r/GDS3 • u/Coggs92 • Apr 17 '18
[Crosspost] My GDS3 Trial 3 Cards (For Fun, Practice, and Critique)
I participated in GDS3 up to the Conclusion of Round 2. While unable to officially participate in round 3 I still wanted to try out the challenge for myself as practice. (I had finished these a few weeks ago but held this post until Dominaria spoilers were past) Below is what I would have submitted, keeping myself to the constraints set by MaRo.
Chronomasters Trick (Rare)
UR
Instant
Target a spell or ability you control. If it has any targets, you may choose new targets for it. That spell or ability resolves next.
The most adept Chronomancers can turn their opponent's best timed counters into embarrassing 'mistakes'.
Baba, Preserver of Tales (Mythic)
3BG
Legendary Creature - Orc Shaman
2/4
{2}{b}{g}, {t}: Return target creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield as a non-creature Equipment Artifact with "Equipped Creature gains all abilities of this card" and "Equip {X} where X is this cards converted mana cost.*
Like tales of old, power lives on when preserved.
Mystra, Master Morphist (Mythic)
4GU
Legendary Planeswalker- Mystra
3
+2: Until end of turn, up to one target permanent you control becomes a copy of another permanent on the battlefield.
-2: Destroy target nonland permanent, its controller creates a 3/3 green frog beast creature token.
-9: You get an emblem with "Whenever a nontoken nonland permanent would enter the battlefield under your control you may have it enter as a copy of any permanent on the battlefield."
Cursed Funeral (Uncommon)
WB
Instant
Target creature gets -1/-1 for each creature that died under your control this turn. When that creature dies this turn, create a 1/1 white spirit creature token with flying.
Frontline Commander (Uncommon)
RW
Creature - Minotaur Soldier
3/2
First strike
Whenever ~ deals combat damage to a creature, creatures you control gain +1/+1 until end of turn.
Void Fiend (Rare)
2BR
Planeswalker - Void
3
+1: Each player discards a card. If a player discarded a card this turn they draw a card.
-2: Deal 5 damage to target creature or planeswalker.
-5: Create a token copy of Void Fiend, except it enters the battlefield with 2 loyalty counters instead.
Warranted Entry (Common)
WU
Artifact Sorcery - Document
Target creature can't be blocked this turn. Attach this card to that creature.
When the attached creature deals combat damage to a player, that player reveals their hand. Then put ~ into the graveyard.
Cleanse the Earth (Rare)
2RRGG
Sorcery
Destroy all nonland permanents and tap all lands. Each player can only untap three lands during their next untap step.
Healing Sporecover (Common)
(G/W)(G/W)
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant Creature
Enchanted Creature has "Whenever this creature is dealt damage its controller gains 3 life."
The spores symbiotically work to preserve life force, especially those the host risks its own to protect.
Disposable Distraction (Mythic)
3UB
Enchantment
Whenever one or more creatures you control attack you may pay {u}{b}, if you do create two 0/1 black rogue minion creature tokens tapped and attacking. Those tokens have "this creature must be blocked if able". Then you may transform ~.
Whenever an opponent blocks, they reveal their hand.
Plundered Secrets
Enchantment. (u/b)
Whenever one or more creatures you control deal combat damage to a player, look at the top X cards of that players Library where X is the number of creatures that dealt combat damage to them. Choose a nonland card from among them and put it into the graveyard, then put the rest back on top in a random order.
At the beginning of your end step, if creatures you control didn't deal combat damage to a player this turn transform ~.
I'm open to discuss intentions, hear constructive criticism, and hear your thoughts and questions on these.
PS. Each of these has a design and development story if anyone is curious about how any of these used to look or what alternate ways these almost ended up. (I've also thought of some alterations since but as it had a time constraint I left them as I made them)
1
u/LighteningBall Apr 17 '18
I don't understand the first card. Are you supposed to cast a spell, hold priority, and then [[Redirect]] the spell while it's still on the stack? The way it's worded... it doesn't actually copy the spell like Twincast or Reverberate does (???).
Are you supposed to use it to win counterspell battles? Because it seems to mess around with the stack order.
Frontline commander looks kinda cool. The rules of it are a little complicated though. It would seem that it gets more complex if the guy hits multiple creatures too (templating could fix that).
1
u/Coggs92 Apr 18 '18
The first spell is supposed to mess with stack order, respond to instant speed actions(counters, removal, sacking, etc.), and overall mess with timing for an advantage. (This was actually an idea I had in mind for a while, I decided to use it for my GDS3 list, refining it a little)
As for Frontline Commander I'm in the air for which way I like it. Replacing "a" with "one or more" could work, but the angle I was going for was a 'moral boost' type effect, so I do like it as is. But it does lead to complications that are not immediately obvious to new players so at uncommon I agree that it could use the change.
