I'm getting back into set design for a custom set on Vryn. Long story short, I'm using Vryn as a Cold War Plane (between Trovians and Ampryns) with the first visit to the plane emphasizing espionage themes. To that end, I'm using Encrypt as a mechanic to emphasize this theme. Encrypt is a keyword action. To encrypt a card, you exile it face down and it becomes encrypted. Players may look at encrypted cards they own. Encrypted cards become something like a secondary hand but also act somewhat like a secondary resource pool similar to Energy. Encrypted cards a player owns will be kept together separate from the exile pile, players won't need to track which encrypt effects exiled which encrypted cards for example and players may randomize the order or encrypted cards whenever they like. There will be no effects that care about the order cards are encrypted.
Enigma Encoder 3
Artifact {U} 1 , T : Encrypt the top card of your library. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down) 1 , T : Put an encrypted card you own into your hand.
Notes:
Every card with Encrypt will have abilities/effects that care about encrypted cards
Encrypt will be in all 5 colors similar to energy
Encrypt is parasitic
There will be no "exile face down" effects in the set other than encrypt for similar reasons +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters are never in the same set
Encrypt also shares roots with imprint. Encrypt is to Imprint as Energy is to Charge counters.
Classified Information 1U
Instant {C}
Encrypt the top two cards of your library. Put an encrypted card you own into your hand. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down)
Dead Dropper 2G
Creature - ?
When Dead Dropper dies, encrypt the top card of your library. Then you may put an encrypted card you own on top of your library. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down)
3/2
Mole Hunter 1B
Creature - ?
When Mole Hunter enters the battlefield, you may encrypt a card from your hand. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down.) 2B , Put an encrypted creature card you own into your graveyard : Target creature gets -2/-2 until end of turn.
2/2
Unknowable Agent 1U
Creature - Illusion
As Unknowable Agent enters the battlefield, encrypt the top card of your library. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down.)
When you control no encrypted cards, sacrifice Unknowable Agent
3/2
Whitewash 2W
Instant
Target attacking or Blocking creature's controller encrypts it. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down.)
Human Trafficker2G
Creature - ?
When Smuggler enters the battlefield, you may encrypt a card from your hand. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down.) 4 : Put an encrypted Creature card you own onto the battlefield.
2/3
Explosive Message 2R
instant
Deal 3 damage to target creature or player.
When Explosive Message leaves exile, you may reveal it and cast it without paying its mana cost.
This text is provisional and incomplete. It is merely meant to try to clarify how the keyword works. I'll be building on this entry as I move forward with the set assuming the keyword stays in the design file. Encrypt
To Encrypt a card, the player exiles it face down. That card becomes Encrypted and may be shuffled into that player's existing set of encrypted cards
Players may look at encrypted cards they own at any time
As usual, names are placeholder. Creature types are filled in when relevant but mostly left blank until I can clear the plane up creatively. Costs are just best guesses and will need to be tuned later. Let me know what you all think. Impressions are welcome. Feel free to offer designs as well if you like.
Renamed "smuggler"->"Human Trafficker" to give it a clearer name to reference its flavor
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
(To encrypt a card, exile it face down. You may look at it at any time.)
Re: Encrypt:
1. If you're using it as inject, the title doesn't make sense. Thus I would not suggest using encrypted cards as a resource.
2. If your plan is to put encrypted cards in your hand, or play them... then this is similar to any number of existing mechanics.
3. I'm also not sure if you want to be able to Encrypt from anywhere. I think the best version would be to have encrypting always hit the top card of your library. (To Encrypt, exile the top card of your library face down. You may look at it at any time.)
However, I love the name. It has clear flavor. My suggestion would be to have there be special conditions that let you do certain things with encrypted cards.
For example: Spymaster2U
Creature - Human Wizard (U)
You may Decrypt two Encrypted cards with different names instead of pay Spymaster's mana cost. If you do, draw a card. (To Decrypt an Encrypted card, place it in its owner's graveyard.)
2/2
Decrypt Bolt1R
Instant (C)
Encrypt 2, then Decrypt a card. ~ deals damage equal to that card's mana cost to target creature.
Uncover Secrets2U
Instant (U)
Draw a card for each encrypted card you own, then discard that many cards minus 1.
Conclusion: The name is what matters here.
___________
Reviews:
Enigma Encoder - If this taps to draw you a card every other turn, it's boring. But what it really does is let you encrypt multiple cards with other effects, then tutor out the best version. That's quite strong.
Classified Information - 1. Note that on my wording, this reads "Encrypt 2", then blah blah. 2. On it's own, this is really great design. But I suspect there'll be many ways to encrypt in your set, so this will be "choose the best of 7 cards" more often than not, and that's just too powerful.
Dead Dropper - Now this is interesting. Maybe make "Decrypt" means putting a card on the top of your library? So if Encrupt's a thing, this is fine. But this is neither an enabler or an abuser; it's just fine; not a signature card to show what the mechanic does. You might just as easily make a 3/2 that Scry 2s when it ETB.
