensive than other cards due to their economic model of Magic as a TCG and not a living card game. With a different economic model, there could be the same games at a fraction of the cost
it's also telling that whenever people try to make comparisons about Magic's costs w/r/t the cost of other hobbies, they always compare it to physical hobbies for outdoorsy white people: snowboarding, fishing, hunting, that sort of thing. Doesn't it say a lot about this CARD GAME that the closest things in terms of cost are things that require so much equipment? Compared to other non-active games, anything that can be played at a kitchen table or on a couch, Magic is super expensive
yes, you don't have to spend as much if you don't want to be competitive. But the decision to make Magic more expensive when played competitively is a decision; it is not integral to the cards themselves.
I've taught Magic to a bunch of people too and one of the reasons many of them stop is, "it's so expensive"
sure, YOU know how to have fun with 10 thrown-together decks for $10, but the newer player just sees booster packs and goes "oh wow that is expensive"
Nice to have you here Kingcobweb. I have no issue whatsoever with you writing about games. However, just as you see fit to acknowledge Maro's own position, I don't feel any issue with noting your lack of experience. I don't dismiss your articles or points because of your inexperience, that's absolutely irrelevant to whether your points are valid or not, I just noted that these are the kind of limited-view arguments that I commonly see from inexperienced designers or people that talk about game design without having done much of it (armchair designers). Correlation, not necessarily causation. I believe I also noted I could be completely wrong on your lack of experience, but was guessing at it based on what you were writing. Seems I wasn't wrong though.
We unfortunately didn't have time to go into the other aspects of your post. As it was, we actually recorded a podcast long enough that we ended up splitting it into two podcasts. The price issue made for an interesting discussion because it's emblematic of a common misunderstanding of the broader player experience. People tend to look at everything on the competitive level, or whatever level they personally focus on, and assume that's all there is. I'm sure the topic of mana variance will eventually come up (as Reuben and I disagree heavily on whether it's a good thing) but I deeply doubt whether we'll be addressing your other arguments. They just aren't relevant to what we're interested in for this podcast.
It's arbitrary and rubs our OCD in a wrong, wrong way.
Again, it just rubs our OCD in a wrong, wrong way.
It's not OCD, it's just your completely normal human preference for order.
The problem with BFZ is not that you're expecting too much from it. It's that it is riddled with crappy, arbitrary design / development / creative decisions, that most Magic vets can identify as slop.
I'm sure there's a great story behind the dumpster fire that is BFZ. Maybe in 5-10 years, MaRo will be free to tell us what it is.
We'll be talking about it on our next podcast. But we haven't really changed our opinion. As we've said a lot, we thought it was going to be messy (and it's turned out even more messy than we expected) but we expected the gameplay to still be sweet.
I thought Sealed was really bad actually. Everyone seemed to be in 3 color, and no one had the mana to support it. I don't think I played a single game in which both myself and my opponent kept a full hand of 7. Everyone seemed to basically have two halves of two different decks. Half their cards played really well with themselves and did nothing with their other cards. The lack of well defined markers of ally status made deck building a chore as well. I didn't see processor work even once. Sealed seemed really bad to me.
I expect draft to be amazing though.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
I thought Sealed was really bad actually. Everyone seemed to be in 3 color, and no one had the mana to support it. I don't think I played a single game in which both myself and my opponent kept a full hand of 7. Everyone seemed to basically have two halves of two different decks. Half their cards played really well with themselves and did nothing with their other cards. The lack of well defined markers of ally status made deck building a chore as well. I didn't see processor work even once. Sealed seemed really bad to me.
I expect draft to be amazing though.
Bummer. I've had completely opposite experiences. There have been some people who were disappointed with what they got and the decks they made, but that happens in every Sealed event. Most people have been in two colors (with perhaps a land splash for Converge). Devoid tribe is a super fun control archetype. Ingest/Processing works quite well. Awaken does what it's supposed to do. Converge is a trap mechanic. Landfall is amazing of course. Rally is okay. (I think Allies were more fun the first time around.) Ramp works nicely. Sacrifice does its job. Etc.
