The intent for this thread to have an open-minded discussion at best, a respectful debate at worst, always focused on the design and development of one or more custom keywords that would be plausible as real (U/R) evergreen keywords.
Since Prowess is in fact not an evergreen keyword but rather a deciduous keyword (neither of which it should be), I thought I’d propose a more suitable mechanic and give opportunity for others to share their ideas for a (U/R) evergreen keyword.
Shifty (As each combat begins, you may switch this creature’s power and toughness until end of turn. If you do, effects that change its power and/or toughness this turn are also switched until end of turn.)
Shifty (Whenever this creature attacks, you may switch its power and toughness until end of turn.)
For simplicity’s sake, I decided on an attack “trigger” only.
Other considerations were:
switch whenever attacks or blocks
switch whenever blocks or becomes blocked
switch whenever attacks or whenever you’re attacked
The biggest test for an evergreen keyword imho is "Can it be put on a 1/1 French vanilla?"
This fails that test because it can only go on creatures with non-square stats. That's a big strike against it at evergreen, as is being a triggered ability.
The biggest test for an evergreen keyword imho is "Can it be put on a 1/1 French vanilla?"
This fails that test because it can only go on creatures with non-square stats. That's a big strike against it at evergreen, as is being a triggered ability.
Shifty doesn't fail the 1/1 test any more than trample fails the 1/x test.
Prowess is a triggered ability, but that didn't stop WotC from trying it as an evergreen mechanic despite its possessing a slew of other non-evergreen qualities. They eventually realized I was right and moved it to deciduous, but they didn’t do so because it was triggered.
Shifty doesn't fail the 1/1 test any more than trample fails the 1/x test.
Trample is one of the oldest evergreens and, unusual though it is, there's use for it with 1 power. Even then, it's useful with pump... and most pump effects are square.
Prowess is a triggered ability, but that didn't stop WotC from trying it as an evergreen mechanic despite its possessing a slew of other non-evergreen qualities. They eventually realized I was right and moved it to deciduous, but they didn’t do so because it was triggered.
So why are you arguing in favor of an evergreen ability by citing something that's now deciduous? Triggered is a big non-evergreen quality. That was one of the lessons of prowess. It should be avoided going forward.
The biggest test for an evergreen keyword imho is "Can it be put on a 1/1 French vanilla?"
This fails that test because it can only go on creatures with non-square stats. That's a big strike against it at evergreen, as is being a triggered ability.
Shifty doesn't fail the 1/1 test any more than trample fails the 1/x test.
Prowess is a triggered ability, but that didn't stop WotC from trying it as an evergreen mechanic despite its possessing a slew of other non-evergreen qualities. They eventually realized I was right and moved it to deciduous, but they didn’t do so because it was triggered.
It being a triggered ability was in fact one of several reasons it got downgraded. If I recall the three main reasons it failed was: It stacked(causing power issues), it was a trigger(thus functioned differently from all other evergreens), and stepped on the toes of set themes. Your mechanic hitting one of those isn't a big problem but to dismiss it as a non problem is wrong.
That said it has bigger problems namely crippling high levels of complexity. While the effect itself is straight forward its interaction with other p/t modifying abilities is not. There is a reason this type of effect hasn't even shown up on 50 different magic cards despite existing since legends.
You know, shifty is a great word. I'd make it more: unblockable as long as this creature is attacking alone. Easy breazy. No triggered ability, no confusion with other cards. Unblockable but weaker. Done.
1. Entirely parasitic
2. Triggered
3. Acted as a combat trick (when triggered at “instant speed”)
4. Stacked (sometimes confusingly)
5. Interfered with set design
6. Skewed drafting
Shifty
1. Triggered
2. Complex
Or is it? I mean, is it really that difficult to understand that all p/t mods applied to a “shifted” creature are likewise switched?
So you don't know what parasitic means. Good to know. I'm not certain that acting as a combat trick was a problem and I'm certain it didnt skew drafting. So you have the same three problems I pointed out.
