Skyrider Domaindude 1UG
Creature – Human Scout
Flying
Domain – Skyrider Domaindude enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters on it, where X is the number of basic land types among lands you control.
0/0
That seems quite fair and strong and well designed. Great in limited if you can get it to be a 2/2.
Converging Winds1R
Instant (U) Converge - ! deals X damage to target creature and target player, where X equals the number of colors of mana used to cast this spell.
Converging FireballXR
Sorcery
Converge - ! deals X+Y damage to target creature or player, where Y equals the number of colors of mana used to cast this spell.
Kicking Coverge1R
Instant
Converge - ! deals X damage to target creature or player, where X equals the number of colors of mana used to cast this spell.
Kicker 3
If you played the kicker cost, create a 1/1 red goblin creature token.
I realize there are more 4CMC than 5, yes. But 5 is where you get "full converge"; 4 and below are "not quire full converge."
No Timmy or Johnny is happy with a converge of 4. So 2/3rds of your audience (by preference) are not happy with the majority of cards with the mechanic. This leaves Spikes... who are only concerned with winning. How do you win in constructed formats? With constructed-format-quality cards... of which there are how many converge cards?
I really don't see why we're talking about this. Are you going to try to convince me that Radiant Flames is a better card than Tribal flames for any environment? Is your position that there's no fact of the matter about which of those two cards is more elegant, more fun, better suited to a balanced limited or constructed environment? No. NO one cares about Radiant Flames. But maybe that's because of poor design.
So I propose a test: Design a well designed Converge counterpart to Tribal Flames. It doesn't have to be standard playable. It doesn't have to be able to work in any old limited format. I just want to see what you think a satisfactory Lightning Bolt variant looks like here. Domain, Madness, Clash, Suspend... all have iconic, simple lightning bolt variants that still see casual and constructed play across a variety of formats. Design a Converge Lightning Bolt that you think represents Converge in a good light.
Edit: Raidant Flames is a Anger of the Gods, Flamebreak, Slagstorm, Sweltering Suns variant. Now which of those do people remember?
It isn't your bias against converge thats a problem. It's your total enslavement to your constructed bias. Your constructed bias, your inability to see the value in cards which don't fit into competitive constructed, is reliably your biggest problem as a designer.
Step 1: Draft.
Step 2: Look at the number of 1-4 drops in your deck, and the number of 5 drops in your deck.
The fact of the matter is that you will rarely get full-converge cards off in either limited or constructed. The fact mana fixing is better in constructed is irrelevant.
Again, this is why Domain > Converge. Tribal Flames is a design that Converge just cannot do, and Tribal Flames saw play because it could get the full domain bonus for only 2 mana (and good deck design).
You say I have a constructed bias. I want to be able to play with my cards. No one plays with Converge cards in constructed because they're poorly balanced and the mechanic cannot allow for the same kind of scaling of Domain cards.
I love Fabricate as a mechanic, but in 2 years time no one will remember it existed. Why? Becasue Wizards didn't design the cards to be good in constructed. I've talked about ways that Astral Slide-style enablers (that gave bonuses for either option) would have made Fabricate decks a thing, giving each option an additional utility and working with options that created either tokens or counters, working with clue production, creature token production, or any old +1/+1 counter effects. They didn't do that, and so a good mechanic will be forgotten.
Gina's Apprentice - My first thought was "Sure"... except that when you untap with him, NONE of your wizards can be the target of an effect. Too good for limited, too slow for constructed.
2 fixes: "Another target wizard..." or "Other wizards you control have hexproof" (and no activation).
Barrin's Will - Boring, but sure. You could swap "wizard" for any creature type, more or less, and that's not very interesting designwise.
Wynston, Aquatic Weaver - 1st ability is nuts. 2nd ability less nuts. Both on the same card for 2 mana with that body (not that he'll ever be bolted) is nuts.
For all I know my bias against the mechanic could be clouding my judgement.
From a design perspective, I hate the idea of a mechanic that's known for only one or two cards. Look at Fatal Push; in 2 years time no one is going to remember any other Revolt cards because (maybe) 1 or two others exist. If this is the case "revolt" isn't short-cut language to prime you for a mechanic that you've seen before.
I fear that Converge cannot produce notable cards naturally. Far more 1-2 drops are played than 5 drops, and (sans Fist of Suns-style cards), 1-2 drop converges just can't be a thing that sees print or serious play (Unless they're combo pieces, sure).
While you may be right about the idea that this isn't quite a Converge "tribal" deck, the keystone interaction of the deck is a Converge-based combo.
Technically it's an Imprint - Converge based combo, right? And "based" is the wrong word, as it's 1/3rd of the mechanic.
However, as I suggested above, I'm a bit worried that this isn't a natural combo, but an artificial one. You didn't design the converge card to be simple and elegant, you designed it to combo with 2 other cards. And then you went and added extra text to those other cards to make the combo even better, right?
Also, I think you have the idea that I designed each of these cards specifically for this combo, when I didn't. I designed the wizard, the artifact, and plenty more cards as I was exploring the design space of Converge.
I have a hard time believing this given the order you posted these on the last page, and the fact that the wizard is a clunky Magus of the Scepter. Scepter's already a pretty rules-intensive card and you just shoved converge text in there. You say it was meant as a drawback (So... again... Converge is being used as a restriction, not a bonus!), but it's this "restriction" that lets it combo with Fist of Suns to go infinite. This is a mighty big coincidence.
