MTG Cardsmith Community Forums
Renaissance Set — Creative Design
This discussion has been closed.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
The reason ensoul shouldn't be life loss only is for a couple of reasons.
First off, life gain really isn't very powerful, unless it's in absurd amounts. (think Soul Sisters) If I gain five life, that might not even save me for a single turn, depending on the board state. Plus, several proposed fixes have been given, such as changing it to a reduction of one each time you gain or lose life, rather than the amount of life gained or lost.
Secondly, if Ensoul only works on life loss, that leads to incredible board stalls. Since there would likely be a wrath with ensoul if we did cost reduction, both players would be scared witless to attack and risk giving their opponent an opportunity to wrath. And I don't wanna get in FNMs where a single game takes 30 minutes because we're scared of each other's ensoul cards.
@ningyounk Personally, my favorite proposed version of Ensoul is the one that provides a bonus based on whether you gained/lost three life that turn, because the flavor seems reasonable to me. "I put work into this spell/I had a painful experience that inspired me," which also goes with our muse theme.
About the flavour of Ensoul, keep in mind the name is just a working concept. Basically it can fit whatever we would like it to fit. It could be called "Hysteria" and be representing people getting overemotional over the Muses' influence for instance. This way gaining life represents being happy and positive emotion while losing life represents being upset and negative emotions. When the life swings exceeds 3, people's emotion start to be out of control and weird things happen.
But that's just one example. I'm sure we could find many ore ways to make it fit ^^
Yes, we could totally make binary effects. Though I like the simplicity of "Ensoul — If you gained or lost 3 or more life this turn, EFFECT", especially for commons, I'm sure there's enough design space for at least a cycle of cards that could twist it in a binary way just as you said =D
@MagicChess
Don't bother photoshopping the Muses, I added that text myself to show you the idea XD You can find all the original images (and much more, I *LOVE* this artist's work) here: http://petemohrbacher.deviantart.com/gallery/ Feel free to create as many Muses as you're inspired!
@EVERYONE:
What do you think of this ability for "Life-Matters"?:
NAME — If you gained or lost 3 or more life this turn, EFFECT.
That makes sense. I'm terrible at balancing so I probably shouldn't even be working with balancing mechanics lol, but only one way to learn I suppose.
@ningyoung
I like that iteration as well. And that flavor is really cool, I hadn't thought about it that way. Maybe it could be called "Outburst" or something like that, referring to the emotional state of the artist, idk.
These are all really cool ideas. This is definitely a new experience for me, as I'm far more accustomed to making one-off cards than cards with mechanics that build upon entire sets, so I apologize for any useless comments I make lol.
And don't ever be scared on sharing your thoughts, there really are no useless comments, it always helps us see how everything could be perceived ^^
If we choose to make the Muses, I propose making them in a coloured cycle. There are plenty of color cycles that make five.
Mono: W, U, B, R, G
Ally duals: WU, UB, BR, RG, GW
Enemy duals: WB, UR, BG, RW, GU
Shards: GWU, WUB, UBR, BRG, RGW
Wedges: WUR, UBG, BRW, RGU, GWB
These are all options for a five card muse cycle.
We can make a very convincing cycle of Muses without each of them having their own mechanic ^^ Think about the Gods of Amonkhet or the Gearhulks of Kaladesh for instance
Also from a general point of view, when you design a mechanic, you want it to appear in AT LEAST two colours. (Here's a recent podcast talking about it: http://podbay.fm/show/580709168/e/1497621600?autostart=1 ). Usually you focus it in two colours and it then appears in most other colours on a few cards (think Embalm or Cycling in Amonkhet) or you limit it strictly to three colours (Think Exert in Amonkhet or Revolt in Aether Revolt). Each set also usually have a five-colours mechanic that is central to the set (think Aftermath, Energy, Double-Faced cards, Devoid, Morph, etc...)
Embolden (I wish I can do Inspire!) - {t}: Until end of turn, another target creature gains (ability or keyword).
Reclaim - {trigger}, return a permanent card that was put into your graveyard this turn to your hand.
Foster N (Whenever a creature with power less than N enters the battlefield under your control, you may put N +1/+1 counters on it.)
Loot N (Draw N cards, then discard a card) And maybe something on the card that benefits discarding certain types of cards.
Astute (Whenever you draw more than one card, you may draw a card at end of turn.)
- - -
Here are some crazy "awe factor" mechanics that are probably broken or nonfunctional:
Blueprint N (Put up to N cards from your hand into your blueprint pile face-up.) Creation of a theoretical 'blueprint' pile like the library, but all cards are face-up and not in any order.
Enlightment counters (like Energy counters, but you never spend them for effects.)
- - -
And, of course, the set needs cards like these:
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?text=+[art]&set=["Unhinged"]
I made a conceptual Muse cycle. There is plenty more applicable art on Pete's page, so perhaps dual-colored Muses could be added.
Sorry about the bad image quality; they didn't fit in the normal editor, so I had to use the downloading thing for "unsupported browsers."
Please note that this is merely a suggestion; I'm just putting this out there. Feedback is encouraged and appreciated.
I don't like the idea of overusing Peter's artwork. Most of them have already been used as well.
No, it's just set to the side unless we gather enough artwork on the theme.
Totally! We need "Gotcha!" in this set!
Also remember that the average set uses five new or recurring mechanics. Such as Cycling, Exert, Embalm, -1/-1 counters, and Aftermath. Or Skulk, Flip Cards, Delirium, Madness, and Investigate.
For the muses we could have them each portraying and archetype of the set. For example, if we were in amonkhet, one would support Embalm, -1/-1 counters, empty handed/cycling, exert, and g-u ramp (because that appears in draft sooooo much.)
Yeah, but I do enjoy the challenge as it makes it more satisfying.
Unhinged? XD When I'm talking about the Awe Factor I'm thinking mechanics like vehicles, Aftermath, double-faced cards, morph, Devoid, etc... But making an Unset may be a little extreme, it wasn't really the initial plan ^^
@MagicChess Sadly, I can't see the images, could you repost them please?
@modnation675 Goddamn that artwork is fabulous. You made me want the Antropomorphs in the set again XD Mechanically that's definitely the spirit! Though it seems a bit too efficient at what it does to be non-Green (White usually balance the number of lands between players.)
You don't like Pete Mohrbacher's artworks for the Muses?
@Tigersol Do you know Gotcha! is considered the biggest mistake of Unhinged? XD We definitely do *NOT* need Gotcha! XD http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/36124446035/hi-maro-why-you-consider-gotcha-to-have-been-a
The average recent sets were all above the level of complexity that Wizards were aiming for, which can give a skewed vision of what we should aim for ourselves. If you take Shadows Over Innistrad + Eldritch Moon for instance, Mark Rosewater later stated they should have removed at least two keywords from this block (most likely Skulk and Escalate).
Amonkhet: http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/159913945923/how-would-you-rate-the-complexity-of-amonkhet
Kaladesh: http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/158575580283/how-did-kaladesh-do-complexity-wise-i-felt-like
Innistrad II: http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/148429054393/do-you-think-shadows-block-pushed-the-complexity
Zendikar II: http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/129459595453/the-complexity-of-bfz-seems-really-high-awaken-is
So no, even if there ARE in average five mechanics per block, the truth is that they are aiming at about three keywords. That's probably about the number we should aim for (though we can get a bit higher if we really need it, but let's not have five mechanics as a goal ^^).
Just use the images as links instead.
As for Peter's artwork, it's heavily over used and I'd prefer to do something original for such a cycle.
I can't do something that's already been done in a well balanced way. Which is why I can't conform to such restrictive ideas as never developing upon the color pie.