• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Magic: The Gathering |OT3| Enchantment Under the Siege

Status
Not open for further replies.

ElyrionX

Member
Played some EDH with a bunch of guys at my LGS. It was great fun. My Azorius Angel-Wizard tribal control deck was really janky but fun to play. Looking forward to more EDH.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Played some EDH with a bunch of guys at my LGS. It was great fun. My Azorius Angel-Wizard tribal control deck was really janky but fun to play. Looking forward to more EDH.

You haven't lived until you've played eight player THG Planechase Archenemy EDH

We did it once, on one very crowded very stupid night
 
Explanation of Gideon's dark skin color in his Funko figure
Q:Re: the new Funko figures - Gideon's a little dark, isn't he? I mean, he's always had lighter skin than that in artwork before. Are they not the final designs, or what?
alienlovemessiah

We were trying to get Gideon closer to his original intended ethnicity, which includes a bit more melanin than he’s had in past illustrations (he was never intended to be a straight-up white guy). He was supposed to have some Mediterranean influence blended with hints of other influences, and that feedback led to the skin color of the vinyl. Gideon’s ethnicity includes more details than just skin color, but Funko vinyls are pretty stylized, so that’s kind of all that came across. :)

#gideon #gideon jura #again though #totes adorbs

So Gideon is supposed to have darker skin, but his previous illustrations didn't really show that. They intend for future art to reflect this better. Also, Kiora still having the last name Atua on the figure is a mistake.

Also, Maro responded to a question about Standard rotation.
marpj said: What are the chances to change the rotation policy to be by set instead of by block (at each new set the oldest rotates out, being always 7 or 8 set standard legal)?

A fine question. If you controlled the rotation policy for Standard, how would you have it work? Keep it the same is an acceptable answer.
 
It turns out Triumph of Ferocity got new art on Duels of the Planeswalkers 2015.
tumblr_inline_nagu25KRyV1qcft8f.jpg


MaRo explains it here
djh119 said: It's kind of annoying you guys gave Triumph of Ferocity an alternate art. There is nothing wrong with the original art; it portrays the struggle equally, in which Liliana wins with Triumph of Cruelty. I think doing so admits that WOTC thinks the first portrayal is indecent, when it is not.

You have to remember that intent is not enough. Yes, our motives behind the illustration were pure, but the way it was perceived upset a portion of our audience.

We have to be sensitive to the fact that, out of context, the art portrayed some things that we work very hard to avoid in our game. The portrayal of women in Magic is something that we strive to be a leader on in our industry.

Part of living up to that goal is being aware not just of what we mean when we make our cards but what the audience perceives when they look at them. We changed the art because it was creating messages, intended or not, that we did not mean to send.

I realize that some people, such as yourself, did not perceive the art that way, but you need to understand that others did and we have to be respectful of that.

Good on Wizards for that.
 

Crocodile

Member
2 down, 8 more to go ;-)

Explanation of Gideon's dark skin color in his Funko figure

So Gideon is supposed to have darker skin, but his previous illustrations didn't really show that. They intend for future art to reflect this better. Also, Kiora still having the last name Atua on the figure is a mistake.

Also, Maro responded to a question about Standard rotation.

So EVERY previous depiction of Gideon, and there have been plenty, were wrong? This is going to be a bit of an awkward transition to say the least. How did they botch it for long if what he looked like before was a mistake?

Also Tezz still looks wonky

It turns out Triumph of Ferocity got new art on Duels of the Planeswalkers 2015.
tumblr_inline_nagu25KRyV1qcft8f.jpg


MaRo explains it here

Good on Wizards for that.

I mean its kind of annoying because to take offense to the image requires you to not be aware of the context (and making a comment on anything sans context is dangerous) of the image and that it is the mirrored image depicting a battle between two planeswalkers of about equal power who are trying to kill each other. This is not some overpowering brute trying to lay his dominance over a weak and defenseless woman. ALL THAT BEING SAID, I understand how the image can be problematic if someone didn't/can't/wasn't able to acquire context and if changing it results in a net increase in happiness in the world then its a good thing. The image isn't worth falling on a sword for.
 
So EVERY previous depiction of Gideon, and there have been plenty, were wrong? This is going to be a bit of an awkward transition to say the least. How did they botch it for long if what he looked like before was a mistake?

I think it's more that they're consciously trying to emphasize the ethnicities of the characters more now instead of allowing them to be depicted as generically white. IIRC, Liliana is supposed to be Middle Eastern in appearance, so from this, it's likely that her next card will better reflect that, in addition to Gideon's next card (probably in Zendeuxkar).
 
