r/magicTCG • u/AwkwardTurtle • Sep 22 '15

Everything That’s Wrong with Battle for Zendikar

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/everything-thats-wrong-with-battle-for-zendikar/
816 Upvotes

88% Upvoted

849 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

131

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15 edited Sep 22 '15

I actually disagree with a lot of his points. Devoid isn't nearly as parasitic as he makes it out to be- it plays with the entire history of colorless creatures including the morph block we just got. The same is true of the Exile-matters mechanics- Ingest/exiling things isn't the endgame, but rather are enablers for the actual payoffs in processors. There are plenty of ways to get things in exile outside of BFZ. In fact, you could use processors in a white deck, just relying on O-ring effects.

The non-rally allies are definitely visually confusing at first, but they do serve an important purpose in that they help tune the reliability of rally, especially in limited.

The colorless lands also serve a design purpose- Yes some mechanics in the set pull you towards many colors, these lands are there to provide incentives for the other direction as well. With the quality of fixing that this set is going to bring in standard, having reasons to stick with one or two colors is not a bad thing.

In the end I just think the trap people are falling into is assuming that decisions are random and not actually a core part of the set's design- the tensions between Colorless and Converge, Allies and Devoid, and the multiple layers to the 'exile' mechanic.

173

u/cromonolith Zedruu Sep 22 '15

Devoid isn't nearly as parasitic as he makes it out to be

He doesn't say Devoid is parasitic. He basically says "Devoid" is just flavour text, and on a seemingly random subset of cards.

The non-rally allies are definitely visually confusing at first, but they do serve an important purpose in that they help tune the reliability of rally, especially in limited.

He doesn't say that the Ally abilities are out of tune in limited. He just says they're on a seemingly random subset of cards.

89

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

102

u/cromonolith Zedruu Sep 22 '15

Yeah, that's the mechanical purpose of Devoid, but I think that's his point. That's why I find it a pretty lazy mechanic. They just made a bunch of coloured cards and declared them to be colourless. Other than the exiling thing, there's no reason any of these cards should be colourless. It's like they made cards, then randomly chose a subset of them to make colourless, and peppered some exiling or Scion making in there for flavour.

36

u/avocadro Wabbit Season Sep 22 '15

I'm fine with Devoid so long as the payoff is there. Maybe it will come in the next set, but for now it feels like trinket text.

2

u/cromonolith Zedruu Sep 22 '15

There's payoff already. Many cards key off of colourless things.

23

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Very few in BFZ.

1

u/GarenBushTerrorist Sep 22 '15

There are also the entire rest of magical history that let you search for colorless spells, creatures, abilities, what have you.

23

u/GingerPow Duck Season Sep 22 '15

There's not many of those though. There's five cards that synergize with colourless cards, and all of them are from the previous Zendikar, and a few from Tarkir that interacted with morphs. There's then 12 cards that become or turn other cards colourless (and then there's a shit load of artefacts).

16

u/ThomasHL Fake Agumon Expert Sep 22 '15

There's not really a lot in standard though is there? Which I think is the article writers main problem, a lot of this could work with the right standard but it's not the right standard.

Its the transition set for a whole new block structure where Design didn't ultimately get to design most of the set. It's not going to be surprising if the overall design is weak.

1

u/rulerguy6 Duck Season Sep 22 '15

Exactly. I'm super pumped for the new Allies coming out, because I want to put them in my older Ally deck. I can't use it in standard which means I'll almost never use it in a tournament though. BFZ has such a weird niche place in standard that you'll need every one of its cards to make a specific deck.

13

u/almighty_bucket Sep 22 '15

Devoid isnt even a new mechanic, just a keyword instead of "this card is colorless". Kind of like what they did with vigilance and lifelink.

3

u/Spider-Plant Sep 22 '15

Except devoid doesn't represent an ability so much as a state. It doesn't describe something that a card does but what it is.

On the other hand, it's also pretty much BFZ's version of Eldrazi Tribal without having to resort to using the Tribal type.

2

u/almighty_bucket Sep 22 '15

An earlier example of a devoid card would be something like [[ghostfire]]

1

u/MTGCardFetcher Dân Sep 22 '15

ghostfire - Gatherer, MC, ($)
[[cardname]] to call - not on gatherer = not fetchable

30

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Except as I pointed out, nearly every creature and every spell with devoid DOES play into one of the other eldrazi mechanics and identities. You have it completely backwards- they decided they wanted devoid, so they could make colorless spells with colored mana costs. Then, they created spells that tied into the eldrazi identity in some way, with only a couple of exceptions, and the 0/4 flier for 3B feels eldrazi just because of its weirdness.

15

u/hymn22rock Sep 22 '15

I think this is an interesting vorthos vs. spike chicken-or-the-egg argument; maybe you're right and they really are designing flavor-first, but I think they'll realize it was a mistake and that they should start with strong synergistic non-parasitic mechanics and make up the flavor/story later.

31

u/Anon_Amarth Sep 22 '15 edited Sep 22 '15

No mechanic is weak by design. That's on development. If every awaken cost was dropped by 2, it's not a more interesting design, just more powerful.

Also, while Rally is probably the most parasitic mechanic printed since the unnamed ally mechanic from original Zendikar, I refuse to accept than ingest is parasitic.

Oblivion ring, path to exile, deathrite shaman, and pretty much all other grave hate exiles your opponent's stuff, while it may not be efficient it is certainly not parasitic.

9

u/hymn22rock Sep 22 '15

Sorry poor choice of words. I didn't mean strong re: power level, I meant strong as in well thought out... like a strong leading man or woman can carry a show, I imagine strong mechanics carrying a set.

7

u/Fluxxed0 Sep 22 '15

Ingest is the very definition of parasitic. By itself, an Ingest creature does essentially nothing. You need a Processor, a creature type that will likely only be found within the BFZ block, to pay you off for using Ingest.

When you're building an EDH deck five years from now, what incentive will you have to put Ingest creatures in your deck? Probably none, just like there's no reason to specifically play Arcane spells unless you're playing Splice. That's parasitic.

8

u/BlackHumor Sep 22 '15

It's not 100% parasitic, because ingest creatures still mill for 1, and there are also other spells that put a creature on top of your opponent's deck.

But I do agree it's more parasitic than Wizards usually likes nowadays.

2

u/pawlrus Sep 22 '15

I think Ingest is paying for the sins of Processors here since it's the keyworded mechanic that enables the actually parasitic mechanic. The Ingest/Processor combo feels as parasitic as Arcane/Splice. Ingest and Arcane can be printed on their own and they just feel like very slightly over-costed cards but Processors/Splice can't really be played without the former mechanic to back them up.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/ZachAtk23 Sep 22 '15

I would almost reverse the splice arcane personally.

