Music-Themed Enlightenment Based Set- EXPLORATORY DESIGN PHASE

123578

Comments

  • @Alextorrez6

    -About the symbol: sorry if I made it seem like there was a fixed set symbol! I'm happy to branch out and see what you have to offer!

    -About the edits: I'll make those shortly and post them on here. 

    -About the cards: Thanks so much for saying that! It's what I needed to hear!

    -About Volcanic Shards: I kind of wanted to make the lightning bolt-spell a common, so maybe we can make it a sorcery? Like what they did for skewer the critics. This seems fairly balanced I think... 


  • On volcanic shards being a sorcery, I agree with that. Makes sense to me.

    Overall, this feels like it's really coming along!
  • edited June 2020
    Thanks a lot @Alextorrez6! I really appreciate all your help throughout this process! 

    This seems like a point where some sets might dwindle out, maybe return after a month with some new concepts, but I would personally like to keep on pushing ahead if we can. As a next step, I think it would be good to fix how many cards of each mechanic are going into each color, based on the general feel of the plane and the story line. 

    Here is the current plan for the entire set (Note: I am currently using the Rezatta design skeleton, and one that has been used many times throughout history, but this can be changed if there is a good reason.)

    -101 commons (19 of each color, 5 artifacts, and 1 nonbasic land. )
    -80 uncommons (11 of each color, 15 multicolored, 9 artifacts, and 1 nonbasic land.)
    -53 rares (7 of each color, 10 multicolored, 3 artifacts, and 5 nonbasic lands.)
    -15 mythic rares (3 of each color) 

    The entire set will include 249 cards, not including the two copies of each basic land type. 

    Thoughs? 
  • edited June 2020
    Are there going to be any enchantments, planeswalkers, or specific legendary creatures? Just curious... The answer doesn't have to be yes.
  • edited June 2020
    Oh nevermind about the enchantments, I was confused by the "artifacts", you mean colorless frames, as opposed to the card type.
  • Yeah, will all the mythics be mono?
  • @Alextorrez6, about the Enchantments, Legendary creatures, and Planeswalkers, we will of course have those card types beginning in Uncommon. They will fill up a slot of the color they are in within the given rarity. Does this answer your question?

    @LordTachanka123 I have also been thinking about this, and I think we can just work that out when we get to the mythics, based on the general "feel" of the cards in the set at that point. 
  • So your artifacts (probably) equate to:

    Common - 1 cycle
    Uncommon - 1 cycle, 4 standalone (I'd probably make one or two of those equipments)
    Rare - 3 standalone (probably one equipment)

    Your multicolors (could potentially) equate to:

    Uncommon - 1 cycle of dual colors (10 cards), 2 (additional) GW (with the cycle, it's 3 total), and 3 Grixis

    Rare - 4 GW, 2 Grixis, 1 hybrid GW, 3 hybrid Grixis (1 in each combination, UR, UB, BR)

    Mythic - ???

    For mythic maybe do 16 cards, have 250 cards in total, and do it like this:

    - 10 Monocolored
    - 6 dual crossovers ([UW, UG,] [RW, RG,] [BW, BG])

    (the crossovers blend each Grixis color with both Selesnya colors)

    What do you think about this?
  • edited June 2020
    @Alextorrez6, I really like the way you put this together! This is exactly what I was looking for!

    I like just about everything I see here. About the mythics, that certainly seems like a good possibility, and we'll assume that's what we're doing for now, but we might end up changing it up a little based on the overall design of the cards at that point. 

    The single cycle of duel colored multicolored uncommons is probably going to be the most important cycle in the entire set, as it will clearly define the archetypes. I like the way you had this cycle alongside the other ones reflecting our factions. 
  • edited June 2020
    About the rares, we will probably want to have a half-cycle of 5 duel colored rares. I don't think we should make all 10 multicolored rares based around the factions, so that people drafting have more variety. 
  • Hi, I'm sorry to intrude, but this thread has REALLY piqued my interests!! I'm a composer, a singer of acapella harmony, and an AVID music fan of many eclectic styles.  I didn't know you were doing this, and I only came to the forums to ask people what they thought of my "harmony counter" mechanic.

