Speaking of which, Beast Within is pretty much mechanically W. It is the only mono-colour that can hit all permanent type (not so much on lands recently) and it is the colour with the "give you a token for your effort" mechanic. Green isn't that far off, mechanically either, considering that it is basically a Mercy-killing attached to a Bramblecrush, both of which can be casted into mono-green.
It's still not colorless, and has no color. That's a paradox. So either you're a Zen master or an idiot, I'll assume the Zen master for sake of argument. This card will have no paradoxes because it has a clear paradox. Deep stuff man.
beat me to it, but IMO desert twister might have been the precedence for Beast Within being green
If you really think Desert Twister is precedent for anything in current design then you are incredibly mistaken. That card is not green in any way. Just because a card has a colored frame does not make it so. Look toward Vindicate to see where that effect is. G/B also can get *close* but still not exact. Definitely not mono-green.
Mercy Killing exists. Transforming creatures in green (and white for that matter) has some precedence.
Edit: Sorry, saw previous post mentioned it. To add to this, would people be so upset if it wasn't so aggressively costed? What if it cost 4CMC? A drawback added to an instant speed Bramblecrush or a more expensive Mercy Killing that doesn't provide massive card advantage to the creature's controller. Could people live with themselves then? Probably wouldn't make a difference. It is pushing the boundaries, but it isn't like they made another desert twister. Plus, Wizards has been experimenting with Green lately it seems to give it some additional removal options. I have come to accept the Hornet Stings and Beast Withins as the experiments they really are.
If you really think Desert Twister is precedent for anything in current design then you are incredibly mistaken. That card is not green in any way. Just because a card has a colored frame does not make it so. Look toward Vindicate to see where that effect is. G/B also can get *close* but still not exact. Definitely not mono-green.
When they made Vindicate, did they say, "Hey, we're going to make a 2 color spell for 3 cmc and its going to say "destroy target permanent." What color are we making it?" "Hey, let's put Gerrard on it, and since Gerrard's Verdict is going to be White Black, lets make this card White Black as well."
Or did they say "Hey guys, we're making a white/black card at rare. What kind of effect should it have?"
There is nothing definingly or strikingly white/black about "destroy target permanent" except for Vindicate itself. It was followed up on with Angel of Despair, but that was 100% homage to Vindicate itself. Vindicate is iconic not because of incredible flavor or rightness, but an agressive, highly playable ability.
There is nothing definingly or strikingly white/black about "destroy target permanent" except for Vindicate itself.
White destroys artifacts and enchantments. Black destroys creatures and lands. At the time Vindicate was printed, those were the only permanent types, so it made sense that together the two colors could destroy anything.
Honestly, I don't understand any of this "pie" nonsense. If it's good, it goes in blue. Otherwise, it can fit into any other color. At least, that's what the development team seems to be doing.
Incorrect. I'm basically quoting Rosewater and he is kind of the authority on color pie.
Not really. He's actually the color pie socialist. Ever since he took over, he's been doing his best to make sure every color has an equal piece of the pie, removing things that do make sense, and inserting them where they don't.
His rationale for decisions are often based on "Some people complained" or "I don't like it", and I'd argue his decisions are very rarely made to promote the health of the game.
When I look at what magic was before MaRo, and what it is today, I'm honestly astounded it's still selling, because it's half the game it used to be. Literally. He's removed a good chunk of the rules for just as little reason as his color pie determinations.
Isn't Beast Within just a micromanaged Terastodon? I don't remember anybody complaining about that.
The contention with Beast Within is that it hits creatures when green isn't supposed to get straight creature destruction. It gets flying hate (so it can kill flying creatures) and creature-based removal, like fight, Provoke and Lure-type effects.
Beast Within is definitely within green's slice of the color pie, though barely.
Green has "transform"-themed creature removal, ie changing one creature into another or into multiple other creatures. In the form of an enchantment, it has Lignify. For a one-shot temporary effect, it has Snakeform. For a sac effect, it has Feed the Pack and Korozda Guildmage. And for almost the exact same effect as Beast Within, it has Mercy Killing, which kills a creature and gives tokens to the controller.
