It's actually worded as intended. It's not supposed to block creatures from phasing back in if it's phased out itself, and as such it requires a little bit of playing with it to let you use it as a means of annoying your opponent. (The easiest way, obviously, is taking an extra turn. He phases back in during that turn's untap step, and you just leave him alone, keeping your opponent's creature held up in limbo.)
In that case, it feels misleading because of the way the first mechanic works. I like that function better than what I thought you intended. Either way, the intuition is a bit off.
So, I'm new here, MagicDeckVortex was taken down, and I was looking for a place to play with my creativity. I'm just a little murky on the rules for new people mid-month. Do I vote for two people per day in previous days, month to date? Am I reading that correctly?
Edit: Apparently I made this account in 2007, but it's been years since I've actually used the site.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Experience is going through different scenarios, not the same one over and over again.
So, I'm new here, MagicDeckVortex was taken down, and I was looking for a place to play with my creativity. I'm just a little murky on the rules for new people mid-month. Do I vote for two people per day in previous days, month to date? Am I reading that correctly?
Edit: Apparently I made this account in 2007, but it's been years since I've actually used the site.
Vote for two people in the latest poll then post your card in the same thread.
Welcome and look forward to seeing your designs.
Teywern, Nature's Whisper by Bolas, the Mindsculptor
- This guy just falls flat. He's such a boring planeswalker. It's also a pet peeve of mine to see heavily green costed cards that make any color of mana. It sort of defeats the deckbuilding purpose to allow any color yet force a heavy green commitment to cast it.
I'm not sure what you mean by flat. She's busty. She may look boring to you, but I'll settle for a plain jane rather than a random and punishing Tibalt anytime.
I'm not sure what format you're talking about, but she's playable in every format, perhaps the "boringness" it exudes to you. When one debates on a certain card, he/she would probably have a format in mind. So what format were you thinking when she was flat? =)
In any case, nobody appreciates Naturalize in draft formats, when it's literally in each set, but would die for one when in a pinch.
I also think many of us have drafted mono colors with a splash before, I see no reason to pass/ignore something that accelerates into a 4 drop, or help me cast a doomblade, fireball, etc. Again, giving 3 options on first blush is by no slouch boring.
You mentioned about being peeved about certain things, this is probably one. Perhaps having a rational and objective view would help? Everyone designs for a reason, a format (like cube, EDH, limited). We should help each other out in terms of wording, costing, appropriateness. We would get less peeved about things if we can see past our bias.
I guess I missed the days of Jura being in standard, so I scoop him up whenever possible in cube. Such an interesting card. I've never been inclined to play with champion of justice though. Even though I would like a calciderm that survived wrath of god.
@ voidnothing: yes I'm sure spikes will enjoy here more than Johnnies or Timmies do. There's no ultimate because it's intended; a toolbox.
@ blydden, planeswalkers are really hard to design. It's hard to hit a home run when it comes to them because it's very hard to capture what a planeswalker should or should not do.
Take my Teywern example; I'm sure it has received mixed reviews. I'm sure yours would too.
Btw, It's a walker which makes different kinds of tokens. Perhaps what will glue it is to give a populate ability? I've a walker that's fairly similar, and that's before the new legend rulings lol you may wanna take a look at the render
Is there a background story to your walker? Sometimes building/writing up a background may help you create a walker. Sometimes even the render may help you make one. Is he/she a summoner like mine was?
An Archon usually represents an event. Perhaps an ill omen (usually is).
I wasn't trying to make something that pushed envelopes with Bly Dden-Rael 1.0, since he was my first ever planeswalker to try and break my planeswalker-phobia.
Didn't work, but I learned things if I ever get the courage to do another planeswalker.
Maybe I'll figure out something new in the future for 2.0 or a different person. Just for now I wanted to make sure people don't look at my signature and go "wow this card is terrible"
I figure that's too much to hope for, but maybe it might actually work out. x-x
I think what a lot of people want in a planeswalker is a strong theme and for the abilities to be powerful and stick strongly to that theme. Many recent planeswalkers are based as much on flavor as anything else and that gives them a strong mechanical direction.
