MTG Salvation

Orzhov Enforcer 2BB
Creature - Human Soldier
Oath - whenever a creature that doesn't have Oath enters the battlefield, sacrifice ~ and that creature's controller sacrifices 2 creatures.
4/4

Council Messenger B
Creature - Gargoyle
Flying
Oath - whenever a creature that doesn't have Oath enters the battlefield, sacrifice ~ and that creature's controller discards a card.
3/1

Orzhov Guardian 1W
Creature - Human Soldier
Defender
Oath - whenever a creature that doesn't have Oath enters the battlefield, sacrifice ~ and gain 5 life.
1/3

A relatively new nation, the Uscal (W) have quickly established themselves as a military power to be feared. Keen to expand their influence, Uscal sought to expand their empire by acquiring colonies. It soon found itself at odds with the other kingdoms of Mortthal.

An industrial powerhouse, Uscal is home to legions of dedicated engineers, scientists, chemists and tacticians. It is capable of fielding large armies of well-equipped, highly-disciplined conscripts at a moment’s notice.

Uscal is home to humans, aven and ainok. It’s early attempts at imperialism have also brought some of the leonin prides under its control.

Once the richest and mightiest empire in Mortthal, the influence of the Estean Empire (U) reaches across the plane. Prizing invention and exploration, Estea was one of the first nations to industrialise and uses raw materials from across the empire to fuel its factories and laboratories.

The rise of Uscal has seriously challenged Estean dominance and the nation now finds itself in a war seemingly impossible to win. Despite their skills in subterfuge and a surprisingly effective air force, Estea have had little success breaking the stalemate on the western front. Instead, they have begun to use their air and sea power to probe for weaknesses in other regions.

The island of Estea is home to humans and a race of Merfolk, the Meroc, who have adapted to life on land. Subjects of the empire, willing or otherwise, include a wide variety of races such as the ainok, aven, nantuko, leonin and tigri.

Once one of the strongest military powers in Mortthal, The Oclan Empire's (B) generals and aristocrats seized the opportunity for war as soon as possible. They see the ongoing carnage as a chance to restore their nation's former glory, no matter the cost.

Although lagging behind in industry, the Oclad is capable of fielding devastating heavy artillery and makes use of many strange and unusal weapons. Unlike other nations, all ranks within the army are encouraged to practice simple magic and unorthodox tactics. As a result, the Oclan army includes specialists with a wide variety of skills, both honourable and otherwise.

The ruling elite of the Oclan Empire is primarily human but it rules over a great many cultures and races. These include ainok, aven, leonin, merfolk and some minotaurs.

In the not-too-distant past, the Crocians (R) put their royalty to the sword. Now citizens of a republic, Crocians place little trust in the magic once used to suppress them and have instead embraced the possibilities of industry with open arms. As a nation of artists and artificers, they are particularly adept at finding non-magical means to achieve magical ends.

Furious at the invading Uscal army, the Crocian army seeks to push the enemy out of their homeland once and for all. It favours mobility coupled with quick, aggressive strikes on enemy positions. There are few sights as terrifying as a Crocian bayonet charge.

Crocia is primarily home to humans, although some ainok, leonin and minotaurs are counted among its citizens.

Ruling from wooden palaces crafted by magic, the Noskan (G) aristocracy is deeply suspicious of new technology. Peasants still work the land as their ancestors did. Court propaganda warns against the unnatural horrors of industry. When the call to war came, the army that marched into battle was a familiar one. Legions of infantry supported by court mages, giant spiders and titanic beasts of war.

But the war is not going well. Stories of heavy casualties and lost battles are making their way back to the homefront and it is rumoured cruel and unusual magic is being used to replace the fallen. King Niskar is becoming increasing insular and nobody trusts his new advisor, the wizard Ragimir.

Noska is primarily home to humans but there are a wide variety of beasts such mammoths, bears and sabre-toothed cats.

Tin Men
“His aim’s a little off and he’s not much cop at cards. Still, it’s good to have Arec fighting with us again.”
Desperate to replenish their dwindling numbers, nations looked for ways to return their wounded to the front. A year into the war, soldiers were surprised to see many of their comrades returning to battle repaired and ready to fight once more. Crude artificial body parts, powered by a combination of magic and technology, are used to replace those damaged in battle.

1. Strict Mechanical Architecture - a suite of mechanics strictly distributed along color, tribal, and/or lore lines that themselves give a coherent identity to draft gameplay archetypes. Exemplar: Khans of Tarkir.
2. Loose Mechanical Architecture - a suite of mechanics distributed along color, tribal, and/or lore lines which contribute to the identity of draft gameplay archetypes. Exemplar: Shadows over Innistrad.
3. Open Mechanical Architecture - a suite of mechanics generally distributed throughout the five colors. Exemplar: Theros.
4. Texture - a qualitative measure for the complexity, depth, and modularity of a format. In Draft, this includes both the drafting and gameplay experiences.
5. Environment - the overall picture of a set's mechanics and how those mechanics together will shape gameplay experience.