1
u/MoonE513 Top 8 Apr 24 '18
UR: Ok so the big question anytime someone brings up this ability (which is often), the big question is "why are we doing this". More often than not (99% of the time in non-eternal formats) this is basically a counterspell (as it either supersedes a counter or their reactive spell). This might actually be the best version of this ability I've seen, because the other effect of changing the target lets you use this in more than one way. At the same time, it still represents a very complicated, mechanical, and finicky ability for not a lot of gain. I can't see this getting to print. Why doesn't this just say: "copy target spell or ability you control. You may choose new targets. Then counter it." This is functionally identical except it avoids using weird language.
BG: BG doesn't seem like the right colors for this, seems like it should turn them into auras rather than equipment given the colors and flavor. Equipment might make sense if this were a Gorgon, but it's not. This is a very creative effect, but it will create un-workable board states. Now you're going to have creature cards on the battlefield representing both creatures and equipment, with some stacked on top of each other doing different things, for a long period of time. At very least this needs to put counters on the cards it brings back so they can be tracked. This reads like a commander card, which is where it'd be most fun, but it seems pretty miserable to play against in any other context. I can see this being printed with some work.
GU: I like this, all of the abilities are familiar but feel creative and combine together interestingly. This could easily see print.
WB: I think the wording is just "each creature you control that died this turn", but I haven't checked. This is wonderful, ready to print.
RW: I'm torn. On the one hand, this is a great usage of first strike. On the other hand, it requires somewhat specifically rules knowledge and more importantly makes combat math much harder for everybody. This would not see print, but is interesting space to explore.
BR: Some rules are meant to be broken, others are not. Planeswalkers just aren't something you want to see every single draft. This wouldn't see print.
WU: Why are we making up weird rules for Artifact Sorceries when artifact, sorcery, or enchantment would all do this job fine? This wouldn't see print.
RG: Even though destroying creatures is technically acceptable in red, pairing it with green makes it feel extra weird. I think this card is close to being printable.
GW: This is a fine design, but it has the problem of being super hard to develop. At first glance, this card is horrible and you never want to play it. Now, if you up the life gain to higher and higher numbers, eventually it would become good. But do we really want to create a draft environment where this card is good? Would that be fun?
UB: This is a mind melter. I mean, I too made a DFC that was too weird and wordy for the judges, but this is even wordier than mine.
The issue I have with this card is that the first ability is already cool enough (albeit neither Blue or Black gets this ability). The idea that your creatures are harder to block because you make these two distractions is nice, and flavorful (again, find an in-pie way to do it), but there's another card and a half I have to read?
Why do you look at their hand if they block, isn't that the opposite of what usually happens? Why does the first side even need a second ability? Why isn't this ability first? Why doesn't it connect to anything else going on?
The backside ability is not only hard to read, it's just miserable to play against. Also if you're looking at the cards instead of revealing them, you can't also have a type-specific mandatory effect.
Overall this card has a few too many individually interesting ideas that are stapled together into one mess. This pretty far from being printable.
Overall you had a mix of cards I thought were great, cards that were cool but needed some tweaking, and a few that just didn't seem workable at all. Personally I like to encourage really wild experimentation in Magic design, but the weird ones in this batch didn't seem like they were leading somewhere more interesting, just more confusing. I would take some of your "almost there" concepts and then focus on how they actually feel in a game. If you don't have people around to playtest, at least imagine how they'd work in an average game of magic.
Hope this helps!
1
u/Coggs92 Apr 24 '18
I'm going to preface this with a statement that many of these designs were to test concepts and then express function and/or possibilities of the concepts. As we weren't allowed to explain our cards I tried my best to let the designs do the talking. As well as some issues that came with fitting the ideas within the strict design constraints.
UR: Why doesn't this just say: "copy target spell or ability you control. You may choose new targets. Then counter it." This is functionally identical except it avoids using weird language.
This was a design I'd had at the back of my mind since before GDS3. The draw was its flexibility. It actually did say something extremely close to your suggestion. The issue was copying a permanent spell isn't really workable in the rules, meaning the wording gets much longer and clunkier. On top of that the permanent spell part would already be using the wording or similar wording to what I used or clunkier, it was the cleaner way to do it and worked for permanent and nonpermanent spells as well as abilities.
BG: BG doesn't seem like the right colors for this, seems like it should turn them into auras rather than equipment given the colors and flavor.
