My biggest disappointment with Zen/Strixhaven was the lack of common MDFCs on theme (not as much for Kaldheim, since it they were thematically tied to the Gods in that set)
Strixhaven especially I wanted to see some common creature/spell cards.
Interpretive Dancer 2U
Creature - Orc Wizard
Magecraft - Whenever you cast or copy an instant or sorcery spell, CARDNAME gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
2/1
//
Disco Inferno 2R
Instant
CARDNAME deals 2 damage to any target. Scry 1.
What are good front/back combos in different colors that make for interesting play choices?
I may differ in opionion with you here as I don't see the lack of common Creature/spell cards as an oversight. I actually see that as a VERY important design choice that wizards deliberately made.
For Spell//Land cards, the decision of whether to use a card as a land or a spell is fairly straightforward. If you can't afford the spell half (or can't afford other important cards in your hand) because you're short on mana (or if the spell half is no longer useful, as is the case with jwari disruption), you use the land half. Otherwise, you try to use the spell half. The system is practically idiot-proof for newer players.
For Creature/Spell cards, however, things get a lot more complicated. Players have to start asking themselves if they want to use Disco Inferno to deal with an evasive inkling or if doing so might render them short on creatures to actually win the game with. If there were common Creature/Spell MDFCs, I can almost guarantee that there would have been a lot of games where newer players would all but stall out against each other when they end up feeling like they have too few creatures to actually engage in combat with. There would be a lot of new players who don't know whether they should try to build tempo or build card advantage. Compared to Tapland vs. Simple card, there is a world of difference in decision-making complexity when both sides are "real cards" and you don't want newer players packing 7-10 spell/spell MDFCs in their draft decks.
While I can theoretically understand the desire for Common Zendikar Spell//Land MDFCs, it wouldn't have made much sense in practice. You were already getting an MDFC in every single pack. Having common spell//land MDFCs would just mean that you'd have a weaker or less impactful card in that slot for a good portion of the time. I guess I can understand it from the perspective of wanting to abuse MDFCs for an "Oops, all spells" type deck but the As-fan for Zendikar MDFCs was as high as it could have realistically been.
In strixhaven, the value is the ability to have either a creature for board presence or a spell for magecraft trigger, same as for the rare/mythic MDFCs. Is it more decision making? Sure, but not drastically more than just having another card in hand or a split card.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Strixhaven especially I wanted to see some common creature/spell cards.
Interpretive Dancer 2U
Creature - Orc Wizard
Magecraft - Whenever you cast or copy an instant or sorcery spell, CARDNAME gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
2/1
//
Disco Inferno 2R
Instant
CARDNAME deals 2 damage to any target. Scry 1.
What are good front/back combos in different colors that make for interesting play choices?
For Spell//Land cards, the decision of whether to use a card as a land or a spell is fairly straightforward. If you can't afford the spell half (or can't afford other important cards in your hand) because you're short on mana (or if the spell half is no longer useful, as is the case with jwari disruption), you use the land half. Otherwise, you try to use the spell half. The system is practically idiot-proof for newer players.
For Creature/Spell cards, however, things get a lot more complicated. Players have to start asking themselves if they want to use Disco Inferno to deal with an evasive inkling or if doing so might render them short on creatures to actually win the game with. If there were common Creature/Spell MDFCs, I can almost guarantee that there would have been a lot of games where newer players would all but stall out against each other when they end up feeling like they have too few creatures to actually engage in combat with. There would be a lot of new players who don't know whether they should try to build tempo or build card advantage. Compared to Tapland vs. Simple card, there is a world of difference in decision-making complexity when both sides are "real cards" and you don't want newer players packing 7-10 spell/spell MDFCs in their draft decks.
While I can theoretically understand the desire for Common Zendikar Spell//Land MDFCs, it wouldn't have made much sense in practice. You were already getting an MDFC in every single pack. Having common spell//land MDFCs would just mean that you'd have a weaker or less impactful card in that slot for a good portion of the time. I guess I can understand it from the perspective of wanting to abuse MDFCs for an "Oops, all spells" type deck but the As-fan for Zendikar MDFCs was as high as it could have realistically been.
Gameplaywise, several of the land/spells could have easily been commons by power level/complexity (Vastwood Fortification, Skyclave Cleric, Akoum Warrior)
In strixhaven, the value is the ability to have either a creature for board presence or a spell for magecraft trigger, same as for the rare/mythic MDFCs. Is it more decision making? Sure, but not drastically more than just having another card in hand or a split card.