|
7 months ago ::
Dec 14, 2012 - 6:12PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Mar 10, 2003
|
I'm talking about anything we see with regularity in Magic, whether keyworded or not. As an example, I think protection  and regeneration  are more problematic than they are interesting and can be replaced with other mechanics. Regeneration is particularly easy to replace: give those creatures activations that make them indestructible until end of turn. Note that I'm looking for replacements going forward, not retroactive errata going backwards.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 15, 2012 - 1:43AM
#2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 15, 2012 - 8:05AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2009
|
I remember reading on a number of occasions that, indeed, Regeneration and Protection are problem children that R&D are working towards 'fixing'. The biggest problem I have with regen being replaced with Indestructible variants is that it A) takes up more space B) doesn't match the flavor As for protection, it has always INFURIATED me that a pro-black creature can be destroyed  , a pro-blue creature can be bounced  , but a pro-red creature can survive a thermonuclear holocaust  . Were it up to me, protection would prevent combat damage, but still allow for non-combat damage.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 15, 2012 - 9:51AM
#4
|
|
|
Were it up to me, protection would read like indestructibility: If a permanent has protection from {attribute}, effects that have that attribute as a source don't effect it, and sources with that attribute can't target it, block it, or be attached to it. Outside of those -- I would probably move away from hexproof and back to normal shroud for certain colors (the    wedge; I could see white and black hexproof from a flavor/philosophy perspective).
Somnia, the Evanescent Plane -- A 3-set Block
Show
Theora, A World of Modern Science
Show
Build Around This
Show
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 15, 2012 - 10:00AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2009
|
What exactly do you feel is red about shroud or hexproof?
I'm not trying to dissuade you, I want to hear the argument.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 15, 2012 - 10:18AM
#6
|
|
|
Somnia, the Evanescent Plane -- A 3-set Block
Show
Theora, A World of Modern Science
Show
Build Around This
Show
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 15, 2012 - 1:20PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
Regeneration isn't easy to replace. If it was, they would have done it. Indestructible has all sort of issues, from needing giant reminder text  in commons (I know regeneration needs it, too, but we're trying to solve the problem, right?), to not fitting in flavor with many creatures, especially trolls, to being a lot more powerful because you only need to pay once per turn as opposed to once-per-intention-to-destroy, to even making indestructible things (which are kinda rare now) feel less special.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 15, 2012 - 2:24PM
#8
|
|
|
Given how many new players think that regeneration involves the permanent going to the graveyard then paying to return it to th battlefield, I think that it would probably be best to replace it with something like:
Resurrect [cost] (When this permanent is destroyed, you may pay [cost]. If you do, return it to the battlefield tapped.)
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 15, 2012 - 2:32PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Oct 12, 2010
|
Anything that is either useless or semi-useful depending on your opponent's deck should go on maybe (and that's a very low maybe) a cycle of uncommons per set, nothing more. Useless in limited, and they're not even One with Nothing  , where I can make a janky but interesting deck out of them.
@FirstTurnKill: How is hexproof black? If anything, it's blue. Green sorta fits with camouflage.
Clever deduction Watson! Maybe you can explain why Supergirl is trying to kill me.
----
Autocard is your friend.
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] = Lightning Bolt 
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 15, 2012 - 2:36PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Mar 10, 2003
|
The biggest problem I have with regen being replaced with Indestructible variants is that it
A) takes up more space
B) doesn't match the flavor
[COST]: Regenerate [NAME]. (The next time this creature would be destroyed this turn, it isn't. Instead tap it, remove all damage from it, and remove it from combat.)
[COST]: [NAME] becomes indestructible until end of turn. (Lethal damage and effects that say "destroy" don't destroy it. If its toughness is 0 or less, it's still put into its owner's graveyard.)
Indestrucitble is about 23 more characters with current reminder text. Arguably, you could remove that "toughness is 0" clause, but even so, the increase isn't enormous (though it is bigger when neither requires reminder text, so there's that). It doesn't seem significant enough to be problematic.
As for the flavor, I can see the argument for it taking a hit, but I'd also argue that there's a huge flavor problem with it already, and that this flavor is one of the things causing misplays. "Regenerate" gives the impression of doing something after an event has happened, which we all know isn't how regenerate works.
Skeletons and trolls probably take the biggest flavor hit. My first instinct would be to do a public test to see how it feels to players. If people dislike the feel, my instinct would be to find new creature types to fill those roles and reimagine what trolls and skeletons might do otherwise.
Regeneration isn't easy to replace. If it was, they would have done it.
Indestructible has all sort of issues, from needing giant reminder text in commons (I know regeneration needs it, too, but we're trying to solve the problem, right?), to not fitting in flavor with many creatures, especially trolls, to being a lot more powerful because you only need to pay once per turn as opposed to once-per-intention-to-destroy, to even making indestructible things (which are kinda rare now) feel less special.
The reminder text is actually smaller. It's not the reminder next that confuses people, anyway. Really, its the name "regenerate" that causes the problem. If it had a name like "prevent", that'd solve one of its bigger problems.
It is more powerful, but not enormously so. It has the following advantages: the creature remains in combat, so it can trump things like first strike; it survives sorcery speed removal better than regenerate (as in, it can take lethal damage in combat and survive Day of Judgment  after; instant speed removal affects both regerenate and indestructible activations equally). Other than that, the two play quite similarly.
The real solution might just be replacing regenerate with a cleaner version of it, like they did with fear (though I think the "artifact creature" clause still stands out awkwardly on intimidate).
|
|
|
and 
.
