|
Hello, everyone.
I like Starcraft, and I like Magic: The Gathering, so a few months ago I had the idea to make a set of MTG cards based on Starcraft. This post describes how I went about it.
The first decision I had to make was choosing which Starcraft game the cards should be based on: Starcraft, Brood War, Wings of Liberty or Heart of the Swarm. I decided that it would be best to choose the most recent Starcraft release so that updating the cards would be as easy as possible, should I ever decide to do so. I’m also more familiar with Starcraft 2 than the original, so the choice was clear.
I had seen a few cards that others made, but many of them were about players, not the units and abilities of the game. Also, I never encountered a full, playable set, and most of the cards didn't really make sense. I believed that the cards should conform to the MTG rules and conventions, but also accurately represent the concepts and functions of Starcraft 2. Here’s an example of a card that I feel doesn't meet these criteria:
+ Show Spoiler +
In Starcraft, the Zealot is the cheapest, weakest ground unit available to Protoss. This Zealot card is 4/4, which is far too strong if we’re going to implement creature cards like the Immortal and Colossus. It’s also worth noting that this Zealot has first strike, which probably represents the Charge upgrade. But by granting the Zealot first strike at no cost, it means that the Zealot will always attack before most ranged units, which doesn't usually happen in Starcraft. The Charge upgrade is probably better represented by haste or by an activated ability.
Also, there is an inclination to implement new concepts and mechanics when creating MTG cards, which usually ends up producing cards that don’t work well with existing MTG sets or that don’t even play like MTG at all. The card above introduces a new ability called Shield that prevents the creature from being destroyed. This ability could cause unforeseen complications, such as imbalance or conflicting rules and also doesn’t really represent how shields function in Starcraft. It’s tempting to make cards complex and powerful, especially the legendary cards, but most existing MTG cards are fairly basic.
Another issue with this card is the color. I know that this is rather subjective, but Protoss doesn’t feel green. With telepathic abilities and a number of flying units, Protoss seems kind of blue. Taking color into consideration is important, since Starcraft allows players to choose one of three races, which suggests that the Starcraft MTG cards should have three main colors or color combinations, which I will discuss later.
Here's another card that does a better job, but still falls short in a few important ways:
+ Show Spoiler +
This Phoenix has more accurate power and toughness than the Zealot example, but the wording in the block restriction is not consistent with MTG, and the Graviton Beam ability of this card allows it to tap (lift) any card on the table, including lands, enchantments and other non-creature cards. This is not how Graviton Beam works in Starcraft 2.
Even small mistakes such as these can cause the unit, or even the entire game, to function improperly, so when I set out to make my MTG set, I decided to adhere as best I could to the following rules:
1. The set should follow established MTG rules and conventions.
2. The cards should accurately represent concepts in Starcraft 2.
3. The races should be divided by color and also be relatively balanced.
The first thing I did was make a spreadsheet with all of the units, structures and abilities in Starcraft 2 (view it by clicking here). I then tweaked power, toughness, cost and abilities in order to meet the criteria above. While doing so, I was forced to answer several serious questions:
1. In Starcraft 2, a player defeats an opponent by eliminating all of their buildings. How do I deal with structures?
2. What card and creature types will I use?
3. Since all abilities in Starcraft 2 are attached to units, how do I decide which, if any, are represented by instants or sorcery cards?
4. The economy of Starcraft 2 is based on minerals and vespene gas, and the abilities are based on energy. Is it possible to incorporate these concepts into MTG cards?
5. How do I translate abilities and mechanics in Starcraft 2 that have no direct equivalent in MTG, such as cloaking, shields and larva?
To answer the first issue, I came up with a few possible solutions:
The first would be to implement a new mechanic for structures, where a player loses the game when he or she no longer controls any structures. This has several problems, the most obvious being that players don’t begin the game with any structures. I felt that this route deviated too far from traditional MTG and would end up producing a completely different game.
The second option I considered was introducing a new card type called Structure that functioned like a planeswalker. Buildings could be placed on the board, but wouldn’t be a creature or an enchantment. This would allow players to target each other's structures. However, I don’t think planeswalkers fit well in MTG as it is, so constructing a set around a similar concept would probably make the game more ridiculous than planeswalkers already make it.
The third option would be to implement structures as enchantments, but attacking structures with units is a huge part of Starcraft 2, so I decided against it.
The fourth option is the one I ended up choosing. I decided that structures should function like walls — creatures that can’t attack. This allows them to enhance creatures while still allowing them to be attacked by units. This also permits players to use structures defensively, which is something players often do in Starcraft 2. Here are some examples of structure cards:
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
Notice that the structures are various types in addition to being structures. This leads to the second difficulty: card types.
Every card in MTG has at least one type. Even a Forest has two types: Basic Land and Forest. The ever-useful Llanowar Elves has three types: Creature, Elf and Druid. These types are used to modify mechanics and interactions between cards. The Dauntless Dourbark and Nightmare derive their power and toughness from the number of a Forests or Swamps you control, respectively, while other cards, like the Elvish Archduid, enhance other creatures. These mechanics are an integral part of MTG, so I felt it important to choose card types carefully.
There are several interactions between units in Starcraft 2 that affect the game in a significant way. In addition to structures, which we already discussed, there’s the light, armored and massive unit type dynamic, which alters the amount of damage units deal to each other. I really wanted to include these types, but this would make combat extremely complex, and the damage that creatures deal in MTG is generally much lower than in Starcraft 2, so it would likely need to be greatly modified in order to avoid breaking the game.
Additional unit types found in Starcraft 2 are Mechanical, Biological and Psionic. The first two are already represented in MTG by similar types called artifact and nonartifact. The third is unique to Starcraft 2 and fairly easy to implement, so I incorporated it into the cards.
Yet another interaction of unit types is found in the Flying and Ground types. These are present in both MTG and Starcraft 2 and function in an almost identical way in both games. However, in Starcraft 2, many more units are only able to attack either Flying or Ground units only. I decided that incorporating these types and restricting unit attacks in the same way they are in Starcraft 2 would not make the game too dissimilar to conventional MTG.
Here are the types I ended up choosing:
Terran
Protoss
Zerg
Structure
Psionic
Artifact (Mechanical)
Non-Artifact (Biological)
Flying
Nonflying (Ground)
The issue of abilities, instants and sorcery cards was one that was more arbitrary. Here’s how I worked through it:
Since, as I mentioned, abilities in Starcraft 2 are attached to units, having no instants or sorcery cards would most accurately represent the concepts of Starcraft 2 (the second rule), but it wouldn’t follow MTG rules and conventions (the first rule). I decided that for the sake of making the game more like MTG, I would remove abilities from units and make them instants or sorcery cards. This also simplified many of the creatures, since it would be quite overwhelming to have a Ghost creature card with Cloak, Snipe, EMP and Nuke.
In order to decide which abilities would be attached to creatures, I relied on what I believed to be the defining abilities of each Starcraft 2 unit. The High Templar, for example, is best known for the Psionic Storm ability, so it would make sense to give this ability to the MTG card, rather than the alternative, Feedback.
Another general rule I followed was to give creatures the ability (or abilities) that would make them most useful and balanced and which were more combat-oriented. The Queen, for example, could have been given Spawn Larva or Spawn Creep Tumor, but Transfuse would seem to function more like a traditional MTG creature ability.
As for the third issue, economy, energy and mana, I decided that meddling with the economy of MTG would be too drastic a change, so I assigned each race a different primary, secondary and tertiary mana color. I chose multiple colors for each race for two reasons: because each race has a diverse set of units and spells and to increase variety and deck creativity. This also helps to keep the races divided, so that it's easy to play as only a single race with this Starcraft 2 MTG set. Here are the color assignments I chose:
1. Terran
I. White: Soldiers, healing and defense are features associated with white in MTG.
II. Red: Units like the Hellion and Reaper are quick and fairly weak, making them seem red.
III. Black: Cloaking and nukes definitely seem like black abilities.
2. Protoss
I. Blue: Telepathic abilities and flying creatures are features associated with blue in MTG.
II. Black: Dark Templar and cloaking seem to be best represented by black mana.
III. White: The Immortal’s strong defense and the Zealot and High Templar’s religious nature seem white.
3. Zerg
I. Red: The Zerg is characterized in Starcraft as swift and numerous, which are features associated with red in MTG.
II. Green: The physical strength of units like the Roach and Ultralisk are best represented by green.
III. Black: A malevolent and a mindless nature are marks of black mana.
The fourth issue I dealt with was determining how to translate abilities from Starcraft 2 that seemed to have no equivalent in MTG. Psionic Storm is an example of an ability that translates well, since it simply deals damage to a number of target creatures. Force Field, on the other hand, cannot easily perform the same roll in MTG that it does in Starcraft 2. In order to bring these abilities into the Starcraft 2 MTG set, I decided that to merely keep the spirit of the abilities the same.
In Starcraft 2, Force Field is used to temporarily trap units in a location, usually making them ineffective by doing so. In MTG, there is a mechanic that does something similar. Some spells, generally white in color, tap a target, making it basically useless for the remainder of the turn. By using this concept, we can make an ability that functions like the Force Field Starcraft 2.
+ Show Spoiler +
By causing attacking creatures to become remain tapped, the defending player is essentially preventing them from retreating from battle, just like in Starcraft 2.
