This thread is for the discussion of my latest article, Off Topic: Green Solutions to the Color Pie. We would be grateful if you would let us know what you think, but please keep your comments on topic.
Really nice article! I kinda inhaled your attempt of defining what green should really be and the logical arguments supporting this.
So to say, without green there would not be Blue, White, Black, Red or whatsoever color.
If you define Green as life in its evolution, it is the basics where all other forms of colors (or life) have developed from.
As you say "Life is resilient and will adapt. It will survive.", this is how the other colors might have developed, each in a different way each resulting from any kind of survival and adaptation.
I think you might also say that the pure Green does not distinguish between good and evil. Being able to distinguish between these two definitions is not entirely based on survival but rather on morale and conscience (and also lies in the eye of the beholder).
I know this is hard to argument for.
For instance, what about elves? Are they really Green? They do distinguish between good and evil. They are a derivative of Green, an evolution out of Green and very much related to it, since they try to live in harmony with life and nature...
Anyways, R&D has to make a decision for each card of how to categorize it to which color. Plague being black? Well, out of a human kind of view, plagues are kind of evil. They destroy life in many (mostly horrible) ways. This fits into the black theme, the dark side of life. Out of a Green kind of view, as you defined it, plagues being Green would be a definite yes. Dakmor Plague, or Endemic Plague could well be Green. Engineered Plague though fits nicely into black for it being engineered by someone to hamper creatures of one type (or race).
Well, it is interesting to think about the cards of each color in a different way. Makes the game also more interesting.
I would like to see further articles about the other colors
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"It is good to be bad"
"This is the infernal spawn of the infernal spawn of evil!"
I have begun to think that green and red should switch places in the color pie.
Red really seems to share more with white than green and green has a lot in common with black.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Don't you see that the whole aim of Moderators is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make infractions literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.
I have begun to think that green and red should switch places in the color pie.
Red really seems to share more with white than green and green has a lot in common with black.
As one who likes to meddle with everything, it never occurred to me the idea of shuffling the color wheel. I don't know if it would be right or wrong, but the idea of reshuffling is an intriguing idea. Now that you say it, I can see why the thought has occurred to you.
Honestly that makes sense especially when it comes to things like evil creatures are still life so they might be more conected to green while red is more of a color of courage which is more akin to white
I'm not a green mage, per se, but I'll share a few thoughts.
1. Nature is very destructive, which is why I'd like to see more mass removal, of some sorts, in green. Tsunami, even if narrow, is the perfect green/nature card. This fits with the 'plague' theme, but in a more WOTC frame of mind. WOTC has this hang-up with having to mix in black to get removal with most green cards.
2. Green is often the colour of efficient beaters, yet they give blue the most efficient beater printed in the last set (3/2 flyer for 1?), making green less appealing for aggro decks.
3. One of my favourite flavourful green cards is Lurking Predators. It works on many levels, and is great for EDH play. It provides green with some trickiness, too. Summoning Trap works this way, too.
4. Further to that, I like the idea of FLASH being a green ability. WOTC has done this with recent cards all the way back to Time Spiral block. Many animals like to 'sudden strike' their prey, so this really should be something less blue and more green.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Looking for a casual playgroup in the Greater Vancouver area? Send me a PM. Our playgroup is always looking for more people to terrorize
I disagree strongly with the article. The problem isn't with Green, it is with Blue, Black, and White.
Green is the color of growth, epitomized by land search and mana ramp. And it's the color of giant dinosaurs, behemoths, and wurms. These are beautifully flavorful, complimentary aspects of the color, with powerful synergy.
Unfortunately, terribly designed cards like Doom Blade, Path to Exile, and Vapor Snag keep getting printed. And having your eight mana, 9/9 fatty countered, pacified, bounced, or removed for just 1 or 2 mana is such a tempo swing it ends games. This ensures that 95% of all green creatures will never see competitive play. In fact, it pushes the average converted mana cost of all playable creatures in each format down to match the cost of the prevalent removal, generally making the most efficient 1 and 2 drops central to the format.
The only fatties that will ever be played in an environment like this are ones that are so ridiculously pushed that they're still good even if they get answered for 1 mana. Enter the Titans. But whoops - every color gets those. Sorry Green!
And therein lies the other problem. The fatty creature color generally gets the worst fatties. Angels, demons, dragons, and vampires get cool abilities like flying, lifelink, first strike, firebreathing, and so on. They steal creatures, ping stuff, protect themselves, and are all around nifty. Big green creatures, though, are generally just vanilla, and rarely even have trample. And when Green finally does a get a fatty that can compete - most recently, Primeval Titan - R&D feels a need to make sure that all the other colors get matching fatties that are as good or better.
Reds connection to black is that it disregards others rules and lives by its own code. But I see this as more of a white trait really.
Black doesnt have a moral code, just like nature doesnt have a moral code.
A Demon simply wants as much power as possible and doesnt care how it gets it.
Just like a wurm will eat anything it can, it doesnt care if its an entire community of elves.
Red has a code even if its an honor amongst theives sorta thing.
Warren Instigator flavor text to me highlights how goblins and dwarves for the most part are really a rw tribe.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Don't you see that the whole aim of Moderators is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make infractions literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.
One thing that bothers me about Green is that it has abilities already established in its part of the color pie that are rarely implemented, such as:
1. Creatures that cannot be countered. I like the idea that green creatures are stealthy and spring up out of nowhere without the prey being able to react. There have been a handful of them printed, but this should be a more widely-used ability. That way, the blue mage has to play creatures to deal with the problem his green mage opponent creates instead of just tapping a few islands and saying "no."
2. Hexproof and shroud. Green creatures should be seen as evolving over time, and if there is constant exposure to magic, doesn't it seem likely that some would develop a resistance to it? I would argue that both abilities could be utilized depending on the type of creature (non-humanoid with hexproof, humanoid with shroud) instead of the seeming shift away from shroud to hexproof that we've been seeing.
This would also have the outcome that opponents of green mages would have to cast creatures to deal with threats instead of just throwing out a Doom Blade or Dismember, effectively ending the "yeah, but it dies to removal" meme. No, it doesn't, so you're going to have to put a few creatures capable of dealing with a fattie in your deck instead of lazily loading your deck with creature kill spells, pacifism or tap effects or burn.
3. Deathtouch. Glad Ambush Viper got this, but there needs to be more of it. Animals develop natural defenses such as poisons, so why couldn't there be more of this ability out there? I don't mind that Typhoid Rats has deathtouch as well; disease-carrying vermin are just as worthy of having the ability as a snake, but this should be more prevalent in green IMHO.
I agree and disagree equally with the article. While the idea of looking at things from a different perspective seems logical, this will not solve the problem. It will only decrease the differences between the colors. Every color has or should have some thing it is more efficient at than the other colors, or that it uniquely has acces to. (Barring some exceptional additional costs).
I am more inclined to agree with the fact that green's key strength of having the most efficient creatures does not play out very well when compared to the other colors. Creatures in general have been powered up a lot since Ravnica block and further. What Wizards seems to have overlooked is the fact that for green to keep it's unique strength, green creatures should have had an even greater increase in power than the other colors. (That said, I do feel creatures have become to powerfull but that's a different topic altogether).
Adding trample more freely to big green creatures should give green a big boost. Giving all green creatures with power 5 or greater trample by default and only taking it away because they have some other cool ability will go a long way towards restoring green's power. Also, good fatties need some more forms of protection against removal other than shroud or hexproof. (Shroud and hexproof, while efficient, severely reduce interactiveness imo). The undying ability (Technically, not flavorfully) is one such example, but regeneration also helps and maybe something like additional costs to target the creature, or an ability that prevents any player other than it's owner to gain control of it could all help. Just consider:
Some Tough Ent GGG
Creature - Treefolk
Trample, Resilience (When this creatures dies, if it the first time this turn, regenerate it).
3/4
I'd play it!
Also, i think that flavorfully, green should get some reanimation. Regrowthing / recycling seems very green and being able to efficiently revive it's own fatties helps greens strategy even more. Let black have the fancy effects like immediatley granting haste etc, but a 1GG Green Zombify does not seem out of order. It can help offset it's lack of card drawing and help a little card advantage wise.
First of all, nice article. You tackled the topic respectfully without overtly resorting to just saying "OMG Green needs buffs!" over and over again. Although, a lot of it was things we already knew, it was still presented well IMO.