Back to the complexity problem. Yes it is a huge deal. On this site in these forums I have seen multiple people continue to misunderstand how this ability interacts with pumps and minuses so if these incredibly enfranchised players don't get it the average player should be completely lost. If you go the route of reducing non square pumps then what even is the point of the mechanic.
I propose Loot(Damage dealt by this creature also cause you to draw and discard that many cards)
This is an effect that is present in both colors and also have the unique feature to gain direct card advantage balanced as card filtering. We can have the effect at common with low power or high cmc creatures without being too oppressive (since it does not increment alone your resources) but potentially leading to interesting sinergies with other things (delve, reanimation, madness, etc.) but I believe is useful and interesting already per se.
I think complexity does not count against an evergreen keyword by itself. For the contrary. The whole point of evergreen abilities is to establish a list of abilities players must familiarize beforehand (aside from the other advantages). The reasons why it's important to learn an ability before starting a game is: (i) the ability is so common it's likely you will have to learn it anyway - thus it's better to learn before starting ; (ii) the ability is so complex it will be annoying to teach it as the game progress.
This is a overall principle of game design that applies to everything, not just magic. You want to codify and create terminology for the mechanics that are commonplace, so that doing so makes the game presentation lighter, and for the things that are too complex to present in extensive form, thus you can add a terminology for it and explain in details in the rules manual.
To see this clearly, let's take a example of Defender and Trample. If Defender was not evergreen anymore the game would barely change. People would just have to read 'This creature can't attack' a couple more times and cards like High Alert would probably don't exist. However if Trample did not exist the game would change dramatically as Trample is too complex to add to a common card and thus would simply not be used aside from some weird mythic. Since Trample is by far the best evasive ability to tackle in a large monster or alongside power pumps, the game of magic would be quite substantially worse without it.
In this example you can clearly see a good evergreen ability is a ability that is fun and elegant, you want to use all the time but it's too complex to write it down and carry it's own rules baggage.
So I think you may not like Shifty as evergreen keyword but not at the grounds of complexity. Personally I think 'shifty' is among the best options. Triggered is surely a bad feature but you can easily create the static counter part using 'as'. And I also like the version with both attack/block.
My version goes as far as 'as ~ enters combat, you may switch ~ power and toughness'. And in my custom rules a creature enter combat when it attacks, blocks or fights.
I think complexity does not count against an evergreen keyword by itself. For the contrary. The whole point of evergreen abilities is to establish a list of abilities players must familiarize beforehand (aside from the other advantages). The reasons why it's important to learn an ability before starting a game is: (i) the ability is so common it's likely you will have to learn it anyway - thus it's better to learn before starting ; (ii) the ability is so complex it will be annoying to teach it as the game progress.
This is a overall principle of game design that applies to everything, not just magic. You want to codify and create terminology for the mechanics that are commonplace, so that doing so makes the game presentation lighter, and for the things that are too complex to present in extensive form, thus you can add a terminology for it and explain in details in the rules manual.
To see this clearly, let's take a example of Defender and Trample. If Defender was not evergreen anymore the game would barely change. People would just have to read 'This creature can't attack' a couple more times and cards like High Alert would probably don't exist. However if Trample did not exist the game would change dramatically as Trample is too complex to add to a common card and thus would simply not be used aside from some weird mythic. Since Trample is by far the best evasive ability to tackle in a large monster or alongside power pumps, the game of magic would be quite substantially worse without it.
In this example you can clearly see a good evergreen ability is a ability that is fun and elegant, you want to use all the time but it's too complex to write it down and carry it's own rules baggage.
So I think you may not like Shifty as evergreen keyword but not at the grounds of complexity. Personally I think 'shifty' is among the best options. Triggered is surely a bad feature but you can easily create the static counter part using 'as'. And I also like the version with both attack/block.
