A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
 
Exclusive: Sword of Truth and Justice
  • posted a message on Mono-blue Tempo
    I think there is no doubt the deck dies post-rotation as Obsession and Tempest Djinn are the two corner stones of the deck.

    I've tried to make UG work but I'm not hopeful. The are a few cards that I like a lot in that deck but it lacks the staples (cheap, reliable counter spells) to bind the whole thing together.

    Outside of blue we get Feather who's already strong right now and could be dominating post-rotation. The only thing holding that deck back is because Feather plays both the Djin and the Obsession part. I feel better having 8 strong cards instead of 4 over the top ones.
    Posted in: Established (Standard)
  • posted a message on Dungeons !!
    Thanks a lot, I think we settled on the template. OP is updated with a loose cycle of mono-color uncommon dungeons.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Mystic Forge - Eternal Central
    Quote from JCaleb »
    How and why is Mystic Forge preordering for $20 foil pretty much everywhere? It's a core set and it's a sub $3 card everywhere. The foil multiplier is insane, it's like it's a premium/limited set rare/mythic...

    I would argue that Golos, Tireless Pilgrim is more playable in that it can easily slot into any 5 color deck, but Forge needs either a colorless deck or a deck (commander anyway) of probably 30+ artifact/colorless cards. Star City Games has foil Golos for $10... and he's a viable commander option himself.

    Is there something I'm not seeing? Sub $3 rare at prerelease, near zero potential to do anything worthwhile in standard, likely too slow for modern and beyond...
    Hell, The new mythic swords from Modern Horizons only have a 300% foil multiplier by comparison... This has almost a 800-900% multiplier...


    legacy eldrazi, and legacy players tend to foil out everything


    And be massive spenders.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Dungeons !!
    Agree but I think No Mercy swings too strongly in the other direction but I agree the standard ability must be strong enough to make players attack the dungeon.

    How about:

    Corrupted Sewers 2B
    Dungeon {U}
    (E triggers when one ore more creatures attacks this dungeon. F triggers when all depth counters are removed from this dungeon, after it has been destroyed.)
    At beginning of your upkeep, each opponent looses 2 life.
    E - Create a 1/1 black rat creature token.
    F - Target creature that dealt damage to corrupted sewers gets -3/-3 until the end of turn.
    /3

    PS: 'E' stands for environment ability and 'F' stands for finale.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on [Read This] An Update, and a Call
    Looks good. Is there any way we can know when MTGNexus is up ?

    Also, good luck with the new project. I really hope it succeeds Smile
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Keyword: Perform
    I think adding more tappers will not change how repetitive this can get. I like the idea of the replicate variant better. Even then the mechanic will likely need a variable value. Replicating removal, draw and discard spells seems a lot more powerful then other stuff like combat tricks and damage to the face.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Dungeons !!
    Thanks, that was pretty helpful feed back.

    Quote from user_938036 »
    Triggering on combat damage for level 3 solves a significant problem I had with the design which was that any self-harm implement immediately broke these. Pain lands being the most obvious offender as you could trigger level 3 for every pain land you have. Dropping the levels and the targeting makes for a much cleaner card. Overall this version looks much better.

    However, now you have a different problem. These only have an ETB unless your opponent attacks you. While you can expect this to happen there are a significant number of games where this doesn't happen. It's not bad to have a number of cards that are like this but its a hard sell for an entire type of card. I think the cards would be better if they worked for you rather than against your opponent.

    I would like to discuss possible changes but the only thing filling my mind is a version of Sagas that gain lore counters when creatures attack.


    I agree there's some unpleasant "punisher" feeling inherent in this kind of design. That's part of the dungeon concept (and traps) but in the end I think the challenge is to make that work despite this problem.

    I guess my point is to try to tackle this problem in design instead of avoiding it in the template. I'm hopeful the first can be done while the later essentially kills the whole idea of dungeon cards.

