It is currently Wed Apr 24, 2019 3:17 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 410 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:37 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 3694
Location: somewhere btwn Achilles and the tortoise
Preferred Pronoun Set:
Shifty (Damage this deals to creatures is lethal if it's greater than or equal to that creature's power.)

Globulous Blob
Creature — Beeble (C)
Shifty
No one could tell quite what it was, exactly.
1/1

Clever Knave
Creature — Human Rogue (U)
First strike, shifty
"You could challenge me to a battle of wits instead, but I think you'd find that my tongue is as sharp as my blade."
2/1

so the Globulous Blob would trade with a Looming Altisaur, and you'd have to be at least a 3/3 to win out against the Clever Knave.

downside is that it's pretty much just a strictly-worse deathtouch, but then again I suppose reach is just a strictly worse flying.

_________________
The stars are about to align...


Last edited by ParadOxymoron on Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:53 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 3015
I had to read that 3 times to understand. Don't think it's a good one. What about something that shows blue/red's mutability?

Apprentice (When this creature attacks or blocks, choose up to one keyword on another creature you control. This creature has that keyword until end of combat.)

_________________
Quote:
"If you refuse to use rock, you will never beat scissors." — Galef, Dakka Dakka Forums


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:30 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 3694
Location: somewhere btwn Achilles and the tortoise
Preferred Pronoun Set:
"keyword" doesn't actually mean anything in magic rules. you have to spell it out.

cleaned up the wording on mine a bit.

_________________
The stars are about to align...


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:33 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 3694
Location: somewhere btwn Achilles and the tortoise
Preferred Pronoun Set:
Here are the original restrictions as dictated by Rush four and a half years ago:

- The keyword probably doesn't want to be evasive. Blue already has flying and a horde of unblockable creatures; red already has intimidate and its own horde of unblockable creatures. You could keyword some sort of evasion that they've shared, but it really doesn't open things up that much.
- It wants to be relatively simple, of course.
- It can't use variables. That's not evergreen.
- Evergreen keywords tend to change the fundamentals of how things worked. Creatures tap to attack... unless they have vigilance. Creatures can't attack the turn they arrive... unless they have haste. The keyword we're looking for is likely to interact with something fundamental in the way creatures interact.
- It should be a static, non-stackable ability. This isn't a written rule, but all 15 of the current evergreen keyword abilities are static abilities. Lifelink and deathtouch at one time weren't, but they actively found a way to update this, which is some of the evidence I'm basing this claim on. So, no triggered or activated abilities.

Since then, I've come to think that Dimir needs this more than Izzet. In the set for which Rush posed this question, if I'm recalling it correctly, he put defender in and flying in , but defender is hard to work with (being a drawback), and when I think of flying, I don't think black.

As for UR, I think that besides the fact that it's evasive, my Stealth keyword may be the best answer that exists. Still, it's a design problem whose solution I'll probably never feel satisfied with.

(There's also razorborne's solution of calling menace "elude" and putting it in Izzet, leaving Jund with trample and haste, which I think would have worked out perfectly if they didn't go on to keyword it as something very non-blue in flavor.)

My most baseline goals when designing an evergreen creature keyword is:

• Can a CMC 1 1/1 common creature have it?

• Can a CMC 1 common Aura grant it?

• Can a "lord" grant it to everything you control, while still having it make sense and feel cool without being overly complex?

My most recent attempt at the top of the page doesn't pass this test, but Stealth does. (So do all the existing evergreens except double strike, but that's really just first strike with French dressing. Notably, prowess doesn't pass the third test because it was too many triggers for MTGO to handle seamlessly, which I think is one of the reasons why it was cut.)