Unknowable Agent - 1. I like the drawback here. However, since he encrypts a card, and there will be few ways to get rid of said cards, then it's pretty much all upside. 2. This feels black. 3. Just make a 3/3 for 1B that dies if you don't have an encrypted card. Straightforward, interesting.
Whitewash - And here's where things go south. Now all you're doing is using encrypt as an alternative for exile. If they can decrypt it (to their hand, or whatever), then it's just a slightly worse exile. If not, it's just exile.
How about: WhitewashW
Instant (U)
Exile target creature attacking you. Its controller encrypts cards equal to its power. (To Encrypt, a player exiles the top card of your library face down and may look at it at any time.)
Note: Maybe make some cards have the ability to play them if they're encrypted by paying their Unencrypt cost (Or ditch decrypt as I've described it above and make Decrypt a madness-like alternate cost?).
Smuggler - The best thing about this is it's name, which is clearly black:
Krovikan Smuggler1B
Creature - Human Rogue (R)
Whenever ~ ETB or attacks, Encrypt 1. (To Encrypt, exile the top card of your library face down. You may look at it at any time.)
Whenever ~ deals combat damage to an opponent, you may pay 2 life. If you do, put an encrypted card in your hand.
2/2
Explosive Message - Actually... this is quite interesting on it's own. But for your set, how about:
Explosive Message1RR
Instant (C)
Explosive Message deals 3 damage to target creature or player.
Decrypt R (As long as this card is encrypted, you may play it for its Decrypt cost.)
If you go with this Decrypt, then it's just a madness variant. Which is okay with me, since I love Madness.
To recap, here are my suggestions:
1. Encrypt N: (To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time.)
2. Decrypt [cost] (You may cast this card for [cost] as long as it is encrypted.)
3. Choose a theme for Encrypted cards:
A. Encrypted cards are a resource to be spent (IE, your version of Ingest). B.Encrypted cards serve as sub-library you can look at and draw form.
(If this is the case, then maybe Encrypt says: (To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time. If you would draw a card, you may instead put an encrypted card in your hand.)
C. Encrypted cards are a resource whose content matters (IE, you can send encrypted cards with certain attributes to the graveyard to get some effect.)
Example: Instead of playing Zombie Dragon's mana cost, you can put an encrypted zombie card and an encrypted dragon card into your graveyard.
D. Encrypted cards serve as a win condition. (To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time. If you have 20 or more encrypted cards, you win the game.)
Honestly, I think option b. is the best, as it works really well with your "bury if you don't have an encrypted card" drawback, still lets you print Decrypt [cost] cards, and serves a practical in-game role, similar to Scry.
Thanks for the designs. I'm sure there will be some number of designs similar to things like Spymaster, Decrypt Bolt, krovikan smuggler and Uncover Secrets in the final set.
(To encrypt a card, exile it face down. You may look at it at any time.)
I started with similar reminder text. I'm currently trying out my shorter text to see if players grock the ability. If players grock Encrypt with my shorter reminder text, I'll stick with it, otherwise I'll need to use a longer more explicit reminder text like yours.
Classified Information - 1. Note that on my wording, this reads "Encrypt 2", then blah blah. 2. On it's own, this is really great design. But I suspect there'll be many ways to encrypt in your set, so this will be "choose the best of 7 cards" more often than not, and that's just too powerful.
Your suspicion is false. In general, players will only have a few encrypted cards at any given time. The number can't get too large, or it will become cumbersome. Basically the same logic that is in place regarding hand size rules.
Dead Dropper - Now this is interesting. Maybe make "Decrypt" means putting a card on the top of your library? So if Encrupt's a thing, this is fine. But this is neither an enabler or an abuser; it's just fine; not a signature card to show what the mechanic does. You might just as easily make a 3/2 that Scry 2s when it ETB.
It was designed to be a simple common support creature. It's not a signature card, it is just showing off some of the design space available at common.
Whitewash - And here's where things go south. Now all you're doing is using encrypt as an alternative for exile. If they can decrypt it (to their hand, or whatever), then it's just a slightly worse exile. If not, it's just exile.
Whitewash was designed as a Divine Verdict variant with integrated set themes. It's also fairly flavorful in my opinion.
Note: Maybe make some cards have the ability to play them if they're encrypted by paying their Unencrypt cost (Or ditch decrypt as I've described it above and make Decrypt a madness-like alternate cost?).
I've considered adding a Decrypt keyword to go alongside Encrypt, but I don't think it's worth it. Decrypt would somehow be even more parasitic and just isn't overly interesting. I can include a card or two with "This may be cast from exile" or "this may be cast from exile while it is encrypted." if I want the effect, but it isn't something I would want a ton of.
Smuggler - The best thing about this is it's name, which is clearly black:
It's been given a new placeholder name to be more clear about the flavor reference.