My version goes as far as 'as ~ enters combat, you may switch ~ power and toughness'. And in my custom rules a creature enter combat when it attacks, blocks or fights.
On that note, an evergreen P/T switching mechanic can act as a tool to teach the intricacies of the layer system because it can be a proper boondoggle sometimes.
If you're reading this post or thread and thinking to yourself "meh", I implore you to consider that it only feels like there's a (U/R) evergreen keyword because we were sold a bill of bads in Prowess, but that Prowess is not the (U/R) evergreen keyword and (U/R) is truly currently without an evergreen keyword.
In Prowess' debut, it was the (R/W)(W/U)(U/R) draft archetype. As an evergreen mechanic in (U/R), whether or not it's a draft archetype is anyone's guess. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Prowess incentivizes its drafters to deliberately play a certain ratio of particular card types in order for it to be more than incidental, which requires strict tracking while drafting. This is fine in general, but is too much for an evergreen mechanic. It can also be quite the trap. There are other negative effects it has on drafting and limited deckbuilding, but I don't feel like typing a dissertation explaining it all. Although, now that I think about it, I'm tempted to do so just so I can solicit a retraction from Doombringer who so arrogantly championed Prowess (along with a few others) as an evergreen mechanic when it was spoiled, despite my criticisms of it.
So you don't know what parasitic means. Good to know.
I've typed, deleted, and retyped several sarcastic responses to your insult, but in the end returned to my original intent for this thread: An open-minded discussion at best, a respectful debate at worst, always focused on the design and development of one or more custom keyword that would be plausible as real (U/R) evergreen keyword. I opened the discussion with a serious proposal of a mechanic that I sincerely believe would be viable as the (U/R) evergreen mechanic. And I stand by it.
By the way, I do know what 'parasitic' means. Consider the possibility that you might be the one who doesn't or that our definitions of it differ slightly.
I think complexity does not count against an evergreen keyword by itself. For the contrary. The whole point of evergreen abilities is to establish a list of abilities players must familiarize beforehand (aside from the other advantages). The reasons why it's important to learn an ability before starting a game is: (i) the ability is so common it's likely you will have to learn it anyway - thus it's better to learn before starting ; (ii) the ability is so complex it will be annoying to teach it as the game progress.
This is a overall principle of game design that applies to everything, not just magic. You want to codify and create terminology for the mechanics that are commonplace, so that doing so makes the game presentation lighter, and for the things that are too complex to present in extensive form, thus you can add a terminology for it and explain in details in the rules manual.
To see this clearly, let's take a example of Defender and Trample. If Defender was not evergreen anymore the game would barely change. People would just have to read 'This creature can't attack' a couple more times and cards like High Alert would probably don't exist. However if Trample did not exist the game would change dramatically as Trample is too complex to add to a common card and thus would simply not be used aside from some weird mythic. Since Trample is by far the best evasive ability to tackle in a large monster or alongside power pumps, the game of magic would be quite substantially worse without it.
In this example you can clearly see a good evergreen ability is a ability that is fun and elegant, you want to use all the time but it's too complex to write it down and carry it's own rules baggage.
So I think you may not like Shifty as evergreen keyword but not at the grounds of complexity. Personally I think 'shifty' is among the best options. Triggered is surely a bad feature but you can easily create the static counter part using 'as'. And I also like the version with both attack/block.
My version goes as far as 'as ~ enters combat, you may switch ~ power and toughness'. And in my custom rules a creature enter combat when it attacks, blocks or fights.
QFT Thank you italofoca. I would be surprised if anyone could sensibly disagree with you here.
I personally really like your custom rules regarding combat. Very cool. Though, I still only want the ability to work upon attacking so as not to require opponents to have to track your Shifty creatures on both offense and defense, so should/would the non-triggered form of my OP proposal look like the following?
Shifty (As this creature attacks, you may switch its power and toughness until end of turn. If you do, effects that change its power and/or toughness this turn are also switched until end of turn.)