Take Ashiok, for example, who "weaves nightmares" by attacking the player's mind, extracting knowledge and turning it against, making thoughts into nightmare realities. Even Elspeth has a theme of endless ranks of soldiers, slaying monsters and eventually overwhelming with the power of friendship!
From that perspective, the problem with Teywern is that there is no theme, it's just 3 good green abilities on an aggressively costed card. Is Teywern good? Would it see play? Probably, yes (heck, I voted for it). Was it exciting and flavorful? No.
TBH, I never understood Tibalt's 2nd and 3rd abilities either. They're felt disjointed and disconnected, hence the dislike? However, had he had better abilities, I won't think he'll be as distasteful as he seems.
There's a lot of iterations to Teywern, but ultimately, she's chosen to have more function than fashion (the 2 common fates cards have).
I'm not sure what you mean by flat. She's busty. She may look boring to you, but I'll settle for a plain jane rather than a random and punishing Tibalt anytime.
I think planeswalker design is misunderstood on a fundamental level by the amateur card creating crowd. Which isn't to say that you misunderstand it (or even that I do understand it). I've been forcing myself to design them for years and have only recently begun to appreciate the nuance put into the original WOTC five. It feels like it took since Lorwyn just to crack the surface!
I'm not sure what format you're talking about, but she's playable in every format, perhaps the "boringness" it exudes to you. When one debates on a certain card, he/she would probably have a format in mind. So what format were you thinking when she was flat? =)
Format wasn't a determining factor. What makes a planeswalker exciting is that it creates a play style that feels like its an individual in the game. Your card lacks this. I'm not talking about internal synergy; planeswalkers don't have to be as closed-minded as Nissa Revane. Rather, what actually gets accomplished by playing this planeswalker? What are you building toward? It's base abilities are just catch-all vanilla spells. The whole thing just seems to lack direction. It's not improperly powered; it just doesn't represent the card type well at all.
I also think many of us have drafted mono colors with a splash before, I see no reason to pass/ignore something that accelerates into a 4 drop, or help me cast a doomblade, fireball, etc. Again, giving 3 options on first blush is by no slouch boring.
It's the philosophy behind multicolor play that makes it so awkward. A card that produces any color of mana is trying to facilitate the play of... multiple colors! Forcing a double green into the cost warps the deckbuilding process and makes it more difficult for that mana to have a multicolor impact. Go look at all the green cards that provide any color of mana. The only ones that cost double green have the ability to create multiple mana at a time to offset the color-intensive drawback.
You mentioned about being peeved about certain things, this is probably one. Perhaps having a rational and objective view would help? Everyone designs for a reason, a format (like cube, EDH, limited). We should help each other out in terms of wording, costing, appropriateness. We would get less peeved about things if we can see past our bias.
I try not to argue semantics too much, but "peeve" doesn't have to suggest an irrational mindset. It annoys me because it's an unnecessary conflict in design. Strange as it seems, had the ability just produced green mana, I would have liked it more. It would have belonged to the package more completely.
At the risk of being torn apart in the same fashion, and as a self-imposed challenge, I'm gonna post a planeswalker today. Like I said above, I think the design process for them is misunderstood and that most of my planeswalkers are bad designs. So, this should be fun.
Thanks for the reply. I think when one becomes a cube designer (like I am), and adds customs into his pool, I think he/she has to play developer. Teywern is a product of necessity; she is indeed a catch-all walker. She gives splash options to a G/x drafter. She's the Naturalize that you don't feel bad putting in your 40-card deck.