1. Encrypt N: (To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time.)
I think being able to encrypt any card is useful and interesting design space. I use it no fewer than three times in the example cards. Further, being able to encrypt specific things feels right from a flavor perspective. Encrypting random things from the top of your library is useful from a gameplay perspective, but not very flavorful. Random things aren't top secret, important battle plans and spy identities are.
3. Choose a theme for Encrypted cards:
As second sets are no longer a thing (and I probably wouldn't go through the trouble of making one anyway) I'd prefer to explore the design space of Encrypt as much as reasonably possible in its first outing. I intend to use Encrypt in all the ways you mention, and more besides.
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
Whitewash was designed as a Divine Verdict variant with integrated set themes. It's also fairly flavorful in my opinion.
This is the ONLY card in the list that makes me think encrypting things other than the top card of your library is worth doing. HOWEVER, the mechanic would be a lot easier if all the cards acted in the same way. This is a fair design that I think should be modified for consistency. (Think if Sunburst gave +1/+1 counters to even non-creature artifacts; the slight uptick in power this would give to animate artifact is irrelevant to the bonus of the mechanic acting uniformly).
I've considered adding a Decrypt keyword to go alongside Encrypt, but I don't think it's worth it. Decrypt would somehow be even more parasitic and just isn't overly interesting. I can include a card or two with "This may be cast from exile" or "this may be cast from exile while it is encrypted." if I want the effect, but it isn't something I would want a ton of.
Decrypt [cost] would require lots of encrypt support. I'd be okay with that, it would lead to an archetype. It would lead to straightforward practical designs for cards that would see play in that archtype and no other, cards that would fill normal limited roles. (IE, that burn spell).
Of course, you could make a "you may play this from exile for the cost" mechanic NOT called decrypt, that lets you play even cards that have been exiled in other ways... but that's got problems, since WOTC doesn't like interacting with exile (except when they do...). But if your set has encrypt, having decrypt feels really good as well (whatever that mechanic turns out to be).
I think being able to encrypt any card is useful and interesting design space.
I think it suffers from the same problem as Kicker - the design space is too big. Heck, look at your sample cards. Some use Encrypt as an alternate hand. Whitewash uses it as a removal/punishment.
Effectively "Encrypt" as is is justface down exile, and that's not particularly interesting. There exist many cards that let you exile face down, and many that let you look at face down exiled cards in various ways/circumstances.
Compare this to MY version of Whitewash (I should have given it a different name, sorry) - That card gives your opponent a resource they wouldn't otherwise have - a rather steep one if you go with suggestion b. - and yet, against a non-decrypt deck, it's a great card!
Long story short: Limitations create design opportunities. Wizards has talked about this at length. Notably, WOTC explained that Kicker was too broad as effects like Evoke and Replicate could be done as kicker costs as well. Being able to encrypt spells from elsewhere is only interesting is encrypt does something, and I hate to say it, but right now encrypt's not doing anything. It's not affecting the game on it's own (where as Scry and clash do...), and it's not even clear what the flavor behind it is (especially if you can't decrypt).
As second sets are no longer a thing (and I probably wouldn't go through the trouble of making one anyway)
I'm not sure if this is a practical way of thinking. How long did the 2-block set format last?
I'd prefer to explore the design space of Encrypt as much as reasonably possible in its first outing.
And yet, if it's this open-ended, you CANNOT do this.
Look at Evoke. Evoke has still not been fully explored, but it did a lot of great, clear things in it's opening set. Compare this with Kicker, where Kicker is still not fully explored.
I intend to use Encrypt in all the ways you mention, and more besides
Not in a 300 card set you don't. It's a keyword action; you won't have more than 30 cards with it, and maybe 10 with decrypt. Thus you need focus. What does Encrypt do?
Again, I encourage you to do this:
(To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time. If you would draw a card, you may instead put an encrypted card in your hand.)
What does Encrypt do?
1) It improves card selection.
2) It acts as a resource (having encrypted cards can trigger effects; cards can get bonuses based on the # of encrypted cards you have, etc.)
3) It lets you decrypt them (in some way).
All three of these lead to interesting play experiences that play differently in different formats. There is variety in this limitation. There will be several kinds of Encrypt decks. And in limited, Encrypting w/o 2 or 3 is still useful, since it allows for card selection.
[quote]I think it suffers from the same problem as Kicker - the design space is too big. Heck, look at your sample cards. Some use Encrypt as an alternate hand. Whitewash uses it as a removal
Could be there is too much design space. But I doubt it. I intend to use the mechanic like energy, meaning I'm going to have on the order of 50 Encrypt cards in the set. Balancing the encrypt economy is going to be tricky, but sounds like an interesting design problem to me.
Being able to encrypt spells from elsewhere is only interesting is encrypt does something, and I hate to say it, but right now encrypt's not doing anything. It's not affecting the game on it's own (where as Scry and clash do...), and it's not even clear what the flavor behind it is (especially if you can't decrypt).
Energy and Imprint don't affect the game on their own either. This is why all encrypt cards will have abilities/effects that interact with encrypted cards in some way. Basically, I'm using encrypt in similar ways to energy and imprint. Flavor seems obvious to me, but I may be in the minority. Basically, you are hiding secrets and using these secrets to your advantage. Feels like classic espionage to me.
(To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time. If you would draw a card, you may instead put an encrypted card in your hand.)
I've added this variant to the design file. I'll play with it some this weekend and see if it's worth doing.
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
Could be there is too much design space. But I doubt it.
Really?
Just the fact that you're able to encrypt from ANY ZONE means that hand, library, battlefield, top-of-library, graveyard, and outside-the-game... not to mention exile, and target opponent counterparts of all of those... means you can't get all of them even halfway developed in only 30 cards.
I intend to use the mechanic like energy,
Energy is arguably the worst executed mechanic in the game's history. It's mana... done with counters... poorly. This is ingest w/ your cards, and ingest is something WOTC doesn't think will come back.
meaning I'm going to have on the order of 50 Encrypt cards in the set.
But NONE of energy's mechanics work for me; there's so much overlap and subtle differences between the filler cards, that outside of maybe 1 cycle (the 2 drop cycle), you have to reread cards many times or you'll make a mistake. Oh, it's +2/+2 and not a +1/+1 counter. (Oh, and referencing +1/+1 counters and energy counters on the same *(^&(^&ing card...)
So if you run 50 cards with at least Encrypt 1, then you have plenty of room for 15-20 Decrypt [cost] cards; probably staple effects. IE, Decrypt Naturalize, lightning bolt. grizzly bear, etc, etc, etc. (I assume there will be few cards with both mechanics).
However, like energy, it seems at best you'll have cycles that do the same thing. But given we talked about ~6 zones up top, this and you'd want 1x copy for your zone, and 1x copy for your opponent's zone (if you're fully developing the open-ended mechanic of encrypt-from-anywhere), then we're talking 12 zones. Even if I give you 60 Encrypt cards, this means you have a tight cycle for each color for each zone. IE, you have a blue card that exiles from your hand, a black card that exiles from your hand, a green card that exiles from your hand... so forth and so on.
What? You're not going to do Tight-cycles? If so, 2 points:
1. How can you say you've fully explored your open-ended mechanic when only ONE card exiles a creature in play? (Also, doesn't that share more in common with Swords to Plowshares than any other encrypt card?
2. Doesn't this just put you in the same bottle of poor design as Kaladesh? Where calling it "Encrypt" does nothing special, since every card works differently? Test: Take your sample cards. Replace "Encrypt" with "Exile." (or even "Exile Face down", which you can look at unless the card text says otherwise according to the rules.) Is there any substantive functional difference? I think not.
Energy and Imprint don't affect the game on their own either.
Energy is a garbage mechanic. It's mana with counters. Worse, it was used very poorly, as some cards traded in lots of energy for small effects, others traded in small amounts of energy for large effects. Sure, any energy producer that was strictly better than an existing card was something people looked at, but really? The energy decks ran cards that generated EEE not to use for their pathetic 1/1s, but to drop 15/15s or 10/10s with another card.
27 cards total. Imprint lets you choose a card and IMPRINT it on another card. Why did this matter? Simple - Isochron Scepter let you play the imprinted card! This is to say that what you imprinted MATTERED for the card. Now, let's look at your sample cards:
Enigma Encoder - doesn't care what you encrypt.
Classified Information - ditto
Dead Dropper - ditto
Mole Hunter - ditto
Unknowable Agent - ditto
Whitewash - ditto
Human Trafficker - ditto
None of these cards CARE about what you Encrypt. But Imprint was all about CARING what you imprinted. That mattered FOR THE CARD. It DID THINGS.
You're using Encrypt like Ingest.
Ingest is a clunky bad mechanic that might mill your opponent and sought to make the milling matter by using the milled cards as "energy counters." (You see where I'm going with this?) Energy was a garbage mechanic, and Ingest is a garbage mechanic. Ingest has a terrible stormscale rating because it played so clunky.
So, to recap: Your use of Encrypt is akin to two garbage mechanics that WOTC dislikes and won't use again. (You can wait a year after Kaladesh rotates for that announcement for energy...). However, you compare it to Energy (useful analogy for the #s alone) and Imprint, one of the BEST MECHANICS EVER, which produced several amazing cards still loved today.
Like Imprint, you keep the open-endedness as to where the imprinted cards came from. Unlike Imprint, however, you don't care what is exiled. It doesn't matter for your cards. It doesn't matter for the game. It's a resource to be exploited. In fact, Encrypt is arguably just the "mana" system from the old Star Wars CCG...
Flavor seems obvious to me
I don't think you know what flavor is. The term "Encrypt" has a dictionary definition. From google:
verb
convert (information or data) into a cipher or code, especially to prevent unauthorized access.
conceal data in (something) by converting it into a code.
So when you encrypt your opponent's creature... are you turning it into data your opponent can read and you can't? As I recall, it's the only substantive example of your encrypting something other than the top card of YOUR DECK.