Another set of abilities that doesn’t translate from Starcraft 2 to MTG is Cloak, Burrow and Detection. In Starcraft 2, a cloaked unit cannot be attacked unless a unit with detection or a Scanner Sweep reveals it. In MTG there are two similar mechanics: unblockable and shadow. Unblockable allows units to attack without ever worrying about being blocked by another unit, and shadow allows units to do the same, except they can be blocked by other creatures with shadow. Neither of these mechanics functions exactly like cloak in Starcraft 2, so I decided that in this case I would create a new mechanic.
I was very apprehensive about proceeding down this path, but I felt like the cloak and detection dynamic was significant and unique enough to warrant its own mechanic. Here’s how I defined these abilities:
Cloak: This creature is unblockable and can’t be the target of opponent’s spells or abilities, other than detection.
Burrow: Zerg creatures you control without flying have “Tap: Gain cloak (This creature is unblockable and can’t be the target of opponent’s spells or abilities, other than detection.) until end of turn.”
Detection: As long as this permanent is on the battlefield, creatures your opponents control no longer have cloak.
While this may cause the Starcraft 2 MTG set to behave strangely with other sets, it seemed important to me that units with cloak, burrow and detection function in a way that accurately reflects their roll in Starcraft 2. If I were to choose Unblockable, then there would be far too many unblockable units, since most Zerg units can burrow. If I chose Shadow, then cloaked units could be detected, but there would be even more units with Shadow than would otherwise be unblockable, since detecting a cloaked unit would require the detecting unit to also have shadow. In addition, neither unblockable nor shadow prevent units from being the target of spells or abilities — an important feature of cloak. Here are some examples of units with cloak and detection:
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
Here are some more examples of cards that reflect my attempt to capture the spirit of a Starcraft 2 abilities and mechanics in MTG cards:
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
There are many more issues that I dealt with while putting together this set. I’ll briefly mention a few of them in the hope that my decisions will make sense.
1. Protoss Shields: This mechanic is designed for a real-time strategy game and doesn’t adapt well to turn-based games, especially ones in which units do not retain damage, so I went with a flat +0/+1 upgrade to all Protoss creatures and structures.
2. Nuclear Strike: The best way to implement this card is probably to make it similar to Wrath of God, but I hate that card and what it does to MTG, so I made Nuclear Strike a black card that destroys multiple creatures or structures, as it does in Starcraft 2.
3. Stimpack: I originally had Stimpack as an ability of Terran nonartifact creatures, but it makes more sense as an instant. I also wrestled with the specific effects. I knew that it had to decrease toughness, but how would it modify a creature's attack? It made sense to have Stimpack increase power, but I decided on haste and double strike, since stimming a unit in Starcraft 2 increases its movement and attack speed.
4. Workers: There were a lot of options for how to do the workers. I originally gave them “Tap: add 1 colorless mana to your mana pool,” since workers harvest crystals, but I noticed a lack of card-drawing abilities in my set, so I went in that direction. I also gave the worker of each race an ability that I thought reflected the its unique function in Starcraft 2.
I. SCV: Prevent damage dealt to artifacts (repair).
II. Probe: Play structure spells with flash (warp in buildings).
III. Drone: Sacrifice Drone to search library for a structure card (morph into structure).
5. Upgrades:
I. Structures: I originally had players spend mana to use the abilities of structures like the Engineering Bay, Forge or Spire to enhance units, but capping the upgrades at +3/+3 proved annoying and complicated. In order to prevent upgrading at more than one structure, they would have to be legendary or the upgrades would have to be restricted by an additional mechanic. I went with a flat +1/+1 upgrade to all Terran, Protoss or Zerg creatures for each of the upgrade structures a player controls.
II. Enchantments: In Starcraft 2, all upgrades are researched at structures. I could have done this in the card game, but I felt as though this would make structures too complicated and the decks more difficult to customize. Also, I felt that it was important to strive for an orthodox distribution of card types, so I made some upgrades into enchantments.
6. Morphing or transforming units: In Starcraft 2, players can morph or transform units from one into another. For Protoss and Zerg, that means sacrificing units like the Zergling or High Templar in order to create a more powerful unit. To implement this mechanic, I simply named the original creature as an additional cost to play the new one. For Terran’s transforming units, like the Hellion and Siege tank, I made reversible cards. The Terran simply taps the creature card to flip it around, representing the time it takes to shift forms.
7. Land: I created special lands that benefit each races. These lands represent a world of significance to each race, such as Korhal for Terran, Aiur for Protoss and Char for Zerg.
8. Mixed-race Units: I implemented some units that have more than one race type. These include the Infested Terran, Hybrid and Kerrigan, Queen of Blades. I wanted to have more mixed-race units to allow for more interesting deck creation, but the Starcraft 2 units didn't justify it.
9. Legendary Units: There are a number of important characters in the Starcraft universe, many of which deserve their own legendary card, but I wanted to limit them to only a few per race, so I only used the most important characters. I was more liberal with translating the abilities of legendary creatures, since they are difficult to quantify.
10. Builds: I created some instant and sorcery cards that represent certain tactics in Starcraft 2. These include the infamous Proxy Barracks, Four Gate and Six Pool.
11. Vespene Gas: I incorporated the Refinery, Assimilator and Extractor as mana-generating structures. They can be tapped for one mana of any color.
12. Supply: There isn’t really a reasonable way to implement such a foreign concept to MTG, so I just had Supply Depots, Overseers and Pylons add colorless mana in order to loosely represent their roll in the player’s economy in Starcraft 2.
13. Burrow: Burrow functions a lot like cloak, but once the Burrowing Claws enchantment is in play, all Zerg ground units a player controls can burrow. I made burrow only require tapping the creature, which could make for interesting untap mechanics.
14. Larva: I dabbled with using larva to draw Zerg creature cards and cast Zerg creature spells, but it ended up making Zerg extremely different from the other two races and violating my first rule. The larva mechanic now exists only as an ability of the Hatchery structure.
15. Automatic Upgrades: I had to decide whether or not creature cards would come with their upgraded abilities. The Psionic Storm ability, for example, must be researched before High Templar can use it in Starcraft 2. Although this could easily work in MTG, I felt as though the defining abilities should be an innate part of the creature, but activated at a cost. This is the route I chose for abilities like Charge and Fungal Growth and also those that don't require an upgrade in Starcraft 2, like Boost and Prismatic Alignment.
16. Number of Cards: Another challenge was deciding how many Starcraft 2 units, structures and abilities should be incorporated into the set. After all, most structures in Starcraft 2 that don't perform any function other than generating units or advancing the tech path. I decided to include all of the units and unit abilities, all of the upgrade and defensive buildings, but only a few of the unit-producing or tech buildings. This is definitely an area that could use improvement, as I'm sure there are many interesting uses for the Starport, Robotics Bay and Hive.
Here are some more examples of cards that I made:
Reaper
+ Show Spoiler +
Widow Mine
+ Show Spoiler +
Viking
+ Show Spoiler +
Thor
+ Show Spoiler +
Battlecruiser
+ Show Spoiler +
Jim Raynor
+ Show Spoiler +
Tech Lab
+ Show Spoiler +
EMP
+ Show Spoiler +
Korhal
+ Show Spoiler +
Stalker
+ Show Spoiler +
Oracle
+ Show Spoiler +
Immortal
+ Show Spoiler +
Carrier
+ Show Spoiler +
Mothership
+ Show Spoiler +
Zeratul
+ Show Spoiler +
Templar Archives
+ Show Spoiler +
Hallucination
+ Show Spoiler +
Shakuras
+ Show Spoiler +
Zergling
+ Show Spoiler +
Mutalisk
+ Show Spoiler +
Swarm Host
+ Show Spoiler +
Ultralisk
+ Show Spoiler +
Brood Lord
+ Show Spoiler +
Kerrigan, Queen of Blades
+ Show Spoiler +
Creep
+ Show Spoiler +
Neural Parasite
+ Show Spoiler +
Zerus
+ Show Spoiler +
Xel'naga Tower
+ Show Spoiler +
Xel'naga Artifact
+ Show Spoiler +
You can download the entire set of card images by clicking here.
Edit: The link above includes the latest version of my cards, which may differ from those in this post.
If you have any comments or questions about my cards, please feel free to share them. But before you do, please ensure that your post doesn't do one of the following two things:
1. Criticize the Zealot or Phoenix cards displayed in the post. These are examples of cards that I feel need improvement.
2. Raise an issue that I already addressed in this post.
If you found this post an overly-complicated waste of time, please visit http://www.dailyduncan.com for more.
I made all of these cards using MSE Development’s Magic Set Editor version 2.0.0. I’d like to thank them for making such an awesome program.
I'd also like to thank my brother, Shebuha, for helping me make some crucial decisions in the making of these cards.
The card art was taken without permission by searching Google images. Many of them are simply screen captures, but I appreciate that there are people out there who devote themselves to making amazing fan art. I apologize to anyone who I offended by borrowing their art. It was not my intent to offend or to profit from this endeavor.
|
Really interesting read. You need to add power/toughness to ghost, and the wording of the rule text is a bit weird for stimpack, since I don't think it targets.
|
So. Sick. I wanted you to post this months ago when I was giving feedback, but I'm glad you waited and added more stuff.
