Okay, so I posted in the art forum as well, but it doesn't look like anyone actually goes there these days, so I'm wondering if this is a better place for this kind of thing. I had some ideas for an optimized version of the MTG cardframe and decided to mock them up.
I've moved a couple of things around and added a few things. Mainly, I've separated the Card Type line from the subtype, and here's why: I wanted all of the most relevant mechanical information to be in generally the same area, near the top left of the card so people can quickly analyze cards in their hand by fanning them out and comparing. That's why I also moved the power and toughness up there.
The other thing you'll notice is that there's a flipped p/t at the bottom right with a symbol next to it. That's there for the opponent to see more easily what's on the other end of the table. The symbol is the symbol for haste, as is written in the text of the card. The idea is that the bottom right corner will show the opponent the power and toughness and any creature keywords the card has in the most condensed way possible.
I've also moved the set/rarity symbol to where the security sticker used to be. I figure that the symbol itself can be holographic and serve the same purpose.
The mana cost is in an entirely different format too, saving space on symbols and making it easier to count to a converted mana cost with just numbers rather than both symbols and numbers.
There are, of course, some issues. The mana cost is more condensed, but slightly larger. I'm also unsure about the effect this will have on the symbols that represent produced mana, but my guess is that they can remain the same and it won't really cause any issues. It also makes things like hybrid mana and colorless costs difficult to handle, but I think I can mock up special frames for those symbols. I'm more concerned about the size of the text than most of anything else though.
Some of these changes are interesting ideas but aren't aesthetically pleasing. Making the power and toughness in the bottom corner upside down feels like a mistake. It just doesn't look good. Some players cast their creatures upside down when they are in summoning sickness to help newer players read and understand cards, but it's not necessary to print part of the text upside down. I also think it's counter intuitive for the subtype of the creature to be in larger text in the center of the card while the actual type is smaller.
The set symbol being in the bottom center and foiling it seems like a change that is too late to make. Perhaps foiling the set symbol but leaving in the same spot would be a positive change.
I feel the mana update uses too much space for little improvement in understanding the CMC and color requirements of the card.
The idea of a evergreen keywords being in the bottom hand corner is interesting and potentially worth exploring but it seems like it'd be really cluttered on cards like Atraxa, Praetors' Voice. I'm also not sure if I like all caps in the title of the card.
I like the colored border of the card on the outer edge.
I'm sorry I have some much critical feedback, I can tell you put a lot of thought and effort in designing these frames. You have some good ideas but the standard frame has gone through so few changes in the past 20 years it's hard to justify so many changes. I do think these are better than the Future Sight frames (i.e. Bitter Ordeal, Quagnoth)
I'm going to try to get through each of your design changes and talk about them individually.
Mana Wheel based Costs - While I love the idea of putting a mana wheel on the front face of the card where people can see it, I think this sollution to displaying mana costs isn't particularly space efficient and doesn't offer obvious ways to support more complex mana costs with hybrid mana, phyrexian mana, 2brid mana, etc. I personally think the best way to do mana costs is in a future shifted style, with the mana cost simply being moved from horizontal in top right corner, to vertical in top left corner. The old argument in favor of doing this is that the bulk of magic players are right handed. So, when they fan out their hand, they can see the top left corner of each card, meaning that's where important information like costs should be. Of course, the difficulty with this is the asymmetry it introduces to the card which I expect would be aesthetically off putting to many people.
P/T in top left corner - I like this idea but not the implementation. If possible, it would be nice to have P/T in top left corner instead of bottom right by similar logic as above. Just make it normal sized though and don't duplicate P/T in the bottom right.
Inverted P/T in bottom right - First off, its duplicated information which is undesirable. Second, it looks bad. Third, opponents will still need to flip the card around to read the card text, so this seems like a design element that helps no one.
Split type and sub type line - I don't think this is a good idea. Its taking what used to only be one line of text and splits it into two, which means you are using space less efficiently.
Security Foil Set Symbol - I love this idea, but there are probably cost related reasons not to do this including: Needing many types of security foil, one for each rarity but common, requiring better security foil tech capable of cutting and using almost arbitrary security foil shapes. Maybe these problems aren't actually problems, I'm not familiar enough with card manufacture to know.
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
So here are some more examples. Kozilek illustrates how unique mana costs can be handled and Avacyn shows off a number of keyword symbols. (I'm not actually sure if I got the symbols correct though).
Someone also pointed out to me that full art looks much better than a solid color, so I'm thinking this could be done with normal cards going forward as well.
I also accidentally moved the Legendary from Arjun down to the "descriptor" line, but these two fix that. Although, if I was in charge, then it wouldn't have rules baggage and it could be in the descriptor line anyway.
