Quote from Stairc »
3) Emeria's Faithful has the text "all your angels violate NWO". This might not be a problem if few angels are at common, but you should explain this more clearly.
Quote from MajoraXThe explanation is simple: mortals trample; Gods annihilate.
Quote from Stairc »My point is that the ally mechanic is much more friendly based on how it's presented to complexity, and also not necessarily an example of that type of mechanic being acceptable in NWO even so.
That said, I'm not sure if the flag only refers to on-board effects you can use at any time or not, and thus need to track. One-shot affect-other-permanent effects like Crackling Triton are red flagged, so sticking to the letter of the law such things are definitely suspect. However, I agree that this skirts the edge of NWO if it's even a red flag at all.
Quote from Stairc »I think you might be missing my point.
A card that you have to remember is in play, because it triggers even when you're not looking at it (especially when it's not a MAY ability, as Emeria's Faithful's trigger isn't optional), increases the amount of complexity going on. It requires players to mentally track more things, not for strategic value necessarily - but rather simply to properly follow the rules of the game. That takes up more mindspace. I'm just not sure it falls under a specific red flag.
As for the focus on instant-speed, it certainly adds to complexity because you need to be thinking about the ability more often - but Crackling Triton would still violate NWO if the ability could only be used at sorcery speed. It just would be a little more managable than it currently is.
The primary purpose of NWO is to streamline combat and make the gameplay about casting spells and attacking, not figuring out how to blow your opponent out (or how they could blow you out). The biggest problem with Lorwyn limited was that no one would attack, yet the environment was supposedly creature based. Effects which occur outside combat really don't matter for the purposes of NWO. Those type of effects exist on a higher level of play, and thus a higher level of development, than NWO is attempting to address
Quote from Maro »Complexity creep was increasing our barrier to entry, making it harder and harder for new players to learn how to play. We were failing to get as many new players because the game was getting progressively harder to learn...
... Sometimes it helps to lay out a problem when you're trying to solve it. Here's what we knew: We had to bring down the level of barrier to entry. It had simply gotten too high. The game was filled with all sorts of complexity, which was pushing it up. On the flip side, though, we had the established players. Much of what was creating the complexity stemmed from things that were important to keep our existing players. Magic has to keep adding new elements. Expansions have to have new mechanics and new keywords and new themes and new strategies. How could we possibly make all the parties happy?
The solution ended up being a tool that trading card games had always had: rarity. How could we get things into the hands of the experienced players without overwhelming the less experienced players? We simply had to keep it out of common. We knew that beginning players buy fewer boosters. This means that the percentage of relevant cards they own that are common is simply much higher.
Quote from Maro »Here was the problem that reared its head during Lorwyn and Morningtide. This type of complexity isn't about what cards can do but rather about how they interact with one another while they are on the battlefield. This problem was most noticeable to R&D during the employee Prerelease for Morningtide. The casual players were quitting after one or two rounds and we kept watching people who stayed in suffer as they couldn't figure out what they had to do. There was just too much dependent interaction.
Another important lesson about board complexity was that it didn't take very many cards with this style of complexity to cause problems. Just one card, for example, can change the design tree from a few choices to a double-digit number of choices.
Magic is a game about interactions. This type of complexity stresses that too much interaction can be just as taxing mentally as cards that take multiple readings to comprehend.
Quote from Maro »Another way to think about is this: Simplifying the commons took away a lot of bookkeeping. By bookkeeping, I mean the requirement to pay attention to elements of the game that could matter but often don't. In general, bookkeeping is something you want to take out of games. Keeping track of a lot of information is actually an unfun activity, but gamers do it because they are doing their best to win.