I have gotten quite a number of people asking what this cycle is doing in the set as the tribes are all allied colors. The answer is that R&D has to think bigger picture than just any one set. Magic needed enemy-color dual lands, and the enemy versions of the M10 lands seemed like the right version. Erik Lauer is responsible for making sure that things work out through multiple sets, like distributing the right mix of lands across the sets. Erik had figured out that this cycle needed to go somewhere in Innistrad block.
...
I was happy with the compromise, which allowed everyone to get what they needed and for the set to feel like a cohesive whole design wise. For those who have been asking if the enemy dual lands hint at some shift towards enemy colors later in the block, my answer is no.
Is this clue enough that there will be heavy enemy color support in the next block? I am imagining multicolor focused on opposing colors but any theme is possible as long as it requires enemy color strategies.
We already had an enemy themed set with eventide, and it turned out to be the worst set since saviors of kamigawa. I would be shocked to see them make a whole block around it.
I believe that I have enough social competence to slip into a party or two, potentially wooing some attractive females that would not mind spending the evening performing the booty dance on me.
1: Eventide wasn't that bad at all.
2: We had enemy color support for scars, it is possible the innistrad duals are meant to supplement the loss of the fetch lands.
We already had an enemy themed set with eventide, and it turned out to be the worst set since saviors of kamigawa. I would be shocked to see them make a whole block around it.
When a set is labeled as a failure, is it really a good idea to make a whole block around it? They experimented with landfall in Zendikar and they liked it, so they said that it would be returning in a future block. But Zendikar was a huge success. Mirrodin was very popular with older players, so they revisited the plane. For some reason, Eventide 2.0 just doesn't seem likely to me.
I believe that I have enough social competence to slip into a party or two, potentially wooing some attractive females that would not mind spending the evening performing the booty dance on me.
Eventide wasn't bad because it was enemy-colour themed, it was bad because it was a mess of a set that threw away everything the rest of the block (I'm including Lorwyn/Morningtide here) had started for no obvious reason. That said, I think the need for enemy-colour fixing is less hinting at the next block being enemy-colour themed and more addressing what would otherwise be a complete absence of enemy-colour fixing in Standard.
Eventide wasn't bad because it was enemy-colour themed, it was bad because it was a mess of a set that threw away everything the rest of the block (I'm including Lorwyn/Morningtide here) had started for no obvious reason. That said, I think the need for enemy-colour fixing is less hinting at the next block being enemy-colour themed and more addressing what would otherwise be a complete absence of enemy-colour fixing in Standard.
Could you epxlain that a little bit more? I like several cards from eventide but haven't compared the whole set to the block. Were the mechanics bad in comparison?
Eventide was gross in limited because of it being an enemy colored set in a allied super block. It was shoe-horned in and would've worked out better if shadowmoor had been enemy color as well.
So we can gather from past experiences with enemy colored design; that wizards will probably design an entire block around it rather than individual sets.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently Playing----------------------------- R/ Nasticore
I always assumed it was because R&D believes two color enemy color decks like Solar Flare simply cannot exist without viable lands to support them. Anyone remember playing Standard during Masques block, with no mana fixing at all? Virtually every deck was mono color.
The problem with defining [EDH] by what is "fun" is that everyone seems to define fun as what they don't lose to. If you keep losing to easily answered cards, that means you should improve your deck. If you don't want to improve your deck, then you should come to peace with the idea that you are going to lose because you chose to not interact with better strategies.
I think the main problem is making enemy colored cards that don't feel forced. Even in RAV block, some card interactions were clumsy. And yes, EVE really did shine a big fat flashlight on the same issue. How to create a unique feeling pair without just basically bleeding color pie into some boring mess?
I love me some Simic and Orzhov action... but having lived through all the previous atempts... I think I'd just ratherthey give us well designed cards in single colors and let our mana base get more creative instead.
Enemy colored Innistrad lands hint to an enemy colored block just as much as enemy colored fetch lands hinted to an enemy colored block (ie: they didn't.) Sometimes, they just need to finish out a cycle of lands. This is the time when they chose to do it.
Asking out a girl is like trying to cast a first turn Necropotence. Sometimes the other player will have the Force of Will to say no. You shouldn't let that stop you from trying it.
