|
Mercury Crusader posted:What if Tarkir is basically Mongolian Kamigawa, with every rare creature in Khans of Tarkir being a legend? Well let me be the first to recommend a pretty good and accessible biography of Genghis Khan and the empire he created, then: Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World. Good read. I think there's an audiobook version on Audible if that's more your thing. Temujin starts his life as the son of a low-class hunter in a steppes consumed by tribal warfare, loses his extended family and is made an outlaw, and ultimately sold into slavery. By force of will and a revolutionary view of transforming and ending the Steppe's endless cycle of tribal strife, he defeats and consumes all the various tribes of the Steppes, transforming what was a multiple loose tribal associations of hunters raiding each other into a unified state based on meritocracy with then-strange things like religious freedom, a non-repressive multi-cultural society, a unique martial code, and what amounted to an executive royalty that actually was beholden to law. There's a reason why there's a joke that the Mongolians are the exception to basically everything about ancient civilizations; they never even bothered to adopt large scale agriculture beyond free-range herding. The fact that they didn't engage in agriculture actually worked vastly to their benefit; by comparison to other armies that mostly had infantry that ate millet-based gruel that really didn't do much for their health, the Mongol's largely meat-and-dairy diet made their soldiers capable of fighting waaay longer and waaay more proficiently than basically everyone they went up against. Combine that with their expert horsemanship (the whole "living in the saddle" thing is pretty much no joke) and obsession with ranged warfare driving them to be reaallly creative about warfare (beyond just being master horseback archers, there's a lot of interesting cultural taboos / religious practice about blood and smells that all in all made them very prone towards finding solutions that involve killing people without having to get too close to them). All I want really in terms of flavor-theming out of the block really is a card that represents diverting a river to obliterate a fortification. When the Mongolians first tried the trick they accidentally destroyed their own camp instead of the town they were besieging, but they got it right the second time. And all the times after that. It's a really interesting culture / society. They were definitely quite brutal to be sure, but hell, all the societies they conquered and absorbed tended to be faaaar worse. Hell, a lot of the notoriety associated with them was actually Mongol propaganda designed to intimidate people into surrendering so that they wouldn't have to bother with actually fighting. They loved them some propaganda. Zorak fucked around with this message at 07:47 on May 27, 2014 |
#
?
May 27, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 07:49 |
|
|
Zorak posted:All I want really in terms of flavor-theming out of the block really is a card that represents diverting a river to obliterate a fortification. When the Mongolians first tried the trick they accidentally destroyed their own camp instead of the town they were besieging, but they got it right the second time. And all the times after that. Perfect opportunity for a reprint: 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 07:35
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:But those were the best parts of Kamigawa I loved Kamigawa block, I'm working on remaking the samurai and spiritcraft decks I had at the time before I sold my collection around Shards of Alara. I think what hurt it the most was falling between Mirrodin and Ravnica. Cards from the set have seen more play in other formats, like Sensei's Diving Top, the Spirit Dragons, etc. I don't know what the playerbase as a whole thought, but Mark Rosewater has mentioned it as something that hurt the block overall.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 07:38
|
|
|
Zorak posted:Well let me be the first to recommend a pretty good and accessible biography of Genghis Khan and the empire he created, then: Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World. I'll have to give that a read. History in general is about the only topic I will read on a recreational basis. That there was so much expansion in the Mongol Empire in such as short span of time intrigues me. Lottery of Babylon posted:Sounds like the problem wasn't so much "Too many legendaries" but rather "Needs more legendaries", let's have an all-legend set like Alara Reborn was all-gold. Vanilla Grizzly Bears and Gray Ogres that are legendary. And to make them work at common/limited, there's three or four of each. I do wonder if they'd ever try something like a "legendary instant/sorcery" or whatever. Pokemon has a subset of Trainer cards that is limited to one of that specific type in a deck (ACE Spec). For example, Computer Search and Master Ball are both ACE Spec cards, so you can only run one or the other in a deck but not both. I don't know if something like that would actually work in Magic.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
Mercury Crusader posted:Vanilla Grizzly Bears and Gray Ogres that are legendary. And to make them work at common/limited, there's three or four of each. Not really, legendary rules only really have a purpose in relation to permanents. Other games like Hearthstone limit the number of cards you can have in your deck, but beyond that... ehhhhh. It would be flavor text with some bonuses more than anything.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
Elyv posted:I'm pretty sure he's talking about the 1W Masques enchantment. Of course hymn is powerful but thanks for the lectures, other people.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 08:00
|
|
|
Mercury Crusader posted:I do wonder if they'd ever try something like a "legendary instant/sorcery" or whatever. Pokemon has a subset of Trainer cards that is limited to one of that specific type in a deck (ACE Spec). For example, Computer Search and Master Ball are both ACE Spec cards, so you can only run one or the other in a deck but not both. I don't know if something like that would actually work in Magic. The epic cycle from Saviors(Enduring Ideal and 4 other cards that no one remembers) were an attempt to make legendary sorceries.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
Mercury Crusader posted:I'll have to give that a read. History in general is about the only topic I will read on a recreational basis. That there was so much expansion in the Mongol Empire in such as short span of time intrigues me. Maybe if two legendary instant/societies are on the stack at once they cancel out?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