Set Mechanics: Bestow, Devotion, Heroic, Monstrosity /// Inspired, Strive, Constellation

Mechanical Interactivity and Structure: Open Mechanical Architecture. The mechanics of Theros Block had a significant amount of interaction. Bestow, Heroic, and Strive naturally go together. Bestow and Constellation naturally go together as well.

Structurally, most of the mechanics formed a web of sorts. Bestow, Constellation, Strive, Heroic form a tight web, and Devotion is mildly linked to Bestow. There were a few mechanics that dwelt independently of this web - Inspired and Monstrosity in particular. In a way, this structural reality helped tell the story of man adjutorum deorum versus monsters.

Environment Cohesion: This format had a good balance of mechanics that leaned toward the aggressive end and mechanics that encouraged you to go longer. The constellation of the set's mechanics seemed put together to creating a format in which a variety of archetypal strategies was possible. "Heroic" incentivizes combat tricks and aggression, whereas mechanics like Monstrosity and Constellation encourage the user to play more lands and aim for a bit longer of a game.

What is perhaps unappreciated is that Bestow and Strive serve as bridges, providing the player with increased versatility at the cost of mana efficiency. These mechanics enable an aggressive deck to compete in the late game, and also help to bring games to a conclusion in a timely fashion.

Overall, then, the mechanical suite of Theros is a textbook example, perhaps the textbook example of how a set's mechanical suite should be designed. You have a healthy mix of aggressive and value mechanics, and some of the mechanics temper the punch of the aggressive mechanics to ensure that most decks are some shade of "midrange".

Other Lessons: I did not play this Block in draft very much so I welcome other perspectives, but from what I hear the Ordeal cycle was simply too good in this set. Aggressive mechanics, when combined with boosts to power and toughness, often lead to very quick games of Limited Magic.

Set Mechanics: Morph (pillar) , Prowess, Outlast, Raid, Ferocious, Delve

Mechanic Structure: Morph was a pillar mechanic. Not all sets have a pillar mechanic, but Khans sure did. Morph was ubiquitous, and indeed the entire format was structured around it. Having 3 mana 2/2s be the sizing baseline for your Limited format was below the curve at the time and so needed to be carefully built around.

The other 5 mechanics were endemic and exclusive to tribal archetypes, which were also the color archetypes, which were also the story archetypes. These 5 mechanics, then, were inherently divisive and categorizing in nature. As most philosophers would say, self-identity inherently requires boundaries. Being something means not being everything. Thus, this set had a strict mechanical architecture.

Mechanical Interactivity:
There is no meaningful cohesion of the set's mechanics from a design or gameplay perspective. A select few rares, like Dragon-Style Twins fit into two clans perfectly. Thus, here is an example of a set's mechanic suite containing intentionally uncohesive mechanics precisely for the sake of preserving the story uniqueness and gameplay uniqueness of the individual clan archetypes. Because nearly all KTK draft decks were some shade of "midrange", mechanics needed to be different so that the various midrange strategies would feel unique and different from each other. Each of the 5 clan-specific mechanics appeared in its 3 colors.

Environmental Design: Khans of Tarkir was a bit of a throwback set - 2/2s for 3 are well below the limited curve nowadays, and the set overall was designed to enable you to play those morph cards face down without getting steamrolled over. Strangely, the mechanics themselves do not seem designed to fill the needs of a very peculiar set and environment. Only Outlast was a mana sink, and often time Outlast was used to quickly get a counter on something so you could beat down. For the most part the other mechanics were neutral in terms of aggressiveness. The one exception was Mardu's Raid mechanic, which does promote attacking.

Here, then, the mechanical suite was not being used as it was in Theros. Indeed, the mechanics here were playing much more of an auxiliary role, more for flavor and distinguishing play experience than for function. Morph, in addition to the cards themselves, did more of the heavy lifting than usual.

Other Lessons: (i)The way that Wizards implemented Raid in this set is a good example of an aggressive mechanic being implemented in such a way as to not overthrow the primary mechanic of the set. Contrast KTK's Raid with Amonkhet's Exert and Kaladesh's Vehicles.

(ii) formats are more boring when every draft and gameplay experience is roughly the same. Khans was so compelling that this blemish didn't hurt the format too much, but 3-4 color midrange value decks slamming into each other every match with virtually no exception is not ideal.

(iii) If you're going to build a set that doesn't play to certain colors' strengths, you've got to find ways for those colors to remain competitive.

Set Mechanics: Manifest, Bolster, Dash, Ferocious, Prowess, Delve

Mechanical Structure: The mechanical structure of Fate Reforged echoes that of Khans of Tarkir. Manifest mechanic is a pillar mechanic, indeed one that directly feeds into the pillar mechanic of Khans of Tarkir. Each clan receives its own exclusive mechanic. Bolster replaced Outlast. Dash replaced Raid. Ferocious, Prowess, and Delve carried over from Khans. Each of the 5 clan mechanics appeared in only 2 of the clan's 3 colors.

One dual land slot in every pack is its own sort of "mechanic", at least a "draft mechanic".

Mechanical Interactivity: same as Khans.

Environmental Design: Fate Reforged offers us an excellent example of how mechanics can be used to add texture to a format. One way it did this was through Bolster. The Abzan clan in KTK was centered around Outlast, the format's sole clan-specific mana sink mechanic. Bolster, by contrast, was an aggressive mechanic, and this enabled a greater diversity of archetype in FRF-KTKx2. GW Aggro was a real deck in that format, for example.

In general, the texture of color was better in FRF-KTKx2 than in KTKx3. In KTKx3, rarely was it advisable to build a two color deck or a five color deck. In FRF-KTKx2, it was frequent to build a deck with any number of colors, two through five. This made the drafting experience significantly more skill-intensive, strategic, and novel, and it made gameplay more diverse.

Other Lessons: (i) Don't put too many ultra-bombs cards at rare! Citadel Siege and Mastery of the Unseen and Mob Rule should have been mythic! It's okay to put parts of cycles at different rarities, especially at the rare/mythic level. Also note how some cards are more unbeatable in certain environments. Mastery of the Unseen was practically unbeatable in FRF-KTKx2, whereas it was merely good to great in DTKx2-FRF.

Set Mechanics: Megamorph(pillar) , Bolster, Dash, Exploit, Rebound, Formidable

Mechanical Structure: Same as Khans - a strict mechanical structure. One ubiquitous mechanic and five clan-specific mechanics. The difference between the DTK and KTK mechanics is that the DTK mechanics are stronger mechanics in that they more directly alter the gameplay experience. Dash and Exploit, for example, lead to decks with more unique gameplay styles than do Ferocious and Prowess. KTK used mechanics for flavor; DTK used mechanics for gameplay diversity in addition to flavor.

Megamorph WUBRG
Dragons WUBRG
Dash BR
Formidable RG
Bolster GW
Rebound WU
Exploit UB

It should be noted that "Dragons" themselves almost constitute a mechanic here that was as much a pillar as Megamorph. All five colors cared about Dragons in different ways, and this added an extra element of draft complexity to the DTK experience.

Dragons of Tarkir only supported ally color-pairs. Mark Rosewater stated that they wanted every allied color-pair to be drafted twice as much as enemy color-pairs, and this goal felt roughly met. Some enemy color pairs (UR, WB) were much more playable than others (UG). All of the Allied color pairs were good except UW. I don't recall these color imbalances negatively affecting the format, which itself is curious and probably contains some sort of game design lesson. Why was it fine that UW was not good in DTK but not fine when (i) WBR was bad in KTK (ii) UB Cycling was bad in AKH or (iii) Green was unplayable in BFZ?

Mechanical Interactivity: None. This seems intentional - we were being encouraged to draft clans, and making Exploit not work with Dash or Bolster was important for making that a reality. Contrast this to THS or SOI.

Environmental Design: DTK is an example of a draft format with a more rigid mechanical structure but which was not predominantly a synergy-driven format. Yes there were synergy-driven decks - the exploit deck in particular and some dash decks on occasion - but for the most part we were playing nuts and bolts limited Magic.

Another thing worth noting is that the format was reasonably well-textured. Different styles of decks within the same archetype and color pair could be constructed. Sometimes your Bolster or Dash deck became a synergy deck. And on occasion you could pull together a Dragon Ramp deck.

Other Lessons: N/A

Anyone else want to fill this in? I was busy at that time and didn't play it.

Set Mechanics: Cohort, Colorless Mana, Devoid, Landfall, Support, Surge (played with Rally, Awaken, and Ingest/Process from BFZ)

Mechanical Structure: The mechanical structure I would call haphazard. You have your tribal mechanics (Cohort and Colorless), your more traditional mechanics (Support and Surge), and a mechanic that just barely dips its toes into the format (Landfall).

Reminiscent of Khans of Tarkir, some of the mechanics are simply here to tell a story - Colorless Mana and Cohort, Eldrazi vs. Allies.

In OGW we see one rendition of an open mechanical structure. White and Blue sit as polar opposites in this set, white being the color with the highest concentration of allies and least concentration of eldrazi, and blue having the highest concentration of eldrazi and the least concentration of allies. Also important, the order of color concentrations doesn't follow the color pie in any discernible geometric way. Allies go from W to R to B to G to U. Eldrazi go from U to B to R to G to W. And personally I found that to be fine.

Mechanical Interactivity: None within the set proper. Several of these mechanics were meant to fit into the same environment as some BFZ mechanics, most notably Cohort with Rally. OGW and BFZ might provide us with our best window into how Magic design will be done in a post-block world - OGW and BFZ occupy the same world, indeed they are different pieces of a story in a narratival arc, and yet the mechanics of each set stand on their own and don't need anything to do with the other.

Environmental Design: Seen from an environmental perspective, the mechanics of OGW are well-crafted. Some mechanics lean aggressive - Support and Landfall. Some are neutral - the tempo mechanic Surge. Some encourage the game to go long (Cohort). Landfall, like Bestow from Theros, is a way to give an aggressive deck increased reach in the late game and helps push a draft environment toward a happy medium regarding longevity which helps breed a certain level of interactivity despite differing gameplans and styles. Some of these mechanics are interesting in that they can be used in a variety of ways to a variety of effects. Colorless Mana, for example, can simply be a 6th color or it can be used as a mana sink. Support can either be hyper-aggressive (Relief Captain) or a late-game mana sink (Joraga Auxiliary).

Like Bolster's relationship to Outlast, Cohort's relation to Rally added texture and difference to decks incorporating a lot of allies. Rally usually encouraged attacking, whereas Cohort is more often a reach mechanic or a value mechanic.

Like Exploit in DTK, Surge added a different gameplay experience for one archetypal deck in particular.

The flexibility of the mechanics helped make OGW a very diverse format, one in which it was possible to build amazing Eldrazi Control decks and hyper hyper-aggressive RW Ally decks. On the whole I was a big fan of this draft format despite a lack of cohesion and polish in the mechanical structure and a lesser degree of cohesion than we're used to with the first set of the Block.

Other Lessons: This is the draft format I've played the most (150+ drafts) with the highest win rate (71%). I can't think of any other game design lessons from this format. A balanced Environmental Design that supports a rich, complex texture and a diversity of strategies and archetypes seems like the most important aspect of designing a set's mechanics. If you get that right, your mechanics can be flawed or uninspiring and you'll still be fine.

Set Mechanics: Delirium, Investigate, Madness, Werewolf Transform, Skulk

Mechanical Structure:There is a lot to discuss here. Shadows over Innistrad contains a Loose Mechanical Structure. Ignoring Skulk (which we'll discuss later), mechanics are shared by either two or three colors, usually allied colors. Madness was a UBR mechanic. Werewolf Transform was in RG. Investigate was in GWU. Delirium was primarily in Abzan colors WBG.

Arranged differently, you have:
White W: Delirium, Investigate
Blue U: Investigate, Madness
Black B: Madness, Delirium
Red R: Madness, Werewolf Transform
Green G: Werewolf Transform, Delirium, Investigate

Overfacing this loose mechanical structure was a strict tribal delineation of the colors in the 5 allied color pairs:
Humans GW
Spirits WU
Zombies UB
Vampires BR
Werewolves RG

I also want to point out that SOI is the polar opposite of KTK in one significant regard - here the mechanics define the gameplay. There is definitely a spectrum of how significantly mechanics shape the core gameplay universe, and two exemplars of the endpoints of that spectrum are Ferocious and Madness.

Mechanical Interactivity: Medium-High. Doing this analysis is making me realize why it is that SOIx3 was the best limited format ever since I started playing Magic competitively in 2013. On top of mechanics that deeply affect core gameplay and demand that they be built around in draft to maximize them, which itself has had a tribal dynamic superimposed on top of itself, you then get a suite of mechanics that have a great deal of synergy between them. Discarding cards for Madness helps you get Delirium, and what I think was an intentional design decision was to make sure that every color had either a primary theme of Madness or Delirium to ensure that every color pair could have some level of synergy with which to build around. This is probably why Delirium was put into White, something that may seem odd from a flavor perspective but which appears helpful from a mechanical perspective.

If you give some color pairs synergy, you need to either ensure that most to all of the other color pairs have synergy or the ability to aggro/tempo the opponent out of the game to punish that synergy. I think the former is infinitely more fun than the latter, but both are good options.

These superimpositions make SOI the most textured format from 2013 onward, which I think is why I found it so compelling. Skill intensive, always new, always combos and cool interactions to explore. I never tired of playing it.

