Planar Ritualist1W
Creature - Human Cleric
When ~ enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 white and black Cleric creature token onto the battlefield. T, Tap four untapped white creatures you control: Destroy all creatures other than ~.
1/1
Windbind Ritualist2U
Creature - Human Wizard
When ~ enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 blue Wizard creature token onto the battlefield. T, Tap two untapped blue creatures you control: Return target creature to its owner's hand.
2/1
Agony Ritualist2B
Creature - Human Cleric
When ~ enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 white and black Cleric creature token onto the battlefield. T, Tap three untapped black creatures you control: Target player loses 4 life and you gain 4 life.
2/2
Bloodrush Ritualist3R
Creature - Human Shaman
When ~ enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 red and green Shaman creature token onto the battlefield. T, Tap any number of untapped red creatures you control: Target creature gets +3/+0 until end of turn for each creature tapped this way (including ~).
3/1
Genesis Ritualist3G
Creature - Human Shaman
When ~ enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 red and green Shaman creature token onto the battlefield. T, Tap six untapped green creatures you control: Put seven 1/1 red and green Shaman creature tokens onto the battlefield.
3/3
Planar Ritualist, on the face of it, seems way too powerful for a 2 mana card, even considering that it destroys your creatures too. It's a repeatable wrath effect.
As a cycle, the relative power levels of the effects on each card also seems pretty imbalanced to each other. That seems to be a common issue that pops up with cycles in general. To some degree maybe that can be okay, but it's something to watch for. Ex: Destroy all other creatures vs. return target creature to its owners hand. Completely different power level. The only thing even about the cycle is that each of them puts a 1/1 token onto the battlefield, and then it seems like you try to use the amount of creatures you have to tap for the more powerful effect to vary in order to justify the wildly different effects.
Yes, the power levels on each effect vary. But they also come with greater costs. Of course Wrath is more powerful than Unsummon, but the Unsummon only requires you to get one other creature before you can use it turn after turn, whereas the Wrath needs you to get three other creatures together to use it once, and then you need to build up another four creatures before you can use it again.
And yeah, repeatable Wraths are powerful. But compare it to other repeatable Wrath effects on bodies. Mageta the Lion, for instance, can be used more often and leaves you with a 3/3 instead of a 1/1. Novablast Wurm can be done turn after turn and leaves you with a 7/7. Planar Ritualist only costs two mana compared to the 5 and 7 of those cards, sure, but you're also always going to be losing at least four creatures to it, and it's much harder for it to reliably go off multiple times.
and then it seems like you try to use the amount of creatures you have to tap for the more powerful effect to vary in order to justify the wildly different effects.
Yes, this is the point. Greater costs come with greater effects.
I think Mageta the Lion is a good reference point, and I'd say Planar Ritualist is still probably too powerful, even if you have to build up forces again to use the ability again. Megeta still costs 5 mana to cast and 4 mana to activate, and is a legendary creature. Novablast Wurm is a Mythic with a specific multicolor mana cost and a CMC of 7. I'm not saying you can't possibly do what Planar Ritualist does, but it's definitely overpowered as a 2 mana card. It seems easy enough to build 4 weenie fodders and have it wrath the board as early as turn 4, while in itself only costing you 2 mana and giving you a free weenie in the meantime.
I think the cost-tinkering isn't necessarily objectionable in itself, but it does potentially feel a bit arbitrary or post-hoc.
Part of the reason I'm hung up on the effects varying this much, is that if these are all supposed to be at the same rarity and be roughly equal in general power, my immediate intuition is to notice that, say, Windbind Ritualist just overall feels weak compared to Planar Ritualist, which is a boardwipe. It'd feel more coherent as a cycle if, for example, Windbind Ritualist also required you to tap 4 creatures and returned all creatures to their owner's hand (blue's version of a boardwipe).
I think Mageta the Lion is a good reference point, and I'd say Planar Ritualist is still probably too powerful, even if you have to build up forces again to use the ability again. Megeta still costs 5 mana to cast and 4 mana to activate, and is a legendary creature. Novablast Wurm is a Mythic with a specific multicolor mana cost and a CMC of 7. I'm not saying you can't possibly do what Planar Ritualist does, but it's definitely overpowered as a 2 mana card. It seems easy enough to build 4 weenie fodders and have it wrath the board as early as turn 4, while in itself only costing you 2 mana and giving you a free weenie in the meantime.