Magic in recent years has spoilt us with top-down design that we kinda forget about bottom-up design. True, it may not seem like design when mashing in abilities into one card. But we've seen that IRL. Cards like Voice of Resurgence, Great Sable Stag are fundamentally "boring" cards borne out of a developer's head. Now, could we still say it isn't design? Our environment necessitates a card to push a certain archetype/meta, or simply to balance the playing field. What I've done with Teywern fulfils this. It may not look pretty, but it's needed. It's necessary design. Like all our commons, vanillas, good and bad.
I'm not sure how one designs without a certain template/frame, I suppose we all can't do inspired design always, 24/7. As for me, I tend to design with a format in mind. Rather, cards that function in multi-formats. What I'm saying is that it's better to give a card some home which in turns gives you a better idea or scope to work with.
And yes, the Lorwyn 5 are the Holy Grail in terms of Planeswalker Design 101. However, as MaRo mentioned, planeswalker design is finite. What he meant indirectly is that boundaries will be pushed as slowly as possible. What I'm doing (and perhaps everyone should) is to find and extrapolate all this possibilities and stretch our imaginations of what a planeswalker can do or can't do.
We live in a world of popular building/voting. Elspeth, Sun's Champion is a result of being a fan favorite in RnD. Our recent You Make the Card is a result of polls (although that one is highly farcical). Innistrad and Theros are based on popular tropes/tales. Likewise, I've calls from my playgroup to design a multi-tool walker with no particular ultimate. Teywern has went through numerous iterations and this is likely to be one of the last.
Planeswalkers are debate-inducing; people are naturally wanting to compare previous works. They 're unique, divisive, and generate lotsa hype. 2cmc walkers are certainly that. It's probably impractical to make a 2cmc walker that has 1 colorless in its cost. As much as I dislike Teywern's GG cost, she's just a victim of numbers. Perhaps she looks better at 1GG, who knows.
As for her ability to add any color, again I stress that options are there for people who draft her. It's a classic Fashion vs Function problem and this time Function wins. She's after all, The Functional Walker. =)
Thanks for the reply. I think when one becomes a cube designer (like I am), and adds customs into his pool, I think he/she has to play developer. Teywern is a product of necessity; she is indeed a catch-all walker. She gives splash options to a G/x drafter. She's the Naturalize that you don't feel bad putting in your 40-card deck.
Ah, that sort of draft. That changes some of my draft commentary. I'm a Johnny, Melvin, bottom up, functionality sort of designer. I've drifted more and more toward the center over the years, but I still drool over clever mechanics moreso than flavorful depictions.
Magic in recent years has spoilt us with top-down design that we kinda forget about bottom-up design. True, it may not seem like design when mashing in abilities into one card. But we've seen that IRL. Cards like Voice of Resurgence, Great Sable Stag are fundamentally "boring" cards borne out of a developer's head. Now, could we still say it isn't design? Our environment necessitates a card to push a certain archetype/meta, or simply to balance the playing field. What I've done with Teywern fulfils this. It may not look pretty, but it's needed. It's necessary design. Like all our commons, vanillas, good and bad.
You didn't design a common, though. And mythics, if nothing else, are intended to be flashy. In fact, had you designed this as an uncommon planeswalker with, say, only two abilities, I would have liked it MORE. Perhaps my use of the word "boring" wasn't descriptive enough. (Though it does bring up a salient point about card creating competitions.)
I'm not sure how one designs without a certain template/frame, I suppose we all can't do inspired design always, 24/7. As for me, I tend to design with a format in mind. Rather, cards that function in multi-formats. What I'm saying is that it's better to give a card some home which in turns gives you a better idea or scope to work with.
I agree. I tend to design with a setting in mind rather than a format. That is, I imagine, even if only briefly, the sort of set any given card would be released in. That's not exactly true for all of my designs, but it's the most common context I use. I doubt that most cards are created without some sort of context.
And yes, the Lorwyn 5 are the Holy Grail in terms of Planeswalker Design 101. However, as MaRo mentioned, planeswalker design is finite. What he meant indirectly is that boundaries will be pushed as slowly as possible. What I'm doing (and perhaps everyone should) is to find and extrapolate all this possibilities and stretch our imaginations of what a planeswalker can do or can't do.