HOLLA HOLLA GET DOLLAAAAAAA
|
|
|
I skimmed through a bit of the cards. Pylon looks really imbalanced. Especially since it's artifact and very good for blue.
Zealot is way too strong for it's cost. Should be like 1GG 3/3 or maybe UGG 4/4
Yamato should be 5 damage, not destroy.
I think carrier would be better if the cost was lowered (maybe 2UUUU or 3UUU) and the interceptors cost UUU each time you attacked or blocked (and have banding).
Mutalisk should also heal 1 damage (add +0/+1 counter til end of turn if targeted by a spell or ability?) or prevent one damage to itself somehow.
Great work, cool idea.
I'll try my hand with a unit. Hellion/Hellbat
1RR
haste, first strike?, trample
tap itself (and R?) to morph into hellbat. Hell bat is 2/3 (maybe 2/4?) but if target by a spell or ability is destroyed.
3/1
This could also be one of those 2 in 1 cards, or evoke cost (no haste though). Where it can be played outright as the hellbat for a cost of RRR or like 2RR. And still retains it's ability to morph back into to hellion.
The tapping itself seems like a big drawback though (you would probably have to do end at the of opponents turn after not attacking), maybe find another way to represent the morphing delay? And also apply that to other mech like viking and tank.
|
Wow, this looks like you put a ton of work into it! Nice job. I'm a MTG noob--why would an ultralisk have haste? Also, the Broodlord description seems to have spacing issues.
Nice work!
|
This is pretty amazing. I like all the work the creator has put into these "cards", especially the artwork on it. The images really portray the "effects" of those units ingame.
|
On December 14 2013 10:06 MarlieChurphy wrote:
I skimmed through a bit of the cards. Pylon looks really imbalanced. Especially since it's artifact and very good for blue.
First of all, thanks for the feedback, but if you're concerned that the Pylon's imbalanced, you should check out Palladium Myr.
On December 14 2013 10:06 MarlieChurphy wrote:
Zealot is way too strong for it's cost. Should be like 1GG 3/3 or maybe UGG 4/4
Perhaps if you hadn't skimmed the post, you would have realized that I used the Zealot as an example of a poorly made card.
On December 14 2013 10:06 MarlieChurphy wrote:
Yamato should be 5 damage, not destroy.
There's definitely a lot of different directions to take with each of the cards. The reason why I chose to have Yamato destroy the target was to make it distinct from the Thor's 250mm Cannons ability.
On December 14 2013 10:06 MarlieChurphy wrote:
I think carrier would be better if the cost was lowered (maybe 2UUUU or 3UUU) and the interceptors cost UUU each time you attacked or blocked (and have banding).
Mutalisk should also heal 1 damage (add +0/+1 counter til end of turn if targeted by a spell or ability?) or prevent one damage to itself somehow.
Great work, cool idea.
I'll try my hand with a unit. Hellion/Hellbat
1RR
haste, first strike?, trample
tap itself (and R?) to morph into hellbat. Hell bat is 2/3 (maybe 2/4?) but if target by a spell or ability is destroyed.
3/1
This could also be one of those 2 in 1 cards, or evoke cost (no haste though). Where it can be played outright as the hellbat for a cost of RRR or like 2RR. And still retains it's ability to morph back into to hellion.
The tapping itself seems like a big drawback though (you would probably have to do end at the of opponents turn after not attacking), maybe find another way to represent the morphing delay? And also apply that to other mech like viking and tank.
I also considered using morph cards, but according to the MTG rules, a face-down morph card is just a 2/2 creature with no specific types, so I didn't take that route.
On December 14 2013 11:21 slowbacontron wrote:
Wow, this looks like you put a ton of work into it! Nice job. I'm a MTG noob--why would an ultralisk have haste? Also, the Broodlord description seems to have spacing issues.
Nice work!
Thanks, and I'm not also sure why the Ultralisk has haste. Perhaps I made that card back when the Ultralisk had burrow-charge and never updated it.
On December 14 2013 11:24 Advantageous wrote:
This is pretty amazing. I like all the work the creator has put into these "cards", especially the artwork on it. The images really portray the "effects" of those units ingame.
Thank you. I'd like to remind everyone that I didn't create any of this art. I did, however, spend a lot of time scanning Google to find images that I thought worked well with the cards.
I'd also like to note that I may alter this post and the card set as corrections are pointed out. As you may have noticed, I added power and toughness to the Ghost as ZigguratOfUr suggested, and I'll likely remove haste from the Ultralisk soon after posting this reply.
|
I like this way this is assembled. I think some people are being too harsh upon the concept and overemphasizing the imbalances of the cards. I don't play magic anymore but I was top 100 in florida back in high school 10 years ago so seeing magic again after a long while based on something of a current hobby is quite fulfilling. Kudos, comrade. GL HF GGs.
|
Bisutopia19203 Posts
GG
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images/b/b5/Draco.png)
|
On December 14 2013 14:36 BisuDagger wrote:GG
Before I even read the moves I thought about him having a move to do with retiring, sure enough you hit the nail on the head. Well done BisuDagger, well done.
|
On December 14 2013 14:36 BisuDagger wrote:GG
On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I had seen a few cards that others made, but many of them were about players, not the units and abilities of the game.
On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
It’s tempting to make cards complex and powerful, especially the legendary cards, but most existing MTG cards are fairly basic.
Why is this card 8/8? Why is is it green and blue? Why is it a Foreigner type and not a creature? Why is there grammatical errors, and why is the wording inconsistent with traditional MTG? This card is the antithesis of everything I spoke about in the original post.
Congratulations on winning the thread.
|
|
|
tech lab and templar archives should be rares .
Zergling should be 2/1 since there is no reason to cast one if it deals 1 damage or make it double damage.
Carriers interceptor spawn per attacking/blocking should be based upon interceptor counters which you can purchase with one colorlessmana. And the carrier should start with 8 interceptor counters so that at the beggining its not that useless. And the interceptor counter cannot be higher than 8.
Just my two cents.
|
On December 14 2013 16:28 Onekobold wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 16:23 Duncan wrote:
Why is there grammatical errors, and why is the wording inconsistent with traditional MTG? Why is that the case for most of the cards in the OP as well?
If you're referring to the weird comma placement and periods inside of brackets, that's how the program used to make these cards does it. It's kinda weird, but a good program overall and fun to use!
The wording is pretty consistent with actual MTG cards though.
|
On December 14 2013 16:35 goody153 wrote:
tech lab and templar archives should be rares .
The rarity of the cards is something I considered, but I spend a lot less time on it than other issues.
On December 14 2013 16:35 goody153 wrote:
Zergling should be 2/1 since there is no reason to cast one if it deals 1 damage or make it double damage.
If the Zergling isn't worth using, then why are there so many 1/1 creatures that cost one mana? This Zergling card is basically just a Raging Goblin. Also, had you looked at all of the cards in the set, you would have noticed that Adrenal Glands grants Zerglings double strike.
On December 14 2013 16:35 goody153 wrote:
Carriers interceptor spawn per attacking/blocking should be based upon interceptor counters which you can purchase with one colorlessmana. And the carrier should start with 8 interceptor counters so that at the beggining its not that useless. And the interceptor counter cannot be higher than 8.
Just my two cents.
I like the idea of representing interceptors with counters, but I think the Carrier in its current form more accurately represents how the unit functions in Starcraft, since interceptors only enter the battlefield when the Carrier is attacking or blocking. Also, as I mentioned in the original post, it's difficult to describe complicated abilities.
|
My comments are going to be all over the place, as I'm just going to do this on the fly as I read.
For someone who complains about their example of a card not conforming to MTG standards and templating, you seem to be absolutely annihilating the color pie and not templating your own cards correctly.
You should definitely not allocate colors to races the way that you do. That's not how MTG design works. The reason you see certain tribes affiliated with certain colors is because the colors represent the mechanics of the cards in that tribe, then there's post-hoc flavor justification.
Cloaking isn't remotely black, making permanents untargetable is historically divided between blue and green (see: Shroud/Hexproof) and unblockability is primary in blue.
With regards to the "blockers", like the ebay and pylon, if you want them to be able to block, they have to be creatures. Non-creature permanents also cannot have power and toughness, as you have placed onto those cards.
Malevolence and mindlessness are not even slightly black. Black isn't intrinsically evil, and black's flavor backing is all about ambition. Something mindless cannot express ambition.
Red's the color that gets flying the second least, with an exception being made for dragons and wacky limited crap like Goblin Balloon Brigade.
Phoenix: No comma separating the mana component and the tap component of the cost, and tap target card makes no sense. Do you intend to tap cards on the stack? Tap target permanent might be what you're looking for.
Stimpack: it seems like you chose the colors for this completely at random. Haste and double strike are both very red abilites. Also, the card doesn't target, so that last clause is meaningless. A more correct clause would be "If this effect would reduce a creature's toughness below 1, that creature is not affected by stimpack". Admittedly that's still probably not right, there aren't any effects I can think of to name that I can compare it to. The alternative is to surround it in an if clause, like the errata on blood lust.
Carrier doesn't work the way you think it should. by the time you've declared it as either an attacker or blocker, it's too late for you to use those tokens that are created, because you've passed your declare attackers or declare blockers step.
I could probably address each card individually but that's pretty time consuming. These were amongst the biggest things I could point out.
|
I think the amount of thought and effort you've invested is commendable.. If you polish it, you could really have something to be proud of!