You lose so much lore and flavor by butchering the card frames in this way.
Can you expand on this? I understand some of the other criticisms, but I am not sure how Lore and Flavor is sacrificed for this frame.
Anyway, I actually like the look of the frames, but I do have the same criticisms as others. The upside down P/T is weird and not really helpful. Having the symbols at the bottom and the text on the card to detail abilities is superfluous and can be confusing (now I have to learn what "Menace" means and what the symbol is for it). And, the color wheel in the top left is a good idea that just lacks execution. That is, I think there could be improvements to how mana costs are displayed (especially for things like Khalni Hydra) but I don't think this is the way to do it.
However, I do like that art goes all the way to the edge of the card without borders. I like the placement of the Supertype and Card Type on Kozilek and Avacyn and then having a separate line for the subtypes. This does free up some room to give things more subtypes (if they want). Not sure this is the best execution, but I don't think it looks bad.
I didn't even notice the symbols. Geez.... I'm still trying to avoid posting a long tirade so I'll keep it short.
A lot of the design elements appear to be there because of other cards games, apparently without considering potential negative impact.
Let's take Yu-Gi-Oh Trap and Spell cards of which there are three types of the first and six types of the latter for a total of nine card types. These are functionally similar to instants, sorceries, and enchantment cards. Seven of the different types are denoted by six different symbols. A memory excercise but not insurmountable. Only marginally harder than trying to memorize the stupid tribute stars and far easier than the obscene rules for summoning creatures.
MTG lists 128 keywords. Menace is 702.118. WotC would be completely out of their minds if they created icons for just half of those keywords. Those symbols won't go away and worse, errata will undoubtedly be applied. Can you imagine?
AP "Ok this has a... so..."
NAP "No dude, that was errataed to be a ."
AP "Are you sure? Judge!"
Judge "lets see... Oracle says it is a ? Wait... what the **** does mean? **** it."
I suspect this is a bare bones mockup, but look at the designs both classic and modern cardframes.
"Elemental" detail is present on both classic and modern cards, they look magical. They look special and interesting.
I thought I already mentioned this but apparently I'm wrong. Texturing can be added later to add that kind of effect. Right now I'm only concerned about functionality.
I didn't even notice the symbols. Geez.... I'm still trying to avoid posting a long tirade so I'll keep it short.
A lot of the design elements appear to be there because of other cards games, apparently without considering potential negative impact.
Let's take Yu-Gi-Oh Trap and Spell cards of which there are three types of the first and six types of the latter for a total of nine card types. These are functionally similar to instants, sorceries, and enchantment cards. Seven of the different types are denoted by six different symbols. A memory excercise but not insurmountable. Only marginally harder than trying to memorize the stupid tribute stars and far easier than the obscene rules for summoning creatures.
MTG lists 128 keywords. Menace is 702.118. WotC would be completely out of their minds if they created icons for just half of those keywords. Those symbols won't go away and worse, errata will undoubtedly be applied. Can you imagine?
AP "Ok this has a... so..."
NAP "No dude, that was errataed to be a ."
AP "Are you sure? Judge!"
Judge "lets see... Oracle says it is a ? Wait... what the **** does mean? **** it."
The symbols are really only intended to be used for evergreen combat keywords, stuff that common creatures most frequently feature and will show up in every set. It's not so much fixing a problem as it is refining what can be refined. They are intended to let the opponent quickly analyze what's across the table without always needing to pick up the card or turn their head in a weird way. Yes, learning curve is a concern, but the fact that it's info that's already availible on other parts of the card means that nobody needs to take advantage of this particular feature if they don't want to. It's just another option.
I didn't even notice the symbols. Geez.... I'm still trying to avoid posting a long tirade so I'll keep it short.
A lot of the design elements appear to be there because of other cards games, apparently without considering potential negative impact.
Let's take Yu-Gi-Oh Trap and Spell cards of which there are three types of the first and six types of the latter for a total of nine card types. These are functionally similar to instants, sorceries, and enchantment cards. Seven of the different types are denoted by six different symbols. A memory excercise but not insurmountable. Only marginally harder than trying to memorize the stupid tribute stars and far easier than the obscene rules for summoning creatures.
MTG lists 128 keywords. Menace is 702.118. WotC would be completely out of their minds if they created icons for just half of those keywords. Those symbols won't go away and worse, errata will undoubtedly be applied. Can you imagine?
AP "Ok this has a... so..."
NAP "No dude, that was errataed to be a ."
AP "Are you sure? Judge!"
Judge "lets see... Oracle says it is a ? Wait... what the **** does mean? **** it."