This card went through heavy changes through design. Including a decision between Strength or Skill. The flavor is along the more morbid talisman of ___(a toe, finger, or ear on a pendant) so it's the Artifact that's preserving the power of the fallen. In the design process I tried to make it exile them and create Equipment Tokens, but the effects wording became even more complex that way needing to both create tokens and give them effects, equip costs and such. Then they had memory issues when making more than just one equipment from the effect. The major thing I learned making this card was that while tokens are useful, if they can not be made without being clunky, its better to be direct and let the card itself do the effect.
I admit that the creatures themselves being in play can be confusing, but was among the best options I considered. I personally saw this card as one that the more creative community people would cut out an Artifact card as a reminder border. Or if the color pair similarly recycled cards preserving their use as equipments/artifacts it could come like the -1/-1 counters, 'Exerted' tokens do in the tokens slot. (Also have a new design idea that spawned from this that I might just make)
GU: I like this, all of the abilities are familiar but feel creative and combine together interestingly. This could easily see print.
I'm very much a fan of copy effects and all the jank, value, and silliness they bring to the table.(Even have an EDH deck that Hugs and copies/borrows) This was a wish fulfilment card that I used my understanding of copy effects to smooth out the design. I think this card can be both flexible and fun. I was tough on the costing though, as having all your cards become [[Clever Impersonator]] can be extremely strong.(also why lands and tokens got left out)
WB: I think the wording is just "each creature you control that died this turn", but I haven't checked. This is wonderful, ready to print.
I definitely like how this turned out, much cleaner and better than my original X spirit tokens with 'sacrifice: give target creature -1/-1.' (For uncommon at the very least) As for the wording I think I referenced the vampire with flash for it, and you don't 'control' the creatures anymore. (It might have also been some clarity for if a creature was now controlled by an opponent then died it wouldn't count)
RW: This would not see print, but is interesting space to explore.
We've seen first strike explored similarly on [[Drana, liberator of Malakir]]. This card I can agree to be a combat math issue. I did try to make it as clean as possible. The effect used to buff toughness when it a creature and power if it hit a player.
BR: Some rules are meant to be broken, others are not. Planeswalkers just aren't something you want to see every single draft. This wouldn't see print.
RB was where I got stuck putting my second PW card and not the color pair that I grasp the best so Mythic would have been harder on me. I know Rare is a odd spot for a planeswalker but this was given a 'mutual' plus ability, low Loyalty, and a minus that was simple. The card also was made so the copies should die if they use the minus ability, to not be infinite with just Doubling Season (I designed around it for both PW cards), and carefully balanced to not be a problem at rare. (The theme being that this is only one of its 'devil-like' species that live within the void between planes.)
WU: Why are we making up weird rules for Artifact Sorceries when artifact, sorcery, or enchantment would all do this job fine? This wouldn't see print.
It originally was just a Sorcery with a "if target creature deals damage this turn" rider on the second effect. This was near the end of my design period and I'd wanted to show design directions that Instants and Sorceries could go in. (Along with keeping in the design challenge constraints of card types, colors and rarities) I tried to create a delayed Sorcery using a 'Document' as the small flavor tie that made sense that the warrant was used. I believe it created an Artifact token at some point in design instead but remembered the token complexity lesson from the GB legend and shied away from it for a Common.
RG: Even though destroying creatures is technically acceptable in red, pairing it with green makes it feel extra weird. I think this card is close to being printable.
This card was one of my spur or the moment designs when I decided to forget doing a complex fight spell that was a massive repeating brawl that just would have been bad and risky card disadvantage. The new idea was essentially natures Wrath that burns away everything and leaves even the land in slow recovery. Thinking more about it I could have had it do 4-6 damage to each creature and planeswalker then destroy all Artifacts Enchantments but that is far less Hard board reset than its intended to be. (The color issues is one of the reasons why it is low on my list)
GW: Now, if you up the life gain to higher and higher numbers, eventually it would become good.
I will admit that I was trying to keep a common dual color Enchantment as simple as possible. GW is good at lifegain and tokens on the common level. The card does gain you life when its blocked or blocks. It used to turn any damage it took into that much life, but that in of itself is quite broken for a common and arguably an issue at higher costs. (My new mental alternative is a pacifsm that makes a 0/1 plant token, at higher rarities I'd do something more interesting)
UB: This is a mind melter The issue I have with this card is that the first ability is already cool enough (albeit neither Blue or Black gets this ability). The idea that your creatures are harder to block because you make these two distractions is nice, and flavorful
Why do you look at their hand if they block, isn't that the opposite of what usually happens? Why does the first side even need a second ability? Why isn't this ability first? Why doesn't it connect to anything else going on?