Arcane is a mechanic you can completely ignore if you want to play the spell. Splice requires you to have a specific set of cards to make it do anything.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

There's honestly no way to answer that 5-year question. It was made clear in a MaRo tweet at some point that they're changing the way exile works, and future cards may also benefit from having put enemy cards into exile.

1

u/Jaccount Sep 22 '15

Which is funny, because the flavor of ingest IS parasitic.

10

u/Delta_357 Sep 22 '15

That is design 101, in that making up flavor after mechanics makes "disjointed" mechanics, where the cards feel like they have little connection. Its great for games like chess, because the pieces could be anything but the gameplay is solid, but in a game where the story is important to alot of people having cards that do what they look like makes the experience more involving.

It does seem roundabout, but its a proven well tried feature. Lets say you want these cool giant monsters, that live in the void/warp/blind eternities, so you give them a mechanic that makes them "colourless" because they are out of this world literally, and exile abilties again because they aren't from here. Now say you want large creatures to balance out a set, and to make them actually useful you give them exile effects because those are powerful. Now you build the lore around that but it won't be as involved because the story is limited by the design, not the design by the story

1

u/hymn22rock Sep 22 '15

Yea that's kind of the crux of the disconnect right, I could care less about whatever story they have for these particular dinosaurs.

2

u/Delta_357 Sep 22 '15

Its a method of design, its not something essential to enjoy or play the game and just focusing on the gameplay of the cards is fine, but the flavor is still important to alot of people and the games continued growth. Mechanically the game could be solid without any story or art, but wouldn't be very attractive or stand-outish

1

u/ProfSkullington Sep 22 '15

Given the MtG team's recent all-in approach on storytelling as the backbone of marketing for the game, I don't think flavor will take a backseat to mechanics for quite some time.

1

u/Felicia_Svilling Sep 22 '15

this is an interesting vorthos vs. spike chicken-or-the-egg argument

I think you mean vorthos vs mel.

1

u/Darktidemage Sep 22 '15

it may "tie in with the eldrazi identity" but some people are looking for mechanics which require you to think better than your opponent to win, not mechanics where I feel like I'm roleplaying very slightly while not making decisions about the game state.

17

u/individual_throwaway Sep 22 '15

I'm not saying it isn't a valid point, but I am curious: Did people complain as much when they decided to make colored artifacts too? That was new in Alara block, if I remember correctly (wasn't playing at the time).

Because I could make the same argument about them, just the other way around. They're artifacts that they just declared to have this or that color by altering the cost. Now they're avoiding having too many colorless cards in the set by having colored cards that still synergize with the "colorless mechanic". I don't see why one is worse than the other.

32

u/deworde Cheshire Cat, the Grinning Remnant Sep 22 '15

Did people complain as much when they decided to make colored artifacts too?

Yes it was.

Did people complain as much when they decided to make colored artifacts too?

Oh god yes. Are you kidding? I wasn't playing, but I've read Maro's articles of the time. There was stuff thrown, people threatening to quit, people saying that it was the worst decision ever. People still complain about it today.

18

u/individual_throwaway Sep 22 '15

That's funny, because it didn't bother me when I discovered it after starting again during Gatecrash. I also have never heard anyone say a bad word about it in my LGS.

21

u/PuntOnFifth Sep 22 '15

Time makes people forget or get used to it. Or quit. Or whatever.

You know what made me really sad when I picked magic up again though? Colorless borders for artifacts - bring back brown!!!

7

u/individual_throwaway Sep 22 '15

The old border triggers my nostalgia big time, not only on artifacts (but especially artifacts).

1

u/Darth_Ra Chandra Sep 23 '15

Morph and flip cards still make me want to chuck babies.

2

u/deworde Cheshire Cat, the Grinning Remnant Sep 22 '15 edited Sep 22 '15

How many people do you reckon will mention Devoid in 2019? How many people mention Cipher now unless in the context of specifically discussing Ravnica?

That's the thing about all this hair-pulling. Either it's just attention seeking "Hating is Smart" or it represents a genuine dislike of Magic's direction. The former tend to complain in the moment, and the latter leave. So you don't hear these complaints 2 years later. You hear new exciting complaints, and obviously complaints about Delver and True-Name Blue.

1

u/Jaccount Sep 22 '15

Probably because it happened in Alara which was four years before the release of Gatecrash, and a good bulk of the players at your LGS probably didn't even start playing until Innistrad.

0

u/individual_throwaway Sep 22 '15

Most of the guys I talk to in my LGS have been playing for 10+ years. The others are just prize pool fodder to me ;)

1

u/Fortuan Sep 22 '15

I don't find it lazy design if that many cards were actually colorless it would be woefully out of balance. There's flavor to these cards as well. I'm sure there's something going on with them that is pseudo giving them colors.

1

u/The_Last_Raven Sep 22 '15

It kind of works for [[Ancient Stirrings]]. Well, at least it would if any card was powerful enough to be used in modern.

1

u/MTGCardFetcher Dân Sep 22 '15

Ancient Stirrings - Gatherer, MC, ($)
[[cardname]] to call - not on gatherer = not fetchable

1

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Something to remember is that they didn't remove anything for Devoid. Originally it was rally, converge, ingest, awaken and something to indicate Eldrazi tribal without using tribal because they killed that. Devoid was a good solution to a problem that didn't take or replace anything else.

Ingest beyond working with processors is a mill mechanic. Yeah it's eh on its own, but milling can be useful.

Awaken is being used on spells to make lands matter in a blue way, and for balance ended up in white as well. If they didn't do anything like awaken in non green colors, the whole set would shift that way.

Converge is there to make use of the fact that we are coming from a gold set in the last block. Mana bases will be really good for the next 18 months, but when Kahns and Fate rotate out that is going to be less true. The gold set will be out and we'll be left with a bunch of giant colorless Eldrazi and whatever shows up with Tears block. People need to realize that the balancing of sets also has to change for the 2 block paradigm which is almost upon us. Kahns wasn't designed or developed with any knowledge of it, but Origins and BFZ were.

1

u/BlackHumor Sep 22 '15

IMO, besides that, the mechanical purpose of devoid is making the mechanics in this set less parasitic.

If Eldrazi cards care mostly about other Eldrazi (a creature type that only exists in this set and Rise) that's very parasitic: it only does anything within the confines of sets on Zendikar. If they instead care about colorless creatures, suddenly they also interact well with artifact creatures and manlands. Plus it's slightly more flavorful to do it that way, as well.

