It is currently Tue Dec 07, 2021 4:15 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2021 11:04 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Aug 30, 2014
Posts: 2221
Test User (1)
Is it me or is VOW the most disappointing set design-wise yet?

First off, I hate blood tokens. Why does a vial of blood let me rummage? It's like they ran out of ideas and just put out something and say "whatever;that will do". The generation and usage of it is all over the place.

And then we have cleave. Is cleave a vampire thing? Maybe there's some vampire subculture I'm not familiar with. And second point, not only does it not resonate with the set theme (that is if my first point was correct), it doesn't even resonate the with game play. It's not a creature or you cleaving things on the battlefield... Or even library... But you cut rule text out? That's a page taken straight out of UN-sets.

After so many in-your-face wedding stuff (rings, invitation, etc) is it too much to ask for partner with on Olivia and Edgar? It's not like it's a complicated or distracting mechanic. Look at phasing with teferi in a CORE SET no less.


Where is the horror? The mystery? The eerie, creepy feeling that makes innistrad innistrad?


They have two full set to flash out or develop werewolves and vampires yet all we got was more of the olds. Nothing new. We actually have less to work with. I didn't agree with blood, but maybe if you have to do blood that way, bring back Madness as well?

While I'm at it, I want to complain about the set icons too lol. (sorry, but not really) the MID icon actually looks more similar to the AFR icon than VOW. All they need to do was put the bat in negative to the same moon? Vampires are night creatures too no? Why print two sets back to back on the same planes when they have little to do with each other? They can't even relate on the set icon level lol


List go on. I think I will arbitrarily cut my rant here. Sorry about this mental vomit. Might come back up edit this to be more comprehensible if I have time. Just really want to vent this out. Get it off my chest.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2021 12:27 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 7772
In similar, if differing, views; my wife is most put out that we got a wedding ring card but not a wedding dress card. Apparently you don't make a set that's wedding-based and not showcase that dress.

_________________
magicpablo666 wrote:
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in an thread with GM_Champion" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against AzureShade when card design is on the line!"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2021 1:03 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 13, 2015
Posts: 6421
They were never going to put partner with on premier set cards. It both combines Commander-specific text and they just don't like tutoring effects now. Olivia with "Draw Edgar" and Edgar with "Draw Olivia" would make have forced them to make the base card weaker.

AzureShade wrote:
In similar, if differing, views; my wife is most put out that we got a wedding ring card but not a wedding dress card. Apparently you don't make a set that's wedding-based and not showcase that dress.

Bride's Gown?


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2021 3:38 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 28, 2019
Posts: 171
Identity: Male
Preferred Pronoun Set: Him etc
Partner with isn't there because they simply refuse to do any mechanic (except for Evolving Wilds/occasional one-off cards) that tutors anything. Maro's justification is that tutoring delays the game significantly and variance is more important than ever with MTGA being the main way to play non-commander formats, which I think is fair enough. Also the example of phasing isn't quite right because they're now doing 'phases out' and 'phases in' as a regular core mechanic, they're not doing actual phasing.

As for vampires and werewolves doing nothing particularly cool or original, I agree with you. Blood is a new mechanic but it's too similar to previous artifact tokens, which they're doing too much now.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2021 7:38 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 7772
neru wrote:
They were never going to put partner with on premier set cards. It both combines Commander-specific text and they just don't like tutoring effects now. Olivia with "Draw Edgar" and Edgar with "Draw Olivia" would make have forced them to make the base card weaker.

AzureShade wrote:
In similar, if differing, views; my wife is most put out that we got a wedding ring card but not a wedding dress card. Apparently you don't make a set that's wedding-based and not showcase that dress.

Bride's Gown?
Oh, the ring was in the commander set so we looked there for the dress. I guess my wife can be happy then. Nevermind.

_________________
magicpablo666 wrote:
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in an thread with GM_Champion" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against AzureShade when card design is on the line!"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 7:29 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 09, 2013
Posts: 7128
Location: Mountain View
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him
I will admit that I'm less excited about VOW than most recent sets, but I still think it'll be fun to play. It feels very much like a classic block's second set, where it's building on MID's mechanics more than anything else.

Honestly, Blood is thing I'm most excited about here. I agree that the flavor isn't good, but in my experience with it so far, it's a powerful way to smooth out draws. It reminds me of GRN's Dimir decks that just never had a bad draw because they were surveilling so much. Plus, the use of it as a resource should lead to interesting situations.

Cleave is not meant to tie into any theme. A lot of sets have a flavorless mechanic thrown in, and this one is at least pretty unique in terms of execution.

I also like the evolution of disturb, and the way they've built it into a whole enchantment subtheme.

Honestly, if you're looking for revolutionary new stories and mechanics, it's better to just wait for a non-return set. Most return sets are primarily about giving players more of what they liked before, and I don't think that's a bad thing in moderation.

_________________
0x10


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 8:53 pm 
Offline
Conqueror of Eldangard
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 13073
Location: Kamloops, BC
Identity: Male
Blood tokens were a real flavor mismatch. If blood tokens prove to be a gameplay hit will they bring them back under a new name? Feels like a sloppy move.

Cleave is another terrible name. Something like Addendum, Fine Print or really most things would work better than "Cleave".

_________________
Cato wrote:
CotW is a method for ranking cards in increasing order of printability.

*"To YMTC it up" means to design cards that have value mostly from a design perspective. i.e. you would put them in a case under glass in your living room and visitors could remark upon the wonderful design principles, with nobody ever worring if the cards are annoying/pointless/confusing in actual play

TPrizesW
TPortfolioW


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 8:35 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 13, 2015
Posts: 6421
Blood rummaging would not be the first thing I thought of, but drinking blood for a rush of euphoria or excitement is a common theme on Innistrad, like Neonate's Rush in the previous set. I don't think it needed to be the most on-point thing; it needed to be a weak token to be used by the vampire cards as a resource.

The idea that Blood is a very specific flavor so it's more difficult to reuse is not a compelling issue for me. I feel like players in general weirdly want more cards with every mechanic. If it doesn't hurt to leave room for future flexibility, then sure, but it makes sense to focus on making the mechanic work for where we know it will be (here) rather than focusing on making it work for the theoretical future.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 11:40 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 856
Location: Indy
No need, its ****.

What you described has been every set since Throne.

_________________
Yuri is best girl!


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 7:58 pm 
Offline
YMtC Pro Tour Champion
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 12772
I like cleave. It's clever and has a lot of design space. The name I maybe like less, but whatever. I enjoy at least a couple of the cards, mostly the weird ones like Toxrill that have nothing to do with the wedding. Runo's summon cthulhu is neat. That said, the set overall does feel very shallow. I have to remind myself that there really is THAT MUCH filler that this thing is a large set and not one of the cruddy little third sets that used to be the dumping ground for excessive gimmicks and forgettable themes (see particularly: Scourge and Alara Reborn)

_________________
"Enjoy your screams, Sarpadia - they will soon be muffled beneath snow and ice."

I have a blog. I review anime, and sometimes related media, with an analytical focus.

I'm a (self) published author now! You can find my first book, The Accursed, on Amazon as an ebook or a paperback!


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 8:03 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 13644
Identity: Chaoslight
Preferred Pronoun Set: She
Show me a cleave card that wouldnt look better as a kicker cost or a split spell of some sort

_________________
altimis wrote:
I never take anytihng Lily says seriously, except for when I take it personally. Then it's personal.
WotC_Ethan wrote:
People, buy more stuff.
#WotCstaff
Spoiler

Image


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 9:28 pm 
Offline
Conqueror of Eldangard
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 13073
Location: Kamloops, BC
Identity: Male
I don;t know that cleave makes anything new mechanically possible, but the terminology can save a lot of words on cards, which I suppose does make the previously unprintable possible.
It's the formatting that disappoints me. I just mentally filter out the square brackets whenever I read a cleave card. Maybe if it were underlined or something? Would curly brackets stand out more? A font change? I dunno. Sadly, italics already has a function.

_________________
Cato wrote:
CotW is a method for ranking cards in increasing order of printability.

*"To YMTC it up" means to design cards that have value mostly from a design perspective. i.e. you would put them in a case under glass in your living room and visitors could remark upon the wonderful design principles, with nobody ever worring if the cards are annoying/pointless/confusing in actual play

TPrizesW
TPortfolioW


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Sat Nov 13, 2021 9:55 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 05, 2014
Posts: 1794
Identity: Male
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him/his/his/himself
I feel like folks are confusing "Partner" and "Partner with"; the latter was in Battle Bond and allowed players to use two specific cards together like Rowan Kenrith and Will Kenrith whereas the former is an exclusively Commander mechanic that allows you to use two commanders at once. Why they didn't use different names for different mechanics, I have no idea, but the Partner with does seem like it would match the premise.

_________________
Image


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Sat Nov 13, 2021 1:53 pm 
Offline
Conqueror of Eldangard
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 13073
Location: Kamloops, BC
Identity: Male
I feel like folks are confusing "Partner" and "Partner with"... Why they didn't use different names for different mechanics, I have no idea...

God yes.

_________________
Cato wrote:
CotW is a method for ranking cards in increasing order of printability.

*"To YMTC it up" means to design cards that have value mostly from a design perspective. i.e. you would put them in a case under glass in your living room and visitors could remark upon the wonderful design principles, with nobody ever worring if the cards are annoying/pointless/confusing in actual play

TPrizesW
TPortfolioW


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 12:12 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mar 18, 2016
Posts: 3942
Location: Anyway the wind blows
Identity: doesnt really matter
Preferred Pronoun Set: to me
TPmanW wrote:
Cleave is another terrible name. Something like Addendum, Fine Print or really most things would work better than "Cleave".


It’s a meta name, right? Breaking the 4th wall. You’re cleaving the text on the card when you pay it’s cost

_________________
Duels Decklists, updated 10/03/19


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 12:43 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: May 08, 2020
Posts: 146
Preferred Pronoun Set: He/Him
Why they didn't use different names for different mechanics, I have no idea, but the Partner with does seem like it would match the premise.


Cause its a sub-mechanic of normal partner, same with mutikicker, the different version of cycle, ect.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 7:08 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 01, 2015
Posts: 900
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him
Most of the text in "Partner with" is about commander. Also if you want to put reminder text on the card it takes of half the textbox just covering the second ability.
Quote:
702.124f “Partner with [name]” is a variant of the partner ability. “Partner with [name]” represents two abilities. One is a static ability that modifies the rules for deck construction. Rather than a single legendary creature card, you may designate two legendary creature cards as your commander if each has a “partner with [name]” ability with the other’s name. You can’t designate two legendary cards as your commander if one has a “partner with [name]” ability and the other isn’t the named card. The other ability represented by “partner with [name]” is a triggered ability that means “When this permanent enters the battlefield, target player may search their library for a card named [name], reveal it, put it into their hand, then shuffle their library.”


Clearly cleave should have been called "Screw the rules, I have mana!"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Sell me VOW?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 11:21 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mar 18, 2016
Posts: 3942
Location: Anyway the wind blows
Identity: doesnt really matter
Preferred Pronoun Set: to me
I suspect the reason cleave causes dissonance to me is that it sounds like a character keyword (a la 1st strike) while being a player ability. Guessing if they called it “redact” I wouldn’t have given it a second thought.

_________________
Duels Decklists, updated 10/03/19


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group