I'm making a custom set based on Pokemon and decided that the transform mechanic was the perfect way to represent evolution (where the Basic form would be the front side and the evolution would be the transformed side). Ideally, I would like a way to reference whether a Pokemon is evolved or not but I'm not sure if "Transformed" or "Untransformed" even means anything. Is it possible to make an effect that cares about permanents that are transformed vs permanents that can transform but aren't?
The original Innistrad cards tended to have their two sides referred to as "day side" and "night side", but this never made it into card text. As far as I know there isn't currently a formal term for what you're referring to. A couple of options:
-"...that hasn't transformed" would technically work, because transforming something is a defined game action and effects can look for whether an action has happened, but this runs into the issues that (a) if there are any effects that are able to transform something back to its original form, that object has been transformed, and (b) anything that isn't a DFC meets the condition too, unless you add "and can transform" or something similar.
- Look at mana cost. This is awkward and has issues if you consider tokens, but the back sides of transformed cards have no mana cost so you could look for whether the creature has one.
- Use creature types. This is potentially the most elegant solution and has a precedent - many Innistrad DFC creatures were Werewolves and also Humans but only on the front side, allowing cards like Moonmist and Immerwolf to be selective about what they affected. Making up a creature type ("Unevolved" is clunky but would get the job done) could be your best bet.
Using DFC's to represent Pokémon is a bad idea because of the issue mentioned by SavannahLion. There would be no way to adequately represent third-stage Pokémon using DFC's. The flavor disconnect in using a second card to represent further evolutionary line progression is huge, too large to warrant DFC's being a feasible option.
To answer your question, since you're defining terms anyway, you might as well go with "unevolved" and "evolved" for your labels. The problem with importing Pokémon in particular is that the name conflict with the Simic evolve mechanic is guaranteed.
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'm planning to just skip the middle stage of evolution for the most part. So Bulbasaur would just transform into Venusaur. The exception is Pokemon that were at one time fully evolved, in which case I'm making an alternate card. For example, for Golbat, I made one card that starts a Zubat and evolves into Golbat, and another that starts as a Johtonian Zubat and evolves into Crobat. I know it's not a perfect solution but there is already precedent for this with Alolan forms and the fact that Kadabra isn't printed as a card anymore so Abra just evolves into Alakazam (with some workarounds). I'm also not making cards for the baby stages with the exception of Togepi since he's a lot more iconic than Togetic.
The other problem, is the ideal name for the unevolved would have been "basic" but that is already a thing in MtG meaning that you can have any number of them in your library.
I'm planning to just skip the middle stage of evolution for the most part. So Bulbasaur would just transform into Venusaur. The exception is Pokemon that were at one time fully evolved, in which case I'm making an alternate card. For example, for Golbat, I made one card that starts a Zubat and evolves into Golbat, and another that starts as a Johtonian Zubat and evolves into Crobat. I know it's not a perfect solution but there is already precedent for this with Alolan forms and the fact that Kadabra isn't printed as a card anymore so Abra just evolves into Alakazam (with some workarounds). I'm also not making cards for the baby stages with the exception of Togepi since he's a lot more iconic than Togetic.
I would have to question your decisions to treat evolution lines this way, but this would be beyond the scope of the Rulings subforum.
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
Champion or a riff thereof would be better imo. Too bad "Basic" is already a supertype and "Evolve" is already a keyword. You could conveivably make Basic Creature - Type, ala Relentless Rats, but I imagine you'd have quite the time developing them. You could perhaps use Evolve triggers to transform your creatures.
Pikachu (Uncommon) W
Creature - Pokemon
1/1
Evolve
When Pikachu has two or more +1/+1 counters on it, exile it, then return it to the battlefield transformed under its owner's control.
///
Riachu
Please design some cards and share them with us instead of asking us to create ideas for you from the raw. That's your job. Not ours. You at least need to bring a lump of clay to the table if you want us to spin it for you.
I wasn't asking anybody to design anything. I already created a full set of the original 150 Pokemon. I'll make a thread at some point in the Custom card section to share some of these since this isn't really the forum to be doing that.
The problem with things like Champion, Offering, and similar things is that they are way too parasitic. I didn't really want to make an entire set that required other specific cards to function. Transform seems like the best way to make the most out of a Pokemon just using a single card. Since there is no ideal situation either way, I think that this is the best compromise to convey evolution while retaining good gameplay.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
-"...that hasn't transformed" would technically work, because transforming something is a defined game action and effects can look for whether an action has happened, but this runs into the issues that (a) if there are any effects that are able to transform something back to its original form, that object has been transformed, and (b) anything that isn't a DFC meets the condition too, unless you add "and can transform" or something similar.
- Look at mana cost. This is awkward and has issues if you consider tokens, but the back sides of transformed cards have no mana cost so you could look for whether the creature has one.
- Use creature types. This is potentially the most elegant solution and has a precedent - many Innistrad DFC creatures were Werewolves and also Humans but only on the front side, allowing cards like Moonmist and Immerwolf to be selective about what they affected. Making up a creature type ("Unevolved" is clunky but would get the job done) could be your best bet.
Basic and Evolved? Basic for the front,... well, you've got the idea.
How do you intend to represent Pokemon with three or more stage evolutions or baby stages?
To answer your question, since you're defining terms anyway, you might as well go with "unevolved" and "evolved" for your labels. The problem with importing Pokémon in particular is that the name conflict with the Simic evolve mechanic is guaranteed.
[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
The other problem, is the ideal name for the unevolved would have been "basic" but that is already a thing in MtG meaning that you can have any number of them in your library.
I would have to question your decisions to treat evolution lines this way, but this would be beyond the scope of the Rulings subforum.
[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
Pikachu (Uncommon)
W
Creature - Pokemon
1/1
Evolve
When Pikachu has two or more +1/+1 counters on it, exile it, then return it to the battlefield transformed under its owner's control.
///
Riachu
Please design some cards and share them with us instead of asking us to create ideas for you from the raw. That's your job. Not ours. You at least need to bring a lump of clay to the table if you want us to spin it for you.
The problem with things like Champion, Offering, and similar things is that they are way too parasitic. I didn't really want to make an entire set that required other specific cards to function. Transform seems like the best way to make the most out of a Pokemon just using a single card. Since there is no ideal situation either way, I think that this is the best compromise to convey evolution while retaining good gameplay.