|
On January 06 2013 11:45 slyboogie wrote:
I don't understand what you're saying. Under what circumstance are you saying that? Color pie violations?
Let's operate under the assumption that certain colors should not be allowed to have certain types of effects (or be hideously overcosted for a cheaper/better effect in another color), for sake of keeping the game unique and interesting.
If so, this is how I see the color pie:
Blue - Countermagic, Card Advantage (Ponder, Preordain, etc.), Control magic (Mind Control)
Black - Kill Spells, Hand Disruption, Low power/toughness regeneration creatures
Green - Big/aggressively-costed creatures, mana ramp, Artifact/Enchantment removal
Red - Direct damage spells, fast (haste) creatures with high power and low toughness, land destruction
White - low-cost creatures with low power and high toughness, board sweeping effects, creature revival effects
Now, sometimes certain card types see play in other colors, like mana ramp in red and black, revival cards in green and black, regen creatures in green, and most recently, seeing uncounterable spells in other colors. Most people refer to this as color pie bleed; these effects aren't normally seen in their "primary" colors, but is accepted due to the "theme" of the card/color. It makes sense for black to have a creature revival spell because it's not a "Life" spell, but a "necromancy" spell to bring them back from the grave.
In this theme, the color pie violation is something that this color has rarely seen, if at all. For example, you wouldn't expect red to have a counterspell because it is in apparent antathem to the core of being Red; aggressive, passionate, bright and destructive.
Giving blue - a color that looks to manipulate and control a creature - a kill creature spell that is normally seen only in black or blue is what people would call a color pie violation.
The last time they did such things was in Time Spiral and Future Sight, when the purpose of the format was to do nothing but color pie violations, to see how such things changed the game. The "theme" of those sets was time is splintering and the universe is unravelling, making what was previously understood "rules" of magic not make sense, as the powers that be tried to stop the universe from being unmade. From an R&D standpoint, the set proved to them that while violations are ok, they should be few and far between, as those particular blocks were not well received, and provided some cards that have proven troublesome in eternal formats.
Cliff notes version: color pie violation is R&D experimenting with cards/effects and happens rarely, and for good reason.
|
On January 06 2013 11:45 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 02:06 Judicator wrote:On January 05 2013 11:17 slyboogie wrote:
It's not the freaking Constitution. I don't care if they make R: Draw 3 cards and Gain 3 life.
But it's a violation. Rationalize it if you want with "bleeding" or Simic watermarks but destroying creatures isn't Blue. Again, I don't care, I just like typing violation.
Edit: don't mean to sound hard headed, btw, but that's how my post reads. Basically, I don't think the color pie is particularly sacred, but there is some reason it exists. The card isn't overpowered or anything like that but it's just not particularly Blue. Game would be really boring and Blue would be straight up dominating AND powercreep would be out of control. I don't understand what you're saying. Under what circumstance are you saying that? Color pie violations?
Let's take card draw for example, Red/Blue/Black all have access to it consistently, set after set after set. If the card making process was completely dictated by the color pie (it's definitely heavily considered) then the sets would be bland after a period of time. Eventually, the only way to add variation is to up (or lower) the power of the cards, instead of draw 3 for 5 at instant speed it might be draw 4 for 5 (just an example).
There are only so many ways to give those colors card draw, "bleeding" and/or flavorful combinations make the cards interesting and more importantly make the game more about combining colors. There's nothing wrong with mono-color anything, but after 10+ years of designing cards, it gets old. By spreading some of the abilities in a way that makes sense aka at a significant cost to the color that normally doesn't get it, the game stays fresher.
As for Blue being overpowered, Urza block already proved that, even in the era of straight hate cards. Wizards overstepped what they could have given to a certain color and Magic suffered for it. Namely, Blue has consistent draw and the other colors do not.
Edit:
Like your original outcry at Pongify reprint, that 3/3 isn't something Blue can handle efficiently (and no, using another card to deal with it is terrible card economy).
|
On January 06 2013 13:23 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 11:45 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 02:06 Judicator wrote:On January 05 2013 11:17 slyboogie wrote:
It's not the freaking Constitution. I don't care if they make R: Draw 3 cards and Gain 3 life.
But it's a violation. Rationalize it if you want with "bleeding" or Simic watermarks but destroying creatures isn't Blue. Again, I don't care, I just like typing violation.
