To date, there are no cards that mention protection on the M15 spoiler. Additionally, cards that flavorfully grant protection (Spirit Bonds, Avacyn, Guardian Angel) use damage prevention and indestructibility instead.
Given MaRo's recent comments about his dissatisfaction with it as a mechanic, do you think we've seen the last of it for now?
Was there any kind of announcement when Hexproof officially replaced Shroud? If not, then it's possible. Personally, I'm totally okay with that, I think protection, (at least from colors) is a pretty dumb mechanic for two reasons:
1. It makes no sense flavorwise. You're telling me that this tiger thing is so perfectly evolved that no blue magic can ever touch it? It doesn't even make sense that a wizard could fully protect himself from a certain color of magic.
2. When protection works, it's kind of just luck. It's like, "Hey, sorry, looks like you're playing red, mate, guess I have the advantage this round." It makes games really unbalanced. Sure, you can say this about other mechanics like lifegain, graveyard exiling, etc., but these actually do something.
He said he didn't like regeneration because it is complicated and counter-intuitive, and landwalk because it is either very strong or completely useless depending on the deck you are facing. Protection is essentially a combination of both of those problems, so I wouldn't be surprised to see it get the boot.
I feel like protection will simply go away and be "replaced" by damage prevention and indestructible, that regenerate will be replaced by a similar keyword that acts less like a shield and more like a creature recovering from its wounds, and that landwalk will go away very slowly.
I believe we're going to see it disappear, a lot of it having to due with the fact that it' confusing for newer players. Personally, I'm going to miss it but that may be because Mirran and Phyrexian Crusader are some of my favorite cards in all of magic.
For what it's worth, the opposite of evergreen is "deciduous" so I suggest we start using that from now on to refer to shroud, banding, islandhome, etc.
Oh, I thought he was talking about playing a spell that is countering a spell with counters on it as it comes into play, but I see you guys were just discussing whether he was flashing a creature with flash in order to flash a flashback or just flashing a creature with flash but not needing flash in order to flashback a spell without flash.
[quote from="Exodite »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/speculation/563478-has-protection-been-de-evergreened?comment=8"]
Protection provides a little bit of everything but is limited in scope, which promotes interaction.
[quote]
How is an un-targetable, un-blockable, un-damageable creature promote interaction? Especially when said creatures can still block and damage with no ill effect to it?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOut of the ground,I rise to grace...W BAfter the lights go out on you, after your worthless life is through. I will remember how you scream...B
I sincerely hope that protection shall not vanish as a mechanic, because it is one of my favorite mechanics in this game. I like how it is so powerful and can do so much, and, to me, it makes perfect sense flavor-wise, at least in most cases. I also believe that some level of complexity in this game is necessary, to keep it interesting and appealing to players who enjoy games that require some level of intellect to play. I do not wish for this game to be "dumbed-down" to appeal to the lowest common denominator among its players.
I wonder if there are enough people who like protection that we could get Wizards to change their mind like they did with Sliver art.
Yes, I do hope that if a sufficient amount of people speak in defense of the protection mechanic, it shall be kept.
As for Mark Rosewater saying that he is not fond of the mechanic, he may be a very important person at WotC, but he is not the supreme authority on all things Magic: the Gathering, so I doubt that he can simply do whatever he wishes to do. Plus, he shall eventually retire, and when he does, perhaps a person who is more open-minded and accepting of various ideas and mechanics ahall replace him.
Protection has got to be the hardest thing for new players to grasp. It took me a while to get the hang of it, too. DEBT helps, but how many people know about that? Not many based on conversations I've overheard and been a part of at FNMs.
Example: I have two Master of Waves out. Opponent casts an overloaded Electrickery. I shrug my shoulders and say, "Ok." He looks at me with a curious stare and says, "They both die." I raise an eyebrow and say, "They have protection from red." He looks at his card then says, "But I overloaded it." I then explain that protection is not hexproof, and that it prevents all damage as well. He gets frustrated and sad.
Example 2: I'm playing monoblue devotion. Opponent casts two Skylashers and puts Unflinching Courage on them. GGs on turn four.
Protection is great if you have it, and sucks when your opponent has it.
Protection has got to be the hardest thing for new players to grasp. It took me a while to get the hang of it, too. DEBT helps, but how many people know about that? Not many based on conversations I've overheard and been a part of at FNMs.
Example: I have two Master of Waves out. Opponent casts an overloaded Electrickery. I shrug my shoulders and say, "Ok." He looks at me with a curious stare and says, "They both die." I raise an eyebrow and say, "They have protection from red." He looks at his card then says, "But I overloaded it." I then explain that protection is not hexproof, and that it prevents all damage as well. He gets frustrated and sad.
Example 2: I'm playing monoblue devotion. Opponent casts two Skylashers and puts Unflinching Courage on them. GGs on turn four.
Protection is great if you have it, and sucks when your opponent has it.