I happened to notice the interaction between the two by accident and thought it could be fun to give it something to work with.
Unlike Fist of Suns, which let you play big things for cheap and max sunburst cards that cost less than 5, your artifact does the latter. It's clearly designed for Converge.
I even designed my extra-turn card to be open-ended and splashy, so as not to broadcast the idea that it was designed with this interaction in mind.
When you look at all 3, it's clear it was designed with this in mind. In fact, the only doubt is that it's too designed with this in mind. You'll be playing 5 colors, so let's make it gold. Max Imprint Converge is 5, so it costs 5. Can't be countered, because combo lock (as if they could counter it if you're taking infinite turns and couldn't counter the first anyways...). And then there's the "Exile this" clause - an entire sentence which on every other magic card of this kind is meant as a means to stop it from being an infinite combo. This basically ensures people will be thinking of combos!
Yes, the wizard was inspired by Isochron Scepter and thus also steps in on Imprint's design space, but contrary to your opinion, that's perfectly okay.
Challenge: Design a Magus of the Scepter (following Magus conventions). Now - put your wizard and the Magus of the Scepter side-by-side. Which do you think is a better designed card?
I'm not saying your wizard can't be printed (although I am saying it can't be printed in a standard with a 5 mana or less time walk). I'm asking you if someone brought you both cards for the 1st card in a set you have no preconceived (combo) notions about, would you choose the card that uses a popular naming/templating convention to replicate one of Magic's most famous and beloved cards, or would you choose the the one that has more text and one of magic's least original and least favorite ability words?
By any measure, a Magus of the Scepter is the better design. The only reason to favor the latter is because of the combo potential.
I honestly don't see how my wizard is more "needlessly complicated." It's a callback to a popular card that makes use of a set mechanic. That sort of thing happens ALL THE TIME.
I honestly don't see how you don't see it.
Converge - When ~ enters the battlefield, you may exile an instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost X or less from your hand, where X is the number of colors of mana spent to cast ~.
VS
Imprint — When ~ enters the battlefield, you may exile an instant card with converted mana cost 2 or less from your hand.
Ways Wizard is more complex than Imprint:
1. X is more complex than a nonvariable 2.
2. Instant or Sorcery VS instant.
3. Keeping track of colors. (I have to do this for wizard, not scepter).
4. Scepter has less game text.
5. The proper templating for this would be Imprint - Converge (two ability words would be a first, no?); but this is symptomatic of the fact the Wizard ties two unrelated mechanics together; Imprint's exile from [location] and Converge's cares-about-mana-used-for cost.
6. Oh, and let's not forget - this is on a creature!
SOME of these you might have overlooked. Some you might not find compellingly complex, or might think the complexity is worth it. But all 5? Come on.
There can be sensible disagreement about whether the combo is worth having, or whether this is printable solely to get to the combo. But there's no honesty in saying you don't know this is more complex. Not just different, layers of mechanic, more words
As for reprinting Fist of Suns, that is actually a wonderful idea and I'll probably make a tweaked version (the name doesn't fit on Alara)
It's an artifact. Have someone planehop with it. Easy peasy.
Currently there is only 1 2-drop converge (UGX) and a fair few 3 drops. Fist lets you bump these to 5. I'd be interested to see what you do here. My suggestion would be make a cycle of commons that are 3 drops that get particularly good if you cast them for 5. Simple, elegant, tight cycle.
I'm not sure if this is a good idea. You're drawing 5 cards with each spell you play. That's pretty degenerate, and you'll need to test A LOT to see if it works. It feels like it snownballs too quickly.
Combo engines need to be watched carefully. Wizards JUST BANNED two "combo engines" that are nowhere near as abusive as this possibly is.
The effect I used is very different than what Fist of Suns does, so comparing the two is like comparing apples and trading cards
See the title of the thread; this was meant to pump your converge cards, Fist of Suns style. I'll grant you the card draw is super clever with an interesting "drawback" that needs testing. Lots and lots of testing.
But here's the thing: That testing might suggest this needs to be 6, 6, and 6. Or 4, 4, and 4. And if you're in it for the combo, you'll have to drop it then.
I'd like you to understand that I am designing these cards the same way WotC would: for limited first.
You designed a 3 card combo featuring 3 rares. That's not a limited thing.
If you were designing for limited, we'd be seeing commons like Cultivate, not rares like Fist of Suns in this thread. Neither have Converge, but one enables it while one combos with it - and even then, not all converge cards and not early enough in the game to be reliable.
I do so with constructed in mind, which is how i discovered this deck, but each of these cards has a much broader purpose in the set than just to be used with each other.
Lastly, while I said I like passionate argument, you have a habit of coming off as abrasive and dismissive. It doesn't quite seem like you are open to actual argument, but rather trying desperately to prove yourself right and other people wrong. Argument is about seeing other points of view and comparing them with your own, not trying to completely replace them with your own. Maybe we could be a bit more open-minded?
I'm sorry if I come across that way. Honesty is the best policy, I think. I'm not going to puff you're ego - Your first card is interesting and has practical implications for a variety of formats. It's original and encourages new deck designs. If I didn't make this clear, I apologize. But - as I said all the way back on page 1 - Converge is a dead-end mechanic and your best efforts haven't dug it out of it's grave... yet.
