2/4/2013 MM: "Designing for Boros"

17 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's Making Magic, which goes live Monday morning on magicthegathering.com.
Insufficient draw cards in white and red for Commander. For the next set, you might think a little more of this deficiency for these two colors in Commander. We just want something solid to our 100 cards in these colors or better, one for red and one for white. Even the green has options like Garruk primal hunter, hunter's insight,'s greater good, momentous fall. For Commander, the color pie should be restored. Greetings from Brazil. (via google translator).
You can feel the excitement in the article about building for Boros talking about the mechanic and how easy the pieces went together.  This makes it pretty obvious why Boros can have such strong draws in limited like the prerelease.
Really interesting the comment that it used to be even faster but had to be toned down for balance.
Insufficient draw cards in white and red for Commander. For the next set, you might think a little more of this deficiency for these two colors in Commander. We just want something solid to our 100 cards in these colors or better, one for red and one for white. Even the green has options like Garruk primal hunter, hunter's insight,'s greater good, momentous fall. For Commander, the color pie should be restored. Greetings from Brazil. (via google translator).


Red and white are the colors that don't draw cards (red only has looting).
Insufficient draw cards in white and red for Commander. For the next set, you might think a little more of this deficiency for these two colors in Commander. We just want something solid to our 100 cards in these colors or better, one for red and one for white. Even the green has options like Garruk primal hunter, hunter's insight,'s greater good, momentous fall. For Commander, the color pie should be restored. Greetings from Brazil. (via google translator).


Red and white are the colors that don't draw cards (red only has looting).

Red and white have other options.  Blue, green, and black get to be spoiled and draw extra cards.  Red and White get to be crafty and blow stuff up better with Earthquake, Purify, and Day of Judgment.  It's a color combination that requires careful discipline and resource management when being played.

In short, if you like drawing cards, play a different color combination.  Or run Astral Slide.



Article was so solid I wanted to comment on how well written it is.  Good writing goes without comment too often.

When I first read the Mechanics site and heard the name "battalion," I immediately thought "okay, attack with 3 creatures or more" before even reading the mechanic. I thought it was a great mechanic and that it fit in perfectly with Boros, much better than the original Radiance. Then I played a Sealed tournament (not Prerelease) with Boros, and I was somewhat disappointed. Battalion is the most "win more" mechanic I can think of. Either I totally wrecked my opponent or I just stumbled and lost easily (except for one game where my opponent's creatures didn't outclass mine, for once, and I got a win through Holy Mantle). I know that's what Boros is about, flavourwise, but I honestly hadn't expected such absolute blowouts to be so prevalent. There were a few cards that would help me activate battalion for one turn (Act of Treason and Mugging, despite being very off-flavour for Boros, worked like a charm), but that's not enough to get back in a race, especially because Boros really sucks at defending. It felt to me as if all I was doing was attack attack attack, then sit back and pray that I'd be able to organise an alpha strike before my opponent inevitably killed me. Which I'm fine with in Constructed, but I'm not sure I'd want Limited to be like that all the time. An uncommon that gains life with battalion would've already changed a lot, I think.

As an aside, I think Radiance's biggest failure was that there simply weren't many good cards. I greatly enjoyed Bathe in Light, Incite Hysteria and especially Rally the Righteous, which I think were very cool cards. The other ones were always underwhelming to me (though I never played with Brightflame). The Wojek Embermages and Wojek Apothecarys of the world simply looked too bad for the rest to be able to compensate.
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.
Many of the other enemy color pairs have some tension between the two colors. While white and red might disagree philosophically (you know, the whole order vs. chaos thing), the two colors are on the same page as to how to win.


Oh Mark... that's the main problem here! You don't understand that white shouldn't be about order!!!

'Order' means 'Hierarchy', but white is about 'Community'.



  • A militia can be used to obtain order in a corrupt country... does this sounds like a white flavor to you?

  • A Monarchy or a Caste System represent a perfect and static order. If you're born by a slave... you're a slave. If you were born by a noble... you're a noble...

  • Your superior orders you to do something you don't want to ... well, there has to be an order of command, right!?!


The truth is: White is also about consistency, not order.
________________________________

Red on contrast is about intensity, spontaneity and ephemerality. "Live fast; Love hard; Die young!" or "Drink, F*ck, Fight"... if you want to.