Environmental Design: Most of the mechanics are neutral in terms of aggression-control. Formats like Shadows that have a plethora of cards that discard to some effect usually would slant aggressive, but here Discard has a wide array of puroses, sometimes aggressive (Stern Constable) and sometimes for value (Mad Prophet).

Overall, the draft format mirrors the mechanical neutrality - all sorts of decks were possible, from Clue Combo to Clue Mill Combo to Human or Werewolf Aggro decks to Spell-based value decks.

How did SOI help ameliorate the vicissitudes of the Magic shuffler? Clue generators off of one or two mana (Thraben Inspector) helped with mana screw, as did some cards like Fork in the Road, Nagging Thoughts, and Press for Answers. Some of these were particuarly amazing design because they helped players play real games of Magic AND and served as essential synergy enablers. On the side of flood, SOI reminds us that mana sinks are not the only way to deal with flooding. Discarding cards for effects or for recursion (like Stitchwing Skaab) is another tool the card designer has to craft Limited environments in which the player, not the deck, determines the winner of a game.

Other Lessons: (i) One interesting thing that SOI did was to have a mechanic in aggressive colors that tempered that aggressiveness. Investigate was a central mechanic for the aggressive WG Human archetype. In general, when compared to RG Werewolves, the deck was more consistent even if its draws were rarely as busted, but the payoff was that the quality of the game experience for both players tended to be higher.

(ii) Skulk shows that you don't have to have *all* mechanics be part of the essential mechanical structure of a set. It turns out that Wizards was testing Skulk as an evergreen keyword (gross!), but notice how Wizards didn't let their real-world experiment detract too much from the environment. I suppose this shows that it's okay to throw something into a set on a few cards just to see what others' reactions are and to see how a mechanic or idea would play out in the future.

Set Mechanics: Delirium, Emerge, Escalate, Madness, Meld, Transform (monstrosity)

Mechanical Structure: Eldritch Moon has a similar structure to SOI. Emerge UG replaced Investigate GWU. A mana sink Transform replaced the normal Werewolf Transform.

What Eldritch Moon did do, though, was fade the importance of all the primary mechanics of SOI. What had been dominant themes became subthemes. Synergistic decks became decks with some synergy. Only the Emerge deck was consistently an entirely synergy-based deck (and usually it wasn't that great, although I did make the finals of a PTQ with a UB Emerge deck). So while the same structure was present in EMN, it was being used entirely differently. This is a good lesson for Magic set designers - you can use the same mechanical structure in different ways!

Mechanical Interactivity: See SOI, although unlike in SOI, the interactivity was not crucial to the environment.

Environmental Design: Here you had a more traditional environment, with not enough ways to mitigate mana screw and a plethora of ways to deal with flooding (Emerge, monstrosity-Transform, Escalate).

One lesson to take from EMN is that you don't have to have aggressive mechanics to enable aggressive decks. There were plenty of viable aggressive archetypes despite the absence of an aggressive mechanic. It is more often the case that you need mana sinks to mitigate mana flood, and part of the success of EMN is that it had plenty of the latter, in almost all colors, so all decks tended to have things to do in the late game. I think that is why EMN is one of my favorite "boring" formats. It's one thing to have a mechanic in a format (like Embalm or Eternalize) that enables one to spend excess mana. It's another for a format to enable all deck archetypes and colors to have access to mana sinks. This also made OGW good now that I think about it.

Other Lessons: It's better to use a second set to develop the themes of the former than to add random stuff unrelated to the former. Escalate and Meld did not belong here, period. At least Emerge fit the story, so that was less obnoxious, but MaRo noted that Escalate and Meld were not well received, and part of the reason why is that they felt randomly inserted instead of organic. Mechanics should always feel organic and native to a world.

Set Mechanics: Energy, Fabricate, Vehicles

Mechanical Structure: Open Mechanical Structure, but definitely faded, and only with respect to Energy. In fact, it might be more helpful to say that there is no mechanical structure in the sense of a "structure of mechanics". The "mechanical structure" is entirely based around the colors of the color pie interacting with different regular things of Magic in different ways. The story as well did a lot of work in giving the card design team a direction for constructing cards for an expert-level set.

One thing this set's design highlights is that you don't need a mechanical structure. You can take barebone simple elements and create a novel, interesting set out of it. If you take this route, you need a strong story/lore/world-building direction, as well as having the draft and gameplay experience be relatively modular, as in SOI. KLD was like SOI in one regard - the themes of the set (energy, artifact servos, vehicles, blinking, ETB triggers) all worked together and could work together in different ways. Despite the set's mechanical simplicity, then, the set was deep enough to make a good draft format. The reason why I consider Kaladesh a poor draft format has nothing to do with the mechanics or basic structure of the set.

Mechanical Interactivity: None. Lesson: you can have a synergy-driven format without mechanical interactivity.

Environmental Design: Nothing to say here either. The mechanics themselves don't push the environment in one direction or another, other than being a set with a greater amount of artifacts than usual. I will say that one thing I appreciate about Kaladesh's set design, especially fresh off of a format dominated by 5-color "let me cast my bombs and win", is that the mana requirements for cards in this set were well done. Despite being an artifact set and thereby having less-specific mana requirements, that didn't lead to the draft experience entailing drafting the best cards and enough fixing to cast everything. Synergy was vital in KLD, and there were enough double-color mana requirements to keep people honest with their color greed. Had Arborback Stomper and Experimental Aviator been printed in HOU, they would have cost 4G and 4U respectively, the justification for which I know not. The intensity of color requirements dramatically shapes a limited environment and draft experience.

I don't want to get too far away from mechanics, but the world-building involved in designing how the colors on Kaladesh related to artifacts and energy was vital for the environment.

Other Lessons: (i) We will see this with Amonkhet too. The power and toughness of Magic cards has, in my view, reached a breaking point. You can't make creature cards physically more powerful without needing to increase players' starting life totals to 25. "Tempo" is too easy to generate when threats are too large early on in the game. Longtusk Cub and Renegade Freighter were so destructive to the format that they caused its rating plummeted from what would have probably been a 7.5 or an 8 down to a 5.5. This was the only format I quit playing after I won a draft after opening 3 long tusk cubs (one in each pack) and just drafting random Blossoming Defenses and some other aggressive creatures. Nothing is worse than yawn-inducing gameplay, and the overpowered nature of two and three drops in Kaladesh (and to a lesser extent the elevated power/toughness of all of Green's creatures, including the Rhino and Peema Outrider) create just that. Be careful with the power/toughness of low-drops. Don't create aggressive cards that snowball out of control. Toolcraft Exemplar and Exemplar of Strength are fine design; Longtusk Cub is the worst-designed Magic card in the past 4 years.

Put differently, you should design Magic sets in which the competitive edge of being on the play is not magnified and exacerbated.

(ii) Parasitic Mechanics might be a problem in Standard/Modern, but in a Limited environment they seem fine so long as it is a predominant mechanic in virtually all colors. Energy was immersive and fun, and was so ubiquitous that it felt natural to the world of Kaladesh and didn't feel parasitic within the world of Kaladesh.

(iv) The aforementioned importance of tempo in Kaladesh led to combat tricks playing a more important role than usual. Wizards could have recognized the high power and toughness of the threats in the set and weakened combat tricks. Instead, the combat tricks in this format were excellent, which in my view negatively affected the format by exacerbating a native problem with the format. Built to Smash, Built to Last, Blossoming Defense, and Ornamental Courage are all excellent, and the white and red ones in particular clearly should have been weaker. Lesson:Use the design of supplemental and support cards to mollify potentially problematic aspects of your set design.

Set Mechanics: Energy, Improvise, Revolt, Vehicles
Mechanical Structure: In appearance, Aether Revolt had a Loose Mechanical Structure.

Energy UG
Improvise UBR
Revolt WBG

Mechanical Interactivity: Two of Aether Revolt's mechanics jived well with those of Kaladesh. Fabricating creatures fueled Improvise. Energy of course works with Energy. Revolt jived moderately well with Fabricate in the sense that having a lot of 1/1 servos leads to losing a lot of permanents, although in practice this did not come easily. Vehicles work well with Improvise since Vehicles count as an artifact. From a mechanical perspective, there is more interactivity among mechanics in Aether Revolt, at least with regard to Improvise.

Environmental Design: Aether Revolt, I believe, was trying to do what Eldritch Moon did - take an often synergistic first set and diminish its synergism, leading to a more "Core-set" feel and complexity. For example, energy became a minor subtheme in Aether Revolt, even in the core energy colors (Simic). Revolt, likewise, was a minor synergy - there was no "revolt deck". Further, some of the deck styles found in Kaladesh, like "BW Tokens" were virtually non-existent in Aether Revolt. There was, however, an Improvise deck; in fact, there were a few improvise decks. Thus, some of the format was synergy-driven, and much of the format was not.

This format, I believe, was structurally flawed. Here there was little way to account for mana screw and mana flood, and a larger percentage of games were decided by mana screw and flood. Furthermore, Improvise is a mana-acceleration mechanic, meaning that it functioned similarly to how the mana accelerants work in the MTGO Vintage Cube - certain decks' gameplans involve attempting to do busted things as quickly as possible, leading to a less-interactive experience. Whereas Kaladesh had problematic cards that punished missing a land drop or being on the draw, Aether Revolt had entire deck archetypes that attempted to do just that, and in added cards likeUntethered Express to ensure that as little dueling Magic as possible was to be had. The rare Expertise cycle and the voluminous threaten effects further exacerbated this aspect of Aether Revolt Draft. Aether Revolt, therefore, gave players the least amount of in-game agency of any format I've ever played.

Other Lessons: (i) Players want worlds to make sense and be cohesive. Kaladesh was a world of energy and invention. As Rosewater/Stoddard noted, Aether Revolt was hurt by focusing too much on the story of revolt (or not integrating that story into the overarching world of Kaladesh. Eldritch Moon did a better job of incorporating the development of story (Emerge creatures) into the world of Innistrad. World-building is more important to player satisfaction than story. Both are important, but never let the latter supplant the former.

Set Mechanics: Cycling, Embalm, Exert, -1/-1 Counters

Mechanical Structure: Amonkhet had a loose mechanical structure, meaning that the mechanics were tied to color combinations and helped give color pairs identity, but not as strictly or as neatly as in DTK. Like KTK, it had a pillar mechanic - Cycling. Thematically, the mechanics were distributed among the colors as follows:

Cycling WUBRG ("cycling matters" payoffs were in UB)
Embalm UW
Exert RGW
-1/-1 Counters GB

In addition to these mechanics was a WB Zombie tribal theme.

The mechanics of Amonkhet were crucial to its gameplay and helped to define what you should be doing in draft. Aggressive decks wanted to be exerting. Wizards designed cycling to be an A-->B mechanic, similiar to Exploit in DTK or Improvise/Revolt in AER. Green-Black decks often were synergistic.

Two notes. One: While there was a decent amount of synergistic deck-building in Amonkhet, the average level of synergy was lower than, say, MM2x3 or BFZx3. Some decks were as heavily synergistic as all decks needed to be in those two formats, but on average they weren't. Interestingly, that synergy was manifest across different axes of gameplay - tribal synergy (zombies), A--> B Enchantment-matters synergy (Trials --> Cartouches), mechanical synergy (Cycling, -1/-1 counters). This was interesting, similar to SOI, and enhanced the gaming experience and replayability of the format.

Two: The difference between SOI and Amonkhet is that in SOI all the mechanics were in sync with each other, stitched together into a seamless whole. Here, even though there was a ubiquitous mechanic in Cycling, the format did not revolve around it. In KTK, it felt like the whole set was built around Morph. In SOI, it felt like the whole format was built around the graveyard. AKH lacked that level of cohesion. I don't think this is necessarily bad, just a difference to note.
Mechanical Interactivity: None.

Environmental Design: I think Amonkhet offers a textbook environmental design. It has a ubiquitous mechanic that reduces the chance that mana screw and flood determine the outcome of the game. It has a balance of aggressive, neutral, and value mechanics. Of note is that the aggressive and value mechanics are not ubiquitous throughout, meaning that some draft color pairs are going to naturally be aggressive, others more grindy, and others more controlling. Overall the mechanical suite is balanced from a meta-environmental perspective.

Other Lessons: (i) Amonkhet's largest failure is that it doesn't deliver on what it promises. And what I mean by that is that the set designers are telling you, the gamer, that you can do certain things when in fact you can't. When you create cards like Spring/Mind and Weaver of Currents, you are telling players that they can build a Green-Blue ramp deck. That was a lie. By devoting an entire color pair to Cycling-matters, you are telling people that they can build a UB "Cycling deck". Doing so was often a matter of sheer luck, a happenstance occurrence that there were enough Ruthless Snipers, Drake Havens, and Archfiend of Ifnirs. I think had Faith of the Devoted been a legitimate payoff like Ruthless Sniper, the archetype would have been more consistently viable.

Once you recognized that this format was built around speed and aggression, the format was wonderful to play (my favorite, in fact). But the game design was lacking because it promises some things it doesn't deliver upon. Amonkhet would have rivaled SOI had certain colors and color-pairs' themes been more heavily built around a low-to-the-ground environment.

(ii) The high P/T problem of Kaladesh rears its ugly head here in Amonkhet. Fortunately Amonkhet wasn't destroyed by it, but the Renegade Freighter syndrome manifests itself again here with Gust Walker, Hooded Brawler, and Emberhorn Minotaur. You don't need aggressive creatures to have artificially-inflated power and toughness. Rewards for attacking should be looked for outside the realm of power-toughness boosts. Watchful Naga and Ahn-Crop Crasher are good examples. I think much of the problem is that the three problem cards I mentioned above were all Common.

(iii) Marshall Sutcliffe is wrong and Ben Stark is right about Stinging Shot. That card is a well-designed Magic card.