I'm eager to see the 3CMC common creature cycle though, the one that gets "real good" with Fist of Suns, but still plays a clear, reliable limited role w/o it. That's designing for both limited and constructed together.
Sulosin, Earthbound1W
Legendary Creature - Human Cleric (R)
Vigilance
Planeswalkers are creatures with power and toughness equal to their loyalty. When in Rakovic, do as the Rakova. I insist.
- Sulosin.
2/2
Anyway, my OP contains two of the three pieces of an infinite combo this deck would be built around:
... and I'm going to stop you right there.
Are you suggesting a converge deck, or an ABC combo deck? If there was an infinite combo deck containing 3 goblins, it wouldn't be "Goblins Tribal" it would be "That one combo deck that happenstancely has 3 goblins."
Now, I admit that this is a semantic argument, and thus kind of annoying, but you're not so much proposing a Converge deck anymore than CopyCat was a Planeswalker Cat Tribal deck.
Let me be clear: A combo deck that "goes off" by maxing out the mechanic in question? That's clever! It really is. But at the end of the day it's still a combo deck.
1U
Creature - Wizard Converge - When ~ enters the battlefield, you may exile an instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost X or less from your hand, where X is the number of colors of mana spent to cast ~. 2, T: Copy the exiled card. You may cast the copy without paying its mana cost.
1/1
Scepter was a fun card. This has Imprint - Converge (and if you don't print it as such, shame on you). But a Magus of the Scepter that's tweaked to combo out is obscene.
Why can't one of the most popular cards ever created just be on a magus? Why do you have to make it a combo piece?
This, in a vaccuum, is just a more fragile, more restrictive Isochron Scepter, with the only upside being that it includes sorceries too. This card does double-duty, being an early drop that can take advantage of any 1 or 2 mana spell (like a soft counter or a burn spell) to help control the game if needed.
In a vaccuum it's Magus of the Scepter... but needlessly complex. Gotcha. Oh, wait, it's not "needlessly" complex; it's a combo piece.
Quick question: Can you name an existing combo piece like this - where the designer jumped through hoops to ruin one of the best magic cards in history to go infinite?
lion's eye diamond was meant to have a drackback, and was accidentally a combo. This is intentionally a combo that looks like a "drawback" to someone who hasn't seen Fist of Suns. (PS, if the fact I have to draw 5 cards on your Fist variant is the part of the combo that works, I'll be very disappointed.)
5
Legendary Artifact
Each spell that would cost less than five mana to cast costs five mana to cast. Converge - Whenever you cast a spell, draw a card for each color of mana spent to cast it.
This card breaks the last one, letting you exile a spell of cmc up to 5 rather than 2.
Step 1: Reprint Fist of Suns
Step 2: Print cards that cost 6 mana in your set.
Step 3: Hey, look, Step 1 and 2 made Sunburst decks more interesting and made cheat-11 drop into play decks more interesting. It's a 2-for-1 with a simpler card. 1 line of text vs 2.
2RGU
Sorcery
~ can't be countered by spells or abilities.
Take an extra turn after this one. Exile ~.
Will it be an infinite life combo? An infinite draw combo? Will it turn on the notion that you're playing a 5 drop for 2 mana?
NOPE! It's your run-of-the-mill infinite turn combo deck.
Oh, and look... you even went so far as to give it a "drawback" that coincidentally doesn't stop it from doing the only thing that line of exile text can conceivably be understood as intending to do.
You realize you could have printed this card:
Not Time WalkUUUUU (or Hybrid Us if you're clever)
Sorcery (R)
Take an extra turn after this turn.
The problem? (1) That's a harder to play spell than the one you're proposing, and (2) WOTC has decided that 5-mana for an extra turn is too little. I don't know that I agree with them, but it's clearly true.
To recap: Isochron Scepter but with Imprint - Converge and a bevy of extra text associated with it. Oh, but it's a creature so give some degree of interaction just in case there should ever be an infinite combo.
Reprint: Fist of Suns
Reprint: Time Warp
Oh, I know you're not actually reprinting those cards, but given their elegance compared to the extra lines of text on your cards... you're just not trying.
Neither Fist of Suns nor Time Warp (or your variants thereof) have converge. 1 card doesn't make a converge deck. In fact, nothing about this deck means it's converge. You might as well print:
Isochron Sledge5
Artifact (R)
Imprint — When Isochron Sledge enters the battlefield, you may exile an instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost 5 or less from your hand. 5, T: You may copy the exiled card. If you do, you may cast the copy without paying its mana cost.
This does the same combo work, but without Fist of Suns.
Isochron Sunburst2
Artifact (R)
Sunburst
Imprint — Remove X charge counters from ~: Exile an instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost X or less from your hand. 4, T: You may copy a card exiled by ~. If you do, you may cast the copy without paying its mana cost.
And this is the crux of the combo. With the legendary artifact out, I can cast the wizard for WUBRG and exile this, getting me the Isochron ScepterTime Walk combo.
I feel really bad that you thought you needed to explain that to me.
I just assumed that you wouldn't have printed anything in your set that cost 5 that could go infinite with Fist of Suns. That you saw the potential for abuse of Scepter and said "We'll put it on a creature, so it can be killed, and be careful not to print too powerful 5 drops in my set." much like mirrodin's designers were careful to avoid printing 2 drops that were too abusable in their set.