For the Zergling.. It's cool how it is because it's like any 1/1 basic creature. But lings have a swarming feel to them in SC2 that is intrinsic to the Zerg. So to address that, maybe have a spawning pool that like a multiple ability artifact. For example (and this may be massively stupid or imbalanced, but anyways)
Spawning Pool 2R
RRR: All Zerglings gain double strike until end of turn (cracklings)
RR: All zerglings gain haste until end of turn (adrenalings)
RR, destroy this card: Place 6 Zergling tokens on the field. These tokens have haste and banding?
Edit: So I was thinking, destroying the pool would kill the upgrade-ability of the lings. So maybe instead, the pool can be tapped to create 1 Zergling token? Or, it could be like (X)mana, tap: place (X) 1/1 zergling tokens on the field, where X is the amount of mana spent? So that the more mana you have at your disposal, the more ling tokens you could crank out?
On the Battlecruiser, I think it's a little wicked as it stands.. Why would anyone ever attack normally? Two mana and I can kill anything I want!
Maybe, instead, you require two Yamato counters in order to use the Yamato ability? Or, you require the card be tapped in addition to the mana cost in order to place a Yamato counter. That way there's a penalty for using Yamato, and ordinary attacking has a purpose and could be use more strategically. For example, if you went the tap + mana cost route, you could use some kind of "untap target creature" ability to spit out yamato blasts in the same turn. Then, you could limit yamato counters to allow only 1 yamato blast per turn, so it's not abused.. Stuff like that! Make the card interesting!
|
In order to assign completely unique colors to each race, I'd go this way:
Zerg: chaos and death - Red and Black
Protoss: order and interdependence - White and Green
Terran: logic and tech - Blue
|
Nice, you might want to add more dual lands, like Shakuras for UB.
|
On December 14 2013 17:02 ThrowLikeEG wrote:
My comments are going to be all over the place, as I'm just going to do this on the fly as I read.
For someone who complains about their example of a card not conforming to MTG standards and templating, you seem to be absolutely annihilating the color pie and not templating your own cards correctly.
On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
...I assigned each race a different primary, secondary and tertiary mana color... so that it's easy to play as only a single race with this Starcraft 2 MTG set...
On December 14 2013 17:02 ThrowLikeEG wrote:
You should definitely not allocate colors to races the way that you do. That's not how MTG design works. The reason you see certain tribes affiliated with certain colors is because the colors represent the mechanics of the cards in that tribe, then there's post-hoc flavor justification.
On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I decided to adhere as best I could to the following rules:
1. The set should follow established MTG rules and conventions.
2. The cards should accurately represent concepts in Starcraft 2.
3. The races should be divided by color and also be relatively balanced.
On December 14 2013 17:02 ThrowLikeEG wrote:
Cloaking isn't remotely black, making permanents untargetable is historically divided between blue and green (see: Shroud/Hexproof) and unblockability is primary in blue.
It's true that unblockable isn't a feature of black, but shadow and fear certainly are. I mentioned in the original post that I considered using shadow, but decided to create my own mechanic. Also, as I already noted, my division of color is not based solely on adherence to MTG conventions.
On December 14 2013 17:02 ThrowLikeEG wrote:
With regards to the "blockers", like the ebay and pylon, if you want them to be able to block, they have to be creatures. Non-creature permanents also cannot have power and toughness, as you have placed onto those cards.
On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I decided that structures should function like walls — creatures that can’t attack.
You're probably right, but I had to introduce a new card type anyway, so I thought it would be okay to allow structures to have power and toughness and such.
On December 14 2013 17:02 ThrowLikeEG wrote:
Malevolence and mindlessness are not even slightly black. Black isn't intrinsically evil, and black's flavor backing is all about ambition. Something mindless cannot express ambition.
Skeletons, zombies, rats, vampires and ghosts are all associated with black. Sacrifice, fear and deathtouch are also features of black cards.
On December 14 2013 17:02 ThrowLikeEG wrote:
Red's the color that gets flying the second least, with an exception being made for dragons and wacky limited crap like Goblin Balloon Brigade.
Correct, but again, complying with MTG convention was not my only goal. Assigning color based solely on precedents in MTG would have ruined race cohesion. I mean, imagine if all Terran, Zerg and Protoss flying units were the same color.
On December 14 2013 17:02 ThrowLikeEG wrote:
Phoenix: No comma separating the mana component and the tap component of the cost, and tap target card makes no sense. Do you intend to tap cards on the stack? Tap target permanent might be what you're looking for.
On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
Perhaps if you hadn't skimmed the post, you would have realized that I used the Zealot as an example of a poorly made card.
The same goes for the Phoenix.
On December 14 2013 17:02 ThrowLikeEG wrote:
Stimpack: it seems like you chose the colors for this completely at random. Haste and double strike are both very red abilites. Also, the card doesn't target, so that last clause is meaningless. A more correct clause would be "If this effect would reduce a creature's toughness below 1, that creature is not affected by stimpack". Admittedly that's still probably not right, there aren't any effects I can think of to name that I can compare it to. The alternative is to surround it in an if clause, like the errata on blood lust.
Fair points.
On December 14 2013 17:02 ThrowLikeEG wrote:
Carrier doesn't work the way you think it should. by the time you've declared it as either an attacker or blocker, it's too late for you to use those tokens that are created, because you've passed your declare attackers or declare blockers step.
Shoot, you may be right. I guess I have to go with the counter method proposed by goody153.
On December 14 2013 17:02 ThrowLikeEG wrote:
I could probably address each card individually but that's pretty time consuming. These were amongst the biggest things I could point out.
Thank you for your contribution.
|
I've always wanted to see this come to life in an intelligent way. This is cool.
Brood Lord's 1/1 spawns should come into play "tapped and attacking," I think, a la Geist of Saint Traft's Angel token.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
Well, we should have Hearthcore: Heroes of Starcraft (core instead stone, cus it's sci-fi universe)
|
On December 14 2013 17:17 BoX wrote:
I think the amount of thought and effort you've invested is commendable.. If you polish it, you could really have something to be proud of!
Thanks, but I'm already proud of it. 
On December 14 2013 17:17 BoX wrote:
For the Zergling.. It's cool how it is because it's like any 1/1 basic creature. But lings have a swarming feel to them in SC2 that is intrinsic to the Zerg. So to address that, maybe have a spawning pool that like a multiple ability artifact. For example (and this may be massively stupid or imbalanced, but anyways)
I can see what you're getting at. Perhaps something like Aurochs?
On December 14 2013 17:17 BoX wrote:
Spawning Pool 2R
RRR: All Zerglings gain double strike until end of turn (cracklings)
RR: All zerglings gain haste until end of turn (adrenalings)
RR, destroy this card: Place 6 Zergling tokens on the field. These tokens have haste and banding?
I have similar mechanics in the Hatchery and Adrenal Glands cards.
On December 14 2013 17:17 BoX wrote:
Edit: So I was thinking, destroying the pool would kill the upgrade-ability of the lings. So maybe instead, the pool can be tapped to create 1 Zergling token? Or, it could be like (X)mana, tap: place (X) 1/1 zergling tokens on the field, where X is the amount of mana spent? So that the more mana you have at your disposal, the more ling tokens you could crank out?
On the Battlecruiser, I think it's a little wicked as it stands.. Why would anyone ever attack normally? Two mana and I can kill anything I want!
Maybe, instead, you require two Yamato counters in order to use the Yamato ability? Or, you require the card be tapped in addition to the mana cost in order to place a Yamato counter. That way there's a penalty for using Yamato, and ordinary attacking has a purpose and could be use more strategically. For example, if you went the tap + mana cost route, you could use some kind of "untap target creature" ability to spit out yamato blasts in the same turn. Then, you could limit yamato counters to allow only 1 yamato blast per turn, so it's not abused.. Stuff like that! Make the card interesting!
You're right; it's probably overpowered. The effect you're describing might be too complicated, but I like the idea of using counters.
|
On December 14 2013 17:51 poeticEnnui wrote:I've always wanted to see this come to life in an intelligent way. This is cool. Brood Lord's 1/1 spawns should come into play "tapped and attacking," I think, a la Geist of Saint Traft's Angel token.
Tapped and attacking? Of course! That's the perfect solution.
Thanks for the compliment and for the help.
|
Terran may work better using Esper color and concept. Protoss could be Bant or UWR. Zerg could be Jund. However, it could be better if you just use the MTG base rules and retranslate the rules to SC universe. For instance:
3 colors instead of 5 colors. That way you can establish color identity better and you can have cards that use Terran/Protoss, Zerg/Terran, and so on.
Mana system could be different. Maybe you could a spiced up version of Heartstone system.
Maybe buildings could be a different card type and could work like planeswalker. I mean, you can attack buildings (their life could be tracked by a dice the same way as planeswalkers) and if you're researching something, it could take some turns to complete. Upgrades could be emblems. Example: +1/+0 to all Air Units and take 2 + Number of emblems already in play (so 2/3/4) and you could have only 3 of the same type of emblems maximum.Wording can be a bitch thou.
|
Good job, once completed this could be a fun play
You might want to note that your wording of "cloak" doesn't need to have the "except for detection" addition because your "detection" ability doesn't target creatures.
|
wow nice. I made ~50to100 cards myself once.
Really nicely done!