Edit: don't mean to sound hard headed, btw, but that's how my post reads. Basically, I don't think the color pie is particularly sacred, but there is some reason it exists. The card isn't overpowered or anything like that but it's just not particularly Blue. Game would be really boring and Blue would be straight up dominating AND powercreep would be out of control. I don't understand what you're saying. Under what circumstance are you saying that? Color pie violations? Let's take card draw for example, Red/Blue/Black all have access to it consistently, set after set after set. If the card making process was completely dictated by the color pie (it's definitely heavily considered) then the sets would be bland after a period of time. Eventually, the only way to add variation is to up (or lower) the power of the cards, instead of draw 3 for 5 at instant speed it might be draw 4 for 5 (just an example). There are only so many ways to give those colors card draw, "bleeding" and/or flavorful combinations make the cards interesting and more importantly make the game more about combining colors. There's nothing wrong with mono-color anything, but after 10+ years of designing cards, it gets old. By spreading some of the abilities in a way that makes sense aka at a significant cost to the color that normally doesn't get it, the game stays fresher. As for Blue being overpowered, Urza block already proved that, even in the era of straight hate cards. Wizards overstepped what they could have given to a certain color and Magic suffered for it. Namely, Blue has consistent draw and the other colors do not. Edit: Like your original outcry at Pongify reprint, that 3/3 isn't something Blue can handle efficiently (and no, using another card to deal with it is terrible card economy).
What? I don't think you understand my previous post. I don't care about the color pie. But Pognify or Rapid Hybridization IS a violation of the color pie. You rationalize it for the sake of design space - and again, I can not emphasize this enough, I don't care about the color pie - but don't you recognize that bleeding is one color entering the territory of another? Isn't that a violation?
So, let's do a thought experiment. Let's say Rapid Hybridization made a 2/2 instead of a 3/3, would that still be Blue? What if it made a 1/1 Blue Frog? What about a 1/1 White Spirit Flyer? 0/1 Colorless? At what point will you point at that card and think: Oh that card isn't blue...
The color pie is already basically an antiquated construct. Every color has a card as an example of something that it "shouldn't" do in the traditional sense. But Rapid Hybridization/Pognify is a color pie violation.
|
Polymorph and Ovinomancer came out long before Pongify/Rapid Hybridization ever did.
Creature destruction is not Blue. Turning a creature into some completely different creature, however, can't be anything except Blue, and the easiest way to do that mechanically is to destroy the old one and put a new one into play.
|
On January 06 2013 15:05 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Polymorph and Ovinomancer came out long before Pongify/Rapid Hybridization ever did.
Creature destruction is not Blue. Turning a creature into some completely different creature, however, can't be anything except Blue, and the easiest way to do that mechanically is to destroy the old one and put a new one into play.
This is, actually, a relatively okay explanation. There is no pleasant mechanic for changing one creature into another creature except for flip and transform, I believe, so if you want to say that this is a limitation of a card game, then that's fine.
However, I would still say that you're falling into the classic trap of looking at cards from the past to justify color pie violations (Psionic Blast says that burn spells are blue,) it's also silly to say changing a creature into a completely different creature can only be blue - what about something like Dragon's Herald or Beast Within. I wanted to say that it was a color pie violation and I insist that it still is - there's no value judgement in that statement.
|
|
|
Alright, I've been fumbling with Boros Humans and the current spoilers.(I have a thing for this deck, as I played it when it was top 8ing with Hero of Bladehold, but I have a love for Rally the Peasants.) And So far it looks pretty promising.
+ Show Spoiler +
23 Lands
4x Cavern of Souls
4x Clifftop Retreat
4x Sacred Foundry
2x Slayers' Stronghold
7x Plains
2x Mountains
33 Creatures
4x Boros Elite
4x Champion of the Parish
4x Precinct Captain
4x Ash Zealot
3x Thalia
4x Silver Blade Paladin
10x ?
4 Spells
4x Rally the Peasants
Total: 60 cards
Now this is where I get stuck. Without Blue we lose Geist but we gain more consistent draws, so I feel Skyknight Legionnaire is fine there. So I think the last 10 slots are to be filled by 4x War Falcon, 4x Skyknight Legionnaire, and 2x Riders of Gavony. But I also like the idea of Hell Rider and Lightning mauler in this deck for a faster clock and bigger beats but I'm not 100% sure yet.