Yu-Gi-Oh is different in that the card type analogs you mention are put on the card only as symbols. The little lightning bolt icon next to the words "Spell Card" or "Trap Card" means that it's effectively the Yu-Gi-Oh equivalent of an instant, but there is no explicitly written word for that type on the card (Quick-Play, in this case).
The render would have both "flying" and a symbol denoting a pair of wings on the card. There's always the word "flying" to work off of if the player doesn't like looking at the equivalent symbol. No such luxury exists in Yu-Gi-Oh to my knowledge.
Of course, I don't necessarily agree with the idea of having the symbols on the card in the first place, but for what it's worth, the symbols hide exactly zero game information in the way that Yu-Gi-Oh's type symbols do.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How to use card tags (please use them for everybody's sanity)
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format Minimum deck size: 60 Maximum number of identical cards: 4 Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
I didn't even notice the symbols. Geez.... I'm still trying to avoid posting a long tirade so I'll keep it short.
A lot of the design elements appear to be there because of other cards games, apparently without considering potential negative impact.
Let's take Yu-Gi-Oh Trap and Spell cards of which there are three types of the first and six types of the latter for a total of nine card types. These are functionally similar to instants, sorceries, and enchantment cards. Seven of the different types are denoted by six different symbols. A memory excercise but not insurmountable. Only marginally harder than trying to memorize the stupid tribute stars and far easier than the obscene rules for summoning creatures.
MTG lists 128 keywords. Menace is 702.118. WotC would be completely out of their minds if they created icons for just half of those keywords. Those symbols won't go away and worse, errata will undoubtedly be applied. Can you imagine?
AP "Ok this has a... so..."
NAP "No dude, that was errataed to be a ."
AP "Are you sure? Judge!"
Judge "lets see... Oracle says it is a ? Wait... what the **** does mean? **** it."
Yu-Gi-Oh is different in that the card type analogs you mention are put on the card only as symbols. The little lightning bolt icon next to the words "Spell Card" or "Trap Card" means that it's effectively the Yu-Gi-Oh equivalent of an instant, but there is no explicitly written word for that type on the card (Quick-Play, in this case).
The render would have both "flying" and a symbol denoting a pair of wings on the card. There's always the word "flying" to work off of if the player doesn't like looking at the equivalent symbol. No such luxury exists in Yu-Gi-Oh to my knowledge.
Of course, I don't necessarily agree with the idea of having the symbols on the card in the first place, but for what it's worth, the symbols hide exactly zero game information in the way that Yu-Gi-Oh's type symbols do.
Maybe not at common but what about higher rarities?
A symbol based keyword would encourage WotC to drop the keyword altogether at some point, maybe at Mythic or those ridiculous Master Pieces. As an aside, In the examples above, it just serves to make the whole card look busy, never mind redundant as you mentioned.
I can see the Un-Set card for that though. A 4/4 Angel with a wall of 128 symbols for every keyword.
Alright, so here's a new mockup of Avacyn with vertical mana symbols, larger power and toughness in the top left, a slightly different color scheme, and no keyword symbols in the bottom right.
I want to keep the flipped p/t down in the right because it still accomplishes what I want it to without any real confusion. It seems to work really nicely for playing cards, so why not Magic?
I have some thoughts about this card frame approach and I want to share a variant frame I made, for comparison.
Please note that this is a planeswalker full-art variation, and in the normal version of the frame, you'd see card background instead of art in the left sidebar and behind the text box.
Things I like about your design:
- Lots of critical card information in a closely packed glance area at top left
- Large background area allows for frame variants like nyx, expedition, devoid
Things I don't like about your design (I'm looking at the Avacyn render):
- Lots of variable-size bubbles, ungainly and cut into art box
- Missed opportunity to revamp mana display system
- Obligatory full-art layout makes most old art unreprintable
- Font choices
- Putting mechanically meaningful text in collector info area
- Separating type and subtype costs additional vertical space
Things I like about my design:
- CMC calculation is easy
- Most card information is confined to left column
- Card type symbol
- (not shown) Sidebar can be used for large-format P/T display
Things I don't like about my design:
- It's unclear what to do with the sidebar for non-creature, non-PW types, and it looks weird to expand it to the left
- No obvious space available for holostamp
- Reduced background area restricts options for variant frames severely
- PW starting loyalty is outside left sidebar area
- Centered text is often weird
So I think if we put our heads together we can come up with some solutions to these problems and maybe borrow some good features from each other also. What do you think?
This latest attempt looks significantly better. However, many of the problems still exist.
- The separated type/subtype "lines" is confusing; I could see doing two lines one atop the other, above the normal text box. But separated is nonsense.