Btw, I think Jim Raynor, Zeratul, Kerrigan should be mythic!
|
In order to assign completely unique colors to each race, I'd go this way:
Zerg: chaos and death - Red and Black
Protoss: order and interdependence - White and Green
Terran: logic and tech - Blue
I'd say Zerg: Red, with some Green and Black.
Protoss: Blue/White
Terran: Green/White
|
there are definitely a few cards that would need adjustments for "real" mtg play, like Brood Lord and Kerrigan's mana costs, but overall good work!
|
Sorry, haven't played MTG in over 5 years before the term "reach" was created. Anyone care to explain what that is in old mtg terminology?
|
On December 14 2013 19:16 Shinta) wrote:
Sorry, haven't played MTG in over 5 years before the term "reach" was created. Anyone care to explain what that is in old mtg terminology?
The creature can block creatures with flying.
|
Really cool read, I liked what you did.
You could do with losing the attitude when responding to people though 
|
Definitely great cards. I love them, and I love how most of the effects and abilities are well-thought and goes with the SC2 gameplay and lore(well kind of). There are definitely some balance changes I would like to see. For example, Swarm Host can have a higher cost, and can produce 2x 2/1 Zerg creatures with haste, since it is pretty obvious that Locusts are really strong a lot stronger than Zerglings or Broodlings that have the same stats here. Also, what somebody said already, I also think that Battle Cruiser should do 5 or 6 damage to the target creature or structure.
Overall, amazing cards. I hope that you will update with more creatures, can't wait to see Siege Tank, Infestor, Archon, Roach, Viper, Marauder etc.
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On December 14 2013 16:23 Duncan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I had seen a few cards that others made, but many of them were about players, not the units and abilities of the game. Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
It’s tempting to make cards complex and powerful, especially the legendary cards, but most existing MTG cards are fairly basic. Why is this card 8/8? Why is is it green and blue? Why is it a Foreigner type and not a creature? Why is there grammatical errors, and why is the wording inconsistent with traditional MTG? This card is the antithesis of everything I spoke about in the original post. Congratulations on winning the thread.
oh relax, it's not like your wording is quite correct either ;p
|
On December 14 2013 19:34 Superiorwolf wrote:Really cool read, I liked what you did. You could do with losing the attitude when responding to people though
I apologize if anyone was offended. I may have been bothered by the fact that the first few people to respond did so without bothering to read the original post. One of them is mentioned in the following reply:
On December 14 2013 19:53 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 16:23 Duncan wrote:On December 14 2013 14:36 BisuDagger wrote:GG On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I had seen a few cards that others made, but many of them were about players, not the units and abilities of the game. On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
It’s tempting to make cards complex and powerful, especially the legendary cards, but most existing MTG cards are fairly basic. Why is this card 8/8? Why is is it green and blue? Why is it a Foreigner type and not a creature? Why is there grammatical errors, and why is the wording inconsistent with traditional MTG? This card is the antithesis of everything I spoke about in the original post. Congratulations on winning the thread. oh relax, it's not like your wording is quite correct either ;p
You're right, my cards aren't perfect. The difference here that I spent a lot of time creating something and asked for feedback, not for someone to disregard everything I said, say, "GG," and post a gag card that someone else made years ago.
On December 14 2013 18:23 Geiko wrote:Good job, once completed this could be a fun play You might want to note that your wording of "cloak" doesn't need to have the "except for detection" addition because your "detection" ability doesn't target creatures.
Are you sure? I know that creatures with hexproof can still be sacrificed and such, but aren't they immune to spells that target all creatures, like Wrath of God?
On December 14 2013 19:51 Ramiz1989 wrote:
...There are definitely some balance changes I would like to see. For example, Swarm Host can have a higher cost, and can produce 2x 2/1 Zerg creatures with haste, since it is pretty obvious that Locusts are really strong a lot stronger than Zerglings or Broodlings that have the same stats here.
I think that at one point locusts were 2/1, but I changed it for some reason. Maybe I thought too many of Zerg's creatures were expensive.
On December 14 2013 19:51 Ramiz1989 wrote:
Also, what somebody said already, I also think that Battle Cruiser should do 5 or 6 damage to the target creature or structure.
Thanks! I just updated it. I also changed the Thor's ability, since it no longer has 250mm Cannons.
|
On December 15 2013 01:37 Duncan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 19:34 Superiorwolf wrote:Really cool read, I liked what you did. You could do with losing the attitude when responding to people though I apologize if anyone was offended. I may have been bothered by the fact that the first few people to respond did so without bothering to read the original post. One of them is mentioned in the following reply: Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 19:53 opterown wrote:On December 14 2013 16:23 Duncan wrote:On December 14 2013 14:36 BisuDagger wrote:GG On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I had seen a few cards that others made, but many of them were about players, not the units and abilities of the game. On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
It’s tempting to make cards complex and powerful, especially the legendary cards, but most existing MTG cards are fairly basic. Why is this card 8/8? Why is is it green and blue? Why is it a Foreigner type and not a creature? Why is there grammatical errors, and why is the wording inconsistent with traditional MTG? This card is the antithesis of everything I spoke about in the original post. Congratulations on winning the thread. oh relax, it's not like your wording is quite correct either ;p You're right, my cards aren't perfect. The difference here that I spent a lot of time creating something and asked for feedback, not for someone to disregard everything I said, say, "GG," and post a gag card that someone else made years ago.
You do realize that you're getting butthurt from a couple of jokes right? Lighten up already geez. Nobody cares if you try to offend them, it just makes YOU look bad.
About the post though, pretty cool stuff. I used to play MTG a lot around 12 years ago. It would be cool to have a sc2 deck ;D
The things that really stuck out to me were things you already changed and/or were pointed out.
The grammar also needs fixing.
On December 14 2013 19:19 ibraishome wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 19:16 Shinta) wrote:
Sorry, haven't played MTG in over 5 years before the term "reach" was created. Anyone care to explain what that is in old mtg terminology? The creature can block creatures with flying.
lol thx man.^^ that makes sense then.
|
On December 15 2013 03:34 Shinta) wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2013 01:37 Duncan wrote:On December 14 2013 19:34 Superiorwolf wrote:Really cool read, I liked what you did. You could do with losing the attitude when responding to people though I apologize if anyone was offended. I may have been bothered by the fact that the first few people to respond did so without bothering to read the original post. One of them is mentioned in the following reply: On December 14 2013 19:53 opterown wrote:On December 14 2013 16:23 Duncan wrote:On December 14 2013 14:36 BisuDagger wrote:GG On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I had seen a few cards that others made, but many of them were about players, not the units and abilities of the game. On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
It’s tempting to make cards complex and powerful, especially the legendary cards, but most existing MTG cards are fairly basic. Why is this card 8/8? Why is is it green and blue? Why is it a Foreigner type and not a creature? Why is there grammatical errors, and why is the wording inconsistent with traditional MTG? This card is the antithesis of everything I spoke about in the original post. Congratulations on winning the thread. oh relax, it's not like your wording is quite correct either ;p You're right, my cards aren't perfect. The difference here that I spent a lot of time creating something and asked for feedback, not for someone to disregard everything I said, say, "GG," and post a gag card that someone else made years ago. You do realize that you're getting butthurt from a couple of jokes right? Lighten up already geez. Nobody cares if you try to offend them, it just makes YOU look bad.
Well he said in the OP that he purposefully didn't make cards of players and didn't want to see them for various reasons. It's not unreasonable to get annoyed when someone comes in to your 3000+ word thread, types "GG" (which can easily be interpreted as "I win/I win the thread") and posts something you purposefully excluded because you thought it was dumb. Additionally, it can be frustrating when you say something like, "here's an example of a bad card," and then someone replies to the thread with, "hey that card is bad, you should change it," clearly signifying that they didn't read it. You know?
I like your signature btw!
|
On December 15 2013 05:59 Shebuha wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2013 03:34 Shinta) wrote:On December 15 2013 01:37 Duncan wrote:On December 14 2013 19:34 Superiorwolf wrote:Really cool read, I liked what you did. You could do with losing the attitude when responding to people though I apologize if anyone was offended. I may have been bothered by the fact that the first few people to respond did so without bothering to read the original post. One of them is mentioned in the following reply: On December 14 2013 19:53 opterown wrote:On December 14 2013 16:23 Duncan wrote:On December 14 2013 14:36 BisuDagger wrote:GG On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I had seen a few cards that others made, but many of them were about players, not the units and abilities of the game. On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
It’s tempting to make cards complex and powerful, especially the legendary cards, but most existing MTG cards are fairly basic. Why is this card 8/8? Why is is it green and blue? Why is it a Foreigner type and not a creature? Why is there grammatical errors, and why is the wording inconsistent with traditional MTG? This card is the antithesis of everything I spoke about in the original post. Congratulations on winning the thread. oh relax, it's not like your wording is quite correct either ;p You're right, my cards aren't perfect. The difference here that I spent a lot of time creating something and asked for feedback, not for someone to disregard everything I said, say, "GG," and post a gag card that someone else made years ago. You do realize that you're getting butthurt from a couple of jokes right? Lighten up already geez. Nobody cares if you try to offend them, it just makes YOU look bad. Well he said in the OP that he purposefully didn't make cards of players and didn't want to see them for various reasons. It's not unreasonable to get annoyed when someone comes in to your 3000+ word thread, types "GG" (which can easily be interpreted as "I win/I win the thread") and posts something you purposefully excluded because you thought it was dumb. Additionally, it can be frustrating when you say something like, "here's an example of a bad card," and then someone replies to the thread with, "hey that card is bad, you should change it," clearly signifying that they didn't read it. You know? I like your quote btw!