I'm so excited for the rest of these spoilers.
|
On January 06 2013 15:16 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 15:05 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Polymorph and Ovinomancer came out long before Pongify/Rapid Hybridization ever did.
Creature destruction is not Blue. Turning a creature into some completely different creature, however, can't be anything except Blue, and the easiest way to do that mechanically is to destroy the old one and put a new one into play. This is, actually, a relatively okay explanation. There is no pleasant mechanic for changing one creature into another creature except for flip and transform, I believe, so if you want to say that this is a limitation of a card game, then that's fine. However, I would still say that you're falling into the classic trap of looking at cards from the past to justify color pie violations (Psionic Blast says that burn spells are blue,) it's also silly to say changing a creature into a completely different creature can only be blue - what about something like Dragon's Herald or Beast Within. I wanted to say that it was a color pie violation and I insist that it still is - there's no value judgement in that statement.
Okay, my bad on misinterpreting your original post, but I thought you brought up because it bothered you.
As for the color pie violation, destroying creatures into another one permanently is very much blue, polymorph/tinker effectively do the same thing except on your creatures. Beast Within states permanent and I do agree a Vindicate in Green seems very off. Rapid Hybridization is just what Wolfinthesheep said, transformation so its ok.
The Psionic Blast argument is a bit loose though as its from a very long time ago. We aren't talking about that long ago, I would say post-Legends and probably even later. Wizards established that changing something into something is Blue albeit primarily with your own stuff, it's not that big of a reach to say Blue can do the same to others. Additionally, the destroy target wording is for rules/balance, so it is a bit awkward to think of Blue getting "destroy".
Edit:
@Shotcoder
Cut the Rally, I know you said you like it, but you have better and more important 2 drops. Other than that, have fun building. Before you reply, just think about it. If you had Ash Zealot or Thalia and Peasants, what would you play? The 2/2 haste, the 2/1 tempo, or the 2 1/1 tokens? Even with Champion out.
|
On January 06 2013 16:33 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 15:16 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 15:05 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Polymorph and Ovinomancer came out long before Pongify/Rapid Hybridization ever did.
Creature destruction is not Blue. Turning a creature into some completely different creature, however, can't be anything except Blue, and the easiest way to do that mechanically is to destroy the old one and put a new one into play. This is, actually, a relatively okay explanation. There is no pleasant mechanic for changing one creature into another creature except for flip and transform, I believe, so if you want to say that this is a limitation of a card game, then that's fine. However, I would still say that you're falling into the classic trap of looking at cards from the past to justify color pie violations (Psionic Blast says that burn spells are blue,) it's also silly to say changing a creature into a completely different creature can only be blue - what about something like Dragon's Herald or Beast Within. I wanted to say that it was a color pie violation and I insist that it still is - there's no value judgement in that statement. Okay, my bad on misinterpreting your original post, but I thought you brought up because it bothered you. As for the color pie violation, destroying creatures into another one permanently is very much blue, polymorph/tinker effectively do the same thing except on your creatures. Beast Within states permanent and I do agree a Vindicate in Green seems very off. Rapid Hybridization is just what Wolfinthesheep said, transformation so its ok. The Psionic Blast argument is a bit loose though as its from a very long time ago. We aren't talking about that long ago, I would say post-Legends and probably even later. Wizards established that changing something into something is Blue albeit primarily with your own stuff, it's not that big of a reach to say Blue can do the same to others. Additionally, the destroy target wording is for rules/balance, so it is a bit awkward to think of Blue getting "destroy". Edit: @Shotcoder Cut the Rally, I know you said you like it, but you have better and more important 2 drops. Other than that, have fun building. Before you reply, just think about it. If you had Ash Zealot or Thalia and Peasants, what would you play? The 2/2 haste, the 2/1 tempo, or the 2 1/1 tokens? Even with Champion out.
You're thinking of Gather the Townsfolk, Rally is the +2/+0 to all your creatures spell.
|
On January 06 2013 16:33 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 15:16 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 15:05 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Polymorph and Ovinomancer came out long before Pongify/Rapid Hybridization ever did.