And obviously green has noncreature permanent removal. No debate there.
Basically, what someone else said: Beast Within is Bramblecrush plus Mercy Killing. Two cards that can be cast entirely with green mana. Explain to me how that is not in green's slice of the color pie.
It is kind of sad that the best single target removal spells in the game (Beast Within and Maelstrom Pulse) are green.
I mean, don't get me wrong, I love the cards, but it is surprising that Beast Within is an instant while Vindicate is only a sorcery, even at the expense of giving your opponent a 3/3.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If combo should die before I wake I'll slide a Smokestack in every deck I play, roll in every shop wreck the Spirit of EDH.
In this thread: people get mad when the dev team throws a bone to the Timmy color.
But in all seriousness, I think Beast Within works just fine as a green card. It's OK for a mechanic or theme to be shared by an enemy-color pair: if white and red can share first strike and battle-cry effects, I see no reason why blue and green can't share Polymorph shenanigans. Snakeform is an excellent example of this shared color-pie space. Blue transforms creatures because blue transforms lots of stuff (see Tinker), and green also has a proud tradition of transforming resources into other resources (see Mwonvuli Acid Moss, Natural End, Rude Awakening). Beast Within may be the first time we've seen "destroy target permanent" in mono-green, but I think the token-creation effect justifies it. Destroying anything to create new life feels VERY green to me.
I'd love to see the Simic guild get another removal-through-transformation spell like this once Gatecrash drops.
Beast Within kinda follows the good old rule of, "if it's really, really flavorful, it's ok to break the color pie, because then you sorta aren't breaking it really". Kinda like those Goblin arsons that burn plains or scarecrows.
Are you kidding? Green is pretty good right now. To say otherwise is a blatant lie.
The rest of your argument is incorrect. Green doesn't get unconditional creature removal (in mono). No, giving them a beast is not a condition.
The very next line ("In all seriousness...") was meant to convey that I was joking about green being nothing but the Timmy color. Green has indeed gotten a lot better than it was during the Craw Wurm days of 4th Edition when I first played Magic, and I'm glad for it. When I'm not playing Izzet counterburn these days I'm probably playing some kind of green brew.
Creature removal effects are so fundamental to victory in Limited formats that every color needs some to be truly competitive during drafts and sealed-deck matches. And most of the competitively low-cost removal in each color is conditional, with only a few exceptions like Terminate and Murder:
R: can't burn out creatures with high enough toughness scores without piling on multiple sources of damage; or blocker removal is only temporary (Nightbird's Clutches, Act of Treason)
U: enchantment-based issues shared with white (Claustrophobia, Mind Control); bounce effects (Unsummon, Griptide) are only temporary removal unless target is a token; counterspells only work while creature spell is on the stack
Compared to many of the above conditions, giving out a 3/3 Beast token actually is a more relevant drawback in most board positions -- more relevant than the compensations offered by white's instant removal in most cases. 3/3 can be a significant blocker or beatstick for your opponent even during the late game. Heck, I've seen cube-drafters cast Beast Within on their own less-relevant permanents to create one more attacker for the following turn's final all-in assault; that shows more than anything how relevant the token is.
The color pie is not set in stone -- nor should it be. The day that the color pie stops evolving is the day that our beloved game begins to stagnate and die. Beast Within was an experiment in instant-speed green removal, just like Pacifism was the debut experiment in white enchantment-based removal during Mirage. Some experiments pave the way for future variations and refinements and redefine how people conceive of a color's slice of the pie. Some experiments are abandoned... but they're still a part of that color's legacy.
Green needed creature removal for the NPH Limited environment. Beast Within removed a creature (among other possible targets) and made a beast token. Green LOVES to make beast tokens. It was an experimental form of green removal inspired by in-color precedents like Terastodon and Mercy Killing. Even if the dev team never designs another mono-green removal card that matches its power level, it will probably serve as the inspiration for a similar token-generating green removal spell in the future, just as Tinker inspired the much weaker Tinker Mage. Beast Within has left its mark on the green slice of the color pie, and it will be remembered as a green card.