So now onto my response:
First I'm just going to come out and say I disagree with you that Green needs to be changed. I respect your opinion on the issue, but again we must realize that there really isn't a right or wrong here. WotC basically defined what the colors can do and they've stuck with it. They don't like giving green certain abilities, the same can be said with other colors obviously.
People like to say blue is the best color (and I would agree), but then they forget that it's been awhile since we've seen a really good mono blue deck. It's always paired with another color (a color that offers something that blue can't usually). Yet mono green, mono white, mono red and to a lesser extent mono black have all been around with more frequency.
I don't want to turn this into an argument over what colors need to become less powerful and which ones need more power. My opinion on this is that there shouldn't have to be absolute balance. Each color does it's own thing, and you certainly see each color be more or less significant each block to varying degrees. I don't understand why someone would get mad because green doesn't have enough card draw or counters. If you want to play card draw/counters, add blue to your deck.
One thing that bothers me about Green is that it has abilities already established in its part of the color pie that are rarely implemented, such as:
1. Creatures that cannot be countered. I like the idea that green creatures are stealthy and spring up out of nowhere without the prey being able to react. There have been a handful of them printed, but this should be a more widely-used ability. That way, the blue mage has to play creatures to deal with the problem his green mage opponent creates instead of just tapping a few islands and saying "no."
2. Hexproof and shroud. Green creatures should be seen as evolving over time, and if there is constant exposure to magic, doesn't it seem likely that some would develop a resistance to it? I would argue that both abilities could be utilized depending on the type of creature (non-humanoid with hexproof, humanoid with shroud) instead of the seeming shift away from shroud to hexproof that we've been seeing.
This would also have the outcome that opponents of green mages would have to cast creatures to deal with threats instead of just throwing out a Doom Blade or Dismember, effectively ending the "yeah, but it dies to removal" meme. No, it doesn't, so you're going to have to put a few creatures capable of dealing with a fattie in your deck instead of lazily loading your deck with creature kill spells, pacifism or tap effects or burn.
3. Deathtouch. Glad Ambush Viper got this, but there needs to be more of it. Animals develop natural defenses such as poisons, so why couldn't there be more of this ability out there? I don't mind that Typhoid Rats has deathtouch as well; disease-carrying vermin are just as worthy of having the ability as a snake, but this should be more prevalent in green IMHO.
THIS.
I can't tell you how much I agree with this post. Green has had interactive abilities, but they just don't get implemented that often. I wish they would print more green weenie creatures that can't be countered. In the same way white control had stuff like Silver Knight back in the day to deal with goblins, why can't you print just a 2/2 bear that can't be countered? Instead of the G/x deck having to have an answer for Jace, now they have to have an answer for this creature.
I'm not as much on board with Deathtouch potentially bringing Green back... because it's only interactive against other creatures, and in constructed being able kill something if it gets damaged no matter what isn't as big a deal. But I'm completely on board with something you actually mentioned indirectly... Flash.
Ambush Viper is something I want to see more of. Again, you don't necessarily have to put Deathtouch on it for it to work. But putting Flash on more green creatures (relevant green creatures) is a way to give green more flexibility in deck building. Right now, if you want to build a beatdown deck, it's all about "curving out" and if you throw in a number of non-creature spells you are kind of forced to choose between potentially using a trick (Beast Within) or playing a creature (Durngrove Elder). If you gave some of those creatures flash, now they will sometimes be able to react to something their opponent has done on their turn... even if it is as simple as playing better around a Slagstorm.
I disagree strongly with the article. The problem isn't with Green, it is with Blue, Black, and White.
Green is the color of growth, epitomized by land search and mana ramp. And it's the color of giant dinosaurs, behemoths, and wurms. These are beautifully flavorful, complimentary aspects of the color, with powerful synergy.
Unfortunately, terribly designed cards like Doom Blade, Path to Exile, and Vapor Snag keep getting printed. And having your eight mana, 9/9 fatty countered, pacified, bounced, or removed for just 1 or 2 mana is such a tempo swing it ends games. This ensures that 95% of all green creatures will never see competitive play. In fact, it pushes the average converted mana cost of all playable creatures in each format down to match the cost of the prevalent removal, generally making the most efficient 1 and 2 drops central to the format.
The only fatties that will ever be played in an environment like this are ones that are so ridiculously pushed that they're still good even if they get answered for 1 mana. Enter the Titans. But whoops - every color gets those. Sorry Green!
And therein lies the other problem. The fatty creature color generally gets the worst fatties. Angels, demons, dragons, and vampires get cool abilities like flying, lifelink, first strike, firebreathing, and so on. They steal creatures, ping stuff, protect themselves, and are all around nifty. Big green creatures, though, are generally just vanilla, and rarely even have trample. And when Green finally does a get a fatty that can compete - most recently, Primeval Titan - R&D feels a need to make sure that all the other colors get matching fatties that are as good or better.
Hahaa. yeah this.
The Japanese should have learned a dark ritual or two to doom blade or remove the eye blight of a dinosaur, Godzilla. Seriously though. "destroy... creature" needs to be more costly.
Removal should have stayed here. I personally like the 4cmc counter we received in DKA. its how a counter should be. why does it take less energy (CMC - x) to stop a force in motion (CMC)? it should take more.
Referencing the article, the only things I really agreed with, Plagues and Adaptation.
bacteria and viruses arent intentionally virulent, they just desire to prolong their existence. they wish to just be... sometimes that 'be'ing requires the atmosphere of a human lung... or cranium. So if people wind up dying... it can't be helped! Green is not the color of Life, but a color of the Life Cycle; death is an accepted part of it.
On adapting, the earlier post about resilience is brilliant. Green wants to survive. Indeed. So green should represent 'survivability' more. mechanics like hexproof, deathtouch, and fight should be faaaarrrrr more widespread/ evergreen.
Also, why dont green creatures adapt to the conditions of the battlefield more often? green creatures with ' whenever a [insert card type or color here] enters the battlefield (or whenever a player plays a ____ spell), this creature [does something that corresponds to the type of card played]. Werewolves were a good and overdue first step. but we should have been beyond casting two spells in a turn to trigger an effect at this point.
Good call on Pognify though.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
~Intelligence is Bliss; Ignorance is Denial.
Skill is an ability that relates more so to the type of deck that's built and how said player pilots it. It also relates to the ability to assess the board and use the cards available to you in the most optimal way relative to each situation.
When a deck is filled with above par cards and every play is solid, there comes a diminishing need to "think" for the lack of wanting to use a better word.
I'm not as much on board with Deathtouch potentially bringing Green back... because it's only interactive against other creatures, and in constructed being able kill something if it gets damaged no matter what isn't as big a deal. But I'm completely on board with something you actually mentioned indirectly... Flash.
Ambush Viper is something I want to see more of. Again, you don't necessarily have to put Deathtouch on it for it to work. But putting Flash on more green creatures (relevant green creatures) is a way to give green more flexibility in deck building. Right now, if you want to build a beatdown deck, it's all about "curving out" and if you throw in a number of non-creature spells you are kind of forced to choose between potentially using a trick (Beast Within) or playing a creature (Durngrove Elder). If you gave some of those creatures flash, now they will sometimes be able to react to something their opponent has done on their turn... even if it is as simple as playing better around a Slagstorm.
Flash as a Green ability hadn't dawned on me when I wrote my post, but it really does make sense. I referenced Green creatures being stealthy in relation to the "unable to be countered" ability, but flash could work as another aspect of that, the "popping up out of nowhere" ability that many predators seem to exhibit.
Flash as a Green ability hadn't dawned on me when I wrote my post, but it really does make sense. I referenced Green creatures being stealthy in relation to the "unable to be countered" ability, but flash could work as another aspect of that, the "popping up out of nowhere" ability that many predators seem to exhibit.
Again, completely agree. And you think about how U/x decks play out, usually the fact that something is an instant or a sorcery matters, whether it be card draw or creature destruction or whatever. Those types of decks don't want to play sorceries unless the card is worth it. I don't see why G/x mages couldn't be forced to make the same decisions with creatures. If Green is supposed to be the "creature color", that evolution makes perfect sense to me.