(iv) Despite its flaws, Amonkhet offered players a high degree of agency in-game. There is something fun and beautiful about low-to-the-ground formats --> they are more like Constructed and even Eternal formats in that you have to lower your curve, which in turn means more spells being cast and thus more on-stack interaction. Fortunately all colors had many ways to interact at instant-speed with early game plays the opponent could make, which was a good game design choice. Here, instead of variants of Built to Smash and Built to Last defining early interaction, Magma Spray, Splendid Agony, and Impeccable Timing were favorite ways to interact with the opponent. It is possible that, with a more thoughtful thematic architecture and a slight tweaking of some of the exert cards, Amonkhet would have delivered a format on par with or even better than Shadows Over Innistrad. I still love this format, mainly because of the high degree of interactivity.

Set Mechanics: Afflict, Cycling, Deserts, Eternalize, Exert

Mechanical Structure: Hour of Devastation had a Loose Mechanical Structure, which seems to be the most common type. Hour of Devastation was a bit of a throwback to Khans of Tarkir in the sense that the mechanics did not usually define decks and the mechanics usually did not define decks' teleologies.

Afflict UBR
Cycling UB
Deserts WUBRG
Eternalize WUBR
Exert RGW

Of note is that there is quite an extreme color distribution of the mechanics, seemingly for story reasons. And that proved to be fine. Mechanics are a tool in a toolbox, and set designers should not necessarily strain themselves to achieving an abstract perfect mechanical suite. HOU and OGW were both great formats. Mechanical suites serve the set.

Mechanical Interactivity: Minimal. Cards checking that a desert is on the battlefield or in the graveyard is a nod to cycling payoffs in the set.

Environmental Design: As with Amonkhet, this set has a balanced suite of mechanics. Mana sinks abounded, Cycling desert lands helped mitigate mana screw and flood, and Afflict proved to be a good reach mechanic for aggressive decks. Hour of Devastation followed in the footsteps of OGW, EMN, and AER in that they were second sets that weakened the synergy-driven nature of the first set. The desert theme was a nice addition in HOU and added a fun complexity to draft. Synergy in Hour of Devastation rarely transcended synergy between individual cards.

Hour of Devastation was the first format I had experienced with multiple wraths at rare. That turned out to be fine, although it would have been better had there been fewer.

Other Lessons: (i) Hour of Devastation, I would argue, did not grapple with the problems of a slower format as well as KTK did. In many ways AKH and HOU are opposites, AKH offering us some examples of things not to do in fast formats and HOU offering us some examples of things not to do in slow formats. Khans gave us few bombs that could not adequately be dealt with. The only card I found truly back-breaking in Khans was High Sentinels of Arashin. KTK was not a prince format, whereas HOU was. And, outside of God-Pharaoh's Gift, I don't even think the problem was necessarily the power-level of some individually-busted cards. It was more that decks managed to reach the end game more often than not, and there was a clear suite of bomb cards that virtually won you the game if the opponent didn't also have a bomb card. Sagu Mauler was no where near as devastating as Hour of Eternity or Unesh, Criosphinx Sovereign. The lesson I took from HOU is that slow formats can more easily devolve into prince formats. A good chunk of the agency players had in AKH was tossed out the window. Players had less agency in HOU than they did in KTK.

(ii) One way to mitigate the impact of princes is to not make color fixing abundant. Sadly, cards like Manalith and Oasis Ritualist enabled multiple players in a draft pod to draft tons of good cards in a variety of colors. Another way to mitigate the impact of princes is to make mana requirements more stringent. Too many cards in HOU didn't require a heavy-enough color investment.

I don't know whether to include this because I don't want it to detract from the main content of the compendium. But some reference point for how good these draft formats ending up being is helpful. These ratings are not of the mechanical suites themselves - rather, they are of the limited draft formats themselves. Sometimes the mechanics were largely responsible for fashioning a limited environment (SOI), and sometimes they were not (KTK).

Theros Block: N/A
KTK: 7.5/10 (Very Good)
KTK-FRF: 8/10 (Excellent)
DTK-FRF: 6.5/10 (Good)
BFZ: N/A
OGW-BFZ: 8/10 (Excellent)
SOI: 9.5/10 (Magnificent)
EMN-SOI: 7.5/10 (Very Good)
KLD: 5.5/10 (Mediocre)
AER: 3/10 (Poor)
AKH: 8.5/10 (Excellent)
HOU: 7.5/10 (Very Good)

(i) I had come in to this project thinking that a few architectures would be best. That turned out not to be the case. In many ways, that makes designing Magic sets more difficult, more like writing a poem, more like designing a dream-level in Inception. As with poetry, we can only read signposts and relics left to us from past authors and works and proceed onward.

1. Mark Rosewater discussing the development of the mechanical architecture of Ixalan.