02/09/2011 Feature: "GDS2 Episode 6: "Introductions Please""

37 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this Feature Article, which goes live Wednesday morning on magicthegathering.com.
Congratulations to the winners, and condolences to Devon Rule. It hurts to make it so far and get cut at the very end.

Thanks to Mark Rosewater and all the other judges for organizing this thing and all the hard work they put into their judging each week.

I'd also like to give a special shoutout to GleamAxe for being the only independent judge that I bothered reading. You got frustrated and lost steam at the end there, bro, but when you were writing regular reviews I was always entertained by insights that were both thought provoking and chuckle inducing. I strongly feel you are a better designer than the final eight, and if Wizards doesn't have a plane ticket for you, I sincerely hope they at least find the resources to send you an email. You are someone I'd like to see involved in actual Magic design.
I'm a little disappointed Devon was eliminated... I probably would have dropped Shaun, but I have a feeling Maro knows what he's looking for better than I do, especially since I'm pretty sure I'd manage to mess up the design of a vanilla creature. I think my problem with his stuff is that 'blight' just never hooked me, anyway.

That said, I think all four of them - actually, all of the top eight - have the potential for a bright future in game design, and wish all of them the best of luck. Go out and make something fun!
SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT

Now, we find out which of the three contestants is actually Pegaweb, playing under a pseudonym.

Congratulations to the two other guys. Your chances just improved by 16.7%.

It's been fun. No one ever suspected a thing.



Show

Wait for it...
Show

It should've been obvious from the start.
Show

Ok, here's the answer.
click here


Just kidding. ;>

owl'd!



EDIT: had an outdated version of Incite Anarchy in mind here

Ok fine, I'll jump on the "Ken is ruining magic!" bandwagon. I love Magic the Gathering as a resource trading game =p 

MR: I think this is my least favorite card in your deck. Tapping creatures really isn't in black's portion of the pie.



Without any explanation of the Stabbing Pain mentioned above you? Or is it a design rule that resonant core set cards (like Entangling Vines) can disregard the pie?
Hats off to the finalists. <| :>

WHAAAT? Incite Anarchy is considered fair? Even by the developer?

T1 Brainstorm, T2 Incite Anarchy for 1 in Blightsteel Colossus, how... no problems with that?



Incite Anarchy (Rare) 
XR 
Sorcery 
Reveal the top X cards of your library. Put each revealed creature card with converted mana cost X or less onto the battlefield. They gain haste. Sacrifice them at the beginning of the next end step. 
Put the rest of the revealed cards on the bottom of your library in any order.

Incite Anarchy (Rare) 
XR 
Sorcery 
Reveal the top X cards of your library. Put each revealed creature card with converted mana cost X or less onto the battlefield. They gain haste. Sacrifice them at the beginning of the next end step. 
Put the rest of the revealed cards on the bottom of your library in any order.





OOOOPS Surprised
Very sorry for that

Hmm... I'm really glad Shawn made it through.
Even though Ethan's design is very good by modern magic standards, it just seems too generic and uninteresting for me. All those agressive mechanics just repeat themselves and don't bring any real fresh air for the game, while ideas of Devon and Shawn could possibly evolve into a really interesting twist.
I'd say goodbye to Scott here, didn't like his ideas at all, but I admit, Devon's entry was the weakest this time.
Good luck to all the players.
And especially good luck to Shawn, I hope he makes it, blight is really really awesome! :D

Having read the comments on Migration Route it seems like the obvious fix is to delete the words "one or" from the card text. That would make the card way weaker, but it will still get the job done and has several other advantages:

1) Creates another opportunity for new players to swap out the card as an incremental improvement.
2) Will be good for the set's Draft environment - it's awkward when fixing is a high pick.
3) Creates interesting decisions in the midgame where you have to choose whether to fix and lose an extra draw or wait to draw what you need naturally.
Without any explanation of the Stabbing Pain mentioned above you? Or is it a design rule that resonant core set cards (like Entangling Vines) can disregard the pie?



Stabbing pain is a top down card, it was desgined for the core set. The only other time black got tapping was in Planar chaos.

Part of being a designing is understanding the color pie, and that includes realizing what cards are and aren't in color. Core sets are about top down flavor, and often break the color pie... they shouldn't be used to justify cards.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

As for this round... well it's certainly clear how swingy the judges are. depending on the judge different people would "win" and "lose" this round.

