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.
Insufficientdrawcardsin white andred forCommander.For the nextset,you might thinka little moreof this deficiencyfor thesetwo colorsinCommander.We just wantsomething solid toour 100cardsin thesecolorsor better, onefor redandone forwhite.Even thegreen hasoptionslikeGarrukprimalhunter,hunter'sinsight,'sgreatergood,momentousfall.ForCommander, thecolorpieshould berestored.Greetings from Brazil.(viagoogle 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 Embermage s and Wojek Apothecary s of the world simply looked too bad for the rest to be able to compensate.
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)
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)
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)
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.
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.
is about order, and it's perfectly fine with corrupt order and opression. 
are already almost identical; do you want to blow up their main difference just because you idiotically think 
