|
4 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 1:27PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Dec 29, 2010
|
The ability to interact with the exile zone appears to have been a point of contention in R&D; it defeats the purpose to have the exile zone simply be a glorified graveyard with identical mechanics, but at the same time there is clearly a want for some interaction with exiled cards. The issue is not with cards that exile cards themselves and then care about the exiled card/s (such as Fiend Hunter  or Chrome Mox  ), but rather cards that interact with cards that have already been exiled via some other means ( Pull From Eternity  ). There are basically four cards that bring up this discussion: Pull From Eternity , the iconic interact-with-an-exiled-card card. Riftsweeper  , a card by design that was meant to stop your opponent's suspend cards. Mirror of Fate  , a wacky Doomsday  -variant meant for Johnnies. (For example, it could be used with Leveler  and a series of cascade cards beginning with Enigma Sphinx  and ending with Mass Hysteria  to cast your library and kill the opponent) and, Misthollow Griffin  , whose worst abuse is with Food Chain  . Mark Rosewater seems to have come to terms with this card, but mentions his frustration and his push to stop the card from being printed at the beginning this article: www.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/Article.a...To that end, what do you think of cards like these? Another thing to note is that R&D has never created a card that interacts with face-down exiled cards if it didn't exile those cards itself. Would that be stepping over the line?
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 2:15PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2009
|
Don't forget Runic Repetition  . I'd have no problem with Pull or Sweeper if they only explicitly affected suspended cards. As is, they do something that should not exist. They interact with things that are supposed to be permanent. Mirror of Fate is... interesting. The drawback and amount of work you have to put into it for it not to be horrible kind of tempers my dislike of interacting with exiled stuff. I have no strong opinions either way. MaRo has said that he had problems with Misthollow because he felt that it worked along the same sort of axis as Pull or Sweeper, but it's more akin to O-Ring. It only affects itself. It has no way of exiling itself so you need to find a way to abuse it yourself. Its kind of like a unique form of evasion. Like, an opponent would never try to O-Ring it because that would be akin to a really overcosted Unsummon  . As such, I have no problems whatsoever with Griffin (but I don't think its something that needs to show up all that often, or even ever again). Repitition is interesting. I like what it's doing, and in theory I have no problems with it because the most likely way that a flashback card will be exiled is by being flashedback. Nonetheless, it can let you pull things from exile that were put there in other ways (like if Lord of the Void  mills it) and thus I have a slight problem with it. Less so than Pull or Sweeper, but it does more harm than good because its setting a precedent for things being pulled from exile. In regards to manipulating with face down exiled things, I've toyed with a couple of designs in that vein myself. I think there's real potential there.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 2:39PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jul 13, 2012
|
It's hard to disagree with Maro on this one: if they print too many cards that get things back from exile, then there will be no point to prefer exiling to putting in the owner's graveyard.
And, as strange as it may look, I believe that Runic Repetition, just like Misthollow Griffin, is in the right category of cards: it affects cards that are meant to get to exile by themselves, not because the opponent put them there.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 29, 2013 - 9:07PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
Misthollow Griffin and Runic Repetition are cool, in my opinion. Sure, you don't need them every set, but I think they're innocent enough. Pull from Eternity  and Riftsweeper , on the other hand, are stepping a little too much. I was going to suggest that they only target opponents' cards, but HairlessThoctar is probably right. Saying "suspended card" is rules-acceptable, and it would actually help that issue about people not knowing that they were supposed to hose suspend. I have no idea what to think of Mirror of Fate . I guess I'm just okay with it because it's incredibly difficult to use. I could dislike it more. As for future designs, I don't want cards that take any exiled card and give it back to the hand or battlefield (if it's shuffled or it goes to the graveyard, I think it's pretty innocent), unless they have a linear intended function like Runic Repetition. I don't mind a card returning itself (I think a phoenix with unearth that returned from exile would be awesome, for example), so these are good, too. Of course, not often. Not even every two blocks.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 30, 2013 - 3:17AM
#5
|
|
|
I think getting cards back from the exile zone is a perfectly okay thing to do, but only when it's narrow in intent, aimed to interact with one specific form of exile. Runic Repetition is an example of a good use of this design space. Its sole design intent is to get things back after they exiled themselves through flashback, and I think that's just fine--flashback and Runic Repetition basically form an O-Ring that's spread across multiple cards--one (kind of) card is designed to exile itself, while the other is designed to return that specific (kind of) card. It's perfectly acceptable behavior when it's on one card, so why not spread across multiples? Yes, there are loopholes in the implementation--you can get back a card with flashback even if it was exiled some other way--but while it is a problem, solving that problem would require sacrificing a bunch of elegance and raising memory issues that just aren't worth the trouble. Pull from Eternity and Riftsweeper would be just fine if they said "suspended card", but they go too far, allowing you to hit way too many things they shouldn't be able to touch.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real.
--Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 30, 2013 - 7:35AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
I find it funny that everyone pretty much agrees in the same points.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 30, 2013 - 1:00PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2009
|
Query:
How would you all feel about a card that could get creatures with Unearth back from exile? Same card, but for Scavenge?
Get that dead guy back
Cost
Sorcery
Return target exiled creature with Unearth/Scavenge you own to your hand.
In theory, it's working in the same space as Ruinc Repitition, but unlike spells creatures are exponentially more likely to be exiled by things  other  than  their own mechanics.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 30, 2013 - 2:15PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
I prefer if it's a creature card that it gets back itself with unearth and scavenge. Sure, it would avoid Oblivion Ring and more, but you can make it black to justify the hate.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 30, 2013 - 2:20PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Dec 13, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 30, 2013 - 2:31PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
|
|
|
~ 
~ 
~ 
~ 