T

Transhuman

Unconfirmed Member
I mean its kind of annoying because to take offense to the image requires you to not be aware of the context (and making a comment on anything sans context is dangerous) of the image and that it is the mirrored image depicting a battle between two planeswalkers of about equal power who are trying to kill each other. This is not some overpowering brute trying to lay his dominance over a weak and defenseless woman. ALL THAT BEING SAID, I understand how the image can be problematic if someone didn't/can't/wasn't able to acquire context and if changing it results in a net increase in happiness in the world then its a good thing. The image isn't worth falling on a sword for.

I think the context of the card even without Triumph of Cruelty is pretty clear though. He's holding her down and saying "remove this curse or I'll kill you", so there's a practical reason for him holding her down the way he is (that doesn't involve sexual abuse, and it isn't just random violence). I'm not even that opposed to the idea that they've updated the art, but the fact that Liliana isn't even on the new version annoys me. Something tells me it's going to be a long time before we see a two people of different genders fighting on a card again, which doesn't feel very progressive,
 

gerg

Member
I think the context of the card even without Triumph of Cruelty is pretty clear though. He's holding her down and saying "remove this curse or I'll kill you", so there's a practical reason for him holding her down the way he is (that doesn't involve sexual abuse, and it isn't just random violence). I'm not even that opposed to the idea that they've updated the art, but the fact that Liliana isn't even on the new version annoys me. Something tells me it's going to be a long time before we see a two people of different genders fighting on a card again, which doesn't feel very progressive,

Why jump to that conclusion? The problem with the original art is the posing, not that it portrays both a woman and a man. All this requires Wizards do is be more sensitive and aware with their art direction.
 
T

Transhuman

Unconfirmed Member
Why jump to that conclusion? The problem with the original art is the posing, not that it portrays both a woman and a man. All this requires Wizards do is be more sensitive and aware with their art direction.

I don't agree that there was anything particularly wrong with the original art, but I'm all for them taking under advisement whether people think cards come off as discriminatory and making a point to not repeat past mistakes. I just wish they'd found a middle ground that involved putting Vess on the card (the flavour text made a lot more sense in the first card). It just reads like they're sacrificing art direction to appease.
 

gerg

Member
I don't agree that there was anything particularly wrong with the original art, but I'm all for them taking under advisement whether people think cards come off as discriminatory and making a point to not repeat past mistakes.

I don't think the issue was that the art was discriminatory, but that it was reflective of domestic abuse or even suggestive of sexual abuse.

I just wish they'd found a middle ground that involved putting Vess on the card (the flavour text made a lot more sense in the first card). It just reads like they're sacrificing art direction to appease.

Sure, but I think that's a different matter. I just think it's silly to suddenly worry that they're never going to show a man and woman fighting again.
 
T

Transhuman

Unconfirmed Member
Sure, but I think that's a different matter. I just think it's silly to suddenly worry that they're never going to show a man and woman fighting again.

I meant hand-to-hand, not that there's much punching/ brawling/ chokeholds to start with (and even less male-to-female), but I think this will cut off future possibilities no matter the concept because it will always come back to "remember the time they hated Triumph? Better try something else". I agree it's a small concern though.
 

bigkrev

Member
State of Design is up... Clipping this part

We Messed Up on Born of the Gods

One of the banes of Magicdesign is third sets. They're just tricky to do. We have to innovate enough to make them fresh after eight months of players being exposed to the block, but we can't deviate too much or else it doesn't feel connected. Obviously, one only needs to look at sets like Rise of the Eldrazi and Avacyn Restored to see that we've gone to great lengths to try and make third sets work.

But wait, wasn't Born of the Gods the second set? Yes, it was. See, I was so concerned with making sure the third set worked that I made the second set give up too much. We finally made a worthy third set only to realize it came at the cost of the second one.

Let me quickly jump in and say that this problem was not because of Ken Nagle, the lead designer of Born of the Gods, but because of me as the head designer. I'm the one who called the shots and decided what went were and, if the second set was lacking, it's because I was saving stuff for the third set. Which leads us to the next lesson:

If they are saying that Born of the Gods was bad to Make Journey into Nyx "good"... man, they failed hard in both cases
 
I wonder if running wedge taplands is better than sets of scrylands. Guess it depends on how mana-hungry Khans is.

If there are more Lightning Angels than Bant Sureblades, they might be a necessary evil.


Also, it's possible to run a slower, 5 color, 24-land decks now without fixing like caryatids.

Let's say you have a blue-based 5-color deck:

4 BUG lands
4 RUG lands
4 UWR lands
4 Caves of Koilos
4 Llanowar Wastes
4 Islands


Thats:
16 Blue sources
12 Green Sources
12 Red sources
12 Black Sources
8 White sources

I don't expect to see a bunch of mana-hungry aggro decks running around, but I suppose 4-color midrange or control isn't completely out of the question. Especially if you go above 24 and cut the tri-color lands in some number.
 