I'm not sure if having Mark be the lone judge with power is such a good idea... then again he's going to have to deal with whomever gets hired.

Should be an interesting final round. I think all three contestants have an equal footing, no clear underdog.
… and then, the squirrels came.
Many congratulations to all the final contestants. All four did excellent work and deserve to be recognised for that.

Best of luck to Scott, Shawn and Ethan. I'm hoping all three of you manage to wrangle some  kind of internship like last time. Commiserations to Devon - a run of solid designs that I guess didn't quite measure up to those of the other three. Your world concept was fascinating but really hard to realise as concrete cards.

I think Breakout and Blight look like awesome fun to play, and I'd love to see any of these cardsets being continued and completed. If any of you want to use a web database for your cardset designs, then Multiverse is still open to all comers
Core sets are about top down flavor, and often break the color pie



IMAGE(http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/9373/conanflip5.gif)

Really? It's okay if the generic, universal, nearly setting-less set that eases people into Magic breaks rules for the sake of that wonderful Core Set flavor, but the sets that focus on specific themes and places have to adhere strictly to the guidelines to avoid confusing the poor, impressionable Expert-level players that buy them at the cost of flavor?
Core sets are about top down flavor, and often break the color pie



Really? It's okay if the generic, universal, nearly setting-less set that eases people into Magic breaks rules for the sake of that wonderful Core Set flavor, but the sets that focus on specific themes and places have to adhere strictly to the guidelines to avoid confusing the poor, impressionable Expert-level players that buy them at the cost of flavor?



Top-down design always gets more leeway to break the color pie.  The core set is nothing special in that regard.  But the leeway isn't guaranteed and I suspect there is a great deal of infighting amongst the gang at Magic every time it comes up.  In case you haven't noticed, it isn't like they all agree with each other and there is only one correct and official answer in these matters.
Core sets are about top down flavor, and often break the color pie



Really? It's okay if the generic, universal, nearly setting-less set that eases people into Magic breaks rules for the sake of that wonderful Core Set flavor, but the sets that focus on specific themes and places have to adhere strictly to the guidelines to avoid confusing the poor, impressionable Expert-level players that buy them at the cost of flavor?



Top-down design always gets more leeway to break the color pie.  The core set is nothing special in that regard.  But the leeway isn't guaranteed and I suspect there is a great deal of infighting amongst the gang at Magic every time it comes up.  In case you haven't noticed, it isn't like they all agree with each other and there is only one correct and official answer in these matters.



I know there's leeway, I know there's grey area and I know there's a lot of disagreement, but he was saying that Core Sets get more wiggle room than other sets, which in retrospect seems to be the case, and if so is exactly backwards.
Congratulations to the final three, but especially congratulations to Ethan!


Having read the comments on Migration Route it seems like the obvious fix is to delete the words "one or" from the card text. That would make the card way weaker, but it will still get the job done and has several other advantages:

1) Creates another opportunity for new players to swap out the card as an incremental improvement.
2) Will be good for the set's Draft environment - it's awkward when fixing is a high pick.
3) Creates interesting decisions in the midgame where you have to choose whether to fix and lose an extra draw or wait to draw what you need naturally.

Removing "one or" from the card text would make no difference in how Migration Route works.  Anytime you search a hidden zone for a card with specific characteristics, you can choose not to find it, even if it exists.  With or without "one or", you can reveal zero, one, or two lands.  The "one or" was added just to make it obvious that you can avoid putting a land on top of your deck.  (Apparently, MaRo still managed to misplay the card!)
Congrats to the final three, and much respect to Devon for making it this far.  As others have said, he was hampered a bit by his choice of world.

It's easy to say this now, having seen the path of the competition, but it seems like one would have the best chance of success establishing a clean mechanical identity for the set, and building the flavor of the world around it.  Daniel Williams had the coolest setting by far, but it evidently didn't lend itself to elegant and fun mechanics as well as some of the others.  I know I'm not the only one who would be terribly bored by "dinosaur world," but Ethan found in it a dynamite central mechanic.