I even actually made three decent, distinct decks from one of my sealed boxes - Grixis Devoid, Gruul Landfall, and a weak but quite playable Orzhov Awaken deck (which wanted nothing more than to Awaken a lone foil Shambling Vent). I foolishly tried out the WB deck against one of the strongest decks in the tournament and wound up 9th as a result. I will say that I really don't like how Landfall and Allies tread the same "sorcery speed combat effects" ground. So much of it becomes boring and feels very noobish ala Portal.
DIRECT DOWNLOAD
Podcast archive link
RSS feed
iTunes Channel
MTGcast page
Check out the Remaking Magic blog and ask us questions
In this episode:
Card Renders:
Contact details:
remakingmagic.tumblr.com
Reuben Covington
Twitter: @reubencovington
Email: reubencovington@gmail.com
MTGsalvation Account: Doombringer
Dan Felder
Email: minimallyexceptional@gmail.com
MTGsalvation Account: Stairc
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
PV wrote an article where he voiced his negative opinion on the design of Battle for Zendikar. He made some interesting points I didn't even consider yet.
Completed sets:
Iamur — The Underwater Set
Overworld — Pirates vs. Octopuses
Esparand — The Sands of Time
Unfinished Sets:
Siege of Ravnica — Eldrazi in Ravnica
Shandalar — The Mana Set
Iamur Reimagined — Iamur v2
You can find more creative projects on my page Antaresdesigns!
One of his complaints in that article was that wizards printed too many sweet lands. He honestly, somehow, considers that to be something wrong with BFZ. The article is pretty dumb if you ask me.
- Manite
On the topic of the podcast itself, I look forward to listening later today.
Edit: Having not yet listened, I think it might be fun to pre-emptively join in on the critique-a-card section.
Psychic Guard gets a 7/7.5 from me as-is. I like what it's doing in general. A 1/1 prowess for U seems fine with a bit of upside, and this upside is really clever. Things I would change - remove Soldier from the type line so it's just a Human Wizard, and give it a more appropriate name. I'd expect a Guard to protect my psyche, not to invade someone else's. These changes would bump it to around an 8.5, which is damn good for a common.
If the great appeal of the set are supposed to be its lands, but you can't play any of them realistically, isn't that a problem?
Completed sets:
Iamur — The Underwater Set
Overworld — Pirates vs. Octopuses
Esparand — The Sands of Time
Unfinished Sets:
Siege of Ravnica — Eldrazi in Ravnica
Shandalar — The Mana Set
Iamur Reimagined — Iamur v2
You can find more creative projects on my page Antaresdesigns!
Except that wasn't the complaint. The article openly states that the lands are cool and playable. The authors stated problem is that because there were so many, they individually wouldn't see as much play as if they had printed fewer. The complaint had nothing to do with power level or design. The author just things there were too many.
- Manite
I haven't listened yet either, but am with you here. Except it should be Psychic Spy, Human Rogue
Tbh I'm not a fan of that article. Especially after re-reading it when it wasn't 2am.
EDIT: I should re-iterate that both me and Dan think BFZ has issues, I just didn't think that PV's article was very good at hitting the arguments of what those issues are. As we said in the Playtesting episode, you often know something is wrong but rarely are you able to correctly identify what that is.
To be fair he may not of played it. I know I've only ever done like two drafts on magic online. Both of which worked perfectly though the UI and accessibility definitely leaves much to be desired.
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
As for the "too many cool lands" - that's an absurd reduction of the argument. The issue is that there are a high number of exciting lands that play well in decks with low color commitments... In a constructed format with heavy color commitments. If the format doesn't support the coolness, then that's awkward development. Of course, it's not as bad as it sounds - because there are many players that don't play constructed - but these are the players that tend to find nonbasic lands like this pretty unexciting. It's hard to get a casual excited about a land that costs 6 to sacrifice and gives you three 1/1s. That's a much spikier card, so it's a shame they aren't in a format where spikes can get to play more of them.
I would normally assume R&D is going to make it fine with the next expansion significantly lowering the color commitments, so they basically "turn on" once Tarkir rotates out, but I'm questioning such comforting assumptions more with the overall mess BFZ seems to be. It really looks like and incredibly well designed custom set. It doesn't look like something professional teams have polished for years.
