This is a 2/2 for 4 mana. I realize that this is supposed to be "half" of the design, what with Partner with, but the ability is steeped in some mechanical nonsense. What practical reason is there to make your enchanted creatures also enchantments? What practical reason is to there to make disenchanting their auras also sacrifice the creature?
Compare your card to this one: Coolio, Aura Master1W
Legendary Creature - Human Cleric
Partner (You can have two commanders if both have partner.)
Creatures you control that are enchanted get +1/+1 and vigilance.
2/2
Single color "partner" so he can mix and match w/ the existing 2-color partners to make a 3-color deck.
As it's not "drawing you a card" in the main, it can be a 2/2 for 2 w/o a problem.
It's ability is all upside, all feel good, and it gives you an additional incentive to enchant creatures - they also gain vigilance. This creates interesting choices, and encourages you to attack with your enchanted creatures - good for casual multiplayer formats.
Dauntless BarrierW
Creature - Spirit Wall (C)
Defender
Sacrifice this creature: Another target creature is indestructible until end of turn.
0/3
Re: Advocate - I echo others, this is too complex for common. All 3 abilities are ridiculously strong, so the "drawback" of being a 1/1 isn't enough for this.
Re: Misery - Sure? This feels uncommon though. I'd also like it to be an instant and/or cost 1BB.
Re; Discard guy - On turn 3 there's far less chance this will be disruptive than on turn 1, but I don't think WOTC would print this effect at (C). If they do print the effect (they should, but probably won't), it should be (U). While we're at it, make it a 3/1 or a 2/2; the effect is fun and interesting but shouldn't come at the cost of playing a 3 mana 2/1.
Unrolling Scenery - This is a combination of two common cards with no drawback. Not cool. And probably not common. I'd be interested to hear what design role you think this plays...
Lone Wolf's Tooth - Players generally hate intimidate, as it's flavor and function is tenuous at best. If you want a card that reward you for only having 1 creature, make it actually reward you. If you want an incidental reward to justify doubling the cost of Bonesplitter, a casual favorite that saw no constructed play, pick a keyword. Vigilance, Haste, Menace, First Strike, Lifelink, Trample, etc. and call it a day.
Sentient World-Tree Vine - Why the choice? Let's say this put 2 +1/+1 counters on target creature and created a 2/2 beear. It'd still be a card that wouldn't see play outside of limited. 5/5 Trample for 3GG + a very small added benefit would be interesting. A 5/5 w/o trample for 3GG with a death's trigger that gives you something would be interesting. Both would be fair commons.
RNA, I think, has a great mechanic - Riot (This creature enters the battlefield with your choice of a 1+1 counter or haste.) - and a fair mechanic - Spectacle (You may cast this card for its spectacle cost rather than its mana cost if an opponent lost life this turn.). Afterlife is good enough, but Addendum rubs me the wrong way and Adapt is bad monstrosity
That said, I think WOTC might have dropped the ball with some of the Spectacle designs and so my goal here is to outline how I might have done Spectacle in the set if given the chance. (This means no changing mechanics I don't like, and only minor changes to non-Rakdos cards largely for limited concerns.)
To start off with, a few restrictions:
(1) To avoid stepping on Riot's heels, no haste on creatures in the set. Fortunately, Haste his clunky with Spectacle, as the normal Spectacle trigger will be combat.
(2) To avoid stepping on Surveil's heels, no Scry. Honestly, the inclusion of "Scry" in this set seems wrongheaded, with only Sphinx of Foresight being remotely interesting. That said, I'd save Sphinx of Foresight for a set where I can fill out the cycle. Sometimes a card design is good, but not good for a particular set. As Rakdos usually doesn't get Scry, unless as part of a Magma Jet-style cycle, this shouldn't be a tough restriction.
Rakdos Black: Drill Bit (U) -> (C). Coercion is common; Drill Bit is a coercion variant, so that's that. Maybe development found that this was "too strong" as a (C) due to a turn 2 Drill Bit after a lack of a 1 drop. Solution? Print more 1 drops.
Step 1: Hard Wall of Wood cycle; this is to say elaborate on Saruli Caretaker to make a cycle of 0/3 defenders. Making Spear Spewer a 0/3 is easy enough. The question would be whether there should be an activation cost boost. While I'm inclined to say "no," maybe throw "Reveal your hand" infront of the tap to make for interesting choices. Resolute Watchdog -> common and looses a power and activates w/o a mana cost. Simple. I suppose Blue's member could be a 0/3 with Adapt that can attack if it has a +1/+1 counter... but to avoid block mechanics, how about Illusory WallU Illusion Spirit Wall - When ~ blocks, return it to it's owner's hand. Otherwise, just a 0/3 that mills when it's dealt damage would be fine. Completing the cycle, maybe black gets Carrion Feeder - the Wall. 0/3 for B, Pay 1 life, Sacrifice a creature: Put a +1/+1 counter on ~. Yes, I'm casually giving black the manaless sacrifice outlet it deserves at (C) as a defender. Alternatively, a 0/3 for B that had "B, Sacrifice this creature: Each opponent loses 1 life and you gain 1 life." would be an enabler for the mechanic. Test 'em to see which work and which don't.
Step 2: Create simple Adapt 1 drops for simic. 1/1 flying for U with some expensive adapt cost would work (and yes, this means changing or scrapping Pteramander which I'm okay with), and a 1/2 reach or 1/1 deathtouch or 1/1 trample with some expensive adapt cost for G. You run these if only for their "adapted" versions; the fact they block Rakdos 1 drops to stave off a turn 2 drill bit is good.
Step 3: French Vanilla 1 drops all around; maybe Healer's Hawk gets reprinted (ugh) with a cycle of 2-keyword 1/1s at (C) (yeah!).
Dead Revels (C) -> (U) and Spectacle 1B -> B. Honestly, I kind of think this should cost 2B... but 1BB might be more "fair" and as double-colors in a card should be avoided in multicolor sets, 3B ends up being right. But all too often you'll be losing attackers to push through the damage for this, so costing its spectacle B makes this a bit easier to think about. I somewhat doubt people would ever consider this sorcery speed card over Find from Find // Finality, so this might just be a "dead design space"; that said making spectacle cost less than Find might make up the difference.
Shambling Clown1B Creature - Zombie 2/2 Spectacle - Pay 4 life. (Simple design made to work with Font of Agonies and/or Death's Shadow while also being something of a skill tester card. You'd run this for it being a 2/2 for 2 in many decks, but would you pay it's spectacle cost? That's INTERESTING.)
Spawn of Mayhem (M) -> Mayhem Demon5BB Creature - Demon (U) Flying, Menace, Spectacle 1BB, Pay 4 life. 4/4 (French vanilla is good design space) Some fancy legendary name4BB Legendary Creature - Demon Rogue (M) "During your upkeep, each opponent loses 1 life and you gain 1 life." Spectacle2BB 5/5 (Juzám Djinn homage. Spawn of Mayhem has far too many lines of text on it that will rarely matter. MAYBE if you want to do something with +1/+1 counters, make a Sengir Vampire variant... but I don't want to do that here.)
Returning Performance4B Sorcery (U) "Return target creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield." Spectacle 1B, Sacrifice a creature. (Zombify Spectacle variant, as opposed to a Gruesome Encore/Macabre Mockery mechanic).
Feral Maaka -> 1R 3/1 Spectacle R (I like vanilla creatures as much as the next person, but come on... by the way, give Prowling Caracal Vigilance or Flash - mostly to make it interesting.)
Rix Maadi Reveler (R) -> (U) 3R 2/2 "T: Discard a card, then draw a card." Spectacle 1R (AKA, works with hellbent)
Skewer the Critics -> Skewer1R Sorcery "Skewer deals 3 damage to any target." "This spell cannot be countered." Spectacle R (WOTC naming conventions suggest Skewer the Critics is designed to be bad. I'd rather it not be so bad, hence this version with the coveted one-word name)
Spikewheel Acrobat -> Giant Juggler3R Giant Rogue (C) Spectacle RR 3/3 (Hill Giant -> Watchwolf is interesting. Good? Probably not, but interesting. Double R keeps it from being too good in limited)
Rubble Reading -> Split in Twain2R Sorcery (U) Destroy target land an opponent controls. That lands controller may search their library for up to two basic land cards and put them onto the battlefield tapped. Draw two cards. Spectacle 1R
Okay, so what is this? Well, it's an attempt to make a Stone Rain effect more like Ghost Quarter without card disadvantage and w/o depriving a 2-color deck of it's two colors by hitting their dual land. More complex than desired, hence the effect is (U). A core set might be able to do this effect w/o getting the opponent 2 lands, and thus this card is given a non-ideal name. That said, this is an answer for IXA flip lands at a reasonable cost.
Red/Black Rakdos Fireblade Artist -> 2/2 Menace, Deathtouch (I know it's not a spectacle card, but a cool french vanilla effect that gives your opponent hard choices and usually enables Spectacle seems like a good, simple substitute.)
Hackrobat -> 3/3 for 2BR with Spectacle RB and the same abilities. Not much to say here, but the spectacle discount feels better now - something worth working for.
Rafter Demon -> Rafter Wizard2BB Creature - Imp Rogue Wizard (U) Flying, Spectacle BR At the end of your turn, if you played a spectacle cost that turn, each opponent discarda card. 2/2
and Rafter Raiser2RR Creature - Goblin Rogue Shaman (U) Menace, Spectacle BR At the end of your turn, if you played a spectacle cost that turn, each opponent sacrifices an artifact. 2/2
amd Spectacular Wurm5BR Creature - Demon Wurm Spectacle 1BR, discard your hand. 5/5 (Hellbent enabler, and yet another skill tester.
Rosey, Pounce got the nod for being new design space, but as DOM obsoleted it immediately and that card hasn't seen play, Titanic Brawl isn't going to change that. This is not to say that a Pounce variant couldn't be constructed playable, but I think the cost for it has to be G or it has to have a substantive upside (giving hexproof).
Siren's Ruse draws a card 95% of the time in any constructed deck it might see play in. Justiciar's Portal... is a combat trick.
Here's the thing - Cloudshift should be in standard - it's like Duress or naturalize or smelt. Good design space that creates interesting situations. Doubling the mana cost and adding something that won't work most of the time doesn't make it a good card.