You do seem to be underestimating the fact that every time you want to do it, you'll always be losing at least four creatures, not an insignificant amount. That said, if you do believe it's too powerful, what would be a more appropriate cost?
Part of the reason I'm hung up on the effects varying this much, is that if these are all supposed to be at the same rarity and be roughly equal in general power, my immediate intuition is to notice that, say, Windbind Ritualist just overall feels weak compared to Planar Ritualist, which is a boardwipe. It'd feel more coherent as a cycle if, for example, Windbind Ritualist also required you to tap 4 creatures and returned all creatures to their owner's hand (blue's version of a boardwipe).
I don't want to make multiple members of the cycle feel that similar. Having some big, powerful, splashy effects for greater costs and some smaller utility effects for a smaller cost makes it feel more varied. If they all just had various versions of a Wrath effect, then what would even be the point of having a full cycle?
You do seem to be underestimating the fact that every time you want to do it, you'll always be losing at least four creatures, not an insignificant amount. That said, if you do believe it's too powerful, what would be a more appropriate cost?
I get that, but it doesn't seem that big of a deal to me when it's weenies and when you can possibly exploit it with token-pump mechanisms. Mageta the Lion is definitely powerful but its mana costs are notably higher, it doesn't get to go off until at least turn 6, and it has legendary status.
I'm not entirely sure what I'd want to cost it, but definitely more than 2. I'd probably at least add 1 or 2 to the cost.
I think those are a good reference point for Windbind Ritualist. It's not so much that I am underestimating the power of Windbind Ritualist, but comparing it to Planar Ritualist it is a lower power level affect simply in not being global, on top of technically being weaker in what it does. And, as I've indicated, Planar Ritualist overall just stands out as being the really powerful one of the bunch.
But based on the reference points you're giving me, I would say the real question is about the relative power levels between, say, Tradewinder Rider or Keeper of the Nine Gales and Mageta the Lion. They aren't part of a cycle together and they do significantly different things at different power levels. One is a legendary board wipe with higher costs, the other two are a single targeted bounce effect.
While it's true that cycles can do different things, I think a certain amount of symmetry can be elegant. The Ascendancy cycle from Kahns for example, while they all do different things, they all cost 3 mana and none of them are bombs or boardwipes. Or the cycle of legendary dragon "stars" from Kamigawa, they all cost 6 mana, are 5/5 flyers, and they all trigger significant splashy effects when they die.
I'd pick Windbind over Planar any day. Depending on what else is in the set, there's some real potential for etb shenanigans. Not the least of which would be its own etb ability. You can return the Windbinder, recast it, lather, rinse, and repeat to generate a token every turn. Have you playtested these? I ask because (even though I like the designs) they don't seem developed.
I would mostly worry that they seem fine early game, but are almost too powerful at breaking board stalls. Will these be uncommon? (I assumed they would be, but maybe not.)
Agony Ritualist, for instance: A curve of t1/2 random creature, t3 Ritualist, t4 Gisa's Bidding (for instance), t5 start draining every turn is the least the card could do, and an 8-point life swing each turn is essentially unbeatable unless they have a removal spell.
And that's maybe the biggest problem: Since they're not combat-based, they can't often be easily dealt with through modern removal. Big hexproof beaters can be killed by a pumped blocker; the unblockable threat can be killed by a lot of white's removal; but these? They'll just stay back and make it impossible to come back from. Specifically:
-Genesis Ritualist: I love the card design because it feels very clever and very green, but it's a) overpowering (come on, 7 power a turn? spread out, sticks around if threat is removed?) and b) more importantly, loses even the nominal impact of tapping your creatures. Normally, tapping your creatures is a cost because it leaves you open for attack. In this case, the 7 blockers are significantly more than enough to deter attacking.
-Bloodrush Ritualist: Looks neat, but is both too powerful and would never be printed today. In some games, it becomes "If you can't block/kill every one of my attackers, I'll give the unblocked one +6/+0 and kill you." R&D would never print it today because of how swingy it could be. I will say, though, it's a neat concept; really, though, it'd probably be acceptable at a rate of +1/+0 per creature, never mind +3/+0.
-Agony Ritualist: See above notes on it, then see Genesis part b). Tapping your whole field is normally a cost, except when an opponent often can't reasonably outrace it, even when all of your creatures are tapped.
-Planar Ritualist: I'd be sorta fine with this if it was Rare and maybe needed 5 creatures. It feels excessive, but it's a very powerful effect.
-Windbind Ritualist: Powerful, probably wouldn't be printed today, but I'd call it probably fine in a custom set.