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
Yeah, new players won't realize that Awaken isn't necesesarily a "goal". It's just the kicker/mana sink of the set and should be viewed similarly to Evoke other kicker variants. If it happens, great, but don't count on it. I think the biggest problem with Awaken for the uninitiated, is that it feels so exciting when you look at it, but when you can't play it, it's a major letdown.
Which would be easier to accept if it weren't Zendikar. Here I have to agree with the article "WotC does a fantastic job with Magic, and the only reason this set feels lackluster is that they have set such a high standard everywhere else." This is true of every profession in the world whether you're a dancer, a plumber, or a game designer - not every performance is going to top previous performances.
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
Right? Totem armor was reviled, and I heard a lot of "ugh, who wants to play defenders?" when Rise first came out.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Ex: Two years ago I've bought Legacy Delve for U$ 2.800,00, owned a total of 8 booster boxes playing with it in local events and now I can sell it for around the same price. If I do I spend only the interest rate of "borrowing" U$ 2.800,00 during two years while I actually gained a few dollars with prizes - I could even be gaining money by playing MTG. Some people will dismiss the financial aspect of it and assume players will buy cards a sunk costs - if they do that I wonder why they are engaging in a TRADING card game. It's a game for traders and collectors, this is the mind set of people who play this sort of game in a advanced level. Killing a goldfish is not attacking the game or it's features, he is attacking the taste of the fun base :/
My points on BFZ:
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
In a two faction set, if the factions are very distinct, limited becomes boring because cards from different factions don't play well together. A famous example of this was Scars or Mirrodin, which forced players to pick either Mirrans or Phyrexians making drafts linear and boring. It also made sealed a terrible format because you could never actually get enough phyrexians/non-phyrexians to make a cohesive deck.
Once you realize that Ingest only exists to make processor work in limited and that processor is the real mechanic, Processor becomes a bit more forgivable. The truth is that processor isn't actually parasitic as it interacts with every exile effect that has been made or ever will be made.
- Manite
I've mentioned other things I see as weakness of the game to people on this forum and on other magic design places, but I find it just causes more arguments with people who haven't given the topic much real thought. Not too many magic custom designers actually have experience designing with other CCGs/unique IPs in mind where there are conscious decisions to encourage different types of gameplay then Magic or to improve upon what people feel are it's errors.
The article writer, while certainly entitled to his opinions, is not a designer and makes attacks that apply to the whole TCG genre moreso then magic specifically. Minus the mana argument.
You're talking about the separation between the two main factions but I was talking about the identity within each faction. There's no blending between Allies and Eldrazi in BFZ as much as there's little blending between Phyrexians and Mirrans in scar's block.
The blending I'm talking about is between the own factions. Some allies are allies for the sake of triggering Rally which is annoying because every creature you play you have to check the creature types instead of assume what's the creature type based solely on art, name or it's abilities which creates complexity. It also is annoying from a flavor perspective - why is Kor Castigator a ally while Shadow Glider isn't ? It's not the race, it's their class, it's not their art, it's not their name, it's not their abilities. It's arbitrary and rubs our OCD in a wrong, wrong way.
Eldrazi have similar issues. What's a Eldrazi Drone stands for ? I thought they were small ingesting little creeps but suddenly there's a 3/4 trample Drone and a (potentially) 10/5 drone while my 5/3 is not a drone. The fact they decided to classify some Eldrazi and not classify all of then is also a issue. Barrage Tyrant and Void Winnower have the same creature type while Vestige of Emrakul have a different creature type even through if someone asked me to separate then in two groups, Void Winnower would certainly be the loner based on p/t amounts and the fact he is the colorless one. Again, it just rubs our OCD in a wrong, wrong way.
The issue is that exile effects are not very common, interacting with it means almost nothing. By far the only reasonable case processor is being cast without the support of ingest is against a opponent playing Delve, which is sort of a "hate" interaction. If "exile mill" were more common and playable in MTG processors would be received in a different way.
