Design Insights

 My friend Sean has posted a fantastic article on things he's learned about TCG game design over the past thirty years and I recommend giving it a read. 

Plus, he opens it up to questions at the end, so if there's anything you were curious about game design-either board games or card games, here's a great opportunity to ask!

Rethinking White

I found this breakdown on "fixing" the color White to be really interesting! 

For all of Magic's flaws, I appreciate that they are still trying to reinvent the wheel to make the game a better one.

Maybe Not Today...

...maybe not tomorrow, but eventually, Grist, the Hunger Tide is going to cause problems. (Credit to Day 9 for the spoiler.)

I say this because years ago on the Mothership, Mark Rosewater was asked why they didn't include Artifact as part of Karn Liberated's types, back in the day. Of course, I can't find it now...but the answer went: it would create huge problems for the game. Which makes some sense: being able to Tinker for Karn Liberated wouldn't create fun play experiences. 

Now, New Phyrexia was printed 10 years ago, and a great deal has changed in Magic, not least of which being the approach we have to Planeswalkers and our available answers. 

But a three mana Planeswalker that has a creature type everywhere BUT the battlefield? This opens up a truly absurd level of interactions, including the ability to be a Commander. 

Do I think this is bad? No. It's the kind of rules complexity I would expect from a set like Modern Horizons 2 and if they didn't provide some truly pushed cards that would be disappointing. I think it's interesting and it doesn't want to be an issue! 

Buuuuuuuuuut I think Grist will cause problems eventually. How soon, I don't know: I certainly hope it's down the line a bit. Having a Hogaak level card (one that is clearly broken and exceptional for a deck type) isn't good. 

But one that players break in a year? Yeah, that's fine. 

On the other hand, I really, really like the designs for Astor and the Underworld Cookbook. Top notch work there. Interesting, flavorful and seems like there's interesting ways to use those cards without them making a mess of things. 

Format, Variance, And Rarity

The design lead for the Transformers TCG posted this article on what the job is for common rarity cards.

No surprise; they're there to make limited (Turbo and Draft) environments work. That's just how TCGs are.

There is good content there, and I really do appreciate the lengths to which Wizards is going to to try and be transparent about how they build the game. Heck, I think there's interesting data there for anyone who plays a trading card game and is fascinated by the process.

However-and you had to know this was coming, right?-there is one big, big questionmark for me. From the article:

We feel Turbo is a strong selling point for our game that we’re starting to build sets towards it. If we can make the Turbo format more varied and fun without sacrificing the Constructed format (I think we can), it gives Transformers TCG an advantage over its competitors on the market. The common slot impacts Turbo the most so any innovations for that format go there.

So, there's just one problem.

Turbo isn't fun. I played two-and-a-half boxes of Turbo from Siege 1 and it wasn't fun. It wasn't fun in Rise of the Combiners, either-it was actually impossible to play, due to the Engima cards.

What was fun? Opening three packs, count stars only for characters, build the decks, go.

The reason Turbo isn't fun is because your battle deck is twelve cards. (Note: the link describing Turbo is incorrect, because the 7th battle card has been replaced by a second character card).

That just is not enough cards! Before your first turn even ends, you will have seen one third of your deck, at minimum, possibly half! That is in a set that has only 64 battle cards to begin with, so it's unlikely that you've got 12 unique cards, and the rarity is dispersed between both the battle cards AND the character cards, so the power levels are going to be wildly off. A rare character is far, far more powerful than a rare battle card and the rare battle card, if you get one, is unlikely to make it to your hand. Instead, it's far more likely you'll see the same common rarity cards flipped over and over.

If those common cards aren't helping you, that's incredibly discouraging, because you're going to see all of them, repeatedly.


By way of contrast, Draft has you making decks of 25 cards, and Constructed 40. Your first turns have you seeing just under 1/6th or 1/10th of your deck, which means there are a lot of surprises and choices left.

There isn't enough variance in your cards in Turbo to make play decisions matter. The power levels have been too flat, and with so few choices to make, games don't feel engaging. It is quite possible to have a bunch of cards in your hand that you cannot play, making your battle deck more and more consistent, meaning players already know the outcomes of the battle. That takes away from the most dynamic element of sealed!

However, at three booster packs, my experience was that games developed tension and my decisions mattered. I couldn't auto-play every character I got, which is good because it meant I was making choices about my game. Plus, the likelihood of my battle deck being blue-dominant and thus useless to me in a game that emphasizes attacking, is mitigated by the presence of those extra 6 cards, or by matching the best characters I could to the cards available to me!

That said, when I read Nagle's statement it's worth nothing he says, "If we can make the Turbo format more varied and fun without sacrificing the Constructed format (I think we can)".

So one of two things could be meant here: Either he knows that the format needs improvement and believes that they are making those improvements with Siege II, or he believes Turbo is fine as a format and they will continue to keep it 'varied and fun' as he groks those concepts.

I am really, really hoping for the former, not the latter. The Transformers TCG is a great deal of fun and I really do appreciate their attempt to keep the "on ramp" format as cheap as they can. As someone who is acutely aware of the costs of TCGs, I think they'd just do themselves a solid by recommending three packs to build the sealed deck instead of two. If I pay $8 and am miserable, or $12 and am entertained, then it's worth the four bucks to be happier. 

The Planeswalker Problem

I have been saying it for years, but Planeswalkers are a problem for Magic. One of the things I've been clamoring for is common rarity removal for the card type. There is common rarity removal for every other card type in Magic.

The argument against has always boiled down to two points:

1) Planeswalkers are mythic and cool and common removal would spoil that!

and

2) Common removal for Planeswalkers would mess up draft environments since they're mythic rarity means that common removal gives drafters useless cards!

Well, since point two isn't true anymore and point one wants to sacrifice good gameplay for "coolness", I think we should disregard both of them. Because Planeswalkers are a problem.

Finally, people are catching on to that. Oko is just the latest in a line of problematic cards that have had people unhappy with Standard and had an impact on formats with much deeper card pools that shouldn't (but do) have severe difficulties with Planeswalkers. The thing that those cards have in common? They're cheap.

I don't think that Planeswalkers shouldn't be good! I just believe that players are not given enough tools to deal with them, which leads me back to the article I linked to and some of the solutions at the end.

While I like some of the concepts at the end of the article, of the ten sketches nine of them are creatures. I feel as though they missed opportunities to make enchantments, instants, sorceries, or even lands that would help deal with the problem. Note, however, that most of those solutions cost 2, in order to come down soon enough to make an impact.

The fact that people can come up with that variety of ideas just for an article suggests that the people at WotC can do something to help balance the game again, too. I hope they decide to do that.

Battlebond Thoughts

This really is the year that WotC woo'd the Commander players, isn't it?

We have a spoiler here.

First, the reprints: these seem driven at least partially, by the Commander format. Sure, Battlebond is meant to be drafted for 2 Headed Giant-they have to pitch the draft format somehow, because that's how they sell packs-but Commander is still the multiplayer format of choice.

Dominaria provides more Legendary creatures and things to go with said creatures than any set since Kamigawa, and now this.

Makes me think that the fall Commander set is going to be 2 Headed Giant themed. And why not? Start people at 100 life and go from there. I wager games would go pretty quickly and provide players with a reason to buy ever more product-both Battlebond and Dominaria benefit.

Plus with the Guilds of Ravnica set this winter and Ravnica Alliance following, that means that you have hosts of multicolored cards (and lands) to support the format that Battlebond is trying to grow.

But I'm getting ahead of myself. The point is: True-Name Nemesis and Diabolic Intent are selling for a little over $20, Seedborn Muse nearly $30 and Doubling Season for nearly $60 as of this writing. TNN is driven by Legacy, the others by Commander, really. Reprinting these cards should drive prices down, giving more players more access to these formats and it'll be done by encouraging players who don't draft much to draft.

These reprints seem to be a better thing-far better, honestly-than Masters 25's attempt. Perhaps the focus on multiplayer allowed for Battlebond to work more needed reprints?

Sure, they aren't all winners (looking at you, Goblin Razerunners and is Nyxathid really good in multiplayer?) but all in all, these look better than I've seen in awhile.

As for specific mechanics:

Assist
I think the base mechanic is OK. Where it gets interesting, for me, is in formats like Commander where political games can be played. I know I've found myself in situations where if I could work together with someone in a similarly disadvantaged position as myself, I would.

Friend or Foe
Like the voting mechanic of Conspiracy, this opens things up to some goofy situations that, again, I find more engaging in Commander where giving a boost to a player that has had a rough start might be worthwhile. In the Limited environment? I'm sure it'll be fine but it's not like it's interesting-you always benefit your partner, oppress your opponent, right?

Partner with...
This new take on Partner is pretty interesting. A nice way to expand options for Commander players while also giving Battlebond Limited players a cool way of feeling like they are working together. I really appreciate that design.

What's especially unusual is that the partners are all opposing color partners, U/G, W/B, etc. I'm not sure why that is: perhaps it plays better with the future Commander set? Guilds of Ravnica has more enemy colored pairs than friendly ones but that's a stretch on my part.

I've seen it suggested that having the colors be opposing partners meant that players wouldn't have to struggle to build decks-you get the white, I get the red, for example, and now the support colors aren't something we are trying to divvy up because while we both like green, blue and black support are still open.

Support
I wasn't excited about this mechanic in the Tarkir days and I'm still meh about it, but what I will say is that it plays well with the Limited environment of 2 Headed Giant.


For this portion, I'm just going to talk about the new cards.

White
Everyone welcome the new hotness, Arena Rector! Yike. That card will be terrifyingly expensive right out of the gate. If that card isn't reprinted rapidly, that's bad news. Academy Rector is over $50 and that just gets something that isn't the most powerful permanent type in the game so...

The printing of Brightling means we are one step closer to finally completing the cycle Morphling started in '94. One more color to go!

Blue
I sort of understand why Arcane Artisan is a mythic rare. Being able to get an Emrakul for three mana doesn't suck. Still: pretty fragile creature so I don't expect it to make huge waves.

Fumble, on the other hand, is the kind of effect I'm surprised we haven't seen before. That should make for some really cool and memorable plays. Sure, most of the time it's just a bounce spell, but when it turns the game around, it will REALLY turn things around and people won't ever forget it.

Black
Fan Favorite represents a mechanical card I am surprised we didn't see more of. Even if it's just one per color, it seems like that mechanic (a call back to Mercadian Masques!) would fit nicely in Battlebond's -ahem- arena. Looks like Green is the only other color to indulge though, with Feral Hydra reprinted.

I also dig Inner Demon and am glad to see Stunning Reversal find a home in black. It feels like it's in the right color, due to it's thematic execution.

Red
Azra Bladeseeker is going to do more work than people might think. That's a good body and a good enters the battlefield effect.

The card that I think is going to be a breakout, though, is Cheering Fanatic. Aside from a straight up combo deck, is there a deck that couldn't use this? Swings, maybe you hit for 2, maybe you don't, but your next spell costs 1 less no matter what. If you attack multiple times, or with multiple Fanatics, that could really add up!

I'm glad to see Najeela, the Blade-Blossom have the ability it does: she'll be a great commander for the Warrior tribe and Red could use the development.

Green
Sorry, did I say Arena Rector was going to be the crazy hotness? I meant Bramble Sovereign. That card + Doubling Season is going to be every player's dream.

After that, most of the hype in Green is in the reprints but I want to talk about Grothama, All Devouring. Because that card is weird. Dubious Challenge weird. I want four copies of it. First, it's the only Legendary Wurm ever. Second, it functions as a bizzaroland boardwipe, if the opponent wants to take that risk-is drawing more cards worth losing your board position? Can you play fun regeneration/indestructible tricks to bluff your opponent into nuking their team?

Artifacts and Multicolor
Eh. There really isn't anything here that jumps out as being odd. Last One Standing is cool, but they don't do a lot with what else they provide you. What makes the Azra creature type significant? The look like purple elves but so what? Victory Chimes is going to make for possible monkeyshines in Commander and Sentinel Tower is...kinda dumb. Because storm is dumb. OK? Storm is dumb. I said it. Still, I'd rather see Sentinel Tower over actual storm cards.

For me, there's lot to like here. Reprints to get people exited, new cards to mess with the most popular casual format, an interesting way to highlight a new casual format...although wouldn't it be cool to see a 2 Headed Giant pro tour? That would be wild. I'd watch it.

Point is, I am hopeful about this one, as I was with the Conspiracy drafts I did, and I think that WotC has once again done a solid job here, giving players of various interests something to have fun with.

Designing Cards Is Hard

There's always a lot of armchair quarterbacking when it comes to things we love, right? A way that we think we could do it better.

But it doesn't take long to figure out how much more challenging the work we admire is to do.

In a Reddit Legacy thread, someone said, "I swear to god if they printed a goblin that was red Thalia it would be instantly playable."

So I asked: What could that look like, though and be thematically in red? Because obviously that card would be pretty crazy, right?

And the responses were all so banal. Riffs on what we already have (Eidolon effects, Harsh Mentor-which isn't a bad place to go but it isn't a red Thalia, either-, Magus of the Moon [which we have? And would be horribly degenerate at two mana], or Dire Fleet Daredevil, which again, we have...). Now, I don't want to say these are terrible ideas! They aren't. They just are a) easy, b) repeats of what we already have and c) don't answer my question at all.

Someone tried to come up with a Trinisphere knock off concept: a goblin that makes so much noise mages can't concentrate, but didn't actually elaborate on it, just said 'goblin that makes everything cost 3'.

And then there was the person who came up with

RW
Spells cost 1 more to cast.
2/2

C'mon, man. That isn't even TRYING. That's just adding white and a tax effect. When I asked how this was thematically red, the poster replied: "It's a goblin", editing in the text 'Goblin Soldier' after I had asked.

There are black goblins. There are artifact goblins. There are green goblins. Being a goblin is not automatically thematically red. This isn't thematically red. Or even mechanically red. It's just lazy. 

You know what happens when you search for multicolored goblins? This. What makes these designs interesting? Hybrid mana cards (Hobgoblin Dragoon) live in the mechanical overlap of those colors. This is also true of many of the multicolored cards (Goblin Deathraiders, Goblin Electromancer).

Cards that has an activated ability stapled onto the card, a la Shattergang Bros? That's not required to be a goblin. Could've been a human or a giant. It works because of the thematic space goblins have carved out but it's not required by any means-but again, thematically because of the destructive nature of goblins and the activated abilities, it works.

Even weird cards like Razorfin Hunter make sense, seen through the lens of time, when blue had pingers. Hell, as weird as Goblin Legionnaire is, the sacrifice notion fits both colors but it's pretty clearly 'we stapled this on'. The ones that stick out the most as being the least well executed are the 'wedge' goblins like Ponyback Brigade (black's token making abilities are pretty narrow) and Ankle Shanker which is just borrowing two abilities from the opposing colors.

But they aren't lazy. You can see the argument for making them what they are. Even if you have to dig into the overall world design to get there, as with the wedge goblins.

Of the things I read, the Trinisphere direction seemed interesting. Two mana land destruction is wrong-or would have to come with such a severe drawback that attaching it to a creature seems pointless. Making a 3 mana goblin with Trinisphere's ability seems like it could work-a 3/3 for 3 that makes everything cost at least 3 could be a bonkers rare card.

However, WotC has said that they're looking for ways to expand Red's themes and land destruction is one of those themes. But land destruction is terrible from a gameplay perspective, so they've been trying to rejigger the theme to one that is more conducive to good Magic. Chandra's Revolution would be the latest spin on that theme, though I see this idea starting with Solfatara and Turf Wound.

I can envision something along the lines of:

Mickey, Noisy Goblin 1R
Legendary
Menace
At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep, tap target land they control.
2/2

Making the goblin legendary means that you can't just lock your opponent out of the game by playing two of them by turn three. It puts a tax on their spells but not a crazy one. Menace seems more thematically appropriate than other red abilities-if the concept is that the goblin is just so loud that it disrupts the opponent's ability to concentrate, then it isn't a far reach to say that noise is scaring creatures away from blocking it solo.

But I had a WEEK to think about this design. For a rare. That might not even work!

This kind of thing is difficult and I always want to remember that.

The Design Contest

My friend Sean entered into the Great Designer Search 3, but unfortunately he didn't get past the testing round.

Their loss is your gain, though, as he decided to publish the answers to their essay questions on his blog.

Since he's employed as a game designer, it's pretty cool to get a window into what he thinks of as Magic's biggest strengths, weaknesses and hurdles.

Reading his essay, I can't help but come up with a couple points of agreement and contention, for example: yes, vehicles are quite intuitive and a great way to amplify the visual aspect of a new plane. Vehicles on Ixalan do not resemble anything on Kaladesh.

On the other hand: expanding artifact capabilities helps two colors: white (which can sometimes use a boost) and blue (which perpetually needs to be kept in check), while creating a greater demand for artifact destruction that is generally lacking in the density or utility required in red and green, and absent in black.

Then there are other points that only someone with his expertise could actually articulate, such as the response to Magic's greatest weakness.

All in all, I dig it, so check it out.

As It Could Be

This article at ChannelFireball posits an interesting question about how to reinvent the color pie. The companion piece about how Magic has never been balanced, is also worth a read.

What I think is missed in the reinvention of the color pie-the solution to which is 'just don't let the colors do all the things well'-is that WotC is already implementing said notions in small ways. Most notably and recently, moving the Fight mechanic to Green and making it a way for Green to have creature removal.

However, to pull from an even more recent example, let's talk about Adanto Vanguard and Glorifier of Dusk.

You have to go back to Mercadian Masques in order to find another mono-white card that will let you do something for a life payment (Righteous Aura). The earliest card I could find with this kind of ability: Order of the Sacred Torch.

However, WotC found a place for White to justifiably break the color pie for story reasons, and they took it. It's likely only for a single set, (until they can find a way to justify it again) but they found a way to take a mechanic typically reserved for Black (life payment for an effect) and crossed it over. Sure, it doesn't do a whole lot but it does shake up how people think of the color.

So I think that WotC is at least a little ahead of the curve in their attempts to create dynamic playing environments. Sure, Mark Rosewater might complain a bit about the color pie being broken-and he should. The color pie being 'boring' means that the color pie is the standard.

That standard is critical to Magic: if you do not have a baseline to deviate from and return to, then what you have is simply chaos. Magic is too complex a game to endure or worse, generate, chaos. Someone has to vanguard that standard and it would seem that part of Mark's job is to do just that.

But I've come around to the notion that offering colors different options as appropriate-especially with story justifications-help keep the game dynamic.

I still don't like white vampires. But I like the mechanic there.

On Planeswalkers

I think this article at MTG Goldfish presents an interesting take on the problem Planeswalkers represent for Magic.

Because I typically ignore the throughline of Magic's story. I know a bit about how stories work and I have really, really gotten bored with Planeswalkers as primary plot-drivers because those characters haven't, in my awareness anyway, undergone any changes.

Each plane used to have its own stars and own narrative. They still do but now that narrative is, somehow, tied into what the Planeswalker does, and it's been this way since Return to Ravnica. That's five years of these characters doing not a whole lot, while the planes they are on tend to undergo some significant changes!

However, I usually tackle the issue of Planeswalkers from a gameplay perspective, so seeing a very specific angle on what Planeswalkers do to Magic from that gameplay view and why is cool.

I also think it's going to become a bigger problem as Magic moves forward, if cards like Desiccated Naga and Companion of the Trials are any indication.

I really, really do not like where those cards indicate Magic is going. Having a card only be good-a 3/2 for 3 isn't terrible so WotC is totally padding the stats there to make this medicine go down-but having a card that is only good if you have a Mythic rarity out there-Liliana of the Veil and Liliana, the Last Hope being sold for $80 and $30 each, respectively, the most recent Gideon, considered to be one of the best cards in standard right now, $17 and the new Gideon will likely go higher-suggests that they are tying to move players away from a sense of place and more into character.

Now, from what I understand, those two cards are tied into the Planeswalker deck boxes, making this a little more palatable but...I don't like it. Having cards be so parasitic is bad, having them be parasitic with mythic rarities is really distasteful to me. It helps increase the reliance on luck (will you or won't you get the Planeswalker you need) in a game that already has plenty of variance.

But that's a very big aside.

When I talk about Planeswalkers I usually talk about how players don't have enough tools to deal with them, so they're positioned to take over any game (or format) where they are pushed.

What I hadn't thought of is how Planeswalkers are pushed in order to be the face of the story, and how that push will exclude other deckbuilding options due to their power.

And people might say, 'so what? Good cards always push out bad cards.' and they would be right.

Except: WotC has said that printing Lightning Bolt in the Modern era was a mistake because it removes deckbuilding decisions. If you can, you run Lightning Bolt because it is better than any other red removal card in the format. It's one of the reasons they don't want to reprint Counterspell.

I think the article makes a very good argument for how Planeswalkers make for a worse Standard by decreasing the decision tree for deckbuilding-just throw a Planeswalker in there, that solves problems.

I've done it myself-most recently with Knives (as you will soon see). So I think this trend bears a lot of consideration and watchfulness.

Aether Revolt Survey

Survey is here, if you're interested.

I love this stuff...

Spire Patrol: I found the art on this marginal. Too busy, with not nearly enough contrast between the flying mechanism and the weapon. Ugh. But for play value, I rated it fair. I'd play it in Draft or Sealed for sure.

Ridgescale Tusker: Once again, the overwhelming greenness of art on a green card. But I like the pose and the name is solid. However, a 5/5 for five mana that boosts every creature you have? That's an excellent card.

Take Into Custody: I rated everything about this card as Good. The art isn't overwhelmingly blue, the name and flavor text work nicely, and the ability is a really solid one because it's an instant. It's got some nice strategic value.

Aethertide Whale: Once again, the overwhelming blueness of art on a blue card. I guess that can't be helped, given the subject and at least the whale is purple but...I don't know. It's trying for some dynamic stuff but looks a little weird, especially that curling eddy in the lower right. I do like the flavor text's addition to the world, and the card itself I'm rating as good. Bouncing for only energy and allowing you to gain as you go seems like something that could be broke in the right circumstances, but at least good in the right deck.

Sly Requisitioner: I really feel like the art conveys the non-chalant manner of the subject, so I dig that and the name as well. I rated the play value as Fair but the overall value as Good, because I think that in the right deck-and it shouldn't be hard to engineer that deck-this card could really be a house.

Shock: Ah, the old classic. Could...someone tell me why the back walls are tinted red? Uh-huh... That said, the subject looks like a sneaky fellow so I'll give it a Fair. Everything else I thought was Good: the flavor text contributes to the overall story and Shock as a value card has proved itself since Tempest.

Hinterland Drake: It's a little weird, looking at a dragon butt, isn't it? No? Just me? OK. In the end, I rated the card Fair: 2/3 fliers don't suck and the drawback isn't a problem. But there are better choices. Limited stuff that I'd play if I had to.

Dawnfeather Eagle: Once again, the overwhelming whiteness of art on a white card. Make up your mind, Wizards, either they sky is blue, or the sky is white. That bird also looks like it's attacking but the hand in the picture looks extended to let the bird rest. Maybe I'm just unfamiliar with avian expressions... I do think the flavor text is Excellent though as well as the play value. Vigilance and +1 can mess up a lot of combat math.

Glint-Sleeve Siphoner: I'm a little lenient on the art, because of the obvious setting of dusk and purple hues. The name is pretty meh though and the card overall I'm just calling Good, because you need to do a lot of work to make it viable.

Defiant Salvager: I like the name and the art and the flavor text, even, although I'm not sure they are harmonious, but the ability is fair at best.

Exquisite Archangel: The art is pretty imposing but the rest of the card is just fair. Seven mana is a LOT, even for a 5/5 flier that has a great ability. It's got its uses but the cost makes it a bit prohibitive.

Welder Automaton: I think this card is pretty good! Not excellent, but the value it provides as a 2 drop both early and late in the game have merit. It's not going to blow the lid off of a format, but it can give you something to do if the board state locks up.

Lightning Runner: I really want to like this card...but I don't. Getting the ability to work (an ability I like!) just costs too much. Marginal.

Greenwheel Liberator: I am rating this a little higher, perhaps, than I ought to because the sum is greater than the parts. The art doesn't really track unless you read the flavor text, for example, but once I did things made sense. However, as card, this puppy is excellent. There are an arbitrarily large number of ways to make this a 4/3 for two mana and that's good stuff.

Ornithoper: another classic, like Shock, that has proven its worth in the right place. And Aether Revolt is a good place for the card. But let's not lie to each other: the card is marginal.

Doomtown: Reloaded, Requiem

The Doomtown LCG is ending soon; word is the last expansion for the game will be released in October and as of this writing, there is no plan for it to be picked up by another publisher.

That's unfortunate, because this is a hell of a game. Yes, the learning curve was quite high, but once it leveled out, the rest of the game came pretty easily. It had an interesting blend of the familiar and the new and few games I've played have as successfully evoked the atmosphere they were going for.

Multiplayer games especially felt like the high noon shootouts of old west movies. They were tense with a lot of buildup and then bangbangbang! Did you guess right about the time to pick your battle? If you did, that felt pretty sweet. If not, it became pretty clear where the stumble was-usually picking a fight you didn't need to.

However, the game had some issues and I'd like to talk a little bit about I think went wrong.

First; playtesting. In the first year of the game, especially in the last half of 2015 and into very early 2016, expansions were arriving every month. That is a lot of product to sift through.

And it lead to some cards that felt awkward or weird or nonsensical. Which leads me to the next point.

Second: unruffled feathers. I remember there was an early expansion that gave Dudes (the characters in the game) keywords of "Confederate" and "Union". The significance of this? They couldn't be on the same team at the same time.

That's it.

Since there was no reason to use them cooperatively, nor a reason to use them to counter each other, then perhaps they were just powerful? No. And if there's one thing Doomtown isn't lacking for it's Dudes to play. So the impact on the game that made players have to take into consideration those keywords was nothing.

So many features of the game, ostensibly new mechanics that were introduced, just didn't matter. Didn't change the status quo, and didn't reach back to make an old card interesting, nor pay off in a near future set. 

That is not a good thing for a new mechanic and it's the kind of problem that many Doomtown expansions had. But when they did we got...

Third: confounding expectations. For certain kinds of mechanics in Doomtown, the player would perform a Pull to see if they succeeded. To Pull, the player would simply announce the ability they were activating (say, the creation of a gadget) and then reveal the top card of their deck. If the value was greater than or equal to the number required for the Pull, the activation was a success. Certain modifiers would come into play at that point: a Dude could have a Mad Scientist value of 3, which would be added to the value of the card-so if I needed to hit a 7 with a Mad Scientist value of 3 and drew a 5 or greater, I'd succeed.

This all got turned upside down with the introduction of the Kung Fu mechanic. Which worked like this:

To play a Technique, you must choose a dude with Kung Fu and pull. If the pull is lower than the dude’s value (remember this is the dude’s printed value plus Kung Fu rating value), it succeeds. If the pull is equal to or higher than the dude’s value (once again, including Kung Fu rating), it fails.

What? Why do we have to add the Kung Fu value to the printed value? Why not just provide a Kung Fu number and then subtract that from the value you needed to hit? It would be a clever mechanical way to distinguish that ability and it would be an easy thing to remember.

In a game like Doomtown where mechanics already were difficult to remember- movement and how jobs worked, being most notable- adding in extra math and issues for value was needlessly complicated. Plus, it would allow for good Kung Fu Dudes at higher values so you would have a broader range of values to work with.

Messy implementations of mechanics like this are impediments, not benefits.

It's because of things like this that I feel Doomtown had difficulty sustaining an audience. It's too bad, because there is a really interesting game under it all that could have had time to shine. Magic was equally messy in it's early years too and people, I think, often overlook that because what we talk about now are the powerful successes that make Legacy and Vintage interesting.

But even with that, Magic almost imploded on itself in it's early years. I would have liked to see Doomtown make a similar escape. 

The Hate Cards

This post at MTGgoldfish describes the usefulness of hate cards to keep strategies from overrunning a format. I rather like the idea and I think it accurately diagnoses an important tool that Wizards needs to use to keep metagames in check.

Which is why I think more removal for Planeswalkers need to be printed.

Again: for every other permanent type, there is frequent common rarity removal printed for that type. Planeswalkers are the only permanent type that have this exception: Mold Shambler and Rootgrapple are the only current exceptions to this and both of those cards cost 5+ mana, which I don't think is terribly out of line, and are 7+ years old, which IS.

WotC might think that keeping Planeswalkers at the mythic rarity is helping but that's only driving prices up. Now I'm seeing a lot of control decks that want to use Planeswalkers as their victory conditions, which means it's only going to get worse.

So; hate cards. And common level Planeswalker removal. Or at least uncommon rarity, if they want to try and keep the supertype special.

I Question This Design

Sorry for the continuing deviation from Rize of the Fenix but:

Emrakul's Influence.

When I talk about "top-down" design being a problem (top-down design is where the world and story provide the impetus for the mechanics, not the other way around), cards like Emrakul's Influence are what I want to highlight.

What is the point of having this card provide card draw only for Eldrazi spells?

Flavor. It's all because of flavor and making you "feel" like the Eldrazi are powerful. We aren't going to find a run on 7+ CMC Eldrazi creature spells that suddenly make this playable--because 7+ CMC Eldrazi creature spells are already doing what you want them to do: change the landscape of the game.

But you know what? This card is still damn near unplayable. It's not going in any constructed deck, because a) they have better things to do with their time and b) it's too narrow. It's not going in any sealed deck for the exact same reasons. Magic isn't like Star Realms, where one turn where you get to draw two extra cards can be backbreaking, so it's worth taking Embassy Yacht-a card that's good on its own. (Don't get me wrong, two extra cards is still good. It's just usually not 'turn the corner to game over' good).

So instead, this card is all about "reinforcing the world" that you're in. As opposed to using the art, flavor text and name to do that.

Why not provide card draw for any creature spell with converted mana cost over 7? You'd still have the Eldrazi influence-reflected in the high casting cost of their creatures, the name, the art and the flavor text-but you'd also have a spell that people who just like to cast big monsters can use! You have a card that could find a nice home in a Commander deck, where people who like to cast big monsters often find themselves running out of resources. Hell, I like casting big monsters sometimes and run out of resources...

Does Emrakul's Influence suddenly become a must-include if this change is made? No. Does it even become a good card? No. But it becomes one that could play a role in some fun decks and at least has a place in Commander, or even my "bad Cube".

Instead we have this incredibly narrow card that is going to do nothing but collect dust in binders, because of top-down design. 

That bums me out.

Magic Dev Blog

The post on Reddit arrived quite late in the evening but it appears that Development has a Tumblr. This seems like a pretty neat way to get insight into how things are done and I thought I'd highlight it.

Shadows Over Innistrad impressions

I'll put it out up front: I like what I'm seeing in Shadows. I'm looking forward to playing with these cards and I think this set has got a lot going for it.

I still don't like double faced cards: I'm never going to like 'em, let's just get that out of the way now. We're agreed to disagree and I'm good with it.

Delirium: this is a neat idea that I wonder if it will work well. The obvious comparison for me is to Tarmogoyf (not the Threshold mechanic), but Tarmogoyf looks at everyone's graveyard for its bonuses. That's a pretty significant drawback and once again, I believe that this mechanic will be a lower tier Limited one. This is both too bad, because the mechanic is a neat way to provide a bonus, but good since it means that the price of fetchlands will remain consistent.

Although if they push the mechanic in Eldritch Moon, expect this to all get turned around and I personally have a R/G Tarmogoyf deck that will love Delirium if there are cards worth playing.

Investigate: it looks like they added 1 to the cost of most of these cards and then let you get a Clue token which can be sac'd for 2 more. So the mechanic has a additional cost of 3, which you can pay over time, to draw a card, instead of being a straight cantrip. From a flavor perspective, it makes sense. Mechanically, it's incredibly boring at the moment. If there's a sacrifice theme in the next set or block, that might become more interesting, and pairing these Clues with things like Arcbound Ravager or Daretti, Scrap Savant. Otherwise, yay Limited stuff.

Of note: they don't spread the card draw very well and I think that's a mistake. White gets Investigate, which is good, but Blue also gets this and it's unnecessary. Red and Black could both benefit from this mechanic. Card draw is too powerful to provide unevenly.

Madness: here is where things get interesting. There are plenty of cards that use discarding as a cost so you can save your mana for the Madness stuff. The cards in SOI don't seem broken or crazy but they're definitely cool and I'm glad this mechanic has come back. More interesting stuff like this WotC.

Again: this ability is really powerful and I'm sorry to see it spread unevenly. Hopefully Eldritch Moon will give Green and White some Madness cards.

Skulk isn't a mechanic but I do like the implementation and the feel of it. I wouldn't be surprised to see this become an evergreen ability.

Individual notes:
While it's cool to use the double-faced mechanic to show Avacyn's transformation, I also feel that this displays a certain lack of imagination on WotC's part, unable to give us an example of a mono-white villain.

Damnit, zombies are going to make my life miserable again, courtesy Fuz.

Why wasn't blue made the color of player mill and black opponent mill? It makes more sense that way: Black will peel back the opponent's mind, Blue will delve into its own.

Werewolves are still the worst tribe, and Wizard's attempt to allow players to control or make this tribe desirable result in making it feel more pathetic rather than less.

I know Westvale Abbey has everyone by the nuts right now but I don't think that will last. The payoff isn't worth it, at least not currently. If W/B lifegain control or tokens can make a dent, then maybe. But putting all of your eggs in one basket is rarely a good idea and the delay to get to 5 creatures and 6 mana is very, very risky, even if the payoff could work.

Also, from a nerd perspective: how does a chapel become a demon? I get having a sacrifice that creates a demon but buildings don't become creatures. And if I'm going to nitpick (and I am) then shouldn't Westvale Abbey be a legendary land, since it provides a legendary creature? How many Westvale Abbeys are there?

I think it's super awesome Scarecrows are coming back as a creature type! But I also want to go back to Shadowmoor so....

There's been word that Cryptolith Rite is just the most broken thing ever. Nope. But it is quite good.

As much as I dislike double-faced cards, I am glad to see them trying some new things, as with Skin Invasion or Startled Awake.

Haunting Past

The Shadows Over Innistrad previews have started and I'm actually more interested in this set than other Magic sets. I still don't like double-faced cards but hey, at least I know what I'm annoyed at going in!

There is one card I've seen, however, that made me worry.

Pore Over The Pages.

Back in Urza's Block there was a mechanic in Blue that allowed spells to essentially be played for "free" by untapping lands equal to the casting cost of the spell. If the CC of spell was 5, then untap 5 lands, for example. Some of these spells were fair, like Rewind, but others, Frantic Search and Cloud of Faeries, were overpowered. Rare was the sweet spot hit-I'd say Treachery probably comes close but even that card is absolutely brutal. This might have worked out OK, except this was also the block that printed Tolarian Academy.

The lesson-one that Magic has had to repeatedly learn-is that giving free anything is extremely risky to gameplay, and giving free things to Blue is Very Bad, if you're interested in providing players with a metagame that is varied and interesting. Uzra's Block taught us that. So did Mirrodin. And then New Phyrexia. Then Khan's block. You know, in case the lesson didn't stick.

Now, if we had environments where lands didn't ever give people two mana, that might be one thing. But both Modern and Legacy are currently being heavily impacted by the Eldrazi enabler cards; lands that tap for two to give players a huge jumpstart on mana, allowing for heavily lopsided board states early on. There have been combo decks made from the common land cycle in Ravnica block, decks that have resulted in bannings.

I realize that Pore Over The Pages is not the same thing as Frantic Search. There are some very significant differences that I have to take into consideration: POTP only untaps two lands and is sorcery speed. These are not small changes!

But it still provides Blue with the opportunity to filter three cards and then either lay a new threat for up to four mana, or protect the current one with up to four mana, and that is potentially very, very unbalancing.

In Standard, a card like this won't make a significant splash but in every other format? I'd be keeping my eyes on it.

Graveyard II, It's STILL a bad idea

So there's this.

It's a long column by Rosewater and we don't have all day, so I'm going to cut to the meat & bones of it. From the article:

Erik then came back to me with another request. Having to keep track of an extra zone was logistically a pain. What if when you "ate" the exiled cards, instead of being super-exiled, they went back to the opponent's graveyard. My gut response was a strong dislike, because I've worked so hard to keep exiled cards from returning, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that it wasn't affecting the issue I cared about most: the ability to get back your own exiled cards. The original version of what we now call Processors was you paying a cost to get an effect, a small part of which was returning exiled cards to your opponent.

 So, credit where due: Erik is right and another zone would be incredibly difficult to keep track of. As it is, there are six (library, hand, battlefield, graveyard, exile, and command) and while two of those zones don't get much use, adding a seventh serves no purpose.

But damnit, why doesn't Mark stick to his guns here? Since the graveyard is now functioning as a second library for so many decks, having cards put back into it from exile is just asking for trouble. Here's his reasoning:

The system could not easily be abused, because it was your opponent who chose whether or not to bring it back to the game, and even then, it was put back into the graveyard where it's not as easy to access

That's an error: the system is now it's now abusable, because it's a system that exists!

There is one thing that people do very, very well: Find ways to manipulate (or abuse) systems. We won't pay that price this year or next year but eventually someone is going to find a way to abuse this new exploit and it's going to happen because the door is now open. Mechanics can now be designed that interact with Exile and eventually someone is going to come up with a neat and seemingly innocuous idea that gets blown up.

Sigh. Yeah, the choice to interact with Delve is a good one but these doors are now open and they won't ever get shut. That they interact differently isn't the point: they now interact with active zones of the game, thus becoming an active zone. It's going to create the necessity of another zone where players cannot interact with cards.

That isn't a good thing.

I'm headed to Nevada tomorrow, so there won't be new content up until next week, but come Thursday let's take a new deck on. Plus I can tell you how badly I did with the Desolation Row deck!

You Can't Argue With Someone Else's Experience (pt 1)

There've been a couple of posts at Killing A Goldfish that have been taking a swing at Magic at large and one of the most popular formats, Commander. There has been discussion at his blog and on the Magic subreddit about it but I felt like some things needed to be said about these rather snarky and not very well substantiated articles.

1) He's right and there's nothing you can do about it. If someone eats a taco and they hate it, you don't get to tell them that they are wrong. Sure, you can but what's the point? Even if they are wrong you cannot change their experience of that wrongness. They hate the taco; they will always have that moment where they hated the taco and nothing you can do will amend that and arguing against it is a waste of everybody's time.

2) Context matters. The thing about that experience though is that it's filtered through whatever life a person brings to it. This is why people continue to love shitty things (nostalgia, say for anything Adam Sandler does) or revisit something and discover it was amazing when they couldn't understand it before (John Coltrane's A Love Supreme, which I still give a day to about once a year because I don't get it) or change, discovering that hey, not all dogs bite so maybe I don't have to be afraid of them.

Which is a long way of saying that the author isn't wrong, exactly, but his experiences have lead him to some conclusions that I find lack the proper context to understand. So let's talk about those points, starting with the 'Why Magic Sucks' article.

"mana variance isn’t fun"
This is correct. Losing because of mana or color screw isn't fun. What this notion fails to take into account are these four considerations:
A) This drawback has forced Magic's designers to work out ways to mitigate those problems, giving us mechanics that are interesting (cycling is the first one I can recall Wizards saying they were doing to help smooth decks out but they continue to work on this).
B) This drawback has forced players to make decks that are actually playable, instead of living in Magical Christmas land where they always get to do what they want.
C) This variance allows for someone with lesser experience to beat a more skilled opponent every so often and that's good for the game. That's partially why we play games. To see who is better. And sometimes, the best player doesn't win. Ask the 2007 Patriots. Then ask everyone else how exciting that game was. Generating excitement is good for a game, every game.
D) There is no human activity that lacks variance. There's just no getting around this fact. No matter how reliable something is, eventually there is going to be the Get Schwifty moment.

Essentially: What he's complaining about is impossible to completely fix and instead has lead to innovations in Magic's design.

"it’s horrifically expensive"
I've long argued this point and while some of the analogies break down (even if you spend $3K on a awesome gaming machine, you now have to spend money for the games for that machine), I think that the secondary market is going to burst. When, I can't say but historically this is true for everything. It's why people shouldn't look at Magic as an investment: it's going to break and they are going to be fucked.

There's a serious problem there, because WotC needs stores to sell their product but the stores need WotC to keep a reliable run of difficult-to-acquire cards flowing that those stores can harvest and sell. So WotC can't just reprint cards that people need to make solid decks, it'll destroy those shops that need Magic money. Buuuuut the current prices are unsustainable: you cannot get new and especially younger players with the secondary market charging so much. Eventually, it's going to collapse if it isn't addressed and nobody is going to come out well when the bottom drops out.

The only way to prevent this from completely cratering? Bring in new and especially younger people. Young folks don't have a lot of money though, so how do you keep them looped in? I'm not sure but they'd better work it out.

"it’s a collectable"
This is a poorly written section, leaping off the last section's point and considerably impacted by the author's experience as an employee for Card Kingdom. Anyone who has worked retail long enough can tell you: retail sucks because you have to deal with people. And even if 90% of the people you deal with are awesome, it only takes 2% of them to fuck up your day, your week, or even more. Because in retail, you have to be nice and you cannot take a stand for yourself when someone else treats you like a subhuman. 

But the point is isn't wrong, it just doesn't come explain itself very well. What I believe the real downer is this: the metagame of trying to find the best prices to buy or sell a card has created a stranglehold on the actual metagame of what the best deck to play is.

If you have ever done comparison shopping online, then you understand. Now imagine having to do that for 16K bits of paper. We have articles and websites dedicated to tracking the ups and downs of the prices of singles. So much of it driven by speculators that I don't even know where to begin.

God, it gets old and it isn't what the actual game is at all. It's a game for some people, absolutely, but it isn't Magic.

"it’s old" and "only wizards makes magic"

I'm grouping these points because they want to talk about the same thing but to get a full article's worth of drama out of it, you gotta break it up and these points either A) don't take into account the reality or B) get contradicted by comments in the Commander article.

The first part of the "it's old" argument is practically refuted by the author himself, reminding everyone that there are artistic endeavors where brilliance comes later. I'll come back to this point though because it holds water.

The second part of "it's old" essentially says "Magic no longer innovates" is true if we accept the final problem, that "only Wizards makes Magic".

Exhibit one is M15.

I know everyone is super high on Origins (which is actually a great set to illustrate exactly why the author is right and the sets are no longer innovating on gameplay) but to properly dispute this point we have to look at M15, a set that was far, far better in my opinion. Part of M15's strength was the presence of cards designed from people who were not part of the Wizard's hivemind. Aggressive Mining, Hot Soup, Chasm Skulker, on and on: a whole host of rares were designed by people who just play the game. Those cards pushed things in interesting directions, directions that players get to explore and Wizards may use sometime.

This means that there is innovation being done, even if it is on a smaller scale.

Exhibit two would be the comments about Cube near the end of the Commander article.

"To me, the ideal casual Magic format is cube. One person supplies all the cards; doesn’t matter if it includes every piece of power in its original Alpha printing, or if they just picked up the entire cube at Kinko’s yesterday. Everyone starts out at equal footing: you sit down with nothing but your knowledge of Magic, without spending anything. The cube designer gets to decide exactly what about Magic they find the most fun, and if everyone in the draft agrees with that perspective, they’ll have a great time.

Cube is also the most self-expressive way to play Magic..."

Cube is someone else making Magic. By the very process of creating an environment and self-selecting the cards that person wants, someone else has made "punk rock Magic", using the tools in ways that Wizards didn't intend, offering players a way to express themselves in a new way or at least one unique to that player. 

Why doesn't the author see that?

As I said before, you cannot argue with someone else's experience and there are reasons this experience exists. I think it's very easy to make the case that Wizards has been timid in its design, art, and willingness to fail since at least Shards block. That the shifts in the game of Magic have been incremental at best and often tilted towards a 'lowest common denominator' way of treating the audience, carried out by a bunch of people who want to protect their world, which means they are going to resist big change. Because, as noted earlier, Magic is an old game.

It isn't the whole story though.

We'll talk Commander next time.

Oblivion Sower

So the first card for Battle for Zendikar has arrived: Oblivion Sower.

There are a few interesting things about this card for me and most of them aren't very exciting.

First, I think the ability on Oblivion Sower is likely the new Eldrazi ability. Of Return of the Eldrazi's colorless Eldrazi creatures, all of them had Annihilator. Which means that the ability of 'exile the top X of an opponent's library and then get Y', where Y = creatures, lands, spells, whatever, is probably the ability of all the new colorless Eldrazi.

I'll just use Eldrazi as short for the colorless creatures from here out. Nobody cares that Rapacious One is an Eldrazi.

I don't think this ability is very exciting, myself and I think it's got a similar problem to Annihilator, which has been nixed as a mechanic for being too 'feel bad'. In the same vein, I think that the free theft of people's decks also feels bad. I think of a card like Shared Fate, which denies people the ability to play their own decks and I see a cousin to this new Eldrazi mechanic.

They don't print cards like Shared Fate often and for a good reason: it's complicated and it cuts a player off from their own creation.

There's also a feel bad if Oblivion Sower misses. Sure, you're likely to get at least one land out of the deal, and just dicking around with the top four cards of various decks I own suggests that two lands is going to be average--and that doesn't suck! But. You're going to miss, too, leaving you with a 5/8 that has no other abilities.

It could be even more one-dimensional; the Eldrazi could only steal lands. That would avoid the 'feel bad' of cutting someone's deck off, but my goodness is that boring as hell. Plus, it would mean that WotC is avoiding a big chunk of design space and I'm not certain why they'd do that. I may not like this ability but the variance of stealing spells or permanents makes sense, provides an actual threat and still allows for the ability to miss. Leaving players with giant vanilla creatures.

Avoiding these feel bad moments means that my next point is pretty likely.

Since the ability on Oblivion Sower reads 'put any number of land cards that player owns in exile' suggests two things: a) that this block will put things into Exile more than Magic has before and b) that this block will interact with that Exile zone more than the game has before.

Making the Exile zone Graveyard 2: Electric Boogaloo. I've talked about this before and stonethorn rightly pointed out that the Exile zone has had a steady stream of cards interacting with that zone for a long time. They are always limited in their interactions but they do exist. My problem is that Exile zone interactions adds complication to the game and I don't think the game needs to be more complicated.

Now, on the other hand I recognize that while it may've been more interesting to have those cards go to the graveyard instead, it presents other problems, because if the Eldrazi milled decks and then stole, players would have more challenging decisions to make playing decks that are using the Delve (in Standard) and feed the graveyard at large (in all other formats). That seems a lot cooler however, I do see that there's an inherent risk powering up your opponent's strategies and leaving you with a vanilla 5/8. That kind of risk makes for an interesting game--or it might, if you didn't pay 6 mana for a 5/8 that has no other value if it misses.

This takes away from the coolness and the threat that the Eldrazi represent, bringing me to the last point.

I just don't get the same feeling from this mechanic as I did from Annihilator. Annihilator felt scary and new, alien and different from the other colors. This just seems Blue, attached to a body that dies to Terror.

That doesn't mean that I think that every Eldrazi should be Emrakul. That would be awful for the game and I don't believe that Oblivion Sower has zero impact. It almost certainly needs more context to be properly evaluated. But it doesn't bring that same sense of dread, either and that's too bad.