By the way, I do know what 'parasitic' means. Consider the possibility that you might be the one who doesn't or that our definitions of it differ slightly.
I'm sorry, but he's right. In magic game design, parasitic means that a mechanic only works within a single subset of cards (for example the Arcane ability of Kamigawa only works with other Arcane spells of the same set). On the contrary, Prowess mention "noncreature cards", which is something extremely generic, that can work for every set. Heck, even if it worked only on a single card type, it still wouldn't be parasitic.
See those MaRO posts to learn the definition of parasitic when applied on Magic design:
Funny enough since one of the biggest reasons Prowess was taken out was it was so broad and step on other mechanics and themes toes. For this last set for example Izzet had a instant and sorcery theme and didn't use prowess since they wanted to guide players to see that theme. Kaladesh was similar (even thought they did have one Prowess creature) in that most cards for the set wanted to care about artifacts and prowess muddled that up some. Similar to why Awaken is just Kicker but narrowed down so that it can fit into the themes of a set.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“There are no weak Jews. I am descended from those who wrestle angels and kill giants. We were chosen by God. You were chosen by a pathetic little man who can't seem to grow a full mustache"
"You can tell how dumb someone is by how they use Mary Sue"
By the way, I do know what 'parasitic' means. Consider the possibility that you might be the one who doesn't or that our definitions of it differ slightly.
I'm sorry, but he's right. In magic game design, parasitic means that a mechanic only works within a single subset of cards (for example the Arcane ability of Kamigawa only works with other Arcane spells of the same set). On the contrary, Prowess mention "noncreature cards", which is something extremely generic, that can work for every set. Heck, even if it worked only on a single card type, it still wouldn't be parasitic.
See those MaRO posts to learn the definition of parasitic when applied on Magic design:
I’m a little bummed that this has become as much about Prowess as it has, but I guess it was inevitable.
I knew that he was in line with WotC’s explanation, but to make a long story short by not explaining myself yet again, I disagree with them and not without reason. And regurgitating MaRo’s words holds little water with me since he’s waffled so many, many, many (did I mention “many”?) times over the years because he is a master salesman.
Power/toughness switching was suggested as blue and red evergreen ability to Maro multiple times. The problem is that the current rules are not very intuitive.
Quote from Mark Rosewater »
Here’s the problem. You have a 1/1 that for W can pump it’s toughness (+0/+1). You pump it once. Then you swap it’s power and toughness. Later in the same turn, you activate it twice and pump it’s toughness two times. What are the stats of the creature? I’ll let people give their answer before saying what happens.
4/1 (not 2/3) due to how layers work.
If the rules would work more intuitive I think power/toughness switch would be the red blue evergreen mechanic.
Power/toughness switching was suggested as blue and red evergreen ability to Maro multiple times. The problem is that the current rules are not very intuitive.
Quote from Mark Rosewater »
Here’s the problem. You have a 1/1 that for W can pump it’s toughness (+0/+1). You pump it once. Then you swap it’s power and toughness. Later in the same turn, you activate it twice and pump it’s toughness two times. What are the stats of the creature? I’ll let people give their answer before saying what happens.
...is it really that difficult to understand that all p/t mods applied to a “shifted” creature are likewise switched?
Obviously, I think not. Also, MaRo said it, so we can be sure that there will be an eventual reason why they can do it (like making the layers more intuitive) and he’s such a genius for making such a mechanic.
The layers system can't be "made more intuitive" in that way. Then they wouldn't be layers, they'd be timestamps. And they're needed for a lot of interactions.
The layers system can't be "made more intuitive" in that way. Then they wouldn't be layers, they'd be timestamps. And they're needed for a lot of interactions.
Yes, but that wasn’t really my point was it?
I think I’m going to include more detailed reminder text:
Shifty (You may switch this creature’s power and toughness as it attacks. If you do, all effects that change it’s power and/or toughness this turn are also switched.)