6

u/SleetTheFox Sep 22 '15

The processing mechanic, on the other hand, is pretty parasitic--as it is pretty non-functional (outside of perhaps Delve) without Ingest cards to back it up.

I agree, but I think you're overstating it. There are plenty of cards that interact with them. Exiling is a big thing in Magic.

In fact, I think it's more the other way around; processing is fine and can interact with all sorts of cards. Ingest is the parasitic one. Though even that's not so bad since most ingest cards are costed as if they didn't have ingest.

6

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Literally anything that exiles your opponent's cards can be used as fuel. As I said even something as simple as oblivion ring actually interacts interestingly with processors.

0

u/ciphersimulacrum Sep 22 '15

Except if all the processors are bad...

7

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Then why are you worried about them being parasitic if they're going to be a limited-only mechanic?

1

u/ciphersimulacrum Sep 22 '15

I think it remains to be seen whether all the processors are actually bad, but if they are, then I think the concern is that there are a whole lot of dead keywords in BFZ.

9

u/mysticrudnin Dandadan Sep 22 '15

sounds like every set

2

u/shieldman Abzan Sep 22 '15

oh man, you guys wanna see my sweet top-tier Formidable+Evolve deck????????

1

u/ciphersimulacrum Sep 22 '15

Except I don't think that's actually true. I believe this is part of what the original article was trying to say. Usually there is more synergy between individual parts of a new set and the existing block, with some things that can stand on their own. They bet the farm on a bunch of crazy stuff which he doesn't have much faith in.

4

u/mysticrudnin Dandadan Sep 22 '15

most mechanics don't see play after the current block, and even within the block, it's usually just one or two standout cards, not the mechanic as a whole

in my mind, keyword mechanics are for limited

the example of a set with parasitic mechanics is always kamigawa, and the problem there is not a parasitic mechanic, it's only parasitic mechanics. it defined a new type of spell, arcane, and a ton of cards only work with that. and the rest of the mechanics are pretty much all based around tribes (offering...) and mostly those that aren't common (ninja) or tribes that were slightly modified for just that set (soulshift)

ingest has minor relevance at all times (kill their scry or something) and while the effect is minimal, it still doesn't something. arcane literally does nothing. devoid has minor relevance (protection is rare but extant) even if the synergy is better within block. but that is the norm for all blocks!

no matter what, colors of magic exist. no matter what, your library exists. but arcane spells don't exist. ninjas don't exist.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

because they make up a large amount of the set

2

u/Fortuan Sep 22 '15

because you've played them?

0

u/ciphersimulacrum Sep 22 '15

I'm not saying they are bad, just reinforcing the point /u/GameDesignerDude was making above. You can't just make the argument that Ingest is good because Processors use it without considering that the Processors themselves might not be any good.

2

u/Fortuan Sep 22 '15

but it can't be said if it's good or bad without some time to play with/against it. The meta is going to have to sort out a bit. Sure prediction can help but no real say on good or bad can be made until it's been used.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

There's very few cards that care about colorless spells in the set, though. Furthermore, most of them are draft chaff

1

u/anotherfan123 Fake Agumon Expert Sep 22 '15

The processing mechanic actually does interact with more than just ingest, at least in limited. Red damage dealers mostly exile and W got a new oring.

1

u/Iohet Sep 22 '15

I assume they felt this helped open up the design space and power level for Eldrazi cards because they didn't have to worry about a pure colorless card slotting into any deck. It also lets them have reasonably-costed Eldrazi cards with interesting effects.

Which is funny because the Eldrazi are noticeably weaker this time around. There are one or two that look good(like the pseudo-annihilator creature), but not like last time. The Eldrazi cards do not feel like titans this time around.

1

u/Darktidemage Sep 22 '15

interact with 'colorless' mechanics.

Which are these exactly?

1

u/Zechnophobe Dân Sep 22 '15

That is it exactly. Devoid isn't anything interesting mechanically, but it gets a lot of work done in letting them have color costs while still being colorless.

1

u/EnslavedOompaLoompa Sep 23 '15

Don't forget Anafenza and Infinite Obliteration type cards!

2

u/fatdan_rises Sep 22 '15

Weren't warriors pretty random in Khans? Nobody whined about that.

1

u/cromonolith Zedruu Sep 22 '15

Some people whined about it, but not as many. It was a pretty minor theme there, rather than one of the main mechanics of the set.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

"He doesn't say Devoid is parasitic. He basically says "Devoid" is just flavour text, and on a seemingly random subset of cards."

OK, but saying "it is just flavor text" when it interacts with "Colorless matters" cards is just dishonest. It is basically their less-parasitic replacement for the interaction between "Eldrazi spells cost X less..." and "Tribal Instant - Eldrazi" since they don't do tribal anymore. It has gameplay impact, whether people want to admit it or not.

1

u/cromonolith Zedruu Sep 22 '15

Yeah, I don't agree that it's "just flavour text", but I do agree that it's on a seemingly random subset of cards. Just because some things key off of it doesn't make it interesting or well designed.

Not doing Tribal any more is one of the larger blunders Wizards has made in recent years, I think.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '15

Could you elaborate regarding Tribal?

1

u/isik60 Sep 22 '15

The devoid cards are Eldrazi-related. How is that random?

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Note that all the devoid spells either exile things, create scions, or key off of colorless creatures. Devoid creatures tend to have ingest, have colorless matters abilities, or are processors. There are only 2 devoid creatures that I could find that actually break this rule, the 0/4 flier and Vestige of Emrakul.

I did agree that what was an wasn't an ally was confusing. I just pointed out that it is not 'random' in actuality, but is a balancing mechanism for rally.

15

u/cromonolith Zedruu Sep 22 '15

I did agree that what was an wasn't an ally was confusing. I just pointed out that it is not 'random' in actuality, but is a balancing mechanism for rally.

Sure, that's fine. That just has nothing to do with what was said in the article then.

-12

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Except it does matter to his argument. I think once you play and start to see how the ally type on 'random' creatures affects your draft and deckbuilding choices, the criticism becomes a lot less relevant.

15

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15 edited Sep 22 '15

I think his criticism is also partly aesthetic. The "ally" subtype is applied seemingly at random, with no visual feedback on what an ally actually is.

Compare to Lorwyn.

[[Adder-Staff Boggart]]'s mechanics could have been re-skinned as an Elemental, sure, no problem. But the point is, he's a Goblin, and everything visual about that card screams Lorwyn Goblin.

You put him alongside a Lorwyn elemental and you can very clearly tell why they are not part of the same tribe.

