I'm realy digging the idea of a world enchantment with a life total. They can't be killed by normal removal, maybe the Planeswalker type allows for player kill cards to hit them, they give a static effect. I think that allows for a decent new type (assuming of course that the new type will be remotely predictable). I would like to see Planeswalkers be something so unique and inovative and cool that it is something no one here has even dreamed of, but I wouldn't quit the game or anything if planeswalkers were just a reworking world enchantments different enough to make them warent a new type. (I personaly think that the origional World supertype as it was wasn't worth the rules baggage, and I guess Wizards thinks so, too.)
Edit - I agree with AlexBonin's idea that this is something a long time in the making. I don't think R&D would have said, "So, whats new in Lorwyn?" "Oh, we are adding a new type, and we only have three months to make it!" I think Lorwyn probably just happened to be the next block they could introduce the new type in after making sure it was realy well done. If it is a shoddy, quick job I will be very sad.
I don't think so, I'm curious though how they'll do it flavorwise.
Whenever my mighty Planeswalker gets smashed in the face by Vizzerdrix, I'll be pissed as hell.
They could have restrictions as: Can only be attacked by Legendary People.
Cause as I said above, being killed by 7 Saproling tokens isn't how I imagined the death of a Planeswalker.
That is so true.. Basicly, saproling are overpowered.
But we used to be just mages when the first saprolings were printed.
20 little tokens killing a mage is something I see happening every day.
One way to print a planeswalker without this silly things like getting killed by a little bird or plant is to let them regenerate their life like creatures, or give them the phantom ability like:
When this is dealt 3 or more damage, instead remove a health counter from ~
When the Planeswalker dies (because it has no health anymore) you remove it from the game. In other words: It escapes to another plane to refill his/her health to join you in your battle next time.
As I told people before, Glimpse the Unthinkable will manage to get PW's in the graveyard. I prefer to assume they won't be killed. But they can run away if they would be killed tho.
Okay, Timmie...but you're forgetting one very important point. Block integration. Glimpse won't be playable when PW's rotate in. So how do we get them into the 'yard without it?
MaRo has said before that he doesn't like using the "Out of Play" zone. This leads me to believe that PW's will be permanents "in play". As such, we have a few cards at our disposal already that can target permanents...and I'm sure more will be printed. One of the rules of game design is balance. If you create a new threat, you also have to ensure there are answers to that threat and those answers have to be available with enough frequency so that you don't dictate deck design outright. (i.e. right now you'd be limiting "killing" PW's to W and G..and G only in older formats, not Standard)
As to what I'll call "flavor interactions" (the argument that "it doesn't make sense for a PW to die to 5 saproling tokens" or "boomerang a PW? that's ridiculous"), those arguments just aren't anything more than little Timmy spending too much time in fantasy land. We have plenty of "odd" interactions like that in any given game. (How did that Faerie kill the greatest Demon in all of Ravnica??!!! or a silly little 2/2 snake kept the Lord of the Pit from ever seeing the light of day??!!) In order to achieve balance, things like this must sometimes happen.
Okay, Timmie...but you're forgetting one very important point. Block integration. Glimpse won't be playable when PW's rotate in. So how do we get them into the 'yard without it?
hmmm, no Glimpse? Guess we'll have to rely on the old Millstone, or any of the many other milling/discarding cards. Really there are a whole lot of them. Also here's a new way to think of them. What if they are like the Beacon cards recently brought back in 10th. When they leave play they get shuffled into your library instead. Still means they're millable or discardable, but it gives them that imortal feel. Sure they "die" in the heat of battle, but they can come back later for more fun. That's the way teferi rocked it before he lost his powers.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTG Rules Advisor
Join The Steamflogged
Human Rigger Minions committed to
forcing Contraptions in YMTC4,
and Resisting The Tyranny of the
they wouldn't need to errata any old burn spells to say they can target planeswalkers. They'd probably just add a line to the Planeswalkers rule card that says 'Planeswalkers can be targeted as players'.
The Un-Sets are not really appropriate to draw arguments from as they are not tournament legal. She might not be able to redeem Ashnod's Coupon, but with the extra line, she would be hittable by all tournament playable spells that target players.
I was joking.
There's a quote about forests and trees that would be appropriate here.
Or tell her to draw 3 cards (might be possible if they have a "hand", but I doubt it), or remove her graveyard from the game (also possible but unlikely), etc.
This makes it unlikely that Planeswalkers can be targeted by any player-targeting spell, unless they basically turn your game into a 2HG game.
Or tell her to draw 3 cards (might be possible if they have a "hand", but I doubt it), or remove her graveyard from the game (also possible but unlikely), etc.