Mercury Crusader posted:I do wonder if they'd ever try something like a "legendary instant/sorcery" or whatever. Pokemon has a subset of Trainer cards that is limited to one of that specific type in a deck (ACE Spec). For example, Computer Search and Master Ball are both ACE Spec cards, so you can only run one or the other in a deck but not both. I don't know if something like that would actually work in Magic. I only have a passing familiarity with the Pokemon TCG (played it as a kid and tried the online flash version for a bit more recently), but it seems like that game has a couple of elements that make the ACE Spec mechanic work better there. The draw power is insane so you can reliably draw most of your deck; trainer cards are all colorless and can be tossed into any deck; and ACE Spec is evergreen. In Magic, draw power isn't as crazy so you'd be less likely to see your ACE Spec, which means anyone lucky enough to randomly draw their ACE Spec would have randomly stumbled into a major advantage. And between the color system and only having ACE Specs around for one block, the pool of ACE Specs would be so limited that you wouldn't have many options when deciding which ACE Spec to put in any given deck. I like the idea of Legendary Instants/Sorceries, but if they ever do print them I'm guessing they'll be more like Tribal Instants/Sorceries than ACE Specs.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 08:06
|
|
|
Shaman Ooglaboogla posted:Maybe if two legendary instant/societies are on the stack at once they cancel out? If they made it like how legendary permanents work now and you can decide between which of the two legendary instants on the stack stays on, that might be interesting on paper. I have no idea if that kind of stack shenanigans would work in practice, though.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
Could have it instead be after you cast it, exile each other copy from your hand/library.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 08:13
|
|
|
Maybe exile it and go what Godsend does where you can't cast another copy. Is there a better way of achieving that effect? If they're mythic you could use an emblem.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 08:14
|
|
|
TheLawinator posted:Could have it instead be after you cast it, exile each other copy from your hand/library.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 11:16
|
|
|
Shaman Ooglaboogla posted:Maybe exile it and go what Godsend does where you can't cast another copy. Is there a better way of achieving that effect? If they're mythic you could use an emblem. It could exile any copies from hand/library/graveyard face down to limit their use. Add a bonus for each copy exiled or an emblem to have some small recurring effect and prevents you from playing more copies or making copies.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 11:53
|
|
|
BrokenKnees posted:It could exile any copies from hand/library/graveyard face down to limit their use. Add a bonus for each copy exiled or an emblem to have some small recurring effect and prevents you from playing more copies or making copies. Doing stuff with your library as a drawback is pretty bad rules-wise - Magic tries very hard to avoid relying on the honor system, and explicitly allows you to "fail to find" a specific card in your library even if it's actually there. And I don't see anything that doing it this way actually gains you over just exiling the first spell and not being able to cast other spells with the same name.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 12:20
|
|
|
Zorak posted:Well let me be the first to recommend a pretty good and accessible biography of Genghis Khan and the empire he created, then: Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World. Good read. I think there's an audiobook version on Audible if that's more your thing. Was the movie telling the truth another Mongols being terrified of thunderstorms? Because that would make for a great blue card with a bounce effect. Macdeo Lurjtux fucked around with this message at 12:53 on May 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 12:34
|
|
|
anti-thoughtseize card: pure intentions from SoK. It is poop 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 12:41
|
|
|
Jabor posted:Doing stuff with your library as a drawback is pretty bad rules-wise - Magic tries very hard to avoid relying on the honor system, and explicitly allows you to "fail to find" a specific card in your library even if it's actually there. And I don't see anything that doing it this way actually gains you over just exiling the first spell and not being able to cast other spells with the same name.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 12:47
|
|
|
You can come up with lots of ways to do "legendary" instants and sorceries that work flavor-wise, more-or-less, but it would need to be a mechanic that actually adds something cool and interesting to gameplay. This kind of thing: TheLawinator posted:Could have it instead be after you cast it, exile each other copy from your hand/library.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
Entropic posted:You can come up with lots of ways to do "legendary" instants and sorceries that work flavor-wise, more-or-less, but it would need to be a mechanic that actually adds something cool and interesting to gameplay. like Epic, for example?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 14:10
|
|
|
For the low price of one mana, One With Nothing blanks Thoughtseize entirely, turning it into a dead card in your opponent's hand! 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
Entropic posted:For the low price of one mana, One With Nothing blanks Thoughtseize entirely, turning it into a dead card in your opponent's hand! The hilarious thing, to me, about One With Nothing is that it was 99% of the time worse than just casting Breakthrough for 0.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
Jabor posted:Doing stuff with your library as a drawback is pretty bad rules-wise - Magic tries very hard to avoid relying on the honor system, and explicitly allows you to "fail to find" a specific card in your library even if it's actually there. And I don't see anything that doing it this way actually gains you over just exiling the first spell and not being able to cast other spells with the same name. Rules-wise it's not hard to come up with a way to do it. Though there's no reason to do so (as you said), I'd template it as either: "When you cast ~, you may exile three cards from your hand or library with the same name as ~. Otherwise, counter ~." Or: "As an additional cost to cast ~, exile up to three cards from your hand or library with the same name as ~. For each card exiled this way, do ..." More interesting design space might be in the opposite direction - a Squadron Hawk instant or sorcery: "When you successfully cast ~, you may search your library for up to three cards named ~, reveal them, and put it into your hand". Or a Llanowar Sentinel version: "When you cast ~, you may pay X. If you do, search your library for a card named ~, and put it onto the stack".