Red and white have other options.  Blue, green, and black get to be spoiled and draw extra cards.  Red and White get to be crafty and blow stuff up better with Earthquake, Purify, and Day of Judgment.  It's a color combination that requires careful discipline and resource management when being played.


That's also 'wrong' argument in my opinion. If white is about Community, Consistency, Protection, Healing and Defense, it's just plain stupid to destroy everything. It tramples on all these claims. IMO, it would be MUCH, MUCH better, if Mark and all the other developers would stick to a simple rule:

Befriended colors do similar things, enemy colors do the opposite!!!


This means that if red and black are about destruction, white should be about construction, healing, protection, provision and precaution and not about Puncturing Light, Armageddon or Day of Judgment.


But Mark and all the others simply can't change that. It's a given fact that all they do is to reprint the same stuff over and over again in a slightly twisted form. The get paid to invent a mechanic that gives a new flavor to the same thing. My bet is that 80% of all cards in a new set are already predetermined is some way.


There has to be a white Pacifism and/or Holy Day spell, a white Swords to Plowshare or Oust, the Disenchant, the small overrun / Glorious Anthem, the healer, the typical small and big white flyer, and of course the Weenie. And that's it. Sometimes you get a 2/2 flying creature with metalgraft, sometimes with batallion, etc. But it always stays the same.


The reason for this is simple: Never change a running system. Players expect it this way. You have to make sure that Drafts are balanced. So stick to your past and do it again.
_____________________________


The editions I've designed are different, because I stick to the rule I've mentioned above. There are 3 fundamental goals that all colors have in common.



  • Card advantage

  • Mana acceleration

  • advantage in lifepoints


Black:
Card advantage: discard, reanimation & destruction
Mana acceleration: via sacrifice & creature-based, mana denial for opponents
Lifepoints:drain life


Red:
Card advantage: mass destruction & spell re-use
Mana acceleration: spell based, land destruction, alternative cost
Lifepoints:damage dealing & absorbing damage


Green:
Card advantage: creature tokens, repeatable or static effects, re-use
Mana acceleration: lands
Lifepoints:gain life & lifelink (combat-&-creature-based lifegain)


White:
Card advantage:  draw spells, avoid destruction, bounce
Mana acceleration: enchantment-based, draw spells
Lifepoints:prevent loss, lifegain


Blue:
Card advantage: search spells, ordering libraries, over-specialized cards, card-denial for opponents
Mana acceleration: see card advantage, mana-denial for opponents
Lifepoints:prevent loss (f.e. tap), unblockable creatures, redirecting spells


You can see that "draw spells" ought to be white. Befriended colors: Blue and Green do similar things. Blue searches for the currently most efficient spell (not a direct card advantage), whereas green concentrates on repeatable effects instead of wasting cards to create effects. And it uses creature tokens instead of casting creature spells (wasting cards).


The enemy colors to white are black and red. Black concentrates on discard to generate card advantage... the opposite strategy to white. (It's a sort of search/reveal effect, what is fine since it is befriended with blue). Red concentrates on destruction and spell reuse. Destruction is the opposite strategy to white playing the drawn cards and reusing spells is similar to the befriended green strategy to create repeatable effects.


White also gains bounce (return to owner's hand) spells. This is a sort of "draw a card in case that permanent would otherwise be destroyed".


Usually, I don't do this, but here are some examples of my approach to white:




With lifegain, bounce and draw spells, it's possible to achieve this. It's basically another version of "if nothing has changed" or "if you resisted all mishaps", you win the game.



Rather than green, white should be centered around enchantments... especially auras. Unlike current auras like Pacifism, white enchantments ought to concentrate on constructive things. So most enchantments can only target permanents you control or create a positive effect.



If black and red is about destruction, white is about avoiding destruction. That's why "hexproof" is a keyword for white spells in my editions... and replaces protection a bit. Green still has shroud, and blue still has counterspells, redirection and more protection.

So if the developers wouldn't treat white as a "yellow" or even "orange" that is basically similar to Red, there would be a much higher conflict between these colors

Defense/Defender vs. Attack/Can't block
Card Draw vs. Card-Waste
Protection vs. Destruction
Vigilance vs. Haste

THEN, and only then, I want to see how you combine both sides. This would be a "task" and not simply combine weenies and flyer... or combining dealing damage + gaining life.

And I want to see if red+white will be distinct to green (weenies + beater) or black (lifedrain).
Many of the other enemy color pairs have some tension between the two colors. While white and red might disagree philosophically (you know, the whole order vs. chaos thing), the two colors are on the same page as to how to win.