This makes it unlikely that Planeswalkers can be targeted by any player-targeting spell, unless they basically turn your game into a 2HG game.
Why would making them targetable as a player mean that they have to have all the things a player has? Just because something has one quality of something else doesn't make it the other thing. For example you see an animal. It is obviously a cat, whiskers, cat eyes, etc... Just because it has ears and dogs have ears doesn't make it a dog. It is still a cat even though it shares many qualities with dogs, fur, ears, paws, claws, etc.
Why would making them targetable as a player mean that they have to have all the things a player has? Just because something has one quality of something else doesn't make it the other thing. For example you see an animal. It is obviously a cat, whiskers, cat eyes, etc... Just because it has ears and dogs have ears doesn't make it a dog. It is still a cat even though it shares many qualities with dogs, fur, ears, paws, claws, etc.
Because the game assumes all players are capable of certain baseline things- that is, they have a library, the potential to draw cards, have a hand, control permanants and make conscious decisions that a human would be able to make. If you open a precedent for having to dumb down player cards (not to mention things you may have to errata), you're only cutting off design space for a stupid, needless gimmick.
Why would making them targetable as a player mean that they have to have all the things a player has? Just because something has one quality of something else doesn't make it the other thing. For example you see an animal. It is obviously a cat, whiskers, cat eyes, etc... Just because it has ears and dogs have ears doesn't make it a dog. It is still a cat even though it shares many qualities with dogs, fur, ears, paws, claws, etc.
If they can be targeted like a player, then they must have all aspects that a player has, otherwise you are left with too many unresolvable rules problems.
If they can be targeted like a player, then they must have all aspects that a player has, otherwise you are left with too many unresolvable rules problems.
Not to mention you have situations like:
Player A: Fact or Fiction
Player B: Okay, Island-Ancestral Visions-Mystical Teachings and Teferi-Island, then.
Player A: No, I was targetting Liliana Vess.
Player B: What? Okay. (Making exaggerated quote fingers) "Liliana Vess" separates them into Island-Ancestral Visions-Mystical Teachings and Teferi-Island.
Player A: Fact or Fiction
Player B: Okay, Island-Ancestral Visions-Mystical Teachings and Teferi-Island, then.
Player A: No, I was targetting Liliana Vess.
Player B: What? Okay. (Making exaggerated quote fingers) "Liliana Vess" separates them into Island-Ancestral Visions-Mystical Teachings and Teferi-Island.
Sounds like a blast.
-E
These are good points, all pushing away from them counting as a player.
However, what if they have life points anyway, and can be attacked as though they were a player? (With the possible idea of them using their life points to power their abilities)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
Why would making them targetable as a player mean that they have to have all the things a player has? Just because something has one quality of something else doesn't make it the other thing. For example you see an animal. It is obviously a cat, whiskers, cat eyes, etc... Just because it has ears and dogs have ears doesn't make it a dog. It is still a cat even though it shares many qualities with dogs, fur, ears, paws, claws, etc.
But both cat and dog are still creatures. If a cat and dog where magic cards, they would both be just creatures and treated the same way. The differences you described would be shown in mechanic or general stats, like cat would be a 2/1 and dog a 2/3. Unless otherwise stated, you can do everything to a cat that you can do to a dog in magic.
I still think planewalkers will be the equivalent to World Enchantments. The way you balance not having kill cards for it, is the rule of only having 1 word enchantment from any player at once. Treat planewalkers like Jitte was, play one of your own to kill theirs.
I still think planewalkers will be the equivalent to World Enchantments.
But that makes no sense. Why would me playing a Planeswalker cause yours to go away, why can only one Planeswalker be in the game at a time. Now, I could see a case for only have one copy of each Planeswalker in play at a time (aka the Legendary rule) and I could also see a case where each player could only have one active at a time, but not the World rule.
Also, I like the idea of Planeswalkers having life points, since they are supposed to be similar to what the players represent. However, if they do have life totals, but if they don't have anything else a player has, like a deck, a graveyard, or a hand, or even things that they control, then that's a huge problem for making them able to be targetted as if they were a player. The primary reaosn to make them targetable as a player is to allow burn spells to work anyway instead of only attacks.
Or we could just errata all burn spells...heck...if they can errata all Interrupts to read Instant, why can't we errata all the old burn spells? And have all the new ones printed to say, "Big Burning Ball of Goo deals X damage to target creature, planeswalker, or player."
