MTGNexus

Thanks for all the encouragement, folks. I'll probably type the bugger up.

toctheyounger wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I have 3 primers currently (and no, it's not because I'm on the committee - there's a standard that needs to be met)

As a person who has three primers and is not on the committee, I can confirm it is possible to have three primers and not be on the committee

Rumpy5897 wrote: ↑

4 years ago

Thanks for all the encouragement, folks. I'll probably type the bugger up.

toctheyounger wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I have 3 primers currently (and no, it's not because I'm on the committee - there's a standard that needs to be met)

As a person who has three primers and is not on the committee, I can confirm it is possible to have three primers and not be on the committee

Ha, good point! It's a lot of work writing a primer but ultimately it's pretty rewarding so I hope you do send it through.

The hardest part is formatting and adding all those cool borders and perfectly resized images!

For what it's worth, this has gotten immeasurably easier on Nexus. The bbcode is comprehensively documented, with all the options explained and often demonstrated. For example, you can have images as percentage width of the screen, getting whatever proportions you want with a good degree of reliability on different displays. I willingly mucked around with formatting my threads after hopping over, adding little stuff like shadows, colouring boxes to resemble parchment and whatnot. Good times.

If working on a primer in a text editing software (like you should), reformatting a post is not too difficult. It's often a case of replacing a particular tag set with another one, with slightly different options. As such, the find/replace functionality of the editor gets a bunch of work done as you kick in various beautification ideas.

Unless you mean darren/Keizam style custom imagery. Yeah, that's voodoo to me

Feyd is also extremely responsive. If there's something missing, he's on board with the idea, and it's easy enough to implement, it usually shows up as a feature in very little time. If that's not true, he's very good about explaining why not.

Between the existing primer template and copying elements from existing primers, you should be able to come up with something that looks like what you want without too much effort. The writing and editing is definitely the more time consuming part once you get the hang of the bbcode.

And even if you can't catch Feyd directly, letting myself or Cryo know and we can get that kind of stuff passed along as well (though usually just tagging Feyd is the fastest way to catch him).

As well as of this, we're making a concerted effort to make the application process more inclusive and cooperative. Any issues with code we're happy to help work out.

I say we in the royal sense as I struggle a little with it, grammar and formatting is more my thing. But Darren and Ben are code masters, they can help with making the code work very nicely for what an applicant is trying to achieve.

Honestly I don't think primers have ever looked as good in general as they do on this site. It's a real credit to what Feyd and the rest of the crew have given us - maximum forum functionality and flexibility.

I die a little on the inside when I see people join salvation to necro a thread of someone I know is over here. I have still been checking up on sally just to check on my old threads now and then. I am half tempted to get more of my lists updated here and then request bob to kill my old lists.

I literally just used the template so far. I figure I'll make it look pretty once accepted.

Dragonlover

ISBPathfinder wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I die a little on the inside when I see people join salvation to necro a thread of someone I know is over here. I have still been checking up on sally just to check on my old threads now and then. I am half tempted to get more of my lists updated here and then request bob to kill my old lists.

I expect Nexus should overtake Sally on the google ranking eventually. It's all a question of traffic.

Without getting into the banlist debate, Torbran, Thane of Red Fell is the first time I've been disappointed by losing Paradox Engine. I'm roughing out a list for him and my first drafts all include plenty of pingers because turning a Cunning Sparkmage activation into a bolt sounds lovely. On the flip side, I'm considering Painter's Servant to get bonus damage on Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle triggers so maybe it balances out.

Really all of it is just feeding into my drive to use unfair cards in fair ways even if I'm not sure I'll ever be able to beat activating Bazaar of Baghdad to swing with Hazoret the Fervent.

I used to enjoy making primers but I found that I wasn't playing the deck as much and couldn't justify keeping the primer status. And even something like Karador I only play the one deck my one way I enjoy it, so I can't even adequately talk about other options.

cryogen wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I used to enjoy making primers but I found that I wasn't playing the deck as much and couldn't justify keeping the primer status. And even something like Karador I only play the one deck my one way I enjoy it, so I can't even adequately talk about other options.

I am sort of the same way. I couldn't bring myself to make a primer until I had played the hell out of a deck but by the time I was done making a primer I generally was playing the deck less. I eventually kill most of my decks and make something new so it became kind of a pain in the ass how often I was killing off primers.

I've kinda noticed this too, although it could just be life and work being pretty busy too.

The upside is by the time you've written your primer you've rationalised all of your choices to yourself, so you've got a really clear idea of what you want for the deck, where it can improve with future releases and what other options the build might have.

It can be a lot of work though.

That's one of the reasons I picked my wincon deck to do a primer for, it'll never be finished. It's such a wonky concept that any set might just have the perfect card for it.

Dragonlover

toctheyounger wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I've kinda noticed this too, although it could just be life and work being pretty busy too.

The upside is by the time you've written your primer you've rationalised all of your choices to yourself, so you've got a really clear idea of what you want for the deck, where it can improve with future releases and what other options the build might have.

It can be a lot of work though.