That said, if it said "Scry 2" or had a good block mechanic (cycling, buyback, madness, kicker, flashback, etc., etc.) then a 2 mana blink effect might be worth considering.
Long story short? Justiciar's Portal was designed to fail; designed to be a mediocre limited combat trick, to have little or anti-synergy with most of the cards in the set, and to not have any block keywords. Why?
Titanic Brawl, in contrast, is one of many cards in the set trying to make up the abject failure of Adapt. Pounce is an elegant (C) design that turns out to be too weak for the format. Yeah, I wish IXA team had figured this out in testing... but I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt... mostly because they named it with a coveted one-word name. But this is now the 2nd, multi-word named card that costs the same as Pounce but adds too much text. Players usually misread the DOM variant (thinking it needed to hit a legend); this borrows from the superior Savage Stomp design... but reduces the cost by 1. That's 3 lines of game text to "discount" the card by 1 mana. It needed to be an instant speed version of Prey Upon to see any play. Indeed, I'd go so far as to think that Pounce was in the design file at G before being nerfed before print. It would explain the "strictly better" Pounce variants being printed within a year, despite worse names.
Re: Reprints - You say WOTC doesn't have incentive to feed us reprints; but you can't have it both ways - either (C) cards sell a set, or they don't. The consensus is that they don't sell the set, that's why common cards are designed "for limited" (and nothing else). But if they don't sell sets, putting constructed playable commons in the set... might.
From the very first stand alone expansion, WOTC has reprinted cards w/ new art. Right now we have Opt and Duress in two standard-viable sets. And new players need those cards, and older players can use their favorite art. To that end, "staple reprints"... aren't a bad idea. I'd get a lot more use out of a RNA Murder than a Grotesque Demise or Consign to the Pit. (Of course, what we probably need is a Dark Withering variant with spectacle, and then a Vicious Offering variant for Orzhov... but that's irrelevant to the question of reprints).
As a Pauper player I have to say that RNA is not really an amazing set.
However I still fail to see how Skewer the Critics is bad by any stretch of the imagination. The power baseline for 1 mana burn is Shock not Lightning Bolt. Bolt is the absolute maximum you can see from a 1 mana burn spell. Saying Skewer are not as amazing as bolt and therefore bad is like saying that shock lands are bad because the original duals were better.
Skewer is twice worse than lightning bolt; sorcery speed and costs significantly more - either 3 mana, or 1 mana after you've met a condition.
If we didn't have Lightning Strike and Lava Coil and Shock (and Wizard's Lightning) in the format... would Skewer see play? Maybe. But I'm more inclined to think red just wouldn't be played, as black and white easily outclass it.
Again - Skewer could have been made good. But given WOTC's naming convention, where a 1-word name is reserved for "good" cards, we have every reason to think WOTC knowingly designed this to be bad.
Again, I'll try and update you once more of these are tested, but a few things I'd like to note:
Spear Spewer - Each player...so? In a Rakdos deck, MY life total is usually not a concern, although it does get me closer to growing Spawn of Mayhem. Secondly, if it's a control deck like Turbofog/Teferi control, then my life total never matters, anyway, outside of Spawn. The point is it enables Spectacle without having to get through blockers.
Yes. It is an enabler designed for limited. Quite frankly, bizarrely so, as attacking *JUST IS* the way to do this in limited. Bloodthirst, for example, didn't get a card like this.
My point is that it's not good at what it does. Ask yourself the ideal-turn order in your constructed deck, now that you have access to all of the spoiled cards. What is your magical christmasland turn 2 play? I can assure you... it's not amazing.
Meanwhile mono red runs over you, boros heroic reinforcements you, midrange laughs as it runs over you, and control? Control sees no difference between this as a Mons's Goblin Raiders
Again - I hope I'm wrong; but no one has given me even a magical christmasland walkthrough.
Also, let's say I have a Doom Whisperer, and am staring down a red aggro deck. The incidental life gain might save the game. It's not why you play the card, it's an added effect should you meet the requirements.
This is pretty much the definition of "win more," but quick question - what creature is mono red sacrificing here?
Ill-Gotten Inheritance isn't Trespasser's Curse. Trespasser's Curse is useless versus a deck without creatures. Inheritance is better versus control where as Curse is better versus aggro.
I can assure you that a 4 mana sorcery speed enchantment that pins for 1 each turn is not "better versus" anything, let alone control.
Over the past year can you think of any situation where on turn 4 you'd have wanted to play this from your hand? I don't think you can.
Undercity Scavenger I am brewing in a Mardu Aristocrats build. A single black mana is easier for me to have lying around than a double black mana, plus it gives me Scry.
Come on man... we're both looking at the same cards. I know it gives you scry. I didn't mention that it gave you scry because it is irrelevant on a 4 drop 3/3 that trades your worst creature to become a subpar 2-for-1.
This is Ravnica standard, and you have access to perfect mana. There is no excuse for not having BB on turn 4 in any deck, other than because you didn't want to invest the money in duals.
And if there's one thing WOTC did right, it's reprint duals so the price goes down and you have more opportunities to open them.
Part of the problem with Demon of Catastrophes is--and I know I've brewed with it, also--is that it has 0 effect if it's Cast Down. At least with the Scavenger I've scryed if I sacrificed a creature. If I have 0 other creatures out, I can still play Scavenger. There are upsides--and downsides--to both. It's not just cut and dry.
It is cut and dry. Talking about Scrying after being 2-for-1ed is like bagging about all that exercise you got while you were being chased by a bear. The bear got you, and you'll spend the next year in the hospital... but you got your steps for the day.
The payoff of the demon is by far greater than the payoff for this guy. If the risk is too much of a risk, don't run either.
And you'd quickly notice how bad a 2/1 for 2 that doesn't affect the board is. But the point is Omenspeaker is much better suited to stop your "wizard aggro" deck than the wizard in question is suited to contribute to it. And Omenspeaer does not see play. Should it? Is it borderline? MAYBE! But this... isn't. The fact it gets Chainwhirlered is just insult to injury.
Having multiple one drops is definitely something you want in an aggro deck. Also, let's say Rakdos, the Showstopper actually becomes a Standard-played card, Fiend survives his trigger automatically. Again, it's not just cut-and-dry.
The two cards are the same color, but they don't go in the same deck. You're describing a funny limited moment, not a viable constructed strategy.
My personal opinion is: it's dangerous to just compare cards directly to others without using context, individual card nuances, and deck needs.
Yes, but you've given no compelling reasons to explain why you'd prefer a 5/5 over a 6/6 trample flyer; no compelling reasons why you'd prefer a 0/2 over a 2/1 for 1 and no compelling reasons why you'd prefer a bad mogg fanatic over the same 2/1 for 1.
Honestly, I think that you might have the situation a bit backwards... Rather than RNA having markably FEWER good commons, I think that Dominaria and Guilds may have had notably MORE good than average (in the "new world order"):
Perhaps. If true, though, all the worse for "new world order."
The fact of the matter is that DOM was a fun, balanced set that many people liked and had reasonable, but not overwhelming, affect on the metagames it influenced.
One doesn't produce a hit movie after a string of flops, then decide to go back to what one was doing before... unless one is WB I suppose...
That said, I think that Opt and Duress and Spell Piece are most notable here. These are staple cards at (C) that do simple things that help balance the format. Opt sees more maindeck play than all of RNA commons will put together, mark my words.
I'm not saying any of these sets are perfect - IXA was widely accepted to be one of the more miserable drafting formats, and this is - in part - due to a decrease in power level at every rarity. But it had a fair bit of commons designed right; whether we're talking the (unfortuantely immediately obsoleted) Pounce as an instant speed version of a sorcery 1 drop that costed G, the bulk of the explore cards, or the mild tribal dinosaur and pirates theme. Compare the 2 blink spells in standard; one might draw you a card if you built your deck right... one is a combat trick? Really?
FearDReaper... what's your turn 2?
Turn 1, you've played a 0/2 defender that can't defend if you enable Spectacle. So what's the turn 2 Spectacle play? The turn 3 spectacle play?
I like this better than black's enabler, a 4CMC enchantment, but you're going to have to tell me a story as to why this is better than any of the 2 power 1 drops in the field. It's a terrible blocker against aggro, and a terrible attacker when you don't want to enable spectacle or when you've already enabled spectacle...
This is clearly false. In Alpha, only a relative few commons were functionally inferior to (U), (R), and (M). I don't like this "sarcity-driven" design space much, but even if you do... it's never been the norm, only the exception.
Rather (C)s should be the cards you want players to see the most. Ideally this will include cards players need the most - basic lands, for example - but for much of Magic's history Lightning bolt and Terror variants were designed to see play at (C).
Now they're not.
That's a problem. It drives up deck prices, makes limited games a boring and monotonous (I'm looking at you IXA draft), and leads to more luck based wins in limited - "Oh, wait, YOU got the "Mythic" (U) card. Lucky you; my first 5 picks from each of my packs can't compare. I guess I have to go to game 2 and hope you don't draw it."
Look at Dominaria, one of the strongest draft environments we've had in recent years. The quality of the commons in that set stands out. Yes, we can talk about kicker variants of shock, but most players would get more use out of a playset of llanowar elves than they would a playset of the entire common run of this set. And the sad thing is... a simic mana elf would have been a perfect plant here - especially since WOTC just threw up their hands and said "I give up!" with regards to the guild's design as a whole.
Boombox,
I hope I'm wrong here. But...
The Bad: Summary Judgment is far, far worse than Seal Away Sage's Row Savant at 2/2, I'd think about it. People don't run Omen Speaker, and Omen Speaker blocks most of boros and mono red creatures. Ill-Gotten Inheritance... what? It costs 4 mana, right? I'll point you to Trespasser's Curse, which while not a standard powerhouse was at least worth considering. Undercity Scavenger - Uh.... Demon of Catastrophes, which is unplayable as Doom Whisperer outclasses it. Undercity's Embrace - Vona's Hunger, Plaguecrafter - Ferocious-light is just not a viable mechanic, and is out of place here. Burning-Tree Vandal - I think you're over-valuing looting. I hope I'm wrong here - but I'd feel a lot better if it had Menace and didn't die to every piece of removal. Spear Spewer - "Each player." Out of curiosity, what 2 drop does this enable that you're happy with? Aeromunculus - I am unprepared to talk about this card, as it dies to everything, has an ability you're losing if you even consider using, and doesn't affect the board. There are dozens of cards I could point to, but let's compare it to Trygon Predator - a card you might know as it has a repeatable practical ability that lets it see play. Applied Biomancy - Manafixing is good, but you'd still rather have the body on a man-o-war. Footlight Fiend - the goblin pirate outclasses this too much. Here's the thing - I could imagine a set of cards that would make this... "meh"... but those cards don't exist here, and seemingly on purpose. By far this is the best of the hybrid (C)s, but that's not saying much in this set I'm afraid.