    What if you called this a "Soothe Counter"?  Music soothes the savage beast, after all.  

    My idea of a "harmony counter" (or Soothe Counter?) is that it functions like a +1/+1 counter, and you can buff your own creatures, but if you cause three or more Soothe Counters to be put on an opponent's creature (like with Proliferate or with this Cantor's activated ability, etc), you gain control of that opponent's creature.  Flavor-wise, the creature appreciates that you're singing to it (and buffing it up) instead of trying to kill it, so after a while, it decides to switch to your team!

    Sorry for stepping on your toes, if this goes against what you're looking for.  I'm a total newb, and my heart's in the right place :smile:


    https://mtgcardsmith.com/view/charismatic-cantor

    Additionally, you could have an entire tribe of Singers (Human, Elf, whatever) who can synergize with each other by putting Soothe counters on each other, or maybe some "choir" cards could give a 0/+1 to all Singers you control, or something :wink:  I dunno.  Just trying to help!
  • @TerryTags first of all, don't be sorry for anything! No matter what I think of your mechanic, I'm always happy for ideas! You're not "intruding", just trying to help, and I totally get that. (After all, why else would I have posted this thread on the forums!)

    Unfortunately, we are pretty packed full of mechanics at the moment, so I'm not sure we would have much room for something like this. While I like the concept, I want to have a balance of new things vs old things so that no one is confused. To many mechanics would result in less fun game play, because people could get confused.

    Again, I want to stress that it's not because I don't like your mechanic. I honestly think it's pretty cool, the utility, ect. We're just a little crammed with mechanics at the moment, and I want to provide a balanced experience for the players. Thanks again anyway! 
  • Okay, that's cool! :smile:  Thanks for your kind words!
    If you're ever looking for help with music theory and other music flavor-related stuff, I'm happy to assist.
  • Sounds good, thanks! 
  • I’m going to propose this for Encore because I was discussing it with a friend.

    Encore [Cost] (If you cast this spell for its encore cost, exile it and you can’t cast any other spells this turn. When you do, at the beginning of your next upkeep, you may cast this card from exile without paying its mana cost.)
  • @Arceus8523, this new proposal for encore is pretty cool, and I would quite honestly make use of it, however we currently have a ton of new mechanics in the set. That said, we were aiming for Encore to be a small, simple mechanic in many, to provide a fun experience for the players, and not throw a  bunch of complex mechanics at them.

    While the original Encore is pretty straightforward, this seems like it would take a lot of rulings and stuff, whereas we wanted to balance it with the other mechanics as much as possible. That said, it does seem to fit the name "Encore" better, so it is not completely thrown out of the bus, just unlikely. Thanks anyway! 
  • edited June 2020
    I would argue Encore isn't any more complicated than Rebound, which I personally didn't have any difficulty understanding even as a new player who started playing during Khans block, where the mechanic had just been used for the second time.
  • @Arceus8523, I'm liking it a lot more, now that I think about it! I do have a question: Using the current wording, the original spell wouldn't resolve. I like it more like this; Is that what you had in mind?
  • I'm guessing this is what you meant for Encore:

    Encore [Cost] (If you cast this spell for its encore cost from your hand, exile it as it resolves, and you can’t cast any other spells this turn. At the beginning of your next upkeep, you may cast this card from exile without paying its mana cost.)

    A couple changes to the mechanic for completeness:
    - It only works when you cast it from your hand. This is like trying to overload Cyclonic Rift from your graveyard (with flashback gained via some means): you can't.
    - You only can't cast any other spells only after the spell resolves. This still allows you to react to your opponents when needed, and removes the "feels-bad" if you opponent counters it.

    The complexity of the mechanic is a bit high, but given that Mutate is quite complex but still appears at common, that wouldn't be my biggest concern.

