Magic Market Index for Feb 8th, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for Feb 1st, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for Dec 28th, 2018
  • posted a message on Archenemy: Nicol Bolas Upgrades
    Well, it took almost a year to get everyone together to playtest these decks. The verdict is in and... the Gatewatch didn't stand a chance. It didn't help that I was able to (using one of the schemes) play both Gideon and Jaya on turn two, but overall it seems like the Gatewatch didn't have enough gas. By the time their decks were coming online, the schemes had catapulted Nicol Bolas into a position where I was able to cast a ludicrous Torment of Hailfire that killed the entire team. Needless to say, the Gatewatch needs some help. My thoughts are to work U back into Nissa's deck and make her the support role. Gideon is also just a little too average and needs to be beefed up to handle the threats Bolas tosses out with ease. Chandra's deck seems fine for the moment, though I'm definitely swapping out Browbeat for Risk Factor as soon as I can get my hands on a copy. Any thoughts on the current set up and what could be done to help the Gatewatch out?
    Posted in: Multiplayer
  • posted a message on Magic Goblins: A Budget Teaching Deck
    Howdy everyone. I'm building a goblin/steal-n-sac themed deck for a friend to help him learn the game. As he's a first-timer, I'm doing my best to keep the gameplay fairly straightforward and lower-budget. He's very driven by amusing flavor and I thought goblins were his best, black-border option. Any feedback y'all can provide would be great!

    Posted in: Casual & Multiplayer Formats
  • posted a message on Magic Wolves: A Budget Teaching Deck
    Always one I overlook, great suggestion. Thanks!
    Posted in: Casual & Multiplayer Formats
  • posted a message on Magic Wolves: A Budget Teaching Deck
    Howdy everyone. I'm building a wolf-themed deck for a friend to help him learn the game. As he's a first-timer, I'm doing my best to keep the gameplay fairly straightforward and lower-budget. Any feedback y'all can provide would be great!

    Lurking Predators is probably out of place in a deck without any ramp and low-cost creatures... Any replacement suggestions?

    Posted in: Casual & Multiplayer Formats
  • posted a message on Chaos Wand Day 9 spoiler
    Memory Lapse seems like a fun combination. Any other cards begging to synergy with this?
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Primevals' Glorious Rebirth
    I want the big art to see all the details.
    This set is amazing


    Well here you go.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on The Great Designer Search 3
    Damn. That cut off is WAY more severe than I expected.

    http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/170286279953/info-on-the-gds3-multiple-choice-test
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on The Great Designer Search 3
    Did anyone else get thrown by the wording of Question 28?

    We try to avoid making two-color cards where the card could be done as a monocolor card in one of the two colors. Given that, suppose you have a two-color 4/4 creature with flying and vigilance (and no other abilities). Which of the following color combinations would be the best choice for this card?
    The gut instinct answer I had was UW, but since these abilities could both be mono-W... the choice I ended up with was BG. The answer doesn't feel right, but each ability is secondary in one of those colors. Idk, I think I overthought this one way too much.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Fallow - Ability Word
    I'm looking at Fallow in the same light as the werewolf transform mechanic, though hopefully not as slow. That is, there's a choice to be made. Fill your board, or let the board you have be at its best. I'm still playing around with this in my head, I definitely want to keep it simple, but make the choice a compelling one.

    Here is the current iteration of the uncommon:

    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Fallow - Ability Word
    Quote from user_938036 »
    Each of your designs exemplify the problem with this mechanic. Its too easy to have the bonus for half your turn and then give it up after it wouldn't matter.

    As long as you tap the mana dork first you will always gain its benefit, as long as you have 4 lands. Both creatures want to be attacking with their enlarged body and have little downside to shrinking in the second main phase.

    For this mechanic to actually be interesting there have to be real decisions made.
    The easiest way to get the same flavor is to check at the end of your turn, this obviously encourages instant and flash cards as you can gain the benefit while still using mana, but at least you have introduced a limitation that is more than 'play the way most people play' and as long as its kept out of the more instant heavy colors it should be fine.
    In general, having a mechanic that required making real decisions is my goal. The problem is, checking for fallow at the end of your/every/opponent's turn is either makes the ability entirely defensive (checking only on your turn) or requires a slight memory issue. Just playing with that idea:

    Fallow - As long as you control four untapped lands, effect.
    shifted to check only at your end step becomes:
    Fallow - If you control four untapped lands at the beginning of your end step, effect.
    or shifted to check each end step becomes:
    Fallow - If you control four untapped lands at the beginning of each end step, effect next turn.

    My thought is that checking at the end of each end step is probably the best, and really isn't any more memory intensive than the transforming werewolves of Innistrad. Thoughts?