- The duplicate information is still annoying/inappropriate. Your opponent needs to know the WHOLE CARD, not the p/t. Do you forget what the P/t of your opponent's creates are regularly? I've never known this to be an issue.
- The black bar w/ reverse p/t and the set symbol seems wasteful. Set symbol can easily be tucked in the type/subtype bar/bars.\
- Why put the symbols on the left, rather than right?
Finally - I love full art cards. But making all cards full art is actually quite busy, and quite restrictive for artists. "Make sure half of your art is so unimpactful that we can cover it w/ a text box and no one will be confused." You've taken a premium thing and made it... everyday. And it's immediately apparent that making it everyday causes problems.
Final thought: At least full art removes the "lack of flavor" from your format, since your format is now "clear text boxes over art atop a black bar." So the art alone grants flavor.
Test: Take a crappy draft common you'll never use again (maybe you were about to throw out your 13th copy of Final Reward), take a black marker to the art and completely black it out. Now look at the card. That boarder is oozing flavor.
Test: Take a crappy draft common you'll never use again (maybe you were about to throw out your 13th copy of Final Reward), take a black marker to the art and completely black it out. Now look at the card. That boarder is oozing flavor.
I suspect this is a bare bones mockup, but look at the designs both classic and modern cardframes.
"Elemental" detail is present on both classic and modern cards, they look magical. They look special and interesting.
I thought I already mentioned this but apparently I'm wrong. Texturing can be added later to add that kind of effect. Right now I'm only concerned about functionality.
Basically, border textures are being ignored because it doesn't serve a function and can be added later for aesthetic appeal. None of the changes to the card frame at the moment precludes the possibility of border textures. They are being ignored at the moment to make iteration faster and easier.
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'm pretty sure it hasn't been addressed. This design makes the cards look generic, bland, and confusing. I have yet to see a reason in favor of any of the changes in question.
For example, why does my mana cost have to be vertical and take up part of the card frame separate from the card name? Current cards fit both aspects into a single text box; this latest version does not. It's change-for-change's sake that actually does the opposite of the thread's title - De-optimizes. Trading 1 text box for 2 is not helpful, but it's done at least THREE TIMES on the current design.
I'm pretty sure it hasn't been addressed. This design makes the cards look generic, bland, and confusing. I have yet to see a reason in favor of any of the changes in question.
For example, why does my mana cost have to be vertical and take up part of the card frame separate from the card name? Current cards fit both aspects into a single text box; this latest version does not. It's change-for-change's sake that actually does the opposite of the thread's title - De-optimizes. Trading 1 text box for 2 is not helpful, but it's done at least THREE TIMES on the current design.
People have been providing reasons throughout the thread. Left oriented vertical costs have already been addressed. If you are familiar with the history of future sight cards, then you should be aware of the arguments already.
The old argument in favor of doing this is that the bulk of magic players are right handed. So, when they fan out their hand, they can see the top left corner of each card, meaning that's where important information like costs should be. Of course, the difficulty with this is the asymmetry it introduces to the card which I expect would be aesthetically off putting to many people.
This is at least the second comment you have made which hasn't featured meaningful criticism or critique. Thank you for sharing your impressions. Feel free to withhold them now that you have shared them.
So I think if we put our heads together we can come up with some solutions to these problems and maybe borrow some good features from each other also. What do you think?
I like pretty much all of your changes. Regarding the security holo stamp, if its technologically feasible, I really do think embedding the holo stamp into/as the set symbol makes a lot of sense.
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
1. Persuasive reasons? Clearly not. It's been quite some time since Future Sight with a minor cardface revision, so you need more than old arguments to persuade me that left > right costs.
1a. Furthermore, 2nd text box is cluttering, not optimizing. So the thread promises one thing, then does another.
2. You say:
This is at least the second comment you have made which hasn't featured meaningful criticism or critique. Thank you for sharing your impressions. Feel free to withhold them now that you have shared them.
How about this: What, in principle, would count as an acceptable criticism for you? If you can't offer an example, your stance is inherently untestable, and thus posting it for critique is deceptive, as nothing can count as such a critique.
Things I don't like about your design (I'm looking at the Avacyn render):
- Lots of variable-size bubbles, ungainly and cut into art box
- Missed opportunity to revamp mana display system
- Obligatory full-art layout makes most old art unreprintable
- Font choices
- Putting mechanically meaningful text in collector info area
- Separating type and subtype costs additional vertical space
Out of curiosity, what fonts are you using on that card? I know they're the normal MTG fonts, I just can't seem to find specifically what they are.