In fact, you could combine "Flash" with "can't be countered/targetted" and make a green creature 4G for a 2/2 with Flash and "when this enters the battlefield, until the beginning of your opponents next upkeep, creatures can't be countered/targeted". That would be in G/x sideboards against blue control in the same way blue can pack counters that counter only creatures.
I like this article. When I started magic, only a few years ago, my color of choice was red, because red is my favorite color. As a noob I learned how to play green well first, because it makes it easier for noobs to get a grasp of the game. There was a simple joy in making big dudes and smacking people with them. That is most of the reason green is my favorite color in mtg right now. I never really gave a lot of thought to what green should be able to do or not do. I always thought of green like most people, the color that beats face. Your perspective on what what green deserves to be is intriging and I completely agree with it. Green should be more than big dumb beasts that just attck. Green should be more cunning, intelligent, clever, and calculating. Green can be "smart" without interceding with blue.
Outside of tribal I think green should have more community type cards that either protect or care for others of the same type. Look at a pride of lions for example. Each lion has its own role in the family. They all take down prey, defend the pride, sleep, and play as a single unit. Maybe banding should be brought back as an ability to bring a sense of community back.
When you talked about viruses and bacteria also being green I agree somewhat. I think that palgues should be both black and green. This might be more an issue describing black than green, but I feel as if black is the "evil" side of what green can be. White is the "good" side of green's potential. So why not share the plague ability with black?
I came up with an example of the plague ability in green.
3GG
Locust swarm
instant
destroy target land
that land's controller gets 4 0/1 locust tokens
Locusts are one the most iconic plague type of creatures in green. They come out of nowhere and then disapear as fast as they came. During their short visit they cause havok usually in the form of eating crops. The crops would represent a land. I know in places where locust swarms are a fairly common occurance the people there collect the leftover dead carcasses and eat them for sustinace. What came as destruction left as free food. I think there are many ways to do this idea I only came up with one. After the player loses his land he gets tokens which he can use to sheild him, or sac them to something if he has something to sac them to. It could backfire and what you thought was a good idea turned into more fuel for his sac engine, or maybe he had buffs that made them into big dudes now aimed at your face. My point is that especially in green I want their to be more cards that have pros and cons in playing them instead of just "grawg I play my big dude".
I hope that green gets a more denfined identity and more unique exsistence. Keep up with thought forming articles like this one. Thanks!
First of all, thank you for writing this article. And thanks MTG staff, for publishing it.
I can read through from start to end without re-reading anything. And that's something.
I agree there is a problem. However, now I will disagree with you. The tone of this disagreement will be a stumbling point, because you may agree, or you may mean the opposite in what you wrote. The concern is that on one point, I believe it is the absolutely essential trait of Green, and if you are treating it as a feature, then we are contrary. I must cut to this sole element above all other quibbles.
I definitely look forward to other writings and publishings from you.
This is my issue. You outline some components of Green, and rearrange and critique the way (it appears) they are treated from the inside. I agree the stumbling over a word like 'instinct' is bad. It is for that reason that I dislike the word 'cunning' for Green, for example. I am all for straightening out intelligence, blue, and green; but cunning is either the property, in fact, of blue, or of none of the colors, and just a strategic virtue. But my issue is where you write:
Chaos Life is born out of chaos. Elements randomly align to form life by application of pressure and time to transform it. Green can appreciate red's love of randomness and chance. The difference is green cares more about the outcome. Red is more concerned about the initial act and the emotional response it produces. [blue and platypuses].
Indeed, Red must care less about where things go, than Green. Things have value as they are, to Green. Yet...
The absolute, firstmost, indispensable, cannot-do-without element of Green is that it gives up the outcome. It is not that it does not care, but it does not aim for, or reason from, or think about, the outcome. That is the entirety of the "Good Life" that Green promises and bestows upon those who take it up. What precisely Green grants is a sort of peace of mind, where you can accept the world by just -being- rather than doing. That is the way to line up the Pie with the philosophies of meditation - they're Green, and that is the message. This comes through more clearly in Rosewater's article in Green's voice he did in Naya week, but this terminology I myself type here was crystallized for me thanks to talks given by Dr. J Peterson.
In spelling out what this means, one will spell out, at a point, why someone would disagree with it, and simultaneously, what its purported strengths are. Those strengths are that, when you become a master of being, you have a sort of skill, a proficiency, in reacting, and acting. There's nothing more natural than being you, so, if you slough off all the traits that hold you back, if you whet away and harden and toughen yourself and give yourself 10 000 hours of experience, then 1) you will be something resilient, and 2) You will endure, because that's what resilient things are. At that point, you will endure because of what _accepting_ your existence (or, giving up the outcome) has made of you.
That's all well and good if it sounds right, but alas, design. What mechanic looks like that?
Well, I got some idea. But this is mainly about checking this one deep point of contrast with someone who definitely deserves any heads-up I feel I can give.
As a speculation, I believe the special ingredient is in the Interdependence bowl. Something relating to the use of 'all the resources at once' and your point about 'millions of viruses' and the need for mechanics that stop other color's powers from restraining Green... something here seems like a solution. It just needs to be found in design, that is to say, in mechanics that will feel like an organic design.
Designs that make the controller of the card 'closer' to Nature, its power - its protective instincts, as you say - ... designs that promise board presence except with mismanagement. Designs that let you attempt to just 'be' (overwhelmingly powerful), weighed against the price of...struggling to get your head around this philosophy - of "being" , and committing, and waiting without forelooking - in the first place. Of taking the risk of casting at all.
Designs that the Werewolves sort of execute. Fascinating.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
I am more inclined to agree with the fact that green's key strength of having the most efficient creatures does not play out very well when compared to the other colors. Creatures in general have been powered up a lot since Ravnica block and further. What Wizards seems to have overlooked is the fact that for green to keep it's unique strength, green creatures should have had an even greater increase in power than the other colors. (That said, I do feel creatures have become to powerfull but that's a different topic altogether).
Adding trample more freely to big green creatures should give green a big boost. Giving all green creatures with power 5 or greater trample by default and only taking it away because they have some other cool ability will go a long way towards restoring green's power. Also, good fatties need some more forms of protection against removal other than shroud or hexproof. (Shroud and hexproof, while efficient, severely reduce interactiveness imo). The undying ability (Technically, not flavorfully) is one such example, but regeneration also helps and maybe something like additional costs to target the creature, or an ability that prevents any player other than it's owner to gain control of it could all help. Just consider:
Some Tough Ent GGG
Creature - Treefolk
Trample, Resilience (When this creatures dies, if it the first time this turn, regenerate it).
3/4
I'd play it!
Also, i think that flavorfully, green should get some reanimation. Regrowthing / recycling seems very green and being able to efficiently revive it's own fatties helps greens strategy even more. Let black have the fancy effects like immediatley granting haste etc, but a 1GG Green Zombify does not seem out of order. It can help offset it's lack of card drawing and help a little card advantage wise.
Very good points. If a green creature is not a common and has a power of 4+ I can't think of any good reason for it to not have trample. Trample is extremely green and can be good but is rarely if ever overpowered. This should just be the default here.
Would also like seeing additional shroud/hexproof/can't be countered, but don't want it getting overused since it's not exactly fun being on the other side of.
Love the "fights as it comes into play idea" too. Other card type that green has previously had that would be great to print more of are cards along the lines of Eternal Witness. Things that let you re-use what you've already used without going headfirst into the negative card advantage pit. Cards like this I think can go a long way in avoiding green wanting/needing pure card draw.
First I would like to get my biases out of the way. My color of choice is black so right off the bat we are at odds with one another (in terms of color pie identity) , second I never really enjoyed green but that doesn’t stop me from playing it because I play a lot of limited and I will use what I can.
That being said I thoroughly enjoyed this article and agree with some of the points you make and I would like to offer some of my opinions and ideas.
I like and agree with the idea that survival better suites green and how important green sense of community is, a common trait that both green and white share. I also think that the examples you gave that represent green are better suited then the ones given.
Green is…
Cunning Green gets treated as a bunch of jocks, but green can be awfully clever. Blue and green don't necessarily differ on an intellectual level. What separates them is the drive behind their goals. Blue strives for knowledge out of curiosity and the sheer pleasure of the search. Blue mages would sit around discussing philosophies about the color pie for pure enjoyment. Green is more practical. It appreciates knowledge for survival, but no more. If it doesn't need to know something, it is useless drivel. This doesn't mean green has little appreciation for an intelligent opponent. It has the utmost respect for a clever adversary.