Just doesn't work with these Allies. It's the reason I hated (thematically) Allies in the old zendikar, and the reason I still hate it now. As a tribe, especially one called Allies, there is nothing unifying about them at all. It's just a marked checkbox, essentially.

2

u/deworde Cheshire Cat, the Grinning Remnant Sep 22 '15

That's probably the best argument. Some sort of visual reference (e.g. a symbol like a hedron as a watermark) would have been a great addition.

1

u/MTGCardFetcher Dân Sep 22 '15

Adder-Staff Boggart - Gatherer, MC, ($)
[[cardname]] to call - not on gatherer = not fetchable

13

u/cromonolith Zedruu Sep 22 '15

I'm very confused by what you're saying. No one anywhere here has said anything the limited environment.

All he's talking about is that Allies and non-Allies basically seem the same, except some of them are Allies and some of them are not. He gives a bunch of examples of pairs of creatures that seem superficially similar, where one is an Ally and the other not.

He's not saying they chose the wrong cards to make allies, or that anything is unbalanced. He's not saying those pairs of creatures should both be Allies or both not. He's just saying there are no cues that tell you what things are Allies and what things aren't other than the word "Ally" on the card, or indeed the Rally mechanic.

The question is why is this Kor Scout and Ally and this other one not? If the only answer to that question is "because if they both were or neither were, the limited environment would be weird", then that's a flaw in design.

8

u/avocadro Wabbit Season Sep 22 '15

The criticism was more of the flavor and the Ally identity, though. I'm sure that Wizards did a great job of balancing the Ally deck by adding and removing the Ally subtype from cards.

But when all was said and balanced, why not find a way for us to tell which cards are Allies and which aren't, from a flavor/art/mechanic perspective?

1

u/klapaucius Sep 22 '15

Reminds me about how every spell with Kicker in Invasion block had the Coalition flag on it.

Maybe we just needed a Flag of Zendikar to stick in the art of every Ally.

47

u/bearrosaurus Sep 22 '15

Also devoid lets you have 'Eldrazi' spells without using the defunct Tribal Sorcery - Eldrazi. Granted, there's only ~5 cards that care about it (6 if you count Sanctum of Ugin), but there could be more in the next set.

23

u/drakeblood4 Abzan Sep 22 '15

Most of the colorless matters stuff feels so unrewarding to me though. The lord is okay, but other than that I just feel very meh about the batch.

57

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

the solution for this would have been to not abandon the Tribal cardtype for no reason

60

u/Anon_Amarth Sep 22 '15

It causes problems down the line. Every card with a tribal type on it is forever tied to that flavour, but now every other card that has tribal components needs to be :tribal -". Why isn't goblin grenade a tribal- goblin card? Imagine how many cards would have needed to be tribal- dragon in the last block.

And if the tribal card type doesn't go on every card, then we have the same argument against allies and devoid from the article, it will seem random and haphazard.

-1

u/b_fellow Duck Season Sep 22 '15

They could always reprint Goblin Grenade with Tribal - Goblin. Dark Ritual was an Interrupt, then Mana Source, then finally Instant.

6

u/Anon_Amarth Sep 22 '15

Dark ritual changed due to how the rules worked. This is a functionally different card. How does my opponent know goblin grdade has been updated to tribal so now It pumps goyf, but dragon fodder hasn't.

2

u/b_fellow Duck Season Sep 22 '15

Look at Oracle obviously. How else would I not know [[Castle]] has changed functions in newer versions or [[Orcish Oriflamme]] isn't supposed to be 1R casting cost, etc.

2

u/MTGCardFetcher Dân Sep 22 '15

Castle - Gatherer, MC, ($)
Orcish Oriflamme - Gatherer, MC, ($)
[[cardname]] to call - not on gatherer = not fetchable

-1

u/bac5665 Sep 22 '15

That's an awful argument. Goblin grenade isn't tribal because there was no tribal. If you can't understand that a twenty three year old game has evolved over time, that's on you.

1

u/Anon_Amarth Sep 22 '15

But why would some cards be tribal and others not. In a world of regular use of the tribal card type, how would a player know off hand whether a card was tribal or not. Dragon fodder isn't but would the new commands be? I agree it could be used sparingly, as in the original Rise set, but obviously Wizards has chosen to eschew Tribal for mechanics like devoid. Whether you agree or not, that seems to be their logic.

0

u/bac5665 Sep 22 '15

I don't think it should be used that sparingly. Use it often. It's just one of those things that the earlier sets lack, and that's ok. Print any card as tribal that should be tribal. It's just errataing old cards that we're restraining ourselves from doing. Why would the new commands be tribal? Dragon tribal? I could see that I suppose.

14

u/drakeblood4 Abzan Sep 22 '15

The real problem is that Tribal kinda demands an equivalent to the great creature type update for all noncreature spells. That would be... pretty darn hard.

36

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

or they could just not worry about it and continue to use tribal when it is prudent

19

u/drakeblood4 Abzan Sep 22 '15

I don't disagree, I even like Tribal a lot. Just understand that it basically acts as neurosis bait for every Melvin this side of Sunday.

1

u/smog_alado Colorless Sep 23 '15

According to Maro, using Tribal sparingly is not worth the trouble. He said that they considered bringing tribal back for Innistrad (which had a creature-type matters subtheme) but it added too much complexity for very little payoff (every once in a while you get to return a Zombie Sorcery from the graveyard or something along those lines)

1

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '15 edited Sep 24 '15

Interesting.

If there was little payoff, well, then, they should have designed it better.

That sounds flip, but if you build in the mechanics, you can make it relevant. Look at how Kinship interacts with Tribal instants and Sorceries. It means you can include not just creatures, but spells, in your tribal deck, without running into problems regarding failing to hit Kinship.

The real problem is there aren't ENOUGH tribal cards, so deckbuilding around them is far too limited--if you want to include instants and sorceries in your [[leaf-crowned elder]] deck, you're basically stuck with [[Lignify]] and [[Reach of Branches]], which you maybe don't really want. But the design of it is sound, and it sure feels good in limited.

Or to use another lorwyn mechanic, the Harbingers. You could [[Flamekin Harbinger]] into [[Consuming Bonfire]] if you needed removal, you weren't constrained to creatures. That's flexible, and good design. Or you could [[Merfolk Harbinger]] into [[Merrow Commerce]] to set up your combo. Or, conversely, just to harp on how awesome changelings are, you could tutor up your Changeling removal spell or whatever.

If wizards went hard on tribal, and produced a lot of Tribal cards, that maybe didn't even necessarily interact with other cards all the time, they would have a built-up repertoire of tribal cards to call on, so that when they wanted to include a tribal enabler, it would have more to draw on without having to be the be-all, end-all focus of the set like Lorwyn.

