This thread is for discussion of this week's The Week That Was, which goes live Friday morning on magicthegathering.com.
As far as the benefit of the rest of Magic is concerned, gold cards in Legends were executed perfectly. They got all the excitement a designer could hope out of a splashy new mechanic without using up any of the valuable design space. Truly amazing.
--Aaron Forsythe's Random Card Comment on Kei Takahashi
The lawmage's argument was clever and well-reasoned,
But Blunk's response proved irrefutable. - Skullcrack
76125763 wrote:Zindaras' meta is like a fossil, ancient and its secrets yet to be uncovered. Only men of yore, long dead, knew of it.
The lack of creativity displayed by names like Red Deck Wins is one of the primary reasons why my instinctive first reaction to tournament players is invariably one of contempt and disdain. This will become something of a problem if I ever fulfill my dream of becoming part of R&D.
There are many issues with (some) tournament players, but even if they didn't have creative deck names, why would that reflect upon their Magic-related characteristics at all? The name or lack thereof has no bearing on how creative or how much fun the actual deck is. I spend a lot of time designing decks (mostly casual), but rarely bother to give them a name at all. When I do refer to a deck, I want it to be immediately obvious which deck I mean, so any name often has to include one or more of the key cards in the deck anyway. That limits the potential for creative deck names.
Is this lack of deck names a flaw in me as either a Magic player or as a person?
Time wasting, old man. Last week you're on holiday. This week is like half a holiday. Nice research and all to come up with the decklists, but you're telling everyone else that you have nothing much else to write. You're paid to write and report, not write crap and report ****. Every word costs Wizards an average of 50cents, so write responsibly please.
Are you noting that all of the deck names described in this article were relatively creative names, with only an abstract connection to the deck's contents? That's the joke here - BDM makes up what a deck would have to look like for those to be the literal names.
even if they didn't have creative deck names, why would that reflect upon their Magic-related characteristics at all? The name or lack thereof has no bearing on how creative or how much fun the actual deck is.
Every Magic card is a work of art, and the careful choice of the best possible (in theory) name for that card is part of the craftsmanship. Wizards goes through a sophisticated process to generate these names, calling for multiple submissions from a large team of writers and then choosing only the best single name and paying for it (an amount of money which is not objectively vast but is pretty damn good for just a couple of words). If it's worth going to that kind of effort to create the best possible name for a card, then why not be equally serious in naming a deck?
My personal pattern in deck nomenclature is mostly derived from my early fondness for the Microprose Magic game. In that game, you have "creatures" that wander around a map, and when you bump into them, you fight their deck with yours. Their deck is designed around a theme and the creature's name often provides some clue to that theme - so if you fight the Mind Slayer deck you know you'll be seeing discard spells and can adjust your plan accordingly. So most of the decks I used to build were named likewise - my Wrath of God deck was called Apocalypse Invoker, my COP Black/Pestilence deck was Plague Shaman, and so forth.
More recently I've gotten away from that structure and just come up with clever names that describe the deck's theme in a roundabout and interesting way. A combo deck based on Eternal Witness, Early Harvest, and Dust Elemental was called "The E's Have It" (as a pun on "The Ayes Have It"). A Heartstone deck based on Mercadia's Rebels was "Rebel with a Heart of Stone". One of my Mirrodin block decks was mostly about using Koth of the Hammer to get enough mana to land a turn-5 Hellkite Igniter and swing for more than 5 by still having mana for his ability, so that deck is "Koth Rides the Dragon" (drug reference for the win). I can't always manage that level of creativity, given that I have literally thousands of decks, but I try to manage as much as possible.
Every deck is a unique creation and an expression of an idea; it deserves a name up to the same standard.