The rest of the deck is filled with fixing helpers and control cards (counterspells, burn, etc.) As well as the green 2-brid creature for an alternative beatdown plan.
Setting aside whether this is an acceptable combo, the fact that this has 1 card with Converge in it doesn't make it a converge deck.
Look up Storm decks. Dredge decks. Goblin decks. Cycling decks. I think you'll see that (with the rare exception of contemporary affinity for some reason), to be [mechanic] deck is to be a deck with multiple cards with that mechanic in it. (Heck, even Storm decks are usually just named after their key combo piece - Mind's Desire; Dragonstorm; etc.
Gosh, I love Storm and Dredge as mechanics so much. And I love Onslaught-era cycling decks. You ran lots of cards with cycling in those cycling decks. You also ran a single card with morph exalted angel. But no one called them "Morph decks"...
Watchwolf; sorry to derail your thread. Let's get it back on track!
I'd be interested in seeing the core of this Converge deck.
For the sake of argument, let's say the deck has 20 City of Brass and/or fetchland variants, and runs 1 of each basic land. Let's assueme there's no nonbasic land hate in standard of note.
As I see it, the biggest reason Domain > Converge is that you can get x5 for as low as less than 5 mana; as Tribal Flames, Worldly Counsel, and Evasive Action show. Similarly 5-color good stuff runs the best cards in the format in all colors, and since the best cards in all colors tend to be under 5 mana... well, you see where I'm going with this.
I know - I know - your converge deck has all the benefits of 5 color good stuff and the best converge cards. I'd really interested in seeing them.
----------------------------------------------
Maelstrom Monument - fun, but still kind of ridiculous. Cards like this need obscene testing, and even that is not worth our time since it does nothing until turn 6 normally.
Bant Ambassador, Naya Ambassador - Converge Lords feel very ally-ish. As in "If you've got enough, they're not terrible." But 2/2 for 3 seem pretty bad. Note that one gives you 5 life for 5, and one gives you a 7/7 WITH BONUSES, for 5 mana . It also gives you a 5/5 for ANY 3 mana, which obsoletes Woolly Thoctar something fierce. One is too weak, one is far too strong.
As for the "shared converge" lord archetype... I'm pretty sure this is doomed to failure. We're talking about a card that adds at least +1 of the relevant bonus to every (creature) spell you play for the rest of the game. every one. This is unprecedented, largely because it would be impossible to balance. Even if you costed the 7/7 for 5 fairly, the fact the next one's a 12/12 seems disheartening. We know it costs 2 to give an additional single +1/+1 counter to a selected tribe; you're giving at least that to every (colored) creature you play! This doesn't just snowball; it goes exponential.
Conduit of the Maelstrom - Magus of the isochron scepter is not anywhere near as fun or interesting as my nickname for it suggests. Also, blending Imprint with Converge seems like a big disconnect here.
Maelstrom's Malice - Fist of Suns aside, let's be clear. Ashes to Ashes needs a drawback other than running ANY 2nd color... while having the ability to kill 1 thing for 3 if you're accidentally mono-black to boot!
Prismatic Dissolution - Evasive Action exists. This is less interesting or fun than that.
Maelstrom Walker - Endless One exists. This feels really bad compared to that - vulnerable to more removal AND capped at 5/5 for the cost of Sliver Queen.
What you're proposing is taking half of the text that all converge cards share in common and getting rid of it. WHY?
Because it expands design space.
...
Explain to me by Rainbow Rootwalla is more converge than the following card:
Pure Brilliant Spectrum3U
Sorcery
Converge — Draw X cards, where X is the number of U mana spent to cast Brilliant Spectrum. Then discard two cards.
Pure Brilliant Spectrum concerns the color of mana used to cast the spell.
Rainbow Rootwalla concerns the variety of mana used to play the ability.
Why is your version of converge that ignores 1/2 of the existing mechanic better than this (equally bad) version of converge that ignores 1/2 of the existing mechanic? (Both are garbage, I think. But making either change opens up design space!).
Given the sheer number of Purity/Vivid/Isolationist/Totally-not-meant-to-evoke-segregation-trust-me mechanics that pop up in this forum, Converge-that-rewards-playing-one-color-of-mana is actually more popular than traditional-diversity-converge!
I understand that bring to light and Rainbow Rootwalla don't have the same ability. I'm stating that there share the same thematic connection, scaling with number of colors, and could trivially use the same ability word to group them together.
Converge is about scaling with the number of colors used to play the spell. All converge cards are like this.
What you're proposing is taking half of the text that all converge cards share in common and getting rid of it. WHY?
It is possible? We've already talked about cycling VS [type]cycling, which people LIKE because it triggers cycling triggers like Astral Slide. The named two similar, but different abilities, cycling to work with a subtheme of cards in Onslaught. But Converge, as an ability word, cannot trigger anything, thus apart from the design worries about calling a spade a club, there's no gameplay reason to do so.
Like I said, converge wasn't well explored. There are lots of things you could do with the keyword that wizards didn't do. Rainbow rootwalla is one such example. You are arguing for a very narrow and awkward version of Converge that there is no reason to hold to.
Casting a spell is not the same as paying a mana cost. It's not that it's not explored; it's that it's not converge...
Yes, you can staple a different mechanic and CALL IT Converge, but as we've seen that's absurd.
Ability words do not pick out a mechanic. They group a set of mechanics together. Ardent Recruiter, argent sphinx, and concussive bolt don't share any mechanic.