Oh Mark... that's the main problem here! You don't understand that white shouldn't be about order!!!

'Order' means 'Hierarchy', but white is about 'Community'.



  • A militia can be used to obtain order in a corrupt country... does this sounds like a white flavor to you?

  • A Monarchy or a Caste System represent a perfect and static order. If you're born by a slave... you're a slave. If you were born by a noble... you're a noble...

  • Your superior orders you to do something you don't want to ... well, there has to be an order of command, right!?!


The truth is: White is also about consistency, not order.
________________________________

Red on contrast is about intensity, spontaneity and ephemerality. "Live fast; Love hard; Die young!" or "Drink, F*ck, Fight"... if you want to.

Red and white have other options.  Blue, green, and black get to be spoiled and draw extra cards.  Red and White get to be crafty and blow stuff up better with Earthquake, Purify, and Day of Judgment.  It's a color combination that requires careful discipline and resource management when being played.


That's also 'wrong' argument in my opinion. If white is about Community, Consistency, Protection, Healing and Defense, it's just plain stupid to destroy everything. It tramples on all these claims. IMO, it would be MUCH, MUCH better, if Mark and all the other developers would stick to a simple rule:

Befriended colors do similar things, enemy colors do the opposite!!!


This means that if red and black are about destruction, white should be about construction, healing, protection, provision and precaution and not about Puncturing Light, Armageddon or Day of Judgment.


But Mark and all the others simply can't change that. It's a given fact that all they do is to reprint the same stuff over and over again in a slightly twisted form. The get paid to invent a mechanic that gives a new flavor to the same thing. My bet is that 80% of all cards in a new set are already predetermined is some way.


There has to be a white Pacifism and/or Holy Day spell, a white Swords to Plowshare or Oust, the Disenchant, the small overrun / Glorious Anthem, the healer, the typical small and big white flyer, and of course the Weenie. And that's it. Sometimes you get a 2/2 flying creature with metalgraft, sometimes with batallion, etc. But it always stays the same.


The reason for this is simple: Never change a running system. Players expect it this way. You have to make sure that Drafts are balanced. So stick to your past and do it again.
_____________________________


The editions I've designed are different, because I stick to the rule I've mentioned above. There are 3 fundamental goals that all colors have in common.



  • Card advantage

  • Mana acceleration

  • advantage in lifepoints


Black:
Card advantage: discard, reanimation & destruction
Mana acceleration: via sacrifice & creature-based, mana denial for opponents
Lifepoints:drain life


Red:
Card advantage: mass destruction & spell re-use
Mana acceleration: spell based, land destruction, alternative cost
Lifepoints:damage dealing & absorbing damage


Green:
Card advantage: creature tokens, repeatable or static effects, re-use
Mana acceleration: lands
Lifepoints:gain life & lifelink (combat-&-creature-based lifegain)


White:
Card advantage:  draw spells, avoid destruction, bounce
Mana acceleration: enchantment-based, draw spells
Lifepoints:prevent loss, lifegain


Blue:
Card advantage: search spells, ordering libraries, over-specialized cards, card-denial for opponents
Mana acceleration: see card advantage, mana-denial for opponents
Lifepoints:prevent loss (f.e. tap), unblockable creatures, redirecting spells


You can see that "draw spells" ought to be white. Befriended colors: Blue and Green do similar things. Blue searches for the currently most efficient spell (not a direct card advantage), whereas green concentrates on repeatable effects instead of wasting cards to create effects. And it uses creature tokens instead of casting creature spells (wasting cards).


The enemy colors to white are black and red. Black concentrates on discard to generate card advantage... the opposite strategy to white. (It's a sort of search/reveal effect, what is fine since it is befriended with blue). Red concentrates on destruction and spell reuse. Destruction is the opposite strategy to white playing the drawn cards and reusing spells is similar to the befriended green strategy to create repeatable effects.


White also gains bounce (return to owner's hand) spells. This is a sort of "draw a card in case that permanent would otherwise be destroyed".


Usually, I don't do this, but here are some examples of my approach to white:




With lifegain, bounce and draw spells, it's possible to achieve this. It's basically another version of "if nothing has changed" or "if you resisted all mishaps", you win the game.



Rather than green, white should be centered around enchantments... especially auras. Unlike current auras like Pacifism, white enchantments ought to concentrate on constructive things. So most enchantments can only target permanents you control or create a positive effect.



If black and red is about destruction, white is about avoiding destruction. That's why "hexproof" is a keyword for white spells in my editions... and replaces protection a bit. Green still has shroud, and blue still has counterspells, redirection and more protection.

So if the developers wouldn't treat white as a "yellow" or even "orange" that is basically similar to Red, there would be a much higher conflict between these colors

Defense/Defender vs. Attack/Can't block
Card Draw vs. Card-Waste
Protection vs. Destruction
Vigilance vs. Haste

THEN, and only then, I want to see how you combine both sides. This would be a "task" and not simply combine weenies and flyer... or combining dealing damage + gaining life.

And I want to see if red+white will be distinct to green (weenies + beater) or black (lifedrain).


White is a lot about order. Part of "mantaining" that order is just blowing everything up. After all, if the world is too disordered already, what can you do but to start again?

Mantaining order through a dictatorship or abussive militia or whatever is definitely white. Following orders / mantaining a hierarchy is, too. Although, funnily, white is more about belief, moral and principles. So if it think it must oppress others for their good, that's what it'll do. If it thinks the power is corrupt, it will try to destroy it. White can play both the dictator and the resistance.

About the mechanics, you postulate how you think these colors should do. However, you need to recognize that there was a lot of thought into how the color pie is distributed, both for flavor and for mechanical reasons, and that the game has a lot of inertia. You can't say "I hate how this set doesn't have a white or red Divination!", because that's what everyone would expect, and how things are done.

But I do encourage you to take this to the Design & Development Theory forum, where we talk about things like what colors should get what mechanics or if a mechanic doesn't make sense flavorwise. I don't agree that every color should get all three of card advantage, mana acceleration and life swings so easily, but you'll definitely get more (and better) responses there.
Many of the other enemy color pairs have some tension between the two colors. While white and red might disagree philosophically (you know, the whole order vs. chaos thing), the two colors are on the same page as to how to win.


Oh Mark... that's the main problem here! You don't understand that white shouldn't be about order!!!

'Order' means 'Hierarchy', but white is about 'Community'.



  • A militia can be used to obtain order in a corrupt country... does this sounds like a white flavor to you?

  • A Monarchy or a Caste System represent a perfect and static order. If you're born by a slave... you're a slave. If you were born by a noble... you're a noble...

  • Your superior orders you to do something you don't want to ... well, there has to be an order of command, right!?!


The truth is: White is also about consistency, not order.
________________________________

Red on contrast is about intensity, spontaneity and ephemerality. "Live fast; Love hard; Die young!" or "Drink, F*ck, Fight"... if you want to.

Red and white have other options.  Blue, green, and black get to be spoiled and draw extra cards.  Red and White get to be crafty and blow stuff up better with Earthquake, Purify, and Day of Judgment.  It's a color combination that requires careful discipline and resource management when being played.


That's also 'wrong' argument in my opinion. If white is about Community, Consistency, Protection, Healing and Defense, it's just plain stupid to destroy everything. It tramples on all these claims. IMO, it would be MUCH, MUCH better, if Mark and all the other developers would stick to a simple rule:

Befriended colors do similar things, enemy colors do the opposite!!!


This means that if red and black are about destruction, white should be about construction, healing, protection, provision and precaution and not about Puncturing Light, Armageddon or Day of Judgment.


But Mark and all the others simply can't change that. It's a given fact that all they do is to reprint the same stuff over and over again in a slightly twisted form. The get paid to invent a mechanic that gives a new flavor to the same thing. My bet is that 80% of all cards in a new set are already predetermined is some way.


There has to be a white Pacifism and/or Holy Day spell, a white Swords to Plowshare or Oust, the Disenchant, the small overrun / Glorious Anthem, the healer, the typical small and big white flyer, and of course the Weenie. And that's it. Sometimes you get a 2/2 flying creature with metalgraft, sometimes with batallion, etc. But it always stays the same.


The reason for this is simple: Never change a running system. Players expect it this way. You have to make sure that Drafts are balanced. So stick to your past and do it again.
_____________________________


The editions I've designed are different, because I stick to the rule I've mentioned above. There are 3 fundamental goals that all colors have in common.



  • Card advantage

  • Mana acceleration

  • advantage in lifepoints


Black:
Card advantage: discard, reanimation & destruction
Mana acceleration: via sacrifice & creature-based, mana denial for opponents
Lifepoints:drain life


Red:
Card advantage: mass destruction & spell re-use
Mana acceleration: spell based, land destruction, alternative cost
Lifepoints:damage dealing & absorbing damage


Green:
Card advantage: creature tokens, repeatable or static effects, re-use
Mana acceleration: lands
Lifepoints:gain life & lifelink (combat-&-creature-based lifegain)


White:
Card advantage:  draw spells, avoid destruction, bounce
Mana acceleration: enchantment-based, draw spells
Lifepoints:prevent loss, lifegain


Blue:
Card advantage: search spells, ordering libraries, over-specialized cards, card-denial for opponents
Mana acceleration: see card advantage, mana-denial for opponents
Lifepoints:prevent loss (f.e. tap), unblockable creatures, redirecting spells


You can see that "draw spells" ought to be white. Befriended colors: Blue and Green do similar things. Blue searches for the currently most efficient spell (not a direct card advantage), whereas green concentrates on repeatable effects instead of wasting cards to create effects. And it uses creature tokens instead of casting creature spells (wasting cards).


The enemy colors to white are black and red. Black concentrates on discard to generate card advantage... the opposite strategy to white. (It's a sort of search/reveal effect, what is fine since it is befriended with blue). Red concentrates on destruction and spell reuse. Destruction is the opposite strategy to white playing the drawn cards and reusing spells is similar to the befriended green strategy to create repeatable effects.


White also gains bounce (return to owner's hand) spells. This is a sort of "draw a card in case that permanent would otherwise be destroyed".


Usually, I don't do this, but here are some examples of my approach to white:




With lifegain, bounce and draw spells, it's possible to achieve this. It's basically another version of "if nothing has changed" or "if you resisted all mishaps", you win the game.



Rather than green, white should be centered around enchantments... especially auras. Unlike current auras like Pacifism, white enchantments ought to concentrate on constructive things. So most enchantments can only target permanents you control or create a positive effect.



If black and red is about destruction, white is about avoiding destruction. That's why "hexproof" is a keyword for white spells in my editions... and replaces protection a bit. Green still has shroud, and blue still has counterspells, redirection and more protection.

So if the developers wouldn't treat white as a "yellow" or even "orange" that is basically similar to Red, there would be a much higher conflict between these colors

Defense/Defender vs. Attack/Can't block
Card Draw vs. Card-Waste
Protection vs. Destruction
Vigilance vs. Haste

THEN, and only then, I want to see how you combine both sides. This would be a "task" and not simply combine weenies and flyer... or combining dealing damage + gaining life.

And I want to see if red+white will be distinct to green (weenies + beater) or black (lifedrain).


Although i do not agree with everything, i like how you think. For example i always though Day of Judgment effect are very non-white and very black.

Your major flaw lays in:
"'Order' means 'Hierarchy', but white is about 'Community'. 



  • A militia can be used to obtain order in a corrupt country... does this sounds like a white flavor to you?

  • A Monarchy or a Caste System represent a perfect and static order. If you're born by a slave... you're a slave. If you were born by a noble... you're a noble...

  • Your superior orders you to do something you don't want to ... well, there has to be an order of command, right!?! "


White is about order, in sense of a hierarchy. If that order is corrupt or something else depends more on the colour white is compared with then on white 'an sich'. Corrupt order for example should be white + black. Even though its an enemy colour pair. If the order is more bureaucratic, you get the white +blue feeling of order. And so on.
There is so much colour pie failure here.

is about order, and it's perfectly fine with corrupt order and opression. Fascism is stated to be a thing, for crying out loud. Did you sleep through the development team's philosophical examinations?

As for enemy colours versus ally colours, there are obvious similarities between allied colours, but if allied colours were too similar, they'd instantly become indistinguishable. and are already almost identical; do you want to blow up their main difference just because you idiotically think is incapable of being evil?

I like similarities between enemy colours because it does express that their conflicts are pretty childish and pointless.
IMAGE(http://www.wizards.com/global/images/mtgcom_daily_mc52_picMain_en.jpg)IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/73821e61e013eadf56a8e4e2226d89a3.jpg?v=90000)
There is so much colour pie failure here.

is about order, and it's perfectly fine with corrupt order and opression. Fascism is stated to be a thing, for crying out loud. Did you sleep through the development team's philosophical examinations?