-As has been pointed out Migration Route is strictly better than Rampant Growth.  Removing "one or" doesn't change that, since you can always fail to find a card with a specific quality in a hidden zone if you'd rather not draw a land next turn.  One fix might be changing it to say, "put one on top of your library and the other/the rest onto the battlefield tapped."
-I'm going to give Ken the benefit of the doubt and assume he was being tongue-in-cheek when he said "blight passes the mustard."
-Surprising that none of the judges seemed to pick up on the (rather clever) flavor of Lustersilk Weaver.  The mage is taking the spider's shiny, golden silk and trading it for whatever he's spending his gold on.  It would be clearer on an actual card with art and flavor text.
I know there's leeway, I know there's grey area and I know there's a lot of disagreement, but he was saying that Core Sets get more wiggle room than other sets, which in retrospect seems to be the case, and if so is exactly backwards.



Yep, the core sets have more wiggle room. A card like stabbing pain or Hornet sting wouldn't likely be printed in a regular set, and certainly not in the volume presented in the core set. Top down cards are a once in awhile thing.

The core set is loaded with top down cards, though, and they don't follow the color pie. Which means using a top down card as a justification for a mechanic being in a color is incorrect.

Also a designer should be up on current color pie theory.

* I liked drug the gaurds, i think it would be a nice blue/black card.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It's not really backwards... most of the cards in the core set keep the color pie... only a handful break it. Alpha caught alot of people's imaginations because of it's flavor, hydras, dragons, demons... the new core set wants to capture that feeling.

Hence, top down design. The only problem is... color issues. But a newer player is more concerned with learning how to play the game, they aren't worrying about what color gets what.

Yeah they might be a bit bummed when they learn that black doesn't actually get creature tapping... but that's not something you can really avoid (even if the cards were moved to an expert level set... the core set can't cover every thing each color does)
… and then, the squirrels came.
I tried to sign in last week, but was too dumb to figure out how. That problem taken care of, i can now say how much this dinosaur thing really works for me on the most basic level (the most important level). Love love love it. yes some minor flaws, a few clunks, but mostly "sweet!" and "awesome!" and "cool!" as my reaction when i first took a look at that deck. plus, i get it, which i can't say for some of the other stuff in gds challenge one billion and ten.

btw, this is over now, right? this guy wins, right?

The Core Set is supposed to be the chief representative of How Magic Works, and the rest of the game is supposed to be experiments and variatons on that. Giving the Core more leeway because it somehow needs more connection to its flavor than sets specifically built around specific themes seems absolutely ass-backwards to me.
So I guess my fundamental problem is this.  If you want designers who will do exactly what R&D is already doing, why bother getting more designers?  If innovation and interesting design is bad, why bother with a competition like this?  You already produce four sets a year that contain a bunch of big monstrous fatties that I'm sure Ken Nagle loves.  What's another designer designing dinosaurs with Trample going to get you that you don't already have?

Eh.  I suppose this was a doomed exercise from the start.
Devon's set was the one that interested me most from the start. While I agree that it needed more building up to be on the level with some of the sets that have come out, I disagree with a lot of the criticism she got for some stuff.

In some instances, the judges made me as a player feel bad. I'm not some middle-school drop out. I know how to read, and I understand basic logic. Some of the cards that were criticised as being too complicated, or confusing, looked just fine to me.

Moreso, I was a little upset at the judges throughout for sticking to only what they know. To take an example from Devon's intro deck: Why the hate on the gold-generating Vampire? Not only can I picture a Vamp that lavishes in gold (Seriously, do you know how common it is for Vamps to be the lord of a castle, or of a small region? Thats earth historical flavor right there.), but it actually helped me picture where the set was going. And hirelings are just obvious in such a setting. Countries have armies, private funders have mercenary forces.
Devon had some great designs but the worst setting I think could be conceived of, even deliberately. I would play that deck ina heartbeat, but if you tried to write a block novel it would be three hundred blank pages.
I tried to sign in last week, but was too dumb to figure out how. That problem taken care of, i can now say how much this dinosaur thing really works for me on the most basic level (the most important level). Love love love it. yes some minor flaws, a few clunks, but mostly "sweet!" and "awesome!" and "cool!" as my reaction when i first took a look at that deck. plus, i get it, which i can't say for some of the other stuff in gds challenge one billion and ten.

btw, this is over now, right? this guy wins, right?




Hah! I wish. 

The three remaining contestants get flown up to Wizards' HQ for interviews and another design challenge.  Only one of us gets the internship. 


