Regeneration could be simply be renamed to "Shield" to solve the issue. The issue with the word Regeneration is that it implies damage has been dealt and the mechanic can restore the creature from that damage. So people wanted to use the mechanic after damage has been dealt, at which point it is too late in the game, state-based actions having already had their effect. They'd have to change the timing of Regeneration to make it more intuitive. For example, it could be the first mechanic that could respond to state-based actions. That is to say, Regeneration could be "if a creature you control has been dealt lethal damage and state-based actions would move this creature to the graveyard as a result, you may pay __ and tap that creature instead, removing all lethal damage from the creature." But this would require a rules overhaul, so it's not gonna happen. Like I said, though, renaming it would work. If Shield functioned identical to how Regeneration does, it would be more intuitive. "I'm setting up a shield with the mechanic Shield that prevents my creature from taking lethal damage. I need my Shield in place before the creature takes damage."
The problem is that Reassembling Skeleton re-enters the battlefield, so that all relevant ETB abilities trigger again, whereas with Regeneration they do not: the creature simply remains on the battlefield.
I think the New Regeneration ability of MaximumC is fine, it just needs to specify that all damage is removed and all -X/-X effect are cancelled on the creature... isn't it?
The problem is that Reassembling Skeleton re-enters the battlefield, so that all relevant ETB abilities trigger again, whereas with Regeneration they do not: the creature simply remains on the battlefield.
I think the New Regeneration ability of MaximumC is fine, it just needs to specify that all damage is removed and all -X/-X effect are cancelled on the creature... isn't it?
704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard. Regeneration can’t replace this event.
704.5g If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.
704.5h If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and it’s been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked, that creature is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.
Note that Indestructible won't save a creature with toughness 0 or less either, since it isn't "destroyed."
Honestly, the whole issue is friggin' stupid on WotC's part. They removed the damage prevention step (a change none asked for or wanted) to streamline the rules, then Regeneration no longer worked, so they made regeneration more complex by changing how it worked, but then regeneration was no longer intuitive, so now they have decided to remove it completely. >.<
What is really friggin' insane is that the whole friggin' issue would be easy to fix on WotC's part by re-enabling the damage prevention step. No one is using it to prevent damage anyway, and never did. It was solely used for regeneration. So, rename it to the "regeneration" step, and the whole issue would disappear like tears in the rain. >.<
Can you tell I am upset about this? Because I am.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's about time for the reserved list to die, for the sake of Vintage and Legacy (And Commander).
The problem is that Reassembling Skeleton re-enters the battlefield, so that all relevant ETB abilities trigger again, whereas with Regeneration they do not: the creature simply remains on the battlefield.
I think the New Regeneration ability of MaximumC is fine, it just needs to specify that all damage is removed and all -X/-X effect are cancelled on the creature... isn't it?
704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard. Regeneration can’t replace this event.
704.5g If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.
704.5h If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and it’s been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked, that creature is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.
Note that Indestructible won't save a creature with toughness 0 or less either, since it isn't "destroyed."
Oops, my bad! I don't know how I could forget that part. So, in fact I see even less complications for this "New regeneration"! Or is it just the same?
I have to say that I would be a little bit sad if Regeneration were to disappear (and the same goes for Protection and Landwalk). I think it is a nice mechanic that has its own motivation and flavour and is quite different from Indestructible. It's also really quite intuitive: it is just an example of those rules or wordings that ironically became much more complicated or cumbersome after the rules were better defined in the last years.
Back when damage still went on the stack, maybe it was possible to respond to it with regeneration and it was more immediate to use... But this rule was changed for a good reason.
Making a Regeneration step after damage is applied would, technically, be an answer. If Regeneration is the only thing in that space.
...it wouldn't make Regeneration evergreen again, cause it would still be more complicated than every other evergreen ability, and still drive judges nuts trying to explain how it plays out. But it would be an answer.
Making a Regeneration step after damage is applied would, technically, be an answer. If Regeneration is the only thing in that space.
...it wouldn't make Regeneration evergreen again, cause it would still be more complicated than every other evergreen ability, and still drive judges nuts trying to explain how it plays out. But it would be an answer.
It would also be intuitive, again, which is a big plus.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's about time for the reserved list to die, for the sake of Vintage and Legacy (And Commander).
People who think regeneration is complicated need to play a different card game.
It is not complicated. But is is complicated for an evergreen keyword. Indestructible shares a lot of the design space and it is much more intuitive, and I think this is the reason for its replacement.