Are you kidding? Green is pretty good right now. To say otherwise is a blatant lie.
The rest of your argument is incorrect. Green doesn't get unconditional creature removal (in mono). No, giving them a beast is not a condition.
If green doesn't get unconditional creature removal, then why does it get fight? No, having it pointlessly hurt your much bigger creature is not a condition.
Let's also ignore the fact that you're not even really removing the creature anyways.
If green doesn't get unconditional creature removal, then why does it get fight? No, having it pointlessly hurt your much bigger creature is not a condition.
Let's also ignore the fact that you're not even really removing the creature anyways.
....Fight is completely conditional. If you don't know what "conditional" means then we can't get anywhere with this discussion.
It doesn't just hit creatures. If you read the card you'll see it hits permanents. Which is actually a minor green thing. Just look up some cards like Woodfall Primus
MaRo is for Magic as Oprah is for the world... When they say something everyone treats it as gospel sung by the angels... Oprah has this way to get terrible books to be best sellers at the wave of her overlarge hands....
If Mark Rosewater told you that Lightning Bolt wasn't red, would you believe him?
I however, like Beast Within where it is. It works and green has always been able to deal with everything in its own course...
The entire purpose of the color pie philosophy is to make sure that the mechanics are balanced so that each color has well-defined weaknesses and strengths, otherwise there's little reason to have color divisions at all. In current color pie philosophy, one of green's weaknesses is spot removal for [non-flying] creatures. The color pie is always shifting. Maybe down the line, creature removal might become a green thing, but for where things are right now, Beast Within (and Mercy Killing) feel out of place.
The entire purpose of the color pie philosophy is to make sure that the mechanics are balanced so that each color has well-defined weaknesses and strengths, otherwise there's little reason to have color divisions at all. In current color pie philosophy, one of green's weaknesses is spot removal for [non-flying] creatures. The color pie is always shifting. Maybe down the line, creature removal might become a green thing, but for where things are right now, Beast Within (and Mercy Killing) feel out of place.
The direct damage thing stayed until Odyssey, so it was definately in pie. The land destruction was also in pie since back then, color hosers made a point of ripping off the hosed color's mechanic to do so. The creature destruction was probably in pie, too, since it happened on multiple cards over multiple sets. It also had Ovinomancer, too. Just because the color pie changed over the years doesn't mean you can point to an old card and say there's no justification. Now, the life payment for Force of Will is a bit of a bleed, but it's a cycle, so you can bend the rules a little bit if it's for the good of the cycle. The black card costs you one life, too. Cycles have bent all kinds of pie typical things like creature sacrifice, discarding your cards, sacrificing your lands, and even the bending for the uncounterable cycle last set.
As far as green having flying creature destruction, though, it isn't that much of a stretch to shift the needle a little and say green can kill any creature as long as it gives you more creatures. Afterall, it's "destroying" creatures already. The token thing is also quite a condition because you can only use Beast Within if the target is more threatening than a 3/3 beast token. That does become a much bigger if in massive multiplayer, though.
Nah, W just changes the card into 1/1 tokens of some sort.
Speaking of which, Beast Within is pretty much mechanically W. It is the only mono-colour that can hit all permanent type (not so much on lands recently) and it is the colour with the "give you a token for your effort" mechanic. Green isn't that far off, mechanically either, considering that it is basically a Mercy-killing attached to a Bramblecrush, both of which can be casted into mono-green.
The only colour with a 99/99
Signature by Spongy Pengwin
UBR: Sedris
beat me to it, but IMO desert twister might have been the precedence for Beast Within being green
Mabbz on MTGO | Demgrinds on Twitch & Twitter | Helpdesk
If you really think Desert Twister is precedent for anything in current design then you are incredibly mistaken. That card is not green in any way. Just because a card has a colored frame does not make it so. Look toward Vindicate to see where that effect is. G/B also can get *close* but still not exact. Definitely not mono-green.