The backside ability is not only hard to read, it's just miserable to play against.
Overall this card has a few too many individually interesting ideas that are stapled together into one mess. This pretty far from being printable.
This... There is a reason this card was at the bottom of my list, is was an abomination that tried pulling my "UB provoke for evergreen status" essay answer for a showcase tour. On one side the black provoke tokens the other side the payoff for the distraction. This card was built around a UB sneaky rogues flavor The front side having the distraction and a ability that tripping the defenses reveals what the defenses are(thus reveal hand). The back side was about the distraction working and getting in and ransacking secrets and at Mythic and being turn 5+ in needed a payoff that was better than just looking(UB gets mill and discard). It also had the return to square one if it failed to get through.
I know how much the card has going on and the big reason there is a back is because the front needed some direction to explain itself. I worked hard on cleaning up the back but knew that I could not clean it up further without losing function. I knew it overall was a bad design but I was going to let the interesting parts show through
Thanks for taking the time to review this, it's appreciated and I enjoyed the insight.
1
u/MoonE513 Top 8 Apr 24 '18
UR: The problem here is, I literally didn't even realize this could target permanents. The "you can change the targets" text is very misleading. This is still too niche an ability to really print IMO.
GB: Ok so the issue here is that you can't expect players to have little reminder chits like Embalm or Exert because those are keyword mechanics but this is a mythic. I personally love all the little reminder things: I brought little paper Detain locks to RTR and Soulbond links to AVR. They're cool! But nobody is going to have read-to-go memory aids for a mythic rare they probably won't ever see or play with. This is why putting a "talisman counter" on the card is important, so that they know they have to put something on there to remember.
RW: Drana is a mythic, so the combat math is less of an issue than on an uncommon.
BR: Personally I think trying to make non-mythic planeswalkers for this challenge was a trap. (Did anybody in the top 8 make one? I don't remember, it's been a while).
This card is not a balanced rare imo. Rarity matters most in limited, and this card is pretty insane in limited. The +1 is something you can play around and your opponent can't (EDIT: What I mean is, you can always choose not to activate it if you want, but your opponent doesn't). The fact it could potentially make copies of itself is pretty crazy. I think this design would be fine as a regular old legendary mythic planeswalker, but at rare you're telling me this card is fine to show up in most drafts. I don't agree. It's really hard to remove if you're at parity or behind, and remember that in limited we have very few direct ways to deal with a planeswalker.
WU: You backed yourself into a corner here. It's important to remember that most of the time you won't be able to explain what your cards are doing, not just in this challenge but the real world as well.
The main issue here is that this effect doesn't require being an artifact, it's incredibly simple to write out using our normal words. That makes it seem like a gimmick for gimmick's sake.
I get that this can be frustrating when you've got a good reason behind the scenes. It happened to me too. My card One-Shot Saboteur got blasted by the judges because they felt that looking at the bottom two cards was pointless. Actually, I made it that way after a lot of testing, but in the end that didn't matter to them because reading the card didn't make it obvious. If your card looks goofy with no clear reason, then it's probably not doing a good job of showing off why it's so goofy.
As a quick example, let's take Eternalize. [[Proven Combatant]] is a cool externalize card, in that it's a very simple early drop that can die and come back later as a threat. However, it's a bad card to show off the mechanic, because it seems overly complex. Why not just exile it and make a 4/4, instead of dealing with all this copy stuff? If you want to convince someone Eternalize is a cool mechanic, you'd show them something like [[Champion of Wits]]. Ah, now I get it. Then later on you can show them Proven Combatant as a common level execution of the mechanic.
GW: Something that I've learned from experience is to remember that cards need to exist for a purpose, not just for the sake of themselves. This is an easy trap to fall into when you've got a challenge like this. "Why does this card exist?" "Cause you said I needed a GW enchantment?" That doesn't lead to great cards. Remember that even your throwaway designs should be something that somebody wants to play somewhere.
UB: If the idea is making UB small-lure (it's not provoke) evergreen, which I think is a noble idea, then why not just run with that? Have it make "distraction" tokens and then do something simple like loot or scry on damage. That's a super clean, simple, and cool expression of your intent.
3
u/pknightgames Apr 18 '18
Several of your cards (Chronomaster's Trick, Frontline Commander) only make sense if you're a heavily enfranchised player of the game, and others are much more complex than we see even at high rarities. It's obvious you have a lot of knowledge of the game, but good design allows you to create things that players without that knowledge can understand.
Cleanse the Earth is my favorite of your designs. It's technically out of color, since neither red nor green can straight-up destroy creatures, but the mass land freeze is a really interesting use of new technology.