What you designed is a planeswalker without a central goal or an ultimate to speak of. I don't find these things inherently problematic. I think they can be used to extrapolate on what we know about planeswalker design. Using the same example as earlier, I think it's possible in a distant future to make a planeswalker themed set with walkers at lower rarities. Your specific design didn't say much to me about taking planeswalkers in different or new directions, though. It just looked like a blunt tool. Consider also that my commentary isn't just developer notes, but also voter notes. At least part of these things are just "this is why I didn't vote on it" rather than "this is why it's a poor design."
We live in a world of popular building/voting. Elspeth, Sun's Champion is a result of being a fan favorite in RnD. Our recent You Make the Card is a result of polls (although that one is highly farcical). Innistrad and Theros are based on popular tropes/tales. Likewise, I've calls from my playgroup to design a multi-tool walker with no particular ultimate. Teywern has went through numerous iterations and this is likely to be one of the last.
Fair enough. If it's intended for cube, I'd still consider either changing its mana cost to 1G (and maybe weakening the tokens if you feel that's too powerful) or its first ability to G. I know that reeks of Tarmogoyf syndrome, but I think it'll allow the base ability to function better.
Planeswalkers are debate-inducing; people are naturally wanting to compare previous works. They 're unique, divisive, and generate lotsa hype. 2cmc walkers are certainly that. It's probably impractical to make a 2cmc walker that has 1 colorless in its cost. As much as I dislike Teywern's GG cost, she's just a victim of numbers. Perhaps she looks better at 1GG, who knows.
I don't think it's ridiculous to cost a planeswalker at 1G. It just has to be done properly. Which isn't the easiest thing, I admit. Have you considered just making her two abilities strong?
Mythics being flashy is relative. Voice doesn't look flashy. For all we know, Wizards have a mythic checklist, flashiness is BUT one of them. Planeswalkers for example, are always mythic. Teywern will always be mythic because she's a planeswalker, and not because she's an amalgamation of "blunt" abilities. That said, one can also point that her toolbox abilities are what makes her special.
And yes, I did consider a 2-ability walker, but that's probably another design for another day. As for 2cmc walkers with 1 generic in the cost, it's been highly debated. I rather rev up the abilities and have a relatively expensive walker (>2) rather than having diluted abilities. Also, planeswalkers should technically be adept enough to "cast at least three spells", passive or nonpassive.
There're a number of factors why Teywern is GG instead of blah blah blah... I think I'd leave it at that the main thing she was a Cube necessity.
A small aside on voter notes: It's as you say, rush. Because you're the only one commenting on every other card, therefore you're influencing an outcome base on your opinion, like it or not. I like what you're doing, don't get me wrong, but again, you need to be levelled in all your critique. Every single card.
Mythics being flashy is relative. Voice doesn't look flashy. For all we know, Wizards have a mythic checklist, flashiness is BUT one of them. Planeswalkers for example, are always mythic. Teywern will always be mythic because she's a planeswalker, and not because she's an amalgamation of "blunt" abilities. That said, one can also point that her toolbox abilities are what makes her special. But "flashy" is a big, big checkbox. Planeswalkers ought to have some compelling part about them, even if that isn't the strict definition of flashiness - Gideon Jura is cool because he can turn into a creature. Tibalt, the Fiend-Blooded is cool because he embodies risk and since both of his minus-loyalty abilities are reactive he's a gambler's card. "Efficient toolbox" isn't even cool to Spike. A Spike will run a card that's cheap and can accomplish things because he feels it's a necessity, and he won't cherish it like he will the sauce that wins him games like a Thragtusk or Bonfire of the Damned.
...