Edit: Sorry, saw previous post mentioned it. To add to this, would people be so upset if it wasn't so aggressively costed? What if it cost 4CMC? A drawback added to an instant speed Bramblecrush or a more expensive Mercy Killing that doesn't provide massive card advantage to the creature's controller. Could people live with themselves then? Probably wouldn't make a difference. It is pushing the boundaries, but it isn't like they made another desert twister. Plus, Wizards has been experimenting with Green lately it seems to give it some additional removal options. I have come to accept the Hornet Stings and Beast Withins as the experiments they really are.
When they made Vindicate, did they say, "Hey, we're going to make a 2 color spell for 3 cmc and its going to say "destroy target permanent." What color are we making it?" "Hey, let's put Gerrard on it, and since Gerrard's Verdict is going to be White Black, lets make this card White Black as well."
Or did they say "Hey guys, we're making a white/black card at rare. What kind of effect should it have?"
There is nothing definingly or strikingly white/black about "destroy target permanent" except for Vindicate itself. It was followed up on with Angel of Despair, but that was 100% homage to Vindicate itself. Vindicate is iconic not because of incredible flavor or rightness, but an agressive, highly playable ability.
Not really. He's actually the color pie socialist. Ever since he took over, he's been doing his best to make sure every color has an equal piece of the pie, removing things that do make sense, and inserting them where they don't.
His rationale for decisions are often based on "Some people complained" or "I don't like it", and I'd argue his decisions are very rarely made to promote the health of the game.
When I look at what magic was before MaRo, and what it is today, I'm honestly astounded it's still selling, because it's half the game it used to be. Literally. He's removed a good chunk of the rules for just as little reason as his color pie determinations.
Green has "transform"-themed creature removal, ie changing one creature into another or into multiple other creatures. In the form of an enchantment, it has Lignify. For a one-shot temporary effect, it has Snakeform. For a sac effect, it has Feed the Pack and Korozda Guildmage. And for almost the exact same effect as Beast Within, it has Mercy Killing, which kills a creature and gives tokens to the controller.
And obviously green has noncreature permanent removal. No debate there.
Basically, what someone else said: Beast Within is Bramblecrush plus Mercy Killing. Two cards that can be cast entirely with green mana. Explain to me how that is not in green's slice of the color pie.
I mean, don't get me wrong, I love the cards, but it is surprising that Beast Within is an instant while Vindicate is only a sorcery, even at the expense of giving your opponent a 3/3.
WBRG Saskia the Unyielding
WUB Sharuum the Hegemon
RWU Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest
RG Wort, the Raidmother
WU Brago, King Eternal
B Chainer, Dementia Master
But in all seriousness, I think Beast Within works just fine as a green card. It's OK for a mechanic or theme to be shared by an enemy-color pair: if white and red can share first strike and battle-cry effects, I see no reason why blue and green can't share Polymorph shenanigans. Snakeform is an excellent example of this shared color-pie space. Blue transforms creatures because blue transforms lots of stuff (see Tinker), and green also has a proud tradition of transforming resources into other resources (see Mwonvuli Acid Moss, Natural End, Rude Awakening). Beast Within may be the first time we've seen "destroy target permanent" in mono-green, but I think the token-creation effect justifies it. Destroying anything to create new life feels VERY green to me.
I'd love to see the Simic guild get another removal-through-transformation spell like this once Gatecrash drops.
Are you kidding? Green is pretty good right now. To say otherwise is a blatant lie.
The rest of your argument is incorrect. Green doesn't get unconditional creature removal (in mono). No, giving them a beast is not a condition.
The very next line ("In all seriousness...") was meant to convey that I was joking about green being nothing but the Timmy color. Green has indeed gotten a lot better than it was during the Craw Wurm days of 4th Edition when I first played Magic, and I'm glad for it. When I'm not playing Izzet counterburn these days I'm probably playing some kind of green brew.