Game mechanics are constructs of rules or methods designed for interaction with the game state, thus providing gameplay. All games use mechanics; however, theories and styles differ as to their ultimate importance to the game.
The gameplay mechanic of affinity for X is reducing the spell's cost for each X you have. The gameplay mechanic of Metalcraft was rewarding yoru for controlling a set number (3) of a type of permanent (artifact).
Again, for Rainbow Rootwalla to be converge, you have to equivocate between casting a spell and playing an ability or you need to say that converge picks out both different mechanics. The former is a sloppy conceptual mistake, the latter is a choice that is a design mistake as it invites people to either make the conceptual mistake discussed or to think of ability words as picking out any number of mechanics; say a set of unrelated mechanics.
Let's be clear: This is a semantic argument. And the problem with your position is that it haphazardly equivocates between casting, activating, ability, mechanic, effect, and any number of other fundamental, primitive concepts. In a nontrivial sense, playing a spell and activating an ability, while they share some things in common, are distinct concepts that you wish to count as once. On your view, then, not only does converge's effects differ from card to card, but the method of activating those effects differ as well. The only constant is the wording of playing multiple colors of mana; i which point Sliver Queen is a converge card that says "Converge - As long as you paid a mana of each color to cast this spell, put this creature onto the battlefield. Otherwise you did not cast it."
Converge ties the scaling to types of mana spent to cast the spell.
Rainbow Rootwalla doesn't do this.
Hence it's not Converge. Your contention is that it's "close enough"; that casting a spell and activating an ability are sufficiently similar. But they're different in a way that existing converge cards are not different.
Either ability words pick out a mechanic or they do not; they clearly do. And that mechanic for Converge involves scaling with types of mana spent to cast the spell. Someday Wizards might pull a landcycling on us.
That seems quite fair and strong and well designed. Great in limited if you can get it to be a 2/2.
2UG for the */* version?
2 damage or 4. Sure. Fist of Suns combo wins too.
X+Y... WOTC's gonna get some calls.
Great design. Time Spiral 2 will love it!
I realize there are more 4CMC than 5, yes. But 5 is where you get "full converge"; 4 and below are "not quire full converge."
No Timmy or Johnny is happy with a converge of 4. So 2/3rds of your audience (by preference) are not happy with the majority of cards with the mechanic. This leaves Spikes... who are only concerned with winning. How do you win in constructed formats? With constructed-format-quality cards... of which there are how many converge cards?
I really don't see why we're talking about this. Are you going to try to convince me that Radiant Flames is a better card than Tribal flames for any environment? Is your position that there's no fact of the matter about which of those two cards is more elegant, more fun, better suited to a balanced limited or constructed environment? No. NO one cares about Radiant Flames. But maybe that's because of poor design.
So I propose a test: Design a well designed Converge counterpart to Tribal Flames. It doesn't have to be standard playable. It doesn't have to be able to work in any old limited format. I just want to see what you think a satisfactory Lightning Bolt variant looks like here. Domain, Madness, Clash, Suspend... all have iconic, simple lightning bolt variants that still see casual and constructed play across a variety of formats. Design a Converge Lightning Bolt that you think represents Converge in a good light.
Edit: Raidant Flames is a Anger of the Gods, Flamebreak, Slagstorm, Sweltering Suns variant. Now which of those do people remember?
Step 1: Draft.
Step 2: Look at the number of 1-4 drops in your deck, and the number of 5 drops in your deck.
The fact of the matter is that you will rarely get full-converge cards off in either limited or constructed. The fact mana fixing is better in constructed is irrelevant.
Again, this is why Domain > Converge. Tribal Flames is a design that Converge just cannot do, and Tribal Flames saw play because it could get the full domain bonus for only 2 mana (and good deck design).
You say I have a constructed bias. I want to be able to play with my cards. No one plays with Converge cards in constructed because they're poorly balanced and the mechanic cannot allow for the same kind of scaling of Domain cards.
I love Fabricate as a mechanic, but in 2 years time no one will remember it existed. Why? Becasue Wizards didn't design the cards to be good in constructed. I've talked about ways that Astral Slide-style enablers (that gave bonuses for either option) would have made Fabricate decks a thing, giving each option an additional utility and working with options that created either tokens or counters, working with clue production, creature token production, or any old +1/+1 counter effects. They didn't do that, and so a good mechanic will be forgotten.
2 fixes: "Another target wizard..." or "Other wizards you control have hexproof" (and no activation).
Barrin's Will - Boring, but sure. You could swap "wizard" for any creature type, more or less, and that's not very interesting designwise.
Wynston, Aquatic Weaver - 1st ability is nuts. 2nd ability less nuts. Both on the same card for 2 mana with that body (not that he'll ever be bolted) is nuts.
From a design perspective, I hate the idea of a mechanic that's known for only one or two cards. Look at Fatal Push; in 2 years time no one is going to remember any other Revolt cards because (maybe) 1 or two others exist. If this is the case "revolt" isn't short-cut language to prime you for a mechanic that you've seen before.
I fear that Converge cannot produce notable cards naturally. Far more 1-2 drops are played than 5 drops, and (sans Fist of Suns-style cards), 1-2 drop converges just can't be a thing that sees print or serious play (Unless they're combo pieces, sure).
But a 2/3 flyer doesn't scream "dwarf" in a fantasy set.
