There are three things I have been wondering:
1. Red can get out of color effects if it offers an opponent the choice to take damage in order to prevent that effect, but what exactly are all the extra effects red is allowed to get this way? Devil Growth
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped. T: Add R to your mana pool. R, Exile ~ from your hand: Put ~ onto the battlefield unless target opponent has it deal 4 damage to them.
2. Aside from damage, what else can be used as the "punishment" part of punisher effects? Land Denial1R
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant land an opponent controls
Whenever enchanted land becomes tapped, you may draw a card.
3. How big can the punishment from one of these effects be before it's considered a cheaty pie break? Visible Stalker1R
Creature - Human Rogue
Whenever ~ becomes the target of a spell or ability an opponent controls, ~ deals 20 damage to that player.
Whenever ~ becomes blocked, it deals 20 damage to defending player.
1/1
Devil Growth, this seems like a card that could be printed, not sure on the numbers but somewhere around there.
Land Denial, this is not actually a punisher card. A punisher card offers two clear choices to the opponent and has them choose between them. This may look like a choose A or B but it is more of a standard aura card granting a benefit to a land. A punisher version of this would be something like "When enchanted land become tapped its controller sacrifices it unless they have you draw a card."
Visible Stalker again not a actual punisher effect. This isn't offering a choice of do A or B its 'punishing' them for making a choice. A punisher version of this card would be "Whenever ~ attackers defending player may have you sacrifice it, if they do it deals X damage to them. If they don't it gains hexproof and is unblockable this turn." Out of pie effect, hexproof unblockable, for an in pie effect.
Devil growth -- This is a land that comes into play tapped. The extra ability may not as well exist.
Apparently it lets you put an additional land. Not even during your turn. Yeah, that's a bit too good.
Given red's redirect effects, Visible stalker is too good, because it effectively grants all your creatures (and all opponent's creatures) shroud at 2cc.
Red isn't the only color that gets punisher effects.
Note that just because you choose something technically (ie choose not to tap a land for mana, choose not to target a creature) that doesn't mean it's a punisher effect. A punisher effect forces a player into very bad situations -- land denial and visible stalker shouldn't count because the choice to do nothing doesn't come with a punishment.
Devil growth -- This is a land that comes into play tapped. The extra ability may not as well exist.
Could you elaborate on this one? As I see it, this allows you to ramp for the next turn.
Given red's redirect effects, Visible stalker is too good, because it effectively grants all your creatures (and all opponent's creatures) shroud at 2cc.
"Whenever an opponent casts a spell targeting ~" would be a solution.
Agreed on the rest. Though punisher effects in red often get specifically pointed out for some reason.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Planar Chaos was not a mistake neither was it random. You might want to look at it again.
[thread=239793][Game] Level Up - Creature[/thread]
3. How big can the punishment from one of these effects be before it's considered a cheaty pie break? Visible Stalker1R
Creature - Human Rogue
Whenever ~ becomes the target of a spell or ability an opponent controls, ~ deals 20 damage to that player.
Whenever ~ becomes blocked, it deals 20 damage to defending player.
1/1
Anything that would usually cause an out-and-out game loss for taking the punishment would be a cheat/pie bend, but in this particular instance even 10 damage would still be in the purview of a red effect. Personally, if this were a serious and not experimental/theoretical card design I would set the amount of damage at maybe 5 or 7.
Imagine a punisher effect's value as: "Worth less than the least of the two options, made worse by how different the options are and made better by your ability to manipulate that choice"
A browbeat for example is worth less than either a 5 damage burn spell or draw 3, because it will always be whichever is worse, so if you could get either effect in isolation it would be better. A Fanatic of Xenagos on the other hand has two options for an opponent which are mostly identical, so they're going to be facing a 4/4 creature either way. So while its worth slightly less than either option on its own, the effects are so similar that its worth about the same. A painful quandry can be manipulated by getting your opponent to discard all their cards, so they are forced to take damage.
With a card like Devil Growth, what you have is either a strong ramp effect in red or a strong burn effect, both pushed well beyond what red can normally get at that mana cost, but its made significantly worse than either because the two effects have such different uses- if your opponent can stabilize their life total its a land, if they are getting burned out its ramp. It might be too strong even so due to how efficient both options are, but what really breaks it is that its just the opportunity cost of a non-basic tapland which is extremely slow, so being able to get whats near the efficiency of lava spike for 'free' in a red deck would break the game.
With a card like Visible Stalker, your opponent has no real choice. The two options are so incredibly disparate in power level- either don't block/target him, or lose the game. So in normal gameplay its simply the same as the invisible type of stalker, which is what you're going for. But the ability to manipulate that opponent's choice is what makes it better than the lesser of the two options: All it takes is any lure effect and a valid blocker and you win the game on the spot with it. And that's broken.
Question 1) The color pie does not only defines what every color must have, but also what it cannot have. So one answer to this is anything that is not in the second group. But that could still be questioned. For example:
Enchantment HateR
Sorcery
Destroy target enchantment unless it's controller have it deals 5 damage to then.
I really dig this card and have included it in many custom sets of mine. But maybe that's because I'm not a fan of the idea that red should never destroy enchantments (and black should never destroy artifacts). The following design, for example, I would personally not support
Punisher Helix2R
Instant
Punisher Helix deals 3 damage to target creature. You gain 3 life unless a opponent have Punisher Helix deals 3 damage to him.
Question 2) This one is simple. Anything that is in-pie for red should be fine.
Question 3) The above post says it all. Punisher effects must be evaluated as the worst of the two effects (plus some nuance regarding how you can force the opponent into some of these choices). If you have a out-of-color effect vs. deals 20 damage, the card is just the out-of-color effect and is a pie violation. There's also the point that giving two too unbalanced choices is bad design regardless of color pie considerations.