Chaos Life is born out of chaos. Elements randomly align to form life by application of pressure and time to transform it. Green can appreciate red's love of randomness and chance. The difference is green cares more about the outcome. Red is more concerned about the initial act and the emotional response it produces. It is the reason green thinks blue mages are a bunch of stuck up snobs. Blue thinks it can create superior beings by stringent scientific methodology. Green appreciates the beautiful beings evolved out of random pressure over time. Blue would have never dreamt of creating the duck-billed platypus.
Adaptive Nature can quickly adjust to its environment. A classic example from college was a moth that turned from white to completely black during the industrial era in a matter of decades. Hardly a month goes by that I don't come across an article detailing about a new resistant bug scientists have discovered. A form of TB in India is now resistant to all forms of treatment as well as the growing resistance of gonorrhea; a once easily treated STD. Necrotic Ooze is a card that I feel could have been green. Humans are adaptive to their environments by creating the necessary tools and clothes in order to survive.
Interdependence Green appreciates white's structure and efficient use of organization. The difference is green has hierarchies for survival or for a higher purpose. White is more of a caste system built out of social standing or duty rather than function. Less important people are thrust into more meaningless jobs. Green denizens don't look at their jobs that way. Each believes they are serving an important and vital role for overall good of the community or their queen.
Protective Green is more than willing to make sacrifices for a higher ideal. In real life, they would be the people who walk three miles to work in order to save the earth. Protecting what is most sacred is more important than the lost of their life. Treebeard is iconic in both ways.
Out of these 5 I agree with the latter three, however I feel that chaos might have been the wrong word to use there and cunning is too broad and encompasses most of the colors as well. For chaos I think that wild or primal might have been better choices. Chaos is red territory, the reason why red and green get along though is because they are, for the most part, both raw and uncontrolled colors. Red is more chaotic while green is more primal. By primal I mean the color’s closeness and use of nature, the use of the world around it to its advantage, instead of making the environment change to suite its needs green changes and adapts to fit in with the environment. As for cunning I feel that all the colors have some sort of cunning to them. Blue and black are both cunning in the way they manipulate people and their environments. White is cunning in its resilience, another thing it shares with green, it takes more then you expect to take out white and even if you do it can bounce back well. Red uses it unpredictable nature to be cunning, you never know what red is going to do or how it’s going to do it.
Next quick note on Flash, on MaRo tumblr someone asked about flash in green, and he said “I always talk about things from where I’m working which is several years in the future. The rise of flash in blue was not something planned but something that kind of happened. Blue is not supposed to be the primary flash color, green is. We’re in the process of fixing this” so we should be getting more flash things in the future.
Also, i think that flavorfully, green should get some reanimation. Regrowthing / recycling seems very green and being able to efficiently revive it's own fatties helps greens strategy even more. Let black have the fancy effects like immediatley granting haste etc, but a 1GG Green Zombify does not seem out of order. It can help offset it's lack of card drawing and help a little card advantage wise. Posted by Ertai Planeswalker
My final point about is about the plagues. I see where you are coming from about them being found in nature, however I feel the reason they should stay in black is not because of what they are but because of what they do. When you get sick you get tired and weaker ect… that effect of making something weak is not what green does. Green makes its own creatures stronger and gives them the ability to survive while black is the color that saps your strength to the point of you not being able to do anything or just flat out killing you.
I tried to keep my points to the color pie and flavor and out of mechanics, mostly because I agree with what was said here. Again I thoroughly enjoyed the article and hope to read more soon.
First off, loved the article. While it is true that I play all five colors very often now a days, my first color and love was and always will be green, and it has always hurt me deeply that the color of physical strength and nine-drop monstrosities can so easily be done in by two and three drop counters from blue. So, here is what I believe is the solution to green.
As RABishop had stated before me, there should be creatures in green who cannot be countered. A central concept to this would be five or six-drop creatures with 4+/4+ bodies that not only get into play come hell or high water, but stay there. my idea for the key word was tenacious.
Here is a few examples of such a creature, in my mind
Mythantos, the Suvivor 3GGG
Legendary Creature - Elf Archer
Tenacious, First Strike, Reach
If you control no other creatures, ~ has deathtouch.
"I have survived the worst this world has to offer, and it has made me strong."
3/3
Stalwart Ent 2GG
Tenacious (this creature and its' activated abilities cannot be countered.)
"My people have lived for eons. We will not allow the harsh words of relative infants to change our path"
3/5
Further, green should have enchantments and lands that facilitate Tenacious, such as:
Thornguard Vale
Land T:AddG to your mana pool. 2G: Until end of turn, all green creature spells have Tenacious.
Second, Green needs a way to counter. other colors have ways to take care of pesky creatures, but Green does not. While it is not in Green's nature to kill other creatures by magical means, there are a number of nasty things that can happen to the unsuspecting. Therefore, I think it needs cards that show enemy creatures what happens when you wander into the jungle...
Crushing Vines3GG
Instant - Trap
If an opponent is attacking with three or more creatures, you may pay 1G instead of ~' mana cost.
Destroy up to two target attacking creatures.
Thirdly, this may be my own pet peeve, but I believe Green needs to focus itself more into certain specific species. While its always fun to have huge stand alone beatsticks running about, I do think that WOTC needs to make Spiders into a tribal species with some actual tribal chemistry, similar to how blue has Merfolks, Faeries and Vedalken, and Black has Vampires, Demons and Horrors.
Finally, I think greens needs a way to preserve the sanctity of death. Green views death as a necessary part of the life cycle, and that dead things need to stay dead. So, why not give it abilities that allow it to provide final rest to its deceased.
Kelrak, Avenger of the Fallen7GGG
Legendary Creature - Elemental
Tenacious, hexproof
If five or more creatures you control died this turn, ~ has flash.
Final Rest - You may exile green creatures in your graveyard to reduce ~'s mana cost by 1 or G.
12/12
Roar of the Jungle XGG
Sorcery
Put X 2/2 green Wolves tokens into play under your control
Final Rest - As ~ is being cast, you may exile X green creatures in your graveyard. If you do, put X 4/4 green Beast tokens into play under your control instead.
Similar to how my first idea gives green some anti-blue power, this one give it some anti-black power, as the fear that killing small things will eventually result in something even bigger is one of the best gifts you could give to green.
This article was mostly Vorthos fluff, but I think it hit one main idea on the head, and a lot of the comments seem to agree with that idea. Wizards needs to unleash and realize the full powers inherent in Green's slice of the color pie, the way they are in the other colors.
For me, the epitome of what Green's standard power level should look like is Thrun, the Last Troll.
By making Thrun a mythic and Legendary, R&D made a firm statement that "this card is at the top of green's power curve". However, I believe that R&D needs to take the bold move of making Thrun-level cards the middle of green's power curve, therefore bringing Green up to the same power level as the other colors.
In my opinion, cards like Thrun need to be in the rare and uncommon slots. Any green creature with P/T equal to CMC should have some form of uncounterable/hexproof/indestructability, with less combinations as you move down the rarities. To me, that is what green in magic is. It is stubborn, it is resiliant, and it should not go away with a single casting of any old generic spell.
R&D also needs to abandon the old P/T=CMC rule when it comes to vanilla green creatures. 1GG should create 5/5 vanillas. GGG should make 6/6 vanillas. 3GG should create 7/7s at the very minimum.
The only reason Green is a weak color in this game is because R&D is irrationally afraid to break obsolete design rules to realize Green's strengths. They are also afraid of making the color of the beginner too powerful, and being accused of dumbing down the game for new players. So instead they make Green cards play by the same design rules as other colors, without giving green the color wheel benefits that other colors enjoy.
Green doesn't need crazy keywords or drastic new abilities. It just wants what the color pie promised it in the first place.
I have to hop in here a moment to give props to everyone who has responded to the article. I am very much enjoying the variety of responses as well as the civilility of the discussion. When I sent in this article, I wasn't expecting to get this much enjoyment out of the responses. Thanks.
It is a really good article and it made me think a lot about the color pie as a whole and made me see new things about green that I never thought before.
However, I think you got some points out of what green or nature is or do.
It is difficult to set the philosophy from the reallity of a game which needs to be balanced. So sometimes we discuss things that make sense, but cannot be made real for the game health.