A small aside on voter notes: It's as you say, rush. Because you're the only one commenting on every other card, therefore you're influencing an outcome base on your opinion, like it or not. I like what you're doing, don't get me wrong, but again, you need to be levelled in all your critique. Every single card. This drama does not need to happen.
Mythics being flashy is relative. Voice doesn't look flashy. For all we know, Wizards have a mythic checklist, flashiness is BUT one of them. Planeswalkers for example, are always mythic. Teywern will always be mythic because she's a planeswalker, and not because she's an amalgamation of "blunt" abilities. That said, one can also point that her toolbox abilities are what makes her special.
Flashiness is their stated goal. They aren't the best at following it of course, :p.
And yes, I did consider a 2-ability walker, but that's probably another design for another day. As for 2cmc walkers with 1 generic in the cost, it's been highly debated. I rather rev up the abilities and have a relatively expensive walker (>2) rather than having diluted abilities. Also, planeswalkers should technically be adept enough to "cast at least three spells", passive or nonpassive.
Fair enough. You have your goals. Without a stated context, the cards have to be given some by the reviewer. Your card doesn't provide much on the surface: it's a cheap, generic planeswalker without an "ultimate". The only implication I see from that is a push to make planeswalkers more general, which seems fitting for a planeswalker oriented set. Hence why it feels odd as a mythic.
That's the trouble with context, of course. Most of my judgments are gonna be based on where Magic is and where it can conceivably go given the card in question.
A small aside on voter notes: It's as you say, rush. Because you're the only one commenting on every other card, therefore you're influencing an outcome base on your opinion, like it or not. I like what you're doing, don't get me wrong, but again, you need to be levelled in all your critique. Every single card.
I'm not sure what you're saying with that last comment. Care to elaborate? My critique is based on my likes and dislikes, what I feel is good design and what is bad design, overall presentation, cohesion, understanding of modern design, creativity, the implied contexts, and a number of other difficult to name factors that crop up individually card to card. If I don't have much to say about a card, I won't strain over finding something to say. Some cards, given the nature of this contest, don't demand much commentary. Some do. I really don't think people even read my comments before voting. My goal with the comments is to offer instructional feedback based on my experiences with amateur game design. This isn't my home card creation forum; I'm a WOTC resident. I don't post around these parts much. So the one place I do post, I unload.
That's where the argument ends. All the other stuff is unimportant. This is where your decision to submit the card to the DCC fails. You created the card for a certain audience. You get your evaluation from a different audience.
All the passion and indignation you feel about the topic is entirely useless. You decided to submit the card in a contest that by its very nature has people look at the card without context and judge by their own appreciation.
You deliberately deviate from the well-known standards of planeswalker evaluation. You will get people using those standards ignore your card.
If you make the card for your playgroup and they like it that's a success. Everyone else is not your target audience and didn't get to tell you what they want from a 'walker beforehand.
Now they do: They want it flashy and top-down (since they are characters with defined traits and not generic mooks). The feedback you get right now on what is missing on your card is equally valuable to your future designs you submit to the DCC as your friends feedback is to what you design for your playgroup.
You didn't try to tell your friends that they are wrong with their wishes, did you? You bend to them when designing this card, isn't that right? Do you react differently to the feedback you get here? If so, why?
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]
In that case, it feels misleading because of the way the first mechanic works. I like that function better than what I thought you intended. Either way, the intuition is a bit off.
Edit: Apparently I made this account in 2007, but it's been years since I've actually used the site.
Vote for two people in the latest poll then post your card in the same thread.
Welcome and look forward to seeing your designs.
Are you designing commons? Check out my primer on NWO.
Interested in making a custom set? Check out my Set skeleton and archetype primer.
I also write articles about getting started with custom card creation.
Go and PLAYTEST your designs, you will learn more in a single playtests than a dozen discussions.
My custom sets:
Dreamscape
Coins of Mercalis [COMPLETE]
Exodus of Zendikar - ON HOLD
Hopefully they'll be better than mine
I'm not sure what you mean by flat. She's busty. She may look boring to you, but I'll settle for a plain jane rather than a random and punishing Tibalt anytime.
I'm not sure what format you're talking about, but she's playable in every format, perhaps the "boringness" it exudes to you. When one debates on a certain card, he/she would probably have a format in mind. So what format were you thinking when she was flat? =)
In any case, nobody appreciates Naturalize in draft formats, when it's literally in each set, but would die for one when in a pinch.
I also think many of us have drafted mono colors with a splash before, I see no reason to pass/ignore something that accelerates into a 4 drop, or help me cast a doomblade, fireball, etc. Again, giving 3 options on first blush is by no slouch boring.
GG is small commitment for what she brings, we're not talking about Arbor Colossus or Cloudthresher levels.
You mentioned about being peeved about certain things, this is probably one. Perhaps having a rational and objective view would help? Everyone designs for a reason, a format (like cube, EDH, limited). We should help each other out in terms of wording, costing, appropriateness. We would get less peeved about things if we can see past our bias.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
You must understand that a pure Spike 'walker won't thrill everyone. She bores the hell out of me too.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Tempted to use the planeswalker in my signature as my next entry. Someone talk me out of it.
I guess old gideon is sorta frustrating to play against though!
Cube talk, design community and much much more!
I do...
I guess I missed the days of Jura being in standard, so I scoop him up whenever possible in cube. Such an interesting card. I've never been inclined to play with champion of justice though. Even though I would like a calciderm that survived wrath of god.
Cube talk, design community and much much more!
@ blydden, planeswalkers are really hard to design. It's hard to hit a home run when it comes to them because it's very hard to capture what a planeswalker should or should not do.
Take my Teywern example; I'm sure it has received mixed reviews. I'm sure yours would too.
Btw, It's a walker which makes different kinds of tokens. Perhaps what will glue it is to give a populate ability? I've a walker that's fairly similar, and that's before the new legend rulings lol you may wanna take a look at the render
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
I mean, I could do this, maybe?
-?: You get an emblem with "At the beginning of your end step, put a 4/4 white Archon token with flying onto the battlefield."
Also, I have now taken your claim as a challenge. Fair warning~!
An Archon usually represents an event. Perhaps an ill omen (usually is).
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
I will say that he likes having a lot of friends, though!
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Didn't work, but I learned things if I ever get the courage to do another planeswalker.
Maybe I'll figure out something new in the future for 2.0 or a different person. Just for now I wanted to make sure people don't look at my signature and go "wow this card is terrible"
I figure that's too much to hope for, but maybe it might actually work out. x-x
Take Ashiok, for example, who "weaves nightmares" by attacking the player's mind, extracting knowledge and turning it against, making thoughts into nightmare realities. Even Elspeth has a theme of endless ranks of soldiers, slaying monsters and eventually overwhelming with the power of friendship!
From that perspective, the problem with Teywern is that there is no theme, it's just 3 good green abilities on an aggressively costed card. Is Teywern good? Would it see play? Probably, yes (heck, I voted for it). Was it exciting and flavorful? No.
TBH, I never understood Tibalt's 2nd and 3rd abilities either. They're felt disjointed and disconnected, hence the dislike? However, had he had better abilities, I won't think he'll be as distasteful as he seems.
There's a lot of iterations to Teywern, but ultimately, she's chosen to have more function than fashion (the 2 common fates cards have).
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
I think planeswalker design is misunderstood on a fundamental level by the amateur card creating crowd. Which isn't to say that you misunderstand it (or even that I do understand it). I've been forcing myself to design them for years and have only recently begun to appreciate the nuance put into the original WOTC five. It feels like it took since Lorwyn just to crack the surface!