Looks like Jeskai's mechanic will revolve around combat tricks and buffs. This could be fun, if you enjoy stuff like Kiln Fiend or Nivix Cyclops.
 
In a block where morph, one of the most complex mechanics in all of Magic, is present, and has to share the set with five other keywords, I'm perfectly fine with the clan mechanics being simple and blatantly encouraging certain play styles. It's interesting how prowess actually encourages casting spells in the first main phase, in the case of sorceries, artifacts, planeswalkers, and enchantments, compared to how raid encourages casting creatures in the second main phase, and Jeskai and Mardu share red and white; along with the obvious instant combat tricks. Plus, the encouragement of casting instants and sorceries ties in well with delve, with Jeskai sharing blue with Surtai... you know, assuming Surtai has delve. EDIT: Also, prowess ties in well with bestow.

It's interesting to hear that Khans block will be even more complex than Theros block, which many even here have complained was too complex. I hope it's handled well. From the outside, I don't really see how the block structure can have such a huge influence on the design, but I guess we'll see what has MaRo so worried.

EDIT: Also, seriously, what's the problem with limited fodder? They do their job as spells to cast in limited.
 

Firemind

Member
Theros block was anything but complex. Control was basically dead unless you had a Hedonia or the serpent that bounced everything your opponent has.
 
Theros block was anything but complex. Control was basically dead unless you had a Hedonia or the serpent that bounced everything your opponent has.

I believe you're equivocating. A lot of people were confused by the mechanics of Theros block; and while I wasn't playing limited at the time, according to the previous State of Design, a lot of people thought Dragon's Maze was too complicated with its eleven mechanics. MaRo doesn't appear concerned with the complexity of the constructed environment, which is a development issue anyway. The complexity of constructed has nothing to do with the complexity of the mechanics, anyway.
 

Firemind

Member
What? There were little decisions to be made in Theros limited. Most of the Bestow creatures were used to grow creatures and turn them sideways until victory was obtained. Ordeals, same thing. Journey into Nyx had a cycle and a few cards where it mattered to enchant your opponent's creatures, but it was too little too late. Tribute usually had one good mode and one bad mode. All the creatures that had triggers when you attack or untap required you to turn your creatures sideways. Scry was an interesting returning keyword I suppose. Too bad it's underutilized in blue/red cards, which conveniently made U/R the worst colour combination by far.
 

bigkrev

Member
I'm curious which mechanics they thought were confusing. Devotion was only confusing to me in regards to hybrid mana costs.

Probably the most confused I've been by a mechanic in recent memory was Soulbond in Avacyn Restored. Thought nothing of it when looking at spoilers, but when sitting down for the prerelease, had a lot of issues. There is no easy way to tell what creature is bonded to what unless you are stacking them on top of each other (which is really awkward and confusing for your opponent), and what happens when 2 creatures with Soulbond are bonded to each other (Do they get both bonuses, or just the one from the card that initiated the bond?). It was also a limited format where boards got clogged (due to zero removal), so it was just a mess.
 

Jaeyden

Member
I know a lot of people were confused with Bestow. When is it an enchantment? When is it a creature? When is it both?
..blah blah blah.
 

Angry Grimace

Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
Bestow was fine, as was Devotion.

I think Tribute was one the least inspired mechanics ever. Well other than Inspired.
 
Misread Prowess at first, and now that I realize a single spell ticks all your prowess creatures it'll probably be alright, especially for Limited. They'll probably have cards that use the template but grant different effects a la Exalted too.

Was morph really that complicated a mechanic? Never had any trouble with it back in Onslaught block. Really starting to dislike NWO if it means they feel they have to water sets down below belief to compensate.
 

kirblar

Member
Misread Prowess at first, and now that I realize a single spell ticks all your prowess creatures it'll probably be alright, especially for Limited.

Was morph really that complicated a mechanic? Never had any trouble with it back in Onslaught block. Really starting to dislike NWO if it means they feel they have to water sets down below belief to compensate.
Morph is pretty wacky and adds a LOT of hidden information/onboard combat tricks to the gameplay. You don't need to make what's surrounding it all that complicated.
 
Basically, limited fodder.

There'll be a 1/1 Prowess for one and it'll be terrible.

I suppose it'll depend on the quality of the non-creature spells, since there really only needs to be 2 or 3 pushed creatures. I doubt we'll get anything on the level of Delver, though.
 
Was morph really that complicated a mechanic? Never had any trouble with it back in Onslaught block. Really starting to dislike NWO if it means they feel they have to water sets down below belief to compensate.
Does morph use the stack? That doesn't have an obvious answer unless you already know it.