I think it's a simple enough trio of goalpoasts to aim for. Then again, sometimes designing something simple is the hardest challenge of all…

_________________
The stars are about to align...


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:18 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Feb 21, 2014
Posts: 2275
defender is a horrible evergreen keyword btw

it should be deciduous and only appear when the flavor dictates it or the mechanical design specifically requires it (like a large blue creature with defender)

------------------------------------------------------

first of all, defender is a drawback keyword, while the rest of the evergreen keywords are advantages

sure there are ways that you can build so that defender is less of a drawback, but the fact of the matter is still that having your color's primary keyword be something negative feels really bad

secondly, much of the time defender is mechanically irrelevant

gameplay-wise, what is the difference between an 0/4 with defender and an 0/4 without defender?

they're literally the same card in 99% of scenarios

and in the rare circumstance in which your player recognizes that it's correct to attack with their 0/4, i feel like it would be better to give them the option of doing so: it doesn't cost the designer anything to remove defender from their creature that wasn't going to attack much in the first place, and the player can feel clever about themselves when they identify the situation in which they should attack, which is a good thing from a design perspective

defender on a wall for flavor reasons is fine

but would Birds of Paradise be a better card with defender? definitely not

_________________
Dwarven Vow #7


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:33 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Feb 21, 2014
Posts: 2275
Also the current state of evergreen color pairs is a bit weird given recent developments.

Haste has been phased out of Black and pushed more towards Green's color pie. This makes Haste and Trample both keywords that are primarily Red and Green.

Black is getting a lot more Flash now, making the keyword now Blue/Black/Green.

_________________
Dwarven Vow #7


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 4:47 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 01, 2016
Posts: 849
<mechanic name> (Tapped creatures can block this creature. This creature can't be blocked by untapped creatures.)

Forces the opponent to attack in some cases if they want to block. Red. Also useful in the early game which red would like.

Is tricky. Blue.

Makes walls less useful against it.

Masako the Humorless

<Cardname>
Instant
Target creature gains <%> until end of turn. (Tapped creatures can block it. It can't blocked by untapped creatures.)

Use it on your own creature to make it harder to block or on an opponent's creature when they attack thinking they're safe.

_________________
gd1's homebrew card repository thread


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:08 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 24, 2013
Posts: 6435
My feedback on Rush's rules / points to consider -

- Rush was making a set that had additional restrictions (especially the non stackable thing), which we don't have to worry about any more

- Some things have changed since the time of the original post. E.g. Red no longer has intimidate. Menace is not as evasive / not evasive in the same way that intimidate is (like you can't use it to get through on a clogged board). I don't think there's anything wrong with the new mechanic being a kind of evasion

- Evergreen mechanics can use variables. Scry is evergreen, and Rampage used to be. Variables are not a big deal either way. Prowess could have used a variable if they wanted to make more cards that got +2/+2 when you cast a spell, but they decided to just spell that out. On the flip side, Afterlife could have not used a variable and you could just write it twice on the cards you wanted to make two spirits if there weren't as many of them

- Why do we want an evergreen mechanic for each color pair, apart from satisfying designers? The main uses for it are in cycles and something to put on hybrid creatures. It doesn't necessarily have to be something you use in high volume (see double strike for example)

- I'm pretty happy with black getting green's flash while green got black's haste, it makes more sense for the strategies of both colors. This also conveniently means UB is settled now and doesn't have to fight WU for flying. It also means that RG has three overlapping mechanics now (trample, reach, haste), but none of them can be ported to UR


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 8:01 pm 
Offline
YMtC Champ '12
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 3829
Location: Orange County, California
Flopfoot wrote:
Rush was making a set that had additional restrictions (especially the non stackable thing), which we don't have to worry about any more

While I came up with the rules examining evergreens for my set, I didn't create them because of my set. They just seemed to be the building blocks of good evergreen, and I believe they still are. The evergreen creature keywords all avoid stacking, save for prowess. But as we've seen, prowess is all but gone, and a lot of that has to do with it being a stackable ability.

Flopfoot wrote:
Some things have changed since the time of the original post. E.g. Red no longer has intimidate. Menace is not as evasive / not evasive in the same way that intimidate is (like you can't use it to get through on a clogged board). I don't think there's anything wrong with the new mechanic being a kind of evasion

From red's end of the spectrum, I agree. But the problem was always from blue's end. Flying is so good at setting the standard for evasion that there's no need to muddy blue by giving it yet another way to avoid combat, even if that is a very blue thing. I actually like menace as a blue/red crossover mechanic, but R&D has other ideas. I didn't even come up with this one--MaRo said it.