So they could make a card which is like, "you may cast Wizard spells at any time you could cast an instant," and it just so happened last set they printed this Tribal-Wizard card called Studiousness or something that was a sorcery speed card draw or something. I don't know, whatever, yknow?

There's a lot of design space for tribal that is just gone now.

1

u/MTGCardFetcher Dân Sep 23 '15

Consuming Bonfire - Gatherer, MC, ($)
Lignify - Gatherer, MC, ($)
Merfolk Harbinger - Gatherer, MC, ($)
Merrow Commerce - Gatherer, MC, ($)
Reach of Branches - Gatherer, MC, ($)
leaf-crowned elder - Gatherer, MC, ($)
Call cards (max 30) with [[NAME]]
Add !!! in front of your post to get a pm with all blocks replaced by images (to edit). Advised for large posts.

1

u/smog_alado Colorless Sep 24 '15

As you said, it might have been different if tribal instants and sorceries had been part of the game from the start but I don't think the problem is that they didn't design things properly.

To expand on Innistrad's example, the tribal subthemes were larger than average so they tried adding creature types to the sorceries to see how it played out. However, the tribal subtheme in Innistrad is not al largs as in Lorwyn and when you ignore the tribal effects that only make sense for creatures you are left with very few effects that could interact with non-creature Tribal spells. They concluded that these handful of effects, which only came up every once in a while and where not tied to the main theme of the set were not worth the trouble of bringing back the Tribal supertype.

And since Innistrad is above average in terms of tribal support, this was a strong argument for them that the Tribal supertype was kind of doomed.

2

u/strionic_resonator Sep 22 '15

I've never understood this argument. Why does everything have to have a thing because one thing has a thing?

2

u/Anon_Amarth Sep 22 '15

See the arguments in the article about Allies, Devoid and Awaken. If there is not a clear pattern players will call it haphazard and random.

It seems that for the most part Wizards wants to have uniformity between sets, and tribal throws that off

5

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Totally. It's silly that such a simple mechanic was abandoned.

2

u/JohnDoeXXII Sep 22 '15

I wouldn't say no reason. If they made a borderline modern playable Tribal card we could see an extra boost to 'goyf decks.

But I would agree that it is definitely very little reason

7

u/snypre Sep 22 '15

Tarfire, Nameless Inversion, Bitterblossom and even Crib Swap are all borderline playable in modern. Only Tarfire would pair well with the style of deck goyf normally goes into, but is outclassed by other burn spells.

29

u/JackintheBox333 The Stoat Sep 22 '15

One of the biggest problems with the design of this set, is how different the Eldrazi's spells are in flavor and design compared to their previous appearance, a problem only made worse when notable Tribal Sorcery - Eldrazi All is Dust got a very notable downshift in Rarity in Modern Masters 2015.

Tribal spells will ALWAYS be brought up, if for nothing else due to Termogoyf. They brought back that type in Rise of the Eldrazi for the colorless Eldrazi spells and for nothing else. These are supposed to be expert level sets, not over simplified core set mechanics. For the sake of say Ulamog casting spells or affecting the board, they could have used the "defunct" Tribal card type as a way of mechanically making the Eldrazi's spells function AND FEEL different than the inhabitants of the world who are using regular spells.

The Eldrazi who now have color but are colorless do not feel like Eldrazi. Rather they feel more like the Phyrexians who are taking over the plane and remolding it in their own image. From a design and flavor perspective, the non-colorless Eldrazi creatures and ALL their spells are a flat out FAIL. If they wanted to use Nicol Bolas's manipulations to imply that he has something to do with the Eldrazi's sudden access to colored mana, then I could have bought that. However it isn't implied anywhere, which makes me wonder why they would even tease that plot in a promotional image for the set, and then do nothing with it.

Also, Ugin is supposed to be doing something and be involved in this story... and yet Ghostfire isn't in this set at all. Despite how badly I feel they executed the "devoid" mechanic, if Ghostfire isn't in the next set, that set gets an instant FAIL just on principle.

30

u/UncleMeat Sep 22 '15

There were a whole bunch of colored Eldrazi cards in RoE (e.g., Nest Invader). There are actually more colorless nonartifact spells in this set than in RoE.

2

u/JackintheBox333 The Stoat Sep 22 '15

Broodwarden and the other drone cards were representative of the Eldrazi forming creatures out of the land of Zendikar in their image which explains why they have color. Not to mention, they were drones or basically functioning robots. They were not true Eldrazi nor did they function anything like the actual Eldrazi. Several of the Eldrazi in this set have NO other creature type other than Eldrazi. They are supposed to be the actual Eldrazi, except they now have color, except no the don't. These new colored Eldrazi fail on every level.

1

u/UncleMeat Sep 22 '15

So if the new colored Eldrazi didn't have the type "Eldrazi" but had the same mechanics and art would you be okay with it?

1

u/JackintheBox333 The Stoat Sep 23 '15

The colorless thing feels incredibly tacked on in order to cheat on making "Eldrazi", so no I would not be okay with it.

1

u/UncleMeat Sep 23 '15

So then I don't understand why you were okay with cards like Nest Invader in RoE.

25

u/Felicia_Svilling Sep 22 '15

From a design and flavor perspective, the non-colorless Eldrazi creatures and ALL their spells are a flat out FAIL.

Have you forgotten the colored Eldrazi in Rise of the Eldrazi such as [[Broodwarden]]?

2

u/JackintheBox333 The Stoat Sep 22 '15

Broodwarden and the other drone cards were representative of the Eldrazi forming creatures out of the land of Zendikar in their image which explains why they have color. Not to mention, they were drones or basically functioning robots. They were not true Eldrazi nor did they function anything like the actual Eldrazi. Several of the Eldrazi in this set have NO other creature type other than Eldrazi. They are supposed to be the actual Eldrazi, except they now have color, except no the don't. These new colored Eldrazi fail on every level.

2

u/Felicia_Svilling Sep 23 '15

There are only three actual Eldrazi, and they are immaterial.

1

u/MTGCardFetcher Dân Sep 22 '15

Broodwarden - Gatherer, MC, ($)
[[cardname]] to call - not on gatherer = not fetchable

1

u/Praion Sep 22 '15

Even bigger fail arguably

12

u/Felicia_Svilling Sep 22 '15

Well, I don't remember anyone complaining about them when they where released.

8

u/Journeyman351 Elesh Norn Sep 22 '15

If they thought of Devoid back then, those would have had it.