I understand why he could get annoyed, but my main point is that this: he's trying to not be mocked, but he's throwing up a bad impression which only goes precisely against his goal.
It would be better to laugh at jokes and maintain the thread as well as his composure.
And thanks. That's been my signature on forums since I first joined one back in my high school days =p
|
On December 15 2013 01:37 Duncan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 19:34 Superiorwolf wrote:Really cool read, I liked what you did. You could do with losing the attitude when responding to people though I apologize if anyone was offended. I may have been bothered by the fact that the first few people to respond did so without bothering to read the original post. One of them is mentioned in the following reply: Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 19:53 opterown wrote:On December 14 2013 16:23 Duncan wrote:On December 14 2013 14:36 BisuDagger wrote:GG On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I had seen a few cards that others made, but many of them were about players, not the units and abilities of the game. On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
It’s tempting to make cards complex and powerful, especially the legendary cards, but most existing MTG cards are fairly basic. Why is this card 8/8? Why is is it green and blue? Why is it a Foreigner type and not a creature? Why is there grammatical errors, and why is the wording inconsistent with traditional MTG? This card is the antithesis of everything I spoke about in the original post. Congratulations on winning the thread. oh relax, it's not like your wording is quite correct either ;p You're right, my cards aren't perfect. The difference here that I spent a lot of time creating something and asked for feedback, not for someone to disregard everything I said, say, "GG," and post a gag card that someone else made years ago. Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 18:23 Geiko wrote:Good job, once completed this could be a fun play You might want to note that your wording of "cloak" doesn't need to have the "except for detection" addition because your "detection" ability doesn't target creatures. Are you sure? I know that creatures with hexproof can still be sacrificed and such, but aren't they immune to spells that target all creatures, like Wrath of God? Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 19:51 Ramiz1989 wrote:
...There are definitely some balance changes I would like to see. For example, Swarm Host can have a higher cost, and can produce 2x 2/1 Zerg creatures with haste, since it is pretty obvious that Locusts are really strong a lot stronger than Zerglings or Broodlings that have the same stats here. I think that at one point locusts were 2/1, but I changed it for some reason. Maybe I thought too many of Zerg's creatures were expensive. Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 19:51 Ramiz1989 wrote:
Also, what somebody said already, I also think that Battle Cruiser should do 5 or 6 damage to the target creature or structure. Thanks! I just updated it. I also changed the Thor's ability, since it no longer has 250mm Cannons.
Wrath of God doesn't target creatures, so creatures with shroud or "can't be the target of spells or abilities" still dies to it.
If "detection" is "all creatures your opponents control lose cloak" then you don't need the "except for detection" line in your "cloak" description.
|
|
|
On December 15 2013 06:34 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2013 01:37 Duncan wrote:On December 14 2013 19:34 Superiorwolf wrote:Really cool read, I liked what you did. You could do with losing the attitude when responding to people though I apologize if anyone was offended. I may have been bothered by the fact that the first few people to respond did so without bothering to read the original post. One of them is mentioned in the following reply: On December 14 2013 19:53 opterown wrote:On December 14 2013 16:23 Duncan wrote:On December 14 2013 14:36 BisuDagger wrote:GG On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I had seen a few cards that others made, but many of them were about players, not the units and abilities of the game. On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
It’s tempting to make cards complex and powerful, especially the legendary cards, but most existing MTG cards are fairly basic. Why is this card 8/8? Why is is it green and blue? Why is it a Foreigner type and not a creature? Why is there grammatical errors, and why is the wording inconsistent with traditional MTG? This card is the antithesis of everything I spoke about in the original post. Congratulations on winning the thread. oh relax, it's not like your wording is quite correct either ;p You're right, my cards aren't perfect. The difference here that I spent a lot of time creating something and asked for feedback, not for someone to disregard everything I said, say, "GG," and post a gag card that someone else made years ago. On December 14 2013 18:23 Geiko wrote:Good job, once completed this could be a fun play You might want to note that your wording of "cloak" doesn't need to have the "except for detection" addition because your "detection" ability doesn't target creatures. Are you sure? I know that creatures with hexproof can still be sacrificed and such, but aren't they immune to spells that target all creatures, like Wrath of God? On December 14 2013 19:51 Ramiz1989 wrote:
...There are definitely some balance changes I would like to see. For example, Swarm Host can have a higher cost, and can produce 2x 2/1 Zerg creatures with haste, since it is pretty obvious that Locusts are really strong a lot stronger than Zerglings or Broodlings that have the same stats here. I think that at one point locusts were 2/1, but I changed it for some reason. Maybe I thought too many of Zerg's creatures were expensive. On December 14 2013 19:51 Ramiz1989 wrote:
Also, what somebody said already, I also think that Battle Cruiser should do 5 or 6 damage to the target creature or structure. Thanks! I just updated it. I also changed the Thor's ability, since it no longer has 250mm Cannons. Wrath of God doesn't target creatures, so creatures with shroud or "can't be the target of spells or abilities" still dies to it. If "detection" is "all creatures your opponents control lose cloak" then you don't need the "except for detection" line in your "cloak" description.
Cool, thanks for clearing that up. I'll change it.
Also, several people have pointed out that there are grammatical errors in my cards. Please let me know which ones have errors, so that I may correct them.
|
On December 15 2013 06:51 Onekobold wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2013 16:44 Shebuha wrote:
The wording is pretty consistent with actual MTG cards though. have you ever actually seen a magic card before?
Wow, you're an asshole. Couldn't you have been respectful like I was to you earlier? Maybe actually pointed out some things that are wrong so they could be fixed?
|
nice! stimpack was my favorite
|
On December 15 2013 07:04 Quakecomm wrote:
nice! stimpack was my favorite
Thanks. You're my favorite.
|
Just skimmed through, really cool idea and you should definitely keep going with this.
Edit: I'm dumb someone already raised my concern.
|
On December 15 2013 07:14 Navillus wrote:
Just skimmed through, really cool idea and you should definitely keep going with this.
Edit: I'm dumb someone already raised my concern.
You're not dumb. You explained the issue in a way that helped me realize the problem. It has now been corrected.
Thanks!
|
|
|
I think the idea behind this is nice. It looks like you've taken a lot of time and effort to do this, and it's pretty impressive for a solo effort. Flavor-wise, I think you've done a great job overall. There are some major issues design-wise though. With that in mind, I'll try to keep this post mostly constructive. However, I think you have a lot of issues with formatting, rules, design, and colors.
Note that your download link doesn't work, so I can only comment on what is in your actual post.
I'm going to go over your cards in order.
Zealot: You already explained why it's bad design, so I'm not going to go over it.
Shield has great potential as a keyword though. Keyword mechanics create a sense of unity across cards in a set. Once the idea is grasped for one card, a player will understand it for most of the other cards. If you look at any magic the gathering set, you will see each set has just a few keywords/mechanics used, and those keyword are used across a large number of cards. I think you already know this based on what you've come up with, so why am I saying this? It seems to me like you are missing on a great opportunity for a resonant theme in protoss by not putting more effort into shield. As a whole, your set seems to be overly concentrated on top-down design as well. Overall, I think the set would be better empathizing a select few themes/mechanics. You have done a good job with clock/detect/burrow, and that is by far the best. Structures are poorly implemented, but we'll get to that later.
Imagine shield formatted as the following ability:
Shield X ([cardname] enters the battlefield with X shield counters. If damage would be dealt to [card name], prevent damage equal to the number of shield counters on [card name], then remove that many shield counters. At the beginning of your upkeep, put a shield counter on [card name] if it has less than X shield counters.)
This is more versatile, but the biggest issue is that it is harder to grasp for newer players. There might be an easier way to implement it, I'm not sure. Flavor-wise, I think it works quite well. A straight +0/+1 might be easier, but I think as a whole the set is lacking mechanically.
For example, a zealot might have:
Shield 1 (Zealot enters the battlefield with 1 shield counter. If damage would be dealt to zealot, prevent damage equal to the number of shield counters on zealot, then remove that many shield counters. At the beginning of your upkeep, put a shield counter on zealot if it has less than 1 shield counters.)
and be a 2/2 for 2W or something like that.
Most protoss card would have shield 1 to keep things simple. Something like a nexus, mothership, or archon might have more.
For instance, a archon might have:
Shield 4 (Archon enters the battlefield with 4 shield counters. If damage would be dealt to archon, prevent damage equal to the number of shield counters on archon, then remove that many shield counters. At the beginning of your upkeep, put a shield counter on archon if it has less than 4 shield counters.)
and be a 5/1 creature.
The biggest issue is complexity. Also, it might be hard to balance as all protoss permanents would want the shield ability flavor-wise. This leaves less room for other mechanics and rules texts on common cards if you are designing your set seriously. Additionally, it would mean no vanilla creatures in protoss. Not sure if you really care about that though. It also requires protoss permanents to cost more to balance out for having shield. This somewhat fits flavorwise as protoss units are generally more expensive and more technologically advanced.
Overall, what I did for shield wouldn't ever be made due to it being too complex/time consuming. Something simpler as a mechanic would still be good though, perhaps as an activated ability, formatted as follows:
1: Shield X (Prevent the next X damage that would be dealt to [cardname] this turn. This ability can only be used once a turn.)
e.g., for a zealot might have:
1: Shield 1 (Prevent the next 1 damage that would be dealt to zealot this turn. This ability can only be used once a turn.)
and be a 2/2
while an archon could have
1: Shield 4 (Prevent the next 4 damage that would be dealt to archon this turn. This ability can only be used once a turn.)
and be a 5/1
Phoenix
Sorry for getting off on a tangent, moving on, we get to the phoenix. I know you used that as a "mistake" card, but the idea is good once again. Of course it should read "phoenix can only block creatures with flying" (like in vaporkin and similar creatures) and it should be "tap target non-flying creature." You might even add "destroy that creature if it's toughness is 1" to the second ability to represent phoenix attacking it, though that is probably unnecessary and extremely inelegant.
Structures
Eh, I get what you are trying to do mechanically here, but the whole thing is really poorly implemented. It doesn't serve a strong purpose mechanics-wise or flavor-wise. Additionally, it's a rules nightmare to implement a new card type that isn't a creature, but can block, and can be attacked. I can't imagine WotC getting behind something like that. Planeswalkers were an exception, you don't just make new card types for such a weak concept (no offense). I don't understand why you can block with buildings either btw.
I don't have a fix suggestion either, sorry. Maybe someone else will come up with something.The concept of structures is good though flavor-wise. Your execution just needs work.
Color wheel
Going through, the next few cards, there are tons of problems color-wise.
I understand the desire to limit each race to three colors, so that you can play each race independently. However, this is a terrible, terrible (damage) design decision. There are not enough cards in each color to justify the cycle you are trying even with your primary, secondary, tertiary color idea. Additionally, you completely ignore the color pie with several of your cards. It would be far better to construct it with some sort of limited drafting in mind as well, with a few mechanics in only a few colors. This will restrict players from doing too much race-crossing. For instance, shield could only be in W or G. Cloak could require U or G. Transform/flip cards (e.g. helion, viking, orbital?, planetary?) could be restricted to certain colors as well. The same could be true for morphing cards (e.g. baneling, broodlord). Even detection can be limited if you so choose.
I do agree that protoss is best represent by esper (WUB) and zerg is best represented by jund (GRB) for what it's worth. Terran is not really dega (WRB), but whatever. The real problem, again, is you don't have a complete cycle to use like you would in most normal set. Ravnica had the 10 guilds and alara had the 5 shards. Sets like Innistrad had tribes with werewolves (GR), humans (WG), zombies (UB), vampires (BR), spirits (UW). Despite this, you are trying to make a cycle. You do realize that not every set has to have a cycle though. In the latest block theros for instance, there are six main mechanics/themes: Heroic, Enchantments, Bestow, Devotion/Gods, Monstrosity, Scry. Enchantments, bestow, heroic, scry, and monstrosity are found in every color. Devotion/gods encourages mono-color. There are mild multi-color themes, but otherwise it's not too significant. As a set, it works extremely well without some sort of color cycle.
The problem with what you are doing is you are pigeonholing the entire race into 3 shards, and that just isn't doable without seriously messing up the color pie. You are seriously restricting what is possible by limiting each race to 3 colors. IMO, It would be much better to focus on designing good mechanics/themes first, and have those only in certain colors. This does mean you have to tighten up your mechanics/themes though. I realize this would entail a serious overhaul, and that's probably not something you want to do.
I did read what you wrote on colors, and I have a feeling that you are just going to ignore me. I think reading about the color-pie will be helpful for you regardless. It is a shame that you designed the whole thing with such a lack of regard for the color-pie, as that will keep any potential of this being a decent set away. I am going to point out color problems, though you are free to ignore it, as it's probably too late now.
Sentry
Forcefield is best represented by the magic ability detain imo. That being said, you don't want to go back to an old mechanic just for 1 card. What you have is OK, but why not just "tap target creature," as sentries can be used offensively and defensively. I would also reconsider your stance on giving reach to all the starcraft units that can hit air. Blue does not get reach. White very rarely gets reach, and it certainly wouldn't be for a case like this. Being a 1/1 reach is also really bad design-wise.
I'd personally drop reach, as I believe your idea of matching reach to units that can attack air in game is silly. It might be nice flavor, but it is very weak design. Additionally, even for flavor, when you think of sentries, their ability to attack air is not very significant.
Cloak, Burrow, and Detection
As I said before, I think this is brilliant. Note that you don't need the "other than detection" in the rules text of cloak, as detection does not target. Your work around for burrow is also very simple and elegant.
Ghost
It makes sense flavorwise, but mechanically there is too much going on. Also, it's a total nightmare in limited. I know you don't care about rarity, but as you have it, it's definitely rare lol. Cloak should probably require U to activate instead. The ghost is hard to do because it has so many abilities in-game. Also, there is no way a mono black creature randomly has reach. You could make the cloak cost G instead to remedy this. Personally I'd just drop reach though, as once again, the ability to hit air is not significant flavor-wise. Oh, also, it needs to read "Ghost deals 2 damage to...[]"
Dark Templar
This is mostly fine. I see no reason for the rules text aside from cloak. At best, killing psionic units is extremely weak flavor-wise. Costing 2UB is better if you decide to follow the color pie.
Overseer
The last ability is excellent! This is not red at all though. Having supply units generate mana is questionable flavor-wise also, but I'll go with it. The fact that it flies is not significant at all. Give it reach instead, and make the card green. That fits with the color pie and goes with the mana generation. The activated ability should require W instead of R.
warpgate
This is great flavor-wise, simple to grasp, and similar to another card. I like this card.
feedback
fine, not sure about casting cost, good flavor
stimpack
should be WR or RG, good idea though, strong flavor
nuclear strike
great
workers
great
burrowing claws
great
hatchery
great
reaper
great
widow mine
great, minor color issues if you ever decide to fix, good flavor, needs to read "widow mine deals 2 damage to....[]"
viking
You can't have costs for both sides of the flip, might as well start it off in fighter mode. The stats would make more sense as a 3/2 in the air, and 2/2 on the ground flavor-wise. That is terrible design-wise though. It's probably best to keep the stats as is, but instead of first strike give it:
"Whenever viking-fighter mode blocks a creature, viking-fighter mode deals 2 damage to that creature"
thor
fine
Battlecruiser
fine
raynor
fine...
tech lab
fine....
The last few were fine, though bland.
emp
fine...
No reason to just target one unit flavor-wise. Is the damage to artifacts supposed to represent something also? I get that most of your mechanical units are artifacts, but I don't really understand this part flavor-wise.
If you were to go with shield, you could do something like "Target opponent's creatures' activated abilities cannot be activated. Damage cannot be prevented this turn."
The first part represents the mana drain, and the second part represents the shield drain. Of course, your opponent can use activated abilities in response while emp is on the stack (due to super gosu micro reflexes)
Korhal
I like this a lot
Stalker
very good as well
oracle
I like this too
immortal
another good one
carrier
already been said, but doesn't work, the change is easy though
mothership
nice
zeratul
color issues
templar archives
ok
halluc
good
shakuras
great
zergling
great
mutalisk
should be B, not R
swarm host
great!!!
ultralisk
good
broodlord
good
kerrigan
good, colorpie issues with cloak, also should read "kerrigan deals x...[]"
creep
I prefer haste to first strike
neural
colorpie issue
zerus
good, although much better than the other lands if you take past sets into account
xel naga tower
good
artifact
good
I got bored towards the end, sorry if my comments aren't the most helpful. There are tons of problems with color. The biggest issue is still that you focused too much on top-down design rather than starting with a few mechanics and thinking more seriously about color distribution. Though that makes sense with your concept, you had the potential to create an actual serious set. Overall, you did well though. I really hope this post doesn't sound too negative or anything, as I liked it. You captured the flavor well. Some of the formatting and concepts needed work, but I feel like I understood most of your ideas.
|
|
|
On December 15 2013 20:10 Urth wrote:
I think the idea behind this is nice. It looks like you've taken a lot of time and effort to do this, and it's pretty impressive for a solo effort. Flavor-wise, I think you've done a great job overall. There are some major issues design-wise though. With that in mind, I'll try to keep this post mostly constructive. However, I think you have a lot of issues with formatting, rules, design, and colors.
ETC.
I'm into MTG on a very casual level (which incidentally means I enjoyed this thread, gjwp OP!), and I have to admit your advice about the color pie seems counter-intuitive to my newbish sensibilities.
Could you explain why splitting up every race between three colors at minimum is a good idea? Given that each race is looking at just about 15 creature cards total, and it's going to be impossible to achieve a perfect split of 5/5/5 while maintaining flavor, and each race will lean heavier on the color that is Zerglings (R), Marines (W?), Zealots (B?) because everyone needs bears... I imagine that players would be encouraged to monocolor their basic unit's color pretty hard, and discouraged from using some of the rarer combinations (black Terran for Ghosts).
Then again, most of your post comes down hard on the side of thinking about this as a legit MTG set, in which case I can only assume we're really talking about 250 cards and the versatility that that implies. Anyone's guess where those 250 cards come from, though. Campaign units, perhaps!