Flopfoot wrote:
Evergreen mechanics can use variables. Scry is evergreen, and Rampage used to be. Variables are not a big deal either way. Prowess could have used a variable if they wanted to make more cards that got +2/+2 when you cast a spell, but they decided to just spell that out. On the flip side, Afterlife could have not used a variable and you could just write it twice on the cards you wanted to make two spirits if there weren't as many of them

Variables aren't a huge deal, but there are reasons you don't see them among the evergreens: (1) the gameplay is more complicated, (2) variables change less about creature fundamentals than evergreens do, and (3) they're less focused overall. Scry is a noncreature keyword, and a keyword action at that, so it's not really relevant to this conversation. Rampage wasn't ever really evergreen; it was on 14 cards total across 4 sets, all before there much idea of what an evergreen keyword was. It was the first "new" keyword introduced (I think... I'm not counting bands with...) and was promptly forgotten once block design became a thing.

Flopfoot wrote:
Why do we want an evergreen mechanic for each color pair, apart from satisfying designers? The main uses for it are in cycles and something to put on hybrid creatures. It doesn't necessarily have to be something you use in high volume (see double strike for example)

We don't. I agree. MaRo wants one because it's a useful tool for Magic set designs to have, but they've clearly done fine making sets without one.

Flopfoot wrote:
I'm pretty happy with black getting green's flash while green got black's haste, it makes more sense for the strategies of both colors. This also conveniently means UB is settled now and doesn't have to fight WU for flying. It also means that RG has three overlapping mechanics now (trample, reach, haste), but none of them can be ported to UR

Flash is an oddball as far as keywords go. MaRo has repeatedly mentioned wishing it were a supertype, and I agree. It's not really a creature keyword as much as a spell keyword. It's got great gameplay, but it also doesn't do much on auras and sorceries. I don't really know where I want it color-wise. I was always fine with it in blue-white; it made sense to me. Green made sense out of necessity. Black? I don't really know why black wants it.

_________________
Dies to Removal | Karados


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:57 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 848
Giving black flash helps push blue black control as a core limited archetype, distinguished from blue white skies. This statement has a lot of slop in it, but hopefully you see what I'm saying.

Since limited is often so much about creatures, the shared keyword for each color pair can serve as a vague foundation for how that pair operates in limited, especially when that keyword appears in larger volumes.

I'm not terribly invested in the above statements.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 10:09 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 24, 2013
Posts: 6435
Even if instant was a supertype, instant creatures could still be primary in some colors and tertiary in others. I don't know what you mean about auras, they're a perfect use-case for flash - start off as a combat trick, but then stay on as a persistent buff.

I don't think green ever really needed it. It seemed more like a PR thing to say look green can be tricky too. Green only needs removal against evasive creatures, which flash didn't do unless it had reach as well. Green doesn't have a lot of other instants so that it wants to keep mana open and only decide what to cast at the end of the opponent's turn. The only thing green could use flash for was surprise attackers, but haste does this better because green has mana ramp - it doesn't make sense to ramp up to a big creature then wait till the end of the opponent's turn to cast it unexpectedly, compared to being able to attack earlier.

For black, they have been reducing the amount and the power of its removal. So flash encourages black to use more creatures in the deck, while still being able to count them as removal spells. If black has haste and it goes for pure aggression, what makes black different from red? But if black is using flash to get around sorcery speed removal spells, then that makes it more of an aggro-control deck.

White doesn't need it since white is already the color of defensive combat tricks like Righteousness. White's strategy is to surprise you with a creature that it already had, but that you thought was too small to block you. We don't want to put all the defensive effects into one color and make you feel like you're free to attack against anyone else. While if white wanted to surprise you with damage it has mass pump effects, even Glorious Anthem cast on your own turn can kill an opponent who wasn't expecting to die.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 11:27 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 01, 2016
Posts: 849
Did you like bizarre Rush_Clasic?

Bizarre (Tapped creatures can block this creature. This creature can't blocked by untapped creatures.)

_________________
gd1's homebrew card repository thread


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 4:20 am 
Offline
YMtC Champ '12
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 3829
Location: Orange County, California
Giving black flash helps push blue black control as a core limited archetype, distinguished from blue white skies. This statement has a lot of slop in it, but hopefully you see what I'm saying.

I guess? Did black need flash to make its creatures better at controlling the game? Deathtouch does a good job at that, and lifelink pushes a good angle on that as well. I'm not opposed to it, but I don't feel much reason to like it either.

Flopfoot wrote:
Even if instant was a supertype, instant creatures could still be primary in some colors and tertiary in others. I don't know what you mean about auras, they're a perfect use-case for flash - start off as a combat trick, but then stay on as a persistent buff.

Sorry, I was very unclear on this point. What I meant is that granting a creature an evergreen keyword is a useful, constantly used tool. Auras and equipment and instants and sorceries have all given creatures haste and vigilance and flying over and over and over. But granting a creature flash is more difficult, something they've rarely done outside of rare. That's because the game cares so much more about what creatures are doing on the battlefield than it cares about how they got there. This gives flash a weak-point the other evergreens don't have. That's all I was really trying to say. You won't see many auras that say "Enchanted creature has flash."

Flopfoot wrote:
I don't think green ever really needed it. It seemed more like a PR thing to say look green can be tricky too. Green only needs removal against evasive creatures, which flash didn't do unless it had reach as well. Green doesn't have a lot of other instants so that it wants to keep mana open and only decide what to cast at the end of the opponent's turn. The only thing green could use flash for was surprise attackers, but haste does this better because green has mana ramp - it doesn't make sense to ramp up to a big creature then wait till the end of the opponent's turn to cast it unexpectedly, compared to being able to attack earlier.

I like this explanation. I think I'm convinced by it. Save for the PR thing. I think green got flash to facilitate some gameplay needs and because it worked within the framework of "Surprise! I was hunting you the whole time!"

Flopfoot wrote:
For black, they have been reducing the amount and the power of its removal. So flash encourages black to use more creatures in the deck, while still being able to count them as removal spells. If black has haste and it goes for pure aggression, what makes black different from red? But if black is using flash to get around sorcery speed removal spells, then that makes it more of an aggro-control deck.

What makes it different from red is its ability to control other aspects of the game, such as through discard. Also, it's ability to gain life. Also, deathtouch. But I get your point.

Flopfoot wrote:
White doesn't need it since white is already the color of defensive combat tricks like Righteousness. White's strategy is to surprise you with a creature that it already had, but that you thought was too small to block you. We don't want to put all the defensive effects into one color and make you feel like you're free to attack against anyone else. While if white wanted to surprise you with damage it has mass pump effects, even Glorious Anthem cast on your own turn can kill an opponent who wasn't expecting to die.

Oh, I don't think defensive a capabilities should be absent in some colors. I just already think black has them.

gd1w wrote:
Did you like bizarre Rush_Clasic?

Bizarre (Tapped creatures can block this creature. This creature can't be blocked by untapped creatures.)

It's an evasion ability, so it doesn't really fit the niche that well. It's a fine ability that encourages attacking, which I like. It's also been recommended a bunch of times. I don't know how to feel about it anymore. I used to like it, but I'm less convinced these days. It's less of a benefit and more of an alternate reality.

_________________
Dies to Removal | Karados


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:10 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 3408
Fire Ring charger :ur::ur:
Creature-Elemental (C)

Stance(When cardname attacks or blocks, you might have it get -1/+1 or +1/-1 until end of turn).

2/2( or maybe 2/2)


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:47 am 
Offline
YMtC Idol Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sep 27, 2013
Posts: 492
Preferred Pronoun Set: she/her/hers
Written in the Stars -
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant creature.
Enchanted creature has fateshield. (Excess damage dealt to this creature is not lethal)
Quote:
704.5g If a creature without fateshield has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.
704.5gg If a creature with fateshield has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.

_________________
From nothing came posts.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:27 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 587
Location: Universe Beta
Precise Striker |
Creature - Human Warrior
Precise (You may distribute combat damage dealt by this creature among any number of creatures blocking it).
3/2


Idk if this is significantly different from ordering blockers tbh.

Perhaps;

Precise Striker |
Creature - Human Warrior
Precise (You may distribute combat damage dealt by this creature among any number of blocking creatures).
3/2

_________________
Quisque comodeus est


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 5:22 am 
Offline
YMtC Champ '12
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 3829
Location: Orange County, California
Antagonize (You or a planeswalker you control must be attacked each turn if able. Each antagonizer requires a separate attacker.)

702.200. Antagonize

702.200a Antagonize is a static ability. "Antagonize" means "During each opponent's turn, that player must attack you or a planeswalker you control with a creature for each permanent you control with antagonize."

702.200b Multiple instances of antagonize on a permanent are redundant.

702.200c Antagonize can't force a creature to attack that otherwise couldn't. (Example: Wall of Wood is a creature with defender, and thus can't attack. A creature with antagonize doesn't allow Wall of Wood to attack.)


Antagonize is an ability that combines red's desire to remove blockers with blue's ability to control attacks. Both colors have a history of compelling the opposition into attacking, and both get varied benefits from the maneuver. It hits a different part of creature interaction than red and blue's existing keywords, which adds some variety to the game. There are questions about how useful this ability is, so let's look at some designs.

Crossroad Challenger
Creature - Human Knight (C)
First strike, antagonize
2/2

Red has always been the weakest defensive color. Antagonize gives it a flavorful way to reinvent that notion. Combined with its only other defensive ability, antagonize can force the opponent into some truly awkward spots.

Alluring Structure
Creature - Wall (C)
Defender, antagonize
0/5

Blue has a lot of tricks to play on unwitting opponents. Leaving your mana up just to have your opponent play smart and not walk into your traps ruins all your blue fun. Perhaps encouraging the opponent take a step forward is just what you need.

Teasing Goblin
Creature - Goblin Warrior (U)
Haste, antagonize
2/1

Why would haste and antagonize work together? Glad you asked. People think they can race red all the time. That is, until they start laying down hastey threats. Should your opponent get overaggressive, just slap this critter down, get in for some surprise damage, and watch as they helplessly swing at you again next turn through no plan of their own.

Jellyfish of Doom
Creature - Jellywish (U)
Antagonize
Whenever Jellyfish of Doom deals combat damage to a creature, tap that creature. It doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step.
1/4

Combat damage triggers are great, but sometimes you just sit around never getting to use them. Not anymore! Let this jellyfish trick your opponent into a long session of the 90 degree blues.



You might be asking at this point "Why not just 'You and/or a planeswalker you control must be attacked each turn if able'?" The biggest reason is that it wouldn't increase as you played more creatures with antagonize. That version might be interesting, but it plays oddly. People expect each of their antagonizers to lure a creature. I don't wanna fight that. "Okay," you might say, "but why make each copy of the keyword per creature redundant?" Again, I believe players will naturally think that their creatures are doing the antagonizing and use them to count. Multiple instances on a creature don't make that much sense anyway; you usually can't use a creature to block more than one attacker. "Fine then," you might conclude. "Isn't this ability sort of unbalanced? Won't it do nothing sometimes and completely wreck opponents other times?" Possibly, but I think a lot of keywords go through that. Like all keywords, it would need to be monitored for fairness. But I think it's a solid (or at least interesting) answer to the blue/red evergreen conundrum, at least, as I've laid it out. Hopefully people agree.

_________________
Dies to Removal | Karados


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:18 am 
Offline
YMtC Idol Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sep 27, 2013
Posts: 492
Preferred Pronoun Set: she/her/hers
I like the mechanic and I like the detailed explanation even more.

_________________
From nothing came posts.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:51 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 28, 2016
Posts: 2698
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him/his/his/himself
Antagonize is SICK.

We need more evegreen mechanic that scale well with toughness. I like Antagonize about as much as Prowess. Still think they have ditched Prowess too fast, but whatever.

It may be more powerful than you give it credit for though. I think it's frimly in a Flying/Hexproof power tier. Maybe even in Indestructible/Double Strike tier.

_________________
nice quotes from this forum

War of the spark will have so many Planeswalkers, they won't even be planeswalking anymore.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 3:42 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: May 29, 2017
Posts: 306
Preferred Pronoun Set: he
Antagonise is very close to provoke for most of those creatures.

Forget it, it's not. But it's close enough that provoke could be thought of as a competitor.

EDIT: in response to my earlier suggestion of provoke, Rush wrote:

Quote:
Blue aims to avoid combat, really. It occasionally gets cards like Alluring Siren , but that's not even guaranteeing a creature clash


So it's odd that his blue examples of antagonise seem to encourage creature clashes.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 410 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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