A unbalanced punisher design is just a card where you get the weaker effect generally but may get a stronger effect under certain circumstances (see Painful Quandary). So I would say the effect your generally get should be in-pie, so that red is not constantly using something that it should not.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard - Serious BGU Control R Aggro
Standard - For Fun BG Auras
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1. Red can get out of color effects if it offers an opponent the choice to take damage in order to prevent that effect, but what exactly are all the extra effects red is allowed to get this way?
Devil Growth
Land
~ enters the battlefield tapped.
T: Add R to your mana pool.
R, Exile ~ from your hand: Put ~ onto the battlefield unless target opponent has it deal 4 damage to them.
2. Aside from damage, what else can be used as the "punishment" part of punisher effects?
Land Denial 1R
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant land an opponent controls
Whenever enchanted land becomes tapped, you may draw a card.
3. How big can the punishment from one of these effects be before it's considered a cheaty pie break?
Visible Stalker 1R
Creature - Human Rogue
Whenever ~ becomes the target of a spell or ability an opponent controls, ~ deals 20 damage to that player.
Whenever ~ becomes blocked, it deals 20 damage to defending player.
1/1
Land Denial, this is not actually a punisher card. A punisher card offers two clear choices to the opponent and has them choose between them. This may look like a choose A or B but it is more of a standard aura card granting a benefit to a land. A punisher version of this would be something like "When enchanted land become tapped its controller sacrifices it unless they have you draw a card."
Visible Stalker again not a actual punisher effect. This isn't offering a choice of do A or B its 'punishing' them for making a choice. A punisher version of this card would be "Whenever ~ attackers defending player may have you sacrifice it, if they do it deals X damage to them. If they don't it gains hexproof and is unblockable this turn." Out of pie effect, hexproof unblockable, for an in pie effect.
Devil growth -- This is a land that comes into play tapped. The extra ability may not as well exist.Apparently it lets you put an additional land. Not even during your turn. Yeah, that's a bit too good.
Given red's redirect effects, Visible stalker is too good, because it effectively grants all your creatures (and all opponent's creatures) shroud at 2cc.
Red isn't the only color that gets punisher effects.
Note that just because you choose something technically (ie choose not to tap a land for mana, choose not to target a creature) that doesn't mean it's a punisher effect. A punisher effect forces a player into very bad situations -- land denial and visible stalker shouldn't count because the choice to do nothing doesn't come with a punishment.
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
Could you elaborate on this one? As I see it, this allows you to ramp for the next turn.
"Whenever an opponent casts a spell targeting ~" would be a solution.
Agreed on the rest. Though punisher effects in red often get specifically pointed out for some reason.
Finally a good white villain quote: "So, do I ever re-evaluate my life choices? Never, because I know what I'm doing is a righteous cause."
Factions: Sleeping
Remnants: Valheim
Legendary Journey: Heroes & Planeswalkers
Saga: Shards of Rabiah
Legends: The Elder Dragons
Read up on Red Flags & NWO
Anything that would usually cause an out-and-out game loss for taking the punishment would be a cheat/pie bend, but in this particular instance even 10 damage would still be in the purview of a red effect. Personally, if this were a serious and not experimental/theoretical card design I would set the amount of damage at maybe 5 or 7.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
A browbeat for example is worth less than either a 5 damage burn spell or draw 3, because it will always be whichever is worse, so if you could get either effect in isolation it would be better. A Fanatic of Xenagos on the other hand has two options for an opponent which are mostly identical, so they're going to be facing a 4/4 creature either way. So while its worth slightly less than either option on its own, the effects are so similar that its worth about the same. A painful quandry can be manipulated by getting your opponent to discard all their cards, so they are forced to take damage.
With a card like Devil Growth, what you have is either a strong ramp effect in red or a strong burn effect, both pushed well beyond what red can normally get at that mana cost, but its made significantly worse than either because the two effects have such different uses- if your opponent can stabilize their life total its a land, if they are getting burned out its ramp. It might be too strong even so due to how efficient both options are, but what really breaks it is that its just the opportunity cost of a non-basic tapland which is extremely slow, so being able to get whats near the efficiency of lava spike for 'free' in a red deck would break the game.
With a card like Visible Stalker, your opponent has no real choice. The two options are so incredibly disparate in power level- either don't block/target him, or lose the game. So in normal gameplay its simply the same as the invisible type of stalker, which is what you're going for. But the ability to manipulate that opponent's choice is what makes it better than the lesser of the two options: All it takes is any lure effect and a valid blocker and you win the game on the spot with it. And that's broken.
Enchantment HateR
Sorcery
Destroy target enchantment unless it's controller have it deals 5 damage to then.
I really dig this card and have included it in many custom sets of mine. But maybe that's because I'm not a fan of the idea that red should never destroy enchantments (and black should never destroy artifacts). The following design, for example, I would personally not support
Punisher Helix2R
Instant
Punisher Helix deals 3 damage to target creature. You gain 3 life unless a opponent have Punisher Helix deals 3 damage to him.
Question 2) This one is simple. Anything that is in-pie for red should be fine.
Question 3) The above post says it all. Punisher effects must be evaluated as the worst of the two effects (plus some nuance regarding how you can force the opponent into some of these choices). If you have a out-of-color effect vs. deals 20 damage, the card is just the out-of-color effect and is a pie violation. There's also the point that giving two too unbalanced choices is bad design regardless of color pie considerations.
A unbalanced punisher design is just a card where you get the weaker effect generally but may get a stronger effect under certain circumstances (see Painful Quandary). So I would say the effect your generally get should be in-pie, so that red is not constantly using something that it should not.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras