I think you're overloading your set by adding vanishing. Morph was only kept in Khans after they came up with the Clan model because it worked well as pseudo-color fixing in a set that needed it. Vanishing is only adding complexity to the set here.
That will be somewhere between difficult and impossible. Vanishing is mechanically critical to the second set where it's referenced by about 20% of the set (the tension of getting short-term value from removing counters from cards that want more counters is the conceit of that set) and is how the flavor of the plane's dwindling time is communicated in mechanics. Honestly, it would be easier to diminish or jettison the five mono-colored mechanics than vanishing as they largely exist for mechanical definition and utility for each color and take a backseat in set two. Don't get me wrong, I understand killing your darlings, it's just not easy to lift out vanishing from the block without creating issues.
What does this overloading/complexity look like for you? Perhaps if I understood your perspective, alternatives would be more clear.
Restore needs to be reworded at the very least, because current wording lets you restore when you have no cards in hand. Also, it will trigger for each restore card in your graveyard regardless of how it is worded, but it currently lets you return your most valuable restore card for the lowest restore value among cards in your graveyard.
Thank you, I was concerned about the wording. Would the following work?
(At the beginning of your upkeep, if you have at least N cards in hand you may return this card from your graveyard to the top of your library. If you do, put exactly N cards from your hand on top of your library in any order.)
Finally, your wording will put the restored card on top, and then the cards from hand on top of that, meaning you don't get the card you restored for multiple draws.
Yes. The mechanic is my take on Buyback and one of the things that made it so crippling in certain decks (blue permission, mostly) was that you had the card back in hand for use again immediately. Since restore was going to be on the exact same types of spells that made buyback so oppressive, I wanted to give a degree of delay so that playstyle wouldn't be as easy to sustain.
Restore 2 (At the beginning of your upkeep, you may put exactly two cards from your hand on top of your library in any order. If you do, put [CARDNAME] on top of you library.)
This is better wording/order and it creates the dependency that you must have card in hand to restore. However, this mechanic is (a) will potentially create repetitive game states (like Buyback does) and (b) cost more than the effect is worth due to the loss of card advantage. Putting the restored card in hand instead of the top of the deck would solve the second problem, but not the first.
The first point is the aspect of buyback I wanted to solve a little bit. I always liked that the mechanic helped make relatively basic effects more interesting because they could be reused consistently. I dialed back on the immediacy as well as the consistency (restore requires cards in hand you don't mind going a turn or two without which means restore can be "turned off" by gamestates more frequently than buyback) to restrict the repetitiveness and oppressive nature of buyback. I was also inspired by the cycle of spells with suspend in Future Sight that re-suspend themselves upon resolution with a three-turn clock. I liked the sense of an impending effect, though I wanted a bit more flexibility and decision-making than that cycle since once they got going there was really not much more input from the caster and limited points of interaction for opponents.
The second point is a concern I had from the mechanic's inception. Balancing the individual cards was challenging as not being careful would result in Buyback 2.0 in terms of controlling/dominating games, and playing it too safe would render the cards too weak to be usable. Plus, balancing Limited with Constructed. I decided to not put restore on any cards that would be exceptionally back-breaking like a counterspell, it's largely utility pieces like twiddling, making a creature unblockable, etc.
I suppose the right balance is the greatest number of turns players are willing to
Manaburst is an interesting idea. It might make the effect more interesting if you found a way to make the ability scale with the amount of mana in the pool, rather than being two or more. This would encourage actually tapping out rather than tapping just enough to get the bonus.
The mechanic started out like that originally, and stratified by rarity. I think it was 2-3-4 or 2-4-6 with the rares being bomby for the extra required mana and the mythic had an effect that scaled with the amount of extra mana. They were too bomby, though, and in the last pass on the set before I started posting it I synced up all the values to one value. I think the challenge with variable values is that the mechanic felt too complex.
Do you think it would help to have both? Most cards "turn on" at two extra mana, but a few scale the effect based on the amount to encourage some bigger commitments or late-game bomb plays?
I don't think hunt will play as well as you want it too, so you'd need top playtest this a lot. The opposite ability (Thorn Elemental) is good because it breaks stalemates, but in hunt's case it will rarely be better to deal damage to a create in place of just reducing the opponent's life total.
Having the hunter deal damage to the marked creature in addition to the player would create some more interesting choice, but mostly would just force the player to block with the marked creature. Having each creature hunting a different creature and changing those targets each turn will also create memory issues.
I'm not sure the in addition rider increases choices, my feeling is that it would restrict choice in that there would be a right choice of doing both and rarely would a player do otherwise. And like you said, the defending player would likely just block with the creature(s) being hunted.
The interesting choice to me for the player doing the hunting is whether the loss of damage to the dome is worth it to pick off a creature. Take, for instance, the 5/5 trampler with hunt. If it isn't blocked, it's probably best to just hit the face but that math can change depending on the state of the board. Are you hunting a flying finisher? Maybe killing it is worth the turn. Chumped with a bit of trample damage spilling over? Maybe that couple points of damage are better used picking off a creature that's making life difficult. And on the other side, playing against hunt is interesting in that it puts the pressure on. Which creatures to chump with to buy a turn an important utility creature or a bomb that can win the game for you in a few turns, when to let the hunter through and when not to, when to play a creature that may be a soft target, etc.
Memory issues are a fair point, though in playtesting, it was rare to have more than three creatures hunting at any one time, and relatively uncommon for them to be all hunting different creatures. Usually, the hunting player went all in on one creature to ensure its death (either in redundancy of attackers in case of blocks, or to tag team a bigger creature), sometimes only two creatures were selected to keep the defender guessing, or (least frequently) all different creatures were picked to create a pseudo board wipe. I actually expected memory issues, to be honest, and I was surprised that the tendency was to employ hunt in a way that wasn't all that memory-intensive. Whether that was because of real strategic choices or to avoid the memory issues isn't clear.
One of my favorite moments was when the hunting player had two 2/2s attacking into a lone 1/5 that was being hunted by both. It would block one, and would take another 2 from the unblocked hunter because the attacking player had effects that trigger when a hunted creature is damaged by a creature hunting it. It was worth redirecting that 2 damage for a couple turns to get a bit of advantage from the triggers because that advantage led to a faster win than the 2 damage would have.
Here's an out of the box idea, based on the monarch:
When this creature enters the battlefield, target creature or planeswalker becomes the hunted. (Whenever that permanent's controller is dealt combat damage, that much damage is dealt to the hunted)
The hunted becomes a marker that only one creature at a time can have, and means that whatever damage the player doesn't block also gets dealt to that creature. There might be a way to make it only relevant to creatures with the Hunt ability, but I'd need to think harder on the wording.
I'd probably leave the "or untaps" component since I want a hunting creature to be able to hunt more than once without requiring other hunting creatures, but I like this version (with the addition of "by creatures with hunt" to the combat damage clause). The most common strategy was to limit the hunted creatures to one a lot of the time, anyway, though I have concerns I'd want to playtest out. At the end of the day, hunt was the most utility-driven of the five and this version preserves that intent, I just want to make sure losing the choices made as a result of the current wording doesn't make the mechanic less fun/interesting.
There's not really cross mechanic synergy (think Surveil/Jumpstart in GRN or Outlast/Ferocious in Khans), so you'll need to find ways to make archetypes between colors that are relevant for draft.
The mechanics aren't supposed to have obvious overlap, the intent was for them to encourage focus on one color with splashes as needed. The original intent was to encourage mono-color play more purposefully, but I eased back as the second set pulled in a direction that would be hard to make work if the first set was harshly mono-colored.
When we did a few playtest drafts, players were generally pulled towards one color with a splash of another though no two examples of a color combination played quite the same. gU tended to be more controlling and focused on restore with green providing ramp to offset the tempo delay from restore, and Gu tended to be creature-based control with blue tap/untap antics assisting hunt. Color pairs don't have strict archetypes for Limited, and the requisite ten uncommon gold cards aren't strictly signposts, they're largely utility cards that can typically slot into any version of that color pair.
The draft environment of set two is much more archetype-focused, with signpost uncommons directing specific strategies, I just liked the old school feel of Katingal's Limited environment.
Feign (latest version) seems like a lot of searching and shuffling for what you're getting out of it. The cost there is also pretty small in practice, as your opponent will lose a lot of value repeatedly trying to kill creatures to bleed you off feign cards and may therefore often not bother, so these cards are going to be quite powerful. And that may make it a little hard to balance, and may be frustrating to play against.
Early on, I'd considered feign working more like grandeur and only working by discarding the card rather than searching it out from the library, but it was difficult to picture it happening frequently. The last version I tried before retreating to the initial version posted here discarded any black creature but that didn't feel like it'd play well and lost a lot of the flavor.
As for the power level, I recognized early on that the mechanic did not want to be on creatures that were a) big, and/or b) highly threatening without feign. It really gravitated towards creatures on the more fragile side so most of their interactions would create scenarios where feign was relevant. As a byproduct, that also limited how difficult they were to handle. I tried to build it as similar to regenerate with a more flexible payment and a limitation on uses (though that limitation is looser now with the less parasitic wording).
Feign is not problematic in Limited as the pool is usually so small that the ability can only trigger a few times per game, even with the updated version. Still useful, as that kind of resiliency matters in Limited games even if it only buys two or three turns. It may be more potent in Constructed, though even in that environment it didn't seem frustrating to deal with. The most potent plays I saw where feign was the decisive factor were board wipes into a lethal swing with feign creatures.
I would suggest changing the cost from searching for feign cards to mill to discarding any creature card. This makes them more flexible and less parasitic, removes the fiddle time of searching and shuffling, and means you get more out of trying to kill a feign creature so you're encouraged to do it more often and feel less bad about it when you have to do it.
I think my greatest concern is that recursion that puts creatures in your hand would easily break the mechanic if the cost is discarding a creature. A Palace Seige would make a feign creature largely indestructible and if you have anything that triggers on a discard, that could be potent.
I agree with your points, do you think this adjustment would make playing against it less fun?
The problem with defensive mechanics like Indomitable is not just whether they encouraged stalled board states, it's that they are not proactive and don't encourage interaction in the game. When you are encouraged to attack, you and your opponent who's on the defence are both forced into making interactive decisions. Things happen. When you are encouraged to hold up blockers, your opponent is often going to be forced to hold back more as well and may not attack at all. Even if the overall board states with a mechanic don't become less interactive and more stalled, the mechanic itself wants to be at the center of the interaction in the game because that's the fun part. Mechanics that live in the less fun parts of the game, well, they're less fun.
In regards to the bolded point, indomitable only ever wants to hold back one blockers. In playtesting, holding back other creatures to keep an opponent guessing was something people did once or twice before just using those creatures to attack. More often than not, the trickiest plays were ones where the white player swung with their indomitable creatures along with other creatures while keeping back a strong blocker. The defending player often had the choice of blocking the creatures with indomitable (hopefully picking off enough to make the lone blocker less challenging to swing into) or the other creatures (this was particularly nasty in GW combinations as this tactic worked well with hunt).
Your point on encouraging/discouraging interaction is well taken. And numerous defensive mechanics that limit interactions (protection, shroud/hexproof) have proved troubling for WotC, I just don't see indomitable as problematically discouraging interaction in the same way (or at least same degree) as those mechanics. Hiding behind a small blockade of indomitable creatures is the most non-interactive the mechanic gets, and even that isn't a strategy decks are going to want to do to win and most decks will play right through it as the blockade is typically pretty susceptible to damage and removal.
Indomitable is often going to serve to intimidate the opponent into making different attacks, maybe attacking with more creatures to force you to block with multiple or not attacking at all, in such a way that it isn't always going to actually trigger and often won't actually make any big trades. Especially with newer players who can often be intimidated by the prospect of losing their creatures when they attack. Exalted, on the other hand, is often going to trigger every turn, and actually directly affect the game with a big swing of damage going somewhere.
Yes, indomitable will be a bit of a rattlesnake, that's its job.
For what it's worth, I really only saw a decrease in activations in the late game. In the early game, indomitable triggered almost every turn as long as there was an attack. Indomitable only discouraged attacks the first few times a player played against that, most caught on quick that they needed to outrace it and apply more pressure. So early game scenarios with an indomitable creature or two on the board usually resulted in opponents swinging in to force trades and chumps as a way of limiting how impenetrable things could get. It frequently came down to who played combat smartest on turn(s) 3-5 with the right blocks/trades/tricks making the difference, which what I'd hoped for.
Restore gives me terrible flashbacks to dredge. That is not a good comparison for a mechanic to have. That said, the mechanic is actually too weak right now, in line with what Rowanalpha said. Not only are you losing card advantage, you're not even getting the card you wanted for multiple turns.
Hahaha, well it was loosely inspired by dredge, so that makes sense.
My feeling was that between card draw and library manipulation, restore was more formidable than at first glance (which is why the cards themselves have relatively weaker effects). A Jace's Erasure, for example, could speed things up by a turn and put more restorable cards in the yard. In playtesting, scrying was effective at this as well.
Manaburst is interesting, but I think it has two issues. One is that the mana pool is on the high end of complexity for something you're going to want at low rarities in some number (it's a large part of why they removed reference to the mana pool from mana generation effects). This is especially so given the unconventional way this effect wants you to play with mana. The second is that this effect is almost always going to function exactly like Kicker when you just let the mana expire or like Surge when you play it with another effect.
The mana pool complexity is something I'm just unconcerned with. I understand completely why WotC felt it necessary to do to simplify things for some players, I just don't feel it's as important a consideration for a homebrew set, especially since it's not a dramatic breaking of things.
Your second point is on point, that's precisely what I wanted the mechanic to play like. It was my attempt at marrying spellslinging and red's love of big, bomby single spells even though those aren't naturally cooperative strategies. You can play a manaburst card pretty flexibly, playing it when you need with no bonus, waiting until you get the bonus and letting the mana go (which may limit your plays until you untap), or playing it for the bonus and chaining into something else. All very red things, and the decisions of how to play it forced some challenging decisions.
Hunt suffers from similar reactive problems to Indomitable. Set mechanics usually want to do something good for you, not hurt your opponent's things, because players don't like having their stuff hurt as much as they like getting good stuff, and because it's dependant on what your opponent is doing as to how useful it is.
Not a bad point, set mechanics that hurt opponents more than they just give the player good things are used relatively sparingly. They do exist (wither, annihilator, extort, overload, ingest, and afflict are all examples imo), it's mostly a matter of justifying their inclusion and ensuring they play in ways that don't feel too crushing to play against. Hunt, I believe, is fine in this regard. Green needed a mechanic that could serve a utility role of conditional creature removal, and hunt was never too dominating to make playing against it unfun.
If your opponent is playing weenies, then hunt isn't going to be as rewarding when you're just hitting 1/1s and 2/2s, or if your opponent is playing a creature-light (or creatureless) control deck then hunt might do nothing much of the time.
The weenie comment is odd as hunt was designed specifically to help green deal with utility creatures that never engaged in combat (which were usually on the smaller size). Some 1/1s and 2/2s are rewarding to pick off.
A weenie army is more challenging, sure, but hunt is still useful. Trample up and then pick off that Mentor of the Meek or Rhys, one strategy suggested was using untapping combat tricks (Benefactor's Draught or Vitalize) with trample to trick an opponent into chumping with your "target" only to pull a 2 for 1. And we actually playtested a hunt-focused deck against a creatureless deck and while hunt didn't kill any of the opponent's creatures, the hunting player just picked one of their own creatures that would survive the hunt damage to get their triggers the deck was built around. A similar version of that trick worked in multiplayer where player A had turtled up and had some creatures affecting the board that the hunting player couldn't attack into successfully so they instead attacked player B who was creature-light and picked off player A's headache-inducing creatures.
There are certainly scenarios where hunt is going to be less effective, and some where it won't be able to do anything at all, but that's a bit of a reductive argument. A lot of mechanics aren't always rewarding, and deckbuilding is often about shifting the balance in your favor. That's no excuse for bad mechanics, but I don't think hunt is.
For instance, earlier you said that each color has its own mechanic, but now there's Vanishing as well?
Indeed, it's used sparingly in this set to set it up for being more of a focus in set 2. In Katingal, each color gets a vertical cycle (with standardized vanishing at each rarity: 2 at common, 3 at uncommon, and 4 at rare) of a creature at common that cares about dying, a creature at uncommon that's just stronger for the cost, and a rare enchantment that triggers a sizable bonus for you during your upkeep. There is also two cycles of lands with vanishing, common monocolored manlands that eat their time counters to animate, and a cycle of uncommon allied duals.
You are right about indomitable as it has less potential to lead to stalemate, but consider that a player is disincentivised to attack if they are going to lose their biggest/best creature, and having one huge blocker is going to make that scenario very common. Remember that combat naturally favors the defending player, so your design will need strategies to compensate for a single big blocker.
Absolutely, I ensured players would have plenty of answers at common and uncommon for all of the major mechanics. Indomitable is, I think, a relatively fragile mechanic in that it doesn't take much to answer one big blocker, particularly when it's bigness relies upon other creatures, so answers to it are fairly commonplace in the set.
* * *
The blue mechanic is called restore and is intended to embody blue attempting to quantify everything about the plane while facing constant threat. The sphinxes know there's something wrong with Katingal, they just don't know what and believe that only through amassing study and carefully preserving learnings will they solve that riddle. So mechanically, that translates to reclaiming and safely storing away knowledge, or spells.
Restore n [i](At the beginning of your upkeep, you may return a card with restore from your graveyard to the top of your library. If you do, put exactly n cards from your hand on top of your library in any order.)
So you can recur spells, but at a (temporary) cost of cards in your hand. It creates an incentive to play more strategically and leans into blue's natural love of card draw in that it both draws you deeper towards a restored card and it also keeps your hand full enough to be able to restore in the first place. It allows to to plan out your draws for a few turns at the expense of having those cards in your hand right now. Cards with restore are typically more utility in nature, the types of cards that don't warp formats when able to recur on their own.
Repeated Mistakes1U
Instant (C)
Tap or untap target artifact, creature or land.
Restore 2 [i](At the beginning of your upkeep, you may return a card with restore from your graveyard to the top of your library. If you do, put exactly two cards from your hand on top of your library in any order.)[/i]
Ylloran Research2U
Sorcery (C)
Draw two cards then discard a card.
Restore 3 [i](At the beginning of your upkeep, you may return a card with restore from your graveyard to the top of your library. If you do, put exactly three cards from your hand on top of your library in any order.)[/i]
Red gets an ability word, Manaburst, that cares about you having excess mana in your pool (standardized at two extra mana). Red in Katingal is highly fixated on hoarding more power and it wants players to hold nothing back and commit to bigger plays. It is a subtle cousin of red's general mechanic of caring about casting more spells per turn, but allows the flexibility of spending that mana on other things like activated abilities. It rewards players for committing to big turns by dumping all (or most) of their mana into their pool at once and chaining together spells and abilities that are improved when there's mana leftover in your pool.
Molten Sentence1R
Sorcery (U)
Destroy target artifact.
[i]Manaburst[/i] — If you have two or more mana in your mana pool, Molten Sentence deals damage equal to that artifact’s converted mana cost to target creature.
Thundercrack1R
Sorcery (C)
Thundercrack deals 2 damage to target creature or player.
[i]Manaburst[/i] — If you have two or more mana in your mana pool, Thundercrack deals 4 damage to that creature or player instead.
Green is more feral in Katingal, and territorial. It is very focused on identifying rivals and threats, and hunting them down doggedly until the threat is taken care of. Once it has identified you as prey, it will pursue you doggedly until you are dead or something even more threatening diverts its attention for a while.
Hunt [i](When this creature enters the battlefield or untaps you may choose another creature. When this creature deals combat damage to an opponent, you may have it deal that damage to the chosen creature instead.)
Hunt started as a mechanic that wasn't keyworded where a creature could fight a creature controlled by a player its dealt combat damage to, but it didn't feel special enough and offered too much flexibility. So I changed it a bit, slowed it down so that the target is specified well in advance and gives green some manner of creature removal that felt authentically green without giving it too much of a leg up on other colors with more effective removal. It does offer you the ability to hunt creatures other than the defending player, thus making hunt quite interesting in multiplayer. You can swing at the player with less defense and pick off a creature controlled by someone with more of a presence on the board. It can also hit your own creatures, should that be ]something you want to do.
Nolbiri Prowler2G
Creature — Elf Rogue Assassin(C)
Hunt [i](When this creature enters the battlefield or untaps you may choose another creature. When this creature deals combat damage to an opponent, you may have it deal that damage to the chosen creature instead.)[/i]
2/2
Writhing Gapewurm 4GG
Creature — Wurm (U)
Trample
Hunt [i](When this creature enters the battlefield or untaps you may choose another creature. When this creature deals combat damage to an opponent, you may have it deal that damage to the chosen creature instead.)[/i]
5/5
To your first point, you're not trying to market a set for sale. If you want to get critiqued on a specific mechanic, post in the main card creation forum and get feedback on that one item. This is subforum is for set creation and feedback, and getting feedback on a single mechanic without seeing how it interacts with the rest of the set makes the feedback less valuable.
Alright, I've explained what works for me and why. I do not like posting dozens of cards at once because I don't find that useful or fun, I don't like sifting through that and I don't expect others to do it for me either. I find too much gets missed or glossed over when assessing that much at once, and on a personal level it challenges my super awesome ADHD/anxiety combo to respond to that much at one time (particularly when its my designs and I feel more of a need to answer everything). It really hasn't been a contentious thing until now.
But that said, I can bend. What would you suggest?
On indomitable itself, you have to be careful with defensive combat keywords, since they can lead the game to becoming staring contests where no one wants to attack. That's not to say "defensive exhalted" can't work (its been proposed enough times in different threads) but without the understanding of how the rest of the set interact with it, it is hard to evaluate.
Incidentally, indomitable started out almost the opposite, it was more along the lines of "When a creature you control blocks, each other blocking creature you control gets +1/+1 until end of turn." that encouraged you to go wide with blockers, which obviously encouraged exactly what you're talking about. I switched to the current version specifically because it's defensive but also encourages more aggressive play against you. Only blocking with one creature carries risks, alpha strikes/attacking with more creatures and removal can quickly upturn the strategy.
One thing I'll say is that the set needed some more focus on defense because the early shape of the set was considerably aggressive. Vanishing is a returning mechanic in all colors and really encourages players to play more aggressively to maximize utility. Indomitable was, in part, a response to that increased incentive to play aggressively without gumming the field up so much that players wouldn't be stuck with vanishing creatures as dead plays or stalled to death.
Okay, you covered feign and received feedback. What about the others?
I understand that you personally like to tease things, but it doesn't help anyone to do so. You want to let us know what you are having happen with the mechanics so we can give the feedback that will help you. Teasing doesn't do this.
Now, please (and simply without a wall of text) explain what restore and hunt are. You have to let people know what you are doing or else we can't help you make them better.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I don't like dumping all of the concepts from a set into one post for the same reason WotC doesn't: it dilutes discussion on any individual piece and it's easy for things to get lost.
I tease it out both because it's fun but also because I prefer to focus discussion on each piece in a more methodical way. It helps me to contextualize things and refine each mechanic/theme/cycle/etc fully before moving on. It as well affords time to roll out the setting and story in a structured way, which I feel is important. I respect that you don't like that style, I can't say that I know how to reconcile that for you, though I do welcome you to continue to discuss the set in the way that works for you.
Also, using the phrase 'feigns dying' isn't what you want. "Whenever a feign ability triggers," would probably be better, imo.
Indeed, that's probably the technical wording, though my counterpoint is that WotC has seemed a bit more flexible on flavorful wordings when they make sense and don't obstruct the card's readability. For instance, many cards with devour care about the number of creatures they devour and it's worded in the flavorful way and not the technical way of "for each creature sacrificed as ~ entered the battlefield." (or whatever the precise wording would be. Similarly in Theros Beyond Death, some cards cared about escaping and don't use the technical wording of "When ~ enters the battlefield, if its escape cost was paid do X", and I don't feel they were difficult to grok. Obsidian Fireheart is another great example of flavorful versus technical wording, though I suppose that's in reminder text.
I suppose the dealbreaker for me is if the phrase "feigns dying" in this context conveys both the flavor and the mechanics at play, I feel it does but I'm open to being convinced otherwise.
* * *
Arshtat commands her legion of angels from her tower, and Katingal denizens see her as the figurehead of an oppressive regime. Even the mortals of Wingsreach are brainwashed to see her as benevolent. To her angels, though, Arshtat is a fierce and nurturing mother figure. She is present for the 'birth' of each of her daughters from the Sunrise Forge, an ancient engine that draws energy from the plane itself to create a new angel each morning as the light of dawn crosses the forge. Arshtat gifts her daughters with purpose, directing them to their mission of bringing order to a chaotic world. Though loving, Arshtat brokers no failure because her legion must above all else be inviolable and commanding.
One angel named Nahasiel finds herself in the unique position of doubting her mother. She knows she was created to serve, but Nahasiel doubts that the orders she is being issued are truly the best way to serve. She cherishes her sense of duty, and feels at home among her sisters, but nagging doubts at the back of her mind threaten to upset the balance of power across the plane. In a moment of unprecedented independence, Nahasiel will act upon her doubts and set off a chain of events that will determine the fates of every life on Katingal.
For the angels and their vassals, I wanted a mechanic that conveyed absolute, unshakable unity. The angels are in perfect harmony and have brainwashed their mortal cannon fodder to align with them in battle. Every unit in Arshtat's army works to serve her directives, and even a single defender can hold Opticon's gates with little else but the faith of every other angel to shield them. Enter indomitable.
Indomitable (Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.)
White's mechanic is a simple defensive twist on exalted, and gives white an interesting way of maintaining defense while still being able to swing or activate abilities. The set was pushing in an aggressive direction so I needed a couple of the colors to pump the brakes a bit and white felt appropriate as one of the counterbalances, and indomitable gives white solid defense with some support from white's defensive effects (limiting attacks, funneling opponents into attacking with fewer creatures, combat tricks to remove attacks, damage prevention, blocking extra creatures, etc).
Angels’s ConscriptW
Creature — Human Soldier (C)
Indomitable (Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.) “They come at night, stealing away the families of insurgents and send them back after reeducation to act as the eyes of Arshtat among the free people of Okatal. There’s no such thing as a friendly face that can be trusted.” -Nefertara
1/1
Opticon Stormbreaker2W
Creature — Human Soldier (U)
Indomitable (Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.) T: Opticon Stormbreaker deals 2 damage to target attacking or blocking creature.
2/1
Tactics of Wingsreach2W
Instant (C)
Exile target creature then return it to the battlefield under its owner’s control. It gains indomitable until end of turn. (Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.)
AbscondXWU
Instant (R)
Exile X target creatures. Return them to the battlefield under their owners’ control at the beginning of the next end step. In an act of rebellion, Nahasiel fled the field with insurgents, saving them from oblivion at the hands of her sisters.
Nahasiel, the Valiant Light2WWW
Legendary Creature — Angel (M)
Flying, vigilance
Indomitable (Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.)
Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, it gains indestructible until end of turn.
4/4
I was alright with feign not being useful in Commander, I'm sure when I first put it in the design file I wasn't even thinking of impacting Commander or if I was, it was in a "well, Ripple doesn't work in Commander either". Which isn't overly valid in 2020.
As for Limited, the mythic and rare didn't really factor into my considerations since they'd inevitably be more a constructed factor than Limited. And with the commons, tests of randomization had at least one of the commons showing up with 2-3 copies in the pool which I figured was suitable as I wanted the mechanic to be important in Limited but not be too resilient and only getting a free save on a creature a couple times per game served as a good balance.
Ultimately, though, you are all likely right about balance for those formats.
On one hand, feign is interesting design space, and I especially like how it makes multiple copies of legendary cards in a deck relevant. On the other the previous posters are right that it is problematic in Commander and Limited, which are probably the two most common ways magic is played.
An alternative to Feign finding a copy of the creature would be to search for another card with Feign. This makes feign usable in the aformentioned formats, and it becomes more like a tribal mechanic. I'd suggest removing the indestructible buff, as being able to dodge getting destroyed multiple times in a turn should cost more than one card out of your deck. It can be worded like regenerate instead.
Feign (If this creature would be destroyed, you may instead search your library for a card with Feign and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and remove all damage from this creature.)