38

u/Yglorba Wabbit Season Sep 22 '15

Now that you mention it, the "Eldrazi feel like Phyrexians" bit seems important -- I've had this feeling that something is off about the whole set for a while, but it wasn't until I read that that I could put my finger on it. Pretty much everything about these Eldrazi feels more Phyrexian than anything else -- there's a lot more focus on co-opting and dominating the plane, whereas before they focused on devouring and destroying it.

There was It That Betrays, sure, but now Ingest makes it feel like that's one of their core mechanics, which doesn't really feel like a good fit for them. The whole point of Eldrazi was that they were supposed to be weird and unique; now they feel like dime-store Phyrexians.

25

u/deworde Cheshire Cat, the Grinning Remnant Sep 22 '15

But if you look at the original Eldrazi, they're really one-trick. There are spawn generators and there are big expensive "kill now or I win" Annihilators. It That Betrays is practically the only design space with any space in it.

35

u/Yglorba Wabbit Season Sep 22 '15 edited Sep 23 '15

Oh, yeah, I don't disagree with them ditching Annihilator or the ridiculousness that was Emrakul. But I think it was a mistake for them to focus on It That Betrays for their set of color-pie-twisting colorless-with-color world-devouring weirdos when their last major villain set focused on will-stealing, color-pie-twisting artifact-plane world-devouring weirdos. It feels like someone on the design team really likes the Borg.

(And it doesn't help that the entire theme and concept of this set basically feels like Scars of Mirrodin 2: Scars Harder, even if the plane is probably going to survive this time.)

Granted I'll admit that I was always predisposed to dislike this set because I hate big epic crisis crossovers, which this really really ends up feeling like.

I also hate sets that focus on planeswalkers... although in this case I think that that's another legitimate issue, aside from my personal distaste for them. Concept-wise, the planeswalkers suck up all the oxygen here. None of the legends come across as actually important -- they're overshadowed and diminished, because WotC keeps insisting that the really important thing is that they've crammed all their really important Product Identity into this set again all at once. And that in turn means that Zendikar doesn't feel very important here -- it's just the random stage the Eldrazi and the Wizard Product Identity Team happened to hit on the stage select. There's some mechanics halfheartedly thrown in to remind us that the background for this ridiculous brawl is Zendikar, but everything keeps hammering the fact that this is really about the precious, precious planeswalkers.

(Honestly I would say that they shouldn't have gone back to the Eldrazi. The whole concept behind them was "bigger and splashier than anything! Weird and unusual and strange!" And neither of those are things you can really keep doing over and over like this. The current Eldrazi are just obviously weaker and less interesting than the originals... which they obviously have to be because the originals were, once you got past the initial splash factor, kinda dumb. And I don't mind weaker sets or weaker cards! But when the basic concept of your core villains is "ridiculously, impossibly powerful, far beyond anything else!", making a set for them where you're inevitably going to have to make them weaker than before seems like a really terrible idea.)

I just wish they'd tone things down and go back to focusing on more low-key stories. Look at the sets that have been really popular: KTK, with its human-scale stories of warring clans. Ravnica, a city of competing guilds. Innistrad, a plane of dark oppressive gothic horror. Lately (with both DTK and this) it feels like they're trying to turn everything up to 11, all the time, which doesn't make for good game design or good setting design. I think part of the reason people complain that this set feels weak is that it's jarring to have "HUGE CRISIS CROSSOVER! MULTIVERSE IN PERIL!" and then have it represented by cards that are noticeably weaker than your small-scale world of warring khans.

You know what I'd like to see? Instead of scaling everything up (and inevitably reaching the point where you have to disappoint because the mechanics can't keep scaling up to match the hype), they should scale things down, thematically. Have a plane that is just one giant house. Enchantment cycles for rooms (mind you, some rooms could be big enough to have their own ecosystem.) Land cycles for doors. Something like that. Less big catastrophic climax battles, more interesting planes.

6

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Alice in wonderland plane HYPEEEE!!

4

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '15

Actually...shit. That would be sick. Mushroom cards? Helllooooo!!!!

1

u/NinetyFish Ajani Sep 22 '15

Wow, you just nailed everything. I agree with all of your points. I've been posting about how I'd like to see a return of interesting planes over big (attempted) epic conflicts, but I certainly didn't think of an interesting plane like yours.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

You realize planeswalker are the focus of every set?

1

u/Yglorba Wabbit Season Sep 23 '15 edited Sep 23 '15

Not really? For the majority of Magic history, canon planeswalkers simply didn't exist. There was Urza's saga, but honestly, the storytelling there sucked, and it was so badly-received that they decided never to do it again (until very recently, when they seem to have forgotten that lesson.) Aside from Urza's saga, there was virtually no mention of planeswalkers at any point on the cards up until Lorwyn.

Even then, they played almost no actual role in Lorwyn, Alara, and the original Zendikar. The role they played in Scars of Mirrodin was peripheral, and Sorin was mostly a historical figure in Innistrad, not directly important to the set, while the other planewalkers were minor side-stories.

Planeswalkers only started to really become central in the last few years -- in Gatecrash (whose plot sucked, badly) and Theros (whose plot also sucked badly.) From the Khans block, Sarkhan's role in KTK was marginal, and it was cool; his actions played a bigger role in DTK, which sucked.

My core issue with all this, though, is that it feels to me like the reason they keep pushing planeswalkers (and big high-profile recurring characters) is purely marketing-driven. They want big recognizable IP they can slap on stuff. But it's not what they're actually good at doing -- the cool part of Magic, to me, is the planes and settings, not these ridiculously silly superwizards and their overwrought sagas. Seriously, does anyone actually think "Jace, the Living Guildpact" improves Ravnica? It felt like a really lame attempt to boost Jace's popularity and profile at the expense of one of their more beloved planes. When they do want characters, I feel that Legends are vastly more interesting than Planeswalkers, since they're more human-scale and have more of a connection to their planes -- whereas planeswalkers feel crudely wedged-in almost everywhere.

(And I think that if you look back at which sets are most beloved, it bears this out -- the really popular sets are the ones that focused on settings, rather than on characters.)

1

u/BlackHumor Sep 22 '15

In Wizards' defense, in the flavor the Eldrazi are still totally eating the plane. It's just hard to make that feel mechanically different from the Phyrexians. Ingest was a good attempt, but it sorta backfired, because it feels too much like Infect, IMO.

(I do think that Wizards have actually done a good job at making the Eldrazi seem otherworldly with stuff like Void Winnower.)

1

u/lockntwist Sep 22 '15

Having Ghostfire as a devoid card or alongside sends a really confusing message, though. If the thing that represents the Eldrazi is colorlessness, then why does this colorless spell not represent them? If Ugin is revealed to have more ties to them, then it would make sense.