Creature removal effects are so fundamental to victory in Limited formats that every color needs some to be truly competitive during drafts and sealed-deck matches. And most of the competitively low-cost removal in each color is conditional, with only a few exceptions like Terminate and Murder:
B: can't target certain types of creatures (Terror, Rend Flesh) or opponent chooses what to sacrifice (Diabolic Edict, Barter in Blood)
R: can't burn out creatures with high enough toughness scores without piling on multiple sources of damage; or blocker removal is only temporary (Nightbird's Clutches, Act of Treason)
W: enchantments only bind the creature until opponent draws enchantment hate (Oblivion Ring, Pacifism); instants only remove targets that meet a certain condition (Rebuke, Smite the Monstrous) or compensate the opponent (Swords to Plowshares, Path to Exile)
U: enchantment-based issues shared with white (Claustrophobia, Mind Control); bounce effects (Unsummon, Griptide) are only temporary removal unless target is a token; counterspells only work while creature spell is on the stack
Compared to many of the above conditions, giving out a 3/3 Beast token actually is a more relevant drawback in most board positions -- more relevant than the compensations offered by white's instant removal in most cases. 3/3 can be a significant blocker or beatstick for your opponent even during the late game. Heck, I've seen cube-drafters cast Beast Within on their own less-relevant permanents to create one more attacker for the following turn's final all-in assault; that shows more than anything how relevant the token is.
The color pie is not set in stone -- nor should it be. The day that the color pie stops evolving is the day that our beloved game begins to stagnate and die. Beast Within was an experiment in instant-speed green removal, just like Pacifism was the debut experiment in white enchantment-based removal during Mirage. Some experiments pave the way for future variations and refinements and redefine how people conceive of a color's slice of the pie. Some experiments are abandoned... but they're still a part of that color's legacy.
Green needed creature removal for the NPH Limited environment. Beast Within removed a creature (among other possible targets) and made a beast token. Green LOVES to make beast tokens. It was an experimental form of green removal inspired by in-color precedents like Terastodon and Mercy Killing. Even if the dev team never designs another mono-green removal card that matches its power level, it will probably serve as the inspiration for a similar token-generating green removal spell in the future, just as Tinker inspired the much weaker Tinker Mage. Beast Within has left its mark on the green slice of the color pie, and it will be remembered as a green card.
If green doesn't get unconditional creature removal, then why does it get fight? No, having it pointlessly hurt your much bigger creature is not a condition.
Let's also ignore the fact that you're not even really removing the creature anyways.
....Fight is completely conditional. If you don't know what "conditional" means then we can't get anywhere with this discussion.
desert twister
If Mark Rosewater told you that Lightning Bolt wasn't red, would you believe him?
I however, like Beast Within where it is. It works and green has always been able to deal with everything in its own course...
I said that because it was as ridiculous as what you stated. If you read it, i copied you verbatim there.
Fight actually removes creatures, beast within does not.
Blue had direct damage, life payment, creature destruction, land destruction, and lots of other mechanics that are generally agreed to be non-blue these days.
The entire purpose of the color pie philosophy is to make sure that the mechanics are balanced so that each color has well-defined weaknesses and strengths, otherwise there's little reason to have color divisions at all. In current color pie philosophy, one of green's weaknesses is spot removal for [non-flying] creatures. The color pie is always shifting. Maybe down the line, creature removal might become a green thing, but for where things are right now, Beast Within (and Mercy Killing) feel out of place.
The direct damage thing stayed until Odyssey, so it was definately in pie. The land destruction was also in pie since back then, color hosers made a point of ripping off the hosed color's mechanic to do so. The creature destruction was probably in pie, too, since it happened on multiple cards over multiple sets. It also had Ovinomancer, too. Just because the color pie changed over the years doesn't mean you can point to an old card and say there's no justification. Now, the life payment for Force of Will is a bit of a bleed, but it's a cycle, so you can bend the rules a little bit if it's for the good of the cycle. The black card costs you one life, too. Cycles have bent all kinds of pie typical things like creature sacrifice, discarding your cards, sacrificing your lands, and even the bending for the uncounterable cycle last set.
As far as green having flying creature destruction, though, it isn't that much of a stretch to shift the needle a little and say green can kill any creature as long as it gives you more creatures. Afterall, it's "destroying" creatures already. The token thing is also quite a condition because you can only use Beast Within if the target is more threatening than a 3/3 beast token. That does become a much bigger if in massive multiplayer, though.