So I guess my fundamental problem is this.  If you want designers who will do exactly what R&D is already doing, why bother getting more designers?  If innovation and interesting design is bad, why bother with a competition like this?  You already produce four sets a year that contain a bunch of big monstrous fatties that I'm sure Ken Nagle loves.  What's another designer designing dinosaurs with Trample going to get you that you don't already have?



The deck I submitted represents just one mechanic out of five from the set, which itself is only one part of the block I planned.  Evolve simply happened to be the most polished mechanic I'd managed to come up with for Epolith, so I used it for the intro deck.  I was working on other mechanics, but I judged that I couldn't get them ready in time to meet the deadline for the challenge, so they simply didn't make the cut. 

I am not Ken Nagel.  I am not Mark Rosewater.  I have a whole different set of creative influences that inform my design choices.  I promise that if I ever get the opportunity to lead a set design, it will not resemble a Nagel set, or a Tinsman set, or a Rosewater set.  It will be a Fleischer set. 

-Ethan Fleischer
The Core Set is supposed to be the chief representative of How Magic Works, and the rest of the game is supposed to be experiments and variatons on that. Giving the Core more leeway because it somehow needs more connection to its flavor than sets specifically built around specific themes seems absolutely ass-backwards to me.



The idea I think is that the core set is more enjoyed in a vorthos way (new players that just 'get' what a card is doing) and expert sets in a melvin way (how does this limited environment look like)

So I guess my fundamental problem is this.  If you want designers who will do exactly what R&D is already doing, why bother getting more designers?  If innovation and interesting design is bad, why bother with a competition like this?

 

They don't want someone exactly the same, but they do check if they're in the same general direction. They're not against innovation, (they're against innovation for innovation's sake) and 'interesting' is subjective.

Stabbing pain is a top down card, it was desgined for the core set. The only other time black got tapping was in Planar chaos.

Part of being a designing is understanding the color pie, and that includes realizing what cards are and aren't in color. Core sets are about top down flavor, and often break the color pie... they shouldn't be used to justify cards.



 Sure, but I would've liked MaRo to say it (my first line was literal, not sarcastic), maybe I've just forgotten, but is it said in the original articles about the Entangling Vines shift and the state of design somewhere around M10 that such violations are still verboten for expert sets?

Also, MaRo being so vocal about Hornet Sting and not Stabbing Pain, maybe I just thought it was a crust thingy for black (many Planar Chaos stuff could be done in a way).
As others have said - congratulations to the final three, although it was clear that the last cut must have been horrible for everyone involved: all four submissions had very good points and some bad points, and all showed serious good design chops (I thought Devon was unlucky here since his world basically collapsed around him somewhat whereas I felt his his mechanical revisions outshone the other entries.  But since the world was an integral part of the contest, he was always fighting a losing battle here.)

I know who I am rooting for, but all of them deserve it.  It's been an excellent contest (I only wish I'd had time to be able to get involved in the contributory parts) and I fully expect to see quite a lot of the submitted cards reappear in the future regardless.  And there are a couple of worlds (not just from the final three) that I'd love to play in.
While WOTC only officially has one position available as a Magic designer, the experience of GDS1 shows that a high placing in a GDS is of huge benefit to those wanting to work at WOTC. Over time, numerous people were pulled from the ranks of GDS1, for all kinds of things.

Anyone in the top 8 who's really serious should (in due time) apply for a position at WOTC, especially positions outside design, and outside Magic. WOTC already knows who you are, and that you're pretty good. Once inside WOTC, you could easily be coopted into Magic R&D if you have what it takes.

I'd hardly be surpised to see the two losing finalists eventually being employed by WOTC in some capacity.

\:>

The Core Set is supposed to be the chief representative of How Magic Works, and the rest of the game is supposed to be experiments and variatons on that. Giving the Core more leeway because it somehow needs more connection to its flavor than sets specifically built around specific themes seems absolutely ass-backwards to me.



The core set is an introduction to Magic... you learn about the colors, how creatures attack, the zones of the game.

But the key part is it introduces you to the magic. It makes the most sense to put top down cards in the core set because top down cards hit on fantasay tropes. A dragon that hordes treasure, or a wish granting genie are very attractive to a player who hasn't played magic before since they know what these things are. New players start at the ground floor... but not really. Everyone knows fantasy tropes, and by exploiting that knowledge, the core sets hope to make learning the game easier for newer players.