The fact is, no matter the format you play, you can't play processor cards without playing some weird/useless exile shenanigans which on itself doesn't interacts with nothing else.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
There are actually a ton of exile effects in standard that are playable, many are already seeing play, and many others just need a home. In modern, virtually everyone packs ways to exile cards already. It is very easy to get opponents cards into exile.
- Manite
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
to the point that I'm an "armchair designer" that hasn't made games: I'm a writer. What I do is write. My subject is games, and specifically Magic. I'm not pretending to be a designer
re: Rosewater: you say yourselves that you have to ignore and filter out his hype about new sets. Doesn't that kind of prove my arguments that he's not relevant, if some percentage of his articles you just accept as "oh yeah this one is just ad copy"? But more fundamentally, you misunderstand what I mean about him. He is a marketing agent of the game, so even when he's speaking honestly about Tempest or whatever (and to be clear, I think he is by far at his most interesting when he's talking about the past, because he doesn't need to filter) he is still coming from the perspective of the Wizards employee. "A History of Video Games Presented by the Nintendo WiiU" is going to have certain biases that color the material, so the same applies to Rosewater
also he's not funny
on to the "why magic sucks" portion: I was disappointed you only touch on 1/4 of the points I made, but sure, price is a big one. The snowboarding analogy is well taken, but the difference I see is that there are physical objects required to be a Serious Snowboarder: you will physically go down a hill in a different way with different gear. Magic, though, only has some cards as more expensive than other cards due to their economic model of Magic as a TCG and not a living card game. With a different economic model, there could be the same games at a fraction of the cost
it's also telling that whenever people try to make comparisons about Magic's costs w/r/t the cost of other hobbies, they always compare it to physical hobbies for outdoorsy white people: snowboarding, fishing, hunting, that sort of thing. Doesn't it say a lot about this CARD GAME that the closest things in terms of cost are things that require so much equipment? Compared to other non-active games, anything that can be played at a kitchen table or on a couch, Magic is super expensive
yes, you don't have to spend as much if you don't want to be competitive. But the decision to make Magic more expensive when played competitively is a decision; it is not integral to the cards themselves.
I've taught Magic to a bunch of people too and one of the reasons many of them stop is, "it's so expensive"
sure, YOU know how to have fun with 10 thrown-together decks for $10, but the newer player just sees booster packs and goes "oh wow that is expensive"
We unfortunately didn't have time to go into the other aspects of your post. As it was, we actually recorded a podcast long enough that we ended up splitting it into two podcasts. The price issue made for an interesting discussion because it's emblematic of a common misunderstanding of the broader player experience. People tend to look at everything on the competitive level, or whatever level they personally focus on, and assume that's all there is. I'm sure the topic of mana variance will eventually come up (as Reuben and I disagree heavily on whether it's a good thing) but I deeply doubt whether we'll be addressing your other arguments. They just aren't relevant to what we're interested in for this podcast.
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
The problem with BFZ is not that you're expecting too much from it. It's that it is riddled with crappy, arbitrary design / development / creative decisions, that most Magic vets can identify as slop.
I'm sure there's a great story behind the dumpster fire that is BFZ. Maybe in 5-10 years, MaRo will be free to tell us what it is.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
I expect draft to be amazing though.
- Manite
Bummer. I've had completely opposite experiences. There have been some people who were disappointed with what they got and the decks they made, but that happens in every Sealed event. Most people have been in two colors (with perhaps a land splash for Converge). Devoid tribe is a super fun control archetype. Ingest/Processing works quite well. Awaken does what it's supposed to do. Converge is a trap mechanic. Landfall is amazing of course. Rally is okay. (I think Allies were more fun the first time around.) Ramp works nicely. Sacrifice does its job. Etc.
I even actually made three decent, distinct decks from one of my sealed boxes - Grixis Devoid, Gruul Landfall, and a weak but quite playable Orzhov Awaken deck (which wanted nothing more than to Awaken a lone foil Shambling Vent). I foolishly tried out the WB deck against one of the strongest decks in the tournament and wound up 9th as a result. I will say that I really don't like how Landfall and Allies tread the same "sorcery speed combat effects" ground. So much of it becomes boring and feels very noobish ala Portal.