Creature destruction is not Blue. Turning a creature into some completely different creature, however, can't be anything except Blue, and the easiest way to do that mechanically is to destroy the old one and put a new one into play. This is, actually, a relatively okay explanation. There is no pleasant mechanic for changing one creature into another creature except for flip and transform, I believe, so if you want to say that this is a limitation of a card game, then that's fine. However, I would still say that you're falling into the classic trap of looking at cards from the past to justify color pie violations (Psionic Blast says that burn spells are blue,) it's also silly to say changing a creature into a completely different creature can only be blue - what about something like Dragon's Herald or Beast Within. I wanted to say that it was a color pie violation and I insist that it still is - there's no value judgement in that statement. Okay, my bad on misinterpreting your original post, but I thought you brought up because it bothered you. As for the color pie violation, destroying creatures into another one permanently is very much blue, polymorph/tinker effectively do the same thing except on your creatures. Beast Within states permanent and I do agree a Vindicate in Green seems very off. Rapid Hybridization is just what Wolfinthesheep said, transformation so its ok. The Psionic Blast argument is a bit loose though as its from a very long time ago. We aren't talking about that long ago, I would say post-Legends and probably even later. Wizards established that changing something into something is Blue albeit primarily with your own stuff, it's not that big of a reach to say Blue can do the same to others. Additionally, the destroy target wording is for rules/balance, so it is a bit awkward to think of Blue getting "destroy". Edit: @Shotcoder Cut the Rally, I know you said you like it, but you have better and more important 2 drops. Other than that, have fun building. Before you reply, just think about it. If you had Ash Zealot or Thalia and Peasants, what would you play? The 2/2 haste, the 2/1 tempo, or the 2 1/1 tokens? Even with Champion out.
Isn't Ovinomancer also like...ancient? But this is irrelevant - I think all colors should be able to destroy creatures. I think all colors should be able to draw cards. I don't know how you keep the game entertaining and nuanced with this belief, it is indeed a conflict.
|
I like how the blue "destroy" creature actually transforms it into a frog lizard, which is totally green 
|
On January 06 2013 17:01 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 16:33 Judicator wrote:On January 06 2013 15:16 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 15:05 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Polymorph and Ovinomancer came out long before Pongify/Rapid Hybridization ever did.
Creature destruction is not Blue. Turning a creature into some completely different creature, however, can't be anything except Blue, and the easiest way to do that mechanically is to destroy the old one and put a new one into play. This is, actually, a relatively okay explanation. There is no pleasant mechanic for changing one creature into another creature except for flip and transform, I believe, so if you want to say that this is a limitation of a card game, then that's fine. However, I would still say that you're falling into the classic trap of looking at cards from the past to justify color pie violations (Psionic Blast says that burn spells are blue,) it's also silly to say changing a creature into a completely different creature can only be blue - what about something like Dragon's Herald or Beast Within. I wanted to say that it was a color pie violation and I insist that it still is - there's no value judgement in that statement. Okay, my bad on misinterpreting your original post, but I thought you brought up because it bothered you. As for the color pie violation, destroying creatures into another one permanently is very much blue, polymorph/tinker effectively do the same thing except on your creatures. Beast Within states permanent and I do agree a Vindicate in Green seems very off. Rapid Hybridization is just what Wolfinthesheep said, transformation so its ok. The Psionic Blast argument is a bit loose though as its from a very long time ago. We aren't talking about that long ago, I would say post-Legends and probably even later. Wizards established that changing something into something is Blue albeit primarily with your own stuff, it's not that big of a reach to say Blue can do the same to others. Additionally, the destroy target wording is for rules/balance, so it is a bit awkward to think of Blue getting "destroy". Edit: @Shotcoder Cut the Rally, I know you said you like it, but you have better and more important 2 drops. Other than that, have fun building. Before you reply, just think about it. If you had Ash Zealot or Thalia and Peasants, what would you play? The 2/2 haste, the 2/1 tempo, or the 2 1/1 tokens? Even with Champion out. Isn't Ovinomancer also like...ancient? But this is irrelevant - I think all colors should be able to destroy creatures. I think all colors should be able to draw cards. I don't know how you keep the game entertaining and nuanced with this belief, it is indeed a conflict.