Format wasn't a determining factor. What makes a planeswalker exciting is that it creates a play style that feels like its an individual in the game. Your card lacks this. I'm not talking about internal synergy; planeswalkers don't have to be as closed-minded as Nissa Revane. Rather, what actually gets accomplished by playing this planeswalker? What are you building toward? It's base abilities are just catch-all vanilla spells. The whole thing just seems to lack direction. It's not improperly powered; it just doesn't represent the card type well at all.
That we don't. But talking about a mythic rare in relation to draft is a thin topic at best.
It's the philosophy behind multicolor play that makes it so awkward. A card that produces any color of mana is trying to facilitate the play of... multiple colors! Forcing a double green into the cost warps the deckbuilding process and makes it more difficult for that mana to have a multicolor impact. Go look at all the green cards that provide any color of mana. The only ones that cost double green have the ability to create multiple mana at a time to offset the color-intensive drawback.
I try not to argue semantics too much, but "peeve" doesn't have to suggest an irrational mindset. It annoys me because it's an unnecessary conflict in design. Strange as it seems, had the ability just produced green mana, I would have liked it more. It would have belonged to the package more completely.
At the risk of being torn apart in the same fashion, and as a self-imposed challenge, I'm gonna post a planeswalker today. Like I said above, I think the design process for them is misunderstood and that most of my planeswalkers are bad designs. So, this should be fun.
Magic in recent years has spoilt us with top-down design that we kinda forget about bottom-up design. True, it may not seem like design when mashing in abilities into one card. But we've seen that IRL. Cards like Voice of Resurgence, Great Sable Stag are fundamentally "boring" cards borne out of a developer's head. Now, could we still say it isn't design? Our environment necessitates a card to push a certain archetype/meta, or simply to balance the playing field. What I've done with Teywern fulfils this. It may not look pretty, but it's needed. It's necessary design. Like all our commons, vanillas, good and bad.
I'm not sure how one designs without a certain template/frame, I suppose we all can't do inspired design always, 24/7. As for me, I tend to design with a format in mind. Rather, cards that function in multi-formats. What I'm saying is that it's better to give a card some home which in turns gives you a better idea or scope to work with.
And yes, the Lorwyn 5 are the Holy Grail in terms of Planeswalker Design 101. However, as MaRo mentioned, planeswalker design is finite. What he meant indirectly is that boundaries will be pushed as slowly as possible. What I'm doing (and perhaps everyone should) is to find and extrapolate all this possibilities and stretch our imaginations of what a planeswalker can do or can't do.
We live in a world of popular building/voting. Elspeth, Sun's Champion is a result of being a fan favorite in RnD. Our recent You Make the Card is a result of polls (although that one is highly farcical). Innistrad and Theros are based on popular tropes/tales. Likewise, I've calls from my playgroup to design a multi-tool walker with no particular ultimate. Teywern has went through numerous iterations and this is likely to be one of the last.
Planeswalkers are debate-inducing; people are naturally wanting to compare previous works. They 're unique, divisive, and generate lotsa hype. 2cmc walkers are certainly that. It's probably impractical to make a 2cmc walker that has 1 colorless in its cost. As much as I dislike Teywern's GG cost, she's just a victim of numbers. Perhaps she looks better at 1GG, who knows.
As for her ability to add any color, again I stress that options are there for people who draft her. It's a classic Fashion vs Function problem and this time Function wins. She's after all, The Functional Walker. =)
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
Ah, that sort of draft. That changes some of my draft commentary. I'm a Johnny, Melvin, bottom up, functionality sort of designer. I've drifted more and more toward the center over the years, but I still drool over clever mechanics moreso than flavorful depictions.
You didn't design a common, though. And mythics, if nothing else, are intended to be flashy. In fact, had you designed this as an uncommon planeswalker with, say, only two abilities, I would have liked it MORE. Perhaps my use of the word "boring" wasn't descriptive enough. (Though it does bring up a salient point about card creating competitions.)
I agree. I tend to design with a setting in mind rather than a format. That is, I imagine, even if only briefly, the sort of set any given card would be released in. That's not exactly true for all of my designs, but it's the most common context I use. I doubt that most cards are created without some sort of context.