I'd be okay with something other than Angel here; but it has to be a white-aligned flying creature type.
Technically it's an Imprint - Converge based combo, right? And "based" is the wrong word, as it's 1/3rd of the mechanic.
However, as I suggested above, I'm a bit worried that this isn't a natural combo, but an artificial one. You didn't design the converge card to be simple and elegant, you designed it to combo with 2 other cards. And then you went and added extra text to those other cards to make the combo even better, right?
Semantics aside, your deck has 1 converge card in it's skeleton. That's like playing monored burn in legacy and saying it's Goblin Guide Tribal.
I have a hard time believing this given the order you posted these on the last page, and the fact that the wizard is a clunky Magus of the Scepter. Scepter's already a pretty rules-intensive card and you just shoved converge text in there. You say it was meant as a drawback (So... again... Converge is being used as a restriction, not a bonus!), but it's this "restriction" that lets it combo with Fist of Suns to go infinite. This is a mighty big coincidence.
Unlike Fist of Suns, which let you play big things for cheap and max sunburst cards that cost less than 5, your artifact does the latter. It's clearly designed for Converge.
When you look at all 3, it's clear it was designed with this in mind. In fact, the only doubt is that it's too designed with this in mind. You'll be playing 5 colors, so let's make it gold. Max Imprint Converge is 5, so it costs 5. Can't be countered, because combo lock (as if they could counter it if you're taking infinite turns and couldn't counter the first anyways...). And then there's the "Exile this" clause - an entire sentence which on every other magic card of this kind is meant as a means to stop it from being an infinite combo. This basically ensures people will be thinking of combos!
Challenge: Design a Magus of the Scepter (following Magus conventions). Now - put your wizard and the Magus of the Scepter side-by-side. Which do you think is a better designed card?
I'm not saying your wizard can't be printed (although I am saying it can't be printed in a standard with a 5 mana or less time walk). I'm asking you if someone brought you both cards for the 1st card in a set you have no preconceived (combo) notions about, would you choose the card that uses a popular naming/templating convention to replicate one of Magic's most famous and beloved cards, or would you choose the the one that has more text and one of magic's least original and least favorite ability words?
By any measure, a Magus of the Scepter is the better design. The only reason to favor the latter is because of the combo potential.
I honestly don't see how you don't see it.
Converge - When ~ enters the battlefield, you may exile an instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost X or less from your hand, where X is the number of colors of mana spent to cast ~.
VS
Imprint — When ~ enters the battlefield, you may exile an instant card with converted mana cost 2 or less from your hand.
Ways Wizard is more complex than Imprint:
1. X is more complex than a nonvariable 2.
2. Instant or Sorcery VS instant.
3. Keeping track of colors. (I have to do this for wizard, not scepter).
4. Scepter has less game text.
5. The proper templating for this would be Imprint - Converge (two ability words would be a first, no?); but this is symptomatic of the fact the Wizard ties two unrelated mechanics together; Imprint's exile from [location] and Converge's cares-about-mana-used-for cost.
6. Oh, and let's not forget - this is on a creature!
SOME of these you might have overlooked. Some you might not find compellingly complex, or might think the complexity is worth it. But all 5? Come on.
There can be sensible disagreement about whether the combo is worth having, or whether this is printable solely to get to the combo. But there's no honesty in saying you don't know this is more complex. Not just different, layers of mechanic, more words
It's an artifact. Have someone planehop with it. Easy peasy.
Currently there is only 1 2-drop converge (UGX) and a fair few 3 drops. Fist lets you bump these to 5. I'd be interested to see what you do here. My suggestion would be make a cycle of commons that are 3 drops that get particularly good if you cast them for 5. Simple, elegant, tight cycle.
I'm not sure if this is a good idea. You're drawing 5 cards with each spell you play. That's pretty degenerate, and you'll need to test A LOT to see if it works. It feels like it snownballs too quickly.
Combo engines need to be watched carefully. Wizards JUST BANNED two "combo engines" that are nowhere near as abusive as this possibly is.
See the title of the thread; this was meant to pump your converge cards, Fist of Suns style. I'll grant you the card draw is super clever with an interesting "drawback" that needs testing. Lots and lots of testing.
But here's the thing: That testing might suggest this needs to be 6, 6, and 6. Or 4, 4, and 4. And if you're in it for the combo, you'll have to drop it then.
You designed a 3 card combo featuring 3 rares. That's not a limited thing.
If you were designing for limited, we'd be seeing commons like Cultivate, not rares like Fist of Suns in this thread. Neither have Converge, but one enables it while one combos with it - and even then, not all converge cards and not early enough in the game to be reliable.
I'm sorry if I come across that way. Honesty is the best policy, I think. I'm not going to puff you're ego - Your first card is interesting and has practical implications for a variety of formats. It's original and encourages new deck designs. If I didn't make this clear, I apologize. But - as I said all the way back on page 1 - Converge is a dead-end mechanic and your best efforts haven't dug it out of it's grave... yet.
I'm eager to see the 3CMC common creature cycle though, the one that gets "real good" with Fist of Suns, but still plays a clear, reliable limited role w/o it. That's designing for both limited and constructed together.
Sulosin, Earthbound 1W
Legendary Creature - Human Cleric (R)
Vigilance
Planeswalkers are creatures with power and toughness equal to their loyalty.