All in all, a few notes:
-If the big cost of using these is that you often need to tap down every creature you control, make sure the effects allow your opponent to reasonably punish you for that. Agony Rit. outraces most normal punishment; Gen. Rit. makes blockers.
-Are these Rare or Uncommon? Either way, possibly too powerful. See next point:
-The effects are deceptively powerful, but not in an obvious way. This is the biggest issue with them: to make them be fair and balanced, they probably need way higher costs than you or your audience expected or wanted. It's the same issue there was with echo, etc.: They were very powerful, but felt terrible to lots of the audience. Mark Rosewater talks about this a lot, how some of this is fine but lots is just unappealing. (The first article I could find about it is here: http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/latest-developments/why-all-negativity-2007-03-16. ) At the moment, these mostly lean toward the 'too powerful' than the 'bad feel' line, but some are both. That's why they 'feel' Uncommon, but probably should be Rares.
All in all, I like the idea, but needs playtesting and redevelopment.
'
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes... Three generations of imbeciles are enough."
--Buck v Bell, 1927. This case, regarding the compulsory sterilization of inmates at mental institutions, has -- somehow -- never been overturned. Just a wee PSA for ya.
I'd pick Windbind over Planar any day. Depending on what else is in the set, there's some real potential for etb shenanigans. Not the least of which would be its own etb ability. You can return the Windbinder, recast it, lather, rinse, and repeat to generate a token every turn. Have you playtested these? I ask because (even though I like the designs) they don't seem developed.
No, I haven't. I posted them as an idea, hoping for refinement as I gathered opinions. Good catch on Windbind, I'll change that.
Quote from CalvinSchwa »
I would mostly worry that they seem fine early game, but are almost too powerful at breaking board stalls. Will these be uncommon? (I assumed they would be, but maybe not.)
They would absolutely be rare, for just that reason.
Agony Ritualist, for instance: A curve of t1/2 random creature, t3 Ritualist, t4 Gisa's Bidding (for instance), t5 start draining every turn is the least the card could do, and an 8-point life swing each turn is essentially unbeatable unless they have a removal spell.
And that's maybe the biggest problem: Since they're not combat-based, they can't often be easily dealt with through modern removal. Big hexproof beaters can be killed by a pumped blocker; the unblockable threat can be killed by a lot of white's removal; but these? They'll just stay back and make it impossible to come back from.
I honestly don't see this as an issue. "Deal with me or lose in short order" is a very common thing that rares often do. The example you gave for Agony Ritualist just says "If I have a god hand and you have no interaction, I win", and...no, I don't see that as a problem. It's just too much to hope for that you have that perfect hand and your opponent has no form of removal.
-Genesis Ritualist: I love the card design because it feels very clever and very green, but it's a) overpowering (come on, 7 power a turn? spread out, sticks around if threat is removed?) and b) more importantly, loses even the nominal impact of tapping your creatures. Normally, tapping your creatures is a cost because it leaves you open for attack. In this case, the 7 blockers are significantly more than enough to deter attacking.
I find it rather comparable to Voice of the Woods. The pros it has regarding that cards are that it doesn't require a specific creature type, and the creature production is less vulnerable to spot removal. The cons being it requires more creatures, summoning sickness is an issue, and it's more vulnerable to damage-based sweepers. Personally, I think that quite balances out.
Quote from Shadowfate »
Out of curiosity, how come Black/White and Red/Green can share the tokens they generate, but blue can only use its own?
To minimize the number of tokens produced. If they each made their own unique token, they probably wouldn't be possible, since that requires five different vanilla 1/1 tokens in the same set. By letting colours share, it cuts that down to a more reasonable three.
So that's potentially 14 14/14 creatures, minimum. I would absolutely attempt to build a deck around those kind of numbers even if Genesis Ritual was just a sorcery. As a creature that I can potentially untap multiple times each turn? I wouldn't even bat an eye.
Out of curiosity, how come Black/White and Red/Green can share the tokens they generate, but blue can only use its own?
To minimize the number of tokens produced. If they each made their own unique token, they probably wouldn't be possible, since that requires five different vanilla 1/1 tokens in the same set. By letting colours share, it cuts that down to a more reasonable three.
Can you think of a single token color/type that could go on all five that would fit in your set's world - like a 1/1 black Minion or perhaps a 0/1 white Goat or green Sheep to tease out the ritual flavor?
Out of curiosity, how come Black/White and Red/Green can share the tokens they generate, but blue can only use its own?
To minimize the number of tokens produced. If they each made their own unique token, they probably wouldn't be possible, since that requires five different vanilla 1/1 tokens in the same set. By letting colours share, it cuts that down to a more reasonable three.
Can you think of a single token color/type that could go on all five that would fit in your set's world - like a 1/1 black Minion or perhaps a 0/1 white Goat or green Sheep to tease out the ritual flavor?
These weren't meant for a set, just a standalone idea. If I made a set for them, it would probably be colour themed. Hmmm, perhaps such a set could find a use for five-colour creatures, allowing for a subtheme of five-colour tokens and letting these all have the same token.
I'm getting inspired.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Creature - Human Cleric
When ~ enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 white and black Cleric creature token onto the battlefield.
T, Tap four untapped white creatures you control: Destroy all creatures other than ~.
1/1
Windbind Ritualist 2U
Creature - Human Wizard
When ~ enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 blue Wizard creature token onto the battlefield.
T, Tap two untapped blue creatures you control: Return target creature to its owner's hand.
2/1
Agony Ritualist 2B
Creature - Human Cleric
When ~ enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 white and black Cleric creature token onto the battlefield.
T, Tap three untapped black creatures you control: Target player loses 4 life and you gain 4 life.
2/2
Bloodrush Ritualist 3R
Creature - Human Shaman
When ~ enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 red and green Shaman creature token onto the battlefield.
T, Tap any number of untapped red creatures you control: Target creature gets +3/+0 until end of turn for each creature tapped this way (including ~).
3/1
Genesis Ritualist 3G
Creature - Human Shaman
When ~ enters the battlefield, put a 1/1 red and green Shaman creature token onto the battlefield.
T, Tap six untapped green creatures you control: Put seven 1/1 red and green Shaman creature tokens onto the battlefield.
3/3
As a cycle, the relative power levels of the effects on each card also seems pretty imbalanced to each other. That seems to be a common issue that pops up with cycles in general. To some degree maybe that can be okay, but it's something to watch for. Ex: Destroy all other creatures vs. return target creature to its owners hand. Completely different power level. The only thing even about the cycle is that each of them puts a 1/1 token onto the battlefield, and then it seems like you try to use the amount of creatures you have to tap for the more powerful effect to vary in order to justify the wildly different effects.
And yeah, repeatable Wraths are powerful. But compare it to other repeatable Wrath effects on bodies. Mageta the Lion, for instance, can be used more often and leaves you with a 3/3 instead of a 1/1. Novablast Wurm can be done turn after turn and leaves you with a 7/7. Planar Ritualist only costs two mana compared to the 5 and 7 of those cards, sure, but you're also always going to be losing at least four creatures to it, and it's much harder for it to reliably go off multiple times.
Yes, this is the point. Greater costs come with greater effects.
I think the cost-tinkering isn't necessarily objectionable in itself, but it does potentially feel a bit arbitrary or post-hoc.
Part of the reason I'm hung up on the effects varying this much, is that if these are all supposed to be at the same rarity and be roughly equal in general power, my immediate intuition is to notice that, say, Windbind Ritualist just overall feels weak compared to Planar Ritualist, which is a boardwipe. It'd feel more coherent as a cycle if, for example, Windbind Ritualist also required you to tap 4 creatures and returned all creatures to their owner's hand (blue's version of a boardwipe).
I don't want to make multiple members of the cycle feel that similar. Having some big, powerful, splashy effects for greater costs and some smaller utility effects for a smaller cost makes it feel more varied. If they all just had various versions of a Wrath effect, then what would even be the point of having a full cycle?
By the way, have you ever played with or against Tradewind Rider or Keeper of the Nine Gales? Because I think you're underestimating how powerful they are.
I'm not entirely sure what I'd want to cost it, but definitely more than 2. I'd probably at least add 1 or 2 to the cost.
I think those are a good reference point for Windbind Ritualist. It's not so much that I am underestimating the power of Windbind Ritualist, but comparing it to Planar Ritualist it is a lower power level affect simply in not being global, on top of technically being weaker in what it does. And, as I've indicated, Planar Ritualist overall just stands out as being the really powerful one of the bunch.
But based on the reference points you're giving me, I would say the real question is about the relative power levels between, say, Tradewinder Rider or Keeper of the Nine Gales and Mageta the Lion. They aren't part of a cycle together and they do significantly different things at different power levels. One is a legendary board wipe with higher costs, the other two are a single targeted bounce effect.