Also, here's my take on your design. P/T on the lower left, as that's still easily viewable when fanning cards and is less likely to be confused as some math equation that's part of the mana cost when it's separated (lots of numbers in a tight space can get confusing), half-art, type lines reunited above the art box, and no flipped P/T.
I purposely excluded the card type symbol for the same reason I ended up removing the keyword symbols, as they would require learning what they mean. I have some ideas on how to use textures to identify each card type, like with lands and artifacts, as well as for things that can be cast at instant speed.
Why is the information in the art box, rather than in empty space already on the card? (IE, text box in the corner; mana in the title line?).
I'm also not sure I like the type line being a cut-out, rather than having it's own line. It means the line shifts in size when the card is an instant vs a legendary creature - mutant ninja turtle.
I will say this: This latest version looks much better.
Edit: Another reason why this won't work: 1WGRBU will run dangerously close to the p/t box. For classic and modern frames, 1BB and 1BU took up the same space. Here, they take up different numbers of text boxes.
Mind you, you could "solve" this by putting the p/t in a box on the other side... or by putting it back where it belongs in the lower right hand corner.
....
Also, while you're at it, you might as well just make new mana symbols with a space for the # inside of the symbol; so they work like colorless symbols (IE, 3 would take up the same space as a white mana symbol with a "3" in it representing 3 white mana.) Interestingly this would also let you print color-identifiers by printing a white mana symbol with a 0 in it.... both of these innovations would actually add something to the existing card design; with mana costs being more straightforward and easier to read (a green mana symbol with a seven in it is easier to read than GGGGGGG; same with an energy symbol with a 7 in it than EEEEEEE).
Why is the information in the art box, rather than in empty space already on the card? (IE, text box in the corner; mana in the title line?).
I'm also not sure I like the type line being a cut-out, rather than having it's own line. It means the line shifts in size when the card is an instant vs a legendary creature - mutant ninja turtle.
I will say this: This latest version looks much better.
The idea is to allow the name line and mana cost each have as much room as they will ever need. If a name ends up being really long, that shouldn't limit how it should be costed. If a card costs a lot of different kinds of mana, like Progenitus, that shouldn't limit how long the name can be. Compromising small portions of the edge of the art is worth the flexibility, I think, especially when the art is actually larger on this frame.
Also, while you're at it, you might as well just make new mana symbols with a space for the # inside of the symbol; so they work like colorless symbols (IE, 3 would take up the same space as a white mana symbol with a "3" in it representing 3 white mana.) Interestingly this would also let you print color-identifiers by printing a white mana symbol with a 0 in it.... both of these innovations would actually add something to the existing card design; with mana costs being more straightforward and easier to read (a green mana symbol with a seven in it is easier to read than GGGGGGG; same with an energy symbol with a 7 in it than EEEEEEE).
I tried that with my first iteration, but somebody brought up color-blind accessibility. If a symbol is just a circle with a number in it, it's much harder for color-blind people to be able to tell what mana to spend on it.
Re: Two boxes for name/cost and type/subtype. I think the current convention of "don't overdo it" has been practical up until now. I would hate it if Progenitus's cost were to become standard, or if 5-6 creature types were to become standard. Legendary Creature - Human Orc Ninja Assassin Soldier Rebel, for example. The current card frame guards against this, in a sense.
However, I would be interested in optional 2nd boxes for relevant cards. Arguably, I'd like to see a Legendary "subtype" line, along the lines of Planeswalkers, that helps to fix the flavor of the legend rule; and this could go out-of-box in some cases. Similarly, some names/costs might require two lines of text. I'd be okay with a 2nd line of text below the relevant one; these would be special, not standard.
Re: Circle - You'd need it to be a symbol with a number in it. A tree with a number. A sun with a number. A fireball? with a number. A teardrop with a number. And... uh... Black's not gonna work, is it? This is why I don't think your changes work.
It would be a lot easier for WOTC to just stop printing stupid things than it would be to revise the cardframe to allow them to print stupid things. Progenitus is kind of stupid, and it'd be more stupid with a longer name. EEEEEE is very stupid. And, yes, GGGGGG is very stupid. If you've got 5 green mana, I'm pretty sure the rest can be colorless.
Honestly the best thing they could do for the card frame is continuing to find ways to make more room to show off the Artwork of the card. I feel like the Artwork is something that draws a lot of people into the game as well as keeps current fans excited due to the uniqueness of the art and how it's tied into the world's MtG encompasses. It's a really big deal for me, at least, because the creativity and talent of some artists blows my mind and really pulls me into the world of Magic. Even making tiny adjustments for more art on a card makes all the difference.
I like the current frame style a lot, it's elegant and matches well.