    What I would be worried about is the variety of effects you can have on this card. Looking at the storm scale of Rebound, it's quite high (at 3) and is rather popular, but it only had a medium design space and created memory issues. With the current Encore, it seems like it will perform more poorly in these aspects, so it will require some extra care.

    We use the examples from before to illustrate the difference:

    ---
    Volcanic Shards
    Sorcery
    2R

    CARDNAME deals 3 damage to any target.

    Encore 3R
    ---

    The Encore cost got bumped significantly, since you get to deal 3 + 3 damage. Note this is different from 6 damage since it is over 2 turns so the creature gets to heal.

    ---
    Sickening Knowledge
    Sorcery
    1U

    Return up to one target creature to its owner's hand.

    Encore 4UU
    ---

    When cast for its Encore cost, it bounces two creatures. The last time we saw blue bouncing two creatures was Floodwaters from Amonkhet, and it already cost 6 mana. Notice I removed the "draw a card" clause, since that is probably too powerful for common.

    ---
    Flight in the Night
    Instant
    1B

    Sacrifice target creature you control. Put that card onto the battlefield under you control at the beginning of the next end step.  If you cast this spell for its Encore cost, it enters with two additional +1/+1 counters on it.

    Encore 3BB
    ---

    I changed the wording a bit using Teferi's Time Twist for reference. I also changed "exile" to "sacrifice". This fits black more nicely and shouldn't affect the discussion on Encore.

    When you cast the spell for its Encore cost, you get the "if cast for Encore" bonus. This means the first creature returns with the +1/+1 counters. However, when you cast it for the second time, you are casting it from exile and are not paying the Encore cost, so a) the creature disappears for the whole turn, and b) it returns with no counters.

    All in all, the mechanic is quite interesting, but should be handled rather carefully.
  • @Arceus8523, @LyndonF, I actually like this version a lot more! I think the different options for each spell will force people to build more creatively, whereas the original version was simply restricting to players.

    I'll remake the cards and post them on here later to see how this kind of thing turns out on cards. I do understand why we have to be careful, because this is effectively doubles the spells' effects. Anyway, like I said, I really love this version after some thought, and I think it should be fun to experiment with throughout the process. Thanks! 
  • Thanks @LyndonF that's what I intended to do, I just made up the wording on the fly without putting enough thought into it. >.<
  • edited June 2020
    OK, so here are the updated versions:

     

    One small issue is the fact that this puts a ton of text on commons. Maybe the reminder text just isn't necessary?


  • edited June 2020
    Sickening Knowledge seems way too expensive, even for a common. I would either make the encore cost 3 (since you also can't cast spells that turn), or else add "draw a card" to the text of the spell.
  • I'm not a fan of this rebound stuff as much... I guess it'll take some getting used to, but I kinda liked it better the old way. It didn't feel like too much of a restriction because unless you're playing a storm deck or something, most people don't play that many spells in a single turn anyway, it just stops you from doing a combo play that turn or something... which seems like a perfectly balanced trade off to me.
  • This just feels like a worse, less fun version of rebound... and I never really liked rebound to start with, because the rebound has to be cast at your upkeep, making it worthless most of the time, because for most instant and some sorcery spells, timing really matters, especially in multiplayer politics.
  • I'm not saying you should change it necessarily just because I'm not the biggest fan of it, but it's just something to consider whether or not this is what you really want before pursuing it.
  • It's totally your call though, it's not a big deal either way.
  • Actually, why not just use rebound? I mean sure, I know I just said why I don't like it, but at least you can cast other spells with rebound, and that way it's a free extra spell rather than a mechanical trade-off. I mean, this would be so much simpler because:

    a) People know rebound, so you wouldn't need the reminder text most of the time.
    b) It's less reminder text anyway, and it's simpler overall.
    c) It's an old mechanic, giving you two old ones and two new ones, which I think is a better balance, and less crammed.
    d) It's thematically sound, since rebound kinda fits in pretty well with musical stuff like harmonize and compose.
  • Like you know

    A spell that says  "Harmonize. Draw a card." and then has rebound.
This discussion has been closed.