When a set is labeled as a failure, is it really a good idea to make a whole block around it? They experimented with landfall in Zendikar and they liked it, so they said that it would be returning in a future block. But Zendikar was a huge success. Mirrodin was very popular with older players, so they revisited the plane. For some reason, Eventide 2.0 just doesn't seem likely to me.
Flip cards were a bad idea, yet we now have new cards that flip. That same "bad" set that had flip cards had a spirit sub-theme, and here we are with a new spirit sub-theme.
All it takes is designing things differently and marketing it differently. I have enough confidence in WotC to believe they could pull that off if they felt they could pull it off. Not saying it's likely. Not saying I want it to happen. Not even saying it will happen. Just saying I wouldn't be surprised.
I think the main problem is making enemy colored cards that don't feel forced. Even in RAV block, some card interactions were clumsy. And yes, EVE really did shine a big fat flashlight on the same issue. How to create a unique feeling pair without just basically bleeding color pie into some boring mess?
Really? I've always felt that enemy pairs and wedges have more untapped design space than allied pairs and arcs (which have been significantly explored no less than four times), something I think we see a lot of in custom card design. Enemy pairings illicit a lot of curiosity and interest in part because they've really only been touched on briefly (Apocalypse made an attempt, but things were very much experimental and in many cases forced; the Ravnica block made a solid attempt to give enemy pairs unique identities and I think it was largely a success; and Eventide, by result of its theme and mechanics, had to force a lot of concepts on pairs and in some cases it came across as awkward but in a few cases I think they identified good shared design space between pairs). Enemy wedges are very commonly designed cards amongst amateur designers, I think largely because there's so much to consider there that hasn't really been covered by sets. And then we have the Commanders, which if I'm not mistaken were incredibly popular (yes, part of that was for a lack of other options aside from the PC alterna-Dragons, but I think they also tapped into rarely-explored design space).
If anything, I think a properly done enemy colored set could be very popular and cover ground we haven't seen much of in the game's 20 year history. I agree that the trick is the operative word 'properly', but I'm not sure that's too great a barrier that the theme will never be visited extensively.
This doesn't hint at anything at all, WOTC just wants to have an enemy cycle of lands so casual players can have fun and these were even playable in competitive decks i think it's good for diversity and that it doesn't really mean anything.
There is absolutely no reason to think an enemy color block is on it's way, just like fetchlands didn't mean the next block would involve shocklands, despite what some people speculated.
Really? I've always felt that enemy pairs and wedges have more untapped design space than allied pairs and arcs (which have been significantly explored no less than four times), something I think we see a lot of in custom card design. Enemy pairings illicit a lot of curiosity and interest in part because they've really only been touched on briefly (Apocalypse made an attempt, but things were very much experimental and in many cases forced; the Ravnica block made a solid attempt to give enemy pairs unique identities and I think it was largely a success; and Eventide, by result of its theme and mechanics, had to force a lot of concepts on pairs and in some cases it came across as awkward but in a few cases I think they identified good shared design space between pairs). Enemy wedges are very commonly designed cards amongst amateur designers, I think largely because there's so much to consider there that hasn't really been covered by sets. And then we have the Commanders, which if I'm not mistaken were incredibly popular (yes, part of that was for a lack of other options aside from the PC alterna-Dragons, but I think they also tapped into rarely-explored design space).
If anything, I think a properly done enemy colored set could be very popular and cover ground we haven't seen much of in the game's 20 year history. I agree that the trick is the operative word 'properly', but I'm not sure that's too great a barrier that the theme will never be visited extensively.
"Properly" is exactly the right thing to consider. There are lots of interesting things to be done with enemy colors... but I don't really think that it's something you want to carry a set with. Alara Reborn isn't exactly the most fondly remembered of all sets, despite the love affair people have with gold cards.
Enemy-combinations are something that's better to be rarely used when there's an overlap... Unburial Rites is a fine example of where an enemy-pair card makes sense, but to have a set that's all enemy colored, you're going to end up in lots of situations where you're going to have to make more and more mundane cards be of enemy pairs just to make your theme work, and in doing so make enemy pairs continue to look less and less special.
There is lots of design space there, but I'd rather have it be exploited wisely to awesome effect and slowly eeked out over blocks and blocks of cards that just dumped with an uncerimonious thud into a single set.