    For example, what if the first ability is the most desirable and meant to build around while the final part is essentially a bonus that is more splashy and meant to carry the narrative ? I'm thinking something like this:

    Self-Aware Workshop 1UR
    Enchantment - Dungeon {R}
    X: Create a artifact token that is a copy of target artifact you control with converted mana cost X. Activate this ability only once per round.
    Whenever you or a planeswalker you control is dealt combat damage, sacrifice Self-Aware Workshop. If you do, until the end of your next turn each noncreature artifact you control is an artifact creature with power and toughness each equal to its converted mana cost.





    Levels were bad names since the individual levels were parts of a conceptual whole, but worked to differently to be all classified the same way - as with ability words a common trigger ability would be mentally more easily grouped together.

    But even going away fro that wording the main problem these dungeons have is that they disincentivize interaction. The opponent cannot "win" on the attack - getting through with some damage is bad, but getting blocked is even worse; better not attack the game and have a board stall. While individual rattlesnake cards like that are okay (we certainly have some enchantments and creatures off the top of my head that work this way), but as the foundation of a card type this is too one-sided.

    I propose that this works more like a Saga that doesn't go away over time but by attack, a planeswalker or an ongoing scheme: Create a recurring advantage over time to incentivize action e. g.

    Volatile Warren 3R
    Enchantment - Dungeon
    When ~ enters the battlefield and at the beginning of your end step, create a 1/1 Goblin creature token.
    If a source would deal combat damage to you or a planeswalker you control, that sources controller may have you sacrifice ~ instead. When you do, sacrifice any number of Goblins and ~ that much damage to target creature or planeswalker.

    Schemer's Stronghold 3U
    Enchantment - Dungeon
    When ~ enters the battlefield and at the beginning of your end step, draw a card, then discard a card.
    If a source would deal combat damage to you or a planeswalker you control, that sources controller may have you sacrifice ~ instead. When you do, return target instant or sorcery card from your graveyard to your hand.

    I personally created a new card type for similar interactions called "asset" which could be directly attacked like players/planeswalkers. I could see this work as an enchantment subtype as well, but the whole "I'm attacking your planeswalker, but it also indirectly attacks both of your dungeon permanents" thing is not good for intuitive gameplay - it's a big reason why noncombat damage rules for planeswalkers were eventually changed and we now have "any target".

    It's up to you to discern when the mechanics "feel" too much like planeswalkers, but I think the good old structure concept of just having a an attackable card type with its own toughness/life total is entirely valid and would be thematically where you want to be with a dungeon.


    A new card type that can be attacked sounds promising. I think that could work. My thoughts:

    • Dungeons is a new card type.
    • Dungeons can be attacked, like players and planeswalkers.
    • Dungeons enters the battlefield with a number of depth counters equal to it's 'starting depth'.
    • Whenever a dungeon is dealt combat damage, remove that many depth counters from it.
    • A dungeon is destroyed whenever it has zero depth counters.
    • Dungeons have three ability boxes (think level-up creatures or sagas).
    • The first unmarked box functions like a standard ability box.
    • The second box marked by a closed door is a triggered ability and it triggers whenever the dungeon is attacked by one or more creatures.
    • The final box marked by a open door is a triggered ability and it triggers when all depth counters are removed the from dungeon. (after it being destroyed)

    I think for this to work dungeons would have to be a permanent addition to the game, like Vehicles. I'm not sure if it's worth the trouble but I'm custom designer and for me it is !

    If I take this route:

    Corrupted Sewers 2B
    Dungeon {U}
    Rat creatures you control have deathtouch.
    I: Create an 1/1 black Rat creature token.
    II: Destroy target creature that dealt damage to Corrupted Sewers this turn.
    /1



    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Mystic Forge - Eternal Central
    In Standard this plays very well along side Ugin.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Tale's End (Jumbo Commander preview)
    Counter all walkers + bolas + krasis on cast ability + blast zone ?

    I'm main boarding this in mono-U :p
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Dungeons !!
    Quote from user_938036 »
    I have some major questions. First, are you meant to get level 2 multiple times? Are you meant to be able to trigger these yourself? If you skip level 2 and hit level 3 are you just out on level 2? Or can you not trigger level 3 until you trigger level 2? Can I trigger level 3 multiple times in response to itself?

    Ignoring these questions, these look like bad sagas. Bad meaning more complicated, more abusable, more confusing and less flavorful. Why am I getting a benefit from my opponent exploring my dungeon? I assume the creature attacking is meant to call to a creature exploring the dungeon, and the damage being slaying the boss which is why the dungeon is gone afterward.


    You can get lvl 2 multiple times. You can trigger those yourself. You can trigger level 3 without level 2 but that's unusual. You can't trigger 3 multiple times with itself because the sacrifice effect is part of the trigger, so when one trigger resolves the card is sacrificed.

    Yeah they are more complicated and more "abusable" then sagas but this doesn't says much as sagas are very simple and non-"abusable".

    About the flavor, I think my vision is that every dungeon has 3 abilities. The first level represents the quest that sends adventures to the dungeon. In Crypts of the Damned, it's the undead getting more powerful. In Dragon's Lair, it's riches.

    The second level represents exploration of the dungeon and this is why it may triggers several times. In crypts it's the undead stirrings in their graves represented by mill (bodies ready to be reanimated). In dragon's lair it's adventurers activating ancient traps (artifacts in graveyard).

    The third level represents the adventurers going to the end of the dungeon and finding the big boss (those cases). It's the conclusion of the adventure.

    I agree, I should drop the whole level thing as it's confusing and takes too much space. How about:

    Tyrant's Tower 2BW
    Enchantment - Dungeon {R}
    When Tyrant's Tower enters the battlefield exile target creature until Tyrant's Tower leaves the battlefield.
    Whenever one or more creatures attacks you or a planeswalker you control, create a 2/2 white Knight creature token with vigilance.
    Whenever you or a planeswalker you control is dealt combat damage, sacrifice Tyrant's Tower. Then create a 2/2 black Knight creature token with Menace.

    Dungeons would have a unique loyalty separating the 3 abilities.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Dungeons !!
    Corrupted Sewers 2B
    Dungeon {U}
    (E triggers when one ore more creatures attacks this dungeon. F triggers when all depth counters are removed from this dungeon, after it has been destroyed.)
    At beginning of your upkeep, each opponent looses 2 life.
    E - Create a 1/1 black rat creature token.
    F - Target creature that dealt damage to corrupted sewers gets -3/-3 until the end of turn.
    /3

    Unhallowed Crypts 1B
    Dungeon {U}
    Skeletons, Spirits and Zombies you control gets +1/+1.
    E - Target player puts the top three cards of their library into their graveyard.
    F - Return target creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield. That creature is a black zombie in addition to it's types and colors.
    /3

    Brimming Warrens 2R
    Dungeon {U}
    At beginning of your upkeep, create a 1/1 red Goblin creature token.
    E - Target creature you control gets +1/+0 and gains first strike until end of turn.
    F - Until the end of your next turn creatures you control have haste.
    /2

    Frozen Caverns 4U
    Dungeon {U}
    At beginning of each opponent combat step, tap target creature that player controls.
    E - Creatures attacking Frozen Cavern gets -1/-0 until end of turn.
    F - Attacking creatures target opponent controls don't untap during that player's next untap step.
    /3




    I've tried to design dungeons in mtg for over 10 years. I think there are some ancient posts on this subject in this forum. I think Innistrad's transform and Dominaria's saga shows that being creative with card template can result in awesome fun sets. With this extra flexibility I think I've finally arrived where I want.

    Crypts of the Damned 3B
    Enchantment - Dungeon {U}
    (Level 1 triggers when this card enters the battlefield. Level 2 triggers when you or planeswalker you control are attacked or targeted by spell or ability. Level 3 triggers when you or planeswalker you control is dealt damage. Sacrifice after level 3.)
    Level 1 - Distribute two +1/+1 counters among zombies, spirits or skeletons you control.
    Level 2 - Target player puts the top three cards of their library into their graveyard.
    Level 3 - Put target creature card from a graveyard onto the battlefield under your control.

    Dragon's Lair 2RR
    Enchantment - Dungeon {R}
    (Level 1 triggers when this card enters the battlefield. Level 2 triggers when you or planeswalker you control are attacked or targeted by spell or ability. Level 3 triggers when you or planeswalker you control is dealt damage. Sacrifice after level 3.)
    Level 1 - Create two Treasure tokens.
    Level 2 - Return target artifact card from your graveyard to the battlefield.
    Level 3 - Create a 5/5 red Dragon creature token with flying and "R: this creature gains +1/+0 until end of turn".

    There are a couple of things I would like to explain about the design but I leave this for later. For now I want the first impressions.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Mu Yianling, Sky Dancer NGA preview
    Your assessment of competitive standard is completely, utterly off. Gruul is highly competitive deck who is everywhere in mtgo and paper. And that deck plays 3-4 Rekindling Phoenix main board and sometimes Nullhide Ferox split in the 75. Nightveil Predator still sees some play in Esper control and hero SB. Rekindling Phoenix is also included in mono-red SB.

    Those 3 cards sees FAR more play then Frilled Mystic, Murmuring Mystic and Josu Vess, Lich Knight (the first sees marginal play, the later two sees no play at all). And Phoenix does see more play then Nicol Bolas, the Ravager given it's role in gruul and mono-red.

    Comparing Mu to a 4 cmc creature is also completely pointless as her cmc is 3. And really doesn't matter the creature will only ht the board later. This is exactly like comparing Delver to cmc 2-3 creatures because he only transforms by turn 2-3.

    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on "Brazen Thief" (WinCondition spoiler- Russian)
    Surprised noone brought its closest comparison: stealer of secrets.

    It has a better trigger but has the life payment downside. I also think black is a more powerful color for this effect because black has more removal while blue's bounce nullify the CA this effect provides.

    I cant wait to play limited M20, so far it looks amazing.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Mu Yianling, Sky Dancer NGA preview
    Quote from bravado1219 »
    @italofoca I think I'm mostly on board with what you're saying. Like I mentioned before, "mostly solved" is sort of a weird term to use right now insofar as this is the most volatile Standard environment I can remember since I started playing. That being said, there are still a few known quantities, and the Bant decks are still primarily Nissa decks. This format is crazy with regards to flex slots, with people going back and forth on individual card choices almost constantly. Can I imagine a decklist showing up with a singleton Mu in the main or board? Absolutely. Would I bet on it? Nope.

    You're totally right, people don't always (a/k/a never) accurately predict the meta, which is how major price spikes happen in Standard. My musings are simply that. But we still have some information we can be pretty sure about, and I think that helps us make informed decisions about what we play in the early days of the format. Heck, that's why mono-red tends to do well early--people are dicking about with new cards to see whether or not they're good. Still doesn't mean we shouldn't think about it.

    I guess if I had to boil down my point it would be that I don't see why you shouldn't be able to make an educated guess about something even if you ultimately turn out to be incorrect. Frankly, I like it when people tell me I'm wrong and give me reasons. If someone's argument is persuasive enough, I might change my mind. That's how I grow as a player.

    TL;DR: Mu is most certainly NOT trash; regardless, I don't foresee her seeing much if any play in this current Standard format; talking about new cards' utility in new formats is fun and is, I think, productive; and, this game is awesome and we all have our love of it in common. Good talk.


    Well, everyone has it's educated guesses and it's fun to talk about it. I believe we agree on that. But judging the card playability by those guesses alone ? I would rather judge it "in a vacuum".

    Btw I think Mu is worth testing in Jeskai (replacing Dovin) and in mono-U.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Mu Yianling, Sky Dancer NGA preview
    Quote from bravado1219 »
    Quote from italofoca »


    There is always cards that slips everyone's radars and cards that people hype that don't see any play. It's always like this because cards can only be evaluated in a vacuum but whether or not they see play depends on what will be released in the future and how the environment shapes up. It even depends on out-of-the-game factors like how much people are spending in the game.

    You can't use playability to measure quality because playability depends on many factors other then quality. Your claim that this card does not see any play in any of the current meta decks is futile for many, many reasons: (i) the current meta is not solved; (ii) this card is not part of this format; (iii) no one can predict how the meta shifts with a new set with any degree of certainty, this is hard fact of reality; (iv) even if you could, M20 is not fully spoiled; (v) there are local variation of meta, even in high level competition, and you can't possibly account for all this.

    It's not people that are bad at evaluating cards, it's just that they don't use your evaluation criteria because it is useless.



    Saying evaluating a card in the context of the existing meta is useless when we have 2/3rds of the next set doesn't make any sense to me. As volatile as this format has been, it's still mostly "solved" insofar as the pillars of the format have been pretty much established. This Standard format is about Teferi, Time Raveler decks, Nissa, Who Shakes the World decks, and the various forms of aggro. To a lesser extent we have Arclight Phoenix decks. I guess Nexus of Fate is still around somewhere.


    I don't think it has been "mostly solved". For example, it has been a matter of weeks that Bant started to show serious results and is now a tier 1 deck. Someone could claim Shalai, Voice of Plenty saw literally no high competitive play 2-3 weeks ago but claiming she is unplayable would still be wrong.

    We've seen a huge chunk of M20 already, and nothing looks like it will result in format upheaval like the release of WAR. Again, I can't speak to future formats with additional sets, but as far as evaluation goes RIGHT NOW, this card just isn't as good as Teferi or Narset, and thus I think it will see little to no immediate play. This is not to say the card is a bad card by any measure, it's just not well-supported currently. I would never argue that quality equates to playability. Tons of great cards see no play (look at Tezzeret, Artifice Master). Also, I've played many "bad" cards because they were well-positioned at a specific point in time (there was a time where I wrecked people with sideboard Woodlot Crawlers, for example). But saying no one can predict how a new set will impact the current metagame is untrue. If a new card competes with existing cards that are more generically powerful, something else has to happen to make the new card viable. I don't see anything in the current spoilers that would indicate Mu slots well into any existing deck, nor do I see any indication that she would be the basis of some new archetype.

    However, by several posters' logic, there's no point in evaluating cards AT ALL before a set releases. If that were the case, what? Everyone just puts random good stuff in their decks with literally no consideration to the existing metagame? I'm pretty sure that's not how it works. Whether I'm right or wrong remains to be seen, but saying the exercise of trying to predict a new card's viability is fruitless is a disservice to MtG players. To a great extent, it's the entire reason there's a spoiler season.


    Nobody disputes she is not as good as Teferi, Time Raveler but there's a huge gap between the best card in standard and "unplayable" or "junk".

    I agree with most of your assessment except that Narset is more "generally powerful" then Mu. Narset is mostly a SB card who is seem lot's of play because everyone is playing the thing she is hating. Plus she is only really good in non-creature decks. Esper Hero still plays her because of the cheer amount of card draw in the format but she is a liability there.

    And people are unable to predict the meta otherwise prices would be stable before and after launch. We still have to guess but no one can guess right. At least not enough to make money consistently.

    I don't know what's the point of judging cards by the current meta is. The meta will shake for sure and "playability right now" will only matter in the few weeks after release. It's much more productive to judge a card by whether it's worth at least being tested and Mu certainly is.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.