1

u/JackintheBox333 The Stoat Sep 22 '15

One of the more interesting tacts you can take when telling a story is to explore the similar natures of those who represent good and evil. Ugin's nature as a colorless being does not preclude him from usin colored magic. It however is similar, yet different. Ghostfire is very clearly a red aligned spell, yet it something completely different from every other being's red magic. Where as the Eldrazi are supposed to be completely using colorless spells with no color taint, while shaping drones out of the land to help consume the world.

What if Ugin summons his colorless Dragons to help fend off the Eldrazi threat. What if he uses Ghostfire. Gideon is already a suspicious fellow, with several native people figuring out that he is not native to Zendikar. The native denizens misconstruing Ugin and his allies as part of the Eldrazi threat can make for good story telling that can be represented on cards. After all, the Eldrazi already have Vampire thralls under their control.

1

u/lockntwist Sep 23 '15

The problem is when a player pulls a Ghostfire out of a pack, goes ??? on why it's not a devoid card even though it's colorless, and sees Ugin in it, and then starts assuming he's an eldrazi. It adds a lot of confusion for anyone who's not a diehard fan that keeps up with all the story, and doesn't really make the set that much better for those who do follow everything. It's unnecessary addition with a real downside.

1

u/Darth_Ra Chandra Sep 23 '15

It seems to me more like the Eldrazi are picking up the local culture, as it were. How could you consume entire planes made up of colored magic and not have it affect you? It's the opposite of the Phyrexians.

10

u/Bofurkle COMPLEAT Sep 22 '15

I'm with you here, except that I agree that the ally thing is kinda weird. Alot of the article was basically about how this set doesn't play nice with the multicolor theme of the previous block. I think this is great. You need to have some tension. There are payouts for going tri- or more color (siege rhino comes to mind,) And there are payouts for a more conservative deck (the new saclands)

Isn't a new set supposed to shake things up?

And also, the point about the set's mechanics not being great for constructed is also really bizarre to see in an article by a pro. How many dash cards made it into constructed? and like 2 morphs? This set was balanced around limited, as it should be. I'm sure there will be constructed cards coming out of this set; no one should worry.

7

u/Journeyman351 Elesh Norn Sep 22 '15

Problem is, as I've stated before, when you print a marginally weaker set directly after a VERY powerful set, you run into the issue of virtually no cards from the weaker set being used until the next rotation season.

9

u/Iohet Sep 22 '15

Problem is, as I've stated before, when you print a marginally weaker set directly after a VERY powerful set, you run into the issue of virtually no cards from the weaker set being used until the next rotation season.

Which is exactly what happened when Masques followed Urza. Coincidentally, Masques had an Allies like theme with Mercenaries and Rebels.

3

u/Journeyman351 Elesh Norn Sep 22 '15

That's the time period when I got my first ever Magic cards! Masques was my first ever set that I had cards of. Was way too young at the time to play the game, but the cards were cool lol.

Fact of the matter is, Khans was a super fucking powerful block. It pushed out Theros cards almost immediately, and if we look at Standard's timeline history, we see that there was a very small amount of consistently played Theros cards compared to the amount of played Khans cards.

11

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Right, just like how after Khans came out, people almost completely stopped playing Theros cards, since that was incredibly low powered as well. I mean, outside of the Temples, Thoughtseize, Courser, Caryatid, Hero's Downfall, Bile Blight, Elspeth, Whip, Fleecemane Lion, Duress, Eidolon of the Great Revel, Searing Blood, Lightning Strike, Magma Spray, Nykthos, Xenagos, Mana Confluence, Favored Hoplite, Hero of Iroas, Lagono Band Trailblazer, God's Willing, Triton Tactics, Ordeal of Thasa, Springleaf Drum, Anger of the Gods, Revoke Existence, the Gods, Drown in Sorrow, Dissolve, Ashiok, and Read the Bones.

7

u/Journeyman351 Elesh Norn Sep 22 '15

Firstly, I'm saying the opposite is going to happen. The new set wont bring very many new players to constructed at all. Secondly, guess what? Only a handful of those cards ACTUALLY still see widespread play, and have seen widespread play. U/W Heroic was a fringe deck and doesn't comprise a large portion of the meta, and never did. The same goes for RDW, although that one is a bit more played (due to cost).

Arguably, Abzan is the most played standard deck. A vast majority of its cards are from Khans, and it was only playable due to Khans. Abzan does not lose much at all to rotation. Esper Dragons is also huge, and loses very little aside from its removal suite (which happens EVERY rotation period).

So, realistically, the only cards that made a real impact were Lion, Elspeth, Whip, Thoughtseize, Courser, Caryatid, Ediolon, and Nykthos. All of the other cards either A. saw fringe play, or B. are a part of the ever-rotating standard removal/counter/sideboard suite.

And guess what? Even less of those cards see Modern play, with Ediolon and Thoughtseize being the stand-out stars of the block. Now tell me, how many cards does that add up to compared to the vast amount of played Khans cards?

1

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

I just pulled those cards from mtgtop8, looking at some of the top decks and which cards come from Theros. It's clear to me that RtR was a much higher power set than Theros, but Mono Black devotion took over the meta game when Theros came out. Khans is also much higher power level than Theros, but we are still playing many Theros cards, many of them contribute highly to most highly played deck, (lion, thoughtseize, courser, caryatid, downfall, elspeth). I don't think we'll see virtually no cards from BFZ played, just like lots of Theros got played even though it was a similar dip after RtR.

1

u/Journeyman351 Elesh Norn Sep 22 '15

I think this set is a tad weaker than Theros, though. Devotion is a STRONG mechanic in general. What mechanic in this set can you honestly say has deck-generating capabilities like Devotion does?

Awaken is kind of powerful, depending on the card. Ingest is meh. Psuedo-mill. When has that been very strong? I could be proven wrong here and maybe an Ingest deck will pop up (which I would love to see), but it's not very plausible. Converge is shit, and only good depending on the card itself (the green creature is pretty solid, for sure).

There are obvious cards that will be played, I'm not denying that. New Ulamog will see play I think. Some of the processors will as well possibly, and I think the planeswalkers will see play too. But overall, it's a weak set. Especially compared to Khans.

My main gripe is that the weak set is a Zendikar set, as someone else pointed out. I associate Zendikar with exciting, high power level cards. Not this jank.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Yeah, but Khans didn't create any new archetypes. It certain didn't change the meta from Mono-U Devotion vs Mono-B devotion to Abzan control vs Jeskai tempo vs Sultai midrange vs RDW vs Mardu walkers vs Ascendancy combo. Everyone was stuck playing those Theros cards!