The Meh: Justiciar's Portal isn't great, but it's fine. Shimmer of Possibility - Bad Impulse is on my list. Deface - on my list. But not-Abrade is not Abrade. Goblin Gathering - On my list, but let's be clear - this is probably really bad. Sworn Companions doesn't exactly show up, and this is no [card]Raise the Alarm[/card].... but it could have been. Open the Gates - on my list. But this is for someone's "maybe someday" gate deck, it's not for today. Sagittars' Volley - I'll err on the side of caution here and give it to you. Stony Strength - Fair enough.
Re: Final Payment-style 1 drop. I think we'd need to test this - I know there are stats we could give this in which a normal deck would consider it (5/5? Sure. 3/4? Maybe?); but for the purposes here it's designed to be a low-tier draft card you often cut, but work with Font of Agonies and a hypothetical W counterpart. It also is interesting to think about for Death's Shadow in modern. This is to say that it's worth more thought than Bloodmist Infiltrator, Carrion Imp, Consign to the Pit, Debtors' Transport, Orzhob Racketeers, etc.
In any case, a design team should have about a half dozen people. I'd ask them each to create as many 1-2 CMC Final Payment-style cards as possible for the relevant two colors, and then workshop the ones that best fit the set. Maybe it's 2 life, not 5. Maybe it's a Centaur Zombie, in case the next block wants to push Centaurs. You see where I'm going with this. But for practical purposes, this card does three important things:
1) Sacrifice outlet (for Orzhov)
2) Pay life outlet.
3) Clunky "limited only" Removal.
The first two are what makes it "constructed playable" (if it is), and the last is the role it plays in limited.
Re: Reanimate variant - More or less, yup. I like Reanimate and the problem with the card was never the turn 2 5 drop, it was the turn 2 "win the game" card. That said, this is what playtesting is for. There is a set of variables (say, the cost could be 2B) where you'd think this is fair.
Re: Exquisite Firecraft - The (R) part about that card is the "4 damage"; Char should have been reprinted in the core set; but historically "4" to any target has been a (R) effect. Also, compare the lines of text on that card to my version of Skewer. WOTC really needs a "clean up" team on some of these designs.
Re: Enable - Needle Drop is an instant, but I see your point. I don't think it's as "dangerous" as you think it is, but yes - I imagine it'd see play somewhere. Modern burn? I don't think so. We can test if need be (perhaps there's a Disinformation Campaign-version of the card that'd be more appropriate at (U)...), but my point is that this is the design space that needed to be filled in; not Ill-Gotten Inheritance (My god, this is ridiculous for a (C) effect, let alone the numbers they threw on there!).
Finally, re: Disenchant + token generator - Sundering Growth is far, far better. Admittedly Populate was super swingy and kept in balance in limited due to the rarity of "big" token generators, but still. Honestly, Azorius needed a Keyword and the disenchant variant needed to have that keyword. Design team utterly failed the mechanics for UW and UG this time around, and kind of phoned in Afterlife if we're being honest. Riot is great design, Spectacle competent design (employed far too frugally) and as a result it's super easy to design cards with those mechanics that are fair and interesting.
Common cycles have yielded many of the most iconic magic cards since Alpha. A cycle is a good way to make sets feel UNQIUE from each other. Kamigawa's the block with the Zubera cycle. Mirrodin had the myr, 5th Dawn the cycle of "instant equip" equipment, Alpha had the boons.
Given how often I've seen a 3/1 for 1W at common in the past few years, a little something to differentiate sets from one another would be welcome.
Binding as many things to cycles s you seem to want is a great way to reduce the variety in a set. The only thing that seems out of place for me not being in a cycle is Simic Ascendancy.
I call nonsense. I'm very disappointed at the lack of an (U) guild ability land (or manland), guild equipment, etc. But that's not an option for this set, we could only introduce mono-colored cycles (so as to not disrupt the interset pattern), and there are about a half dozen interesting (C) or (U) cards that would have made for great cycles here. More or less take your favorite (C) from the set and ask "What if they'd done 4 more of these" - 4 more relentless creatures; 4 more kindle effects, 4 more (U) auras that call back to a previous mechanic, etc.
By tribal support, I meant giving creatures relevant creature types. That said, we have a convoluted Ooze Lord at (M) in this set.
I'm not saying turn Ravnica into the next Onslaught. But taking an old card that was "close" to seeing play and swapping it's creature type to a supported type? That's fair design space.
Just tacking on some extra mechanic does not a good card make. Look at all the cards from Theros block that were terrible cards because they tacked on scry and increased the cost.
I'm not going to tell you Scry was implemented well... since Mirrodin block, where it was great. But that strategy works for Cycling a lot. I can tell you I'd be a lot happier with Root Snare if it had cycling... or Scry 2...
I don't understand your beef with Skewer. It's a fine card. Probably better than Wizard's Lightning except that it's a sorcery.
Skewer is twice worse than Lightning Bolt. In principle, that's feel bad design.
Apart from design concerns, but because of how it was designed, it's also not constructed playable as it costs too much and is sorcery speed.
So my "beef" with Skewer is that it's a poorly named, poorly designed card that fills limited role worse than every other variant of lightning bolt in standard. It's designed to be bad.
I'm not sure you entirely understand how they design cards.
I know how they should design cards. And after the explanation of the RIX reprint of Raptor Companion, I think we should know how they design cards.
Step 1: Get some foundations. Mechanics. Cycles to complete.
Step 2: Fill in the pillars, the iconic (M)s and legendaries, and create a few pushed set mechanic cards.
Step 3: Phone it in. (Probably copy and paste a bunch of "safe" commons from previous sets and/or the design file. If you're lucky, they'll give Coercion and Lightning Strike a guild mechanic.)
I'm being a bit facetious here, but this is far closer to an apt description than anyone of us should be happy with.
The UW mechanic is a timespiral mechanic.
The WB mechnic is Doomed Traveler
The BR mechanic is a simple cost reduction mechanic they decided to paste kicker into.
The RG mechanic is... new and interesting. A pair of good (U)s and a few good (R)s show that they know how to do it right.
The GU mechnaic is monstrous.
So of the 5 mechanics, only Riot is new. Yet Riot is the one with the greatest percentage of playable cards.
Thus, by your logic, WOTC's failure in implementing Riot is that they gave it too many good cards... like 4-5... and should have cut back, like their... uh... 1... playable Adapt card (let's face it, any adapt that sees play outside of the legend isn't going to be "adapted" so much as climbed.
So the reason they didn't make a bunch of spectacle cards like you proposed is because 1: the cards you talked about are commons and uncommons and those sort of alternate costs would go on rares.
Alternate costs are on (C) all the time - in this set even. Skewer is a terrible card, but it's not too complex for (C).
and 2: When they first introduce a mechanic they try to keep what they do with it simple.
Please take a moment to look over the set. I can assure you that "simple" is not a design concern on 80% of the cards with block mechanics in this set.
As a quick test, count lines of text on the cards. Let 1-2 lines of text on a creature be "simple"; 3-4 on a spell. How many block mechanic cards violate this at (C) and (U)? At (R) and (M)?
Now in the War of the Spark or whatever the third set is they may have one or two guild mechanic cards for each guild and those may experiment with what the mechanics can do.
If your position is that they want to use 10 block mechanics in the next set... and experiment... I think we might have a problem.
But that said this isn't a block so they don't have to do that. The other thing you seem to miss is that your way of designing leads to power creep.
No. Baneslayer Angel and Doom Whisperer are power creep. They flagrantly violate the color pie p/t ratios to be "pushed".
Asking for a Skewer to be uncounterable... is still just a card that is worse than Lightning Bolt in 95+% of all situations.
Rather than add to the available card pool, you're suggesting WOTC print cards that will not see constructred play - power regress - and then print a few cards that will see play (which also might be regressed, as with the not Mana Leak.
Sometimes a card doesn't have to be as good as a card that did the same thing in the past. and that's fine.
Sure. But if the card is designed to be unplayable, THAT IS NOT FINE. That is the opposite of fine. That's failing to design a card that people will like to play with!
I'd hate if Magic became Pokemon and had to constantly one up itself with ridiculously powerful cards that constantly obsolete older cards.
Pokemon does have runaway power creep... and still manages to make most of it's (C) cards unplayable as well. Power creep is a thing to worry about, but my proposals don't lead to it.
And a gain just remember that most commons aren't meant for constructed play. And if they are it's as generic role players not as key pieces.
Yes, most commons were designed to fail and be unplayable. Like Pokemon, a game with runaway power creep you've just mentioned not wanting MTG to be like.
Edit: To speak to your first point. Not every deck needs to be supported in every set. There's just not room.
I didn't say that it did.
But there is plenty of room in RNA to support SOME decks. Goblins and Zombies have tribal support in other sets, throwing them a few halfway decent cards would be... minimally decent.
And also in terms of Grim Haruspex and Midnight Reaper context is key. In this standard there is a place for that card. If they had printed Harspex instead of reaper it would definitely be seeing play in reapers place.
Yes, but Reaper goes in my Zombie Commander deck.
And I think that's a great place to put it - sometimes making a card constructed playable is merely a matter of doing something minor such that it has increased synergy with an existing deck - whether commander, casual, modern, or standard.
However, we're all on the same page here with regards to the commons in this set - WOTC designed them to fail. And they failed.
Darksteel Ingot should be the gold standard; it's a great core set card that can teach indestructible and work with an animate artifact-style effets to be a fun casual combo.
I'm much rather this be a 3/3 Deathtouch for 1BB with the clause. The Menace is nice, but it only serves to complicate what should be a straightforward design archetype.