Enemy-combinations are something that's better to be rarely used when there's an overlap... Unburial Rites is a fine example of where an enemy-pair card makes sense, but to have a set that's all enemy colored, you're going to end up in lots of situations where you're going to have to make more and more mundane cards be of enemy pairs just to make your theme work, and in doing so make enemy pairs continue to look less and less special.
Exactly. That and the bleed between colors tends to go only so far creatively. WB is a no brainer for reanimation spells, tokens, and lifebleed effects... but then look at GB... graveyard tricks, tokens, and lifebleed effects. There is just a much more defined line for allied pairs... BU is card draw, mill, punishing control effects... nothing else really does that.
"Properly" is exactly the right thing to consider. There are lots of interesting things to be done with enemy colors... but I don't really think that it's something you want to carry a set with. Alara Reborn isn't exactly the most fondly remembered of all sets, despite the love affair people have with gold cards.
You're right, the Alara block as a whole wasn't incredibly well-received. I think a large part of that is that by that point players were burnt out on gold. And it certainly didn't help that much of the multicolor in that block felt forced or was otherwise just a retread. The pendulum swung away from multicolor after that, but make no mistake, it will one day swing back. It won't be too long before we see another block with a greater than average focus on multicolor, it's too popular a theme to never revisit again. And if I had to bet on how this future gold block would differ from the last few, I'd reckon they'd make it different by giving more focus to the less-represented half of multicolor: enemies.
Next year's block? I don't know, I honestly doubt it. But an enemy gold block is something I consider to be inevitable.
As far as enemy gold not being something able to carry a set, I don't feel that's true. Enemy pairs were half the focus of the Ravnica block and they held their end as well as the ally pairs (in some ways, they did better since it's invariably the enemy guilds I hear the most about in terms of that block's successes). And I think if ally gold is still capable of carrying a block (and though it wasn't a complete success, I think the Alara block wasn't an abject failure either - much of its failure, as I said before, was due to players just not being wowed by a multicolor block right after Shadowmoor and a bit too much of the actual gold cards just not being great), enemy gold theoretically could as well. I'm more willing to think it could since enemy gold is much more of a novelty (it's not often we get much multicolor and when we do, it's typically just allied stuff with a light bit of enemy) and that is likely to go over better than yet another well-trodden allied gold block.
Exactly. That and the bleed between colors tends to go only so far creatively. WB is a no brainer for reanimation spells, tokens, and lifebleed effects... but then look at GB... graveyard tricks, tokens, and lifebleed effects. There is just a much more defined line for allied pairs... BU is card draw, mill, punishing control effects... nothing else really does that.
Eeeehhhh, I don't think you're really digging well enough. Yes, in general terms, some pairs have overlap, but I think if you dig deep enough, the enemy pairs have a lot of unique shared design space.
With green-black, yes you have reanimation, tokens and lifebleed like in white-black, but there's more to the pair than that. Regeneration matters, deathtouch as a common keyword, Consume Strength cards, the 'circle of life' theme realized via sacrificing for benefits, provoke-style effects, general graveyard matters (both colors frequently derive effects scaling based on cards in graveyards), the Golgari sub-theme of growing upward (via +1/+1 counters) strikes me as fitting.
Black-white has a heavier focus on lifebleeding, damage redirection, lifelink and similarly themed mechanics (I always liked Souls of the Faultless), large-scale creature destruction, life totals mattering, graveyard exiling, taxing via life payments.
Red-white is the home of double strike, combat matters (significantly more than other pairs and this encompasses a great amount of mechanics), "target attacking or blocking creature".
Blue-red is the color of meta-magic so it redirects and copies spells, steals spells and permanents, looting, artifacts and various artifacts-matters effects, power/toughness switching, returning sorceries and instants from your graveyard to your hand, casting spells/putting things into play for cheap/free, unblockable/can't block effects, self-bounce.
Blue-green is the combo that cares most about hexproof, creature/token/counter doubling, augmenting power and toughness ("X is a 3/3 creature" etc), Ophidian abilities, copying abilities, using the top of the library (both in looking at those cards for effects as well as bouncing things there), caring about cards in hand, moving auras/counters between permanents, flash on creatures, ability countering (activated and triggered).
In some cases, this shared design space can be correctly argued for in other combinations, but I feel they have the strongest homes in these pairs. Only red/white seems light on design space but that's only because the pair's one major focus (combat) involves a lot of smaller concepts.
They aren't doing mechanically themed blocks anymore, so an enemy color block isn't likely.