The thing about the color pie is... to work, it has to be followed most of the time. Goblins are a red race... why? Because they show up in red almost all the time. THey do show up in other colors from time to time... but they are normally in red.

It is a bit backwards to not follow the color pie as strictly in the introduction set, but the need of making the core set resonate flavorfully with newer players trumps the need to establish the colors absolutely. Players will learn (though the expert sets) what colors normally get what.

Sure, but I would've liked MaRo to say it (my first line was literal, not sarcastic), maybe I've just forgotten, but is it said in the original articles about the Entangling Vines shift and the state of design somewhere around M10 that such violations are still verboten for expert sets?

Also, MaRo being so vocal about Hornet Sting and not Stabbing Pain, maybe I just thought it was a crust thingy for black (many Planar Chaos stuff could be done in a way).



Oh, sorry. It's hard to judge tone from text.

I think it's less likely that you'd see top down cards that violate the color pie in expert sets since such cards would likely be stolen by the core set. (or more likely people who come up with the idea would save it for the core set instead of putting it into the design file).

I'm kind of glad Maro didn't sit us down to explain what a top down card is, and why it's allowed to violate the color pie. I often feel like he's babying us (Now children, Designers and Developers don't really dislike each other).

I know i'm not the typical reader, but it still irks me when he does things like that.

* Though i too was shocked when he didn't commnent  on Stabbing pain when another judge brought it up, especially since he often comments on other judge's comments.
… and then, the squirrels came.
The Core Set is supposed to be the chief representative of How Magic Works, and the rest of the game is supposed to be experiments and variatons on that. Giving the Core more leeway because it somehow needs more connection to its flavor than sets specifically built around specific themes seems absolutely ass-backwards to me.



The core set is an introduction to Magic... you learn about the colors, how creatures attack, the zones of the game.

But the key part is it introduces you to the magic. It makes the most sense to put top down cards in the core set because top down cards hit on fantasay tropes.



I know why they do it, and I like the new "classic fantasy" cards a lot in and of themselves, I just think it's a bit counterproductive considering the amount of work they seem to always be doing to reinforce clear delineations among the colors in players' minds.
"Intro Deck, not Theme Deck"

Sigh. Can I please have my Theme Decks back? Please? With properly-sized boxes for holding their cards? Pretty please?
I am very happy with the submissions, critiques, and results of this round. At first I was a bit turned down by Tom's negativity, but then I realized that is exactly what the developer is supposed to do. Good job to all involved.
KEN: We've killed this card multiple times in design files because it goes infinite with sayKitchen Finks and other persist creatures. While fun on the surface, it's abusability probably outweighs the good times it generates.