Gutterstorm,
I don't think this is fair. Look at standard "Zombies" - because of the relatively low quantity of zombies, the deck doesn't fire. But you add a few "ok" zombies, say at (C) or (U), and then "Mono black zombies" might be a tier 3 deck. To illustrate this, consider: Midnight Reaper; a functionally worse version of a morph creature that didn't see play... and this sees play in Golgari.
To be clear; I'm not asking for "the same" cards reskinned each set (Not that this seems to have stopped WOTC, which has AGAIN reprinted a card from the past set with the same art "just because", let alone the cavalcade of strictly inferior vanillas at common that could be made playable with a keyword a type change...). But rather than another Raptor Companion, it would be nice if they changed this up by making a new card... give it a relevant creature type (Goblin Knight?), a keyword (Vigilance, Lifelink, Flash!...).
More importantly, every keyword opens up variant designs of existing cards. Expose to Daylight is the right kind of design, but with the wrong keyword (and poorly balanced).
Try these Disenchant + Mechanic designs: 2W Instant Choose 1 or both: Destroy target artifact, or destroy target enchantment (Oh, wait, they did this w/ exile the last set at 3W,...) 2W Instant Disenchant + Addendum - Create a 1/1 human creature token. 2W Instant Choose 1 - Disenchant or Creatures you control gain Afterlife. 2W Instant Disenchant Spectacle W (For illustration, obviously.)
But really? Here are the two variants we needed in *THIS SET* 2W Instant Disenchant, then Disenchant for each card named ~ in your graveyard. (AKA, Goblin Gathering Cycle... and yes, make it an instant so the 1st isn't just terrible.) W Instant Pay 5 life or sacrifice a creature. Disenchant (AKA, Font of Agonies combo card. Listen, I'm not sure if I like Final Payment really... but it's on my list. So do a white Font of Retribution, that lets you remove counters for tokens or something, and do this and then do a black 1 drop for the "3 card" guild cycle; something like: B 2/2 Zombie Deathtouch As an additional cost to cast this, pay 5 life or sacrifice a creature. BSorcery As an additional cost to cast this, pay 5 life or sacrifice a creature. Return a creature card with a CMC of 5 or less from your graveyard to the battlefield. B As an additional cost to cast this, pay 5 life or sacrifice a creature. Create 2 treasure tokens. (I mean, not that I'd have brought back treasures, but if you do bring back treasures...)
I don't want this to devolve into a "You make the card," thread, but my point is this: It's easy to fill out cycles in such a way that they're mediocre limited cards but fair niche constructed cards.
Heck, consider Blade Juggler. Suppose that it's Spectacle cost was B, Pay 4 life. Indeed; why isn't there a Spectacle card with an alternate cost... Discard a creature card; Pay 5 life, etc.
Not so filler Zombie1B Creature - Zombie Rogue Spectacle - Pay 4 life. 2/2 Not filler Kill Spell5B Sorcery - Destroy target creature. Spectacle - Discard a creature card. Not Filler clear the Stage3B Sorcery - Target creature gets -3/-3 until end of turn. Spectacle - Sacrifice a creature.
Finally, re: Skewer - It strikes me that it'd be very easy to fix. The easiest solution, I think, is to cost it at 1R. or Add Magma Spray text. or Make it a Kindle-effect. Or make it modal, and let the other half do something relevant (destroy defender, tap blocker, blah blah blah). Abrade is amazing because of it's utility. If Skewer had a 2nd, interesting mode it'd be more interesting. But really? The entire card is wrong-headed; Spectacle is a keyword that alters the cost when damage has been dealt; so the "damage any target" things are ideally spectacle enablers. Thus, reprinting Shock and/or Lightning Strike (with new, cool block art) would be fair game here instead. That said, putting Lightning Bolt in the set would be notable as it'd be the only (C) or (U) that immediately stands out. (By the way, while I can see the argument for not reprinting Lightning Bolt, I think it's fairly obvious this is more "fair but restrictive," rather than unfair.)
Still, I think it's pretty clear they knew Skewer was designed to be bad; as the name "Skewer" is untaken and would be very flavorful. If I'm going to make a card named Skewer; and I'm going to make it the signature (C) Spectacle card, it's going to be this: Skewer1R Sorcery (due to the way WOTC wants Spectacle to work.) Skewer does 3 damage to any target. This spell cannot be countered. Spectacle R
Now THIS version of Skewer is interesting. The uncountable clause is relevant, the cost is the same as Lightning Strike, but with the drawback of being a sorcery.
But, finally, it's worth noting another alternate cost Spectacle variant:
Stage Magic1R Sorcery. (U) Stage Magic deals 3 damage to any target. Spectacle - Each opponent creates a 1/1 red goblin creature token.
Lastly, I think it's clear we need a Spectacle Enabler at (C): EnableR Sorcery Enable deals 1 damage to each opponent. Draw a card.
In fact, the lack of cantrips in this set is particularly annoying, as 1 mana cantrips usually are in the running for constructed play, niche or otherwise. Again, my point is that these are "low impact" (C) designs, but have practical limited and constructed value.
To recap; here are common, obvious strategies to design interesting cards:
1) Tribal Support
2) Cycle making
3) Alternate Costs
4) Staple + Mechanic (at appropriate cost)
5) Reprint existing cards. (Especially older cards that haven't seen play but might here.)
First, to be clear, any card you like is good. I love burglar rat, even though it's barely constructed playable. It's a great design, an excellent update of a classic card, with the "single creature" art/naming convention. If you like an unplayable vanilla because of the art or the flavor text - great!
That said, Impassioned Orator is no Soul Warden reprint. Eve if this was a 2/2 or 1/3 w/ symmetrical ability, it'd be great. But it's one-sided, and thus worthless for any serious play. Sorry.
Clear the Mind fails twice - it's a sorcery (and thus can't "counter" enemy reanimator spells); and it costs 3 mana. This effect at 1U and instant *MIGHT* have a chance in several constructed formats; notably Commander. But as is, it falls below what one would expect. Gideon's Reproach is an instant speed answer to Drakes (and you might imagine mono white running 4 seal away and 1-4 reproach for Drakes.) This costs too much, is slow, and doesn't provide card advantage. Feldon's Cane is fun; this is not. And yes, Gaea's Blessing is far better, if only for it's "free" effect.
Prying Eyes costs 6 mana. Opportunity is functionally better in 2 ways... and significantly more simple.
Sage's Row Savant - MAYBE; but Chainswhirler... If this was a 2/2 for 2 with Scry 2, I'd still be surprised to see it see play... outside of wizard deck maybe. But 2/1s are pretty much never playable unless they effect the board immediately. Note: This *MIGHT* pass my test for a fair filler (C), but it's not something I'd ever be happy with.
Undercity's Embrace - Diabolic Edict + ferocious-light feels bad. The fact this doesn't work with any block mechanics is also disappointing. Finally, "each" vs "target" makes all the difference for Commander and 2HG. This fails even that test.
Skewer - Twice worse Lightning Bolt is bad, save MAYBE modern mono red burn... you know, the bad version of the tier 2-3 modern deck that doesn't get Boros Charm or Lightning Helix... notably 2 cards from Ravnica expansions.
Footlight Fiend - Fair enough. But with no Nantuko Husk variants (IE, free sacrifice), this is not a thing. I wish it was a thing, but this is another instance of (C) cards seeing play and WOTC saying "Oh yeah, give me a second..."
Edit: Re: Fiend; I think that this would be a "good enough" card if part of a strict 1CMC 1/1 for H cycle (perhaps including boros recruit last set, which would be far more reasonable w/ mentor...). As is, it's the ONLY hybrid (C) that is even close to being worth considering from these last 2 sets... and that's bad.
I think the "current philosophy" is misguided. I understand a need to balance things for limited, but one can balance limited through enabling archetypes , having cards for constructed, and making synergies harder to pull off in limited (due, in part, to rarity - consider affinity, improvise, exhaulted, infect, etc.). Consider Simian Spirit Guide was a (C). Why? Because in limited, it's usually a Gray Ogre. It's very each to staple a mediocre body to a narrow, constructed-aimed ability, that would fill the "C-" limited slot.
Historically, WOTC printed "Staple ability + 0-1 + block Keyword. Here, the closest we get is ... Drill Bit, a great (C) and a mediocre (U). Maybe testing showed it had to be (U)... but the next closest we get it... Expose to Daylight, which doesn't even use a block mechanic! (Indeed, it uses Scry, which really shouldn't be in a set after Surveil... talk about asking for trouble...).
The important thing about these spells is that while they're not strictly better (usually) than existing core-set staples, they offer deckbuilding options. If I'm going to build my deck around Spectacle, what do I get for it? Light Up the Stage. I don't get a Spectacle Smelt variant, or a Spectacle TERRoR variant, or a Spectacle Threaten effect. The closest I get is a 2x strictly worse Lightning Bolt. Oh, and my naturalize variant is a (R) now.
Arena is a great entry to MTG; but no one will open a pack of RNA and say "Oh, this is cool." No one will buy a Planeswalker deck and play it with an experienced player and say "that was fun." And the big answer for that is that WOTC has decided to push (R) and (M) cards and turn (C) cards into garbage. But this means that the bulk of what your customers see is defective product; not what they wanted. And in a game like magic, where top tier constructed playable cards can often be "not what they wanted" just because of the color... that's a problem!
Re: Justiciar's Portal - It's no Cloudshift. I mean, it's neat design space; but in a set with 5 new mechanics (not a one returning guild mechanic WOTC?), is this really a line of text worth printing? I don't recall Cloudshift seeing a lot of play, and I don't think WOTC would lose a lot of money letting people play their old Cloudshifts. Given the Azorius and Orzhov mechanics, there's no Cloudshift variant that would make use of the block mechanic... but it'd be easy to make a variant like this: 1W Instant - Sacrifice a creature, then return that creature to the battlefield from your graveyard. It gains First Strike until end of turn.
That card works with a block mechanic - Afterlife - competently.
I've played a lot of formats. Classic formats like Mirrodin, Ravnica (original), and even contemporary Dominaria run many, many turns. Even "fast" formats like IXA routinely run many turns in most cases - although you did have to fight for 2 drops, in part due to design failures.
