miscellaneous card design discussion thread
Community Rules
‖ Forum rules
-
folding_music glitter pen on my mana crypt
- Posts: 2236
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: they / them
Drop individual custom cards here, or discuss how you'd re-do cards, or sets, or abilities from the past, or drop homebrew precons, or talk about your own priorities when you design a card, or whatever you'd like to post that tangentially touches on card design or its philosophy! For when you don't wanna start a thread or for when you have a rant that doesn't really belong anywhere. <3
here's a topic to begin with: there are so many single-set mechanics like Outlast, Cipher and Surge (plus many more) which barely get explored, and the few cards they do appear on don't really do justice to the potential of the ability. Is that normal or just a waste of design space; which mechanics would you bring back, which should be adapted into something new and which should be abandoned? If you're a set designer, which of them do you fancy stealing for your own designs?
here's a topic to begin with: there are so many single-set mechanics like Outlast, Cipher and Surge (plus many more) which barely get explored, and the few cards they do appear on don't really do justice to the potential of the ability. Is that normal or just a waste of design space; which mechanics would you bring back, which should be adapted into something new and which should be abandoned? If you're a set designer, which of them do you fancy stealing for your own designs?
-
Krishnath Mechanical Dragon
- Posts: 3565
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
- Location: A cave somewhere in Scandinavia
I think the reason they do so is because of the potential of bringing back the mechanics if they show themselves to be popular, thus leaving themselves some design potential for the mechanics untapped so they have something new to bring to the table when they do bring them back. But the thing is, even if the mechanic shows itself to be very popular, it is no guarantee that it will get used again. And sometimes they don't bring them back because they turn out to be problematic or, as in the case with Cipher/Haunt can cause memory issues.
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
-
- Posts: 546
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
Also a bunch of times people will say to Maro 'Why don't you do more with X mechanic?' and he's like 'Yeah turns out, not as much design space as it looks like there is.'.
My pet peeve is when you're bouncing an idea around in your head and just can't translate normal language into Magic-ese concisely enough to make something that would actually be coherent enough to be a card. Especially when you know it's doable, but just can't see how to get there.
My main priority when designing is to make something that reads as an actual Magic card. I'll stay on-pie if I can, but I'm not fussed about the odd break here and there, especially in the free-flowing contest threads. Obviously I'm a lot more conservative in MCC designs. Also, and I know it'd be a sin if I actually worked for Wizards, I'm usually pretty likely to design a card that I'd play in a deck, usually because I'm thinking of holes that I'd like to plug in my own decks.
To loop back round, I kind of want to see the world where Outlast was at instant speed, just to see if it does actually improve it or if it's just the same lines of play repeatedly.
Dragonlover
My pet peeve is when you're bouncing an idea around in your head and just can't translate normal language into Magic-ese concisely enough to make something that would actually be coherent enough to be a card. Especially when you know it's doable, but just can't see how to get there.
My main priority when designing is to make something that reads as an actual Magic card. I'll stay on-pie if I can, but I'm not fussed about the odd break here and there, especially in the free-flowing contest threads. Obviously I'm a lot more conservative in MCC designs. Also, and I know it'd be a sin if I actually worked for Wizards, I'm usually pretty likely to design a card that I'd play in a deck, usually because I'm thinking of holes that I'd like to plug in my own decks.
To loop back round, I kind of want to see the world where Outlast was at instant speed, just to see if it does actually improve it or if it's just the same lines of play repeatedly.
Dragonlover
All my decks are here
-
Krishnath Mechanical Dragon
- Posts: 3565
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
- Location: A cave somewhere in Scandinavia
If I recall correctly, the reason that Outlast is sorcery speed is because it led to unfun gameplay if you could do it in response to your opponent targeting your creature with for example a Magma Spray or the like. It is like that with a lot of sorcery speed effects from keywords. This incidentally is also why Morph doesn't use the stack and can't be responded to, because it led to unfun gameplay if your opponent could respond to you unmorphing a creature with a Lightning Bolt or Shock.Dragonlover wrote: ↑4 years agoAlso a bunch of times people will say to Maro 'Why don't you do more with X mechanic?' and he's like 'Yeah turns out, not as much design space as it looks like there is.'.