Where are you getting that from? The last full block was themed around Artifacts and Poison, both arguably mechanical themes. And the block before that? Oh yeh, lands. We even got a special ability word for it.
The way I see it, Innistrad is the first block that hasn't had a heavy mechanical theme since, um, Time Spiral, I guess.
The big issue here is that, when Innistrad rotates, it'll take the enemy lands with it. While they could do a full 10 reprint in M13, I don't think they would. So that leaves us with an enemy colored block, and no enemy lands in Standard.
Well, considering that we won't be losing Innistrad til several months afterM14 hits, I don't think we need to worry quite yet
...
Is this clue enough that there will be heavy enemy color support in the next block? I am imagining multicolor focused on opposing colors but any theme is possible as long as it requires enemy color strategies.
RUG Riku, Two is Better Than One
UB [PRIMER] Wrexial, Classic Control
RG Radha, Ramp's Theme Goes With Everything
2: We had enemy color support for scars, it is possible the innistrad duals are meant to supplement the loss of the fetch lands.
They can't fix it if they don't try.
When a set is labeled as a failure, is it really a good idea to make a whole block around it? They experimented with landfall in Zendikar and they liked it, so they said that it would be returning in a future block. But Zendikar was a huge success. Mirrodin was very popular with older players, so they revisited the plane. For some reason, Eventide 2.0 just doesn't seem likely to me.
RUG Riku, Two is Better Than One
UB [PRIMER] Wrexial, Classic Control
RG Radha, Ramp's Theme Goes With Everything
Could you epxlain that a little bit more? I like several cards from eventide but haven't compared the whole set to the block. Were the mechanics bad in comparison?
So we can gather from past experiences with enemy colored design; that wizards will probably design an entire block around it rather than individual sets.
R/ Nasticore
I love me some Simic and Orzhov action... but having lived through all the previous atempts... I think I'd just ratherthey give us well designed cards in single colors and let our mana base get more creative instead.
Level 1 DCI Judge
Check out my Commons Cube.
Flip cards were a bad idea, yet we now have new cards that flip. That same "bad" set that had flip cards had a spirit sub-theme, and here we are with a new spirit sub-theme.
All it takes is designing things differently and marketing it differently. I have enough confidence in WotC to believe they could pull that off if they felt they could pull it off. Not saying it's likely. Not saying I want it to happen. Not even saying it will happen. Just saying I wouldn't be surprised.
Really? I've always felt that enemy pairs and wedges have more untapped design space than allied pairs and arcs (which have been significantly explored no less than four times), something I think we see a lot of in custom card design. Enemy pairings illicit a lot of curiosity and interest in part because they've really only been touched on briefly (Apocalypse made an attempt, but things were very much experimental and in many cases forced; the Ravnica block made a solid attempt to give enemy pairs unique identities and I think it was largely a success; and Eventide, by result of its theme and mechanics, had to force a lot of concepts on pairs and in some cases it came across as awkward but in a few cases I think they identified good shared design space between pairs). Enemy wedges are very commonly designed cards amongst amateur designers, I think largely because there's so much to consider there that hasn't really been covered by sets. And then we have the Commanders, which if I'm not mistaken were incredibly popular (yes, part of that was for a lack of other options aside from the PC alterna-Dragons, but I think they also tapped into rarely-explored design space).
If anything, I think a properly done enemy colored set could be very popular and cover ground we haven't seen much of in the game's 20 year history. I agree that the trick is the operative word 'properly', but I'm not sure that's too great a barrier that the theme will never be visited extensively.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
There is absolutely no reason to think an enemy color block is on it's way, just like fetchlands didn't mean the next block would involve shocklands, despite what some people speculated.
"Properly" is exactly the right thing to consider. There are lots of interesting things to be done with enemy colors... but I don't really think that it's something you want to carry a set with. Alara Reborn isn't exactly the most fondly remembered of all sets, despite the love affair people have with gold cards.
Enemy-combinations are something that's better to be rarely used when there's an overlap... Unburial Rites is a fine example of where an enemy-pair card makes sense, but to have a set that's all enemy colored, you're going to end up in lots of situations where you're going to have to make more and more mundane cards be of enemy pairs just to make your theme work, and in doing so make enemy pairs continue to look less and less special.
