Oh no... He's Actually Trying This Time! (Ignisp 1.1 Pre-Set Feedback)

edited May 26 in Custom Card Sets
This page is regularly updated. Please check back for the latest updates and surveys.

Scroll down if you don't have time to read

Hello everyone! With my new job, I'm much shorter on time to spend, but I actually have the money to get back into Magic for good. Speaking of which, I plan on making a set feasibly playable in standard, and instead of returning to host more contests to be abandoned, I'm actually taking a step back to build a new set from the ground up.

With the current state of standard (idk what's going on anymore), I figured that before I go too crazy, I should see what people have to say. Main thing is, my next set, Ignisp, focuses on a plane where planeswalkers are one to a thousand instead of one in a million, so it's pretty common that average men and women living normal lives actually have a spark that will never be ignited. Conviniently, War of the Spark also focused heavily on planeswalkers, so even though I have a game plan already (and trust me, it's not War of the Spark 2.0) I want to get some feedback and help.

TL;DR: As time goes on, I'll use this discussion as a place to post pools and whatnot for my new set. My goal is to work actively with the community to bring my idea to life, and make this set on-par with a WotC release. Thank you in advance. Let's make it happen!

Current Request: I have the first survey up! You can submit responses by clicking the link below. Note: Requires a Google Account. Limit one response per person, but you may come back and edit your response later.

Take the survey here.

Also, I had a quick and simple idea for a mechanic.

Sparktouch (Whenever this creature deals damage to a planeswalker, destroy that planeswalker.)


  • edited May 19
    Since Google Forms doesn't work on a phone, I'll pop the most important question right here. Ignisp was originally taking a new approach to Planeswalkers, since the set has a decent number of them. Some creatures will utilize loyalty counters, and some weaker Planeswalkers would appear in Rare. However, a few months later, Wizards of the Coast dropped the bomb with War of the Spark, which gives me an opportunity to pool the Community. I'd like to know what people's thoughts are on the gameplay, cards, and aspects of War of the Spark. Was it abysmal? Tell me why so I don't make the same mistakes. Did you love it? Tell me why.

    Anyways, thank you in advance.
  • @Tommia I haven't played enough WAR to have any really big contributions to make, but all the planeswalkers and stuff seem pretty fun from the limited I've played (less so the God-Eternal cycle).

    On the subject of the set plan, making creatures with loyalty counters seems like it'd be really hard to pull off. I'm not sure how you'd be planning to format it / generally make it work, but I guess it'll be interesting to see.
  • I think for doing stuff with loyalty counters, cards that do that sort of thing should create other kinds of relevant counters that can be put on creatures, as planeswalkers aren't exactly the easiest to get out
  • My experience with WAR has been entirely on mtgArena and watching streams and vids of people playing it, so take it for what you will.
    The planeswalkers in WAR are pretty much excellent. They add an extra level of thinking to an average game where you have to consider the static effects of planeswalkers, and can react to them more than you could an enchantment (on average) which allows for them to be more interesting in that regard. The God-Eternals are probably overboard (Black is the only one that I've not seen get a ton of play). Amass hasn't really been able to do much in constructed, and probably doesn't really have a chance to at least until the next set if not rotation.
    As for your plans, the only thing I'll really say right now is that I believe rules-wise only planeswalkers can actually have loyalty counters on them. But there's still a ton of design space around adding and removing, and triggered abilities related to them being added or removed, and things that care how many loyalty abilities a walker has, etc.
    Hope that helps!
  • @Tommia

    WAR is one of my favorite sets of all time, because of a few reasons:

    1. It would have been very hard to screw up Gatewatch: Endgame, and they didn't

    2. rAvNicA

    3. It added a new depth to planeswalkers with the uncommon-rarity "doomed to die" models that are great in combos.

    4. It is from the WAR booster packs and boxes that I forged "Millwatch Magnum", the deck from my arsenal I consider to be the best at the moment.