If I had the time I would make more of my decks into primer style threads, even if I wasn't going to actually submit them for the tag. It really is helpful to be able to write out your entire thought process behind the deck, as well as giving other people the mindset you're in.

The thing that takes the most time is the card options section, at least in my case. You're stuck pondering all the possible options that you should mention to make it feel comprehensive, write up justifications and roles of each individual include. It takes a while, eats up a lot of space, and ultimately lives in a spoiler. Rustling up an introduction plus strategy section should get a sensible approximation.

While I may be sitting on three primers and considering writing up a fourth, I don't make them lightly. Those tend to happen for decks that have "made it" - builds that I greatly enjoy and hereby commit to maintaining and improving in the future. Toc's points about the primer writing itself being a sort of rite of passage for the deck holds very much true.

cryogen wrote: ↑

4 years ago

toctheyounger wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I've kinda noticed this too, although it could just be life and work being pretty busy too.

The upside is by the time you've written your primer you've rationalised all of your choices to yourself, so you've got a really clear idea of what you want for the deck, where it can improve with future releases and what other options the build might have.

It can be a lot of work though.

If I had the time I would make more of my decks into primer style threads, even if I wasn't going to actually submit them for the tag. It really is helpful to be able to write out your entire thought process behind the deck, as well as giving other people the mindset you're in.

Oh for sure. I'd do the same. It's a really rewarding thought experiment. When you get halfway through and go 'what the hell AM I actually trying to do?' really makes you think about what you've justified for the list and how each piece works as part of the whole. I've also found it really beneficial in terms of how it plays in a meta context and what sort of role your deck thrives with.

But yeah, time is a finite resource. I do most of my writing at work in downtime and that varies greatly. Peaks and troughs.

toctheyounger wrote: ↑

4 years ago

Oh for sure. I'd do the same. It's a really rewarding thought experiment. When you get halfway through and go 'what the hell AM I actually trying to do?' really makes you think about what you've justified for the list and how each piece works as part of the whole. I've also found it really beneficial in terms of how it plays in a meta context and what sort of role your deck thrives with.

But yeah, time is a finite resource. I do most of my writing at work in downtime and that varies greatly. Peaks and troughs.

I've been doing a lot of writing regarding Chainer recently (in a Testing Area thread) over some card swaps, to force myself to really think about the cards and which ones actually help the goals of the deck and which ones are "maybe this'll be fun occasionally" (toys). I feel like I'm still not very good at it, but getting better as long as I stick to the focused evaluation. I'd finally made an initial selection of swaps and then did a little goldfishing and went, "wait. no. these 3 are toys. "

But it's been producing some interesting re-examinations of how complementary things are balanced in the list, like sacrifice outlets vs on-death triggers, especially now that things like Pitiless Plunderer exist for the trigger side as opposed to Phyrexian Altar on the sac side.

Edit: I also realized how trigger-stacking with Mesmeric Orb vs upkeep draw like Phyrexian Arena makes top-of-library stuff like Vampiric Tutor and Volrath's Stronghold more dynamic.

lyonhaert wrote: ↑

4 years ago

toctheyounger wrote: ↑

4 years ago

Oh for sure. I'd do the same. It's a really rewarding thought experiment. When you get halfway through and go 'what the hell AM I actually trying to do?' really makes you think about what you've justified for the list and how each piece works as part of the whole. I've also found it really beneficial in terms of how it plays in a meta context and what sort of role your deck thrives with.

But yeah, time is a finite resource. I do most of my writing at work in downtime and that varies greatly. Peaks and troughs.

I've been doing a lot of writing regarding Chainer recently (in a Testing Area thread) over some card swaps, to force myself to really think about the cards and which ones actually help the goals of the deck and which ones are "maybe this'll be fun occasionally" (toys). I feel like I'm still not very good at it, but getting better as long as I stick to the focused evaluation. I'd finally made an initial selection of swaps and then did a little goldfishing and went, "wait. no. these 3 are toys. "

But it's been producing some interesting re-examinations of how complementary things are balanced in the list, like sacrifice outlets vs on-death triggers, especially now that things like Pitiless Plunderer exist for the trigger side as opposed to Phyrexian Altar on the sac side.

Edit: I also realized how trigger-stacking with Mesmeric Orb vs upkeep draw like Phyrexian Arena makes top-of-library stuff like Vampiric Tutor and Volrath's Stronghold more dynamic.

Should we on the Committee keep our eyes peeled? I hope so, he's a classic commander.

But yeah this is the sort of stuff you realise writing it all up, it's so worth it. I'd done the same with my most recent primer of Varina - there's TONS of areas she can delve into and plenty of options in each, some of which I cover. My build being mostly midrange means I need to get the balance pretty right between draw options, token generation, ramp, win cons, lord effects, control and removal. That's already a lot to fit in, especially with what is a really lean resource engine, so going through it all piece by piece made me a lot more cognizant of where the balance is and what I'd want moving forward.

ISBPathfinder wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I am sort of the same way. I couldn't bring myself to make a primer until I had played the hell out of a deck but by the time I was done making a primer I generally was playing the deck less. I eventually kill most of my decks and make something new so it became kind of a pain in the ass how often I was killing off primers.