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
Why not have it be a card type, call them, like, supreme sorceries or supreme instants. Then all supreme spells give you an emblem that says "Whenever you play a supreme spell, counter that spell and draw a card." You get the once per game powerful effect, but it's still one you can draw reliably and the other copies aren't completely dead.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure somewhere along time way they've outright said no on this card type idea because vintange is the only format where they want restricted or restricted like cards.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
Dan Carlin can have weird opinions at times, but his 5 part history wrath of the khans from 2012 is pretty fascinating with some of the history and imagery if you want to get more information about the period all from the comfort of a podcast. (That's his archive page didn't want to link directly to the episodes.)
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
Legendary instants and sorceries are pretty hard to justify compared to creatures, where a creature being unique is easier to understand and makes a greater deal of sense. What makes a legendary fireball distinct from a regular, non-legendary fireball? Could it be justified by making it the signature spell of a legendary creature?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
I think you guys are overestimating how often Turn 1 Thoughtseize actually occurs in Standard. I don't think it even makes sense to let you brick Turn 1 Thoughtseize.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
SharkTattoos posted:Dan Carlin can have weird opinions at times, but his 5 part history wrath of the khans from 2012 is pretty fascinating with some of the history and imagery if you want to get more information about the period all from the comfort of a podcast. (That's his archive page didn't want to link directly to the episodes.) This podcast series was really great and I have to throw in another recommendation for it if you want to do a little more digging into Mongol history.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I think you guys are overestimating how often Turn 1 Thoughtseize actually occurs in Standard. I don't think it even makes sense to let you brick Turn 1 Thoughtseize. Yeah, most of the field plays a scryland turn 1 so it's Turn 2 Thoughtseize (still against zero mana up) that happens most games 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I think you guys are overestimating how often Turn 1 Thoughtseize actually occurs in Standard. I don't think it even makes sense to let you brick Turn 1 Thoughtseize. Decks running Thoughtseize are such a large portion of the field that it happens more than people who run Thoughtseize thinks it does, just by volume. You (the general you I have no idea what you play) might not be casting them that much but people really do not like discard and so they remember it, and when you consider what a huge portion of the field it is, you end up with this.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Yeah, as a Thoughtseize player, turn 1–2 Thoughtseize does happen a good amount of the time. Though it bit me in the rear end one game; he leads with Elvish Mystic, I cast Thoughtseize, and I'm treated to a hand of three lands and three Loxodon Smiters. I lost that one in very short order.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Thoughtseize is a card that's essentially impossible to elegantly deal with of short of bannings by virtue of the sheer speed of the card. Any card that can deal with it would effectively need to be active turn 0. What I'm trying to say is reprint Leyline of Sanctity, Wizards. It wouldn't actually help.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
New Wide Beta update. Looks like it's essentially the status quo? "Feedback was mixed but we're not changing a thing about our direction".
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Looks like it's essentially the status quo? Leagues have been coming back for half a decade now or something.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Legendary instants and sorceries were already done in SoK with Epic
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
threefive posted:Legendary instants and sorceries were already done in SoK with Epic Epic was a neat concept, but I think you should still have been allowed to cast spells, with how highly costed those effects were. If they repeat it in the future, I hope they change that portion.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
The tension between having a free spell every turn and not casting other stuff is what made Epic fun or at least unique. If anything they should have just costed the spells a bit more aggressively. Your version is basically just rebound except better.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
AnacondaHL posted:Ahaha I just finished T-64 with Breakfast Burrito. Like I was just handed cash for that deck's performance. Thanks goons! Congratulations! What kind of matchups did you win and lose with it? Were you running The Mimeoplasm or Underworld Cerberus kill? Any particularly funny stories to share?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 07:49 |
|
|
Enduring Ideal was legitimately good, guys; it even top 8'd some extended GPs.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 20:08
|
|