End of the day, if your set is full of 5 color cards, mediore fixing, and 5 different main strategies, there's no reason to think things will be "run away" even if we tripled the number of "good somewhere" cards; the closest was Boros which routinely needed to play 5CMC mediocre removal spells to win on turn 5. Yet there are many GRN common R and W cards that you'd run but don't contribute to the boros strategy, instead meant for WG or RU.
I'm talking all constructed formats - including Pauper, Highlander variants, and Brawl.
I'm sure many WOTC designers agree that they can "check out" on designing commons; however this strikes me as irresponsible. Players will open more common cards than any others. In the original Ravnica, I was happy to see a signet. Elves of Deepshadow was awesome. In Mirrodin block, even if you ignore the fact that Affinity was a deck with like 8 rares and mostly commons, I enjoyed several cycles of common cards - echoing instants, myr, and equipment! Bonesplitter - a fun, casual equipment that saw no serious constructed play, but was efficient and fun!
So let's say you open up a pack of RNA, and your rare is... Amplifire, and your uncommons are Angelic Exaltation, Rally to Battle, and Sentinel's Mark. And you shuffle through your commons and see no Relentless Advisors. You settle down and you're about to thumb through your 10 common cards - What percentage of them do you think are worth your interest, in the broadest possible scope?
I've been back in magic for ~ 2 years after a fairly big gap, and I'm shocked at how often players will just abandon their booster packs after opening them and not opening a "chase" card. When I was a kid, I bought lots of llanowar elves; it was a (C) and went in every one of my green decks. I still horde Naturalize, Smelt, Erase, duress, divest, and similar cards that are in the running for being good in decks. Staples.
I can't think of one card in RNA that is a "staple," outside of Relentless Advisors... which is basically a give-me. Indeed, the three non-"chase common" cards that come closest are... strictly inferior versions of other cards (4 if you include Skewer...)! That's insane! If the three of the top 5 common cards in a set was a strictly worse llanowar elves, disenchant, or counterspell... I can't help but think you'd be annoyed. But that's where we are; with functionally worse Fog, Impulse, and Mana Leak being the most likely cards to see play in multiple decks!
I think WOTC is dangling shocklands and mythic angels in front of our eyes, while poisoning the well. I'm absolutely at a loss; until yesterday I just assumed they'd sneak the good 1 drops, or neat cantrips, or cycle of interesting (C)s or (U)s in at the last moment. But nope!
Compare your card to this one:
Coolio, Aura Master 1W
Legendary Creature - Human Cleric
Partner (You can have two commanders if both have partner.)
Creatures you control that are enchanted get +1/+1 and vigilance.
2/2
Single color "partner" so he can mix and match w/ the existing 2-color partners to make a 3-color deck.
As it's not "drawing you a card" in the main, it can be a 2/2 for 2 w/o a problem.
It's ability is all upside, all feel good, and it gives you an additional incentive to enchant creatures - they also gain vigilance. This creates interesting choices, and encourages you to attack with your enchanted creatures - good for casual multiplayer formats.
Dauntless Barrier W
Creature - Spirit Wall (C)
Defender
Sacrifice this creature: Another target creature is indestructible until end of turn.
0/3
Re: Misery - Sure? This feels uncommon though. I'd also like it to be an instant and/or cost 1BB.
Re; Discard guy - On turn 3 there's far less chance this will be disruptive than on turn 1, but I don't think WOTC would print this effect at (C). If they do print the effect (they should, but probably won't), it should be (U). While we're at it, make it a 3/1 or a 2/2; the effect is fun and interesting but shouldn't come at the cost of playing a 3 mana 2/1.
Unrolling Scenery - This is a combination of two common cards with no drawback. Not cool. And probably not common. I'd be interested to hear what design role you think this plays...
Lone Wolf's Tooth - Players generally hate intimidate, as it's flavor and function is tenuous at best. If you want a card that reward you for only having 1 creature, make it actually reward you. If you want an incidental reward to justify doubling the cost of Bonesplitter, a casual favorite that saw no constructed play, pick a keyword. Vigilance, Haste, Menace, First Strike, Lifelink, Trample, etc. and call it a day.
Sentient World-Tree Vine - Why the choice? Let's say this put 2 +1/+1 counters on target creature and created a 2/2 beear. It'd still be a card that wouldn't see play outside of limited. 5/5 Trample for 3GG + a very small added benefit would be interesting. A 5/5 w/o trample for 3GG with a death's trigger that gives you something would be interesting. Both would be fair commons.
That said, I think WOTC might have dropped the ball with some of the Spectacle designs and so my goal here is to outline how I might have done Spectacle in the set if given the chance. (This means no changing mechanics I don't like, and only minor changes to non-Rakdos cards largely for limited concerns.)
To start off with, a few restrictions:
(1) To avoid stepping on Riot's heels, no haste on creatures in the set. Fortunately, Haste his clunky with Spectacle, as the normal Spectacle trigger will be combat.
(2) To avoid stepping on Surveil's heels, no Scry. Honestly, the inclusion of "Scry" in this set seems wrongheaded, with only Sphinx of Foresight being remotely interesting. That said, I'd save Sphinx of Foresight for a set where I can fill out the cycle. Sometimes a card design is good, but not good for a particular set. As Rakdos usually doesn't get Scry, unless as part of a Magma Jet-style cycle, this shouldn't be a tough restriction.
Rakdos Black:
Drill Bit (U) -> (C). Coercion is common; Drill Bit is a coercion variant, so that's that. Maybe development found that this was "too strong" as a (C) due to a turn 2 Drill Bit after a lack of a 1 drop. Solution? Print more 1 drops.
Step 1: Hard Wall of Wood cycle; this is to say elaborate on Saruli Caretaker to make a cycle of 0/3 defenders. Making Spear Spewer a 0/3 is easy enough. The question would be whether there should be an activation cost boost. While I'm inclined to say "no," maybe throw "Reveal your hand" infront of the tap to make for interesting choices. Resolute Watchdog -> common and looses a power and activates w/o a mana cost. Simple. I suppose Blue's member could be a 0/3 with Adapt that can attack if it has a +1/+1 counter... but to avoid block mechanics, how about Illusory Wall U Illusion Spirit Wall - When ~ blocks, return it to it's owner's hand. Otherwise, just a 0/3 that mills when it's dealt damage would be fine. Completing the cycle, maybe black gets Carrion Feeder - the Wall. 0/3 for B, Pay 1 life, Sacrifice a creature: Put a +1/+1 counter on ~. Yes, I'm casually giving black the manaless sacrifice outlet it deserves at (C) as a defender. Alternatively, a 0/3 for B that had "B, Sacrifice this creature: Each opponent loses 1 life and you gain 1 life." would be an enabler for the mechanic. Test 'em to see which work and which don't.
Step 2: Create simple Adapt 1 drops for simic. 1/1 flying for U with some expensive adapt cost would work (and yes, this means changing or scrapping Pteramander which I'm okay with), and a 1/2 reach or 1/1 deathtouch or 1/1 trample with some expensive adapt cost for G. You run these if only for their "adapted" versions; the fact they block Rakdos 1 drops to stave off a turn 2 drill bit is good.
Step 3: French Vanilla 1 drops all around; maybe Healer's Hawk gets reprinted (ugh) with a cycle of 2-keyword 1/1s at (C) (yeah!).
Blade Juggler (C) - good enough, I suppose.
Dead Revels (C) -> (U) and Spectacle 1B -> B. Honestly, I kind of think this should cost 2B... but 1BB might be more "fair" and as double-colors in a card should be avoided in multicolor sets, 3B ends up being right. But all too often you'll be losing attackers to push through the damage for this, so costing its spectacle B makes this a bit easier to think about. I somewhat doubt people would ever consider this sorcery speed card over Find from Find // Finality, so this might just be a "dead design space"; that said making spectacle cost less than Find might make up the difference.
Shambling Clown 1B Creature - Zombie 2/2 Spectacle - Pay 4 life. (Simple design made to work with Font of Agonies and/or Death's Shadow while also being something of a skill tester card. You'd run this for it being a 2/2 for 2 in many decks, but would you pay it's spectacle cost? That's INTERESTING.)
Spectacular Death 5B Sorcery. Destroy target creature. Spectacle - 1B (Dark Withering-homage; replaces Consign to the Pit.
Spawn of Mayhem (M) ->
Mayhem Demon 5BB Creature - Demon (U) Flying, Menace, Spectacle 1BB, Pay 4 life. 4/4 (French vanilla is good design space)
Some fancy legendary name 4BB Legendary Creature - Demon Rogue (M) "During your upkeep, each opponent loses 1 life and you gain 1 life." Spectacle2BB 5/5 (Juzám Djinn homage. Spawn of Mayhem has far too many lines of text on it that will rarely matter. MAYBE if you want to do something with +1/+1 counters, make a Sengir Vampire variant... but I don't want to do that here.)
Returning Performance 4B Sorcery (U) "Return target creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield." Spectacle 1B, Sacrifice a creature. (Zombify Spectacle variant, as opposed to a Gruesome Encore/Macabre Mockery mechanic).
Rakdos Red:
Light Up the Stage - Perfect.
Feral Maaka -> 1R 3/1 Spectacle R (I like vanilla creatures as much as the next person, but come on... by the way, give Prowling Caracal Vigilance or Flash - mostly to make it interesting.)
Rix Maadi Reveler (R) -> (U) 3R 2/2 "T: Discard a card, then draw a card." Spectacle 1R (AKA, works with hellbent)
Skewer the Critics -> Skewer 1R Sorcery "Skewer deals 3 damage to any target." "This spell cannot be countered." Spectacle R (WOTC naming conventions suggest Skewer the Critics is designed to be bad. I'd rather it not be so bad, hence this version with the coveted one-word name)
Spikewheel Acrobat -> Giant Juggler 3R Giant Rogue (C) Spectacle RR 3/3 (Hill Giant -> Watchwolf is interesting. Good? Probably not, but interesting. Double R keeps it from being too good in limited)
Rubble Reading -> Split in Twain 2R Sorcery (U) Destroy target land an opponent controls. That lands controller may search their library for up to two basic land cards and put them onto the battlefield tapped. Draw two cards. Spectacle 1R
Okay, so what is this? Well, it's an attempt to make a Stone Rain effect more like Ghost Quarter without card disadvantage and w/o depriving a 2-color deck of it's two colors by hitting their dual land. More complex than desired, hence the effect is (U). A core set might be able to do this effect w/o getting the opponent 2 lands, and thus this card is given a non-ideal name. That said, this is an answer for IXA flip lands at a reasonable cost.