Cheers,
Austin
Edit: I really like the feel of PW's having a life total instead of a P/T. It makes them feel distinct and would be something very "different" mechanics-wise.
you know whats messed up with giving them life points? a 2/4 creature can hold off a 3/3 creature all day, bvut a Planeswalker with 20 life....7 turns.\\\
odd something so powerful can be slain by something so minor and effectively for 3 mana. poor timmy.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Reject Conformity, Embrace Individuality Join The Alliance
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before, but what if the mechanic of Planeswalker is that, instead of adding a new player to your side, the Planeswalker takes your place?
For instance, you pay to put the Planeswalker into play by the mana cost and X amount of life. The Planeswalker takes your place. and starts with the X life. There it stays, like a Mindslaver'd player, until it is removed from play, or the Planeswalker zone, or whatever.
Planeswalkers are attacked and targetted as though they were the player. Their permanents are your permanents, their library is your library, etc...
In the end, I think it solves all the problems with treating Planeswalkers as players. The flavor is that you basically ask the Planeswalker for assistance for a short time. You can keep it to only one Planeswalker per side, and by having to "transfer" life points, it can keep you from throwing Planeswalkers up as continuous meat shields.
But that makes no sense. Why would me playing a Planeswalker cause yours to go away, why can only one Planeswalker be in the game at a time. Now, I could see a case for only have one copy of each Planeswalker in play at a time (aka the Legendary rule) and I could also see a case where each player could only have one active at a time, but not the World rule.
Two beings as powerful as plainswalkers can't be present during the same battle or it would destroy the world!!
Makes more since than having a card with a life total. Having a card with a life total is convoluted and complicated. Something that MTG has been staying away from. What ever Planewalkers are, it will be simple. Cards having life totals would be way too confusing with cards that have counters on them, burn, creatures */*, player life totals and many others. I don't understand how this idea is not been put to rest yet. Having a card with a life total is just absurd.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Edit - I agree with AlexBonin's idea that this is something a long time in the making. I don't think R&D would have said, "So, whats new in Lorwyn?" "Oh, we are adding a new type, and we only have three months to make it!" I think Lorwyn probably just happened to be the next block they could introduce the new type in after making sure it was realy well done. If it is a shoddy, quick job I will be very sad.
GENERATION 11: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig and add 1 to the generation. social experiment.
My Have/Want list (MTGO)
Now 3-5 life I could see but think of 9 life that means I need to either devote 1-2 full on creature attacks to take said planeswalker out.
Either that or I devote 2-3 burn spells now last I checked one card requiring that much effort to remove is quite powerful on its own.
I know for a fact I would go for the player 99 times out of 100 basically making said planeswalker a unremovable card.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
Whenever my mighty Planeswalker gets smashed in the face by Vizzerdrix, I'll be pissed as hell.
They could have restrictions as: Can only be attacked by Legendary People.
Cause as I said above, being killed by 7 Saproling tokens isn't how I imagined the death of a Planeswalker.
But we used to be just mages when the first saprolings were printed.
20 little tokens killing a mage is something I see happening every day.
One way to print a planeswalker without this silly things like getting killed by a little bird or plant is to let them regenerate their life like creatures, or give them the phantom ability like:
When this is dealt 3 or more damage, instead remove a health counter from ~
When the Planeswalker dies (because it has no health anymore) you remove it from the game. In other words: It escapes to another plane to refill his/her health to join you in your battle next time.
I can also see them being Vanguardesque in nature.
How you should approach every game of Magic.
Mod Helpdesk (defunct)
My Flawless Score MCC Card | My Other One | # Three!
MaRo has said before that he doesn't like using the "Out of Play" zone. This leads me to believe that PW's will be permanents "in play". As such, we have a few cards at our disposal already that can target permanents...and I'm sure more will be printed. One of the rules of game design is balance. If you create a new threat, you also have to ensure there are answers to that threat and those answers have to be available with enough frequency so that you don't dictate deck design outright. (i.e. right now you'd be limiting "killing" PW's to W and G..and G only in older formats, not Standard)
As to what I'll call "flavor interactions" (the argument that "it doesn't make sense for a PW to die to 5 saproling tokens" or "boomerang a PW? that's ridiculous"), those arguments just aren't anything more than little Timmy spending too much time in fantasy land. We have plenty of "odd" interactions like that in any given game. (How did that Faerie kill the greatest Demon in all of Ravnica??!!! or a silly little 2/2 snake kept the Lord of the Pit from ever seeing the light of day??!!) In order to achieve balance, things like this must sometimes happen.
Cheers,
Austin
Millstone, Ambassador Laquatus, Whetwheel...just off the top of my head...
There is also discard.