As for enemy colours versus ally colours, there are obvious similarities between allied colours, but if allied colours were too similar, they'd instantly become indistinguishable. and are already almost identical; do you want to blow up their main difference just because you idiotically think is incapable of being evil?

I like similarities between enemy colours because it does express that their conflicts are pretty childish and pointless.


I agree with prety much everything you just said, but you do seem like you've never seen a color pie argument before, because you expect them to be sane and rational. I've never seen a color pie argument that didn't consist almost entirely of, to paraphrase Stephen Colbert, people not thinking about things with you but feeling them at you.
There is so much colour pie failure here.

is about order, and it's perfectly fine with corrupt order and opression. Fascism is stated to be a thing, for crying out loud. Did you sleep through the development team's philosophical examinations?

As for enemy colours versus ally colours, there are obvious similarities between allied colours, but if allied colours were too similar, they'd instantly become indistinguishable. and are already almost identical; do you want to blow up their main difference just because you idiotically think is incapable of being evil?

I like similarities between enemy colours because it does express that their conflicts are pretty childish and pointless.


I agree with prety much everything you just said, but you do seem like you've never seen a color pie argument before, because you expect them to be sane and rational. I've never seen a color pie argument that didn't consist almost entirely of, to paraphrase Stephen Colbert, people not thinking about things with you but feeling them at you.



Oh, I have participated in colour pie arguments before. Mostly against people who think the Izzet are a good examples of religious fanatism (seriously).
IMAGE(http://www.wizards.com/global/images/mtgcom_daily_mc52_picMain_en.jpg)IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/73821e61e013eadf56a8e4e2226d89a3.jpg?v=90000)
Oh, I have participated in colour pie arguments before. Mostly against people who think the Izzet are a good examples of religious fanatism (seriously).


...

Oh, I have participated in colour pie arguments before. Mostly against people who think the Izzet are a good examples of religious fanatism (seriously).

...................................................Where can I find these people? I want to watch them say these things. (Popcorn would probably be involved.)

"Proc" stands for "Programmed Random OCcurance". It does not even vaguely apply to anything Magic cards do. Don't use it.

Level 1 Judge as of 09/26/2013

Zammm = Batman

"Ability words are flavor text for Melvins." -- Fallingman

Although i do not agree with everything, i like how you think. For example i always though Day of Judgment effect are very non-white and very black.

Your major flaw lays in:
"'Order' means 'Hierarchy', but white is about 'Community'. 


White is about order, in sense of a hierarchy. If that order is corrupt or something else depends more on the colour white is compared with then on white 'an sich'. Corrupt order for example should be white + black. Even though its an enemy colour pair. If the order is more bureaucratic, you get the white +blue feeling of order. And so on.

Well, I argued about 'order' in another thread.

Order - as a word - means 'giving things a (fixed) place'. So a room is considered orderly, if all pieces are at the 'right' place. In mathematics, an 'ordered' set fulfills certain criteria, f.e. that you can determine the 'previous' part/thing/etc. and the 'next' one. In this way, the first position is always the 'first', etc. If you add the fourth dimension, 'ordered' refers to 'causality'.. 'giving things a (fixed) place in time'. 'Previous' becomes ancestor/precursor, 'next' becomes descendant/successor. You can formulate a chain-of-reaction => a (ordered) sequence of actions. That's why it's called "order a meal". You expect a certain chain of reactions associated with your initial one.

All in all, 'order' is linked to a categorization, classification and coordination.... and all these attributes are linked to a blue flavor in my opinion.

And that's why I wrote that 'order' is about hierarchy. It's the "chain of command". It's a (fixed) ranking. It feels awkward to me that this is considered to be a white flavor. It's the fixed nature that bothers me most. A dictatorship, monarchy and/or caste share the concept of a fixed hierarchy and therefore a fixed order or ranking. (see my last post). If I ought to state some white virtues, it would be friendship and brotherhood, but not hierarchy or ranking. That's why I keep repeating myself, saying white is about 'commandments' and 'concession' and not about 'law' and 'order'.

Let's follow this thought: If 'order' is more or less f'ree of value' or free of morality, it's the morality behind an ordered system that shifts its flavor towards black or white

If an order is enforced, it's perfectly black.... it's the wish to dominate others. In other words - to establish a fixed order where only a few people have a benefit. On the opposite, if an order is accepted voluntarily, it's perfectly white. It's a form of mentorship or trust. It's for the benefit of the whole group.

So a 'currupt order' - as you called it - is more a blue-black flavor in my opinion and a bureaucratic order is purely blue.
___________________________________________

There is so much colour pie failure here.

is about order, and it's perfectly fine with corrupt order and opression. Fascism is stated to be a thing, for crying out loud. Did you sleep through the development team's philosophical examinations?


The fascism discussion can only lead towards a ban of this thread. I already had this discussion. I was born in Eastern Germany, so maybe I have a different relevance to this aspect.

Fascism is derived from 'fascis' = bundle or group. The roots of fascism is the syndicalism.... and that's the white flavor in fascism. The nationalism and miliarism aren't white flavored in my opinon, but a 'natural' tendency in a problematic or maybe over-crowded enviroment. White virtues are the brotherhood and freindship. And both forms/words are limited to a specific (small) amount of persons. But this could lead towards isolation, intolerance to 'outsiders' ... and in the extreme to nationalism (as a 'natural' group or brotherhood) and militarism. But this wouldn't be the color 'heart' anymore but rather some forms of color-combinations.

As for enemy colours versus ally colours, there are obvious similarities between allied colours, but if allied colours were too similar, they'd instantly become indistinguishable. and are already almost identical; do you want to blow up their main difference just because you idiotically think is incapable of being evil?


I want to form a 'new' definition for the color-cycle and don't wish to mix it.

F.e. 'drawing a card' and 'searching your library for a card' effects are similar, but not identical. Both result in a new card in your hand. Likewise, casting a creature spell and putting a creature token onto the battlefield are similar, but not identical.

When I say that I would give blue all the search spells and white card draw instead, there is no mixture in it. This would only happen if you compare it to cards that don't follow these guidelines (from other sets).

White, green and blue suffer the most from this mixture between sets & editions and therefore lost some color identity. On contrast, red had burn spells and black many destruction spells all the time, so their color identity is centered around this fact. But both colors suffer in a different way. They are too much focussed on these two parts, so all other aspects suffered. If I look through my card folder, most red or black creatures are simply useless and flavorless as well. For a long time, black was the color of powerful individual spells, whereas the rest was worthless crap. Only by now, Wizard tends to fix this by supporting black vampires and demons.
____________________________________________

White is a lot about order. Part of "mantaining" that order is just blowing everything up. After all, if the world is too disordered already, what can you do but to start again?

Mantaining order through a dictatorship or abussive militia or whatever is definitely white. Following orders / mantaining a hierarchy is, too. Although, funnily, white is more about belief, moral and principles. So if it think it must oppress others for their good, that's what it'll do. If it thinks the power is corrupt, it will try to destroy it. White can play both the dictator and the resistance.


As you've recognized by yourself, white is about morale and principles. I would take step further and say white is about optimism, hope, forgiveness, preservation and peace.

So all these aspects are ignored just to justify mass-destruction, preventative-aggression and militarism.

If I had to choose, I would rather kick the mass-destruction out than to choose the peaceful, constructive behaviour.

About the mechanics, you postulate how you think these colors should do. However, you need to recognize that there was a lot of thought into how the color pie is distributed, both for flavor and for mechanical reasons, and that the game has a lot of inertia. You can't say "I hate how this set doesn't have a white or red Divination!", because that's what everyone would expect, and how things are done.


No, that's  not true.

Let's say that Wizard would reprint all blue cards as white cards.... suddenly, white would be about card draw, bounce, flying and counterspells and wouldn't have an aggressive weenie theme. Wizards would be clerics or citizens, etc.



  • Suddenly, with bounce spells being white, that color would have the weakest answer to creature threats... IMO perfectly white.



  • White would be about hexproof instead of first strike... not a bad thing either!




You see, there is neither a mechanical nor flavorful reason not to adjust/change the color pie this way.
All in all, 'order' is linked to a categorization, classification and coordination.... and all these attributes are linked to a blue flavor in my opinion.



Blue is far less about order than White. Oh, don't get me wrong, Blue's rational worldview mixes well with coordinated thought. But Blue is not about order, is not about stasis, is not about lack of motion, is not about hierarchy, is not about law, is not about literal and psychological stagnation.

Blue is progress, is about changing the world, is about modifying the existing structures. Blue is basically chaotic in a way, distinguished from Red in both controlled change rather than mindless impulse. That is the will of the scientist: s/he doesn't want a stagnated, never changing world, s/he wants improvement upon it and above all change.

This also manifests in flavour. White imposes laws and forms strategies, Blue changes reality often to a chaotic degree, and cannot strategise efficiently.

Again, bother to examine the colour pie before failing to grasp it.

And that's why I wrote that 'order' is about hierarchy. It's the "chain of command". It's a (fixed) ranking. It feels awkward to me that this is considered to be a white flavor. It's the fixed nature that bothers me most. A dictatorship, monarchy and/or caste share the concept of a fixed hierarchy and therefore a fixed order or ranking. (see my last post). If I ought to state some white virtues, it would be friendship and brotherhood, but not hierarchy or ranking. That's why I keep repeating myself, saying white is about 'commandments' and 'concession' and not about 'law' and 'order'.



This is worth even more face palming. White is NOT brotherhood or friendship; those are emotional qualities, and are Green and Red in nature. White in it's benevolent state is about equality, duty and consideration, and frienships and brotherhood actually prevent that because it's about playing favourites. White characters obviously can have friendships and brotherhood feelings, but so can Black characters, Blue characters and so on.

Likewise, yes, White can be dictatorial and opressive. This isn't just ignoring what the colour is about, this is ignoring canon as it is, as well as logic and common sense.

If an order is enforced, it's perfectly black.... it's the wish to dominate others. In other words - to establish a fixed order where only a few people have a benefit. On the opposite, if an order is accepted voluntarily, it's perfectly white. It's a form of mentorship or trust. It's for the benefit of the whole group.



Except for the many times order is often necessary for the common good, but restrictive of freedoms and not voluntarily accepted. You know, like the laws that prevent murderers and rapists from doing what they do?

Two minutes of real world observation is all you need.

So a 'currupt order' - as you called it - is more a blue-black flavor in my opinion and a bureaucratic order is purely blue.





Blue is NOT about bureaucratic order. Blue can take a complex hierarchy, but Bue by nature does not enforce laws - honestly, if you were a person whose entire vocation is to study a particular field, would you waste your time imposing laws that often restrict your research? This why Blue has conflicts with White; White imposes rules, and Blue breaks them for unethical research - and actually tends to be solitary by nature.

In addition, Blue-Black manifests as secrecy and manipulation. Either can only manifest as order if mixed with White; otherwise, they are pretty damn chaotic.

Fascism is derived from 'fascis' = bundle or group. The roots of fascism is the syndicalism.... and that's the white flavor in fascism. The nationalism and miliarism aren't white flavored in my opinon, but a 'natural' tendency in a problematic or maybe over-crowded enviroment. White virtues are the brotherhood and freindship. And both forms/words are limited to a specific (small) amount of persons. But this could lead towards isolation, intolerance to 'outsiders' ... and in the extreme to nationalism (as a 'natural' group or brotherhood) and militarism. But this wouldn't be the color 'heart' anymore but rather some forms of color-combinations.



Wrong again. Nationalism and militarism are very, very White, or are you telling me that the armies we see in MTG and the many White nations we've seen so far that display both are not White? In addition, given the wonderful colour misunderstandings you've provided, they should be even more White, since that you think White takes emotional priorities over duty.

And yes, White can and often will be intolerant to outsiders and isolationist. This has been accepted as part of White's nature since the beginning of the game. Frankly, your obsessions become even more pointless when you're basically removing White's own identity in favour of fantasy stereotypes.

As you've recognized by yourself, white is about morale and principles. I would take step further and say white is about optimism, hope, forgiveness, preservation and peace.

So all these aspects are ignored just to justify mass-destruction, preventative-aggression and militarism.

If I had to choose, I would rather kick the mass-destruction out than to choose the peaceful, constructive behaviour.



Black is about individuality, self worth, pragmatism, moral relativism and the drive to live, yet those aren't represented in cards.

MTG is a battle game, thus it focuses on the warrior aspects of the colours. To say a colour deserves to have it's militaristic side removed is extremely asinine and hypocrital.

But, then again, most people obsessed with making White loose it's morally ambiguous traits tend to be very hypocrital and basically lacking in imagination, so I should not blame you.
IMAGE(http://www.wizards.com/global/images/mtgcom_daily_mc52_picMain_en.jpg)IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/73821e61e013eadf56a8e4e2226d89a3.jpg?v=90000)
I had hoped this would be about how to build boros instead of arguements about colors lol