People who think regeneration is complicated need to play a different card game.
Or you could deal with the fact that some people understand certain things less easily than you, just as some people understand certain things more easily than you. I mean seriously, you are basically saying some players don't deserve to play the game because they don't understand a single damn mechanic.
"I don't think it's complicated" is essentially a non argument really. One player's perception of a mechanic's complexity is insignificant here.
The fact is people simply did not understand the mechanic very well- that's why they did it. Nothing you can say will change that. And WotC is not going to ignore that just because you don't think it's so hard. They are going to act for the larger playerbase, as is in their interests, as is in the majority of players interests.
I just think they haven't tried their hardest to understand it, really. Sure it might come off as confusing at first, but you're telling me there's still people out there who just can't understand it?
It doesn't even remotely need to be people simply can't understand it. All that it needs to be is people don't tend to understand it very well.
And there are things way more confusing in this game, such as layering, triggers, etc...
Exactly. So why have more confusing things?
Things like layering and triggers are necessary to make the game work, and often not relevant to beginners. Regeneration can be simply removed and it is pretty relevant to beginners when printed.
There's also another reason Regeneration is gone that hasn't been mentioned by anyone that I've seen. It's problematic on many creatures. To the point that every piece of removal started having "that creature can't be regenerated" added to it to make sure those regenerators could be killed. But then, when all the good removal gets around it, what's the point of regeneration any more? It was a problem only solved by removing that clause from removal and reducing the number and power of creatures that had the ability. Ultimately, all these problems made it so that it just wasn't worth having the ability around anymore.
I think they're replacing it with the temporary indestructibility found on creatures like Wily Bandar.
Making a Regeneration step after damage is applied would, technically, be an answer. If Regeneration is the only thing in that space.
...it wouldn't make Regeneration evergreen again, cause it would still be more complicated than every other evergreen ability, and still drive judges nuts trying to explain how it plays out. But it would be an answer.
It would also be intuitive, again, which is a big plus.
Making a regeneration step would be more intuitive but people still wouldn't intuitively know that it causes the creature to tap, leave combat, and remove damage. I mean the remove damage makes sense but the other two are kind of random. The leaving combat is even the opposite of how it works in most fantasy ips. Usually the monster keeps on fighting while it regenerates. The only cool thing it really does is sounds good on trolls. Otherwise, it's just indestructible with weird corner cases that don't actually make much more sense than damage on the stack. Yeah, people have argued power level but we don't need to tweak rules for power level. Magic has the mana system to tweak power as well as additional costs and restrictions.
Making a Regeneration step after damage is applied would, technically, be an answer. If Regeneration is the only thing in that space.
...it wouldn't make Regeneration evergreen again, cause it would still be more complicated than every other evergreen ability, and still drive judges nuts trying to explain how it plays out. But it would be an answer.
It's not a complete answer, though, because after damage is applied, before a player receives priority, state-based actions are checked. Any creature dealt lethal damage will be moved to the graveyard. Therefore, before you even get to the Regeneration step, any creature that needs regeneration will be in the graveyard. So it would not only require a new step, but also require some kind of change to how state-based actions function or their timing. This is why I noted above that for Regeneration to be intuitive, you'd have to make it where people could respond to state-based actions, allowing regeneration to take place after damage is dealt but before state-based actions move the creature to the graveyard. And I don't see that happening.
People who think regeneration is complicated need to play a different card game.
Or you could deal with the fact that some people understand certain things less easily than you, just as some people understand certain things more easily than you. I mean seriously, you are basically saying some players don't deserve to play the game because they don't understand a single damn mechanic.
"I don't think it's complicated" is essentially a non argument really. One player's perception of a mechanic's complexity is insignificant here.
The fact is people simply did not understand the mechanic very well- that's why they did it. Nothing you can say will change that. And WotC is not going to ignore that just because you don't think it's so hard. They are going to act for the larger playerbase, as is in their interests, as is in the majority of players interests.
Granted, I would like if regeneration was replaced with something akin to Persist or Undying on cards like Skeletons and Plants, but for Trolls temporary indestructible works fine.
MTGS Wikia Article about "New World Order"
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.
PSA to everyone who keeps forgetting about the Reserved List:
You're on a website dedicated to talking about MtG. You're only a few keystrokes away from finding out what cards are on the Reserved List. You're also only a few keystrokes away from finding out why some cards on the Reserved List got foil printings in FtV, as Judge promos, or whatnot, as well as why that won't happen again. Stop doing this.
All this discussion about regeneration and I just want cycling to be evergreen.
I like the Reassembling Skeleton idea though. Either that or a new undying-esque regeneration with fatigue counter instead of the +1/+1 counter as someone suggested. Indestructible until end of turn is an easy alternative, but one that doesn't make much sense flavor-wise. The regenerating creature is supposed to step back from combat in order to heal itself, not become temporarily impervious to further damage or destruction effects.
Besides that, the concept behind undying is that it's essentially a form of regeneration, with the creature never really experiencing death in the first place. And creatures going to the graveyard and coming back because they weren't actually deadis a recurring theme independent of any ability in particular.
Making a Regeneration step after damage is applied would, technically, be an answer. If Regeneration is the only thing in that space.
...it wouldn't make Regeneration evergreen again, cause it would still be more complicated than every other evergreen ability, and still drive judges nuts trying to explain how it plays out. But it would be an answer.
It would also be intuitive, again, which is a big plus.
Making a regeneration step would be more intuitive but people still wouldn't intuitively know that it causes the creature to tap, leave combat, and remove damage. I mean the remove damage makes sense but the other two are kind of random. The leaving combat is even the opposite of how it works in most fantasy ips. Usually the monster keeps on fighting while it regenerates. The only cool thing it really does is sounds good on trolls. Otherwise, it's just indestructible with weird corner cases that don't actually make much more sense than damage on the stack. Yeah, people have argued power level but we don't need to tweak rules for power level. Magic has the mana system to tweak power as well as additional costs and restrictions.
It is no more counter intuitive than the deathtouch/trample interaction.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's about time for the reserved list to die, for the sake of Vintage and Legacy (And Commander).
What doesn't work with deathtouch/trample? One damage kills things when you have deathtouch and the rest tramples over. It was counter intuitive after M10 and before M11.
The difference between Indestructible and Regeneration would be that you could:
* Remove the indestructible ability from the creature with lethal damage marked to destroy it later in the same turn, you could try to kill again the regenerated creature later in the turn.
* Regeneration was much more flavorful than temporary indestructibility, or at least evokes a different flavor (The regenerating creature is recovering from its wounds, that's why it's tapped and removed from combat, while indestructible could he that the creature hardens as rock or surrounds itself with a magical shield)
* Reassembling Skeleton was BROKEN, as it replaced "Sacrifice a creature" with "1B", letting you to do hilariously powerful stuff with that ability, still, it WAS flavorful, because skeletons can shatter and then reassemble as soon as you turn your back on them, they just had to rise the cost as they did on Shadows over Innistrad cycle.
The "if I don't pay for this then the creature's gone for good but not as good as Reassembling Skeleton but not regeneration" would be Tenacious Dead, a card that had you to have mana open for it, much like renegeration, and whose ability was a mixture between Reassembling and traditional regeneration.
The additional step for regeneration was kinda clunky, I had to admidt that the rules got a bit easier in 6th Edition, save for the whole "combat damage goes to stack" thing, glad to see that one gone, because now THAT was difficult to explain to newer players
What doesn't work with deathtouch/trample? One damage kills things when you have deathtouch and the rest tramples over. It was counter intuitive after M10 and before M11.
You'd be surprised how many players don't know this. Like regeneration taps the creature and removes it from combat, it is something that needs to be learned, but isn't actually that hard to remember.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's about time for the reserved list to die, for the sake of Vintage and Legacy (And Commander).
What doesn't work with deathtouch/trample? One damage kills things when you have deathtouch and the rest tramples over. It was counter intuitive after M10 and before M11.
You'd be surprised how many players don't know this. Like regeneration taps the creature and removes it from combat, it is something that needs to be learned, but isn't actually that hard to remember.
But trample + deathtouch is a specific combination that can be moved away from. Regenerate is the entire mechanic.
What doesn't work with deathtouch/trample? One damage kills things when you have deathtouch and the rest tramples over. It was counter intuitive after M10 and before M11.
You'd be surprised how many players don't know this. Like regeneration taps the creature and removes it from combat, it is something that needs to be learned, but isn't actually that hard to remember.
But trample + deathtouch is a specific combination that can be moved away from. Regenerate is the entire mechanic.
The only way it can be "moved away from" is if WOTC quit printing things that grant deathtouch or trample to creatures that don't have it inherently. These things include enchantments, artifacts (and especially equipment), sorceries, instants, Planeswalkers, and lands. So basically, to avoid having the interaction of trample and deathtouch, they'd have to neuter both of these abilities' design space.