Flavorwise, to encrypt something is to make it so your opponent has trouble reading/looking/finding it/understanding it. Putting information in exile sounds like encrypting... but, let's face it, it's no more "secret" there than it is in your hand.
The more I think about it, the only interesting thing about your mechanic is the NAME of the mechanic. For the mechanic to fit, flavorfully, it has to represent keeping information secret in some way. Some way other than the normal secrecy of it being in your hand, which is usually secret enough on it's own.
I've added this variant to the design file. I'll play with it some this weekend and see if it's worth doing.
One final thought on this: You *NEED* to find an alternate use than "slow card draw" and "ingest 2.0" for encrypted cards.
As I've hinted at in earlier posts, maybe make the cards that you encrypt matter.
For example, maybe have a card that gets a special effect if you decrypt (here understood as putting into the yard, ingest style) a card of each color.
Because your opponent cannot look at your face down cards, they'll never know whether you can activate that card's effect.
Sample: Encryption Bolter1R
Creature - Human Wizard
When you play ~, Encrypt 2 (To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time. If you would draw a card, you may instead put an encrypted card in your hand.).
Decrypt two cards with different names, T: ~ deals 3 damage to target creature or player. (You decrypt a card, put an encrypted card you control into your graveyard face up.)
2/1
Note that WHAT you put into the yard matters here, and encrypting the card feels sort of secret (insofar as your opponent won't know if it satisfies the criteria in question. (Mind you, this is still ingest 2.0...).
Look, I appreciate your natural response and it's interesting to see you miss things (implying a lack of grockabilly in the designs which I'm worried about) but a lot of what your are saying is missing the boat. Experience with you in the past suggests that you will get confrontational if I attempt to correct you, so I'm simply moving on. Thank you for your time and input.
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
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Enigma Encoder 3
Artifact {U}
1 , T : Encrypt the top card of your library. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down)
1 , T : Put an encrypted card you own into your hand.
Notes:
Classified Information 1U
Instant {C}
Encrypt the top two cards of your library. Put an encrypted card you own into your hand. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down)
Dead Dropper 2G
Creature - ?
When Dead Dropper dies, encrypt the top card of your library. Then you may put an encrypted card you own on top of your library. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down)
3/2
Mole Hunter 1B
Creature - ?
When Mole Hunter enters the battlefield, you may encrypt a card from your hand. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down.)
2B , Put an encrypted creature card you own into your graveyard : Target creature gets -2/-2 until end of turn.
2/2
Unknowable Agent 1U
Creature - Illusion
As Unknowable Agent enters the battlefield, encrypt the top card of your library. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down.)
When you control no encrypted cards, sacrifice Unknowable Agent
3/2
Whitewash 2W
Instant
Target attacking or Blocking creature's controller encrypts it. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down.)
Human Trafficker2G
Creature - ?
When Smuggler enters the battlefield, you may encrypt a card from your hand. (to encrypt a card, look at and exile it face down.)
4 : Put an encrypted Creature card you own onto the battlefield.
2/3
Explosive Message 2R
instant
Deal 3 damage to target creature or player.
When Explosive Message leaves exile, you may reveal it and cast it without paying its mana cost.
This text is provisional and incomplete. It is merely meant to try to clarify how the keyword works. I'll be building on this entry as I move forward with the set assuming the keyword stays in the design file.
Encrypt
As usual, names are placeholder. Creature types are filled in when relevant but mostly left blank until I can clear the plane up creatively. Costs are just best guesses and will need to be tuned later. Let me know what you all think. Impressions are welcome. Feel free to offer designs as well if you like.
Renamed "smuggler"->"Human Trafficker" to give it a clearer name to reference its flavor
- Manite
Re: Encrypt:
1. If you're using it as inject, the title doesn't make sense. Thus I would not suggest using encrypted cards as a resource.
2. If your plan is to put encrypted cards in your hand, or play them... then this is similar to any number of existing mechanics.
3. I'm also not sure if you want to be able to Encrypt from anywhere. I think the best version would be to have encrypting always hit the top card of your library.
(To Encrypt, exile the top card of your library face down. You may look at it at any time.)
However, I love the name. It has clear flavor. My suggestion would be to have there be special conditions that let you do certain things with encrypted cards.
For example:
Spymaster 2U
Creature - Human Wizard (U)
You may Decrypt two Encrypted cards with different names instead of pay Spymaster's mana cost. If you do, draw a card. (To Decrypt an Encrypted card, place it in its owner's graveyard.)
2/2
Decrypt Bolt 1R
Instant (C)
Encrypt 2, then Decrypt a card. ~ deals damage equal to that card's mana cost to target creature.
Uncover Secrets2U
Instant (U)
Draw a card for each encrypted card you own, then discard that many cards minus 1.
Conclusion: The name is what matters here.
___________
Reviews:
Enigma Encoder - If this taps to draw you a card every other turn, it's boring. But what it really does is let you encrypt multiple cards with other effects, then tutor out the best version. That's quite strong.