I've moved a couple of things around and added a few things. Mainly, I've separated the Card Type line from the subtype, and here's why: I wanted all of the most relevant mechanical information to be in generally the same area, near the top left of the card so people can quickly analyze cards in their hand by fanning them out and comparing. That's why I also moved the power and toughness up there.
The other thing you'll notice is that there's a flipped p/t at the bottom right with a symbol next to it. That's there for the opponent to see more easily what's on the other end of the table. The symbol is the symbol for haste, as is written in the text of the card. The idea is that the bottom right corner will show the opponent the power and toughness and any creature keywords the card has in the most condensed way possible.
I've also moved the set/rarity symbol to where the security sticker used to be. I figure that the symbol itself can be holographic and serve the same purpose.
The mana cost is in an entirely different format too, saving space on symbols and making it easier to count to a converted mana cost with just numbers rather than both symbols and numbers.
There are, of course, some issues. The mana cost is more condensed, but slightly larger. I'm also unsure about the effect this will have on the symbols that represent produced mana, but my guess is that they can remain the same and it won't really cause any issues. It also makes things like hybrid mana and colorless costs difficult to handle, but I think I can mock up special frames for those symbols. I'm more concerned about the size of the text than most of anything else though.
What do you guys think?
Edit: Here's an example of a multicolor card:
The set symbol being in the bottom center and foiling it seems like a change that is too late to make. Perhaps foiling the set symbol but leaving in the same spot would be a positive change.
I feel the mana update uses too much space for little improvement in understanding the CMC and color requirements of the card.
The idea of a evergreen keywords being in the bottom hand corner is interesting and potentially worth exploring but it seems like it'd be really cluttered on cards like Atraxa, Praetors' Voice. I'm also not sure if I like all caps in the title of the card.
I like the colored border of the card on the outer edge.
I'm sorry I have some much critical feedback, I can tell you put a lot of thought and effort in designing these frames. You have some good ideas but the standard frame has gone through so few changes in the past 20 years it's hard to justify so many changes. I do think these are better than the Future Sight frames (i.e. Bitter Ordeal, Quagnoth)
UBRKess, Dissident MageUBR - Controlling Dissidents
GRhonas the IndomitableG - Indomitable Four Drops
WUBOloro, Ageless AsceticWUB - Loot & Renanimate
You lose so much lore and flavor by butchering the card frames in this way.
Mana Wheel based Costs - While I love the idea of putting a mana wheel on the front face of the card where people can see it, I think this sollution to displaying mana costs isn't particularly space efficient and doesn't offer obvious ways to support more complex mana costs with hybrid mana, phyrexian mana, 2brid mana, etc. I personally think the best way to do mana costs is in a future shifted style, with the mana cost simply being moved from horizontal in top right corner, to vertical in top left corner. The old argument in favor of doing this is that the bulk of magic players are right handed. So, when they fan out their hand, they can see the top left corner of each card, meaning that's where important information like costs should be. Of course, the difficulty with this is the asymmetry it introduces to the card which I expect would be aesthetically off putting to many people.
P/T in top left corner - I like this idea but not the implementation. If possible, it would be nice to have P/T in top left corner instead of bottom right by similar logic as above. Just make it normal sized though and don't duplicate P/T in the bottom right.
Inverted P/T in bottom right - First off, its duplicated information which is undesirable. Second, it looks bad. Third, opponents will still need to flip the card around to read the card text, so this seems like a design element that helps no one.
Split type and sub type line - I don't think this is a good idea. Its taking what used to only be one line of text and splits it into two, which means you are using space less efficiently.
Security Foil Set Symbol - I love this idea, but there are probably cost related reasons not to do this including: Needing many types of security foil, one for each rarity but common, requiring better security foil tech capable of cutting and using almost arbitrary security foil shapes. Maybe these problems aren't actually problems, I'm not familiar enough with card manufacture to know.
- Manite
Someone also pointed out to me that full art looks much better than a solid color, so I'm thinking this could be done with normal cards going forward as well.
I also accidentally moved the Legendary from Arjun down to the "descriptor" line, but these two fix that. Although, if I was in charge, then it wouldn't have rules baggage and it could be in the descriptor line anyway.
Also, sorry the images are so large.
I wrote this long post about consistency, color blindness, CMC control, etc until I realized it just effectively repeats the above. So there ya go.
Anyway, I actually like the look of the frames, but I do have the same criticisms as others. The upside down P/T is weird and not really helpful. Having the symbols at the bottom and the text on the card to detail abilities is superfluous and can be confusing (now I have to learn what "Menace" means and what the symbol is for it). And, the color wheel in the top left is a good idea that just lacks execution. That is, I think there could be improvements to how mana costs are displayed (especially for things like Khalni Hydra) but I don't think this is the way to do it.