OMFGNOWAI 
Zammm = Batman. Bronies unite. "I'd call you a genius, but I'm in the room."
It's my sig in a box
58280208 wrote:
Everything is better when you read it in Bane's voice.
192334281 wrote:
Your human antics and desire to continue living have moved me. Just kidding. You cannot move me physically or emotionally. Wall humor.
57092228 wrote:
Copy effects work like a photocopy machine: you get a copy of the 'naked' card, NOT of what's on it.
56995928 wrote:
Funny story: InQuest Magazine (I think it was InQuest) had an oversized Chaos Orb which I totally rooked someone into allowing into a (non-sanctioned) game. I had a proxy card that was a Mountain with "Chaos Orb" written on it. When I played it, my opponent cried foul: Him: "WTF? a Proxy? no-one said anything about Proxies. Do you even own an actual Chaos Orb?" Me: "Yes, but I thought it would be better to use a Proxy." Him: "No way. If you're going to put a Chaos Orb in your deck you have to use your actual Chaos Orb." Me: "*Sigh*. Okay." I pulled out this huge Chaos Orb and placed it on the table. He tried to cry foul again but everyone else said he insisted I use my actual Chaos Orb and that was my actual Chaos Orb. I used it, flipped it and wiped most of his board. Unsurprisingly, that only worked once and only because everyone present thought it was hilarious.
My DM on Battleminds:
no, see i can kill defenders, but 8 consecutive crits on a battlemind, eh walk it off.
144543765 wrote:
195392035 wrote:
Hi guys! So, I'm a sort of returning player to Magic. I say sort of because as a child I had two main TCG's I liked. Yu-Gi-Oh, and Pokemon. Some of my friends branched off in to Magic, and I bought two pre-made decks just to kind of fit in. Like I said, Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon were what I really knew how to play. I have a extensive knowledge of deck building in those two TCG's. However, as far as Magic is concerned, I only ever used those two pre made decks. I know how the game is played, and I know general things, but now I want to get in the game for real. I want to begin playing it as a regular. My question is, are all cards ever released from the time of the inception of this game until present day fair game in a deck? Or are there special rules? Are some cards forbidden or restricted? Thanks guys, and I will gladly accept ANY help lol.
I have the same problem with women.
117639611 wrote:
198869283 wrote:
Oh I have a standing rule. If someone plays a Planeswalker I concede the game. I refuse to play with or against people who play Planeswalkers. They really did ruin the game.
A turn two Tibalt win?! Wicked... Betcha don't see that everyday.
Is this my new ego sig? Yes it is, other Barry
57461258 wrote:
And that's why you should never, ever call RP Jesus on being a troll, because then everyone else playing along gets outed, too, and the thread goes back to being boring.
57461258 wrote:
See, this is why RPJesus should be in charge of the storyline. The novel line would never have been cancelled if he had been running the show. Specifically the Slobad and Geth's Head talkshow he just described.
57461258 wrote:
Not only was that an obligatory joke, it was an on-topic post that still managed to be off-topic due to thread derailment. RP Jesus does it again folks.
92481331 wrote:
I think I'm gonna' start praying to Jesus... That's right, RPJesus, I'm gonna' be praying to you, right now. O' Jesus Please continue to make my time here on the forums fun and cause me to chuckle. Amen.
92481331 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
It was wonderful. Us Johnnies had a field day. That Timmy with the Grizzly bears would actually have to think about swinging into your Mogg Fanatic, giving you time to set up your silly combo. Nowadays it's all DERPSWING! with thier blue jeans and their MP3 players and their EM EM OH AR PEE JEES and their "Dewmocracy" and their children's card games and their Jersey Shores and their Tattooed Tenaged Vampire Hunters from Beverly Hills
Seriously, that was amazing. I laughed my *ss off. Made my day, and I just woke up.
[quote=ArtVenn You're still one of my favorite people... just sayin'.[/quote]
56756068 wrote:
56786788 wrote:
.....would it be a bit blasphemous if I said, "PRAYSE RPJAYSUS!" like an Evangelical preacher?
Perhaps, but who doesn't like to blaspheme every now and again? Especially when Mr. RPJesus is completely right.
56756068 wrote:
I don't say this often, but ... LOL
57526128 wrote:
You... You... Evil something... I actualy made the damn char once I saw the poster... Now you made me see it again and I gained resolve to put it into my campaign. Shell be high standing oficial of Cyrix order. Uterly mad and only slightly evil. And it'll be bad. Evil even. And ill blame you and Lizard for it :P.
57042968 wrote:
111809331 wrote:
I'm trying to work out if you're being sarcastic here. ...
Am going to stop you right there... it's RPJesus... he's always sarcastic
58335208 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
112114441 wrote:
we can only hope it gets the jace treatment...it could have at least been legendary
So that even the decks that don't run it run it to deal with it? Isn't that like the definition of format warping?
I lol'd.
56287226 wrote:
98088088 wrote:
Uktabi Orangutan What the heck's going on with those monkeys?
The most common answer is that they are what RPJesus would call "[Debutantes avert your eyes]ing."
56965458 wrote:
Show
57461258 wrote:
116498949 wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because off-topic discussions are a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_... Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively. If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
...Am I the only one that thinks this is reaching the point of downright Kafkaesque insanity?
I condone the use of the word Kafkaesque. However, I'm presentely ambivalent. I mean, that can't be serious, right? We're April 1st, right? They didn't mod RPJesus for off-topic discussion when the WHOLE THREAD IS OFF-TOPIC, right? Right.
57545908 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
Save or die. If you disagree with this, you're wrong (Not because of any points or arguements that have been made, but I just rolled a d20 for you and got a 1, so you lose).
58397368 wrote:
58222628 wrote:
This just won the argument, AFAIC.
That's just awesome.
57471038 wrote:
57718868 wrote:
HOW DID I NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BEAR PRODUCING WORDS OF WILDING?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME?!
That's what RPJesus tends to do. That's why I don't think he's a real person, but some Magic Card Archive Server sort of machine, that is programmed to react to other posters' comments with obscure cards that do in fact exist, but somehow missed by even the most experienced Magic players. And then come up with strange combos with said cards. All of that is impossible for a normal human to do given the amount of time he does it and how often he does it. He/It got me with Light of Sanction, which prompted me to go to RQ&A to try and find if it was even possible to do combat damage to a creature I control (in light that Mark of Asylum exists).
71235715 wrote:
+10
100176878 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
57078538 wrote:
heaven or hell.
Round 1. Lets rock.
GG quotes! RPJesus just made this thread win!
56906968 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
143359585 wrote:
Blue players get all the overpowerered cards like JTMS. I think it's time that wizards gave something to people who remember what magic is really about: creatures.
Initially yes, Wizards was married to blue. However, about a decade ago they had a nasty divorce, and a few years after that they began courting the attention of Green. Then in Worldwake they had a nasty affair with their ex, but as of Innistrad, things seem to have gotten back on track, and Wizards has even proposed.
You are my favorite. Yes you. And moments like this make it so. Thank you RPJesus for just being you.
On what flavor text fits me:
57307308 wrote:
Surely RPJesus gets Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius?
56874518 wrote:
First: I STILL can't take you seriously with that avatar. And I can take RPJesus seriously, so that's saying something.
121689989 wrote:
I'd offer you a cookie for making me laugh but it has an Upkeep Cost that has been known to cause people to quit eating.
56267956 wrote:
I <3 you loads
57400888 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
"AINT NO LAWS IN THE SKY MOTHER****." - Agrus Kos, Wojek Veteran
10/10. Amazing.
I gotta say, I was pretty impressed by all of the submissions this week, even the ones from people whose submissions I normally wasn't that fond of.  Congrats to all of the final four, and best of luck to the final three.
Fun fact, I just reread the GDS1 questions, and one was this:


#25) Which of the following abilities is most likely to appear on a common red 3/4 Giant?

a) Tap: Target creature you control with power less than this creature’s toughness gains flying until end of turn. Sacrifice that creature at end of turn.
b) Sacrifice a mountain: Target Goblin you control gets +1/+0 and gains flying until end of turn.
c) Tap, Sacrifice a Giant: Destroy target land.
d) Red ManaWhite Mana, Tap, Sacrifice a creature: Destroy target enchantment unless its controller has CARDNAME deal 4 damage to target creature of his or her choice.
e) Red Mana: CARDNAME gets +1/+0 until end of turn.



The answer is e) Red Mana: CARDNAME gets +1/+0 until end of turn. This is another question that threw a number of people for a loop. I think it stemmed from two problems: 1) focusing too much on the fact that the card was a Giant, and 2) misunderstanding the flavor of “Red Mana: CARDNAME gets +1/+0 until end of turn”. In short, I feel people talked themselves out of e) because it didn’t seem enough like a Giant.


Before we examine that issue, though, let’s walk through why the other answers were not correct. The problem with a) is that red granting flying is a color bleed and we seldom do color bleeds at common. The same issue takes b) out of consideration. The ability is also a bit convoluted for common. Option c) is out, as we do not put repeatable land destruction at common. First and foremost, d) is not a common card. In addition, there are a number of issues like the fact that red just doesn’t do enchantment destruction (although I do realize that the card is a punisher variant).


Now lets get back to e). Obviously, it’s a basic effect that we put at common all the time. Just because the aura that grants the “Red Mana: CARDNAME gets +1/+0 until end of turn” ability is called Firebreathing (and thus this is the unofficial nickname for this ability), that does not mean that it always has to be represented conceptually by the creature breathing fire. Yes, it often is, but power pumping can represent other things. For instance, it makes perfect sense on a creature that has the ability to enrage itself and put itself into a frenzy, thus temporarily increasing its power. Finally, there is no reason that a giant couldn’t be concepted to breath fire. There are actual examples of this in real mythologies. Plus, we’re allowed to make stuff up.