This is where I'm at. Most of my lists don't make it into double digits for games played. I might play the same general or similar themes, but it's rare for me to actually keep and tune a single deck. It's great for trying out a bunch of things, but terrible for the kind of deep dive that you want in a primer.

toctheyounger wrote: ↑

4 years ago

Should we on the Committee keep our eyes peeled? I hope so, he's a classic commander.

Yep. Eventually I'll have enough progress with main sections and whatnot to start that process. Lots of stuff competes for my time these days, so I've been writing bit by bit in that hidden thread working on the card-swaps for about 3 weeks now, since the last activity in the actual thread. But I figure I mostly need to cover my version of the deck and a handful of alternate cards rather than trying to cover other possible approaches to Chainer too much, since I can just link to other threads.

lyonhaert wrote: ↑

4 years ago

But I figure I mostly need to cover my version of the deck and a handful of alternate cards rather than trying to cover other possible approaches to Chainer too much, since I can just link to other threads.

Yes. This is the approach I took to Varina too. There's tons of options around, all you need to do is cover your build, and if you want to, cover off some alternate options for differing builds in brief. You're definitely not required to be encyclopedic.

That was the original intent of the Primer project actually.

At it's heart, the idea of making primers was to encourage a series of starting points for people who were interested in building a certain Commander or style. It was there to highlight exceptional resources, and exceptional people who made them. The goal was to be able to rationally explain what the deck's basic goals and functions were.

As time went on though, the Primer needs somewhat changed (as all things do). Initially, I would even say that it wasn't necessary to explain each and every card. Everyone knows what Wood Elves are for, you don't need a 3 paragraph text explaining ramp. However, certain cards DO need to be explained, and when lists would get submitted that were missing crucial information, the way that requirement was written needed to change to be able to catch that - that leaves the bar higher than it technically needs to be in a lot of cases, but it needs to be there to catch a still significant number of decks that do need it there. This means that some have to overcommit a bit, but it's usually better to get a bit of extra detail, than miss a crucial piece. Of course, you don't want to set it TOO high either, otherwise you're filling in a bunch of padding and fluff, and diluting from the actual important pieces.

Likewise with the recorded changelog. I personally never really cared for it, never really used it when reading someone else's primer, and it's the one part of my primers that I hated having to record. But different people find value in different things, and some people really like and utilize it. I want to say that there were 4 or 5 of us voting as to whether that part needed to be required, and I was the only dissenting voice on that one, so I accepted that I was wrong on that issue, and that it had a higher value than I thought.

Primers are also a lot fancier than they used to be. Obviously, making something look nice adds an extra level of professionalism. Having images helps highlight key cards, gives strength to certain points you make, and helps break up the text and keep the reader interested. I started the trend by also adding in the section links when I discovered that MTGS could make use of anchor tags. Basic organization and functionality was expected for Primers, but I feel that now some people are hesitant to make Primers because they are intimidated by how complex some of them are, or how much coding they think they'll need to do, when really it's the content and explanation that's always been the most important thing. The visuals are there to help and aid the content, not be the centerpiece itself.

toctheyounger wrote: ↑

4 years ago

lyonhaert wrote: ↑

4 years ago

But I figure I mostly need to cover my version of the deck and a handful of alternate cards rather than trying to cover other possible approaches to Chainer too much, since I can just link to other threads.

Yes. This is the approach I took to Varina too. There's tons of options around, all you need to do is cover your build, and if you want to, cover off some alternate options for differing builds in brief. You're definitely not required to be encyclopedic.

Much this. The requirement for showing other options was simply to explain how your Commander/Deck fit in against similar options. What made you choose this Commander instead of another, or Since you built this Commander, how did that influence your building, compared to similar options? etc. It initially was only a small paragraph/section requirement to lay a bit of the groundwork/backdrop. Sometimes people intentionally pick a sub-par Commander. This section was there so if someone was reading your thread, you'd be able to say "If you want to play this style, technically you should probably run XXXX, but I built YYYY instead, because I think YYYY has more flavor. It changed how I approached this deck, because of ZZZZ... so you'll want to keep that in mind."

Obviously, If you'd actually gone through several Commanders, it could get significantly larger. When I wrote my Chainer write up, that deck had originated during Kokusho testing, and initially had 3 interchangeable Commanders: Chainer, Dementia Master, Balthor the Defiled, and Kokusho, the Evening Star. I also occasionally ran other creatures in the Command Zone, including Griselbrand, during his brief stint in Commander (which led to one of the most hilariously bad games for me).

Again, this section - like all sections in the Primer format - changed and expanded over time, shifting as the needs and goals of Primers have shifted. The needs and expectations of Primers is vastly different from when it first started, but that's only natural, since what people expect FROM primers has changed since then as well.

Absolutely fascinating how it has evolved.

I'll hold my hand up as being kind of intimidated, if it wasn't for the template I'd probably have never taken the plunge.

Full set's up for Eldraine btw guys - https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... ldraine?bi

Dragonlover