What you designed is a planeswalker without a central goal or an ultimate to speak of. I don't find these things inherently problematic. I think they can be used to extrapolate on what we know about planeswalker design. Using the same example as earlier, I think it's possible in a distant future to make a planeswalker themed set with walkers at lower rarities. Your specific design didn't say much to me about taking planeswalkers in different or new directions, though. It just looked like a blunt tool. Consider also that my commentary isn't just developer notes, but also voter notes. At least part of these things are just "this is why I didn't vote on it" rather than "this is why it's a poor design."
Fair enough. If it's intended for cube, I'd still consider either changing its mana cost to 1G (and maybe weakening the tokens if you feel that's too powerful) or its first ability to G. I know that reeks of Tarmogoyf syndrome, but I think it'll allow the base ability to function better.
I don't think it's ridiculous to cost a planeswalker at 1G. It just has to be done properly. Which isn't the easiest thing, I admit. Have you considered just making her two abilities strong?
And yes, I did consider a 2-ability walker, but that's probably another design for another day. As for 2cmc walkers with 1 generic in the cost, it's been highly debated. I rather rev up the abilities and have a relatively expensive walker (>2) rather than having diluted abilities. Also, planeswalkers should technically be adept enough to "cast at least three spells", passive or nonpassive.
There're a number of factors why Teywern is GG instead of blah blah blah... I think I'd leave it at that the main thing she was a Cube necessity.
A small aside on voter notes: It's as you say, rush. Because you're the only one commenting on every other card, therefore you're influencing an outcome base on your opinion, like it or not. I like what you're doing, don't get me wrong, but again, you need to be levelled in all your critique. Every single card.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
Comments are in bold.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Flashiness is their stated goal. They aren't the best at following it of course, :p.
Fair enough. You have your goals. Without a stated context, the cards have to be given some by the reviewer. Your card doesn't provide much on the surface: it's a cheap, generic planeswalker without an "ultimate". The only implication I see from that is a push to make planeswalkers more general, which seems fitting for a planeswalker oriented set. Hence why it feels odd as a mythic.
That's the trouble with context, of course. Most of my judgments are gonna be based on where Magic is and where it can conceivably go given the card in question.
You're a better judge of how it will affect your needs than I am, that's for sure.
I'm not sure what you're saying with that last comment. Care to elaborate? My critique is based on my likes and dislikes, what I feel is good design and what is bad design, overall presentation, cohesion, understanding of modern design, creativity, the implied contexts, and a number of other difficult to name factors that crop up individually card to card. If I don't have much to say about a card, I won't strain over finding something to say. Some cards, given the nature of this contest, don't demand much commentary. Some do. I really don't think people even read my comments before voting. My goal with the comments is to offer instructional feedback based on my experiences with amateur game design. This isn't my home card creation forum; I'm a WOTC resident. I don't post around these parts much. So the one place I do post, I unload.
That's where the argument ends. All the other stuff is unimportant. This is where your decision to submit the card to the DCC fails. You created the card for a certain audience. You get your evaluation from a different audience.
All the passion and indignation you feel about the topic is entirely useless. You decided to submit the card in a contest that by its very nature has people look at the card without context and judge by their own appreciation.
You deliberately deviate from the well-known standards of planeswalker evaluation. You will get people using those standards ignore your card.
If you make the card for your playgroup and they like it that's a success. Everyone else is not your target audience and didn't get to tell you what they want from a 'walker beforehand.
Now they do: They want it flashy and top-down (since they are characters with defined traits and not generic mooks). The feedback you get right now on what is missing on your card is equally valuable to your future designs you submit to the DCC as your friends feedback is to what you design for your playgroup.
You didn't try to tell your friends that they are wrong with their wishes, did you? You bend to them when designing this card, isn't that right? Do you react differently to the feedback you get here? If so, why?
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