Red/Black Rakdos
Fireblade Artist -> 2/2 Menace, Deathtouch (I know it's not a spectacle card, but a cool french vanilla effect that gives your opponent hard choices and usually enables Spectacle seems like a good, simple substitute.)
Hackrobat -> 3/3 for 2BR with Spectacle RB and the same abilities. Not much to say here, but the spectacle discount feels better now - something worth working for.
Rafter Demon ->
Rafter Wizard 2BB Creature - Imp Rogue Wizard (U) Flying, Spectacle BR At the end of your turn, if you played a spectacle cost that turn, each opponent discarda card. 2/2
and
Rafter Raiser 2RR Creature - Goblin Rogue Shaman (U) Menace, Spectacle BR At the end of your turn, if you played a spectacle cost that turn, each opponent sacrifices an artifact. 2/2
amd
Spectacular Wurm 5BR Creature - Demon Wurm Spectacle 1BR, discard your hand. 5/5 (Hellbent enabler, and yet another skill tester.
Pounce got the nod for being new design space, but as DOM obsoleted it immediately and that card hasn't seen play, Titanic Brawl isn't going to change that. This is not to say that a Pounce variant couldn't be constructed playable, but I think the cost for it has to be G or it has to have a substantive upside (giving hexproof).
Siren's Ruse draws a card 95% of the time in any constructed deck it might see play in. Justiciar's Portal... is a combat trick.
Here's the thing - Cloudshift should be in standard - it's like Duress or naturalize or smelt. Good design space that creates interesting situations. Doubling the mana cost and adding something that won't work most of the time doesn't make it a good card.
That said, if it said "Scry 2" or had a good block mechanic (cycling, buyback, madness, kicker, flashback, etc., etc.) then a 2 mana blink effect might be worth considering.
Long story short? Justiciar's Portal was designed to fail; designed to be a mediocre limited combat trick, to have little or anti-synergy with most of the cards in the set, and to not have any block keywords. Why?
Titanic Brawl, in contrast, is one of many cards in the set trying to make up the abject failure of Adapt. Pounce is an elegant (C) design that turns out to be too weak for the format. Yeah, I wish IXA team had figured this out in testing... but I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt... mostly because they named it with a coveted one-word name. But this is now the 2nd, multi-word named card that costs the same as Pounce but adds too much text. Players usually misread the DOM variant (thinking it needed to hit a legend); this borrows from the superior Savage Stomp design... but reduces the cost by 1. That's 3 lines of game text to "discount" the card by 1 mana. It needed to be an instant speed version of Prey Upon to see any play. Indeed, I'd go so far as to think that Pounce was in the design file at G before being nerfed before print. It would explain the "strictly better" Pounce variants being printed within a year, despite worse names.
Re: Reprints - You say WOTC doesn't have incentive to feed us reprints; but you can't have it both ways - either (C) cards sell a set, or they don't. The consensus is that they don't sell the set, that's why common cards are designed "for limited" (and nothing else). But if they don't sell sets, putting constructed playable commons in the set... might.
From the very first stand alone expansion, WOTC has reprinted cards w/ new art. Right now we have Opt and Duress in two standard-viable sets. And new players need those cards, and older players can use their favorite art. To that end, "staple reprints"... aren't a bad idea. I'd get a lot more use out of a RNA Murder than a Grotesque Demise or Consign to the Pit. (Of course, what we probably need is a Dark Withering variant with spectacle, and then a Vicious Offering variant for Orzhov... but that's irrelevant to the question of reprints).
Skewer is twice worse than lightning bolt; sorcery speed and costs significantly more - either 3 mana, or 1 mana after you've met a condition.
If we didn't have Lightning Strike and Lava Coil and Shock (and Wizard's Lightning) in the format... would Skewer see play? Maybe. But I'm more inclined to think red just wouldn't be played, as black and white easily outclass it.
Again - Skewer could have been made good. But given WOTC's naming convention, where a 1-word name is reserved for "good" cards, we have every reason to think WOTC knowingly designed this to be bad.
Yes. It is an enabler designed for limited. Quite frankly, bizarrely so, as attacking *JUST IS* the way to do this in limited. Bloodthirst, for example, didn't get a card like this.
My point is that it's not good at what it does. Ask yourself the ideal-turn order in your constructed deck, now that you have access to all of the spoiled cards. What is your magical christmasland turn 2 play? I can assure you... it's not amazing.
Meanwhile mono red runs over you, boros heroic reinforcements you, midrange laughs as it runs over you, and control? Control sees no difference between this as a Mons's Goblin Raiders
Again - I hope I'm wrong; but no one has given me even a magical christmasland walkthrough.
Rarity is for limited balance and complexity; NOT POWER LEVEL.
This is pretty much the definition of "win more," but quick question - what creature is mono red sacrificing here?
I can assure you that a 4 mana sorcery speed enchantment that pins for 1 each turn is not "better versus" anything, let alone control.
Over the past year can you think of any situation where on turn 4 you'd have wanted to play this from your hand? I don't think you can.
Come on man... we're both looking at the same cards. I know it gives you scry. I didn't mention that it gave you scry because it is irrelevant on a 4 drop 3/3 that trades your worst creature to become a subpar 2-for-1.
This is Ravnica standard, and you have access to perfect mana. There is no excuse for not having BB on turn 4 in any deck, other than because you didn't want to invest the money in duals.
And if there's one thing WOTC did right, it's reprint duals so the price goes down and you have more opportunities to open them.
It is cut and dry. Talking about Scrying after being 2-for-1ed is like bagging about all that exercise you got while you were being chased by a bear. The bear got you, and you'll spend the next year in the hospital... but you got your steps for the day.
The payoff of the demon is by far greater than the payoff for this guy. If the risk is too much of a risk, don't run either.
And you'd quickly notice how bad a 2/1 for 2 that doesn't affect the board is. But the point is Omenspeaker is much better suited to stop your "wizard aggro" deck than the wizard in question is suited to contribute to it. And Omenspeaer does not see play. Should it? Is it borderline? MAYBE! But this... isn't. The fact it gets Chainwhirlered is just insult to injury.
... but won't be. Because it's a bad version of a card that barely sees play.
The two cards are the same color, but they don't go in the same deck. You're describing a funny limited moment, not a viable constructed strategy.
Yes, but you've given no compelling reasons to explain why you'd prefer a 5/5 over a 6/6 trample flyer; no compelling reasons why you'd prefer a 0/2 over a 2/1 for 1 and no compelling reasons why you'd prefer a bad mogg fanatic over the same 2/1 for 1.
Perhaps. If true, though, all the worse for "new world order."
The fact of the matter is that DOM was a fun, balanced set that many people liked and had reasonable, but not overwhelming, affect on the metagames it influenced.
One doesn't produce a hit movie after a string of flops, then decide to go back to what one was doing before... unless one is WB I suppose...
I've played enough of these to be able to comment sensibly here.
First, you're overlooking a lot of the tribal enabler cards. This is a game of "charitably low bar", not "search mtg top 8 placings"...
For example, for IXA I'd include things like Blossom Dryad, Bishop's Soldier, Costly Plunder, Ixalli's Diviner, Legion Conquistador, New Horizons, One with the Wind, Pounce. Prying Blade, Rile, Ritual of Rejuvenation, River Herald's Boon, Sailor of Means, Siren's Ruse, Skulduggery, Slash of Talons, and more.
That said, I think that Opt and Duress and Spell Piece are most notable here. These are staple cards at (C) that do simple things that help balance the format. Opt sees more maindeck play than all of RNA commons will put together, mark my words.
I'm not saying any of these sets are perfect - IXA was widely accepted to be one of the more miserable drafting formats, and this is - in part - due to a decrease in power level at every rarity. But it had a fair bit of commons designed right; whether we're talking the (unfortuantely immediately obsoleted) Pounce as an instant speed version of a sorcery 1 drop that costed G, the bulk of the explore cards, or the mild tribal dinosaur and pirates theme. Compare the 2 blink spells in standard; one might draw you a card if you built your deck right... one is a combat trick? Really?
Turn 1, you've played a 0/2 defender that can't defend if you enable Spectacle. So what's the turn 2 Spectacle play? The turn 3 spectacle play?
I like this better than black's enabler, a 4CMC enchantment, but you're going to have to tell me a story as to why this is better than any of the 2 power 1 drops in the field. It's a terrible blocker against aggro, and a terrible attacker when you don't want to enable spectacle or when you've already enabled spectacle...
Rather (C)s should be the cards you want players to see the most. Ideally this will include cards players need the most - basic lands, for example - but for much of Magic's history Lightning bolt and Terror variants were designed to see play at (C).
Now they're not.
That's a problem. It drives up deck prices, makes limited games a boring and monotonous (I'm looking at you IXA draft), and leads to more luck based wins in limited - "Oh, wait, YOU got the "Mythic" (U) card. Lucky you; my first 5 picks from each of my packs can't compare. I guess I have to go to game 2 and hope you don't draw it."
Look at Dominaria, one of the strongest draft environments we've had in recent years. The quality of the commons in that set stands out. Yes, we can talk about kicker variants of shock, but most players would get more use out of a playset of llanowar elves than they would a playset of the entire common run of this set. And the sad thing is... a simic mana elf would have been a perfect plant here - especially since WOTC just threw up their hands and said "I give up!" with regards to the guild's design as a whole.
I hope I'm wrong here. But...
The Bad:
Summary Judgment is far, far worse than Seal Away
Sage's Row Savant at 2/2, I'd think about it. People don't run Omen Speaker, and Omen Speaker blocks most of boros and mono red creatures.
Ill-Gotten Inheritance... what? It costs 4 mana, right? I'll point you to Trespasser's Curse, which while not a standard powerhouse was at least worth considering.
Undercity Scavenger - Uh.... Demon of Catastrophes, which is unplayable as Doom Whisperer outclasses it.
Undercity's Embrace - Vona's Hunger, Plaguecrafter - Ferocious-light is just not a viable mechanic, and is out of place here.
Burning-Tree Vandal - I think you're over-valuing looting. I hope I'm wrong here - but I'd feel a lot better if it had Menace and didn't die to every piece of removal.
Spear Spewer - "Each player." Out of curiosity, what 2 drop does this enable that you're happy with?
Aeromunculus - I am unprepared to talk about this card, as it dies to everything, has an ability you're losing if you even consider using, and doesn't affect the board. There are dozens of cards I could point to, but let's compare it to Trygon Predator - a card you might know as it has a repeatable practical ability that lets it see play.
Applied Biomancy - Manafixing is good, but you'd still rather have the body on a man-o-war.
Footlight Fiend - the goblin pirate outclasses this too much. Here's the thing - I could imagine a set of cards that would make this... "meh"... but those cards don't exist here, and seemingly on purpose. By far this is the best of the hybrid (C)s, but that's not saying much in this set I'm afraid.
The Meh:
Justiciar's Portal isn't great, but it's fine.
Shimmer of Possibility - Bad Impulse is on my list.
Deface - on my list. But not-Abrade is not Abrade.
Goblin Gathering - On my list, but let's be clear - this is probably really bad. Sworn Companions doesn't exactly show up, and this is no [card]Raise the Alarm[/card].... but it could have been.
Open the Gates - on my list. But this is for someone's "maybe someday" gate deck, it's not for today.
Sagittars' Volley - I'll err on the side of caution here and give it to you.
Stony Strength - Fair enough.
The Good:
Lawmage's Binding - I suppose Flash Arrest is fair. Good call.
Re: Final Payment-style 1 drop. I think we'd need to test this - I know there are stats we could give this in which a normal deck would consider it (5/5? Sure. 3/4? Maybe?); but for the purposes here it's designed to be a low-tier draft card you often cut, but work with Font of Agonies and a hypothetical W counterpart. It also is interesting to think about for Death's Shadow in modern. This is to say that it's worth more thought than Bloodmist Infiltrator, Carrion Imp, Consign to the Pit, Debtors' Transport, Orzhob Racketeers, etc.
In any case, a design team should have about a half dozen people. I'd ask them each to create as many 1-2 CMC Final Payment-style cards as possible for the relevant two colors, and then workshop the ones that best fit the set. Maybe it's 2 life, not 5. Maybe it's a Centaur Zombie, in case the next block wants to push Centaurs. You see where I'm going with this. But for practical purposes, this card does three important things:
1) Sacrifice outlet (for Orzhov)
2) Pay life outlet.
3) Clunky "limited only" Removal.
The first two are what makes it "constructed playable" (if it is), and the last is the role it plays in limited.
Re: Reanimate variant - More or less, yup. I like Reanimate and the problem with the card was never the turn 2 5 drop, it was the turn 2 "win the game" card. That said, this is what playtesting is for. There is a set of variables (say, the cost could be 2B) where you'd think this is fair.
Re: Exquisite Firecraft - The (R) part about that card is the "4 damage"; Char should have been reprinted in the core set; but historically "4" to any target has been a (R) effect. Also, compare the lines of text on that card to my version of Skewer. WOTC really needs a "clean up" team on some of these designs.
Re: Enable - Needle Drop is an instant, but I see your point. I don't think it's as "dangerous" as you think it is, but yes - I imagine it'd see play somewhere. Modern burn? I don't think so. We can test if need be (perhaps there's a Disinformation Campaign-version of the card that'd be more appropriate at (U)...), but my point is that this is the design space that needed to be filled in; not Ill-Gotten Inheritance (My god, this is ridiculous for a (C) effect, let alone the numbers they threw on there!).
Finally, re: Disenchant + token generator - Sundering Growth is far, far better. Admittedly Populate was super swingy and kept in balance in limited due to the rarity of "big" token generators, but still. Honestly, Azorius needed a Keyword and the disenchant variant needed to have that keyword. Design team utterly failed the mechanics for UW and UG this time around, and kind of phoned in Afterlife if we're being honest. Riot is great design, Spectacle competent design (employed far too frugally) and as a result it's super easy to design cards with those mechanics that are fair and interesting.
Common cycles have yielded many of the most iconic magic cards since Alpha. A cycle is a good way to make sets feel UNQIUE from each other. Kamigawa's the block with the Zubera cycle. Mirrodin had the myr, 5th Dawn the cycle of "instant equip" equipment, Alpha had the boons.
Given how often I've seen a 3/1 for 1W at common in the past few years, a little something to differentiate sets from one another would be welcome.
I call nonsense. I'm very disappointed at the lack of an (U) guild ability land (or manland), guild equipment, etc. But that's not an option for this set, we could only introduce mono-colored cycles (so as to not disrupt the interset pattern), and there are about a half dozen interesting (C) or (U) cards that would have made for great cycles here. More or less take your favorite (C) from the set and ask "What if they'd done 4 more of these" - 4 more relentless creatures; 4 more kindle effects, 4 more (U) auras that call back to a previous mechanic, etc.
By tribal support, I meant giving creatures relevant creature types. That said, we have a convoluted Ooze Lord at (M) in this set.
I'm not saying turn Ravnica into the next Onslaught. But taking an old card that was "close" to seeing play and swapping it's creature type to a supported type? That's fair design space.
I'm not going to tell you Scry was implemented well... since Mirrodin block, where it was great. But that strategy works for Cycling a lot. I can tell you I'd be a lot happier with Root Snare if it had cycling... or Scry 2...
Skewer is twice worse than Lightning Bolt. In principle, that's feel bad design.
Apart from design concerns, but because of how it was designed, it's also not constructed playable as it costs too much and is sorcery speed.
So my "beef" with Skewer is that it's a poorly named, poorly designed card that fills limited role worse than every other variant of lightning bolt in standard. It's designed to be bad.
I know how they should design cards. And after the explanation of the RIX reprint of Raptor Companion, I think we should know how they design cards.
Step 1: Get some foundations. Mechanics. Cycles to complete.
Step 2: Fill in the pillars, the iconic (M)s and legendaries, and create a few pushed set mechanic cards.
Step 3: Phone it in. (Probably copy and paste a bunch of "safe" commons from previous sets and/or the design file. If you're lucky, they'll give Coercion and Lightning Strike a guild mechanic.)
I'm being a bit facetious here, but this is far closer to an apt description than anyone of us should be happy with.
The UW mechanic is a timespiral mechanic.
The WB mechnic is Doomed Traveler
The BR mechanic is a simple cost reduction mechanic they decided to paste kicker into.
The RG mechanic is... new and interesting. A pair of good (U)s and a few good (R)s show that they know how to do it right.
The GU mechnaic is monstrous.
So of the 5 mechanics, only Riot is new. Yet Riot is the one with the greatest percentage of playable cards.
Thus, by your logic, WOTC's failure in implementing Riot is that they gave it too many good cards... like 4-5... and should have cut back, like their... uh... 1... playable Adapt card (let's face it, any adapt that sees play outside of the legend isn't going to be "adapted" so much as climbed.
Alternate costs are on (C) all the time - in this set even. Skewer is a terrible card, but it's not too complex for (C).
Please take a moment to look over the set. I can assure you that "simple" is not a design concern on 80% of the cards with block mechanics in this set.
As a quick test, count lines of text on the cards. Let 1-2 lines of text on a creature be "simple"; 3-4 on a spell. How many block mechanic cards violate this at (C) and (U)? At (R) and (M)?
If your position is that they want to use 10 block mechanics in the next set... and experiment... I think we might have a problem.
No. Baneslayer Angel and Doom Whisperer are power creep. They flagrantly violate the color pie p/t ratios to be "pushed".
Asking for a Skewer to be uncounterable... is still just a card that is worse than Lightning Bolt in 95+% of all situations.
Rather than add to the available card pool, you're suggesting WOTC print cards that will not see constructred play - power regress - and then print a few cards that will see play (which also might be regressed, as with the not Mana Leak.
Sure. But if the card is designed to be unplayable, THAT IS NOT FINE. That is the opposite of fine. That's failing to design a card that people will like to play with!
Pokemon does have runaway power creep... and still manages to make most of it's (C) cards unplayable as well. Power creep is a thing to worry about, but my proposals don't lead to it.
Yes, most commons were designed to fail and be unplayable. Like Pokemon, a game with runaway power creep you've just mentioned not wanting MTG to be like.
I didn't say that it did.
But there is plenty of room in RNA to support SOME decks. Goblins and Zombies have tribal support in other sets, throwing them a few halfway decent cards would be... minimally decent.
Yes, but Reaper goes in my Zombie Commander deck.
And I think that's a great place to put it - sometimes making a card constructed playable is merely a matter of doing something minor such that it has increased synergy with an existing deck - whether commander, casual, modern, or standard.
However, we're all on the same page here with regards to the commons in this set - WOTC designed them to fail. And they failed.
I don't think this is fair. Look at standard "Zombies" - because of the relatively low quantity of zombies, the deck doesn't fire. But you add a few "ok" zombies, say at (C) or (U), and then "Mono black zombies" might be a tier 3 deck. To illustrate this, consider: Midnight Reaper; a functionally worse version of a morph creature that didn't see play... and this sees play in Golgari.
To be clear; I'm not asking for "the same" cards reskinned each set (Not that this seems to have stopped WOTC, which has AGAIN reprinted a card from the past set with the same art "just because", let alone the cavalcade of strictly inferior vanillas at common that could be made playable with a keyword a type change...). But rather than another Raptor Companion, it would be nice if they changed this up by making a new card... give it a relevant creature type (Goblin Knight?), a keyword (Vigilance, Lifelink, Flash!...).
More importantly, every keyword opens up variant designs of existing cards. Expose to Daylight is the right kind of design, but with the wrong keyword (and poorly balanced).
Try these Disenchant + Mechanic designs:
2W Instant Choose 1 or both: Destroy target artifact, or destroy target enchantment (Oh, wait, they did this w/ exile the last set at 3W,...)
2W Instant Disenchant + Addendum - Create a 1/1 human creature token.
2W Instant Choose 1 - Disenchant or Creatures you control gain Afterlife.
2W Instant Disenchant Spectacle W (For illustration, obviously.)
But really? Here are the two variants we needed in *THIS SET*
2W Instant Disenchant, then Disenchant for each card named ~ in your graveyard. (AKA, Goblin Gathering Cycle... and yes, make it an instant so the 1st isn't just terrible.)
W Instant Pay 5 life or sacrifice a creature. Disenchant (AKA, Font of Agonies combo card. Listen, I'm not sure if I like Final Payment really... but it's on my list. So do a white Font of Retribution, that lets you remove counters for tokens or something, and do this and then do a black 1 drop for the "3 card" guild cycle; something like:
B 2/2 Zombie Deathtouch As an additional cost to cast this, pay 5 life or sacrifice a creature.
BSorcery As an additional cost to cast this, pay 5 life or sacrifice a creature. Return a creature card with a CMC of 5 or less from your graveyard to the battlefield.
B As an additional cost to cast this, pay 5 life or sacrifice a creature. Create 2 treasure tokens. (I mean, not that I'd have brought back treasures, but if you do bring back treasures...)
I don't want this to devolve into a "You make the card," thread, but my point is this: It's easy to fill out cycles in such a way that they're mediocre limited cards but fair niche constructed cards.
Heck, consider Blade Juggler. Suppose that it's Spectacle cost was B, Pay 4 life. Indeed; why isn't there a Spectacle card with an alternate cost... Discard a creature card; Pay 5 life, etc.
Not so filler Zombie 1B Creature - Zombie Rogue Spectacle - Pay 4 life. 2/2
Not filler Kill Spell 5B Sorcery - Destroy target creature. Spectacle - Discard a creature card.
Not Filler clear the Stage 3B Sorcery - Target creature gets -3/-3 until end of turn. Spectacle - Sacrifice a creature.
Finally, re: Skewer - It strikes me that it'd be very easy to fix. The easiest solution, I think, is to cost it at 1R. or Add Magma Spray text. or Make it a Kindle-effect. Or make it modal, and let the other half do something relevant (destroy defender, tap blocker, blah blah blah). Abrade is amazing because of it's utility. If Skewer had a 2nd, interesting mode it'd be more interesting. But really? The entire card is wrong-headed; Spectacle is a keyword that alters the cost when damage has been dealt; so the "damage any target" things are ideally spectacle enablers. Thus, reprinting Shock and/or Lightning Strike (with new, cool block art) would be fair game here instead. That said, putting Lightning Bolt in the set would be notable as it'd be the only (C) or (U) that immediately stands out. (By the way, while I can see the argument for not reprinting Lightning Bolt, I think it's fairly obvious this is more "fair but restrictive," rather than unfair.)
Still, I think it's pretty clear they knew Skewer was designed to be bad; as the name "Skewer" is untaken and would be very flavorful. If I'm going to make a card named Skewer; and I'm going to make it the signature (C) Spectacle card, it's going to be this:
Skewer 1R Sorcery (due to the way WOTC wants Spectacle to work.) Skewer does 3 damage to any target. This spell cannot be countered. Spectacle R
Now THIS version of Skewer is interesting. The uncountable clause is relevant, the cost is the same as Lightning Strike, but with the drawback of being a sorcery.
But, finally, it's worth noting another alternate cost Spectacle variant:
Stage Magic 1R Sorcery. (U) Stage Magic deals 3 damage to any target. Spectacle - Each opponent creates a 1/1 red goblin creature token.
Lastly, I think it's clear we need a Spectacle Enabler at (C):
Enable R Sorcery Enable deals 1 damage to each opponent. Draw a card.
In fact, the lack of cantrips in this set is particularly annoying, as 1 mana cantrips usually are in the running for constructed play, niche or otherwise. Again, my point is that these are "low impact" (C) designs, but have practical limited and constructed value.
To recap; here are common, obvious strategies to design interesting cards:
1) Tribal Support
2) Cycle making
3) Alternate Costs
4) Staple + Mechanic (at appropriate cost)
5) Reprint existing cards. (Especially older cards that haven't seen play but might here.)
That said, Impassioned Orator is no Soul Warden reprint. Eve if this was a 2/2 or 1/3 w/ symmetrical ability, it'd be great. But it's one-sided, and thus worthless for any serious play. Sorry.
Clear the Mind fails twice - it's a sorcery (and thus can't "counter" enemy reanimator spells); and it costs 3 mana. This effect at 1U and instant *MIGHT* have a chance in several constructed formats; notably Commander. But as is, it falls below what one would expect. Gideon's Reproach is an instant speed answer to Drakes (and you might imagine mono white running 4 seal away and 1-4 reproach for Drakes.) This costs too much, is slow, and doesn't provide card advantage. Feldon's Cane is fun; this is not. And yes, Gaea's Blessing is far better, if only for it's "free" effect.
Prying Eyes costs 6 mana. Opportunity is functionally better in 2 ways... and significantly more simple.
Sage's Row Savant - MAYBE; but Chainswhirler... If this was a 2/2 for 2 with Scry 2, I'd still be surprised to see it see play... outside of wizard deck maybe. But 2/1s are pretty much never playable unless they effect the board immediately. Note: This *MIGHT* pass my test for a fair filler (C), but it's not something I'd ever be happy with.
Undercity's Embrace - Diabolic Edict + ferocious-light feels bad. The fact this doesn't work with any block mechanics is also disappointing. Finally, "each" vs "target" makes all the difference for Commander and 2HG. This fails even that test.
Skewer - Twice worse Lightning Bolt is bad, save MAYBE modern mono red burn... you know, the bad version of the tier 2-3 modern deck that doesn't get Boros Charm or Lightning Helix... notably 2 cards from Ravnica expansions.
Footlight Fiend - Fair enough. But with no Nantuko Husk variants (IE, free sacrifice), this is not a thing. I wish it was a thing, but this is another instance of (C) cards seeing play and WOTC saying "Oh yeah, give me a second..."
Edit: Re: Fiend; I think that this would be a "good enough" card if part of a strict 1CMC 1/1 for H cycle (perhaps including boros recruit last set, which would be far more reasonable w/ mentor...). As is, it's the ONLY hybrid (C) that is even close to being worth considering from these last 2 sets... and that's bad.
Historically, WOTC printed "Staple ability + 0-1 + block Keyword. Here, the closest we get is ... Drill Bit, a great (C) and a mediocre (U). Maybe testing showed it had to be (U)... but the next closest we get it... Expose to Daylight, which doesn't even use a block mechanic! (Indeed, it uses Scry, which really shouldn't be in a set after Surveil... talk about asking for trouble...).
The important thing about these spells is that while they're not strictly better (usually) than existing core-set staples, they offer deckbuilding options. If I'm going to build my deck around Spectacle, what do I get for it? Light Up the Stage. I don't get a Spectacle Smelt variant, or a Spectacle TERRoR variant, or a Spectacle Threaten effect. The closest I get is a 2x strictly worse Lightning Bolt. Oh, and my naturalize variant is a (R) now.
Arena is a great entry to MTG; but no one will open a pack of RNA and say "Oh, this is cool." No one will buy a Planeswalker deck and play it with an experienced player and say "that was fun." And the big answer for that is that WOTC has decided to push (R) and (M) cards and turn (C) cards into garbage. But this means that the bulk of what your customers see is defective product; not what they wanted. And in a game like magic, where top tier constructed playable cards can often be "not what they wanted" just because of the color... that's a problem!
Re: Justiciar's Portal - It's no Cloudshift. I mean, it's neat design space; but in a set with 5 new mechanics (not a one returning guild mechanic WOTC?), is this really a line of text worth printing? I don't recall Cloudshift seeing a lot of play, and I don't think WOTC would lose a lot of money letting people play their old Cloudshifts. Given the Azorius and Orzhov mechanics, there's no Cloudshift variant that would make use of the block mechanic... but it'd be easy to make a variant like this:
1W Instant - Sacrifice a creature, then return that creature to the battlefield from your graveyard. It gains First Strike until end of turn.
That card works with a block mechanic - Afterlife - competently.
I've played a lot of formats. Classic formats like Mirrodin, Ravnica (original), and even contemporary Dominaria run many, many turns. Even "fast" formats like IXA routinely run many turns in most cases - although you did have to fight for 2 drops, in part due to design failures.
End of the day, if your set is full of 5 color cards, mediore fixing, and 5 different main strategies, there's no reason to think things will be "run away" even if we tripled the number of "good somewhere" cards; the closest was Boros which routinely needed to play 5CMC mediocre removal spells to win on turn 5. Yet there are many GRN common R and W cards that you'd run but don't contribute to the boros strategy, instead meant for WG or RU.
I'm sure many WOTC designers agree that they can "check out" on designing commons; however this strikes me as irresponsible. Players will open more common cards than any others. In the original Ravnica, I was happy to see a signet. Elves of Deepshadow was awesome. In Mirrodin block, even if you ignore the fact that Affinity was a deck with like 8 rares and mostly commons, I enjoyed several cycles of common cards - echoing instants, myr, and equipment! Bonesplitter - a fun, casual equipment that saw no serious constructed play, but was efficient and fun!
So let's say you open up a pack of RNA, and your rare is... Amplifire, and your uncommons are Angelic Exaltation, Rally to Battle, and Sentinel's Mark. And you shuffle through your commons and see no Relentless Advisors. You settle down and you're about to thumb through your 10 common cards - What percentage of them do you think are worth your interest, in the broadest possible scope?
I've been back in magic for ~ 2 years after a fairly big gap, and I'm shocked at how often players will just abandon their booster packs after opening them and not opening a "chase" card. When I was a kid, I bought lots of llanowar elves; it was a (C) and went in every one of my green decks. I still horde Naturalize, Smelt, Erase, duress, divest, and similar cards that are in the running for being good in decks. Staples.
I can't think of one card in RNA that is a "staple," outside of Relentless Advisors... which is basically a give-me. Indeed, the three non-"chase common" cards that come closest are... strictly inferior versions of other cards (4 if you include Skewer...)! That's insane! If the three of the top 5 common cards in a set was a strictly worse llanowar elves, disenchant, or counterspell... I can't help but think you'd be annoyed. But that's where we are; with functionally worse Fog, Impulse, and Mana Leak being the most likely cards to see play in multiple decks!
I think WOTC is dangling shocklands and mythic angels in front of our eyes, while poisoning the well. I'm absolutely at a loss; until yesterday I just assumed they'd sneak the good 1 drops, or neat cantrips, or cycle of interesting (C)s or (U)s in at the last moment. But nope!