Strangely enough giving a +N/-N or -N/+N bonus to the stats, where N is the difference between power and toughness at the moment the ability goes off, would work in a way that many people would think of as more intuitive without touching the layer system.
However that is of course much more wordy then switch power and toughness.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Drop your knees to the floor
Hands to the sky
Give a round of applause
For the great Miss Y!
If you don't agree with what Maro says that's fine. If you don't like the vocabulary he is establishing for the game he designs then that is a lot harder to swallow. If you use your own personal vocabulary then it becomes significantly more difficult to hold conversations or discussions because you are using words that people assume have one meaning with a completely different meaning. Further you refuse to explain yourself because you have had to explain yourself over and over again, but the problem is if you are using a nonstandard meaning of a word you should expect to explain yourself every time you use the word.
Lets take a step away from that and look back at the mechanic. Italofca makes a good point however it still functions very differently from all other abilities because it has you make a choice which is a significant hurdle for both smooth gameplay and complexity. So I propose Shifty(As long as ~ is attacking switch its power and toughness)
If you don't agree with what Maro says that's fine. If you don't like the vocabulary he is establishing for the game he designs then that is a lot harder to swallow. If you use your own personal vocabulary then it becomes significantly more difficult to hold conversations or discussions because you are using words that people assume have one meaning with a completely different meaning. Further you refuse to explain yourself because you have had to explain yourself over and over again, but the problem is if you are using a nonstandard meaning of a word you should expect to explain yourself every time you use the word.
Lets take a step away from that and look back at the mechanic. Italofca makes a good point however it still functions very differently from all other abilities because it has you make a choice which is a significant hurdle for both smooth gameplay and complexity. So I propose Shifty(As long as ~ is attacking switch its power and toughness)
You’re absolutely right. I apologize. I should have used the word “dependent”.
Regarding Shifty. You bring up a good point. I used “you may” for a couple of reasons:
1. It’s easy to imagine feel-bad scenarios were it mandatory.
2. Mandatory version seems weak compared to existing evergreens but on par when optional.
I think both versions are worth playtesting.
Regarding your iteration of Shifty. I think the effect should last until end of turn. Otherwise, it could be very difficult to track the effects of damage and pumps after combat. So how about:
Shifty (If this creature attacked this turn, it’s power and toughness are switched until end of turn.)
The version of shifty that doesn't last until end of turn is effectively just a power modifier, so it's absolutely necessary to have the swap last ueot.
How about a beginning of combat trigger? I mean, it’s a trigger, but a very basic one, one that’s easy for players to manage mentally. Eh?
Shifty (At the beginning of each combat, you may switch this creature’s power and toughness until end of turn. If you do, effects that change its power and/or toughness this turn are also switched until end of turn.)
EDIT: Or is a nontrigger version possible?
Shifty (As each combat begins, you may switch this creature’s power and toughness until end of turn. If you do, effects that change its power and/or toughness this turn are also switched until end of turn.)
Since Prowess is in fact not an evergreen keyword but rather a deciduous keyword (neither of which it should be), I thought I’d propose a more suitable mechanic and give opportunity for others to share their ideas for a (U/R) evergreen keyword.
Shifty (As each combat begins, you may switch this creature’s power and toughness until end of turn. If you do, effects that change its power and/or toughness this turn are also switched until end of turn.)
Shifty (Whenever this creature attacks, you may switch its power and toughness until end of turn.)For simplicity’s sake, I decided on an attack “trigger” only.
Other considerations were:
switch whenever attacks or blocks
switch whenever blocks or becomes blocked
switch whenever attacks or whenever you’re attacked
This fails that test because it can only go on creatures with non-square stats. That's a big strike against it at evergreen, as is being a triggered ability.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Shifty doesn't fail the 1/1 test any more than trample fails the 1/x test.
Prowess is a triggered ability, but that didn't stop WotC from trying it as an evergreen mechanic despite its possessing a slew of other non-evergreen qualities. They eventually realized I was right and moved it to deciduous, but they didn’t do so because it was triggered.
So why are you arguing in favor of an evergreen ability by citing something that's now deciduous? Triggered is a big non-evergreen quality. That was one of the lessons of prowess. It should be avoided going forward.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
That said it has bigger problems namely crippling high levels of complexity. While the effect itself is straight forward its interaction with other p/t modifying abilities is not. There is a reason this type of effect hasn't even shown up on 50 different magic cards despite existing since legends.
1. Entirely parasitic
2. Triggered
3. Acted as a combat trick (when triggered at “instant speed”)
4. Stacked (sometimes confusingly)
5. Interfered with set design
6. Skewed drafting
Shifty
1. Triggered
2. Complex
Or is it? I mean, is it really that difficult to understand that all p/t mods applied to a “shifted” creature are likewise switched?
Back to the complexity problem. Yes it is a huge deal. On this site in these forums I have seen multiple people continue to misunderstand how this ability interacts with pumps and minuses so if these incredibly enfranchised players don't get it the average player should be completely lost. If you go the route of reducing non square pumps then what even is the point of the mechanic.
This is an effect that is present in both colors and also have the unique feature to gain direct card advantage balanced as card filtering. We can have the effect at common with low power or high cmc creatures without being too oppressive (since it does not increment alone your resources) but potentially leading to interesting sinergies with other things (delve, reanimation, madness, etc.) but I believe is useful and interesting already per se.
This is a overall principle of game design that applies to everything, not just magic. You want to codify and create terminology for the mechanics that are commonplace, so that doing so makes the game presentation lighter, and for the things that are too complex to present in extensive form, thus you can add a terminology for it and explain in details in the rules manual.
To see this clearly, let's take a example of Defender and Trample. If Defender was not evergreen anymore the game would barely change. People would just have to read 'This creature can't attack' a couple more times and cards like High Alert would probably don't exist. However if Trample did not exist the game would change dramatically as Trample is too complex to add to a common card and thus would simply not be used aside from some weird mythic. Since Trample is by far the best evasive ability to tackle in a large monster or alongside power pumps, the game of magic would be quite substantially worse without it.
In this example you can clearly see a good evergreen ability is a ability that is fun and elegant, you want to use all the time but it's too complex to write it down and carry it's own rules baggage.
So I think you may not like Shifty as evergreen keyword but not at the grounds of complexity. Personally I think 'shifty' is among the best options. Triggered is surely a bad feature but you can easily create the static counter part using 'as'. And I also like the version with both attack/block.
My version goes as far as 'as ~ enters combat, you may switch ~ power and toughness'. And in my custom rules a creature enter combat when it attacks, blocks or fights.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
On that note, an evergreen P/T switching mechanic can act as a tool to teach the intricacies of the layer system because it can be a proper boondoggle sometimes.
In Prowess' debut, it was the (R/W)(W/U)(U/R) draft archetype. As an evergreen mechanic in (U/R), whether or not it's a draft archetype is anyone's guess. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Prowess incentivizes its drafters to deliberately play a certain ratio of particular card types in order for it to be more than incidental, which requires strict tracking while drafting. This is fine in general, but is too much for an evergreen mechanic. It can also be quite the trap. There are other negative effects it has on drafting and limited deckbuilding, but I don't feel like typing a dissertation explaining it all. Although, now that I think about it, I'm tempted to do so just so I can solicit a retraction from Doombringer who so arrogantly championed Prowess (along with a few others) as an evergreen mechanic when it was spoiled, despite my criticisms of it.
I've typed, deleted, and retyped several sarcastic responses to your insult, but in the end returned to my original intent for this thread: An open-minded discussion at best, a respectful debate at worst, always focused on the design and development of one or more custom keyword that would be plausible as real (U/R) evergreen keyword. I opened the discussion with a serious proposal of a mechanic that I sincerely believe would be viable as the (U/R) evergreen mechanic. And I stand by it.