Classified Information - 1. Note that on my wording, this reads "Encrypt 2", then blah blah. 2. On it's own, this is really great design. But I suspect there'll be many ways to encrypt in your set, so this will be "choose the best of 7 cards" more often than not, and that's just too powerful.
Dead Dropper - Now this is interesting. Maybe make "Decrypt" means putting a card on the top of your library? So if Encrupt's a thing, this is fine. But this is neither an enabler or an abuser; it's just fine; not a signature card to show what the mechanic does. You might just as easily make a 3/2 that Scry 2s when it ETB.
Unknowable Agent - 1. I like the drawback here. However, since he encrypts a card, and there will be few ways to get rid of said cards, then it's pretty much all upside. 2. This feels black. 3. Just make a 3/3 for 1B that dies if you don't have an encrypted card. Straightforward, interesting.
Whitewash - And here's where things go south. Now all you're doing is using encrypt as an alternative for exile. If they can decrypt it (to their hand, or whatever), then it's just a slightly worse exile. If not, it's just exile.
How about:
Whitewash W
Instant (U)
Exile target creature attacking you. Its controller encrypts cards equal to its power. (To Encrypt, a player exiles the top card of your library face down and may look at it at any time.)
Now it's a condemn variant, rather than a Final Reward variant.
Note: Maybe make some cards have the ability to play them if they're encrypted by paying their Unencrypt cost (Or ditch decrypt as I've described it above and make Decrypt a madness-like alternate cost?).
Smuggler - The best thing about this is it's name, which is clearly black:
Krovikan Smuggler 1B
Creature - Human Rogue (R)
Whenever ~ ETB or attacks, Encrypt 1.
(To Encrypt, exile the top card of your library face down. You may look at it at any time.)
Whenever ~ deals combat damage to an opponent, you may pay 2 life. If you do, put an encrypted card in your hand.
2/2
Explosive Message - Actually... this is quite interesting on it's own. But for your set, how about:
Explosive Message 1RR
Instant (C)
Explosive Message deals 3 damage to target creature or player.
Decrypt R (As long as this card is encrypted, you may play it for its Decrypt cost.)
If you go with this Decrypt, then it's just a madness variant. Which is okay with me, since I love Madness.
To recap, here are my suggestions:
1. Encrypt N:
(To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time.)
2. Decrypt [cost]
(You may cast this card for [cost] as long as it is encrypted.)
3. Choose a theme for Encrypted cards:
A. Encrypted cards are a resource to be spent (IE, your version of Ingest).
B. Encrypted cards serve as sub-library you can look at and draw form.
(If this is the case, then maybe Encrypt says:
(To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time. If you would draw a card, you may instead put an encrypted card in your hand.)
C. Encrypted cards are a resource whose content matters (IE, you can send encrypted cards with certain attributes to the graveyard to get some effect.)
Example: Instead of playing Zombie Dragon's mana cost, you can put an encrypted zombie card and an encrypted dragon card into your graveyard.
D. Encrypted cards serve as a win condition.
(To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time. If you have 20 or more encrypted cards, you win the game.)
Honestly, I think option b. is the best, as it works really well with your "bury if you don't have an encrypted card" drawback, still lets you print Decrypt [cost] cards, and serves a practical in-game role, similar to Scry.
I started with similar reminder text. I'm currently trying out my shorter text to see if players grock the ability. If players grock Encrypt with my shorter reminder text, I'll stick with it, otherwise I'll need to use a longer more explicit reminder text like yours.
Your suspicion is false. In general, players will only have a few encrypted cards at any given time. The number can't get too large, or it will become cumbersome. Basically the same logic that is in place regarding hand size rules.
It was designed to be a simple common support creature. It's not a signature card, it is just showing off some of the design space available at common.
Whitewash was designed as a Divine Verdict variant with integrated set themes. It's also fairly flavorful in my opinion.
I've considered adding a Decrypt keyword to go alongside Encrypt, but I don't think it's worth it. Decrypt would somehow be even more parasitic and just isn't overly interesting. I can include a card or two with "This may be cast from exile" or "this may be cast from exile while it is encrypted." if I want the effect, but it isn't something I would want a ton of.
It's been given a new placeholder name to be more clear about the flavor reference.
I think being able to encrypt any card is useful and interesting design space. I use it no fewer than three times in the example cards. Further, being able to encrypt specific things feels right from a flavor perspective. Encrypting random things from the top of your library is useful from a gameplay perspective, but not very flavorful. Random things aren't top secret, important battle plans and spy identities are.
As second sets are no longer a thing (and I probably wouldn't go through the trouble of making one anyway) I'd prefer to explore the design space of Encrypt as much as reasonably possible in its first outing. I intend to use Encrypt in all the ways you mention, and more besides.
- Manite
I'm confident you can balance encrypt to cost better than WOTC did energy to cost.
But even if you never Encrypt 2 on any other cards, I suspect you'll have quite a pool of cards in many constructed games. (Please don't try to make encrypt cards limited-only to avoid this.)
This is the ONLY card in the list that makes me think encrypting things other than the top card of your library is worth doing. HOWEVER, the mechanic would be a lot easier if all the cards acted in the same way. This is a fair design that I think should be modified for consistency. (Think if Sunburst gave +1/+1 counters to even non-creature artifacts; the slight uptick in power this would give to animate artifact is irrelevant to the bonus of the mechanic acting uniformly).
Decrypt [cost] would require lots of encrypt support. I'd be okay with that, it would lead to an archetype. It would lead to straightforward practical designs for cards that would see play in that archtype and no other, cards that would fill normal limited roles. (IE, that burn spell).
Of course, you could make a "you may play this from exile for the cost" mechanic NOT called decrypt, that lets you play even cards that have been exiled in other ways... but that's got problems, since WOTC doesn't like interacting with exile (except when they do...). But if your set has encrypt, having decrypt feels really good as well (whatever that mechanic turns out to be).
I think it suffers from the same problem as Kicker - the design space is too big. Heck, look at your sample cards. Some use Encrypt as an alternate hand. Whitewash uses it as a removal/punishment.
Effectively "Encrypt" as is is just face down exile, and that's not particularly interesting. There exist many cards that let you exile face down, and many that let you look at face down exiled cards in various ways/circumstances.
Compare this to MY version of Whitewash (I should have given it a different name, sorry) - That card gives your opponent a resource they wouldn't otherwise have - a rather steep one if you go with suggestion b. - and yet, against a non-decrypt deck, it's a great card!
Long story short: Limitations create design opportunities. Wizards has talked about this at length. Notably, WOTC explained that Kicker was too broad as effects like Evoke and Replicate could be done as kicker costs as well. Being able to encrypt spells from elsewhere is only interesting is encrypt does something, and I hate to say it, but right now encrypt's not doing anything. It's not affecting the game on it's own (where as Scry and clash do...), and it's not even clear what the flavor behind it is (especially if you can't decrypt).
I'm not sure if this is a practical way of thinking. How long did the 2-block set format last?
And yet, if it's this open-ended, you CANNOT do this.
Look at Evoke. Evoke has still not been fully explored, but it did a lot of great, clear things in it's opening set. Compare this with Kicker, where Kicker is still not fully explored.
Not in a 300 card set you don't. It's a keyword action; you won't have more than 30 cards with it, and maybe 10 with decrypt. Thus you need focus. What does Encrypt do?
Again, I encourage you to do this:
(To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time. If you would draw a card, you may instead put an encrypted card in your hand.)
What does Encrypt do?
1) It improves card selection.
2) It acts as a resource (having encrypted cards can trigger effects; cards can get bonuses based on the # of encrypted cards you have, etc.)
3) It lets you decrypt them (in some way).
All three of these lead to interesting play experiences that play differently in different formats. There is variety in this limitation. There will be several kinds of Encrypt decks. And in limited, Encrypting w/o 2 or 3 is still useful, since it allows for card selection.
Could be there is too much design space. But I doubt it. I intend to use the mechanic like energy, meaning I'm going to have on the order of 50 Encrypt cards in the set. Balancing the encrypt economy is going to be tricky, but sounds like an interesting design problem to me.
Energy and Imprint don't affect the game on their own either. This is why all encrypt cards will have abilities/effects that interact with encrypted cards in some way. Basically, I'm using encrypt in similar ways to energy and imprint. Flavor seems obvious to me, but I may be in the minority. Basically, you are hiding secrets and using these secrets to your advantage. Feels like classic espionage to me.
I've added this variant to the design file. I'll play with it some this weekend and see if it's worth doing.
- Manite
Really?
Just the fact that you're able to encrypt from ANY ZONE means that hand, library, battlefield, top-of-library, graveyard, and outside-the-game... not to mention exile, and target opponent counterparts of all of those... means you can't get all of them even halfway developed in only 30 cards.
Energy is arguably the worst executed mechanic in the game's history. It's mana... done with counters... poorly. This is ingest w/ your cards, and ingest is something WOTC doesn't think will come back.
I'll give this to you. Kaladesh has 47 energy cards.
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&text= [energy]&set=+[%22Kaladesh%22]
But NONE of energy's mechanics work for me; there's so much overlap and subtle differences between the filler cards, that outside of maybe 1 cycle (the 2 drop cycle), you have to reread cards many times or you'll make a mistake. Oh, it's +2/+2 and not a +1/+1 counter. (Oh, and referencing +1/+1 counters and energy counters on the same *(^&(^&ing card...)
So if you run 50 cards with at least Encrypt 1, then you have plenty of room for 15-20 Decrypt [cost] cards; probably staple effects. IE, Decrypt Naturalize, lightning bolt. grizzly bear, etc, etc, etc. (I assume there will be few cards with both mechanics).
However, like energy, it seems at best you'll have cycles that do the same thing. But given we talked about ~6 zones up top, this and you'd want 1x copy for your zone, and 1x copy for your opponent's zone (if you're fully developing the open-ended mechanic of encrypt-from-anywhere), then we're talking 12 zones. Even if I give you 60 Encrypt cards, this means you have a tight cycle for each color for each zone. IE, you have a blue card that exiles from your hand, a black card that exiles from your hand, a green card that exiles from your hand... so forth and so on.
What? You're not going to do Tight-cycles? If so, 2 points:
1. How can you say you've fully explored your open-ended mechanic when only ONE card exiles a creature in play? (Also, doesn't that share more in common with Swords to Plowshares than any other encrypt card?
2. Doesn't this just put you in the same bottle of poor design as Kaladesh? Where calling it "Encrypt" does nothing special, since every card works differently?
Test: Take your sample cards. Replace "Encrypt" with "Exile." (or even "Exile Face down", which you can look at unless the card text says otherwise according to the rules.) Is there any substantive functional difference? I think not.
Energy is a garbage mechanic. It's mana with counters. Worse, it was used very poorly, as some cards traded in lots of energy for small effects, others traded in small amounts of energy for large effects. Sure, any energy producer that was strictly better than an existing card was something people looked at, but really? The energy decks ran cards that generated EEE not to use for their pathetic 1/1s, but to drop 15/15s or 10/10s with another card.
But let's look at imprint.
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&text= [imprint]
27 cards total. Imprint lets you choose a card and IMPRINT it on another card. Why did this matter? Simple - Isochron Scepter let you play the imprinted card! This is to say that what you imprinted MATTERED for the card. Now, let's look at your sample cards:
Enigma Encoder - doesn't care what you encrypt.
Classified Information - ditto
Dead Dropper - ditto
Mole Hunter - ditto
Unknowable Agent - ditto
Whitewash - ditto
Human Trafficker - ditto
None of these cards CARE about what you Encrypt. But Imprint was all about CARING what you imprinted. That mattered FOR THE CARD. It DID THINGS.
You're using Encrypt like Ingest.
Ingest is a clunky bad mechanic that might mill your opponent and sought to make the milling matter by using the milled cards as "energy counters." (You see where I'm going with this?) Energy was a garbage mechanic, and Ingest is a garbage mechanic. Ingest has a terrible stormscale rating because it played so clunky.
So, to recap: Your use of Encrypt is akin to two garbage mechanics that WOTC dislikes and won't use again. (You can wait a year after Kaladesh rotates for that announcement for energy...). However, you compare it to Energy (useful analogy for the #s alone) and Imprint, one of the BEST MECHANICS EVER, which produced several amazing cards still loved today.
Like Imprint, you keep the open-endedness as to where the imprinted cards came from. Unlike Imprint, however, you don't care what is exiled. It doesn't matter for your cards. It doesn't matter for the game. It's a resource to be exploited. In fact, Encrypt is arguably just the "mana" system from the old Star Wars CCG...
I don't think you know what flavor is. The term "Encrypt" has a dictionary definition. From google:
So when you encrypt your opponent's creature... are you turning it into data your opponent can read and you can't? As I recall, it's the only substantive example of your encrypting something other than the top card of YOUR DECK.
Flavorwise, to encrypt something is to make it so your opponent has trouble reading/looking/finding it/understanding it. Putting information in exile sounds like encrypting... but, let's face it, it's no more "secret" there than it is in your hand.
The more I think about it, the only interesting thing about your mechanic is the NAME of the mechanic. For the mechanic to fit, flavorfully, it has to represent keeping information secret in some way. Some way other than the normal secrecy of it being in your hand, which is usually secret enough on it's own.
One final thought on this: You *NEED* to find an alternate use than "slow card draw" and "ingest 2.0" for encrypted cards.
As I've hinted at in earlier posts, maybe make the cards that you encrypt matter.
For example, maybe have a card that gets a special effect if you decrypt (here understood as putting into the yard, ingest style) a card of each color.
Because your opponent cannot look at your face down cards, they'll never know whether you can activate that card's effect.
Sample:
Encryption Bolter 1R
Creature - Human Wizard
When you play ~, Encrypt 2 (To Encrypt N, exile the top N cards of your library face down. You may look at it at any time. If you would draw a card, you may instead put an encrypted card in your hand.).
Decrypt two cards with different names, T: ~ deals 3 damage to target creature or player. (You decrypt a card, put an encrypted card you control into your graveyard face up.)
2/1
Note that WHAT you put into the yard matters here, and encrypting the card feels sort of secret (insofar as your opponent won't know if it satisfies the criteria in question. (Mind you, this is still ingest 2.0...).
Look, I appreciate your natural response and it's interesting to see you miss things (implying a lack of grockabilly in the designs which I'm worried about) but a lot of what your are saying is missing the boat. Experience with you in the past suggests that you will get confrontational if I attempt to correct you, so I'm simply moving on. Thank you for your time and input.
- Manite