Note on the wording: The "may" is so that you can ignore the trigger for something like -X/-X effects, where the creature would die no matter how many times you feigned. It also specifies "destroyed" so that the abuses the previous posters mentioned with Sac outlets won't happen. The "remove all damage" keeps the creature from dying again after the trigger for the same reason.
I think that preserves the vision for the mechanic but cleans it up nicely, thank you!!
I initially thought that opening it up to any creature with feign would make it problematically parasitic in both Limited and Constructed, but I don't think that it is. I've done a few randomization checks to see how many cards with feign you could expect to have in your pool, and the floor was one card and the ceiling five with most pools having 2-3 most of the time. I don't think that's too difficult for Limited to handle.
In Constructed, my only hesitation is that I wonder how dominating a deck of 12-20 creatures that basically can't be killed outside of exile/-X/-X would be. Most of them would be relatively substandard (3/4, 3/1, and 4/2 are the biggest ones), so I don't think that's too overpowered, but I do want to ensure the mechanic doesn't warp anything around it. I don't want all of the cards with feign to need to be weakened, but I suppose if it does become an issue, a simple flat cost could be added to feign to reign it in.
I like that this version maintains the player choice aspect I liked about the original but widens it a bit. Is it worth it to run a few feign creatures you wouldn't ordinarily run but will help cards like Nefertara survive longer? Is it always the right choice to save the creature on the board? Even if it is, which card to you pick from your library? I dig that. I think the best mechanics are ones that are simple on their face, but provide players challenging choices and rewards them for smart plays. I think this version certainly qualifies across the board.
Lastly, for balance in the set you will want Feign on small and low toughness creatures. The cost to keep them from dying is minimal, if they are too hard to kill before feign triggers then it will be very overpowered. It also depends what the other mechanics in the set do.
Indeed, the largest toughness is on Nefertara herself at 4, the rest are all with toughness 1 or 2, with most at 1-3 power as well. I wanted the ability relevant as often as possible, so the creatures with it are purposefully weaker so that they'd be dying naturally more often.
Restore a card?
Feigns dying?
A creature it's hunting?
Please provide reminder text for these so we know what is happening here.
All three are teases for mechanics in the set (each color gets their own and all five are hinted at in the cards I spoiled), I like to tease things out a bit and roll cards out in thematic groups with a bit more context. In this instance, each mechanic is relatively simple and is intended both to fill a utility role and to explore how each color views survival on Katingal.
Let's start with black, since I already mentioned Nefertara and this is a good jumping off point in setting more of the stage for the story in the set.
* * *
The resistance against Opticon's angels has existed as long as any on the plane remember, with ebbs and flows in just how successful the rebels have been at thwarting Arshtat's pursuit of controlling the population. The resistance is currently on an upswing, due largely to Nefertara's ruthless and duplicitous tactics. She is willing to use territory, allies, and supplies as decoys, bait, or distractions to keep the angels occupied and confused. Nefertara leads not because she is an inspiring leader, her reputation for backstabbing is known even to Arshtat, she leads because her track record speaks for itself. She came of age as a spy for the resistance, utilizing her keen eye and subtle nature to supply resistance leaders with strategic information. Nefertara would come to lead the resistance itself when her predecessors elected to ignore intelligence that indicated liberating Okatal would be possible. She stoked tensions between resistance generals until they turned on one another and she seized the opportunity to take control. Any doubts about her ability were laid to rest when her strategy worked and Okatal was liberated with few deaths for the resistance. Nefertara's victories continued and her reputation for brutal tactics and a willingness to sacrifice anything or anyone to achieve her goals grew. Her allies strive to always be useful enough to her that they never become more useful as a sacrifice, and many seek to unseat her from the resistance. Nefertara, however, is shrewd enough to always be one step ahead her would-be usurpers. She utilizes decoys, false information, and feigning death to evade attempts on her life both on the battlefield as well as among allies.
This leads us to black's mechanic: Feign.
Envisioned as the classic RPG ability to play dead to evade or trick enemies, the feign mechanic makes your creatures deceptively more resilient at the expense of backup copies of a creature. Essentially like using a decoy to fake death to live another day.
Feign (If this creature would die, instead search your library for a card with the same name and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and this remains on the battlefield and gains indestructible until end of turn.)
Feign provides creatures limited protection from damage and destruction, though will not protect from bounce, exile, sacrifice, -X/-X effects, etc. You're limited to the number of copies of a creature you have (so not great for EDH) so players need to be mindful as feigning death can only trick your opponents for so long.
Master of Deceits3B
Creature — Human Rogue (C)
Feign (If this creature would die, instead search your library for a card with the same name and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and this remains on the battlefield and gains indestructible until end of turn.)
3/1
So should Master of Deceits become blocked, or be the target of direct damage or a kill spell, you can respond to the impending death by searching your library for another copy of MoD and put it into your graveyard. This can also provide extra "resources" for sacrifice effects, though Katingal as result has relatively few sacrifice outlets. And Rogue's Opportunity triggers upon the resolution of the feign ability if the creature card is put into your graveyard. Thematically, all the cards with feign are Rogues to play into the trope a bit more.
Some additional cards in theme:
Bonefield Merchant2BB
Creature — Naga Rogue (R) 1B, Exile a creature card from your graveyard: Draw a card.
Feign (If this creature would die, instead search your library for a card with the same name and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and this remains on the battlefield and gains indestructible until end of turn.)
2/2
Cloak in Weakness2B
Enchantment — Aura (C)
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +1/-1 and has feign. (If enchanted creature would die, instead search your library for a card with the same name and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and that creature remains in play.)
GravechurnB
Sorcery (C)
Put up to three creature cards from your graveyard on the bottom of your library in any order. “If we’re going to wage a war, we’re going to need fresh recruits. Well, maybe not fresh.” -Fiza, Okatal necromancer
Nefertara, the Bitter End2BBB
Legendary Creature — Naga Rogue (M) 2B, Sacrifice a creature: Target opponent loses 2 life and you gain 2 life.
Feign (If this creature would die, instead search your library for a card with the same name and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and this remains on the battlefield and gains indestructible until end of turn.)
3/4
So even when I stopped playing MtG for a decade, I was still very engaged in card design and particularly set design. I used to post a lot in Custom Cards & Sets and though I haven't in many years, I never really stopped designing at home. A mini-block I started working on in 2013 is now just about ready and I want to start sharing it. Yay!
* * *
Katingal is a unique artificial plane that was created millennia ago by oldwalkers that perceived the Multiverse as rife with conflict, corruption, immorality, and greed. They created the plane of Katingal as a prison to hold the multiverse's worst, including other planeswalkers. Over centuries, Katingal's architects stole away countless mortals and planeswalkers alike that they considered to be dangerous, leaving them stranded on Katingal where they could harm only themselves. Katingal is unique among planes in that its leylines were manipulated and weaved in such a way that they formed a labyrinth of energy that made the spells that enable planeswalking exceptionally difficult. The plane itself effectively counters every time a planeswalker attempts to leave it and those same energies draw planeswalkers in, with an enchantment of unknown composition drawing in planeswalkers who harbor guilt, vengeance, or hatred in their hearts. Katingal has ensnared many planeswalkers whose journeys brought them too close to the pull Katingal exerts, planeswalkers who now live in secret among the population.
The plane itself is a perfect circle, with a central land mass surrounded by a deep sea. At the edge of the sea is the Nullbreak, a mysterious barrier of pure energy. The denizens of the plane have studied it for years, and the reclusive sphinxes of Yllora Isle use their outpost perched near the Nullbreak to study it. Though they have made great strides in understanding the composition of the Nullbreak and its effects, they lack the knowledge that the Multiverse exists and therefore do not understand that the Nullbreak is the inner wall of a shell crafted from the energies of the Blind Eternities. The Nullbreak repels inorganic material and disintegrates organic material, making the sphinxes' study perilous, and the energy emanating from it (nicknamed the Reap by many on the plane) affects the mind, driving all but the most disciplined to madness eventually.
The landmass of Katingal itself has varied terrain, but is dominated by two features: the central tower named Opticon, and the scarred battlegrounds razed by the inhabitants of Opticon, Katingal's militant angels. Created to be the wardens of the Jail, Katingal's angels are resolute, uncompromising, and oppressive. They exist to serve order, but centuries of maintaining order on a plane populated by denizens that resist the angels' yoke has radicalized them, and made them a force of oppression. They watch from Opticon, its heights giving them a vantage point to see most of the plane and they use that advantage to keep the population at bay. Circling Opticon's base is Wingsreach, a community made of the angels' collaborators that were promised protection in return for subservience. Rumors persist that the collaborators are brainwashed, but to Katingal's insurgents there is no difference. The angel's dominating leader, Arshtat, has used Wingsreach as a human shield for many years, believing the insurgents will not attack Opticon for fear of killing the residents of Wingsreach, but in truth the insurgency has been laying the groundwork to launch an assault that will topple Opticon for good, collateral damage be damned. The insurgents have launched similar frontal assaults before only to be slowed by Wingsreach and left vulnerable to the angels' counterattack. They are planning their next attack to be decisive.
Key to the insurgents' renewed focus and ruthless plotting is Nefertara, a veteran naga whose guile is matched only by her merciless resolve. She sees her allies as tools to be utilized to further her goals, and though her reputation for not hesitating to slit the throat of a friend who has become a liability, the insurgents follow her because they believe in her vision as well as her results. Her efforts have freed the city of Okatal from the angels, and though curfews and oppressive patrolling persists, Nefertara's tactics have allowed residents to live more freely than before, with networks of spies, portalmages, and decoys carving out keeping the insurgents one step ahead at all times. Though not all people in Okatal are insurgents, Nefertara has used this to shield herself from the angels, with the brutal tactics of Opticon radicalizing more people every day and turning them to the naga's cause.
* * *
Katingal is a set that has a few returning mechanics, and each color gets its own unique mechanic to play with. As a plane defined by desperation, each color responds a little differently, Katingal as a plane is reflected in the colors becoming more insular and a more uncompromising version of themselves. White is isolationist and defensive. Blue is controlling and cunning. Black is ruthless and untrustworthy. Red is zealous and hedonistic. Green is fierce and predatory.
Exscind3WW
Instant (R)
Exile target permanent. “That which cannot serve order must bend to it. That which cannot bend will be broken.” -Arshtat, celestial queen
Gift of Valiance1W
Enchantment (U)
Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, you may pay W. If you do, untap each other creature you control. “There is joy in being shepherded. Witness your protectors triumph and be warmed to the soul.” -Opticon reeducation
Accumulated Knowledge1U
Instant (C)
Draw a card, then draw cards equal to the number of cards named Accumulated Knowledge in all graveyards. Perched within sight of the Nullbreak, the sphinxes of Yllora Isle desperately seek the bitterest of ironies: answers to a riddle they cannot solve.
Scholar of Yllora Isle1U
Creature — Human Wizard (U)
Whenever you restore a card in your graveyard, you may pay U. If you do, scry 1. Few humans are permitted to assist the sphinxes studying the farthest reaches of Katingal, fewer still return to the mainland with their sanity.
1/1
Final Say1BB
Instant (R)
Target spell’s controller reveals their hand and discards all cards that share a type with the targeted spell. “Opticon is predictable in its tactics. It makes them a force to be reckoned with, but it also makes their pride easy to exploit.” -Nefertara
Rogue’s Opportunity1B
Enchantment (U)
Whenever a creature feigns dying, you may pay B. If you do, target opponent discards a card. “I find that your enemies believing you’re dead leads to them breathing a sigh of relief. Capitalize on their stupidity.” -Nefertara
Mad Prophet3R
Creature — Human Shaman (U)
Haste T, Discard a card: Draw a card. Uncas had spent years drunkenly rambling to any who would listen that the Nullbreak was a sign of impending doom. As sunrise split through the intensifying haze, he was suddenly struck with the fear he may actually have been right.
2/2
Vessel of Volatility1R
Enchantment (C) 1R, Sacrifice Vessel of Volatility: Add RRRR. “The power I seek refuses to be tamed, the perfect counter to Opticon’s controlling fist.” -Zha’Fazir
Carnivorous AdvantageGG
Enchantment — Aura (C)
Enchant creature
Whenever enchanted creature deals damage to another creature, scry 1. “The elves tend to their little garden, the frogs cower in the dark. It is the predators who will inherit this world.” -Yaizel, the prowling eye
Suresight Companion1G
Creature — Wolf (U)
Whenever a creature you control deals damage to a creature it’s hunting, you may pay G. If you do, draw a card. “Why have you come here?” Yaizel regarded his prey with suspicion, “The wolves don’t like what they smell, and neither do I.”
1/1
Arshtat, Celestial Queen4RW
Legendary Creature — Angel (M)
Flying, lifelink, first strike
Other Angels you control get +1/+1.
Whenever you would gain life, gain twice that much life instead.
Whenever a noncreature source you control would deal damage, it deals twice that much damage instead.
6/4
Let me know what you think. I'll be posting themed previews around different factions and mechanics periodically and responding to questions and feedback. The set (and its follow up) is finished, so aside from minor wording tweaks I likely won't be making many big changes, but feedback is always appreciated.
That will be somewhere between difficult and impossible. Vanishing is mechanically critical to the second set where it's referenced by about 20% of the set (the tension of getting short-term value from removing counters from cards that want more counters is the conceit of that set) and is how the flavor of the plane's dwindling time is communicated in mechanics. Honestly, it would be easier to diminish or jettison the five mono-colored mechanics than vanishing as they largely exist for mechanical definition and utility for each color and take a backseat in set two. Don't get me wrong, I understand killing your darlings, it's just not easy to lift out vanishing from the block without creating issues.
What does this overloading/complexity look like for you? Perhaps if I understood your perspective, alternatives would be more clear.
Thank you, I was concerned about the wording. Would the following work?
(At the beginning of your upkeep, if you have at least N cards in hand you may return this card from your graveyard to the top of your library. If you do, put exactly N cards from your hand on top of your library in any order.)
Yes. The mechanic is my take on Buyback and one of the things that made it so crippling in certain decks (blue permission, mostly) was that you had the card back in hand for use again immediately. Since restore was going to be on the exact same types of spells that made buyback so oppressive, I wanted to give a degree of delay so that playstyle wouldn't be as easy to sustain.
The first point is the aspect of buyback I wanted to solve a little bit. I always liked that the mechanic helped make relatively basic effects more interesting because they could be reused consistently. I dialed back on the immediacy as well as the consistency (restore requires cards in hand you don't mind going a turn or two without which means restore can be "turned off" by gamestates more frequently than buyback) to restrict the repetitiveness and oppressive nature of buyback. I was also inspired by the cycle of spells with suspend in Future Sight that re-suspend themselves upon resolution with a three-turn clock. I liked the sense of an impending effect, though I wanted a bit more flexibility and decision-making than that cycle since once they got going there was really not much more input from the caster and limited points of interaction for opponents.
The second point is a concern I had from the mechanic's inception. Balancing the individual cards was challenging as not being careful would result in Buyback 2.0 in terms of controlling/dominating games, and playing it too safe would render the cards too weak to be usable. Plus, balancing Limited with Constructed. I decided to not put restore on any cards that would be exceptionally back-breaking like a counterspell, it's largely utility pieces like twiddling, making a creature unblockable, etc.
I suppose the right balance is the greatest number of turns players are willing to
The mechanic started out like that originally, and stratified by rarity. I think it was 2-3-4 or 2-4-6 with the rares being bomby for the extra required mana and the mythic had an effect that scaled with the amount of extra mana. They were too bomby, though, and in the last pass on the set before I started posting it I synced up all the values to one value. I think the challenge with variable values is that the mechanic felt too complex.
Do you think it would help to have both? Most cards "turn on" at two extra mana, but a few scale the effect based on the amount to encourage some bigger commitments or late-game bomb plays?
I'm not sure the in addition rider increases choices, my feeling is that it would restrict choice in that there would be a right choice of doing both and rarely would a player do otherwise. And like you said, the defending player would likely just block with the creature(s) being hunted.
The interesting choice to me for the player doing the hunting is whether the loss of damage to the dome is worth it to pick off a creature. Take, for instance, the 5/5 trampler with hunt. If it isn't blocked, it's probably best to just hit the face but that math can change depending on the state of the board. Are you hunting a flying finisher? Maybe killing it is worth the turn. Chumped with a bit of trample damage spilling over? Maybe that couple points of damage are better used picking off a creature that's making life difficult. And on the other side, playing against hunt is interesting in that it puts the pressure on. Which creatures to chump with to buy a turn an important utility creature or a bomb that can win the game for you in a few turns, when to let the hunter through and when not to, when to play a creature that may be a soft target, etc.
Memory issues are a fair point, though in playtesting, it was rare to have more than three creatures hunting at any one time, and relatively uncommon for them to be all hunting different creatures. Usually, the hunting player went all in on one creature to ensure its death (either in redundancy of attackers in case of blocks, or to tag team a bigger creature), sometimes only two creatures were selected to keep the defender guessing, or (least frequently) all different creatures were picked to create a pseudo board wipe. I actually expected memory issues, to be honest, and I was surprised that the tendency was to employ hunt in a way that wasn't all that memory-intensive. Whether that was because of real strategic choices or to avoid the memory issues isn't clear.
One of my favorite moments was when the hunting player had two 2/2s attacking into a lone 1/5 that was being hunted by both. It would block one, and would take another 2 from the unblocked hunter because the attacking player had effects that trigger when a hunted creature is damaged by a creature hunting it. It was worth redirecting that 2 damage for a couple turns to get a bit of advantage from the triggers because that advantage led to a faster win than the 2 damage would have.
I'd probably leave the "or untaps" component since I want a hunting creature to be able to hunt more than once without requiring other hunting creatures, but I like this version (with the addition of "by creatures with hunt" to the combat damage clause). The most common strategy was to limit the hunted creatures to one a lot of the time, anyway, though I have concerns I'd want to playtest out. At the end of the day, hunt was the most utility-driven of the five and this version preserves that intent, I just want to make sure losing the choices made as a result of the current wording doesn't make the mechanic less fun/interesting.
The mechanics aren't supposed to have obvious overlap, the intent was for them to encourage focus on one color with splashes as needed. The original intent was to encourage mono-color play more purposefully, but I eased back as the second set pulled in a direction that would be hard to make work if the first set was harshly mono-colored.
When we did a few playtest drafts, players were generally pulled towards one color with a splash of another though no two examples of a color combination played quite the same. gU tended to be more controlling and focused on restore with green providing ramp to offset the tempo delay from restore, and Gu tended to be creature-based control with blue tap/untap antics assisting hunt. Color pairs don't have strict archetypes for Limited, and the requisite ten uncommon gold cards aren't strictly signposts, they're largely utility cards that can typically slot into any version of that color pair.
The draft environment of set two is much more archetype-focused, with signpost uncommons directing specific strategies, I just liked the old school feel of Katingal's Limited environment.
Early on, I'd considered feign working more like grandeur and only working by discarding the card rather than searching it out from the library, but it was difficult to picture it happening frequently. The last version I tried before retreating to the initial version posted here discarded any black creature but that didn't feel like it'd play well and lost a lot of the flavor.
As for the power level, I recognized early on that the mechanic did not want to be on creatures that were a) big, and/or b) highly threatening without feign. It really gravitated towards creatures on the more fragile side so most of their interactions would create scenarios where feign was relevant. As a byproduct, that also limited how difficult they were to handle. I tried to build it as similar to regenerate with a more flexible payment and a limitation on uses (though that limitation is looser now with the less parasitic wording).
Feign is not problematic in Limited as the pool is usually so small that the ability can only trigger a few times per game, even with the updated version. Still useful, as that kind of resiliency matters in Limited games even if it only buys two or three turns. It may be more potent in Constructed, though even in that environment it didn't seem frustrating to deal with. The most potent plays I saw where feign was the decisive factor were board wipes into a lethal swing with feign creatures.
I think my greatest concern is that recursion that puts creatures in your hand would easily break the mechanic if the cost is discarding a creature. A Palace Seige would make a feign creature largely indestructible and if you have anything that triggers on a discard, that could be potent.
I agree with your points, do you think this adjustment would make playing against it less fun?
In regards to the bolded point, indomitable only ever wants to hold back one blockers. In playtesting, holding back other creatures to keep an opponent guessing was something people did once or twice before just using those creatures to attack. More often than not, the trickiest plays were ones where the white player swung with their indomitable creatures along with other creatures while keeping back a strong blocker. The defending player often had the choice of blocking the creatures with indomitable (hopefully picking off enough to make the lone blocker less challenging to swing into) or the other creatures (this was particularly nasty in GW combinations as this tactic worked well with hunt).
Your point on encouraging/discouraging interaction is well taken. And numerous defensive mechanics that limit interactions (protection, shroud/hexproof) have proved troubling for WotC, I just don't see indomitable as problematically discouraging interaction in the same way (or at least same degree) as those mechanics. Hiding behind a small blockade of indomitable creatures is the most non-interactive the mechanic gets, and even that isn't a strategy decks are going to want to do to win and most decks will play right through it as the blockade is typically pretty susceptible to damage and removal.
Yes, indomitable will be a bit of a rattlesnake, that's its job.
For what it's worth, I really only saw a decrease in activations in the late game. In the early game, indomitable triggered almost every turn as long as there was an attack. Indomitable only discouraged attacks the first few times a player played against that, most caught on quick that they needed to outrace it and apply more pressure. So early game scenarios with an indomitable creature or two on the board usually resulted in opponents swinging in to force trades and chumps as a way of limiting how impenetrable things could get. It frequently came down to who played combat smartest on turn(s) 3-5 with the right blocks/trades/tricks making the difference, which what I'd hoped for.
Hahaha, well it was loosely inspired by dredge, so that makes sense.
My feeling was that between card draw and library manipulation, restore was more formidable than at first glance (which is why the cards themselves have relatively weaker effects). A Jace's Erasure, for example, could speed things up by a turn and put more restorable cards in the yard. In playtesting, scrying was effective at this as well.
The mana pool complexity is something I'm just unconcerned with. I understand completely why WotC felt it necessary to do to simplify things for some players, I just don't feel it's as important a consideration for a homebrew set, especially since it's not a dramatic breaking of things.
Your second point is on point, that's precisely what I wanted the mechanic to play like. It was my attempt at marrying spellslinging and red's love of big, bomby single spells even though those aren't naturally cooperative strategies. You can play a manaburst card pretty flexibly, playing it when you need with no bonus, waiting until you get the bonus and letting the mana go (which may limit your plays until you untap), or playing it for the bonus and chaining into something else. All very red things, and the decisions of how to play it forced some challenging decisions.
Not a bad point, set mechanics that hurt opponents more than they just give the player good things are used relatively sparingly. They do exist (wither, annihilator, extort, overload, ingest, and afflict are all examples imo), it's mostly a matter of justifying their inclusion and ensuring they play in ways that don't feel too crushing to play against. Hunt, I believe, is fine in this regard. Green needed a mechanic that could serve a utility role of conditional creature removal, and hunt was never too dominating to make playing against it unfun.
The weenie comment is odd as hunt was designed specifically to help green deal with utility creatures that never engaged in combat (which were usually on the smaller size). Some 1/1s and 2/2s are rewarding to pick off.
A weenie army is more challenging, sure, but hunt is still useful. Trample up and then pick off that Mentor of the Meek or Rhys, one strategy suggested was using untapping combat tricks (Benefactor's Draught or Vitalize) with trample to trick an opponent into chumping with your "target" only to pull a 2 for 1. And we actually playtested a hunt-focused deck against a creatureless deck and while hunt didn't kill any of the opponent's creatures, the hunting player just picked one of their own creatures that would survive the hunt damage to get their triggers the deck was built around. A similar version of that trick worked in multiplayer where player A had turtled up and had some creatures affecting the board that the hunting player couldn't attack into successfully so they instead attacked player B who was creature-light and picked off player A's headache-inducing creatures.
There are certainly scenarios where hunt is going to be less effective, and some where it won't be able to do anything at all, but that's a bit of a reductive argument. A lot of mechanics aren't always rewarding, and deckbuilding is often about shifting the balance in your favor. That's no excuse for bad mechanics, but I don't think hunt is.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
Indeed, it's used sparingly in this set to set it up for being more of a focus in set 2. In Katingal, each color gets a vertical cycle (with standardized vanishing at each rarity: 2 at common, 3 at uncommon, and 4 at rare) of a creature at common that cares about dying, a creature at uncommon that's just stronger for the cost, and a rare enchantment that triggers a sizable bonus for you during your upkeep. There is also two cycles of lands with vanishing, common monocolored manlands that eat their time counters to animate, and a cycle of uncommon allied duals.
Absolutely, I ensured players would have plenty of answers at common and uncommon for all of the major mechanics. Indomitable is, I think, a relatively fragile mechanic in that it doesn't take much to answer one big blocker, particularly when it's bigness relies upon other creatures, so answers to it are fairly commonplace in the set.
* * *
The blue mechanic is called restore and is intended to embody blue attempting to quantify everything about the plane while facing constant threat. The sphinxes know there's something wrong with Katingal, they just don't know what and believe that only through amassing study and carefully preserving learnings will they solve that riddle. So mechanically, that translates to reclaiming and safely storing away knowledge, or spells.
Restore n [i](At the beginning of your upkeep, you may return a card with restore from your graveyard to the top of your library. If you do, put exactly n cards from your hand on top of your library in any order.)
So you can recur spells, but at a (temporary) cost of cards in your hand. It creates an incentive to play more strategically and leans into blue's natural love of card draw in that it both draws you deeper towards a restored card and it also keeps your hand full enough to be able to restore in the first place. It allows to to plan out your draws for a few turns at the expense of having those cards in your hand right now. Cards with restore are typically more utility in nature, the types of cards that don't warp formats when able to recur on their own.
Instant (C)
Tap or untap target artifact, creature or land.
Restore 2 [i](At the beginning of your upkeep, you may return a card with restore from your graveyard to the top of your library. If you do, put exactly two cards from your hand on top of your library in any order.)[/i]
Ylloran Research 2U
Sorcery (C)
Draw two cards then discard a card.
Restore 3 [i](At the beginning of your upkeep, you may return a card with restore from your graveyard to the top of your library. If you do, put exactly three cards from your hand on top of your library in any order.)[/i]
Red gets an ability word, Manaburst, that cares about you having excess mana in your pool (standardized at two extra mana). Red in Katingal is highly fixated on hoarding more power and it wants players to hold nothing back and commit to bigger plays. It is a subtle cousin of red's general mechanic of caring about casting more spells per turn, but allows the flexibility of spending that mana on other things like activated abilities. It rewards players for committing to big turns by dumping all (or most) of their mana into their pool at once and chaining together spells and abilities that are improved when there's mana leftover in your pool.
Sorcery (U)
Destroy target artifact.
[i]Manaburst[/i] — If you have two or more mana in your mana pool, Molten Sentence deals damage equal to that artifact’s converted mana cost to target creature.
Thundercrack 1R
Sorcery (C)
Thundercrack deals 2 damage to target creature or player.
[i]Manaburst[/i] — If you have two or more mana in your mana pool, Thundercrack deals 4 damage to that creature or player instead.
Green is more feral in Katingal, and territorial. It is very focused on identifying rivals and threats, and hunting them down doggedly until the threat is taken care of. Once it has identified you as prey, it will pursue you doggedly until you are dead or something even more threatening diverts its attention for a while.
Hunt [i](When this creature enters the battlefield or untaps you may choose another creature. When this creature deals combat damage to an opponent, you may have it deal that damage to the chosen creature instead.)
Hunt started as a mechanic that wasn't keyworded where a creature could fight a creature controlled by a player its dealt combat damage to, but it didn't feel special enough and offered too much flexibility. So I changed it a bit, slowed it down so that the target is specified well in advance and gives green some manner of creature removal that felt authentically green without giving it too much of a leg up on other colors with more effective removal. It does offer you the ability to hunt creatures other than the defending player, thus making hunt quite interesting in multiplayer. You can swing at the player with less defense and pick off a creature controlled by someone with more of a presence on the board. It can also hit your own creatures, should that be ]something you want to do.
Creature — Elf Rogue Assassin(C)
Hunt [i](When this creature enters the battlefield or untaps you may choose another creature. When this creature deals combat damage to an opponent, you may have it deal that damage to the chosen creature instead.)[/i]
2/2
Writhing Gapewurm 4GG
Creature — Wurm (U)
Trample
Hunt [i](When this creature enters the battlefield or untaps you may choose another creature. When this creature deals combat damage to an opponent, you may have it deal that damage to the chosen creature instead.)[/i]
5/5
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
Alright, I've explained what works for me and why. I do not like posting dozens of cards at once because I don't find that useful or fun, I don't like sifting through that and I don't expect others to do it for me either. I find too much gets missed or glossed over when assessing that much at once, and on a personal level it challenges my super awesome ADHD/anxiety combo to respond to that much at one time (particularly when its my designs and I feel more of a need to answer everything). It really hasn't been a contentious thing until now.
But that said, I can bend. What would you suggest?
Incidentally, indomitable started out almost the opposite, it was more along the lines of "When a creature you control blocks, each other blocking creature you control gets +1/+1 until end of turn." that encouraged you to go wide with blockers, which obviously encouraged exactly what you're talking about. I switched to the current version specifically because it's defensive but also encourages more aggressive play against you. Only blocking with one creature carries risks, alpha strikes/attacking with more creatures and removal can quickly upturn the strategy.
One thing I'll say is that the set needed some more focus on defense because the early shape of the set was considerably aggressive. Vanishing is a returning mechanic in all colors and really encourages players to play more aggressively to maximize utility. Indomitable was, in part, a response to that increased incentive to play aggressively without gumming the field up so much that players wouldn't be stuck with vanishing creatures as dead plays or stalled to death.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I don't like dumping all of the concepts from a set into one post for the same reason WotC doesn't: it dilutes discussion on any individual piece and it's easy for things to get lost.
I tease it out both because it's fun but also because I prefer to focus discussion on each piece in a more methodical way. It helps me to contextualize things and refine each mechanic/theme/cycle/etc fully before moving on. It as well affords time to roll out the setting and story in a structured way, which I feel is important. I respect that you don't like that style, I can't say that I know how to reconcile that for you, though I do welcome you to continue to discuss the set in the way that works for you.
Indeed, that's probably the technical wording, though my counterpoint is that WotC has seemed a bit more flexible on flavorful wordings when they make sense and don't obstruct the card's readability. For instance, many cards with devour care about the number of creatures they devour and it's worded in the flavorful way and not the technical way of "for each creature sacrificed as ~ entered the battlefield." (or whatever the precise wording would be. Similarly in Theros Beyond Death, some cards cared about escaping and don't use the technical wording of "When ~ enters the battlefield, if its escape cost was paid do X", and I don't feel they were difficult to grok. Obsidian Fireheart is another great example of flavorful versus technical wording, though I suppose that's in reminder text.
I suppose the dealbreaker for me is if the phrase "feigns dying" in this context conveys both the flavor and the mechanics at play, I feel it does but I'm open to being convinced otherwise.
* * *
Arshtat commands her legion of angels from her tower, and Katingal denizens see her as the figurehead of an oppressive regime. Even the mortals of Wingsreach are brainwashed to see her as benevolent. To her angels, though, Arshtat is a fierce and nurturing mother figure. She is present for the 'birth' of each of her daughters from the Sunrise Forge, an ancient engine that draws energy from the plane itself to create a new angel each morning as the light of dawn crosses the forge. Arshtat gifts her daughters with purpose, directing them to their mission of bringing order to a chaotic world. Though loving, Arshtat brokers no failure because her legion must above all else be inviolable and commanding.
One angel named Nahasiel finds herself in the unique position of doubting her mother. She knows she was created to serve, but Nahasiel doubts that the orders she is being issued are truly the best way to serve. She cherishes her sense of duty, and feels at home among her sisters, but nagging doubts at the back of her mind threaten to upset the balance of power across the plane. In a moment of unprecedented independence, Nahasiel will act upon her doubts and set off a chain of events that will determine the fates of every life on Katingal.
For the angels and their vassals, I wanted a mechanic that conveyed absolute, unshakable unity. The angels are in perfect harmony and have brainwashed their mortal cannon fodder to align with them in battle. Every unit in Arshtat's army works to serve her directives, and even a single defender can hold Opticon's gates with little else but the faith of every other angel to shield them. Enter indomitable.
Indomitable (Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.)
White's mechanic is a simple defensive twist on exalted, and gives white an interesting way of maintaining defense while still being able to swing or activate abilities. The set was pushing in an aggressive direction so I needed a couple of the colors to pump the brakes a bit and white felt appropriate as one of the counterbalances, and indomitable gives white solid defense with some support from white's defensive effects (limiting attacks, funneling opponents into attacking with fewer creatures, combat tricks to remove attacks, damage prevention, blocking extra creatures, etc).
Angels’s Conscript W
Creature — Human Soldier (C)
Indomitable (Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.)
“They come at night, stealing away the families of insurgents and send them back after reeducation to act as the eyes of Arshtat among the free people of Okatal. There’s no such thing as a friendly face that can be trusted.” -Nefertara
1/1
Opticon Stormbreaker 2W
Creature — Human Soldier (U)
Indomitable (Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.)
T: Opticon Stormbreaker deals 2 damage to target attacking or blocking creature.
2/1
Tactics of Wingsreach 2W
Instant (C)
Exile target creature then return it to the battlefield under its owner’s control. It gains indomitable until end of turn. (Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.)
Abscond XWU
Instant (R)
Exile X target creatures. Return them to the battlefield under their owners’ control at the beginning of the next end step.
In an act of rebellion, Nahasiel fled the field with insurgents, saving them from oblivion at the hands of her sisters.
Nahasiel, the Valiant Light 2WWW
Legendary Creature — Angel (M)
Flying, vigilance
Indomitable (Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.)
Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, it gains indestructible until end of turn.
4/4
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
I was alright with feign not being useful in Commander, I'm sure when I first put it in the design file I wasn't even thinking of impacting Commander or if I was, it was in a "well, Ripple doesn't work in Commander either". Which isn't overly valid in 2020.
As for Limited, the mythic and rare didn't really factor into my considerations since they'd inevitably be more a constructed factor than Limited. And with the commons, tests of randomization had at least one of the commons showing up with 2-3 copies in the pool which I figured was suitable as I wanted the mechanic to be important in Limited but not be too resilient and only getting a free save on a creature a couple times per game served as a good balance.
Ultimately, though, you are all likely right about balance for those formats.
I think that preserves the vision for the mechanic but cleans it up nicely, thank you!!
I initially thought that opening it up to any creature with feign would make it problematically parasitic in both Limited and Constructed, but I don't think that it is. I've done a few randomization checks to see how many cards with feign you could expect to have in your pool, and the floor was one card and the ceiling five with most pools having 2-3 most of the time. I don't think that's too difficult for Limited to handle.
In Constructed, my only hesitation is that I wonder how dominating a deck of 12-20 creatures that basically can't be killed outside of exile/-X/-X would be. Most of them would be relatively substandard (3/4, 3/1, and 4/2 are the biggest ones), so I don't think that's too overpowered, but I do want to ensure the mechanic doesn't warp anything around it. I don't want all of the cards with feign to need to be weakened, but I suppose if it does become an issue, a simple flat cost could be added to feign to reign it in.
I like that this version maintains the player choice aspect I liked about the original but widens it a bit. Is it worth it to run a few feign creatures you wouldn't ordinarily run but will help cards like Nefertara survive longer? Is it always the right choice to save the creature on the board? Even if it is, which card to you pick from your library? I dig that. I think the best mechanics are ones that are simple on their face, but provide players challenging choices and rewards them for smart plays. I think this version certainly qualifies across the board.
Indeed, the largest toughness is on Nefertara herself at 4, the rest are all with toughness 1 or 2, with most at 1-3 power as well. I wanted the ability relevant as often as possible, so the creatures with it are purposefully weaker so that they'd be dying naturally more often.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
All three are teases for mechanics in the set (each color gets their own and all five are hinted at in the cards I spoiled), I like to tease things out a bit and roll cards out in thematic groups with a bit more context. In this instance, each mechanic is relatively simple and is intended both to fill a utility role and to explore how each color views survival on Katingal.
Let's start with black, since I already mentioned Nefertara and this is a good jumping off point in setting more of the stage for the story in the set.
* * *
The resistance against Opticon's angels has existed as long as any on the plane remember, with ebbs and flows in just how successful the rebels have been at thwarting Arshtat's pursuit of controlling the population. The resistance is currently on an upswing, due largely to Nefertara's ruthless and duplicitous tactics. She is willing to use territory, allies, and supplies as decoys, bait, or distractions to keep the angels occupied and confused. Nefertara leads not because she is an inspiring leader, her reputation for backstabbing is known even to Arshtat, she leads because her track record speaks for itself. She came of age as a spy for the resistance, utilizing her keen eye and subtle nature to supply resistance leaders with strategic information. Nefertara would come to lead the resistance itself when her predecessors elected to ignore intelligence that indicated liberating Okatal would be possible. She stoked tensions between resistance generals until they turned on one another and she seized the opportunity to take control. Any doubts about her ability were laid to rest when her strategy worked and Okatal was liberated with few deaths for the resistance. Nefertara's victories continued and her reputation for brutal tactics and a willingness to sacrifice anything or anyone to achieve her goals grew. Her allies strive to always be useful enough to her that they never become more useful as a sacrifice, and many seek to unseat her from the resistance. Nefertara, however, is shrewd enough to always be one step ahead her would-be usurpers. She utilizes decoys, false information, and feigning death to evade attempts on her life both on the battlefield as well as among allies.
This leads us to black's mechanic: Feign.
Envisioned as the classic RPG ability to play dead to evade or trick enemies, the feign mechanic makes your creatures deceptively more resilient at the expense of backup copies of a creature. Essentially like using a decoy to fake death to live another day.
Feign (If this creature would die, instead search your library for a card with the same name and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and this remains on the battlefield and gains indestructible until end of turn.)
Feign provides creatures limited protection from damage and destruction, though will not protect from bounce, exile, sacrifice, -X/-X effects, etc. You're limited to the number of copies of a creature you have (so not great for EDH) so players need to be mindful as feigning death can only trick your opponents for so long.
Master of Deceits 3B
Creature — Human Rogue (C)
Feign (If this creature would die, instead search your library for a card with the same name and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and this remains on the battlefield and gains indestructible until end of turn.)
3/1
So should Master of Deceits become blocked, or be the target of direct damage or a kill spell, you can respond to the impending death by searching your library for another copy of MoD and put it into your graveyard. This can also provide extra "resources" for sacrifice effects, though Katingal as result has relatively few sacrifice outlets. And Rogue's Opportunity triggers upon the resolution of the feign ability if the creature card is put into your graveyard. Thematically, all the cards with feign are Rogues to play into the trope a bit more.
Some additional cards in theme:
Bonefield Merchant 2BB
Creature — Naga Rogue (R)
1B, Exile a creature card from your graveyard: Draw a card.
Feign (If this creature would die, instead search your library for a card with the same name and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and this remains on the battlefield and gains indestructible until end of turn.)
2/2
Cloak in Weakness 2B
Enchantment — Aura (C)
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +1/-1 and has feign. (If enchanted creature would die, instead search your library for a card with the same name and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and that creature remains in play.)
Gravechurn B
Sorcery (C)
Put up to three creature cards from your graveyard on the bottom of your library in any order.
“If we’re going to wage a war, we’re going to need fresh recruits. Well, maybe not fresh.” -Fiza, Okatal necromancer
Nefertara, the Bitter End 2BBB
Legendary Creature — Naga Rogue (M)
2B, Sacrifice a creature: Target opponent loses 2 life and you gain 2 life.
Feign (If this creature would die, instead search your library for a card with the same name and put it into your graveyard. If you do, shuffle your library and this remains on the battlefield and gains indestructible until end of turn.)
3/4
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
So even when I stopped playing MtG for a decade, I was still very engaged in card design and particularly set design. I used to post a lot in Custom Cards & Sets and though I haven't in many years, I never really stopped designing at home. A mini-block I started working on in 2013 is now just about ready and I want to start sharing it. Yay!
* * *
Katingal is a unique artificial plane that was created millennia ago by oldwalkers that perceived the Multiverse as rife with conflict, corruption, immorality, and greed. They created the plane of Katingal as a prison to hold the multiverse's worst, including other planeswalkers. Over centuries, Katingal's architects stole away countless mortals and planeswalkers alike that they considered to be dangerous, leaving them stranded on Katingal where they could harm only themselves. Katingal is unique among planes in that its leylines were manipulated and weaved in such a way that they formed a labyrinth of energy that made the spells that enable planeswalking exceptionally difficult. The plane itself effectively counters every time a planeswalker attempts to leave it and those same energies draw planeswalkers in, with an enchantment of unknown composition drawing in planeswalkers who harbor guilt, vengeance, or hatred in their hearts. Katingal has ensnared many planeswalkers whose journeys brought them too close to the pull Katingal exerts, planeswalkers who now live in secret among the population.
The plane itself is a perfect circle, with a central land mass surrounded by a deep sea. At the edge of the sea is the Nullbreak, a mysterious barrier of pure energy. The denizens of the plane have studied it for years, and the reclusive sphinxes of Yllora Isle use their outpost perched near the Nullbreak to study it. Though they have made great strides in understanding the composition of the Nullbreak and its effects, they lack the knowledge that the Multiverse exists and therefore do not understand that the Nullbreak is the inner wall of a shell crafted from the energies of the Blind Eternities. The Nullbreak repels inorganic material and disintegrates organic material, making the sphinxes' study perilous, and the energy emanating from it (nicknamed the Reap by many on the plane) affects the mind, driving all but the most disciplined to madness eventually.
The landmass of Katingal itself has varied terrain, but is dominated by two features: the central tower named Opticon, and the scarred battlegrounds razed by the inhabitants of Opticon, Katingal's militant angels. Created to be the wardens of the Jail, Katingal's angels are resolute, uncompromising, and oppressive. They exist to serve order, but centuries of maintaining order on a plane populated by denizens that resist the angels' yoke has radicalized them, and made them a force of oppression. They watch from Opticon, its heights giving them a vantage point to see most of the plane and they use that advantage to keep the population at bay. Circling Opticon's base is Wingsreach, a community made of the angels' collaborators that were promised protection in return for subservience. Rumors persist that the collaborators are brainwashed, but to Katingal's insurgents there is no difference. The angel's dominating leader, Arshtat, has used Wingsreach as a human shield for many years, believing the insurgents will not attack Opticon for fear of killing the residents of Wingsreach, but in truth the insurgency has been laying the groundwork to launch an assault that will topple Opticon for good, collateral damage be damned. The insurgents have launched similar frontal assaults before only to be slowed by Wingsreach and left vulnerable to the angels' counterattack. They are planning their next attack to be decisive.
Key to the insurgents' renewed focus and ruthless plotting is Nefertara, a veteran naga whose guile is matched only by her merciless resolve. She sees her allies as tools to be utilized to further her goals, and though her reputation for not hesitating to slit the throat of a friend who has become a liability, the insurgents follow her because they believe in her vision as well as her results. Her efforts have freed the city of Okatal from the angels, and though curfews and oppressive patrolling persists, Nefertara's tactics have allowed residents to live more freely than before, with networks of spies, portalmages, and decoys carving out keeping the insurgents one step ahead at all times. Though not all people in Okatal are insurgents, Nefertara has used this to shield herself from the angels, with the brutal tactics of Opticon radicalizing more people every day and turning them to the naga's cause.
* * *
Katingal is a set that has a few returning mechanics, and each color gets its own unique mechanic to play with. As a plane defined by desperation, each color responds a little differently, Katingal as a plane is reflected in the colors becoming more insular and a more uncompromising version of themselves. White is isolationist and defensive. Blue is controlling and cunning. Black is ruthless and untrustworthy. Red is zealous and hedonistic. Green is fierce and predatory.
Exscind 3WW
Instant (R)
Exile target permanent.
“That which cannot serve order must bend to it. That which cannot bend will be broken.” -Arshtat, celestial queen
Gift of Valiance 1W
Enchantment (U)
Whenever a creature you control blocks alone, you may pay W. If you do, untap each other creature you control.
“There is joy in being shepherded. Witness your protectors triumph and be warmed to the soul.” -Opticon reeducation
Accumulated Knowledge 1U
Instant (C)
Draw a card, then draw cards equal to the number of cards named Accumulated Knowledge in all graveyards.
Perched within sight of the Nullbreak, the sphinxes of Yllora Isle desperately seek the bitterest of ironies: answers to a riddle they cannot solve.
Scholar of Yllora Isle 1U
Creature — Human Wizard (U)
Whenever you restore a card in your graveyard, you may pay U. If you do, scry 1.
Few humans are permitted to assist the sphinxes studying the farthest reaches of Katingal, fewer still return to the mainland with their sanity.
1/1
Final Say 1BB
Instant (R)
Target spell’s controller reveals their hand and discards all cards that share a type with the targeted spell.
“Opticon is predictable in its tactics. It makes them a force to be reckoned with, but it also makes their pride easy to exploit.” -Nefertara
Rogue’s Opportunity 1B
Enchantment (U)
Whenever a creature feigns dying, you may pay B. If you do, target opponent discards a card.
“I find that your enemies believing you’re dead leads to them breathing a sigh of relief. Capitalize on their stupidity.” -Nefertara
Mad Prophet 3R
Creature — Human Shaman (U)
Haste
T, Discard a card: Draw a card.
Uncas had spent years drunkenly rambling to any who would listen that the Nullbreak was a sign of impending doom. As sunrise split through the intensifying haze, he was suddenly struck with the fear he may actually have been right.
2/2
Vessel of Volatility 1R
Enchantment (C)
1R, Sacrifice Vessel of Volatility: Add RRRR.
“The power I seek refuses to be tamed, the perfect counter to Opticon’s controlling fist.” -Zha’Fazir
Carnivorous Advantage GG
Enchantment — Aura (C)
Enchant creature
Whenever enchanted creature deals damage to another creature, scry 1.
“The elves tend to their little garden, the frogs cower in the dark. It is the predators who will inherit this world.” -Yaizel, the prowling eye
Suresight Companion 1G
Creature — Wolf (U)
Whenever a creature you control deals damage to a creature it’s hunting, you may pay G. If you do, draw a card.
“Why have you come here?” Yaizel regarded his prey with suspicion, “The wolves don’t like what they smell, and neither do I.”
1/1
Arshtat, Celestial Queen 4RW
Legendary Creature — Angel (M)
Flying, lifelink, first strike
Other Angels you control get +1/+1.
Whenever you would gain life, gain twice that much life instead.
Whenever a noncreature source you control would deal damage, it deals twice that much damage instead.
6/4
Let me know what you think. I'll be posting themed previews around different factions and mechanics periodically and responding to questions and feedback. The set (and its follow up) is finished, so aside from minor wording tweaks I likely won't be making many big changes, but feedback is always appreciated.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains