Community

Feb 3, 2013 -- 5:48PM, TPmanW wrote:

Bonds of Worship does two completely unrelated things. It would be more grokable if an enchantment that gave a stat bonus when it was encoded gave a similar (or even opposite) bonus to the creature it enchanted. If you want a pacifism effect that can be encoded onto something then it should do someting like pacifism-like to the encoded creature. Maybe it gains vigilance, which is sort of, kinda the opposite of pacifism. Or maybe it gives the encoded creture the ability to pacify an enemy creature by tapping.

It was supposed to be an homage to Bonds of Faith from the Innistrad block. I know it's a bit of a stretch.

Feb 4, 2013 -- 12:36PM, KeeperofManyNames wrote:

Feb 4, 2013 -- 7:42AM, SuperSpawnWrithe wrote:

I thought it would be cool to use the "encoded" terminology instead of create something new and probably much more complicated- creatures becoming enchantments, enchantments becoming auras- but I suppose it's actually very flavourful to show a priest becoming a piece of magic. 
 
"Before thinking outside the box, first check what's in the box and see if it's really necessary"- Maro. Is there a reason encoding can't work?


You're correct that the 3 power value was chosen to show that it is only big, divine creatures being worshipped. It's just weird to have  a bunch of templars and priests worshipping a Little Girl. Also, priests worshipping eachother is also a bit unorthodox. 
 
The name would obviously change depending on the setting. Currently, I'm posting potential mechanics for a wedge block. This fits into W/B/R and I kinda need the word Worship to make it fit the flavour.

TPManW: Anyone can use this mechanic.       


  

The reason encoding can't work is that it's a bad choice of word in this context. Encode works for the Dimir because it's such a Dimir word. It brings to mind ideas of cryptography, spies, secrets, and skullduggery. You do not want these connotations for this ability.

All you have to do is come up with a better word and put it in the place of "encoded." That's it. It's a simple change with significant semiotic benefits, so there's really no good reason not to do it.

And the power thing is just bad. Get rid of it. The two times you should add complexity like that are for strict gameplay or rules reasons (the game will break without the added text) or extremely heightened flavor reasons. The very fact that you've already been given a number of weak creatures in human history that have received worship should indicate to you that this is actually a flavor downside rather than an upside. You are essentially creating a Wurms Wearing Boots problem where none exists, while in the process giving players one more number to think about.

Plus, three is a weird number to begin with. Why is three the cutoff for holy stuff? Does it really make more sense to worship a Trained Armodon than an Angelic Page ? If you're really doing big, holy stuff, shouldn't it be somewhere around 5 or 6 power?


Also, Naya does not support your case, it contradicts it. High power was a Naya thing because Naya was most influenced by Green mana. It showed up in some white cards there, sure, but it wasn't primarily a white thing. 

"Exile this permanent encoded on that creature"

"Exile this permanent worshipping that creature"


Surely these two can't coexist?    

Feb 4, 2013 -- 2:46PM, KeeperofManyNames wrote:

Why couldn't they coexist? Cipher and Haunt exist together, even though their shared headspace is just as close as the shared headspace between Cipher and Worship.

Ah. Excellent point. I never fully made the connection between Cipher and Haunt. You win!