    P.S. : And yes, I'm the type of players that gives pet names to all their decks
  • @HeroKP

    I give pet names too!
  • WAR was a beast. I play commander, so I don't get these cards rotated out, and so I have to deal with changelings getting amassed, proliferate from two different sets, five color "ultra mega I'm-gonna-do-plainswalker-tribal-before-that's-a-thing super friends" decks which now get mega boosted by WAR.
    The plainswalkers themselves are good, I didn't really see any way to deal with them outside of attacking them.
    Also, I give pet names to my decks (persistent petitioners = the telemarketer deck) but not often.
  • @Bowler218 I never considered changlings and armys... I may have to look into this further.
    Also, as far as ways to deal with walkers outside of combat, there were considerably more ways than usual to, it was something they made sure to include more of. Not all of it is "good" because limited, but eh.
  • I like the insight I’m getting so far. I’m working on a detailed pool, but for now, I’ll leave you with a little look at how I’m solving the problem with loyalty counters on creatures... it’s an ability

    Ignite [n] (This creature is a Planeswalker in addition to its other types. Its starting loyalty is [n].)

    Activated version: [cost]: Ignite [n] (If this creature is not a Planeswalker, it becomes a Planeswalker in addition to its other types. Its starting loyalty is [n].)
  • Something very important you're gonna have to pay attention to during construction of the set is complexity in limited. War of the Spark was undoubtedly one of the most interesting, but also most complicated limited formats we've had, due to the inherent nature of planeswalkers adding so much more to keep track of, especially if they have passive abilities now.
  • edited May 22
    @Tommia Huh, ignite seems neat. I'd like to say, however, that being a 'walker seems to take priority over being a mere whatever-the-heck-else (as seen on assorted Gideons, though I'll admit that none of them are creatures all of the time).

    I'd still be of the opinion that you'd have to make walkers and give them passive "this is also a creature / whatever else all of the time".
  • New gideon is a creature most of the time.
  • edited May 22
    @Red_Tower But it isn't a creature all of the time (only in your turns) while this seems to be going for being a creature AND a 'walker 100% of the time. That'd be a real pain in terms of logic because attacking or blocking with such a creature would make it lose loyalty counters, unlike Gideon who gets damage immunity during your turn so that he can swing without such risk.
  • Just a hunch, but I think that might be intentional by @Tommia
    Gideon's always have a clause saying to prevent damage to them while their creatures. So you never have to worry about the loyalty counters then. Without a clause like that, it seems fairly straight forward that a creature planeswalker that receives combat damage would lose counters. Does it add another level to think about for combat? Sure. Is it a "real pain in terms of logic"? I'm not sure. That's something that making a couple mock cards with the concept and playtesting would probably have to sort out honestly. The worst part of it is really just that with all the gideons we've had, people are use to not having to think about that. But as long as it's communicated well enough the difference I'd like to imagine it would be fine.
  • @Red_Tower True. It's occured to me that I made a mechanic that basically did this same thing a while ago but without the loyalty counters, so I'll be quiet now.
  • I quite enjoyed WAR, but from a judge standpoint it created a lot of opportunities for players to make mistakes. I love complex boardstates but it's not easy to balance or craft in a way that's also fun to play. Time Spiral block ran into this in that it was a bunch of cool ideas that most players couldn't quickly grok.

    The dangerous complexity of having creatures with loyalty abilities is that players intrinsically don't understand how they work (or don't work) together. Sarkhan the Masterless embodied this well. Its +1 ability made your planeswalkers creatures instead of planeswalkers but players were/are perpetually confused about whether or not they can activate their abilities or lose loyalty.

    In summary, a non-'walker creature with loyalty abilities can activate them - they're not intrinsically tied to being a planeswalker - but they don't lose loyalty counters when they're dealt damage - that is linked to being a 'walker. If a creature becomes both a creature and a planeswalker like in your proposed mechanic, it would have two different ways to die, both by being dealt greater damage than its toughness and having no loyalty counters on it. This can be tough to track but it's mostly strange gameplay-wise. You can't attack an opponent's creature directly, but if they're planeswalkers and creatures indefinitely, you can, but their loyalty and toughness both impact its longevity differently.