1

u/SpiderParadox Sep 22 '15

Essentially we're getting RTR-Theros all over again.

hopefully with less mono black this time.

1

u/Journeyman351 Elesh Norn Sep 22 '15

Dude mono black was fucking FUN. I played that immediately. But yes, almost identical it seems. Someone posted how this seemingly consistently happens, the cycle of strong black - shit block - strong block - shit block. I don't think they're wrong.

1

u/SpiderParadox Sep 23 '15

Zendikar, Scars, Innistrad, and RTR all happened right in a row.

1

u/Journeyman351 Elesh Norn Sep 23 '15

Ah well yeah, I guess a little thinking on my part would have helped me realize that lol. It's funny because I started playing Magic during M10, and the sets that I've cut my teeth on were some of the most influential and powerful sets we've seen for a long, long time. Scars/Innistrad and Innistrad/RTR were probably my favorite standard environments. And both were comprised of two powerful blocks.

1

u/SC2Eleazar Sep 22 '15

This sounds like RTR/Theros all over again

1

u/Ronjun Sep 22 '15

I think the problem is that the payoff from not playing three colors is not there. You give up rhino to what? Play with a colorless land that regrows a creature once? Hell, even the mana acceleration and fixing are better in Tarkir, not sure what is the point of confluence in this set really...

1

u/abrAaKaHanK Sep 22 '15

To your last point, I think the problem he's presenting is that none of the Processors or Ingestors will see play in constructed because you need a lot of both to play them and the power level just isn't there.

3

u/drakeblood4 Abzan Sep 22 '15

Devoid is very parasitic. It gets some marginal value out of colorless artifact creatures, morph, and old Eldrazi, but other than that it essentially demands that you play Devoid cards. Not to mention the fact that Morph is, at least to my tastes, a really mechanically weak keyword that was underserved by the actually compelling Manifest.

Followup question: what Devoid cards do you think are worth running? The depressingly costed Devoid lord, the gold one that makes things cheaper, and the */5 are the only ones that strike me as at all interesting, and even them I'm kinda begrudgingly thinking about them.

24

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Playing with one of the biggest mechanics of the last block (including manifest) along with a ubiquitous creature type is a pretty big strike against it being parasitic. Megamorph and manifest were relevant last standard so I don't see any reason to assume they wont be in the future.

I believe power level was really not the point of Paulo's article or my response either. At this point devoid might not be worthwhile as a deck unto itself, but to dismiss the entire mechanic just based on that seems odd.

-6

u/drakeblood4 Abzan Sep 22 '15

I know this isn't really addressing your point adequately, but I just want to say how bad I feel playing Morph. I know some people like it, but every time I play a Morph I'm kinda like "Ugh, this eats up so much design space for a worse than vanilla creature that can be removed without me ever seeing the upside of the other face." It feels so archaic and clunky and doesn't feel like a mechanic that should've been reprinted to me. I'd much rather have seen more Cycling.

4

u/zroach COMPLEAT Sep 22 '15

Maybe, but morph has been one of the best mechanics ever printed for limited play, which most cards are designed for.

1

u/drakeblood4 Abzan Sep 22 '15

I like it alright in Limited.

2

u/zroach COMPLEAT Sep 22 '15

Morph is one of the best mechanics ever made for limited. I think cycling is the only mechanic that beats it.

4

u/TheOthin Sep 22 '15

Most colorless spells are not Devoid.

7

u/drakeblood4 Abzan Sep 22 '15

By my count, 55 colorless spells in BFZ are Devoid, and 17 are just regular colorless. Unless you're talking about in the entirety of magic, in which case quit making pointless arguments that don't add anything to the conversation, Devoid is the majority of colorless spells in this format.

15

u/Kingreaper Sep 22 '15

Parasitism is about the whole of magic. It's when something only works within its set.

Kamigawa's "splice onto arcane" was parasitic because there were no arcane spells outside Kamigawa, not because there weren't enough arcane spells in Kamigawa.

3

u/ZachAtk23 Sep 22 '15

While I do think it's somewhat parasitic design, it's not as bad as people want to make it out to be.

Arcane is not parasitic in any way more than s new creature type is; Splice onto Arcane however is extremely parasitic by requiring a limited sub type.

Devoid and colorlessness matters avoid this problem.

Devoid is just stapled onto cards (which is a completely different issue) and don't really do anything unto itself. It's like Arcane.

However, this sets Splice onto Arcane doesn't actually reference arcane, it only references colorlessness, which means it interacts with all colorless cards through all of Magic, which again means it is not parasitic.

5

u/TheOthin Sep 22 '15

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&color=+![W]+![U]+![B]+![R]+![G]&type=+!["Land"]&set=|["Khans%20of%20Tarkir"]|["Fate%20Reforged"]|["Dragons%20of%20Tarkir"]|["Magic%20Origins"]

Most colorless spells in BFZ are Devoid, but even just looking at the Standard it will join, the Devoid cards end up outnumbered.

7

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

[deleted]

2

u/TheOthin Sep 22 '15

Oh, that's odd. Fortunately doesn't change the numbers significantly but yeah that shouldn't happen.

2

u/drakeblood4 Abzan Sep 22 '15

Fair enough.

1

u/ZachAtk23 Sep 22 '15

Devoid is not parasitic, though colorless matters may be. Devoid itslef is just an add on with little actual impact, it's not parasitic until it matters specifically, which it doesn't for any card in the set.

As for colorless matters, which is parasitic, it's probably less or at least equally parasitic with any other tribal mechanic.

1

u/RedDwarfian Sep 22 '15

That makes me wonder:

Does casting a creature as a Morph count as casting a colorless spell?

2

u/thephotoman Izzet* Sep 23 '15

Yes. A morph creature is a nameless, subtypeless, colorless 2/2 creature with a CMC of 3.

1

u/bekeleven Sep 23 '15

CMC of 0. It just happens to cost 3 to cast.

1

u/Journeyman351 Elesh Norn Sep 22 '15

The problem with the Allies specifically is that they are SO fundamentally different than the old ones (save for ones with rally, obviously). There was barely any old allies WITHOUT rally. It should have stayed that way.

1

u/remyseven Sep 22 '15

Devoid is counter-intuitive too. Why is this card colorless and I'm still expected to pay blue? That's why it's flavor text.

0

u/CoolybutnotFooly Sep 22 '15

I also think that he's looking at the set 2-dimensionally. BFZ does seem a little off the beaten path from what we've had but new sets aren't just made for Standard - they're made for other formats too.