My pet peeve is when you're bouncing an idea around in your head and just can't translate normal language into Magic-ese concisely enough to make something that would actually be coherent enough to be a card. Especially when you know it's doable, but just can't see how to get there.
My main priority when designing is to make something that reads as an actual Magic card. I'll stay on-pie if I can, but I'm not fussed about the odd break here and there, especially in the free-flowing contest threads. Obviously I'm a lot more conservative in MCC designs. Also, and I know it'd be a sin if I actually worked for Wizards, I'm usually pretty likely to design a card that I'd play in a deck, usually because I'm thinking of holes that I'd like to plug in my own decks.
To loop back round, I kind of want to see the world where Outlast was at instant speed, just to see if it does actually improve it or if it's just the same lines of play repeatedly.
Dragonlover
That said, there are still a lot of mechanics that still have a lot of "gas" in them that WotC have been unwilling to explore properly (like the Snow supertype and Snow mana), particularly in combination with other mechanics (Using snow as an example, combining it with things like buyback, echo, flashback, kicker, madness, morph, and unearth for example).
And then there are the mechanics that didn't have much gas to begin with because they are very limited. And some, are simply unfun (such as inspired and sweep), or lead to degenerate states (fateseal).
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
-
- Posts: 546
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
I think snow will get it's proper showcase soon personally. They've gotta hit that Viking world up eventually, right?
What's your design thing you wish you could do? For me, I wish my brain trended a bit more to coherent groups of cards. I'm pretty sure I'll never design a set off my own back, but random one offs? Sure, all damn day!
Dragonlover
What's your design thing you wish you could do? For me, I wish my brain trended a bit more to coherent groups of cards. I'm pretty sure I'll never design a set off my own back, but random one offs? Sure, all damn day!
Dragonlover
All my decks are here
-
Krishnath Mechanical Dragon
- Posts: 3565
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
- Location: A cave somewhere in Scandinavia
I wish I could do more non-creature spells. Creatures are just so much easier to design than noncreatures. I've been getting better at noncreatures though, by making charms and other spells based on characters. It is good training.Dragonlover wrote: ↑4 years agoI think snow will get it's proper showcase soon personally. They've gotta hit that Viking world up eventually, right?
What's your design thing you wish you could do? For me, I wish my brain trended a bit more to coherent groups of cards. I'm pretty sure I'll never design a set off my own back, but random one offs? Sure, all damn day!
Dragonlover
I also wish I was better at coming up with mechanics that doesn't feel derivative.
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
MaRo hits on how he feels like that because so many abilities are "just kicker." I like to convey flavor mechanically if possible instead of just mechanics a set needs.Krishnath wrote: ↑4 years agoI wish I could do more non-creature spells. Creatures are just so much easier to design than noncreatures. I've been getting better at noncreatures though, by making charms and other spells based on characters. It is good training.
I also wish I was better at coming up with mechanics that doesn't feel derivative.
-
JovialJovian Captain, I object!
- Posts: 2254
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
This is nice, I often have single card ideas, but don't really want to gum up the boards with them.
Also, no cards here yet, shall I be the first?
Chandra, Blazing Star
Legendary Planeswalker - Chandra
+2: ~ deals 1 damage to each player and each non-Chandra planeswalker. Add for each damage dealt this way.
-2: Exile the top two cards of your library. Until the end of your next turn, you may play those cards.
-9: You get an emblem with "Whenever a non-emblem source deals damage, this emblem deals that much damage to any target."
4
The + is comparable to Chandra, Bold Pyromancer, it will typically give .
Key difference is the -2, which is the stronger version of the abilities from Chandra, Torch of Defiance and Chandra, Pyromaster, allowing you to use her mana ability to cast the cards even the following turn.