Plus, even two face down creatures on your opponent's board gives you a lot that you have to consider.
 

Crocodile

Member
A) Once you adjust your card evaluations (i.e. you have to realize that Lash the Whip is an actively bad card) Control (especially UB) was very much a viable strategy in Theros draft. I felt it got weaker as the bock progressed though.

B) Y'all are lying if you said you understood how Bestow worked in every scenario off the bat. LYING. That was definitely a complex mechanic. Theros block overall had alot of mechanics - more than it needed. As they admit, Tribute should not have even existed. Waste of everybody's time. Inspired was so undercooked there there was no point in printing any of them aside from Pain Seer (which wouldn't have needed a keyword).

Glad to see WOTC is aware that Born of the Gods was crap and that there were too few "enchantments matter" cards in the "enchantment block". Odd that Maro took the bullet instead of Lapille/development. Not only were not a lot of interesting things happening in that set, most of the cards were WEAK. That was kind of a big problem with the block overall, BOTN and JIN were both so much weaker than Theros itself that it was hard to change/compete with the strategies introduced in the first set.
 

Jaeyden

Member
Bestow was fine, as was Devotion.

I think Tribute was one the least inspired mechanics ever. Well other than Inspired.

Bestow is fine when you understand it, but for new players it was confusing. The ways it can change card type on the stack, the ways it doesn't change card type on the stack and it's type on the battlefield is not something new players are really ready for.

You don't choose whether the spell is going to be an Aura spell or not until the spell is already on the stack. Abilities that affect when you can cast a spell, such as flash, will apply to the creature card in whatever zone you're casting it from. For example, an effect that said you can cast creature spells as though they have flash will allow you to cast a creature card with bestow as an Aura spell anytime you could cast an instant.
On the stack, a spell with bestow is either a creature spell or an Aura spell. It's never both.
Unlike other Aura spells, an Aura spell with bestow isn't countered if its target is illegal as it begins to resolve. Rather, the effect making it an Aura spell ends, it loses enchant creature, it returns to being an enchantment creature spell, and it resolves and enters the battlefield as an enchantment creature.
Unlike other Auras, an Aura with bestow isn't put into its owner's graveyard if it becomes unattached. Rather, the effect making it an Aura ends, it loses enchant creature, and it remains on the battlefield as an enchantment creature. It can attack (and its Tap abilities can be activated, if it has any) on the turn it becomes unattached if it's been under your control continuously, even as an Aura, since your most recent turn began.
If a permanent with bestow enters the battlefield by any method other than being cast, it will be an enchantment creature. You can't choose to pay the bestow cost and have it become an Aura.
Auras attached to a creature don't become tapped when the creature becomes tapped. Except in some rare cases, an Aura with bestow remains untapped when it becomes unattached and becomes a creature.

I love this shit, and I hope WOTC doesn't back down and water the shit out of future design but this is not an easy mechanic for newbs.
 
Hell, when bestow was first revealed, I remember that one high level player absolutely insisted that creatures cast for their bestow cost were countered if the creature it was targeting was destroyed, and was really surprised when it was revealed that it wasn't.

And for an even more recent example of complexity causing a lot of confusion for experts at the game: Generator Servant. Can it be used on two creature spells? Do you have to spend the full (2) to get the haste effect? And that was a common creature.

EDIT: Just realized, all of the revealed mechanics so far (morph, raid, prowess) strongly encourage a play style where you can bluff by sending in a weak creature to attack. If you have a 5/5 creature and your opponent has Jeskai Elder attack you, and the set has Giant Growth, do you block? Is the opponent trying to trigger raid? And of course, is the face down creature huge or small?
 

Maledict

Member
I think the fact that Theros was supposed to be the enchantment block, and yet we didn't see an enchantress deck come out of it or even a deck with a strong enchant theme showed that it wasn't a great success design wise.

The enchantment theme felt very tacked on and unnecessary, and the fact that we only get 'enchantment matters' cards in the third set was a real hindrance (plus those cards felt ridiculously underpowered).
 
[QUOTE="God's Beard!";125980004]Don't they give hints in these things? Where maro makes a list of vagues ideas like "a planeswalker with five ablities" or whatever?[/QUOTE]

That's just every once in a while. He hasn't done it since Innistrad, IIRC.

EDIT: It turns out prowess is another Great Designer Search 2 mechanic. Where it appears. MaRo on the subject.
physics-pony said: who made raid and prowess? they are both so simple and yet, so full of potential!

Raid was made by the exploratory design team for Khans (Ethan Fleischer, Shawn Main and myself). I thought I came up with prowess but it turns out it came from Jon Loucks in the second Great Designer Search and I didn’t realize where the idea got lodged in my head.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom