Wednesday, January 05, 2011
Happy New Year!
Happy New Years everyone! Once again, to celebrate the new year, I'm posting another magic article and preview card. I want to write an article about Rarities (specifically how it relates to fake sets) and something about "liking your cards", so I'll do the latter today, as the Rarities article would relate better to a different set of preview cards. Today's article will probably be pretty short, so you'll get to your preview card soon enough.
Before I start on today's article, I remembered something I wanted to add to the previous article, about mana costs and restrictive color costs. I said before that something that costs BBB might be okay for constructed but not for limited, although that's not always true.
Sometimes if you open an extremely good card that is designed for monocolored play, you try really hard to stick to that color. As you open more boosters and see more cards, you will get tempted to switch to more colors, but maybe your persistence will pay off and you'll be able to stay in 1 color and be able to play that card. In your mind, you will say "good job".
But it's a bit different in Unknown 2; Because you're only drafting Unknown 2 a very limited number of times, it is very unfair to the other colors and the other designers if you are limiting your choices to a single color. In my opinion, each of the designers is trying to share a vision or an idea through each of their cards, and, in my opinion, if you choose to make a single-color deck then you aren't being very open-minded to the ideas of others.
Therefore, I believe it would be good practice to try to not force people into drafting a single color. Actually, this point sort of deals with this upcoming article too, so with that, let's get into today's article.
I imagine creating/designing cards for a core set is vastly different than creating/designing cards for an actual set; similarly, that can be different than creating/designing cards for a fake set, and also, creating/designing cards for a portion of a fake set.
For example, in a core set, you, as a designer, might be asked to fill in a common black slot, and you'll come up with three mana 2/2 vanilla creature... and that's all fine and all. When the set comes out, you won't be looking for feedback on your contribution, and you're not expecting reviews on how your vanilla creature is affecting the Magic scene. Sometimes this happens in a real set too; you might need a common black creature, and you get the three to cast 2/2 infect, which once again isn't going to win any awards for creativity or won't become a staple.
But for the most part, if you're in charge of designing a rare, you would probably be trying really hard to make an interesting card that people will find use for, or that people will find flavorful or exciting. After designing a rare that you've put your heart and soul into, you'd probably want some feedback from your fellow designers, and also from the players that play with your card. Sure, there are still plenty of rares that just feel kinda regular, but every now and then there's a really neat card (usually a rare) that changes the way you think about Magic.
I'd like to think the same is true for each of our portions of Unknown 2; as a designer, you are hoping to create cards that people will like. In Unknown 2, you're not in charge of making 2/2 vanilla creatures, or you don't have the responsibility to fill in portions of the set with filler cards. You are hoping to put a personal touch on each of your cards that make the player say "Wow" when they first see the card.
I think this is true for me. When people open the boosters and see some of my rares and uncommons, I want them to say "ooh" and I'd like to think that they would take my cards. I don't mean to say that you should make ultra-powerful or ultra-broken cards, but the cards should be interesting, exciting, and yes, somewhat powerful. Also, I don't mean to limit it to rares and uncommons; commons are fair game too.
We all have had the experience of opening a booster and getting a bad rare. My idea of Unknown 2 is that every booster opened would contain an exciting rare, made by someone that really liked the card and hopes that it would be played. Anyway, my question to you is, what do you think? Is this true of your portion of Unknown 2?
Anyway, that's it. Now for the preview cards!
Something Old, Something New, Something Violent, Something Cruel
Today's preview card is actually two preview cards, which are part of a common cycle. Anyway, I'm going to be a hypocrite now and take back something I just wrote... I said that in Unknown 2, you, as a designer, do not have a responsibility to make filler cards... which is partially true, but I did say earlier in e-mails that the set needs cards such as instant black creature removal, instant red direct damage, enchantment removal, etc... so while we are pretty free in what we do, we still have a couple responsibilities here and there.
Today's preview cycle is actually born from these responsibilities. In order to fulfill all these different basic functionality for the different colors, we would probably need to fill many different common slots... unfortunately, we each don't have that many slots to play around with... we have about, what, 3 or 4 common slots for each color? So I decided I had to perhaps combine some of the ideas.
To be honest, this cycle's idea was also born from an actual Magic EDH game I played with Vinh. I used Jhoira of the Ghitu to suspend Rite of Replication, and then when it was put on the stack, I asked Vinh if I could play the kicker cost and he said I could, as it was an additional cost to play the spell that I could pay for... and I'm a pretty big fan of kicker. Generally, I like the idea that cards have several ways to play them, depending on what stage you are at in a game. That said, I'm also a fan of cycling, as it's basically the same idea as kicker, but, like, backwards (except for resounding wave, which is a pretty implementation of cycling).
So there I was, with a previously suspended Rite of Replication, and now the option to spend 5 mana to greatly boost the spell, which is a great deal. Alternatively, I could choose not to spend the five mana and just have the spell for free. Alternatively to that, I could have skipped the suspending, and just pay the regular four mana to hard-cast the spell. And the last alternative, was I could pay the whole nine mana to cast the spell and pay its kicker at the same time, and get the entire effect.
So similar to Resounding Wave, which, by the way, is a common, I wanted to have a cycle of cards that could have potentially powerful results, if you like to invest mana into them. But the problem was, how could I represent the first two ideas, in which I didn't hard-cast the spell? Eventually, the idea came to me, and I was pleased with the result.
I must say, this common cycle is probably my least elegant cycle I've done in a while; it's wordy, and in some ways it's all over the place. Also, I haven't named these cards yet, so I'll just use the codenames. Anyway, I want to say more about the cards, but first I'll show them off to you:
Again, I'm going to be honest; I did say before that I want people to like my cards, but really though, these cards are incredibly inefficient. If you want, you can have a functional Mind Rot or Staggershock on turn three, which is okay. However, if you want to play with the special effects, at the earliest, you would have to spend three of your four mana on turn four (which basically uses the whole turn), and then four of your five mana on turn five (which basically uses up that whole turn too). However, if that destroys two small creatures and an artifact, that might be a good use of two turns. It is still kinda inefficient, because you're spending your fourth turn to cast something that is (arguably) optimal on turn 3, and using your fifth turn to get an effect that is (arguably) more reasonable for turn 4.
Then the alternative is you can spend seven mana on a later turn, and have a marginal effect; you can't honestly say you would spend 7 mana to destroy a creature and cause them to discard a card, or to destroy a land and deal 2 damage to a player. However, the bonus comes in the next turn, where you spend an additional four mana (or half of your turn eight) to get the whole effect again. 7 mana for two card discard and two creature deaths is pretty reliable, or four damage and two lands, although half of your mana will be tied up the next turn.
Also, note the mana costs, which I wrote about in my previous article. For the basic effect, a simple splash would do and would get you the traditional Mind Rot or Staggershock. If you ever want the special effect, you'll need to either main the color or have it be a strong splash, as it requires two of that color of mana. However, if you ever want the ultimate special where you get all the effects as often as you can, you'll need three of your seven mana to be that color, which basically means you should main that color.
I hoped you enjoyed this preview article. The preview cards may not be as good as Cruel Ultimatum, but at common, monocolored, and with all the other options, it sure is more playable.
Comments:
Post a Comment
Before I start on today's article, I remembered something I wanted to add to the previous article, about mana costs and restrictive color costs. I said before that something that costs BBB might be okay for constructed but not for limited, although that's not always true.
Sometimes if you open an extremely good card that is designed for monocolored play, you try really hard to stick to that color. As you open more boosters and see more cards, you will get tempted to switch to more colors, but maybe your persistence will pay off and you'll be able to stay in 1 color and be able to play that card. In your mind, you will say "good job".
But it's a bit different in Unknown 2; Because you're only drafting Unknown 2 a very limited number of times, it is very unfair to the other colors and the other designers if you are limiting your choices to a single color. In my opinion, each of the designers is trying to share a vision or an idea through each of their cards, and, in my opinion, if you choose to make a single-color deck then you aren't being very open-minded to the ideas of others.
Therefore, I believe it would be good practice to try to not force people into drafting a single color. Actually, this point sort of deals with this upcoming article too, so with that, let's get into today's article.
I imagine creating/designing cards for a core set is vastly different than creating/designing cards for an actual set; similarly, that can be different than creating/designing cards for a fake set, and also, creating/designing cards for a portion of a fake set.
For example, in a core set, you, as a designer, might be asked to fill in a common black slot, and you'll come up with three mana 2/2 vanilla creature... and that's all fine and all. When the set comes out, you won't be looking for feedback on your contribution, and you're not expecting reviews on how your vanilla creature is affecting the Magic scene. Sometimes this happens in a real set too; you might need a common black creature, and you get the three to cast 2/2 infect, which once again isn't going to win any awards for creativity or won't become a staple.
But for the most part, if you're in charge of designing a rare, you would probably be trying really hard to make an interesting card that people will find use for, or that people will find flavorful or exciting. After designing a rare that you've put your heart and soul into, you'd probably want some feedback from your fellow designers, and also from the players that play with your card. Sure, there are still plenty of rares that just feel kinda regular, but every now and then there's a really neat card (usually a rare) that changes the way you think about Magic.
I'd like to think the same is true for each of our portions of Unknown 2; as a designer, you are hoping to create cards that people will like. In Unknown 2, you're not in charge of making 2/2 vanilla creatures, or you don't have the responsibility to fill in portions of the set with filler cards. You are hoping to put a personal touch on each of your cards that make the player say "Wow" when they first see the card.
I think this is true for me. When people open the boosters and see some of my rares and uncommons, I want them to say "ooh" and I'd like to think that they would take my cards. I don't mean to say that you should make ultra-powerful or ultra-broken cards, but the cards should be interesting, exciting, and yes, somewhat powerful. Also, I don't mean to limit it to rares and uncommons; commons are fair game too.
We all have had the experience of opening a booster and getting a bad rare. My idea of Unknown 2 is that every booster opened would contain an exciting rare, made by someone that really liked the card and hopes that it would be played. Anyway, my question to you is, what do you think? Is this true of your portion of Unknown 2?
Anyway, that's it. Now for the preview cards!
Something Old, Something New, Something Violent, Something Cruel
Today's preview card is actually two preview cards, which are part of a common cycle. Anyway, I'm going to be a hypocrite now and take back something I just wrote... I said that in Unknown 2, you, as a designer, do not have a responsibility to make filler cards... which is partially true, but I did say earlier in e-mails that the set needs cards such as instant black creature removal, instant red direct damage, enchantment removal, etc... so while we are pretty free in what we do, we still have a couple responsibilities here and there.
Today's preview cycle is actually born from these responsibilities. In order to fulfill all these different basic functionality for the different colors, we would probably need to fill many different common slots... unfortunately, we each don't have that many slots to play around with... we have about, what, 3 or 4 common slots for each color? So I decided I had to perhaps combine some of the ideas.
To be honest, this cycle's idea was also born from an actual Magic EDH game I played with Vinh. I used Jhoira of the Ghitu to suspend Rite of Replication, and then when it was put on the stack, I asked Vinh if I could play the kicker cost and he said I could, as it was an additional cost to play the spell that I could pay for... and I'm a pretty big fan of kicker. Generally, I like the idea that cards have several ways to play them, depending on what stage you are at in a game. That said, I'm also a fan of cycling, as it's basically the same idea as kicker, but, like, backwards (except for resounding wave, which is a pretty implementation of cycling).
So there I was, with a previously suspended Rite of Replication, and now the option to spend 5 mana to greatly boost the spell, which is a great deal. Alternatively, I could choose not to spend the five mana and just have the spell for free. Alternatively to that, I could have skipped the suspending, and just pay the regular four mana to hard-cast the spell. And the last alternative, was I could pay the whole nine mana to cast the spell and pay its kicker at the same time, and get the entire effect.
So similar to Resounding Wave, which, by the way, is a common, I wanted to have a cycle of cards that could have potentially powerful results, if you like to invest mana into them. But the problem was, how could I represent the first two ideas, in which I didn't hard-cast the spell? Eventually, the idea came to me, and I was pleased with the result.
I must say, this common cycle is probably my least elegant cycle I've done in a while; it's wordy, and in some ways it's all over the place. Also, I haven't named these cards yet, so I'll just use the codenames. Anyway, I want to say more about the cards, but first I'll show them off to you:
Again, I'm going to be honest; I did say before that I want people to like my cards, but really though, these cards are incredibly inefficient. If you want, you can have a functional Mind Rot or Staggershock on turn three, which is okay. However, if you want to play with the special effects, at the earliest, you would have to spend three of your four mana on turn four (which basically uses the whole turn), and then four of your five mana on turn five (which basically uses up that whole turn too). However, if that destroys two small creatures and an artifact, that might be a good use of two turns. It is still kinda inefficient, because you're spending your fourth turn to cast something that is (arguably) optimal on turn 3, and using your fifth turn to get an effect that is (arguably) more reasonable for turn 4.
Then the alternative is you can spend seven mana on a later turn, and have a marginal effect; you can't honestly say you would spend 7 mana to destroy a creature and cause them to discard a card, or to destroy a land and deal 2 damage to a player. However, the bonus comes in the next turn, where you spend an additional four mana (or half of your turn eight) to get the whole effect again. 7 mana for two card discard and two creature deaths is pretty reliable, or four damage and two lands, although half of your mana will be tied up the next turn.
Also, note the mana costs, which I wrote about in my previous article. For the basic effect, a simple splash would do and would get you the traditional Mind Rot or Staggershock. If you ever want the special effect, you'll need to either main the color or have it be a strong splash, as it requires two of that color of mana. However, if you ever want the ultimate special where you get all the effects as often as you can, you'll need three of your seven mana to be that color, which basically means you should main that color.
I hoped you enjoyed this preview article. The preview cards may not be as good as Cruel Ultimatum, but at common, monocolored, and with all the other options, it sure is more playable.