WAIT DON'T LOOK I MADE A MISTAKE. I WILL POST THIS DISCUSSION WHEN I FIX THE CARDS

edited October 14 in Custom Card Sets
So basically, you know how politics used to be very interesting to follow and delve into? (And then trump vs hillary with bernie on the sidewalk threw that out the window, but that's not the point).

Well so basically, let's have a political oriented set in magic! Not like, referencing actual politics, but like mindgames in a world of fictional politics... and stuff!

There will be 5 2-colour parties,

The B/R Oriana (Mostly Vampires, with demons and bats thrown in)

image

The R/G Radan (Mostly Bears, with wolves and foxes thrown in)

image

The G/W Salengir (Mostly Humans, with beasts and birds thrown in)

image

The W/U Ahalia, which I already started making (Mostly Squirrels, with other small rodents such as hamsters and chinchillas thrown in)

image

The U/B Viridon (Mostly Spirits, with some ghosts and illusions thrown in)

image


As you can see, it is centered pretty heavily around balance with mechanics like Entourage (representing the entourage of the world council [still working on the exact lore of this]) and others like it.



As the politics in this century, this set will experiment with old foundations and prejudices, but while the politics of this century are a never ending vortex of abject failure of democracy and the doom of civilisation, this set is guaranteed to be
a Breath of fresh air! (hopefully)
The ORIANA:

A thing we haven't really seen before is black-red control. However, I plan on having the Oriana do exactly that. Vampires in the MTG universe surprisingly haven't fleshed out making other creatures vampires, like they usually do in folklore. That's where the Oriana come in. They will play with making other cards vampires, while deleting the vampire tag from some, which could offer for many interesting control plays.

The RADAN:

Haste tradeoffs! Give creatures haste, take haste from creatures for other benefits, that's basically it. One thing I should clarify is that, these are not were-bears, no no no no. They are anthropomorphic bears, that aren't actually related to humans.

The SALENGIR:

Since there are no elves on the plane (another challenge for us), the humans basically take their place. This will envision a very different version of the humans, that are mostly gentle nature mages. They will play around with land matters.

The AHALIA: (hmm, @Corwinn ? Interested?)

sQuIrReLs gAlOrE!
A topic that hasn't been tackled much in white-blue is shrinking (the MTG term for direct self harm, usually in power and/or toughness, in order to gain a different advantage). A common example that I think is really fun, is upgrading flying to unblockable for a cutback in power, but we can add many others, such as hexproof for a price (try saying that 3 times fast!)

The VIRIDON:

It's just dead people. Dead people with ghost swords. Oh, whoops, the swords are real!
But that's exactly what it is, concealing true power with minute creatures, but abilities that can scour the deck for spells to enlarge them. Indestructibility is something we can play around with, but we need to be careful not to go nuts.

AHALIA: did someone mention nUtS?!?!




So, anyone wanna help?




Comments

  • I am pinning the following people and shamelessly begging them to notice this set:

    @Corwinn @TenebrisNemo @nimrod111 @Jonteman93 @sanjaya666
  • Entourage should be retooled into an ability word rather than a keyword, just first thoughts.
  • @Arceus8532

    Right, what exactly do you mean? Can you show me an example?
  • Entourage--If there are more [subtype] cards on the battlefield than any other type, [effect]. If there are an equal number or more of [subtype] cards on the battlefield, [effect].
  • So, it's essentialy the same, but there are no parentheses and the italics are reversed?
  • I will mark that down, and change it when I make the final version of the set
  • edited October 6
    Yeah, yeah. Basically, when your mechanics use parenthesis, the text in the parenthesis needs to stay almost exactly the same each time. Like, if you just wrote "Entourage" on the card without the text in parenthesis, would it still be clear exactly what the card does?
  • If you don't spell @Corwinn's name right, he might not see this.
    XD
  • Oh right, 3 ns then, @Corwinnn XD
  • Thanks,for the tip, @Arceus8523
  • Oh, hey now... what's this!
    ;)
  • What should actually we do, @HeroKP ?
  • @sanjaya666

    Idk. Send Ideas. Make some cards, if you feel like helping out extensively. I could still add them to the set, since I should be getting premium fairly soon
  • edited October 7
    @HeroKP How about removing those weird subtypes first?
  • @sanjaya666 Why? They are the key for the Entourage mechanic to work, and that's basically the big set idea
  • They are the name of the factions, if you didn't understand
  • edited October 7
    @HeroKP That just makes the set inflexible like those Ally creatures from Zendikar. But this is just equal to Ally that is divided again by five factions.
  • @sanjaya666

    No, this is much more complex that Ally. This gives different results depending on the balance of forces.
  • @HeroKP That's why the set's synergy is inflexible because you can't do much outside of it.
  • @sanjaya666

    Really, it's the "entourage" cards that aren't flexible, but the cards that determine the balance absolutely are.

    I see your point, but I really want to make this.

    Thanks, anyway! :)
Sign In or Register to comment.