Most of all, something I learned is that color are not exactly about how thing are, but the intention of how things are used. Red uses ice to damage, blue uses it freenze things.
Beside it, there is the great conflict of nature and life, something shared on by every other color. Every color has living beings and use natural phonemes. They aren't all green just because they part of nature. Green doesn't use them because it isn't its way to do things.
Also, there are the two concept of nature's creatures. There are the wild beast and animals and there are the ones who appreciate nature, like most the green planewalkers/players around there. They are usually hunters, druids, rangers, etc, they enjoy the natural things and try to protect or keep it as it is. Most of then are sentience being as human, elfs or ents.
Here is where enters the text fragment you hated:
While every other color fights to change the world, green battles to keep it the same.
You are right, nature really don't care for changes, but every green mage who use its force or every single green creature who lived on an environment do care. It is their intrinsic characteristic: they are bound to how thing are, if nature change, they will individually perish. If the weather changes, if the environment changes or whatever the world became, that will still be nature.
But what is nature, exactly? If you take a broad perspective, nature is everything . Everything that other colors do is also part of this broad nature of the universe. But that is not Green.
Green is more close to the concept of natural. Green like what is natural and hate what isn't; and natural is what things are now and how they work now.
From that point comes the greatest green identity's conflict and power e the contradiction which I guess upset most of the green mages. Green isn't a color about the WHOLE and BROAD nature and life concept. Green is a color about how nature is NOW, how to keep it alike and how survive if it changes. Green is the attrition of the time, the inertia of every force, the effort to just stay the same..
Although they do adapt, they do it slowly and painfully, as whole race or niche, never as one individual being, and never driven by a goal other than just survive. Survival's of what? Life.
Interdependence Green appreciates white's structure and efficient use of organization. The difference is green has hierarchies for survival or for a higher purpose. White is more of a caste system built out of social standing or duty rather than function
Nature and savage beings don't have any purpose at all beside survive (a word you used a lot). A high purpose is a quite White thing: faith, moral, ideal, etc. White believe and pursuit something beyond the mundane and natural things.
For the same reason I don't think that green should have Pariah abilities. I've never seen a antilop jump over a fellow brother to save it from claws of the predator. Every single nature being will try the best for they own survival. The one who is out there trying to protect the whole is the green planewalker or druid, not the green beast.
Cunning Green gets treated as a bunch of jocks, but green can be awfully clever. Blue and green don't necessarily differ on an intellectual level.
I maybe got wrong what you meant for "intellectual level", but green are far behind on blue on this. You don't like the world instinct, but it what beast have. They do what is in their guts and it don't know why or even cares about a why. And that is what I think intelligence is: the ability to understand and reason about things. I don't know where exactly I should put the word "Behavior", but is there for green somehow. Blue is science, green is common sense.
Adaptive Nature can quickly adjust to its environment. A classic example from college was a moth that turned from white to completely black during the industrial era in a matter of decades. (...) Humans are adaptive to their environments by creating the necessary tools and clothes in order to survive.
I agree with first part, but I can't agree with the second one. Nature and the living creatures which compose it are not the same thing. Every white moth DIED, every single dinosaur, every extincted animal; they individually have perished. However, Nature as a whole didn't lose anything.
The human part isn't just a green adaptation ability, because humans adapt thinking about the problem. They go out and try to understand, manipulated and control things for they survival (and for more than just survival). A important point who set humans apart from the most of other animals is that humans create things when they are alive. Humans have the power of Meme, while the rest of creatures can only count with their genes to try, on the next generation, something better.
That is why I think green adaptive strength shouldn't be on a single creature card or its ability to keep resisting, but on the green strategy as a whole. Losing a creature, for a green mage, shouldn't be so bad. It actually should be their chance to adapt. The next wave (or iteration) shouldn't die so easily to same thing. Green should have something like:
Evoluted Beast 4[G]
When ~this enter on the battlefield, choose a card from target opponent's graveyard. ~This has protection from that card's colors.
5/4
Plagues are, of course, a natural thing.. Many scientists even argue viruses are alive... However, while these contagions may be natural, their use as removal is not. Infection spells have a specific and unnatural INTENT to do harm and kill.
In the same way fire is a natural thing but a Red mage intentionally summoning it to burn her opponent's face is not, and using plagues to torture and kill is strictly Black.
Also the Borg, as Rosewater has pointed out, are not Green.. They are selfish parasites programmed to destroy and accumulate knowledge and power. They are not instinctual or natural. Their consciousness is a sentient evil.
Further more, Black and Green do not overlap in their lack or morality.. Black is immoral, while Green is amoral. (You can look those up if you're confused by what I mean.) Black understands morality and disregards it, while animals do not consider such things.
A bacterium strain doing what it does may be Green - but a sentient being deliberately unleashing it on a population to extirminate them is an act of "murder" the same as Terror, Doom Blade or any other "kill spell."
Green deserves haste. It makes more sense to have haste as a main ability in green than Red. Predators (not the aliens, but animal predators) aren't slow. They're fast. Thus, they should be able to attack right out of the gate.
Also, why are green signature creatures huge? Its a stupid thing. Tigers, Lions, wolves, panthers etc. aren't big fatties. They're lean, fast, quick. Why don't we have more cards that deal with those animals instead of cards designed around Elephants, or Rhinos, or just big giants?
Also, great idea for green removal. Virus removal. A creature gets a virus counter, and an upkeep or two later, it dies. Wouldn't be swift, but would act like a virus and slowly kill you. Reminds me of wither a little. Maybe it would have a debilitating effect to go with it?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Proud supporter of playing to win. Weekly Words of Wisdom 6 A card is bad in constructed when its not GOOD.
A card is bad in casual when its not FUN.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So to say, without green there would not be Blue, White, Black, Red or whatsoever color.
If you define Green as life in its evolution, it is the basics where all other forms of colors (or life) have developed from.
As you say "Life is resilient and will adapt. It will survive.", this is how the other colors might have developed, each in a different way each resulting from any kind of survival and adaptation.
I think you might also say that the pure Green does not distinguish between good and evil. Being able to distinguish between these two definitions is not entirely based on survival but rather on morale and conscience (and also lies in the eye of the beholder).
I know this is hard to argument for.
For instance, what about elves? Are they really Green? They do distinguish between good and evil. They are a derivative of Green, an evolution out of Green and very much related to it, since they try to live in harmony with life and nature...
Anyways, R&D has to make a decision for each card of how to categorize it to which color. Plague being black? Well, out of a human kind of view, plagues are kind of evil. They destroy life in many (mostly horrible) ways. This fits into the black theme, the dark side of life. Out of a Green kind of view, as you defined it, plagues being Green would be a definite yes. Dakmor Plague, or Endemic Plague could well be Green. Engineered Plague though fits nicely into black for it being engineered by someone to hamper creatures of one type (or race).
Well, it is interesting to think about the cards of each color in a different way. Makes the game also more interesting.
I would like to see further articles about the other colors
"This is the infernal spawn of the infernal spawn of evil!"
Thank you for this sig image @myself
I have begun to think that green and red should switch places in the color pie.
Red really seems to share more with white than green and green has a lot in common with black.
As one who likes to meddle with everything, it never occurred to me the idea of shuffling the color wheel. I don't know if it would be right or wrong, but the idea of reshuffling is an intriguing idea. Now that you say it, I can see why the thought has occurred to you.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=7853975#post7853975
my trades list
1. Nature is very destructive, which is why I'd like to see more mass removal, of some sorts, in green. Tsunami, even if narrow, is the perfect green/nature card. This fits with the 'plague' theme, but in a more WOTC frame of mind. WOTC has this hang-up with having to mix in black to get removal with most green cards.
2. Green is often the colour of efficient beaters, yet they give blue the most efficient beater printed in the last set (3/2 flyer for 1?), making green less appealing for aggro decks.
3. One of my favourite flavourful green cards is Lurking Predators. It works on many levels, and is great for EDH play. It provides green with some trickiness, too. Summoning Trap works this way, too.
4. Further to that, I like the idea of FLASH being a green ability. WOTC has done this with recent cards all the way back to Time Spiral block. Many animals like to 'sudden strike' their prey, so this really should be something less blue and more green.