There is lots of design space there, but I'd rather have it be exploited wisely to awesome effect and slowly eeked out over blocks and blocks of cards that just dumped with an uncerimonious thud into a single set.
Exactly. That and the bleed between colors tends to go only so far creatively. WB is a no brainer for reanimation spells, tokens, and lifebleed effects... but then look at GB... graveyard tricks, tokens, and lifebleed effects. There is just a much more defined line for allied pairs... BU is card draw, mill, punishing control effects... nothing else really does that.
You're right, the Alara block as a whole wasn't incredibly well-received. I think a large part of that is that by that point players were burnt out on gold. And it certainly didn't help that much of the multicolor in that block felt forced or was otherwise just a retread. The pendulum swung away from multicolor after that, but make no mistake, it will one day swing back. It won't be too long before we see another block with a greater than average focus on multicolor, it's too popular a theme to never revisit again. And if I had to bet on how this future gold block would differ from the last few, I'd reckon they'd make it different by giving more focus to the less-represented half of multicolor: enemies.
Next year's block? I don't know, I honestly doubt it. But an enemy gold block is something I consider to be inevitable.
As far as enemy gold not being something able to carry a set, I don't feel that's true. Enemy pairs were half the focus of the Ravnica block and they held their end as well as the ally pairs (in some ways, they did better since it's invariably the enemy guilds I hear the most about in terms of that block's successes). And I think if ally gold is still capable of carrying a block (and though it wasn't a complete success, I think the Alara block wasn't an abject failure either - much of its failure, as I said before, was due to players just not being wowed by a multicolor block right after Shadowmoor and a bit too much of the actual gold cards just not being great), enemy gold theoretically could as well. I'm more willing to think it could since enemy gold is much more of a novelty (it's not often we get much multicolor and when we do, it's typically just allied stuff with a light bit of enemy) and that is likely to go over better than yet another well-trodden allied gold block.
ETA:
Eeeehhhh, I don't think you're really digging well enough. Yes, in general terms, some pairs have overlap, but I think if you dig deep enough, the enemy pairs have a lot of unique shared design space.
With green-black, yes you have reanimation, tokens and lifebleed like in white-black, but there's more to the pair than that. Regeneration matters, deathtouch as a common keyword, Consume Strength cards, the 'circle of life' theme realized via sacrificing for benefits, provoke-style effects, general graveyard matters (both colors frequently derive effects scaling based on cards in graveyards), the Golgari sub-theme of growing upward (via +1/+1 counters) strikes me as fitting.
Black-white has a heavier focus on lifebleeding, damage redirection, lifelink and similarly themed mechanics (I always liked Souls of the Faultless), large-scale creature destruction, life totals mattering, graveyard exiling, taxing via life payments.
Red-white is the home of double strike, combat matters (significantly more than other pairs and this encompasses a great amount of mechanics), "target attacking or blocking creature".
Blue-red is the color of meta-magic so it redirects and copies spells, steals spells and permanents, looting, artifacts and various artifacts-matters effects, power/toughness switching, returning sorceries and instants from your graveyard to your hand, casting spells/putting things into play for cheap/free, unblockable/can't block effects, self-bounce.
Blue-green is the combo that cares most about hexproof, creature/token/counter doubling, augmenting power and toughness ("X is a 3/3 creature" etc), Ophidian abilities, copying abilities, using the top of the library (both in looking at those cards for effects as well as bouncing things there), caring about cards in hand, moving auras/counters between permanents, flash on creatures, ability countering (activated and triggered).
In some cases, this shared design space can be correctly argued for in other combinations, but I feel they have the strongest homes in these pairs. Only red/white seems light on design space but that's only because the pair's one major focus (combat) involves a lot of smaller concepts.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
Follow the link for nice cheap clothing.
Playing:
Death's Shadow Jund
Played:
Kiki Chord, Zoo variants, Goblins, Burn
The Rumor Mill here has reliable information to the contrary. Next year's block reportedly takes place in a new setting, not on Ravnica.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
Where are you getting that from? The last full block was themed around Artifacts and Poison, both arguably mechanical themes. And the block before that? Oh yeh, lands. We even got a special ability word for it.
The way I see it, Innistrad is the first block that hasn't had a heavy mechanical theme since, um, Time Spiral, I guess.
Well, considering that we won't be losing Innistrad til several months afterM14 hits, I don't think we need to worry quite yet
Check out my blog, Swing For Game!