The ult is, dare I say, the ultimate form of Furnace of Rath. All damage is doubled, but you gain full control over where the doubled half of the damage is directed. It would be hard to lose after achieving that ult, but not impossible, which is the mark of a good ult in my opinion.
Also, no cards here yet, shall I be the first?
Chandra, Blazing Star
Legendary Planeswalker - Chandra
+2: ~ deals 1 damage to each player and each non-Chandra planeswalker. Add for each damage dealt this way.
-2: Exile the top two cards of your library. Until the end of your next turn, you may play those cards.
-9: You get an emblem with "Whenever a non-emblem source deals damage, this emblem deals that much damage to any target."
4
The + is comparable to Chandra, Bold Pyromancer, it will typically give .
Key difference is the -2, which is the stronger version of the abilities from Chandra, Torch of Defiance and Chandra, Pyromaster, allowing you to use her mana ability to cast the cards even the following turn.
The ult is, dare I say, the ultimate form of Furnace of Rath. All damage is doubled, but you gain full control over where the doubled half of the damage is directed. It would be hard to lose after achieving that ult, but not impossible, which is the mark of a good ult in my opinion.
-
void_nothing Look On My Sash...
- Posts: 14927
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
- Location: Tal Terig, Zendikar
I daresay that Chandra is a bit on the underpowered side (at least assuming a Standard-level product and not something meant directly for Commander or Battlebond or the like). Getting to that ultimate is relatively tough given that expensive mana cost, the +2 is situationally good in multiplayer but usually worse than the +1 of the Chandra you cited, and that -2... well, I'd want more out of the middle ability of a six-mana-three-of-it-colored planeswalker.
That ultimate, however, is really and truly badass and over the top and wonderful.
This also reminds me we need a Single Card Critique Thread/One Card at a Time.
That ultimate, however, is really and truly badass and over the top and wonderful.
This also reminds me we need a Single Card Critique Thread/One Card at a Time.
Psst, check the second page of Custom Card Contests & Games! Because of the daily contests, a lot of games fall down to there.
The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)
Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type
The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)
Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type
-
Krishnath Mechanical Dragon
- Posts: 3565
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
- Location: A cave somewhere in Scandinavia
The thing I try using is "Batching" as well as create keywords and keyword actions on permanents. As well as abilities usable from graveyards only. None of that feels like "kicker, but more limited." Still, it is far from easy, and I've only come up with a small handful, only a couple of which I am happy with. With one of them, I felt like a friggin' genius when I came up with it.BOVINE wrote: ↑4 years agoMaRo hits on how he feels like that because so many abilities are "just kicker." I like to convey flavor mechanically if possible instead of just mechanics a set needs.Krishnath wrote: ↑4 years agoI wish I could do more non-creature spells. Creatures are just so much easier to design than noncreatures. I've been getting better at noncreatures though, by making charms and other spells based on characters. It is good training.
I also wish I was better at coming up with mechanics that doesn't feel derivative.
Liturgy of the Rose
Enchantment (Common)
Ceremony ( , tap a creature you control: Put a prayer counter on this permanent. Ceremony only as a sorcery.)
Remove five Prayer counters from Lithurgy of the Rose: Return target creature, enchantment, or land card from your graveyard to your hand.
I designed it because of a set I was working on, the faction, a religious order, needed a mechanic. This was the result. It is designed to primarily go on Artifacts and enchantments, but could easily be put on any type of permanent if costed appropriately. The wording is similar to outlast. The ability can tap creatures you control with summoning sickness as it is part of the activation cost of the ability and not something the creature does inherently. The power level of this particular card is on par with the common quests from Zendikar/Worldwake.
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
-
folding_music glitter pen on my mana crypt
- Posts: 2236
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: they / them
I'm terrible at leaving cards simple - I always add a second ability to a boring card or, if I'm feeling reserved, add like three lines of flavour text instead. If you gave me a thousand attempts at the blank slate I would never design Lightning Bolt.Dragonlover wrote: ↑4 years agoWhat's your design thing you wish you could do? For me, I wish my brain trended a bit more to coherent groups of cards. I'm pretty sure I'll never design a set off my own back, but random one offs? Sure, all damn day!
I wish Enchantment Creatures had more a more coherent place/identity in Magic design, outside of Bestow and Theros in general. You have creatures with effects that make them truly feel like a living enchantment, yet due to the game's history they don't have the Enchantment type. Then you do have cards that follow a genuine "Enchantment+Creature" feel in terms of their effects and gameplay, but there's so few of them that they seem more of a novelty than anything, and just inherently tied to Theros. It's a bit of a mess.
-
void_nothing Look On My Sash...
- Posts: 14927
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
- Location: Tal Terig, Zendikar
The problem is that (nonenchantment) creatures have had global static and triggered abilities forever just like many enchantments do; there's no way to give them mechanical identity in a global sense. because they don't have the general association with something like colorlessness like artifacts, both creature and noncreature, do.
To give credit to the Theros block ones, I think all of them in that set did feel relatively like enchantments with legs (the Gods did this particularly well), or else needed to be enchantments for keyword reasons (the bestow and constellation creatures).
To give credit to the Theros block ones, I think all of them in that set did feel relatively like enchantments with legs (the Gods did this particularly well), or else needed to be enchantments for keyword reasons (the bestow and constellation creatures).
Psst, check the second page of Custom Card Contests & Games! Because of the daily contests, a lot of games fall down to there.
The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)
Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type
The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)
Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type
-
Krishnath Mechanical Dragon
- Posts: 3565
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
- Location: A cave somewhere in Scandinavia
I think the primary reason to make a creature an enchantment creature is for flavor reasons rather than mechanical ones, and I believe this is how WotC approached it in Theros block. Flavored as the creatures associated with the gods, and the gods themselves empowered by the Devotion of the mortals.
A similar reason is the best way to approach them in card creation. Give a flavor reason to why the creature is also an enchantment, and go wild.
A similar reason is the best way to approach them in card creation. Give a flavor reason to why the creature is also an enchantment, and go wild.
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
How would y'all improve/fix Cipher?
Example card:
Scryfall search of Cipher cards
I'm renaming Cipher for a project but want to address the issues, if I can, that MaRo talks about in this Storm Scale article.
Cipher (Then you may exile this spell card encoded on a creature you control. Whenever that creature deals combat damage to a player, its controller may cast a copy of this card without paying its mana cost.)
Example card:
Scryfall search of Cipher cards
I'm renaming Cipher for a project but want to address the issues, if I can, that MaRo talks about in this Storm Scale article.
-
void_nothing Look On My Sash...
- Posts: 14927
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
- Location: Tal Terig, Zendikar
I would just not put it in a Standard-level product. Cipher's cards, due to the complexity, power, and consistency issues inherent in making a strong effect endlessly repeatable, were usually... not good. If you could put it in a higher-complexity product for invested players where everyone playing the cards would understand how to use the keyword at instant speed (i.e. any time in combat before the combat damage step if you want it to trigger that combat), you'd have a better experience.
Or just do Auras that grant saboteur effects. That's basically what the appeal of cipher is, putting your own saboteur triggers on stuff.
Or just do Auras that grant saboteur effects. That's basically what the appeal of cipher is, putting your own saboteur triggers on stuff.
Psst, check the second page of Custom Card Contests & Games! Because of the daily contests, a lot of games fall down to there.
The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)
Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type
The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)
Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type
-
folding_music glitter pen on my mana crypt
- Posts: 2236
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: they / them
I remember being fairly disenchanted with Theros' designs, giggle, cos I saw a big difference between the concepts of "enchantment block" and "enchantment-matters block" at the time. Looking through the sets now there are still a lot of cards that are exciting to me but they're buried between cards that recite every reasonable permutation of core abilities with Bestow or Constellation written on them - it's a really rote set. They've still yet to do an enchantments set which goes off the rails in the same way the artifacts sets do - Mirrodin is always crazy, Aether Revolt is crazy, etc. Urza's block was a long time ago!
there does seem to be a problem with how wotc design enchantments in general, really, cos I notice my recent-ish favourite enchantments (Ghirapur Aether Grid, As Foretold, Crop Sigil, Tectonic Reformation) are mostly enablers for other, better-regarded card types. The whole role of enchantments needs a bit of a reboot.
-----
I think Cipher is a cool ability but every card it appears on is either overcosted or rote. Trait Doctoring is fascinating but a weird relic of the time they were happy printing hosers and weird Balduvian Shaman-esque fluff. there's simply nothing to doctor out there now!
boring but reliable version that you can actually get value out of:
Cipher (Play a copy of this spell for each creature you control that has dealt combat damage to a player this turn.)
eccentric version with even more text:
Cipher (Then exile this spell encoded on a creature you control. Play a copy of the encoded card without paying its mana cost the first time each turn that creature deals combat damage to a player or has one of its abilities activated.)
there does seem to be a problem with how wotc design enchantments in general, really, cos I notice my recent-ish favourite enchantments (Ghirapur Aether Grid, As Foretold, Crop Sigil, Tectonic Reformation) are mostly enablers for other, better-regarded card types. The whole role of enchantments needs a bit of a reboot.
-----
I think Cipher is a cool ability but every card it appears on is either overcosted or rote. Trait Doctoring is fascinating but a weird relic of the time they were happy printing hosers and weird Balduvian Shaman-esque fluff. there's simply nothing to doctor out there now!
boring but reliable version that you can actually get value out of:
Cipher (Play a copy of this spell for each creature you control that has dealt combat damage to a player this turn.)
eccentric version with even more text:
Cipher (Then exile this spell encoded on a creature you control. Play a copy of the encoded card without paying its mana cost the first time each turn that creature deals combat damage to a player or has one of its abilities activated.)
- SecretInfiltrator
- Posts: 5701
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: they / them
- Location: The Shattered Realm
So part of the issue with cipher is the limited design space. Is renamed cipher also a blue-black only mechanic?
"When ~ enters the battlefield or enchanted creature deals combat damage to a player" is such a simple concept and far better implementation of what cipher does in the end. It must have been them just running out of better timely options after experimenting with grind.void_nothing wrote: ↑4 years agoOr just do Auras that grant saboteur effects. That's basically what the appeal of cipher is, putting your own saboteur triggers on stuff.
-
Krishnath Mechanical Dragon
- Posts: 3565
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: he / him
- Location: A cave somewhere in Scandinavia
I think that is exactly what happened. Here's the thing, milling is incredibly fun to play with, but it is inherently unfun to play against, or at least requires an environment where you *want* to get cards into your yard. That means it is only really ever viable as a major mechanic in a set that cares about graveyards, which is not any Ravnica set. It could work well in a set with a lot of flashback, delirium, delve, or other graveyard based mechanics in it, because then it isn't exactly unfun to get hit with "put the top five cards of your library" into your graveyard. I think the set designers realized this when putting together the set, but they were running out of time, so they added a tweaked haunt instead without testing it properly to see if there was a better way to implement it. Cipher feels rushed.SecretInfiltrator wrote: ↑4 years agoSo part of the issue with cipher is the limited design space. Is renamed cipher also a blue-black only mechanic?"When ~ enters the battlefield or enchanted creature deals combat damage to a player" is such a simple concept and far better implementation of what cipher does in the end. It must have been them just running out of better timely options after experimenting with grind.void_nothing wrote: ↑4 years agoOr just do Auras that grant saboteur effects. That's basically what the appeal of cipher is, putting your own saboteur triggers on stuff.