Looking for a casual playgroup in the Greater Vancouver area? Send me a PM. Our playgroup is always looking for more people to terrorize
Green is the color of growth, epitomized by land search and mana ramp. And it's the color of giant dinosaurs, behemoths, and wurms. These are beautifully flavorful, complimentary aspects of the color, with powerful synergy.
Unfortunately, terribly designed cards like Doom Blade, Path to Exile, and Vapor Snag keep getting printed. And having your eight mana, 9/9 fatty countered, pacified, bounced, or removed for just 1 or 2 mana is such a tempo swing it ends games. This ensures that 95% of all green creatures will never see competitive play. In fact, it pushes the average converted mana cost of all playable creatures in each format down to match the cost of the prevalent removal, generally making the most efficient 1 and 2 drops central to the format.
The only fatties that will ever be played in an environment like this are ones that are so ridiculously pushed that they're still good even if they get answered for 1 mana. Enter the Titans. But whoops - every color gets those. Sorry Green!
And therein lies the other problem. The fatty creature color generally gets the worst fatties. Angels, demons, dragons, and vampires get cool abilities like flying, lifelink, first strike, firebreathing, and so on. They steal creatures, ping stuff, protect themselves, and are all around nifty. Big green creatures, though, are generally just vanilla, and rarely even have trample. And when Green finally does a get a fatty that can compete - most recently, Primeval Titan - R&D feels a need to make sure that all the other colors get matching fatties that are as good or better.
If your answer is "No," then your morality does not come from God's commandments.
If your answer is "Yes," then please, please reconsider.
Black doesnt have a moral code, just like nature doesnt have a moral code.
A Demon simply wants as much power as possible and doesnt care how it gets it.
Just like a wurm will eat anything it can, it doesnt care if its an entire community of elves.
Red has a code even if its an honor amongst theives sorta thing.
Warren Instigator flavor text to me highlights how goblins and dwarves for the most part are really a rw tribe.
1. Creatures that cannot be countered. I like the idea that green creatures are stealthy and spring up out of nowhere without the prey being able to react. There have been a handful of them printed, but this should be a more widely-used ability. That way, the blue mage has to play creatures to deal with the problem his green mage opponent creates instead of just tapping a few islands and saying "no."
2. Hexproof and shroud. Green creatures should be seen as evolving over time, and if there is constant exposure to magic, doesn't it seem likely that some would develop a resistance to it? I would argue that both abilities could be utilized depending on the type of creature (non-humanoid with hexproof, humanoid with shroud) instead of the seeming shift away from shroud to hexproof that we've been seeing.
This would also have the outcome that opponents of green mages would have to cast creatures to deal with threats instead of just throwing out a Doom Blade or Dismember, effectively ending the "yeah, but it dies to removal" meme. No, it doesn't, so you're going to have to put a few creatures capable of dealing with a fattie in your deck instead of lazily loading your deck with creature kill spells, pacifism or tap effects or burn.
3. Deathtouch. Glad Ambush Viper got this, but there needs to be more of it. Animals develop natural defenses such as poisons, so why couldn't there be more of this ability out there? I don't mind that Typhoid Rats has deathtouch as well; disease-carrying vermin are just as worthy of having the ability as a snake, but this should be more prevalent in green IMHO.
I am more inclined to agree with the fact that green's key strength of having the most efficient creatures does not play out very well when compared to the other colors. Creatures in general have been powered up a lot since Ravnica block and further. What Wizards seems to have overlooked is the fact that for green to keep it's unique strength, green creatures should have had an even greater increase in power than the other colors. (That said, I do feel creatures have become to powerfull but that's a different topic altogether).
Adding trample more freely to big green creatures should give green a big boost. Giving all green creatures with power 5 or greater trample by default and only taking it away because they have some other cool ability will go a long way towards restoring green's power. Also, good fatties need some more forms of protection against removal other than shroud or hexproof. (Shroud and hexproof, while efficient, severely reduce interactiveness imo). The undying ability (Technically, not flavorfully) is one such example, but regeneration also helps and maybe something like additional costs to target the creature, or an ability that prevents any player other than it's owner to gain control of it could all help. Just consider:
Some Tough Ent GGG
Creature - Treefolk
Trample, Resilience (When this creatures dies, if it the first time this turn, regenerate it).
3/4
I'd play it!
Also, i think that flavorfully, green should get some reanimation. Regrowthing / recycling seems very green and being able to efficiently revive it's own fatties helps greens strategy even more. Let black have the fancy effects like immediatley granting haste etc, but a 1GG Green Zombify does not seem out of order. It can help offset it's lack of card drawing and help a little card advantage wise.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
So now onto my response:
First I'm just going to come out and say I disagree with you that Green needs to be changed. I respect your opinion on the issue, but again we must realize that there really isn't a right or wrong here. WotC basically defined what the colors can do and they've stuck with it. They don't like giving green certain abilities, the same can be said with other colors obviously.
People like to say blue is the best color (and I would agree), but then they forget that it's been awhile since we've seen a really good mono blue deck. It's always paired with another color (a color that offers something that blue can't usually). Yet mono green, mono white, mono red and to a lesser extent mono black have all been around with more frequency.
I don't want to turn this into an argument over what colors need to become less powerful and which ones need more power. My opinion on this is that there shouldn't have to be absolute balance. Each color does it's own thing, and you certainly see each color be more or less significant each block to varying degrees. I don't understand why someone would get mad because green doesn't have enough card draw or counters. If you want to play card draw/counters, add blue to your deck.
THIS.
I can't tell you how much I agree with this post. Green has had interactive abilities, but they just don't get implemented that often. I wish they would print more green weenie creatures that can't be countered. In the same way white control had stuff like Silver Knight back in the day to deal with goblins, why can't you print just a 2/2 bear that can't be countered? Instead of the G/x deck having to have an answer for Jace, now they have to have an answer for this creature.
I'm not as much on board with Deathtouch potentially bringing Green back... because it's only interactive against other creatures, and in constructed being able kill something if it gets damaged no matter what isn't as big a deal. But I'm completely on board with something you actually mentioned indirectly... Flash.
Ambush Viper is something I want to see more of. Again, you don't necessarily have to put Deathtouch on it for it to work. But putting Flash on more green creatures (relevant green creatures) is a way to give green more flexibility in deck building. Right now, if you want to build a beatdown deck, it's all about "curving out" and if you throw in a number of non-creature spells you are kind of forced to choose between potentially using a trick (Beast Within) or playing a creature (Durngrove Elder). If you gave some of those creatures flash, now they will sometimes be able to react to something their opponent has done on their turn... even if it is as simple as playing better around a Slagstorm.
Hahaa. yeah this.
The Japanese should have learned a dark ritual or two to doom blade or remove the eye blight of a dinosaur, Godzilla. Seriously though. "destroy... creature" needs to be more costly.
Removal should have stayed here. I personally like the 4cmc counter we received in DKA. its how a counter should be. why does it take less energy (CMC - x) to stop a force in motion (CMC)? it should take more.
Referencing the article, the only things I really agreed with, Plagues and Adaptation.
bacteria and viruses arent intentionally virulent, they just desire to prolong their existence. they wish to just be... sometimes that 'be'ing requires the atmosphere of a human lung... or cranium. So if people wind up dying... it can't be helped! Green is not the color of Life, but a color of the Life Cycle; death is an accepted part of it.
On adapting, the earlier post about resilience is brilliant. Green wants to survive. Indeed. So green should represent 'survivability' more. mechanics like hexproof, deathtouch, and fight should be faaaarrrrr more widespread/ evergreen.
Also, why dont green creatures adapt to the conditions of the battlefield more often? green creatures with ' whenever a [insert card type or color here] enters the battlefield (or whenever a player plays a ____ spell), this creature [does something that corresponds to the type of card played]. Werewolves were a good and overdue first step. but we should have been beyond casting two spells in a turn to trigger an effect at this point.
Good call on Pognify though.
Skill is an ability that relates more so to the type of deck that's built and how said player pilots it. It also relates to the ability to assess the board and use the cards available to you in the most optimal way relative to each situation.
When a deck is filled with above par cards and every play is solid, there comes a diminishing need to "think" for the lack of wanting to use a better word.
Flash as a Green ability hadn't dawned on me when I wrote my post, but it really does make sense. I referenced Green creatures being stealthy in relation to the "unable to be countered" ability, but flash could work as another aspect of that, the "popping up out of nowhere" ability that many predators seem to exhibit.
Again, completely agree. And you think about how U/x decks play out, usually the fact that something is an instant or a sorcery matters, whether it be card draw or creature destruction or whatever. Those types of decks don't want to play sorceries unless the card is worth it. I don't see why G/x mages couldn't be forced to make the same decisions with creatures. If Green is supposed to be the "creature color", that evolution makes perfect sense to me.
In fact, you could combine "Flash" with "can't be countered/targetted" and make a green creature 4G for a 2/2 with Flash and "when this enters the battlefield, until the beginning of your opponents next upkeep, creatures can't be countered/targeted". That would be in G/x sideboards against blue control in the same way blue can pack counters that counter only creatures.
Outside of tribal I think green should have more community type cards that either protect or care for others of the same type. Look at a pride of lions for example. Each lion has its own role in the family. They all take down prey, defend the pride, sleep, and play as a single unit. Maybe banding should be brought back as an ability to bring a sense of community back.
When you talked about viruses and bacteria also being green I agree somewhat. I think that palgues should be both black and green. This might be more an issue describing black than green, but I feel as if black is the "evil" side of what green can be. White is the "good" side of green's potential. So why not share the plague ability with black?
I came up with an example of the plague ability in green.
3GG
Locust swarm
instant
destroy target land
that land's controller gets 4 0/1 locust tokens
Locusts are one the most iconic plague type of creatures in green. They come out of nowhere and then disapear as fast as they came. During their short visit they cause havok usually in the form of eating crops. The crops would represent a land. I know in places where locust swarms are a fairly common occurance the people there collect the leftover dead carcasses and eat them for sustinace. What came as destruction left as free food. I think there are many ways to do this idea I only came up with one. After the player loses his land he gets tokens which he can use to sheild him, or sac them to something if he has something to sac them to. It could backfire and what you thought was a good idea turned into more fuel for his sac engine, or maybe he had buffs that made them into big dudes now aimed at your face. My point is that especially in green I want their to be more cards that have pros and cons in playing them instead of just "grawg I play my big dude".
I hope that green gets a more denfined identity and more unique exsistence. Keep up with thought forming articles like this one. Thanks!
My Saffi deck
Unfortunately when they do, they give the creature a mono green casting cost, leaving Green even more isolated.
It begs the question, what does a colour get for splashing green if all it's good cards are creatures, and they all require a big green commitment.
Red, splash for burn. Black, splash for removal/discard. Blue, splash for counters. White, splash for wrath effects, exile effects etc.
Why splash for green? It should be for creatures which do things other colours can't do anywhere near as efficiently green does.
Modern:
WBG
Legacy:
WBG
I can read through from start to end without re-reading anything. And that's something.
I agree there is a problem. However, now I will disagree with you. The tone of this disagreement will be a stumbling point, because you may agree, or you may mean the opposite in what you wrote. The concern is that on one point, I believe it is the absolutely essential trait of Green, and if you are treating it as a feature, then we are contrary. I must cut to this sole element above all other quibbles.
I definitely look forward to other writings and publishings from you.
This is my issue. You outline some components of Green, and rearrange and critique the way (it appears) they are treated from the inside. I agree the stumbling over a word like 'instinct' is bad. It is for that reason that I dislike the word 'cunning' for Green, for example. I am all for straightening out intelligence, blue, and green; but cunning is either the property, in fact, of blue, or of none of the colors, and just a strategic virtue. But my issue is where you write:
Indeed, Red must care less about where things go, than Green. Things have value as they are, to Green. Yet...
The absolute, firstmost, indispensable, cannot-do-without element of Green is that it gives up the outcome. It is not that it does not care, but it does not aim for, or reason from, or think about, the outcome. That is the entirety of the "Good Life" that Green promises and bestows upon those who take it up. What precisely Green grants is a sort of peace of mind, where you can accept the world by just -being- rather than doing. That is the way to line up the Pie with the philosophies of meditation - they're Green, and that is the message. This comes through more clearly in Rosewater's article in Green's voice he did in Naya week, but this terminology I myself type here was crystallized for me thanks to talks given by Dr. J Peterson.
In spelling out what this means, one will spell out, at a point, why someone would disagree with it, and simultaneously, what its purported strengths are. Those strengths are that, when you become a master of being, you have a sort of skill, a proficiency, in reacting, and acting. There's nothing more natural than being you, so, if you slough off all the traits that hold you back, if you whet away and harden and toughen yourself and give yourself 10 000 hours of experience, then 1) you will be something resilient, and 2) You will endure, because that's what resilient things are. At that point, you will endure because of what _accepting_ your existence (or, giving up the outcome) has made of you.
That's all well and good if it sounds right, but alas, design. What mechanic looks like that?
Well, I got some idea. But this is mainly about checking this one deep point of contrast with someone who definitely deserves any heads-up I feel I can give.
As a speculation, I believe the special ingredient is in the Interdependence bowl. Something relating to the use of 'all the resources at once' and your point about 'millions of viruses' and the need for mechanics that stop other color's powers from restraining Green... something here seems like a solution. It just needs to be found in design, that is to say, in mechanics that will feel like an organic design.
Designs that make the controller of the card 'closer' to Nature, its power - its protective instincts, as you say - ... designs that promise board presence except with mismanagement. Designs that let you attempt to just 'be' (overwhelmingly powerful), weighed against the price of...struggling to get your head around this philosophy - of "being" , and committing, and waiting without forelooking - in the first place. Of taking the risk of casting at all.
Designs that the Werewolves sort of execute. Fascinating.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Very good points. If a green creature is not a common and has a power of 4+ I can't think of any good reason for it to not have trample. Trample is extremely green and can be good but is rarely if ever overpowered. This should just be the default here.
Would also like seeing additional shroud/hexproof/can't be countered, but don't want it getting overused since it's not exactly fun being on the other side of.
Love the "fights as it comes into play idea" too. Other card type that green has previously had that would be great to print more of are cards along the lines of Eternal Witness. Things that let you re-use what you've already used without going headfirst into the negative card advantage pit. Cards like this I think can go a long way in avoiding green wanting/needing pure card draw.
That being said I thoroughly enjoyed this article and agree with some of the points you make and I would like to offer some of my opinions and ideas.
I like and agree with the idea that survival better suites green and how important green sense of community is, a common trait that both green and white share. I also think that the examples you gave that represent green are better suited then the ones given.
Out of these 5 I agree with the latter three, however I feel that chaos might have been the wrong word to use there and cunning is too broad and encompasses most of the colors as well. For chaos I think that wild or primal might have been better choices. Chaos is red territory, the reason why red and green get along though is because they are, for the most part, both raw and uncontrolled colors. Red is more chaotic while green is more primal. By primal I mean the color’s closeness and use of nature, the use of the world around it to its advantage, instead of making the environment change to suite its needs green changes and adapts to fit in with the environment. As for cunning I feel that all the colors have some sort of cunning to them. Blue and black are both cunning in the way they manipulate people and their environments. White is cunning in its resilience, another thing it shares with green, it takes more then you expect to take out white and even if you do it can bounce back well. Red uses it unpredictable nature to be cunning, you never know what red is going to do or how it’s going to do it.
Next quick note on Flash, on MaRo tumblr someone asked about flash in green, and he said “I always talk about things from where I’m working which is several years in the future. The rise of flash in blue was not something planned but something that kind of happened. Blue is not supposed to be the primary flash color, green is. We’re in the process of fixing this” so we should be getting more flash things in the future.
My final point about is about the plagues. I see where you are coming from about them being found in nature, however I feel the reason they should stay in black is not because of what they are but because of what they do. When you get sick you get tired and weaker ect… that effect of making something weak is not what green does. Green makes its own creatures stronger and gives them the ability to survive while black is the color that saps your strength to the point of you not being able to do anything or just flat out killing you.
I tried to keep my points to the color pie and flavor and out of mechanics, mostly because I agree with what was said here. Again I thoroughly enjoyed the article and hope to read more soon.
As RABishop had stated before me, there should be creatures in green who cannot be countered. A central concept to this would be five or six-drop creatures with 4+/4+ bodies that not only get into play come hell or high water, but stay there. my idea for the key word was tenacious.
Here is a few examples of such a creature, in my mind
Mythantos, the Suvivor 3GGG
Legendary Creature - Elf Archer
Tenacious, First Strike, Reach
If you control no other creatures, ~ has deathtouch.