By the way, I do know what 'parasitic' means. Consider the possibility that you might be the one who doesn't or that our definitions of it differ slightly.
QFT Thank you italofoca. I would be surprised if anyone could sensibly disagree with you here.
I personally really like your custom rules regarding combat. Very cool. Though, I still only want the ability to work upon attacking so as not to require opponents to have to track your Shifty creatures on both offense and defense, so should/would the non-triggered form of my OP proposal look like the following?
Shifty (As this creature attacks, you may switch its power and toughness until end of turn. If you do, effects that change its power and/or toughness this turn are also switched until end of turn.)
I'm sorry, but he's right. In magic game design, parasitic means that a mechanic only works within a single subset of cards (for example the Arcane ability of Kamigawa only works with other Arcane spells of the same set). On the contrary, Prowess mention "noncreature cards", which is something extremely generic, that can work for every set. Heck, even if it worked only on a single card type, it still wouldn't be parasitic.
See those MaRO posts to learn the definition of parasitic when applied on Magic design:
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/5669806237/whats-the-difference-between-parasitic-and-linear
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/57064590663/you-may-have-explained-this-but-what-does
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/151203852243/by-your-definition-of-parasitic-evermind-was-the
"You can tell how dumb someone is by how they use Mary Sue"
I’m a little bummed that this has become as much about Prowess as it has, but I guess it was inevitable.
I knew that he was in line with WotC’s explanation, but to make a long story short by not explaining myself yet again, I disagree with them and not without reason. And regurgitating MaRo’s words holds little water with me since he’s waffled so many, many, many (did I mention “many”?) times over the years because he is a master salesman.
If the rules would work more intuitive I think power/toughness switch would be the red blue evergreen mechanic.
Source: http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/174827410193/right-now-were-talking-about-if-theres-a-way-to
Hands to the sky
Give a round of applause
For the great Miss Y!
Like I said...
Obviously, I think not. Also, MaRo said it, so we can be sure that there will be an eventual reason why they can do it (like making the layers more intuitive) and he’s such a genius for making such a mechanic.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Yes, but that wasn’t really my point was it?
I think I’m going to include more detailed reminder text:
Shifty (You may switch this creature’s power and toughness as it attacks. If you do, all effects that change it’s power and/or toughness this turn are also switched.)
Strangely enough giving a +N/-N or -N/+N bonus to the stats, where N is the difference between power and toughness at the moment the ability goes off, would work in a way that many people would think of as more intuitive without touching the layer system.
However that is of course much more wordy then switch power and toughness.
Hands to the sky
Give a round of applause
For the great Miss Y!
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
Lets take a step away from that and look back at the mechanic. Italofca makes a good point however it still functions very differently from all other abilities because it has you make a choice which is a significant hurdle for both smooth gameplay and complexity. So I propose Shifty(As long as ~ is attacking switch its power and toughness)
You’re absolutely right. I apologize. I should have used the word “dependent”.
Regarding Shifty. You bring up a good point. I used “you may” for a couple of reasons:
1. It’s easy to imagine feel-bad scenarios were it mandatory.
2. Mandatory version seems weak compared to existing evergreens but on par when optional.
I think both versions are worth playtesting.
Regarding your iteration of Shifty. I think the effect should last until end of turn. Otherwise, it could be very difficult to track the effects of damage and pumps after combat. So how about:
Shifty (If this creature attacked this turn, it’s power and toughness are switched until end of turn.)
Shifty (At the beginning of each combat, you may switch this creature’s power and toughness until end of turn. If you do, effects that change its power and/or toughness this turn are also switched until end of turn.)
EDIT: Or is a nontrigger version possible?
Shifty (As each combat begins, you may switch this creature’s power and toughness until end of turn. If you do, effects that change its power and/or toughness this turn are also switched until end of turn.)