When in Rakovic, do as the Rakova. I insist.
- Sulosin.
2/2
... and I'm going to stop you right there.
Are you suggesting a converge deck, or an ABC combo deck? If there was an infinite combo deck containing 3 goblins, it wouldn't be "Goblins Tribal" it would be "That one combo deck that happenstancely has 3 goblins."
Now, I admit that this is a semantic argument, and thus kind of annoying, but you're not so much proposing a Converge deck anymore than CopyCat was a Planeswalker Cat Tribal deck.
Let me be clear: A combo deck that "goes off" by maxing out the mechanic in question? That's clever! It really is. But at the end of the day it's still a combo deck.
Scepter was a fun card. This has Imprint - Converge (and if you don't print it as such, shame on you). But a Magus of the Scepter that's tweaked to combo out is obscene.
Why can't one of the most popular cards ever created just be on a magus? Why do you have to make it a combo piece?
In a vaccuum it's Magus of the Scepter... but needlessly complex. Gotcha. Oh, wait, it's not "needlessly" complex; it's a combo piece.
Quick question: Can you name an existing combo piece like this - where the designer jumped through hoops to ruin one of the best magic cards in history to go infinite?
lion's eye diamond was meant to have a drackback, and was accidentally a combo. This is intentionally a combo that looks like a "drawback" to someone who hasn't seen Fist of Suns. (PS, if the fact I have to draw 5 cards on your Fist variant is the part of the combo that works, I'll be very disappointed.)
...
Step 1: Reprint Fist of Suns
Step 2: Print cards that cost 6 mana in your set.
Step 3: Hey, look, Step 1 and 2 made Sunburst decks more interesting and made cheat-11 drop into play decks more interesting. It's a 2-for-1 with a simpler card. 1 line of text vs 2.
Will it be an infinite life combo? An infinite draw combo? Will it turn on the notion that you're playing a 5 drop for 2 mana?
NOPE! It's your run-of-the-mill infinite turn combo deck.
Oh, and look... you even went so far as to give it a "drawback" that coincidentally doesn't stop it from doing the only thing that line of exile text can conceivably be understood as intending to do.
You realize you could have printed this card:
Not Time WalkUUUUU (or Hybrid Us if you're clever)
Sorcery (R)
Take an extra turn after this turn.
The problem? (1) That's a harder to play spell than the one you're proposing, and (2) WOTC has decided that 5-mana for an extra turn is too little. I don't know that I agree with them, but it's clearly true.
To recap:
Isochron Scepter but with Imprint - Converge and a bevy of extra text associated with it. Oh, but it's a creature so give some degree of interaction just in case there should ever be an infinite combo.
Reprint: Fist of Suns
Reprint: Time Warp
Oh, I know you're not actually reprinting those cards, but given their elegance compared to the extra lines of text on your cards... you're just not trying.
Neither Fist of Suns nor Time Warp (or your variants thereof) have converge. 1 card doesn't make a converge deck. In fact, nothing about this deck means it's converge. You might as well print:
Isochron Sledge 5
Artifact (R)
Imprint — When Isochron Sledge enters the battlefield, you may exile an instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost 5 or less from your hand.
5, T: You may copy the exiled card. If you do, you may cast the copy without paying its mana cost.
This does the same combo work, but without Fist of Suns.
Isochron Sunburst 2
Artifact (R)
Sunburst
Imprint — Remove X charge counters from ~: Exile an instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost X or less from your hand.
4, T: You may copy a card exiled by ~. If you do, you may cast the copy without paying its mana cost.
There we go; now we need Fist of Suns again.
I feel really bad that you thought you needed to explain that to me.
I just assumed that you wouldn't have printed anything in your set that cost 5 that could go infinite with Fist of Suns. That you saw the potential for abuse of Scepter and said "We'll put it on a creature, so it can be killed, and be careful not to print too powerful 5 drops in my set." much like mirrodin's designers were careful to avoid printing 2 drops that were too abusable in their set.
Setting aside whether this is an acceptable combo, the fact that this has 1 card with Converge in it doesn't make it a converge deck.
Look up Storm decks. Dredge decks. Goblin decks. Cycling decks. I think you'll see that (with the rare exception of contemporary affinity for some reason), to be [mechanic] deck is to be a deck with multiple cards with that mechanic in it. (Heck, even Storm decks are usually just named after their key combo piece - Mind's Desire; Dragonstorm; etc.
Gosh, I love Storm and Dredge as mechanics so much. And I love Onslaught-era cycling decks. You ran lots of cards with cycling in those cycling decks. You also ran a single card with morph exalted angel. But no one called them "Morph decks"...
I'd be interested in seeing the core of this Converge deck.
For the sake of argument, let's say the deck has 20 City of Brass and/or fetchland variants, and runs 1 of each basic land. Let's assueme there's no nonbasic land hate in standard of note.
1. What are the core 5-6 converge cards your converge deck runs?
2. Why do I want those cards as opposed to, say, lightning bolt, Hero's Downfall, disenchant, Eternal Witness, Snapcaster Mage, and Siege Rhino? (You see where I'm going with this, right?
3. Why do I want those cards as opposed to, say, (assuming 10 detches and 15 dual lands as a mana base), Tribal Flames, Collective Restraint, Exploding Borders, Might of Alara, Worldly Counsel, and Evasive Action?