"I have survived the worst this world has to offer, and it has made me strong."
3/3
Stalwart Ent 2GG
Tenacious (this creature and its' activated abilities cannot be countered.)
"My people have lived for eons. We will not allow the harsh words of relative infants to change our path"
3/5
Further, green should have enchantments and lands that facilitate Tenacious, such as:
Thornguard Vale
Land
T:AddG to your mana pool.
2G: Until end of turn, all green creature spells have Tenacious.
Second, Green needs a way to counter. other colors have ways to take care of pesky creatures, but Green does not. While it is not in Green's nature to kill other creatures by magical means, there are a number of nasty things that can happen to the unsuspecting. Therefore, I think it needs cards that show enemy creatures what happens when you wander into the jungle...
Crushing Vines3GG
Instant - Trap
If an opponent is attacking with three or more creatures, you may pay 1G instead of ~' mana cost.
Destroy up to two target attacking creatures.
Thirdly, this may be my own pet peeve, but I believe Green needs to focus itself more into certain specific species. While its always fun to have huge stand alone beatsticks running about, I do think that WOTC needs to make Spiders into a tribal species with some actual tribal chemistry, similar to how blue has Merfolks, Faeries and Vedalken, and Black has Vampires, Demons and Horrors.
Finally, I think greens needs a way to preserve the sanctity of death. Green views death as a necessary part of the life cycle, and that dead things need to stay dead. So, why not give it abilities that allow it to provide final rest to its deceased.
Kelrak, Avenger of the Fallen7GGG
Legendary Creature - Elemental
Tenacious, hexproof
If five or more creatures you control died this turn, ~ has flash.
Final Rest - You may exile green creatures in your graveyard to reduce ~'s mana cost by 1 or G.
12/12
Roar of the Jungle XGG
Sorcery
Put X 2/2 green Wolves tokens into play under your control
Final Rest - As ~ is being cast, you may exile X green creatures in your graveyard. If you do, put X 4/4 green Beast tokens into play under your control instead.
Similar to how my first idea gives green some anti-blue power, this one give it some anti-black power, as the fear that killing small things will eventually result in something even bigger is one of the best gifts you could give to green.
For me, the epitome of what Green's standard power level should look like is Thrun, the Last Troll.
By making Thrun a mythic and Legendary, R&D made a firm statement that "this card is at the top of green's power curve". However, I believe that R&D needs to take the bold move of making Thrun-level cards the middle of green's power curve, therefore bringing Green up to the same power level as the other colors.
In my opinion, cards like Thrun need to be in the rare and uncommon slots. Any green creature with P/T equal to CMC should have some form of uncounterable/hexproof/indestructability, with less combinations as you move down the rarities. To me, that is what green in magic is. It is stubborn, it is resiliant, and it should not go away with a single casting of any old generic spell.
R&D also needs to abandon the old P/T=CMC rule when it comes to vanilla green creatures. 1GG should create 5/5 vanillas. GGG should make 6/6 vanillas. 3GG should create 7/7s at the very minimum.
The only reason Green is a weak color in this game is because R&D is irrationally afraid to break obsolete design rules to realize Green's strengths. They are also afraid of making the color of the beginner too powerful, and being accused of dumbing down the game for new players. So instead they make Green cards play by the same design rules as other colors, without giving green the color wheel benefits that other colors enjoy.
Green doesn't need crazy keywords or drastic new abilities. It just wants what the color pie promised it in the first place.
However, I think you got some points out of what green or nature is or do.
It is difficult to set the philosophy from the reallity of a game which needs to be balanced. So sometimes we discuss things that make sense, but cannot be made real for the game health.
Most of all, something I learned is that color are not exactly about how thing are, but the intention of how things are used. Red uses ice to damage, blue uses it freenze things.
Beside it, there is the great conflict of nature and life, something shared on by every other color. Every color has living beings and use natural phonemes. They aren't all green just because they part of nature. Green doesn't use them because it isn't its way to do things.
Also, there are the two concept of nature's creatures. There are the wild beast and animals and there are the ones who appreciate nature, like most the green planewalkers/players around there. They are usually hunters, druids, rangers, etc, they enjoy the natural things and try to protect or keep it as it is. Most of then are sentience being as human, elfs or ents.
Here is where enters the text fragment you hated:
You are right, nature really don't care for changes, but every green mage who use its force or every single green creature who lived on an environment do care. It is their intrinsic characteristic: they are bound to how thing are, if nature change, they will individually perish. If the weather changes, if the environment changes or whatever the world became, that will still be nature.
But what is nature, exactly? If you take a broad perspective, nature is everything . Everything that other colors do is also part of this broad nature of the universe. But that is not Green.
Green is more close to the concept of natural. Green like what is natural and hate what isn't; and natural is what things are now and how they work now.
From that point comes the greatest green identity's conflict and power e the contradiction which I guess upset most of the green mages.
Green isn't a color about the WHOLE and BROAD nature and life concept. Green is a color about how nature is NOW, how to keep it alike and how survive if it changes. Green is the attrition of the time, the inertia of every force, the effort to just stay the same..
Although they do adapt, they do it slowly and painfully, as whole race or niche, never as one individual being, and never driven by a goal other than just survive. Survival's of what? Life.
Nature and savage beings don't have any purpose at all beside survive (a word you used a lot). A high purpose is a quite White thing: faith, moral, ideal, etc. White believe and pursuit something beyond the mundane and natural things.
For the same reason I don't think that green should have Pariah abilities. I've never seen a antilop jump over a fellow brother to save it from claws of the predator. Every single nature being will try the best for they own survival. The one who is out there trying to protect the whole is the green planewalker or druid, not the green beast.
I maybe got wrong what you meant for "intellectual level", but green are far behind on blue on this. You don't like the world instinct, but it what beast have. They do what is in their guts and it don't know why or even cares about a why. And that is what I think intelligence is: the ability to understand and reason about things. I don't know where exactly I should put the word "Behavior", but is there for green somehow. Blue is science, green is common sense.
I agree with first part, but I can't agree with the second one. Nature and the living creatures which compose it are not the same thing. Every white moth DIED, every single dinosaur, every extincted animal; they individually have perished. However, Nature as a whole didn't lose anything.
The human part isn't just a green adaptation ability, because humans adapt thinking about the problem. They go out and try to understand, manipulated and control things for they survival (and for more than just survival). A important point who set humans apart from the most of other animals is that humans create things when they are alive. Humans have the power of Meme, while the rest of creatures can only count with their genes to try, on the next generation, something better.
That is why I think green adaptive strength shouldn't be on a single creature card or its ability to keep resisting, but on the green strategy as a whole. Losing a creature, for a green mage, shouldn't be so bad. It actually should be their chance to adapt. The next wave (or iteration) shouldn't die so easily to same thing. Green should have something like:
Evoluted Beast 4[G]
When ~this enter on the battlefield, choose a card from target opponent's graveyard. ~This has protection from that card's colors.
5/4
In the same way fire is a natural thing but a Red mage intentionally summoning it to burn her opponent's face is not, and using plagues to torture and kill is strictly Black.
Also the Borg, as Rosewater has pointed out, are not Green.. They are selfish parasites programmed to destroy and accumulate knowledge and power. They are not instinctual or natural. Their consciousness is a sentient evil.
Further more, Black and Green do not overlap in their lack or morality.. Black is immoral, while Green is amoral. (You can look those up if you're confused by what I mean.) Black understands morality and disregards it, while animals do not consider such things.
A bacterium strain doing what it does may be Green - but a sentient being deliberately unleashing it on a population to extirminate them is an act of "murder" the same as Terror, Doom Blade or any other "kill spell."
Also, why are green signature creatures huge? Its a stupid thing. Tigers, Lions, wolves, panthers etc. aren't big fatties. They're lean, fast, quick. Why don't we have more cards that deal with those animals instead of cards designed around Elephants, or Rhinos, or just big giants?
Also, great idea for green removal. Virus removal. A creature gets a virus counter, and an upkeep or two later, it dies. Wouldn't be swift, but would act like a virus and slowly kill you. Reminds me of wither a little. Maybe it would have a debilitating effect to go with it?
Proud supporter of playing to win.
Weekly Words of Wisdom 6
A card is bad in constructed when its not GOOD.
A card is bad in casual when its not FUN.