I believe that in both of your examples, the player who suffers due to their opponent's creatures having protection needs to simply accept their loss and not complain about it. WotC should not pander to new players who cannot comprehend certain mechanics or players who complain about said mechanics, in my mind.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Those who would trade their freedoms for security will have neither.”-Benjamin Franklin
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
It's possible but I think unlikely. I know he's said a lot about it, but it seems like protection has, if anything, been more prevalent over the last few years than in the past. If something that's been a huge part of the game all the way back to alpha were going away, I'd expect it to be phased out more gradually.
Personally, I never saw the confusion with protection from colors. Even as a 14-year-old new player, it seemed pretty intuitive that something with "protection" from red can't be blocked by red, targeted by red, or dealt damage by red (the "E" in "debt" is really an extension of the "T"). I'll admit it gets a little weirder when you're trying to understand why something with pro-white is still affected by wrath of god or zealous persecution, but that's more an issue of understanding targeting or the difference between damage and getting -1/-1 than protection, IMO. I'll also admit some of the other protections are harder to grasp intuitively (ex: protection from "creatures", "everything", "colored spells", and a player).
Personally, I would be very sad if protection, specifically from colors, went away. To me it's extremely flavorful and not easily replaced. If anything, I'd just say spell it out in the text: "XXX cannot be blocked by red creatures, dealt damage by red sources, or targeted by red spells or effects."
I believe that in both of your examples, the player who suffers due to their opponent's creatures having protection needs to simply accept their loss and not complain about it.
Agreed
WotC should not pander to new players who cannot comprehend certain mechanics or players who complain about said mechanics, in my mind.
So you're saying WotC shouldn't listen to their customers.
Protection has got to be the hardest thing for new players to grasp. It took me a while to get the hang of it, too. DEBT helps, but how many people know about that? Not many based on conversations I've overheard and been a part of at FNMs.
Example: I have two Master of Waves out. Opponent casts an overloaded Electrickery. I shrug my shoulders and say, "Ok." He looks at me with a curious stare and says, "They both die." I raise an eyebrow and say, "They have protection from red." He looks at his card then says, "But I overloaded it." I then explain that protection is not hexproof, and that it prevents all damage as well. He gets frustrated and sad.
Example 2: I'm playing monoblue devotion. Opponent casts two Skylashers and puts Unflinching Courage on them. GGs on turn four.
Protection is great if you have it, and sucks when your opponent has it.
I believe that in both of your examples, the player who suffers due to their opponent's creatures having protection needs to simply accept their loss and not complain about it. WotC should not pander to new players who cannot comprehend certain mechanics or players who complain about said mechanics, in my mind.
The printing of Gods Willing in Theros block has shown me that even experienced players forget the "equipped or enchanted" part of protection. I'm not saying that the different parts of protection don't have a place in the game. I'm just saying that it'd be nice if there weren't 4 different abilities hidden behind a keyword with no reminder text.
Protection has got to be the hardest thing for new players to grasp. It took me a while to get the hang of it, too. DEBT helps, but how many people know about that? Not many based on conversations I've overheard and been a part of at FNMs.
Example: I have two Master of Waves out. Opponent casts an overloaded Electrickery. I shrug my shoulders and say, "Ok." He looks at me with a curious stare and says, "They both die." I raise an eyebrow and say, "They have protection from red." He looks at his card then says, "But I overloaded it." I then explain that protection is not hexproof, and that it prevents all damage as well. He gets frustrated and sad.
Example 2: I'm playing monoblue devotion. Opponent casts two Skylashers and puts Unflinching Courage on them. GGs on turn four.
Protection is great if you have it, and sucks when your opponent has it.
Let me try this:
Example 3: I'm playing monoblack devotion. Opponent cast Gladecover Scout and puts Ethereal Armor and Unflinching Courage on it. GG.
Protection is fine. But the problem that MaRo is having with evergreen words are their complexity at the common/uncommon levels. Protection on its own is not the problem, but when they want to put it on an uncommon creature, it kinda goes in the face of the NWO.
Also, simplifying a complex evergreen doesn't always yield positive results. For example: while Hexproof is far simpler than Shroud, I think we can all agree it is a more destructive mechanic on game interaction because now you've turned an all-around balanced keyword into a one-sided clear advantage.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Old enough to know better, much too young to care.
So you're saying WotC shouldn't listen to their customers.
If they were, land destruct and mill should be a viable strategy.
Listening to their customers is why they don't make land destruction viable. Most people hate it.
Some Esper control decks used milling as their win condition back when Drownyards were in standard, and Jace, Memory Adept has been used as a finisher. But you're never going to see cards like Glimpse the Unthinkable see play because that strategy is just a worse version of burn.
There are plenty work arounds for protection effects ie non-dmamging sweepers and sacrifice abilities. I really don't understand the dislike.
Both of those effects are really only in white and black. Also the exact same thing can be said of hexproof (except with even more ways to deal with it), yet people won't stop *****ing about that.
Given MaRo's recent comments about his dissatisfaction with it as a mechanic, do you think we've seen the last of it for now?
Cubetutor Link
1. It makes no sense flavorwise. You're telling me that this tiger thing is so perfectly evolved that no blue magic can ever touch it? It doesn't even make sense that a wizard could fully protect himself from a certain color of magic.
2. When protection works, it's kind of just luck. It's like, "Hey, sorry, looks like you're playing red, mate, guess I have the advantage this round." It makes games really unbalanced. Sure, you can say this about other mechanics like lifegain, graveyard exiling, etc., but these actually do something.
He said he didn't like regeneration because it is complicated and counter-intuitive, and landwalk because it is either very strong or completely useless depending on the deck you are facing. Protection is essentially a combination of both of those problems, so I wouldn't be surprised to see it get the boot.
I feel like protection will simply go away and be "replaced" by damage prevention and indestructible, that regenerate will be replaced by a similar keyword that acts less like a shield and more like a creature recovering from its wounds, and that landwalk will go away very slowly.
One of Maro's finest moments.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
-regarding Snapcaster Mage.
Protection provides a little bit of everything but is limited in scope, which promotes interaction.
[quote]
How is an un-targetable, un-blockable, un-damageable creature promote interaction? Especially when said creatures can still block and damage with no ill effect to it?
BAfter the lights go out on you, after your worthless life is through. I will remember how you scream...B
Yes, I do hope that if a sufficient amount of people speak in defense of the protection mechanic, it shall be kept.
As for Mark Rosewater saying that he is not fond of the mechanic, he may be a very important person at WotC, but he is not the supreme authority on all things Magic: the Gathering, so I doubt that he can simply do whatever he wishes to do. Plus, he shall eventually retire, and when he does, perhaps a person who is more open-minded and accepting of various ideas and mechanics ahall replace him.
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
Example: I have two Master of Waves out. Opponent casts an overloaded Electrickery. I shrug my shoulders and say, "Ok." He looks at me with a curious stare and says, "They both die." I raise an eyebrow and say, "They have protection from red." He looks at his card then says, "But I overloaded it." I then explain that protection is not hexproof, and that it prevents all damage as well. He gets frustrated and sad.
Example 2: I'm playing monoblue devotion. Opponent casts two Skylashers and puts Unflinching Courage on them. GGs on turn four.
Protection is great if you have it, and sucks when your opponent has it.
I believe that in both of your examples, the player who suffers due to their opponent's creatures having protection needs to simply accept their loss and not complain about it. WotC should not pander to new players who cannot comprehend certain mechanics or players who complain about said mechanics, in my mind.
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
I'm not sure if he was on the Commander2013 design team..?
Cubetutor Peasant'ish-Funbox
Project: Khans of Tarkir Cube (cubetutor)
Personally, I never saw the confusion with protection from colors. Even as a 14-year-old new player, it seemed pretty intuitive that something with "protection" from red can't be blocked by red, targeted by red, or dealt damage by red (the "E" in "debt" is really an extension of the "T"). I'll admit it gets a little weirder when you're trying to understand why something with pro-white is still affected by wrath of god or zealous persecution, but that's more an issue of understanding targeting or the difference between damage and getting -1/-1 than protection, IMO. I'll also admit some of the other protections are harder to grasp intuitively (ex: protection from "creatures", "everything", "colored spells", and a player).
Personally, I would be very sad if protection, specifically from colors, went away. To me it's extremely flavorful and not easily replaced. If anything, I'd just say spell it out in the text: "XXX cannot be blocked by red creatures, dealt damage by red sources, or targeted by red spells or effects."
The printing of Gods Willing in Theros block has shown me that even experienced players forget the "equipped or enchanted" part of protection. I'm not saying that the different parts of protection don't have a place in the game. I'm just saying that it'd be nice if there weren't 4 different abilities hidden behind a keyword with no reminder text.
Let me try this:
Example 3: I'm playing monoblack devotion. Opponent cast Gladecover Scout and puts Ethereal Armor and Unflinching Courage on it. GG.
Also, simplifying a complex evergreen doesn't always yield positive results. For example: while Hexproof is far simpler than Shroud, I think we can all agree it is a more destructive mechanic on game interaction because now you've turned an all-around balanced keyword into a one-sided clear advantage.
If they were, land destruct and mill should be a viable strategy.
And you're not running Devour Flesh why?
Listening to their customers is why they don't make land destruction viable. Most people hate it.
Some Esper control decks used milling as their win condition back when Drownyards were in standard, and Jace, Memory Adept has been used as a finisher. But you're never going to see cards like Glimpse the Unthinkable see play because that strategy is just a worse version of burn.
How is Devour Flesh better vs Hexproof than vs Protection?
Block with Desecration Demon? The elf is still just a 5/5. If the elf had pro black, then you'd be screwed.
Both of those effects are really only in white and black. Also the exact same thing can be said of hexproof (except with even more ways to deal with it), yet people won't stop *****ing about that.
Eliminating protection entirely however would be a sad day. It's good design space with a lot of different variations.
R Norin the Wary: I've Got a Bad Feeling About This
UG Thrasios & Kydele: Knowledge is Power
RG Borborygmos Enraged: The Breaking of the World
BG The Gitrog Monster: All Glory to the Hypnotoad
WUR Zedruu the Greathearted: Endless Possibilities, One Outcome
WBG Karador, Ghost Chieftain: What's Dead May Never Die
Turn your junk into something great with PucaTrade!