However, I do like that art goes all the way to the edge of the card without borders. I like the placement of the Supertype and Card Type on Kozilek and Avacyn and then having a separate line for the subtypes. This does free up some room to give things more subtypes (if they want). Not sure this is the best execution, but I don't think it looks bad.
"Elemental" detail is present on both classic and modern cards, they look magical. They look special and interesting.
A lot of the design elements appear to be there because of other cards games, apparently without considering potential negative impact.
Let's take Yu-Gi-Oh Trap and Spell cards of which there are three types of the first and six types of the latter for a total of nine card types. These are functionally similar to instants, sorceries, and enchantment cards. Seven of the different types are denoted by six different symbols. A memory excercise but not insurmountable. Only marginally harder than trying to memorize the stupid tribute stars and far easier than the obscene rules for summoning creatures.
MTG lists 128 keywords. Menace is 702.118. WotC would be completely out of their minds if they created icons for just half of those keywords. Those symbols won't go away and worse, errata will undoubtedly be applied. Can you imagine?
AP "Ok this has a... so..."
NAP "No dude, that was errataed to be a ."
AP "Are you sure? Judge!"
Judge "lets see... Oracle says it is a ? Wait... what the **** does mean? **** it."
Yu-Gi-Oh is different in that the card type analogs you mention are put on the card only as symbols. The little lightning bolt icon next to the words "Spell Card" or "Trap Card" means that it's effectively the Yu-Gi-Oh equivalent of an instant, but there is no explicitly written word for that type on the card (Quick-Play, in this case).
The render would have both "flying" and a symbol denoting a pair of wings on the card. There's always the word "flying" to work off of if the player doesn't like looking at the equivalent symbol. No such luxury exists in Yu-Gi-Oh to my knowledge.
Of course, I don't necessarily agree with the idea of having the symbols on the card in the first place, but for what it's worth, the symbols hide exactly zero game information in the way that Yu-Gi-Oh's type symbols do.
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format
Minimum deck size: 60
Maximum number of identical cards: 4
Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
Maybe not at common but what about higher rarities?
A symbol based keyword would encourage WotC to drop the keyword altogether at some point, maybe at Mythic or those ridiculous Master Pieces. As an aside, In the examples above, it just serves to make the whole card look busy, never mind redundant as you mentioned.
I can see the Un-Set card for that though. A 4/4 Angel with a wall of 128 symbols for every keyword.
I want to keep the flipped p/t down in the right because it still accomplishes what I want it to without any real confusion. It seems to work really nicely for playing cards, so why not Magic?
Please note that this is a planeswalker full-art variation, and in the normal version of the frame, you'd see card background instead of art in the left sidebar and behind the text box.
Things I like about your design:
- Lots of critical card information in a closely packed glance area at top left
- Large background area allows for frame variants like nyx, expedition, devoid
Things I don't like about your design (I'm looking at the Avacyn render):
- Lots of variable-size bubbles, ungainly and cut into art box
- Missed opportunity to revamp mana display system
- Obligatory full-art layout makes most old art unreprintable
- Font choices
- Putting mechanically meaningful text in collector info area
- Separating type and subtype costs additional vertical space
Things I like about my design:
- CMC calculation is easy
- Most card information is confined to left column
- Card type symbol
- (not shown) Sidebar can be used for large-format P/T display
Things I don't like about my design:
- It's unclear what to do with the sidebar for non-creature, non-PW types, and it looks weird to expand it to the left
- No obvious space available for holostamp
- Reduced background area restricts options for variant frames severely
- PW starting loyalty is outside left sidebar area
- Centered text is often weird
So I think if we put our heads together we can come up with some solutions to these problems and maybe borrow some good features from each other also. What do you think?
This latest attempt looks significantly better. However, many of the problems still exist.
- The separated type/subtype "lines" is confusing; I could see doing two lines one atop the other, above the normal text box. But separated is nonsense.
- The duplicate information is still annoying/inappropriate. Your opponent needs to know the WHOLE CARD, not the p/t. Do you forget what the P/t of your opponent's creates are regularly? I've never known this to be an issue.
- The black bar w/ reverse p/t and the set symbol seems wasteful. Set symbol can easily be tucked in the type/subtype bar/bars.\
- Why put the symbols on the left, rather than right?
Finally - I love full art cards. But making all cards full art is actually quite busy, and quite restrictive for artists. "Make sure half of your art is so unimpactful that we can cover it w/ a text box and no one will be confused." You've taken a premium thing and made it... everyday. And it's immediately apparent that making it everyday causes problems.