What doesn't work with deathtouch/trample? One damage kills things when you have deathtouch and the rest tramples over. It was counter intuitive after M10 and before M11.
You'd be surprised how many players don't know this. Like regeneration taps the creature and removes it from combat, it is something that needs to be learned, but isn't actually that hard to remember.
But trample + deathtouch is a specific combination that can be moved away from. Regenerate is the entire mechanic.
The only way it can be "moved away from" is if WOTC quit printing things that grant deathtouch or trample to creatures that don't have it inherently.
No, that's not the only way. "Move away from" doesn't mean here "stop from happening ever"
They can also simply not print cards with trample and deathtouch
They can limit the frequency of cards with trample or deatthouch and cards that grant trample or deathtouch
They can adjust the rarity of cards with trample or deatthouch and cards that grant trample or deathtouch
I don't think it's that they don't get trample plus deathtouch. It's that they don't want it to work like that right now because it's causing them to lose the game. I don't see how it's actually unintuitive that if 1 or more damage from deathtouch is fatal that the rest would trample over. In order for it to not be, what, exactly, is the sensible conclusion of an unbiased observer that hasn't looked it up? The only possible options are that damage over 1 tramples over or damage over toughness tramples over. If they aren't just upset about losing, it sounds more like a problem with the reminder text they printed on beginner cards. There are also currently zero cards that have both abilities so it isn't going to be any more common than lots of other interactions. Infact, I don't actually ever remember having a creature with both abilities at the same time, ever. It might be a good way to actually make the interaction less confusing if they started doing it, though. Of course, it would be better than my old buddy super trample. (Thorn Elemental)
Allegedly, though, some people thought super trample was unblockable, though, despite it literally saying on the card that the creature could deal its damage "as though it weren't blocked" There's just some people that lie and some people that there's no rules change that would help. I sure wouldn't mind seeing some modern powered super trample, though. I really like the ability a lot. Maybe go all Terra Stomper with 10/10 for 3GGG since we can get 8/8 for 3GG now. Of course, to be honest, I'd prefer something like 18/18 for 8GG as would my girlfriend.
I think the real confusion over Trample + Deathtouch stems not from their own interaction but the way they interact with keywords like Indestructible and Protection. The combination only requires that enough damage to destroy be assigned to the blocking creature, not that the damage actually destroys it; Deathtouch just means that number is always 1.
That said, the Death-Trample combo is harder to understand than Regeneration, but only when certain combinations of mechanics come together. Even now I still often forget that Regeneration taps the creature, because it doesn't feel like an intuitive part of the process. Removing damage and removing from combat make sense, but the tapping part seldom does.
I'm fine with Indestructible being used for Troll-style regeneration since it accomplishes the intended net result ("damage can't kill me"), but I would prefer that reanimation and regrowth be represented through graveyard interactions somehow.
Considering that white and green both have overlaps with black in reanimation, but white leans more toward bringing small creatures back to the field while green can return anything from the graveyard to the hand, I think it would be neat if new overlap keywords between WB and BG were introduced to capture those respective flavors.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTGS Wikia Article about "New World Order"
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.
PSA to everyone who keeps forgetting about the Reserved List:
You're on a website dedicated to talking about MtG. You're only a few keystrokes away from finding out what cards are on the Reserved List. You're also only a few keystrokes away from finding out why some cards on the Reserved List got foil printings in FtV, as Judge promos, or whatnot, as well as why that won't happen again. Stop doing this.
Yeah, but every time they get a decent one, persist, undying, reassembling skeleton, Tenacious Dead, Prized Amalgam, Gravecrawler, and dredge have all have become powerful combo engines. Actually returning things from the graveyard to the battlefield is very strong in itself. I can't say I don't like recursion engines, but that isn't exactly a good idea for more than a card or two. Do we really want cards like Tormod's Crypt maindecked in standard ever?
What doesn't work with deathtouch/trample? One damage kills things when you have deathtouch and the rest tramples over. It was counter intuitive after M10 and before M11.
You'd be surprised how many players don't know this. Like regeneration taps the creature and removes it from combat, it is something that needs to be learned, but isn't actually that hard to remember.
But trample + deathtouch is a specific combination that can be moved away from. Regenerate is the entire mechanic.
The only way it can be "moved away from" is if WOTC quit printing things that grant deathtouch or trample to creatures that don't have it inherently.
