4/8/2013 Feature: "You Make the Card – Aura"

118 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of the feature article "You Make the Card 4: Aura", which goes live Monday morning on magicthegathering.com.
Okay, so can we all at least agree to vote against Aura come Monday?
No article yet, but the rumor is that Black won the color vote.

edit: the rumor is utterly unconfirmed, from someone who claimed they had a source. So who knows, could easily be wrong. 
Okay, so can we all at least agree to vote against Aura come Monday?



I'm voting non-aura since thats the ideas I've been coming up with, but it wouldn't be the end of the world if aura won.
Okay, so can we all at least agree to vote against Aura come Monday?


Definitely.

IMAGE(http://i1.minus.com/jbcBXM4z66fMtK.jpg)

192884403 wrote:
surely one can't say complex conditional passive language is bad grammar ?
I'm not so sure.

If we go with Aura, it must NOT enchant a creature.

It must also have "0: Return CARDNAME to its owner's hand"

Let us not forget how much fun we have had with such things as Rancor and Animate Dead.

Most importantly, don't vote for what everyone is voting; vote for what you Want.
Voting against aura. I didn't vote for enchantment just to get a glorified Rancor.
I don't know with all the annoying cheap dectruction spells I wouldn't mind a cheap indestructible aura that grant indestructibility or one that returns to your hand so that you can keep atleast one creature on the field. Hate the fact that so many destruction spells are in standard and are so cheap....
IMAGE(http://i1287.photobucket.com/albums/a637/Duke-Daemon/impurple_zps3e279094.jpg)
I don't know with all the annoying cheap dectruction spells I wouldn't mind a cheap indestructible aura that grant indestructibility or one that returns to your hand so that you can keep atleast one creature on the field. Hate the fact that so many destruction spells are in standard and are so cheap....



Well, in recent expansions, indestructible is white and artifact. (Phylactery Lich is an exception, but that only makes sense because of the "flavor" of being a lich). Hexproof is mostly green and blue. So, that probably wont be doable unless white, blue, or green wins (very unlikely).

Any color can bounce an enchantment back to your hand though, I think.
Yeah, voting for aura is just wrong.  I want a cool enchantment that changes the rules of the game, or at least the way the game is played, not something that makes my dull creatures slightly less dull.
Please remember that auras can also be allowed to find players, artifacts, lands, and other enchantments. Well, also spells in graveyards, but I don't think anyone's going to try something that...ahem...convoluted this time around.

(Enchant graveyard...?)

{sigh} And I had a backup idea for red all set up, too. (Whenever a creature you control fights and destroys a creature you don't control, you may draw a card if your creature is still controlled by you. ~mana cost~, discard a card: Target creature you control fights another target creature you don't control.)

Anyway, time to scheme for aura and non-aura alike...
Consistency  BBB
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant Rules
Enchanted rules gain "permanents don't require targets in order to be cast."
Consistency is indestructible and persists through the end of the game.
I voted for black, and wouldn't have minded if red had won. White rightfully got last as well, so all's good.

IMAGE(http://i1.minus.com/jbcBXM4z66fMtK.jpg)

192884403 wrote:
surely one can't say complex conditional passive language is bad grammar ?
to the surprise of almost absolutely no one, red and black whomped the field.

Why?

Because those are the two colors we haven't done yet, thats why. YMTC 5 will probably be land or a red non-land.

To those who were skeptical, I told ya so.
to the surprise of almost absolutely no one, red and black whomped the field.

Why?

Because those are the two colors we haven't done yet, thats why. YMTC 5 will probably be land or a red non-land.

To those who were skeptical, I told ya so.



That's why? I'm sorry, but you imply correlation without providing data. You fail logic.

"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)
It's kinda obvious, Qilong. The correlation does not prove causation, but it certainly heavily implies it, especially since we saw how Enchantment and Land (The two card types that didn't get a previous YMTC entry) beat everything else. 
Why couldn't we get to vote for a World Enchantment? *gets all grumpy*
I voted aura, in the hopes we'll see a black aura totem. That would be some fun, freaky stuff.
You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what I create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
At first I was inclined to auto-vote for non-aura, but there is some potential to auras.  While, I wouldn't want an enchant creature, an Enchant Player could be interesting.  However, is the quirkiness of enchant player any better than a self-helping global enchantment, or a 'each opponent' style global enchantment?

Alternatively, we could make a unique enchant effect. Enchant Planeswalker has never been done, but the narrowness of an enchant planeswalker card almost auto kills it (barring a 'Planeswalker matters' set similar to Kamigawa, which is less than likely to happen). Enchant exiled card? Enchant hand? Enchant Graveyard? Enchant Aura (eww)? Enchant Equipment (Carry Away is the only one)?

There is certainly potential for unusual auras. However, as the enchantment is black, I feel it would work better as a global enchantment in the end. If aura DOES win in the end, I do hope for something interesting all the same. 
I voted aura.

How about "Enchant Graveyard"?

~ Tim   
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
How has nobody come up with enchant Planeswalker?


  • Black certainly has some sick possibilities in that department. I think a black 'enchant planeswalker' would be flavorful.

  • Wizards seeks to find solutions to planeswalkers.

  • You make the card is the chance for such new cards to be made

  • The feeling of enchanting and using an opponent's planeswalker to your advantage rather than his would be great.

  • Enchanting rather than killing would prevent your opponent from simply replacing his planeswalker.


My only disappointment would be if we voted for Aura and Wizards would omit the possibility for choosing to vote for planeswalker later on, however, if Aura is given enough voice hopefully they would make it possible
to the surprise of almost absolutely no one, red and black whomped the field.

Why?

Because those are the two colors we haven't done yet, thats why. YMTC 5 will probably be land or a red non-land.

To those who were skeptical, I told ya so.



That is only part of the reason.  Another reason is that red and black are underdesigned at the moment and why Enchantment and land won the inital vote along with the reason you are giving.

Another reason is that if anyone listened to you or made their choice based on outside polls and decided to tactical vote, that already skewed the votes to red and black.

I could list a few more but hopefully I have made my point that your reason is only one reason, and not THE reason, why the votes are going the way they are.

By the way, though I was a little surprised that black won I was not surprised that red had high votes.  After reading the forums, a lot of indication was that people were wanting a good red enchantment that does something other than relate to burn as Wizards is seemingly having a difficult time making one.  Though again, not the only indication.
IMAGE(http://pwp.wizards.com/1205820039/Scorecards/Landscape.png)
By the way, though I was a little surprised that black won I was not surprised that red had high votes.  After reading the forums, a lot of indication was that people were wanting a good red enchantment that does something other than relate to burn as Wizards is seemingly having a difficult time making one.  Though again, not the only indication.


It probably helped that the voting article was pushing Red subliminally: www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.a...
(look at the color wheel, and note that the word "RED" was written the other way up to all the other colors)

~ Tim   
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
Yes, an "Enchant Graveyard" or an "Enchant Planeswalker" could be cool. Here's the problem. Right now, the vote is only for Global or Aura. If you vote Aura in hopes of getting a wacky Enchant type, here's what will happen: either Wizards will assume that by voting "aura", we meant "enchant creature", or the next vote will be on what sort of "enchant foo" effect it will be--and do you really think the people will vote for anything other than "enchant creature"? Come on. Realistically, a vote for aura is a vote for aura--enchant creature, and a vote for creature enchantments is a vote for boring. Vote global!
I'm gonna vote global in hopes of Necropotence v2. :3
I just wanna say this "you make the card" as a series of weekly votes is pretty cool.
Voting aura, lets make one that works as good as rancor or angelic destiny, there have been so few worth playing in constructed over the years it needs love.
I'm calling it now, in the end we will get a non-aura enchantment that lets you somehow trade life for card-drawing, because we have never seen such a card before *yawn*
Abbot Pheldy OSM Mafia Awards 2010 Most Unique Playstyle Designer of Game of the Year 2010 Designer of Most Flavorful Game My achievements random hum
hellbent sounded like a good idea
NO WAR

 

They've killed Fritz
I've been shadow banned by youtube my comments only show when I'm logged

does any see my comment here ?

It's kinda obvious, Qilong. The correlation does not prove causation, but it certainly heavily implies it, especially since we saw how Enchantment and Land (The two card types that didn't get a previous YMTC entry) beat everything else. 



It implies no such thing. The person stating this (Northjawhawk) implies that thing, and illogically attempts to support this with a statement that proves no causation. The argument (that these were "the two colors" not done yet) is not supported by facts: He neither demonstrates that the reasoning for the vote was due to not tread. It doesn't help that the second YMTC chose NOT to go with color in the first place. There isn't enough data at hand to even support the essential claim being made, that players would opt to choose a color, if given the option, that wasn't taken up before.

On its face, the argument is fallacious.

"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)
So after failing to get a land 20.000 voters decided to drop from the process ?
So after failing to get a land 20.000 voters decided to drop from the process ?


I can only speak for myself, but I didn't vote because colour wasn't a particularly interesting choice with so little to go on.
singing is respectable
NO WAR

 

They've killed Fritz
I've been shadow banned by youtube my comments only show when I'm logged

does any see my comment here ?

Blackcap Skills -
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +6/+0 and gains "At the beginning of your upkeep, you lose 3 life."   
On its face, the argument is fallacious.



If his argument is that data suggests people voted for that reason, then yes, his argument is fallacious because we have no data at all about people's reasons for voting.  To be fair, though, he didn't say anything about having data.  He just said the reason why red and black were popular was obvious.  The fact that they haven't been chosen before is an obvious reason.

You don't actually need statistical support for a claim before making it.  I can say, without needing to satisfy any burden of proof, that people voted for Obama because he is tall.  Doing so makes it an opinion, rather than a fact, but that doesn't make it fallacious in any way.  An opinion can only be fallacious if it's contradictory, and his opinion is certainly not contradicting any facts we know.
I don't think they'll be 'that' strict on the enchantment aura. I think they'll give us a choice between common targets.
Enchant creature
Enchant land
Maybe some uncommon targets too...
Enchant permanent
Enchant player



Regardless, I think this ability should go on the enchantment. It works best as an aura, but it could go on anything.

Enchant land
Enchanted land has ":T:, Pay 1 life: Target player discards a card."

Instant discard could be fun in, though it might be 2 life to better balance it (instead of an increased casting cost)
Official archnemesis of magicpablo666 Host of Reactionary Proud owner of "The Terrible Cube" The altimis Archive I'm baking lands!!! Beginner of GROMA
Notable Quotables:
58060728 wrote:
I carefully examine the walls of the room in a determined effort to not follow the GMs plot.
It's kinda obvious, Qilong. The correlation does not prove causation, but it certainly heavily implies it, especially since we saw how Enchantment and Land (The two card types that didn't get a previous YMTC entry) beat everything else. 



It implies no such thing. The person stating this (Northjawhawk) implies that thing, and illogically attempts to support this with a statement that proves no causation. The argument (that these were "the two colors" not done yet) is not supported by facts: He neither demonstrates that the reasoning for the vote was due to not tread. It doesn't help that the second YMTC chose NOT to go with color in the first place. There isn't enough data at hand to even support the essential claim being made, that players would opt to choose a color, if given the option, that wasn't taken up before.

On its face, the argument is fallacious.




*sigh*

We were not trying to prove a new unified theory of physics or show our work on a math theorem. We took what evidence was available, and concluded the obvious. The polls pointed to a close red vs black whomping everything else. The fact that the mighty creature lost to the humble enchantment and land pointed to red vs black. A casual reading of posts pointed to red vs black. You are conveniently demanding absolute proof, which obviously is impossible. We weren't trying to prove that red/black were the only colors that had a chance, we were pointing out what was obviously most likely. And yes, it was logical and we were correct.
Why can't we have an enchantment that is neither an aura or global? Like Lucid Liminid? I'd like to see enchantment lands, you know kinda like how they made artifact lands?
IMAGE(http://i1287.photobucket.com/albums/a637/Duke-Daemon/impurple_zps3e279094.jpg)
Why can't we have an enchantment that is neither an aura or global? Like Lucid Liminid? I'd like to see enchantment lands, you know kinda like how they made artifact lands?



Which are global enchantments.
IMAGE(http://pwp.wizards.com/1205820039/Scorecards/Landscape.png)
cant spell to save my own damn life, it's supposed to say 'Lucent Liminid' and sorry for those who were confused. So want enchanment lands that tap to produce mana but are still enchantments. By Verduran enchantress deck wud luv that so much. Cry

And are they global? It's really just a creature though...
IMAGE(http://i1287.photobucket.com/albums/a637/Duke-Daemon/impurple_zps3e279094.jpg)
Why can't we have an enchantment that is neither an aura or global? Like Lucid Liminid? I'd like to see enchantment lands, you know kinda like how they made artifact lands?



Because they said that they would never do that again.

Voted for Global. Aura is too likely to suck.