Final thought: At least full art removes the "lack of flavor" from your format, since your format is now "clear text boxes over art atop a black bar." So the art alone grants flavor.
Test: Take a crappy draft common you'll never use again (maybe you were about to throw out your 13th copy of Final Reward), take a black marker to the art and completely black it out. Now look at the card. That boarder is oozing flavor.
This has already been addressed.
Basically, border textures are being ignored because it doesn't serve a function and can be added later for aesthetic appeal. None of the changes to the card frame at the moment precludes the possibility of border textures. They are being ignored at the moment to make iteration faster and easier.
- Manite
For example, why does my mana cost have to be vertical and take up part of the card frame separate from the card name? Current cards fit both aspects into a single text box; this latest version does not. It's change-for-change's sake that actually does the opposite of the thread's title - De-optimizes. Trading 1 text box for 2 is not helpful, but it's done at least THREE TIMES on the current design.
People have been providing reasons throughout the thread. Left oriented vertical costs have already been addressed. If you are familiar with the history of future sight cards, then you should be aware of the arguments already.
This is at least the second comment you have made which hasn't featured meaningful criticism or critique. Thank you for sharing your impressions. Feel free to withhold them now that you have shared them.
I like pretty much all of your changes. Regarding the security holo stamp, if its technologically feasible, I really do think embedding the holo stamp into/as the set symbol makes a lot of sense.
- Manite
1a. Furthermore, 2nd text box is cluttering, not optimizing. So the thread promises one thing, then does another.
2. You say:
How about this: What, in principle, would count as an acceptable criticism for you? If you can't offer an example, your stance is inherently untestable, and thus posting it for critique is deceptive, as nothing can count as such a critique.
Also, here's my take on your design. P/T on the lower left, as that's still easily viewable when fanning cards and is less likely to be confused as some math equation that's part of the mana cost when it's separated (lots of numbers in a tight space can get confusing), half-art, type lines reunited above the art box, and no flipped P/T.
I purposely excluded the card type symbol for the same reason I ended up removing the keyword symbols, as they would require learning what they mean. I have some ideas on how to use textures to identify each card type, like with lands and artifacts, as well as for things that can be cast at instant speed.
Why is the information in the art box, rather than in empty space already on the card? (IE, text box in the corner; mana in the title line?).
I'm also not sure I like the type line being a cut-out, rather than having it's own line. It means the line shifts in size when the card is an instant vs a legendary creature - mutant ninja turtle.
I will say this: This latest version looks much better.
Edit: Another reason why this won't work:
1WGRBU will run dangerously close to the p/t box. For classic and modern frames, 1BB and 1BU took up the same space. Here, they take up different numbers of text boxes.
Mind you, you could "solve" this by putting the p/t in a box on the other side... or by putting it back where it belongs in the lower right hand corner.
....
Also, while you're at it, you might as well just make new mana symbols with a space for the # inside of the symbol; so they work like colorless symbols (IE, 3 would take up the same space as a white mana symbol with a "3" in it representing 3 white mana.) Interestingly this would also let you print color-identifiers by printing a white mana symbol with a 0 in it.... both of these innovations would actually add something to the existing card design; with mana costs being more straightforward and easier to read (a green mana symbol with a seven in it is easier to read than GGGGGGG; same with an energy symbol with a 7 in it than EEEEEEE).
The same goes for text in the text box.
And thank you
I tried that with my first iteration, but somebody brought up color-blind accessibility. If a symbol is just a circle with a number in it, it's much harder for color-blind people to be able to tell what mana to spend on it.
However, I would be interested in optional 2nd boxes for relevant cards. Arguably, I'd like to see a Legendary "subtype" line, along the lines of Planeswalkers, that helps to fix the flavor of the legend rule; and this could go out-of-box in some cases. Similarly, some names/costs might require two lines of text. I'd be okay with a 2nd line of text below the relevant one; these would be special, not standard.
Re: Circle - You'd need it to be a symbol with a number in it. A tree with a number. A sun with a number. A fireball? with a number. A teardrop with a number. And... uh... Black's not gonna work, is it? This is why I don't think your changes work.
It would be a lot easier for WOTC to just stop printing stupid things than it would be to revise the cardframe to allow them to print stupid things. Progenitus is kind of stupid, and it'd be more stupid with a longer name. EEEEEE is very stupid. And, yes, GGGGGG is very stupid. If you've got 5 green mana, I'm pretty sure the rest can be colorless.
I like the current frame style a lot, it's elegant and matches well.
Dunes of Zairo
SHANDALAR
Innistrad - The Darkest Night
~THE RAVNICAN CONSORTIUM~
A Community Set
Commander: Allies & Adversaries