Honestly, so far Surveil has been the best Dimir mechanic, because it feels extremely Dimir, the spy guild.
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.
Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.
It's exactly the solution I'm going to use.SecretInfiltrator wrote: ↑4 years agoSo part of the issue with cipher is the limited design space. Is renamed cipher also a blue-black only mechanic?"When ~ enters the battlefield or enchanted creature deals combat damage to a player" is such a simple concept and far better implementation of what cipher does in the end. It must have been them just running out of better timely options after experimenting with grind.void_nothing wrote: ↑4 years agoOr just do Auras that grant saboteur effects. That's basically what the appeal of cipher is, putting your own saboteur triggers on stuff.
Edit to answer: It was going to be for a Muraganda set and called Instinct(s) – would have been primarily in green and red, secondary in blue and black, tertiary in white. I was going to use it because I'm representing the vanilla creatures matter theme and Cipher keeps the ability off the creature but still deep within (encoded) flavorfully as instincts
I could see a
Predacious (Then you may exile this card. Whenever a creature you control attacks, you may cast a predacious card you own from exile.)
It's easier to trigger, and forms a pool of cards you can cast from a second time when being aggressive. But the spell ain't free so it's easier to develop.
reworked Cipher being something like:Predacious (Then you may exile this card. Whenever a creature you control attacks, you may cast a predacious card you own from exile.)
It's easier to trigger, and forms a pool of cards you can cast from a second time when being aggressive. But the spell ain't free so it's easier to develop.
We'd still probably want combat damage to grant access to the predacious pool though right? That would incentivize combat interaction like Cipher does. Even paying full price to cast spells seems strong for such repeatableness.
-
- Posts: 181
- Joined: 4 years ago
- Pronoun: Unlisted
In general, mechanics work better when there's more levers of balance. The fundamental mistake of Dredge was treating the self-mill as a cost, but in reality a higher Dredge count is a bigger upside, because it gets more stuff in your graveyard to be abused. And the mechanic had no other way of being balanced.
One of the thoughts for fixing Dredge I've considered is a Skaab-flavored mechanic, as Skaabs, as an "archetype", have creature exile as a cost that does what Dredge is supposed to do. The version of it I've actually written before is... More than a little messed up... But here's a more-close-to-dredge version:
Recreate {cost} (When you would draw a card while this card is in the graveyard, you may pay pay the Recreate cost of a card in your hand, then discard that card, to return this card to your hand instead.)
The idea with this mechanic is that it adds a cost to the recovery, which can be just mana or be hardcore loop-breaking fair like exiling stuff in your graveyard, and contains the mechanic to other instances, so it isn't synergising with other graveyard mechanics, save for the natural toolbox effect of filling out your graveyard. You still need to actually have another Recreate card in hand to recur, so all Dredge is doing for you is expanding your options, and it has a cost to getting it back in your hand that includes swapping it for a different one you drew.
Flavor-wise, the Innistrad-intended Blue version is experimental replication as applied to Mad Science, hence the discard. The mechanic could also represent a salvage-heavy Artifact theme, as well as careful preparation and reuse of materials in Black, allowing for it to be reused later without too much flavor baggage in the way of swapping from Mad Science to undead legions, or something else.
Ultimately, each would additionally need to be attached to a loop-breaking effect whenever there's a risk, either from playing the card or as part of the Recreate cost. The biggest factor holding back the mechanic is that cards you want to recur and costs you want to pay are fundamentally separated, so cards that are spectacularly good to replay paradoxically are the best to put efficient Recreate costs on because that cost is what you use when you aren't playing it.
One of the big things is that I can easily see a manifestation of everything Blue does expressed in this mechanic. Have one or two counterspells, suddenly the whole setup can be a control shell, throw in an aggressive creature, you get to have a near-unremovable threat and tools to protect it, have curve-topping shenanigans, you get to replay them until you win and are interested in finding the cheapest Recreate costs to do it with. Aggro, tempo, straight control, draw-go/Delver-style decks, combos, because every card with the keyword can be recurred by every other card with it, it turns into a recursive toolbox that could well play as whatever archetype of Blue most compromises the opponent from one 75-card build. With reliability issues because you have to get both payable Recreate costs and the right card to be recurring to do the task.
And, of course, because you're returning them to hand, you have to pay their normal mana cost on top of the Recreate cost, meaning that it's always more expensive to reuse the same card. On top of the card disadvantage imposed by needing to discard the one you pay the Recreate cost of, which is the biggest suppression to just cycling through powerful stuff, because eventually you run out of payable costs.
One of the thoughts for fixing Dredge I've considered is a Skaab-flavored mechanic, as Skaabs, as an "archetype", have creature exile as a cost that does what Dredge is supposed to do. The version of it I've actually written before is... More than a little messed up... But here's a more-close-to-dredge version:
Recreate {cost} (When you would draw a card while this card is in the graveyard, you may pay pay the Recreate cost of a card in your hand, then discard that card, to return this card to your hand instead.)
The idea with this mechanic is that it adds a cost to the recovery, which can be just mana or be hardcore loop-breaking fair like exiling stuff in your graveyard, and contains the mechanic to other instances, so it isn't synergising with other graveyard mechanics, save for the natural toolbox effect of filling out your graveyard. You still need to actually have another Recreate card in hand to recur, so all Dredge is doing for you is expanding your options, and it has a cost to getting it back in your hand that includes swapping it for a different one you drew.
Flavor-wise, the Innistrad-intended Blue version is experimental replication as applied to Mad Science, hence the discard. The mechanic could also represent a salvage-heavy Artifact theme, as well as careful preparation and reuse of materials in Black, allowing for it to be reused later without too much flavor baggage in the way of swapping from Mad Science to undead legions, or something else.
Ultimately, each would additionally need to be attached to a loop-breaking effect whenever there's a risk, either from playing the card or as part of the Recreate cost. The biggest factor holding back the mechanic is that cards you want to recur and costs you want to pay are fundamentally separated, so cards that are spectacularly good to replay paradoxically are the best to put efficient Recreate costs on because that cost is what you use when you aren't playing it.
One of the big things is that I can easily see a manifestation of everything Blue does expressed in this mechanic. Have one or two counterspells, suddenly the whole setup can be a control shell, throw in an aggressive creature, you get to have a near-unremovable threat and tools to protect it, have curve-topping shenanigans, you get to replay them until you win and are interested in finding the cheapest Recreate costs to do it with. Aggro, tempo, straight control, draw-go/Delver-style decks, combos, because every card with the keyword can be recurred by every other card with it, it turns into a recursive toolbox that could well play as whatever archetype of Blue most compromises the opponent from one 75-card build. With reliability issues because you have to get both payable Recreate costs and the right card to be recurring to do the task.
And, of course, because you're returning them to hand, you have to pay their normal mana cost on top of the Recreate cost, meaning that it's always more expensive to reuse the same card. On top of the card disadvantage imposed by needing to discard the one you pay the Recreate cost of, which is the biggest suppression to just cycling through powerful stuff, because eventually you run out of payable costs.
What are all the color combinations of goad in theory?
How would goad be organized by the Primary, Secondary, Tertiary convention?
So far goad is on 4 cards, 2 cards, 1 card, and 1 card.
Quote from most recent Mechanical Color Pie 2017 article (although not technically goad. Goad isn't mentioned in that article):
How would goad be organized by the Primary, Secondary, Tertiary convention?
So far goad is on 4 cards, 2 cards, 1 card, and 1 card.
Quote from most recent Mechanical Color Pie 2017 article (although not technically goad. Goad isn't mentioned in that article):
Forced attack (Target creature attacks this turn if able.)
Primary: red
Secondary: blue
We don't use this ability a lot, but when we do, we use it in red and blue. Red is flavored as emotional tampering and blue as mind control.