    To put it another way. I'm fine with this ability. As long as armageddon or stone rain and ice storm are in the set, too.
    Yes, I definitely want to avoid a format where land destruction becomes a necessity. I would probably want to see some cards like Chandra's Revolution/Reduce // Rubble to interact with the mechanic a bit, to be sure. I also want to avoid swinging too far in the other direction and end up with a Fateful Hour situation.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Fallow - Ability Word
    Hello all! I'm trying to play around with a druidic flavor-based mechanic in RG, where the druids and forest creatures care about the land. The land is being abused for its resources, so they're all about letting the land rest whenever possible. My take on this is an ability word, Fallow - As long as you control four or more untapped lands, bonus. See examples below. Mechanically, the idea is that the cards will be fine at their rarity when they do not pass the fallow check, and good to slightly better than average when they do meet said check. In theory, I want fallow to make decent cards in the early game not completely dead in the late game. Thoughts? Is this too much to track (a la Threshold)? Thoughts always welcomed.






    Edit: The rare is almost definitely undercosted, as untapping on turn 6 with a 9/9 trample/menace critter is a bit much. I'll definitely be adjusting this one down the line.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Wording Improvement
    I see where I was getting confused then. I don't think we're defining design space the same way. If I understand correctly, you are defining design space as the number of designs a set can/should contain, and Spectrum is taking up that space. My understanding of design space is how many more cards could be designed with the mechanic. Good or bad, a card that changes colors can be put on... just about anything.

    I'm also really not sure how you reached the conclusion that the mechanic isn't or can't be attached to the color pie. This example card is always green and by itself only has a green effect. It might sometimes also be white or blue and has a corresponding white or blue ability (brokeness aside). Of course you're absolutely right, changing colors does nothing by itself, but that doesn't then equate it to parasitism. It makes the most sense in a set that cares about color, but can be played in any set without a single other Spectrum card. Again, I'm not trying to defend how good or useful the keyword is, just trying to understand why you had concerns about it being parasitic.
    One last note: keywording is not, inherently, a universal good. It's a tradeoff that sacrifices comprehensibility (Spectrum is quite roundabout) in exchange for...something. Self-referential mechanics need keywords, and other mechanics need to condense massive walls of text or appear a million and one times. Your ability doesn't fit under any of those, so what does this change bring to the table?
    I wanted to quote this last bit because you're 100% correct and I would like to remember this going forward. The exercise here was trying to find a way to condense and shorten the Firespout mechanic in a way that was also still easy to understand. The eventual goal was to be able to design cards that could care about 3+ colors (if needed), which would in fact be a wall of text that would require condensing. I don't think Spectrum is a success in that regard, but I appreciate the feedback nonetheless.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Wording Improvement
    Eh, I'm not crazy about it. The wording that cares about colors spent actually has more design space than your idea. The former can fit into any multicolor set, while yours is pretty much restricted to color-matters sets. The level of parasitism is also a concern.

    Thank you for the feedback. Could you clarify a couple of things for me?

    I'm curious how one has more or less design space than the other. Both require the same mana to be spent to achieve the same effect.

    I'm also curious how either card would be parasitic. While the mana required to get full usage from the card definitely points you to a Bant mana-base, either card could be played in any set.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Wording Improvement
    Hello all! I am undertaking a mental exercise in preparation for the design challenges that are to come in GDS3. I'm setting mini-challenges for myself and would love to get feedback or thoughts. Below are two almost identical card designs. The first is a card that works exactly like Firespout. The second is a card that does almost exactly the same thing, albeit with a keyword. The mechanic with the reminder text doesn't really save space, but throwing Spectrum onto a Rare or Mythic without reminder text could save a ton of space...




    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on The Great Designer Search 3
    An evergreen mechanic is a keyword mechanic that shows up in (almost) every set. If you had to make an existing keyword mechanic evergreen, which one would you choose and why?
    I chose to add cycling. It has shown up in more sets than any other non-evergreen keyword, can go on any card type, and helps smooth out games in all colors.

    If you had to remove evergreen status from a keyword mechanic that is currently evergreen, which one would you remove and why?
    Like others here, I also chose defender. I suspect this will be a common answer. It's the only keyword that is inherently a drawback and won't leave a "keyword void" in any colors as it's fairly evenly spread across all colors.

    What is Magic's greatest strength and why?
    I said Magic's greatest strength was it's diversity, stemming directly from the color pie.

    What is Magic's greatest weakness and why?
    I said Magic's greatest weakness was it's complexity. Design is definitely moving towards keeping the complexity as a "hidden layer" for experts to explore, but Magic has a lot of tough concepts to crack like priority, the stacks, and layers.

    Good luck to everyone who submitted! I'd also be very curious what others said to question #10 (What one thing would you change about Magic)?
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.