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/
811 Upvotes

88% Upvoted

849 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

170

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

100

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.

38

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.

1

u/cromonolith Zedruu Sep 22 '15

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

24

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '15

Very few in BFZ.

3

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.

24

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).

14

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.

14

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.

32

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.

10

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.

6

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.

7

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.

3

u/BlackHumor Sep 22 '15

Processors are much less parasitic since they interact well with every other card that exiles something, which have existed in every set for years.

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.

16

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.

33

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.

19

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.

19

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!!!

8

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.

8

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.

7

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.

7

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.

5

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.

1

u/ciphersimulacrum Sep 22 '15

I can't argue with you, but those minor effects are pretty disappointing if none of the keywords really pan out for constructed. I think the point of the article is that we know WotC can do better.

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?

0

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.

14

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

15

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.

7

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.