No, that's not the only way. "Move away from" doesn't mean here "stop from happening ever"
They can also simply not print cards with trample and deathtouch
They can limit the frequency of cards with trample or deatthouch and cards that grant trample or deathtouch
They can adjust the rarity of cards with trample or deatthouch and cards that grant trample or deathtouch
All of which are things they generally do.
The topic of the thread pertaining to regeneration not being printed and the discussion about the counter-intuitiveness of regeneration as a mechanic as compared to the deathtouch+trample interaction guided my interpretation of your use of "move away from." If that's not how you meant it, my apologies for misunderstanding. However, to "move away from" a deathtouch+trample interaction in the same way as WOTC has "moved away from" regeneration would require the nerfing of one or both mechanics. They didn't print regeneration in SOI block or Kaladesh. This completely eliminates players' interaction with regeneration in the draft scene, and will only take a couple years for the same in the Standard scene if they continue to not print regeneration on cards in new Standard sets. I doubt the same will happen to either deathtouch or trample. There will also always be common/uncommon cards that have or give deathtouch or trample, unless there are major shifts in the evergreen mechanics.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think the New Regeneration ability of MaximumC is fine, it just needs to specify that all damage is removed and all -X/-X effect are cancelled on the creature... isn't it?
704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard. Regeneration can’t replace this event.
704.5g If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.
704.5h If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and it’s been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked, that creature is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.
Note that Indestructible won't save a creature with toughness 0 or less either, since it isn't "destroyed."
What is really friggin' insane is that the whole friggin' issue would be easy to fix on WotC's part by re-enabling the damage prevention step. No one is using it to prevent damage anyway, and never did. It was solely used for regeneration. So, rename it to the "regeneration" step, and the whole issue would disappear like tears in the rain. >.<
Can you tell I am upset about this? Because I am.
---
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
Oops, my bad! I don't know how I could forget that part. So, in fact I see even less complications for this "New regeneration"! Or is it just the same?
I have to say that I would be a little bit sad if Regeneration were to disappear (and the same goes for Protection and Landwalk). I think it is a nice mechanic that has its own motivation and flavour and is quite different from Indestructible. It's also really quite intuitive: it is just an example of those rules or wordings that ironically became much more complicated or cumbersome after the rules were better defined in the last years.
Back when damage still went on the stack, maybe it was possible to respond to it with regeneration and it was more immediate to use... But this rule was changed for a good reason.
...it wouldn't make Regeneration evergreen again, cause it would still be more complicated than every other evergreen ability, and still drive judges nuts trying to explain how it plays out. But it would be an answer.
It would also be intuitive, again, which is a big plus.
---
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
It is not complicated. But is is complicated for an evergreen keyword. Indestructible shares a lot of the design space and it is much more intuitive, and I think this is the reason for its replacement.
It doesn't even remotely need to be people simply can't understand it. All that it needs to be is people don't tend to understand it very well.
Exactly. So why have more confusing things?
Things like layering and triggers are necessary to make the game work, and often not relevant to beginners. Regeneration can be simply removed and it is pretty relevant to beginners when printed.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
I think they're replacing it with the temporary indestructibility found on creatures like Wily Bandar.
It's not a complete answer, though, because after damage is applied, before a player receives priority, state-based actions are checked. Any creature dealt lethal damage will be moved to the graveyard. Therefore, before you even get to the Regeneration step, any creature that needs regeneration will be in the graveyard. So it would not only require a new step, but also require some kind of change to how state-based actions function or their timing. This is why I noted above that for Regeneration to be intuitive, you'd have to make it where people could respond to state-based actions, allowing regeneration to take place after damage is dealt but before state-based actions move the creature to the graveyard. And I don't see that happening.
Granted, I would like if regeneration was replaced with something akin to Persist or Undying on cards like Skeletons and Plants, but for Trolls temporary indestructible works fine.
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.
I like the Reassembling Skeleton idea though. Either that or a new undying-esque regeneration with fatigue counter instead of the +1/+1 counter as someone suggested. Indestructible until end of turn is an easy alternative, but one that doesn't make much sense flavor-wise. The regenerating creature is supposed to step back from combat in order to heal itself, not become temporarily impervious to further damage or destruction effects.
Besides that, the concept behind undying is that it's essentially a form of regeneration, with the creature never really experiencing death in the first place. And creatures going to the graveyard and coming back because they weren't actually dead is a recurring theme independent of any ability in particular.
---
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
* Remove the indestructible ability from the creature with lethal damage marked to destroy it later in the same turn, you could try to kill again the regenerated creature later in the turn.