    If you're committed to this ability, the activated version is the cleanest.
    Ignite N [cost] (If this creature isn't a planeswalker, put N loyalty counters on it and it becomes a legendary planeswalker in addition to its other types.)
    Notably, this doesn't prevent it from using any loyalty abilities that are printed on it.

    tl;dr - It's really complicated, doesn't play as well as you might expect and doesn't make sense to most players.
  • Thank you very much for your responses. @DomriKade you bring up a very valid point. I'm considering just doing these cards like the walkers from Origins, but I'll explore more options and potentially do a U-turn on the concept entirely.

    Anyways, I have the first survey up! You can submit responses by clicking the link below. Note: Requires a Google Account. Limit one response per person, but you may come back and edit your response later.

    Take the survey here.
  • I've filled out the survey. Only thing I'd personally have liked to be able to change about it is I wanted to comment on why I liked or disliked a given mechanic you suggested.
  • @Red_Tower I was in a rush, I can fix that right away!
  • You're good, just make it optional haha
  • edited May 23
    A minor update has been made to the survey. Responses submitted before can be edited.
  • edited May 24
    Thanks for the responses so far! I’m paying attention to your responses, and may alter or change mechanics.

    In the meantime, I made another minor update (added a question on creature planeswalker mechanic preference).

    Note: You don’t have to redo the entire survey. You can edit your response by going back into the survey
  • Updated my responses with thoughts on mechanics.
  • I have noticed greatly negative feedback towards seppuku and great guard. I'll reflect on all mechanics so far and get back soon.
  • Working on the second survey. Even though I’m not getting much of a chance to work on it, I’m going to put time into making new mechanics for factions, as well as mechanics for the set as a whole. Speaking of which, a quick pop for a mechanic.

    Sparktouch (Whenever this creature deals damage to a planeswalker, destroy that planeswalker.)
  • Figured out a good way to mix multiple ideas for great guard. Tell me what you think.

    Great guard (This creature can block creatures as if the attacking creature didn't have intimidate, fear, or menace. The attacking creature assigns all of its damage to this creature.)
  • @Tommia It still seems like too much of a situational hate mechanic that warps the set's design. Do you put in lots of creatures with that kind of evasion to make it more effective and therefore make factions without it suffer in limited formats, or do you not and make it a meaningless thing that might do something useful?
  • I'm in agreement with MemoryHead, additionally this still runs into issues of Magic's general rule of "Can't beats can".
  • edited June 15
    As a permanent change, the effect of legacy is different, and is not faction specific. Also, Thanks to @CrafterofTruths for letting me use their mechanic, Legacy! (P.S.; I hope you don’t mind, but I tweaked the effect)

    When (this creature) dies, [if criteria is met], you may carry on its legacy.(Exile it, then put it onto the battlefield in its Legacy form.)

    What do I intend to do with this? As they say, heroes never die. Even when a creature with a legacy kicks the big one, their spirit lives on to inspire the masses. Take for example this prototype. Kaze was a brave warrior whose awe inspiring speed gave those around him the courage to charge into the fray. His death inspired warriors to rise up and take his place. While no one could replace him, his memory lives on in the spirit of the warrior’s charge,

    Casting Side

    Kaze, Swift Inspirator

    Legendary Creature - Human Samurai 3/3

    When Kaze dies, if it attacked, you may carry on its Legacy.

    Creatures you control have haste.


    Kaze’s Legacy

    Legendary Legacy

    At the beginning of combat on your turn, you may choose a player. If that player controls less creatures than you, creatures you control gain haste until end of turn and must attack that player this turn if able.

    Legacies are a new card type, thanks to the new Custom Type option. Like Emblems, they grant permanent benefits that don’t go away. However, you will lose the creature if you carry on its Legacy.

    Also, to prevent chaos, Legacies are legendary, so you cannot control two of the same one.
  • Just with that example, a G/B or G/R deck will shred through that faction. You'll need a way to give hexproof quickly and consistantly.
Sign In or Register to comment.