While it's true that cycles can do different things, I think a certain amount of symmetry can be elegant. The Ascendancy cycle from Kahns for example, while they all do different things, they all cost 3 mana and none of them are bombs or boardwipes. Or the cycle of legendary dragon "stars" from Kamigawa, they all cost 6 mana, are 5/5 flyers, and they all trigger significant splashy effects when they die.
Agony Ritualist, for instance: A curve of t1/2 random creature, t3 Ritualist, t4 Gisa's Bidding (for instance), t5 start draining every turn is the least the card could do, and an 8-point life swing each turn is essentially unbeatable unless they have a removal spell.
And that's maybe the biggest problem: Since they're not combat-based, they can't often be easily dealt with through modern removal. Big hexproof beaters can be killed by a pumped blocker; the unblockable threat can be killed by a lot of white's removal; but these? They'll just stay back and make it impossible to come back from. Specifically:
-Genesis Ritualist: I love the card design because it feels very clever and very green, but it's a) overpowering (come on, 7 power a turn? spread out, sticks around if threat is removed?) and b) more importantly, loses even the nominal impact of tapping your creatures. Normally, tapping your creatures is a cost because it leaves you open for attack. In this case, the 7 blockers are significantly more than enough to deter attacking.
-Bloodrush Ritualist: Looks neat, but is both too powerful and would never be printed today. In some games, it becomes "If you can't block/kill every one of my attackers, I'll give the unblocked one +6/+0 and kill you." R&D would never print it today because of how swingy it could be. I will say, though, it's a neat concept; really, though, it'd probably be acceptable at a rate of +1/+0 per creature, never mind +3/+0.
-Agony Ritualist: See above notes on it, then see Genesis part b). Tapping your whole field is normally a cost, except when an opponent often can't reasonably outrace it, even when all of your creatures are tapped.
-Planar Ritualist: I'd be sorta fine with this if it was Rare and maybe needed 5 creatures. It feels excessive, but it's a very powerful effect.
-Windbind Ritualist: Powerful, probably wouldn't be printed today, but I'd call it probably fine in a custom set.
All in all, a few notes:
-If the big cost of using these is that you often need to tap down every creature you control, make sure the effects allow your opponent to reasonably punish you for that. Agony Rit. outraces most normal punishment; Gen. Rit. makes blockers.
-Are these Rare or Uncommon? Either way, possibly too powerful. See next point:
-The effects are deceptively powerful, but not in an obvious way. This is the biggest issue with them: to make them be fair and balanced, they probably need way higher costs than you or your audience expected or wanted. It's the same issue there was with echo, etc.: They were very powerful, but felt terrible to lots of the audience. Mark Rosewater talks about this a lot, how some of this is fine but lots is just unappealing. (The first article I could find about it is here: http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/latest-developments/why-all-negativity-2007-03-16. ) At the moment, these mostly lean toward the 'too powerful' than the 'bad feel' line, but some are both. That's why they 'feel' Uncommon, but probably should be Rares.
All in all, I like the idea, but needs playtesting and redevelopment.
'
--Buck v Bell, 1927. This case, regarding the compulsory sterilization of inmates at mental institutions, has -- somehow -- never been overturned. Just a wee PSA for ya.
They would absolutely be rare, for just that reason.
I honestly don't see this as an issue. "Deal with me or lose in short order" is a very common thing that rares often do. The example you gave for Agony Ritualist just says "If I have a god hand and you have no interaction, I win", and...no, I don't see that as a problem. It's just too much to hope for that you have that perfect hand and your opponent has no form of removal.
I find it rather comparable to Voice of the Woods. The pros it has regarding that cards are that it doesn't require a specific creature type, and the creature production is less vulnerable to spot removal. The cons being it requires more creatures, summoning sickness is an issue, and it's more vulnerable to damage-based sweepers. Personally, I think that quite balances out.
To minimize the number of tokens produced. If they each made their own unique token, they probably wouldn't be possible, since that requires five different vanilla 1/1 tokens in the same set. By letting colours share, it cuts that down to a more reasonable three.
So that's potentially 14 14/14 creatures, minimum. I would absolutely attempt to build a deck around those kind of numbers even if Genesis Ritual was just a sorcery. As a creature that I can potentially untap multiple times each turn? I wouldn't even bat an eye.
Can you think of a single token color/type that could go on all five that would fit in your set's world - like a 1/1 black Minion or perhaps a 0/1 white Goat or green Sheep to tease out the ritual flavor?
I'm getting inspired.