* Regeneration was much more flavorful than temporary indestructibility, or at least evokes a different flavor (The regenerating creature is recovering from its wounds, that's why it's tapped and removed from combat, while indestructible could he that the creature hardens as rock or surrounds itself with a magical shield)
* Reassembling Skeleton was BROKEN, as it replaced "Sacrifice a creature" with "1B", letting you to do hilariously powerful stuff with that ability, still, it WAS flavorful, because skeletons can shatter and then reassemble as soon as you turn your back on them, they just had to rise the cost as they did on Shadows over Innistrad cycle.
The "if I don't pay for this then the creature's gone for good but not as good as Reassembling Skeleton but not regeneration" would be Tenacious Dead, a card that had you to have mana open for it, much like renegeration, and whose ability was a mixture between Reassembling and traditional regeneration.
The additional step for regeneration was kinda clunky, I had to admidt that the rules got a bit easier in 6th Edition, save for the whole "combat damage goes to stack" thing, glad to see that one gone, because now THAT was difficult to explain to newer players
Fan of Both old and new Slivers (But the new ones are still better anyway)
C Call of Emrakul - G vs R DD: Elves vs. Goblins - W vs B DD: Divine vs. Demonic - WUB Esper Artifice - RGW Aura Dancers
WUBRG Wrath of the Reaper King - WB Men of Faith - B Mercenaries - UB Phyrexian Assault 2.0 - WU Artifacts of Empires
BR Skeleton Warriors - RG Night of The Howlpack - B Bog Murderers - BR Eldrazi Assault - BGU Ulamog's Swarm
You'd be surprised how many players don't know this. Like regeneration taps the creature and removes it from combat, it is something that needs to be learned, but isn't actually that hard to remember.
---
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
But trample + deathtouch is a specific combination that can be moved away from. Regenerate is the entire mechanic.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
The only way it can be "moved away from" is if WOTC quit printing things that grant deathtouch or trample to creatures that don't have it inherently. These things include enchantments, artifacts (and especially equipment), sorceries, instants, Planeswalkers, and lands. So basically, to avoid having the interaction of trample and deathtouch, they'd have to neuter both of these abilities' design space.
No, that's not the only way. "Move away from" doesn't mean here "stop from happening ever"
They can also simply not print cards with trample and deathtouch
They can limit the frequency of cards with trample or deatthouch and cards that grant trample or deathtouch
They can adjust the rarity of cards with trample or deatthouch and cards that grant trample or deathtouch
All of which are things they generally do.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
Allegedly, though, some people thought super trample was unblockable, though, despite it literally saying on the card that the creature could deal its damage "as though it weren't blocked" There's just some people that lie and some people that there's no rules change that would help. I sure wouldn't mind seeing some modern powered super trample, though. I really like the ability a lot. Maybe go all Terra Stomper with 10/10 for 3GGG since we can get 8/8 for 3GG now. Of course, to be honest, I'd prefer something like 18/18 for 8GG as would my girlfriend.
That said, the Death-Trample combo is harder to understand than Regeneration, but only when certain combinations of mechanics come together. Even now I still often forget that Regeneration taps the creature, because it doesn't feel like an intuitive part of the process. Removing damage and removing from combat make sense, but the tapping part seldom does.
I'm fine with Indestructible being used for Troll-style regeneration since it accomplishes the intended net result ("damage can't kill me"), but I would prefer that reanimation and regrowth be represented through graveyard interactions somehow.
Considering that white and green both have overlaps with black in reanimation, but white leans more toward bringing small creatures back to the field while green can return anything from the graveyard to the hand, I think it would be neat if new overlap keywords between WB and BG were introduced to capture those respective flavors.
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.
The topic of the thread pertaining to regeneration not being printed and the discussion about the counter-intuitiveness of regeneration as a mechanic as compared to the deathtouch+trample interaction guided my interpretation of your use of "move away from." If that's not how you meant it, my apologies for misunderstanding. However, to "move away from" a deathtouch+trample interaction in the same way as WOTC has "moved away from" regeneration would require the nerfing of one or both mechanics. They didn't print regeneration in SOI block or Kaladesh. This completely eliminates players' interaction with regeneration in the draft scene, and will only take a couple years for the same in the Standard scene if they continue to not print regeneration on cards in new Standard sets. I doubt the same will happen to either deathtouch or trample. There will also always be common/uncommon cards that have or give deathtouch or trample, unless there are major shifts in the evergreen mechanics.