And all of them can, Polymorphing is typically Blue (and Green more recently), the card is Simic so UG fits perfectly. Black has kill spells, red has direct damage, white has exiling.
All colors can draw cards too, Green based on creatures (Greater Good, Hunter's Insight, Garruk, etc.), Blue based on cards, Black by paying life, Red usually connected in some way to damage (Browbeat), and White cantrips and cycles a fair bit.
|
On January 07 2013 00:00 deth2munkies wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 17:01 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 16:33 Judicator wrote:On January 06 2013 15:16 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 15:05 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Polymorph and Ovinomancer came out long before Pongify/Rapid Hybridization ever did.
Creature destruction is not Blue. Turning a creature into some completely different creature, however, can't be anything except Blue, and the easiest way to do that mechanically is to destroy the old one and put a new one into play. This is, actually, a relatively okay explanation. There is no pleasant mechanic for changing one creature into another creature except for flip and transform, I believe, so if you want to say that this is a limitation of a card game, then that's fine. However, I would still say that you're falling into the classic trap of looking at cards from the past to justify color pie violations (Psionic Blast says that burn spells are blue,) it's also silly to say changing a creature into a completely different creature can only be blue - what about something like Dragon's Herald or Beast Within. I wanted to say that it was a color pie violation and I insist that it still is - there's no value judgement in that statement. Okay, my bad on misinterpreting your original post, but I thought you brought up because it bothered you. As for the color pie violation, destroying creatures into another one permanently is very much blue, polymorph/tinker effectively do the same thing except on your creatures. Beast Within states permanent and I do agree a Vindicate in Green seems very off. Rapid Hybridization is just what Wolfinthesheep said, transformation so its ok. The Psionic Blast argument is a bit loose though as its from a very long time ago. We aren't talking about that long ago, I would say post-Legends and probably even later. Wizards established that changing something into something is Blue albeit primarily with your own stuff, it's not that big of a reach to say Blue can do the same to others. Additionally, the destroy target wording is for rules/balance, so it is a bit awkward to think of Blue getting "destroy". Edit: @Shotcoder Cut the Rally, I know you said you like it, but you have better and more important 2 drops. Other than that, have fun building. Before you reply, just think about it. If you had Ash Zealot or Thalia and Peasants, what would you play? The 2/2 haste, the 2/1 tempo, or the 2 1/1 tokens? Even with Champion out. Isn't Ovinomancer also like...ancient? But this is irrelevant - I think all colors should be able to destroy creatures. I think all colors should be able to draw cards. I don't know how you keep the game entertaining and nuanced with this belief, it is indeed a conflict. And all of them can, Polymorphing is typically Blue (and Green more recently), the card is Simic so UG fits perfectly. Black has kill spells, red has direct damage, white has exiling. All colors can draw cards too, Green based on creatures (Greater Good, Hunter's Insight, Garruk, etc.), Blue based on cards, Black by paying life, Red usually connected in some way to damage (Browbeat), and White cantrips and cycles a fair bit.
So then, why is there even a color pie? If every color can kill creatures and draw cards - why can't every color ramp mana and counter spells? What's the difference between "bleeding" into a color and straight "being" a color? Is there something particularly sacred about mana elves that make them always green?
I don't have any sort of answer, it's more of a philosophical question for the people who develop the game.
|
On January 07 2013 04:59 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2013 00:00 deth2munkies wrote:On January 06 2013 17:01 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 16:33 Judicator wrote:On January 06 2013 15:16 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 15:05 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Polymorph and Ovinomancer came out long before Pongify/Rapid Hybridization ever did.
Creature destruction is not Blue. Turning a creature into some completely different creature, however, can't be anything except Blue, and the easiest way to do that mechanically is to destroy the old one and put a new one into play. This is, actually, a relatively okay explanation. There is no pleasant mechanic for changing one creature into another creature except for flip and transform, I believe, so if you want to say that this is a limitation of a card game, then that's fine. However, I would still say that you're falling into the classic trap of looking at cards from the past to justify color pie violations (Psionic Blast says that burn spells are blue,) it's also silly to say changing a creature into a completely different creature can only be blue - what about something like Dragon's Herald or Beast Within. I wanted to say that it was a color pie violation and I insist that it still is - there's no value judgement in that statement. Okay, my bad on misinterpreting your original post, but I thought you brought up because it bothered you. As for the color pie violation, destroying creatures into another one permanently is very much blue, polymorph/tinker effectively do the same thing except on your creatures. Beast Within states permanent and I do agree a Vindicate in Green seems very off. Rapid Hybridization is just what Wolfinthesheep said, transformation so its ok. The Psionic Blast argument is a bit loose though as its from a very long time ago. We aren't talking about that long ago, I would say post-Legends and probably even later. Wizards established that changing something into something is Blue albeit primarily with your own stuff, it's not that big of a reach to say Blue can do the same to others. Additionally, the destroy target wording is for rules/balance, so it is a bit awkward to think of Blue getting "destroy". Edit: @Shotcoder Cut the Rally, I know you said you like it, but you have better and more important 2 drops. Other than that, have fun building. Before you reply, just think about it. If you had Ash Zealot or Thalia and Peasants, what would you play? The 2/2 haste, the 2/1 tempo, or the 2 1/1 tokens? Even with Champion out. Isn't Ovinomancer also like...ancient? But this is irrelevant - I think all colors should be able to destroy creatures. I think all colors should be able to draw cards. I don't know how you keep the game entertaining and nuanced with this belief, it is indeed a conflict. And all of them can, Polymorphing is typically Blue (and Green more recently), the card is Simic so UG fits perfectly. Black has kill spells, red has direct damage, white has exiling. All colors can draw cards too, Green based on creatures (Greater Good, Hunter's Insight, Garruk, etc.), Blue based on cards, Black by paying life, Red usually connected in some way to damage (Browbeat), and White cantrips and cycles a fair bit. So then, why is there even a color pie? If every color can kill creatures and draw cards - why can't every color ramp mana and counter spells? What's the difference between "bleeding" into a color and straight "being" a color? Is there something particularly sacred about mana elves that make them always green? I don't have any sort of answer, it's more of a philosophical question for the people who develop the game.
The color pie isn't just "These colors can never do X", it's HOW the color does X. Drawing cards and removing creatures is something every color needs to be able to do for limited balance at the very least. It's just like the fact there's creatures, instants, and sorceries in every color. The fact that the creatures, instants, and sorceries vary depending on each color is what matters.
|
On January 07 2013 05:01 deth2munkies wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2013 04:59 slyboogie wrote:On January 07 2013 00:00 deth2munkies wrote:On January 06 2013 17:01 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 16:33 Judicator wrote:On January 06 2013 15:16 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 15:05 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Polymorph and Ovinomancer came out long before Pongify/Rapid Hybridization ever did.
Creature destruction is not Blue. Turning a creature into some completely different creature, however, can't be anything except Blue, and the easiest way to do that mechanically is to destroy the old one and put a new one into play. This is, actually, a relatively okay explanation. There is no pleasant mechanic for changing one creature into another creature except for flip and transform, I believe, so if you want to say that this is a limitation of a card game, then that's fine. However, I would still say that you're falling into the classic trap of looking at cards from the past to justify color pie violations (Psionic Blast says that burn spells are blue,) it's also silly to say changing a creature into a completely different creature can only be blue - what about something like Dragon's Herald or Beast Within. I wanted to say that it was a color pie violation and I insist that it still is - there's no value judgement in that statement. Okay, my bad on misinterpreting your original post, but I thought you brought up because it bothered you. As for the color pie violation, destroying creatures into another one permanently is very much blue, polymorph/tinker effectively do the same thing except on your creatures. Beast Within states permanent and I do agree a Vindicate in Green seems very off. Rapid Hybridization is just what Wolfinthesheep said, transformation so its ok. The Psionic Blast argument is a bit loose though as its from a very long time ago. We aren't talking about that long ago, I would say post-Legends and probably even later. Wizards established that changing something into something is Blue albeit primarily with your own stuff, it's not that big of a reach to say Blue can do the same to others. Additionally, the destroy target wording is for rules/balance, so it is a bit awkward to think of Blue getting "destroy". Edit: @Shotcoder Cut the Rally, I know you said you like it, but you have better and more important 2 drops. Other than that, have fun building. Before you reply, just think about it. If you had Ash Zealot or Thalia and Peasants, what would you play? The 2/2 haste, the 2/1 tempo, or the 2 1/1 tokens? Even with Champion out. Isn't Ovinomancer also like...ancient? But this is irrelevant - I think all colors should be able to destroy creatures. I think all colors should be able to draw cards. I don't know how you keep the game entertaining and nuanced with this belief, it is indeed a conflict. And all of them can, Polymorphing is typically Blue (and Green more recently), the card is Simic so UG fits perfectly. Black has kill spells, red has direct damage, white has exiling. All colors can draw cards too, Green based on creatures (Greater Good, Hunter's Insight, Garruk, etc.), Blue based on cards, Black by paying life, Red usually connected in some way to damage (Browbeat), and White cantrips and cycles a fair bit. So then, why is there even a color pie? If every color can kill creatures and draw cards - why can't every color ramp mana and counter spells? What's the difference between "bleeding" into a color and straight "being" a color? Is there something particularly sacred about mana elves that make them always green? I don't have any sort of answer, it's more of a philosophical question for the people who develop the game. The color pie isn't just "These colors can never do X", it's HOW the color does X. Drawing cards and removing creatures is something every color needs to be able to do for limited balance at the very least. It's just like the fact there's creatures, instants, and sorceries in every color. The fact that the creatures, instants, and sorceries vary depending on each color is what matters.
So, for fairness sake, every color should also be able to counter spells and ramp mana, right? I mean, they all have creatures instants and sorceries - it's just HOW we make them do it?
|
|
|
Oh right, this is why I hate conversations about the color pie.
So what's universal? What is essential? Could you fill out this list?
1. Card Draw
2. Removal
3. ?
4. ?
15. ?
|
On January 06 2013 14:12 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 13:23 Judicator wrote:On January 06 2013 11:45 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 02:06 Judicator wrote:On January 05 2013 11:17 slyboogie wrote:
It's not the freaking Constitution. I don't care if they make R: Draw 3 cards and Gain 3 life.
But it's a violation. Rationalize it if you want with "bleeding" or Simic watermarks but destroying creatures isn't Blue. Again, I don't care, I just like typing violation.
Edit: don't mean to sound hard headed, btw, but that's how my post reads. Basically, I don't think the color pie is particularly sacred, but there is some reason it exists. The card isn't overpowered or anything like that but it's just not particularly Blue. Game would be really boring and Blue would be straight up dominating AND powercreep would be out of control. I don't understand what you're saying. Under what circumstance are you saying that? Color pie violations? Let's take card draw for example, Red/Blue/Black all have access to it consistently, set after set after set. If the card making process was completely dictated by the color pie (it's definitely heavily considered) then the sets would be bland after a period of time. Eventually, the only way to add variation is to up (or lower) the power of the cards, instead of draw 3 for 5 at instant speed it might be draw 4 for 5 (just an example). There are only so many ways to give those colors card draw, "bleeding" and/or flavorful combinations make the cards interesting and more importantly make the game more about combining colors. There's nothing wrong with mono-color anything, but after 10+ years of designing cards, it gets old. By spreading some of the abilities in a way that makes sense aka at a significant cost to the color that normally doesn't get it, the game stays fresher. As for Blue being overpowered, Urza block already proved that, even in the era of straight hate cards. Wizards overstepped what they could have given to a certain color and Magic suffered for it. Namely, Blue has consistent draw and the other colors do not. Edit: Like your original outcry at Pongify reprint, that 3/3 isn't something Blue can handle efficiently (and no, using another card to deal with it is terrible card economy). What? I don't think you understand my previous post. I don't care about the color pie. But Pognify or Rapid Hybridization IS a violation of the color pie. You rationalize it for the sake of design space - and again, I can not emphasize this enough, I don't care about the color pie - but don't you recognize that bleeding is one color entering the territory of another? Isn't that a violation? So, let's do a thought experiment. Let's say Rapid Hybridization made a 2/2 instead of a 3/3, would that still be Blue? What if it made a 1/1 Blue Frog? What about a 1/1 White Spirit Flyer? 0/1 Colorless? At what point will you point at that card and think: Oh that card isn't blue... The color pie is already basically an antiquated construct. Every color has a card as an example of something that it "shouldn't" do in the traditional sense. But Rapid Hybridization/Pognify is a color pie violation.
This is hardly a color pie violation. Blue has long had transformation spells, just because it says destroy target creature on the card doesn't change the fact that it is in fact, not destroying it, but simply transforming it from one form to another - this being a 3/3 Frog Lizard, or in Pongify's case an Ape. Just look at things like Polymorph & Ovinomancer.
|
On January 07 2013 07:01 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 14:12 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 13:23 Judicator wrote:On January 06 2013 11:45 slyboogie wrote:On January 06 2013 02:06 Judicator wrote:On January 05 2013 11:17 slyboogie wrote:
It's not the freaking Constitution. I don't care if they make R: Draw 3 cards and Gain 3 life.
But it's a violation. Rationalize it if you want with "bleeding" or Simic watermarks but destroying creatures isn't Blue. Again, I don't care, I just like typing violation.
Edit: don't mean to sound hard headed, btw, but that's how my post reads. Basically, I don't think the color pie is particularly sacred, but there is some reason it exists. The card isn't overpowered or anything like that but it's just not particularly Blue. Game would be really boring and Blue would be straight up dominating AND powercreep would be out of control. I don't understand what you're saying. Under what circumstance are you saying that? Color pie violations? Let's take card draw for example, Red/Blue/Black all have access to it consistently, set after set after set. If the card making process was completely dictated by the color pie (it's definitely heavily considered) then the sets would be bland after a period of time. Eventually, the only way to add variation is to up (or lower) the power of the cards, instead of draw 3 for 5 at instant speed it might be draw 4 for 5 (just an example). There are only so many ways to give those colors card draw, "bleeding" and/or flavorful combinations make the cards interesting and more importantly make the game more about combining colors. There's nothing wrong with mono-color anything, but after 10+ years of designing cards, it gets old. By spreading some of the abilities in a way that makes sense aka at a significant cost to the color that normally doesn't get it, the game stays fresher. As for Blue being overpowered, Urza block already proved that, even in the era of straight hate cards. Wizards overstepped what they could have given to a certain color and Magic suffered for it. Namely, Blue has consistent draw and the other colors do not. Edit: Like your original outcry at Pongify reprint, that 3/3 isn't something Blue can handle efficiently (and no, using another card to deal with it is terrible card economy). What? I don't think you understand my previous post. I don't care about the color pie. But Pognify or Rapid Hybridization IS a violation of the color pie. You rationalize it for the sake of design space - and again, I can not emphasize this enough, I don't care about the color pie - but don't you recognize that bleeding is one color entering the territory of another? Isn't that a violation? So, let's do a thought experiment. Let's say Rapid Hybridization made a 2/2 instead of a 3/3, would that still be Blue? What if it made a 1/1 Blue Frog? What about a 1/1 White Spirit Flyer? 0/1 Colorless? At what point will you point at that card and think: Oh that card isn't blue... The color pie is already basically an antiquated construct. Every color has a card as an example of something that it "shouldn't" do in the traditional sense. But Rapid Hybridization/Pognify is a color pie violation. This is hardly a color pie violation. Blue has long had transformation spells, just because it says destroy target creature on the card doesn't change the fact that it is in fact, not destroying it, but simply transforming it from one form to another - this being a 3/3 Frog Lizard, or in Pongify's case an Ape. Just look at things like Polymorph & Ovinomancer.
See previous post:
On January 06 2013 15:16 slyboogie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 15:05 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Polymorph and Ovinomancer came out long before Pongify/Rapid Hybridization ever did.
Creature destruction is not Blue. Turning a creature into some completely different creature, however, can't be anything except Blue, and the easiest way to do that mechanically is to destroy the old one and put a new one into play. This is, actually, a relatively okay explanation. There is no pleasant mechanic for changing one creature into another creature except for flip and transform, I believe, so if you want to say that this is a limitation of a card game, then that's fine.
|
On January 07 2013 05:59 slyboogie wrote:
Oh right, this is why I hate conversations about the color pie.
So what's universal? What is essential? Could you fill out this list?
1. Card Draw
2. Removal
3. ?
4. ?
15. ?
It would be easier if you thought of it as a spectrum rather than discrete blocks of color. Now if Blue suddenly got something like target player sacks a creature (Edicts), then that would be what you refer to as a violation. It's not a question of essential or necessity or universality, it's a simple fact that Wizards decided what colors will get more of something while others get more of the other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