As I see it, the biggest reason Domain > Converge is that you can get x5 for as low as less than 5 mana; as Tribal Flames, Worldly Counsel, and Evasive Action show. Similarly 5-color good stuff runs the best cards in the format in all colors, and since the best cards in all colors tend to be under 5 mana... well, you see where I'm going with this.
I know - I know - your converge deck has all the benefits of 5 color good stuff and the best converge cards. I'd really interested in seeing them.
----------------------------------------------
Maelstrom Monument - fun, but still kind of ridiculous. Cards like this need obscene testing, and even that is not worth our time since it does nothing until turn 6 normally.
Bant Ambassador, Naya Ambassador - Converge Lords feel very ally-ish. As in "If you've got enough, they're not terrible." But 2/2 for 3 seem pretty bad. Note that one gives you 5 life for 5, and one gives you a 7/7 WITH BONUSES, for 5 mana . It also gives you a 5/5 for ANY 3 mana, which obsoletes Woolly Thoctar something fierce. One is too weak, one is far too strong.
As for the "shared converge" lord archetype... I'm pretty sure this is doomed to failure. We're talking about a card that adds at least +1 of the relevant bonus to every (creature) spell you play for the rest of the game. every one. This is unprecedented, largely because it would be impossible to balance. Even if you costed the 7/7 for 5 fairly, the fact the next one's a 12/12 seems disheartening. We know it costs 2 to give an additional single +1/+1 counter to a selected tribe; you're giving at least that to every (colored) creature you play! This doesn't just snowball; it goes exponential.
Conduit of the Maelstrom - Magus of the isochron scepter is not anywhere near as fun or interesting as my nickname for it suggests. Also, blending Imprint with Converge seems like a big disconnect here.
Maelstrom's Malice - Fist of Suns aside, let's be clear. Ashes to Ashes needs a drawback other than running ANY 2nd color... while having the ability to kill 1 thing for 3 if you're accidentally mono-black to boot!
Prismatic Dissolution - Evasive Action exists. This is less interesting or fun than that.
Maelstrom Walker - Endless One exists. This feels really bad compared to that - vulnerable to more removal AND capped at 5/5 for the cost of Sliver Queen.
...
Explain to me by Rainbow Rootwalla is more converge than the following card:
Pure Brilliant Spectrum 3U
Sorcery
Converge — Draw X cards, where X is the number of U mana spent to cast Brilliant Spectrum. Then discard two cards.
Pure Brilliant Spectrum concerns the color of mana used to cast the spell.
Rainbow Rootwalla concerns the variety of mana used to play the ability.
Why is your version of converge that ignores 1/2 of the existing mechanic better than this (equally bad) version of converge that ignores 1/2 of the existing mechanic? (Both are garbage, I think. But making either change opens up design space!).
Given the sheer number of Purity/Vivid/Isolationist/Totally-not-meant-to-evoke-segregation-trust-me mechanics that pop up in this forum, Converge-that-rewards-playing-one-color-of-mana is actually more popular than traditional-diversity-converge!
Converge is about scaling with the number of colors used to play the spell. All converge cards are like this.
What you're proposing is taking half of the text that all converge cards share in common and getting rid of it. WHY?
It is possible? We've already talked about cycling VS [type]cycling, which people LIKE because it triggers cycling triggers like Astral Slide. The named two similar, but different abilities, cycling to work with a subtheme of cards in Onslaught. But Converge, as an ability word, cannot trigger anything, thus apart from the design worries about calling a spade a club, there's no gameplay reason to do so.
Casting a spell is not the same as paying a mana cost. It's not that it's not explored; it's that it's not converge...
Yes, you can staple a different mechanic and CALL IT Converge, but as we've seen that's absurd.
The mechanic of needing 3 or more artifacts is a mechanic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_mechanics
The gameplay mechanic of affinity for X is reducing the spell's cost for each X you have. The gameplay mechanic of Metalcraft was rewarding yoru for controlling a set number (3) of a type of permanent (artifact).
Again, for Rainbow Rootwalla to be converge, you have to equivocate between casting a spell and playing an ability or you need to say that converge picks out both different mechanics. The former is a sloppy conceptual mistake, the latter is a choice that is a design mistake as it invites people to either make the conceptual mistake discussed or to think of ability words as picking out any number of mechanics; say a set of unrelated mechanics.
Let's be clear: This is a semantic argument. And the problem with your position is that it haphazardly equivocates between casting, activating, ability, mechanic, effect, and any number of other fundamental, primitive concepts. In a nontrivial sense, playing a spell and activating an ability, while they share some things in common, are distinct concepts that you wish to count as once. On your view, then, not only does converge's effects differ from card to card, but the method of activating those effects differ as well. The only constant is the wording of playing multiple colors of mana; i which point Sliver Queen is a converge card that says "Converge - As long as you paid a mana of each color to cast this spell, put this creature onto the battlefield. Otherwise you did not cast it."
Angel Tribal would love a 3 drop, so I don't see a problem tribal-shifting the creature to be more marketable/popular.
Rainbow Rootwalla doesn't do this.
Hence it's not Converge. Your contention is that it's "close enough"; that casting a spell and activating an ability are sufficiently similar. But they're different in a way that existing converge cards are not different.
Either ability words pick out a mechanic or they do not; they clearly do. And that mechanic for Converge involves scaling with types of mana spent to cast the spell. Someday Wizards might pull a landcycling on us.