Twitter
The Steamflogged
Human Rigger Minions committed to
forcing Contraptions in YMTC4,
and Resisting The Tyranny of the
Viva La Assembly!
Quotes:
Good luck getting Liliana Vess to get you a soda.
-E
I was joking.
There's a quote about forests and trees that would be appropriate here.
-E
The Steamflogged
Human Rigger Minions committed to
forcing Contraptions in YMTC4,
and Resisting The Tyranny of the
Viva La Assembly!
Quotes:
This makes it unlikely that Planeswalkers can be targeted by any player-targeting spell, unless they basically turn your game into a 2HG game.
Why would making them targetable as a player mean that they have to have all the things a player has? Just because something has one quality of something else doesn't make it the other thing. For example you see an animal. It is obviously a cat, whiskers, cat eyes, etc... Just because it has ears and dogs have ears doesn't make it a dog. It is still a cat even though it shares many qualities with dogs, fur, ears, paws, claws, etc.
GENERATION 11: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig and add 1 to the generation. social experiment.
My Have/Want list (MTGO)
Because the game assumes all players are capable of certain baseline things- that is, they have a library, the potential to draw cards, have a hand, control permanants and make conscious decisions that a human would be able to make. If you open a precedent for having to dumb down player cards (not to mention things you may have to errata), you're only cutting off design space for a stupid, needless gimmick.
-E
Um, because otherwise what do you do when they are targetted by Ancestral Recall, Tormod's Crypt, Compulsive Research, Stupor, or Twisted Justice?
If they can be targeted like a player, then they must have all aspects that a player has, otherwise you are left with too many unresolvable rules problems.
Not to mention you have situations like:
Player A: Fact or Fiction
Player B: Okay, Island-Ancestral Visions-Mystical Teachings and Teferi-Island, then.
Player A: No, I was targetting Liliana Vess.
Player B: What? Okay. (Making exaggerated quote fingers) "Liliana Vess" separates them into Island-Ancestral Visions-Mystical Teachings and Teferi-Island.
Sounds like a blast.
-E
These are good points, all pushing away from them counting as a player.
However, what if they have life points anyway, and can be attacked as though they were a player? (With the possible idea of them using their life points to power their abilities)
Twitter
But both cat and dog are still creatures. If a cat and dog where magic cards, they would both be just creatures and treated the same way. The differences you described would be shown in mechanic or general stats, like cat would be a 2/1 and dog a 2/3. Unless otherwise stated, you can do everything to a cat that you can do to a dog in magic.
I still think planewalkers will be the equivalent to World Enchantments. The way you balance not having kill cards for it, is the rule of only having 1 word enchantment from any player at once. Treat planewalkers like Jitte was, play one of your own to kill theirs.
But that makes no sense. Why would me playing a Planeswalker cause yours to go away, why can only one Planeswalker be in the game at a time. Now, I could see a case for only have one copy of each Planeswalker in play at a time (aka the Legendary rule) and I could also see a case where each player could only have one active at a time, but not the World rule.
Also, I like the idea of Planeswalkers having life points, since they are supposed to be similar to what the players represent. However, if they do have life totals, but if they don't have anything else a player has, like a deck, a graveyard, or a hand, or even things that they control, then that's a huge problem for making them able to be targetted as if they were a player. The primary reaosn to make them targetable as a player is to allow burn spells to work anyway instead of only attacks.
Cheers,
Austin
Edit: I really like the feel of PW's having a life total instead of a P/T. It makes them feel distinct and would be something very "different" mechanics-wise.
odd something so powerful can be slain by something so minor and effectively for 3 mana. poor timmy.
For instance, you pay to put the Planeswalker into play by the mana cost and X amount of life. The Planeswalker takes your place. and starts with the X life. There it stays, like a Mindslaver'd player, until it is removed from play, or the Planeswalker zone, or whatever.
Planeswalkers are attacked and targetted as though they were the player. Their permanents are your permanents, their library is your library, etc...
In the end, I think it solves all the problems with treating Planeswalkers as players. The flavor is that you basically ask the Planeswalker for assistance for a short time. You can keep it to only one Planeswalker per side, and by having to "transfer" life points, it can keep you from throwing Planeswalkers up as continuous meat shields.
Two beings as powerful as plainswalkers can't be present during the same battle or it would destroy the world!!
Makes more since than having a card with a life total. Having a card with a life total is convoluted and complicated. Something that MTG has been staying away from. What ever Planewalkers are, it will be simple. Cards having life totals would be way too confusing with cards that have counters on them, burn, creatures */*, player life totals and many others. I don't understand how this idea is not been put to rest yet. Having a card with a life total is just absurd.