But in the meanwhile, they did print Lowland Oaf, combination of a) and b), and the closest ever to a firebreathing giant is Flowstone Giant, which is more Flowstone than Giant Laughing
I too am sad that Devon's gone, because I thought it would be neat to see the peaceful sides of the different colors. But he did beat the gold mechanic to death in his challenge entries. And while the fundamental idea of accumulating gold counters that you can use to pay both generic mana and life costs is pretty impressive, I'm not a fan of a having a bunch of "spend gold on me" cards, which are more parasitic on their block than spiritcraft cards are on their block.

Also, though at least it was self-contained, Ageless Patriarch made a bad first impression on me, since if I can cast it I probably don't need much more mana. (Naturally the utility of the gold you get from Ageless Patriarch depends on the environment, but in a vacuum the gold generation doesn't look great.) But the vampire concept seemed fine to me; Dracula was pretty rich, wasn't he? Of course, mana generation of this level is not currently black, as the judges said.

Regarding Lotus Garden, I didn't realize until I read the judges' comments that it's always correct to tap this card at the end of your opponent's turn and get a gold counter; I temporarily forgot that mana burn no longer exists! They might want to consider this misperception when making similar cards.
Fun fact, I just reread the GDS1 questions, and one was this:
#25) Which of the following abilities is most likely to appear on a common red 3/4 Giant?

But in the meanwhile, they did print Lowland Oaf, combination of a) and b), and the closest ever to a firebreathing giant is Flowstone Giant, which is more Flowstone than Giant Laughing

Yeah, for pretty much all rounds of the competition, it was important to answer and design according to MaRo's design principles, and not what Wizards actually prints.  That was sometimes really tricky!  Maybe part of the problem here is that we don't see the cards that Design hands off, we only see what Development finally turns in.
Thanks to everyone who helped with the design of the plane of Golamo in the Great Designer Search 2!
My Decks
These are the decks I have assembled at the moment:
Tournament Decks (4)
Kicker Aggro (Invasion Block) Sunforger/Izzet Guildmage Midrange (Ravnica/Time Spiral/Xth Standard) Dragonstorm Combo (Time Spiral/Lorwyn/Xth Standard) Bant Midrange (Lorwyn/Shards/M10 Standard)
Casual Multiplayer Decks (50)
Angel Resurrection Casual Soul Sisters Sindbad's Adventures with Djinn of Wishes Sphinx-Bone Wand Buyback Morph (No Instants or Sorceries) Cabal Coffers Control Zombie Aggro Hungry, Hungry Greater Gargadon/War Elemental Flashfires/Boil/Ruination - Boom! Call of the Wild Teysa, Orzhov Scion with Twilight Drover, Sun Titan, and Hivestone Slivers Rebels Cairn Wanderer Knights Only Gold and () Spells Captain Sisay Toolbox Spellweaver Helix Combo Merfolk Wizards Izzet Guildmage/The Unspeakable Arcane Combo Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind and his Wizards Creatureless Wild Research/Reins of Power Madness Creatureless Pyromancer Ascension Anarchist Living Death Anvil of Bogardan Madness Shamen with Goblin Game/Wound Reflection Combo Mass damage Quest for Pure Flame Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle/Clear the Land with 40+ Lands Doubling Season Thallids Juniper Order Ranger Graft/Tokens Elf Archer Druids Equilibrium/Aluren Combo Experiment Kraj Combo Reap Combo False Cure/Kavu Predator Combo Savra, Queen of the Golgari Sacrifice/Dredge Elf Warriors Eight-Post Sneak Attack Where Ancients Tread Zur the Enchanter with Opal creatures Tamanoa/Kavu Predator/Collapsing Borders Esper Aggro Mishra, Artificer Prodigy and his Darksteel Reactor Theft and Control Unearth Aggro Soul's Fire Vampires Devour Tokens Phytohydra with Powerstone Minefield Treefolk Friendly? Questing Phelddagrif Slivers Dragon Arch Fun I'm probably forgetting a few...
Yeah, for pretty much all rounds of the competition, it was important to answer and design according to MaRo's design principles, and not what Wizards actually prints.  That was sometimes really tricky!  Maybe part of the problem here is that we don't see the cards that Design hands off, we only see what Development finally turns in.



Yeah, it bugged me to no end that some principles MaRo stated were completely different from how actual sets look to us, like "no LD at common" or "no more than 3 cards with new keyword at common".