If my assumptions are incorrect, please enlighten me.
|
IMO
terran should be white/red
protoss should be blue/colorless
zerg should be black/green
|
oh yeah i think the stim pack should be changed .. it is not as threatening as the stim pack in sc IMO its not even worth casting like how emerge unscathed or PTE was worth to cast at least .. make it more worth it like adding double strike to the effect or something else
|
+ Show Spoiler +On December 15 2013 20:10 Urth wrote:
I think the idea behind this is nice. It looks like you've taken a lot of time and effort to do this, and it's pretty impressive for a solo effort. Flavor-wise, I think you've done a great job overall. There are some major issues design-wise though. With that in mind, I'll try to keep this post mostly constructive. However, I think you have a lot of issues with formatting, rules, design, and colors.
Note that your download link doesn't work, so I can only comment on what is in your actual post.
I'm going to go over your cards in order.
Zealot: You already explained why it's bad design, so I'm not going to go over it.
Shield has great potential as a keyword though. Keyword mechanics create a sense of unity across cards in a set. Once the idea is grasped for one card, a player will understand it for most of the other cards. If you look at any magic the gathering set, you will see each set has just a few keywords/mechanics used, and those keyword are used across a large number of cards. I think you already know this based on what you've come up with, so why am I saying this? It seems to me like you are missing on a great opportunity for a resonant theme in protoss by not putting more effort into shield. As a whole, your set seems to be overly concentrated on top-down design as well. Overall, I think the set would be better empathizing a select few themes/mechanics. You have done a good job with clock/detect/burrow, and that is by far the best. Structures are poorly implemented, but we'll get to that later.
Imagine shield formatted as the following ability:
Shield X ([cardname] enters the battlefield with X shield counters. If damage would be dealt to [card name], prevent damage equal to the number of shield counters on [card name], then remove that many shield counters. At the beginning of your upkeep, put a shield counter on [card name] if it has less than X shield counters.)
This is more versatile, but the biggest issue is that it is harder to grasp for newer players. There might be an easier way to implement it, I'm not sure. Flavor-wise, I think it works quite well. A straight +0/+1 might be easier, but I think as a whole the set is lacking mechanically.
For example, a zealot might have:
Shield 1 (Zealot enters the battlefield with 1 shield counter. If damage would be dealt to zealot, prevent damage equal to the number of shield counters on zealot, then remove that many shield counters. At the beginning of your upkeep, put a shield counter on zealot if it has less than 1 shield counters.)
and be a 2/2 for 2W or something like that.
Most protoss card would have shield 1 to keep things simple. Something like a nexus, mothership, or archon might have more.
For instance, a archon might have:
Shield 4 (Archon enters the battlefield with 4 shield counters. If damage would be dealt to archon, prevent damage equal to the number of shield counters on archon, then remove that many shield counters. At the beginning of your upkeep, put a shield counter on archon if it has less than 4 shield counters.)
and be a 5/1 creature.
The biggest issue is complexity. Also, it might be hard to balance as all protoss permanents would want the shield ability flavor-wise. This leaves less room for other mechanics and rules texts on common cards if you are designing your set seriously. Additionally, it would mean no vanilla creatures in protoss. Not sure if you really care about that though. It also requires protoss permanents to cost more to balance out for having shield. This somewhat fits flavorwise as protoss units are generally more expensive and more technologically advanced.
Overall, what I did for shield wouldn't ever be made due to it being too complex/time consuming. Something simpler as a mechanic would still be good though, perhaps as an activated ability, formatted as follows:
1: Shield X (Prevent the next X damage that would be dealt to [cardname] this turn. This ability can only be used once a turn.)
e.g., for a zealot might have:
1: Shield 1 (Prevent the next 1 damage that would be dealt to zealot this turn. This ability can only be used once a turn.)
and be a 2/2
while an archon could have
1: Shield 4 (Prevent the next 4 damage that would be dealt to archon this turn. This ability can only be used once a turn.)
and be a 5/1
Phoenix
Sorry for getting off on a tangent, moving on, we get to the phoenix. I know you used that as a "mistake" card, but the idea is good once again. Of course it should read "phoenix can only block creatures with flying" (like in vaporkin and similar creatures) and it should be "tap target non-flying creature." You might even add "destroy that creature if it's toughness is 1" to the second ability to represent phoenix attacking it, though that is probably unnecessary and extremely inelegant.
Structures
Eh, I get what you are trying to do mechanically here, but the whole thing is really poorly implemented. It doesn't serve a strong purpose mechanics-wise or flavor-wise. Additionally, it's a rules nightmare to implement a new card type that isn't a creature, but can block, and can be attacked. I can't imagine WotC getting behind something like that. Planeswalkers were an exception, you don't just make new card types for such a weak concept (no offense). I don't understand why you can block with buildings either btw.
I don't have a fix suggestion either, sorry. Maybe someone else will come up with something.The concept of structures is good though flavor-wise. Your execution just needs work.
Color wheel
Going through, the next few cards, there are tons of problems color-wise.
I understand the desire to limit each race to three colors, so that you can play each race independently. However, this is a terrible, terrible (damage) design decision. There are not enough cards in each color to justify the cycle you are trying even with your primary, secondary, tertiary color idea. Additionally, you completely ignore the color pie with several of your cards. It would be far better to construct it with some sort of limited drafting in mind as well, with a few mechanics in only a few colors. This will restrict players from doing too much race-crossing. For instance, shield could only be in W or G. Cloak could require U or G. Transform/flip cards (e.g. helion, viking, orbital?, planetary?) could be restricted to certain colors as well. The same could be true for morphing cards (e.g. baneling, broodlord). Even detection can be limited if you so choose.
I do agree that protoss is best represent by esper (WUB) and zerg is best represented by jund (GRB) for what it's worth. Terran is not really dega (WRB), but whatever. The real problem, again, is you don't have a complete cycle to use like you would in most normal set. Ravnica had the 10 guilds and alara had the 5 shards. Sets like Innistrad had tribes with werewolves (GR), humans (WG), zombies (UB), vampires (BR), spirits (UW). Despite this, you are trying to make a cycle. You do realize that not every set has to have a cycle though. In the latest block theros for instance, there are six main mechanics/themes: Heroic, Enchantments, Bestow, Devotion/Gods, Monstrosity, Scry. Enchantments, bestow, heroic, scry, and monstrosity are found in every color. Devotion/gods encourages mono-color. There are mild multi-color themes, but otherwise it's not too significant. As a set, it works extremely well without some sort of color cycle.
The problem with what you are doing is you are pigeonholing the entire race into 3 shards, and that just isn't doable without seriously messing up the color pie. You are seriously restricting what is possible by limiting each race to 3 colors. IMO, It would be much better to focus on designing good mechanics/themes first, and have those only in certain colors. This does mean you have to tighten up your mechanics/themes though. I realize this would entail a serious overhaul, and that's probably not something you want to do.
I did read what you wrote on colors, and I have a feeling that you are just going to ignore me. I think reading about the color-pie will be helpful for you regardless. It is a shame that you designed the whole thing with such a lack of regard for the color-pie, as that will keep any potential of this being a decent set away. I am going to point out color problems, though you are free to ignore it, as it's probably too late now.
Sentry
Forcefield is best represented by the magic ability detain imo. That being said, you don't want to go back to an old mechanic just for 1 card. What you have is OK, but why not just "tap target creature," as sentries can be used offensively and defensively. I would also reconsider your stance on giving reach to all the starcraft units that can hit air. Blue does not get reach. White very rarely gets reach, and it certainly wouldn't be for a case like this. Being a 1/1 reach is also really bad design-wise.
I'd personally drop reach, as I believe your idea of matching reach to units that can attack air in game is silly. It might be nice flavor, but it is very weak design. Additionally, even for flavor, when you think of sentries, their ability to attack air is not very significant.
Cloak, Burrow, and Detection
As I said before, I think this is brilliant. Note that you don't need the "other than detection" in the rules text of cloak, as detection does not target. Your work around for burrow is also very simple and elegant.
Ghost
It makes sense flavorwise, but mechanically there is too much going on. Also, it's a total nightmare in limited. I know you don't care about rarity, but as you have it, it's definitely rare lol. Cloak should probably require U to activate instead. The ghost is hard to do because it has so many abilities in-game. Also, there is no way a mono black creature randomly has reach. You could make the cloak cost G instead to remedy this. Personally I'd just drop reach though, as once again, the ability to hit air is not significant flavor-wise. Oh, also, it needs to read "Ghost deals 2 damage to...[]"
Dark Templar
This is mostly fine. I see no reason for the rules text aside from cloak. At best, killing psionic units is extremely weak flavor-wise. Costing 2UB is better if you decide to follow the color pie.
Overseer
The last ability is excellent! This is not red at all though. Having supply units generate mana is questionable flavor-wise also, but I'll go with it. The fact that it flies is not significant at all. Give it reach instead, and make the card green. That fits with the color pie and goes with the mana generation. The activated ability should require W instead of R.
warpgate
This is great flavor-wise, simple to grasp, and similar to another card. I like this card.
feedback
fine, not sure about casting cost, good flavor
stimpack
should be WR or RG, good idea though, strong flavor
nuclear strike
great
workers
great
burrowing claws
great
hatchery
great
reaper
great
widow mine
great, minor color issues if you ever decide to fix, good flavor, needs to read "widow mine deals 2 damage to....[]"
viking
You can't have costs for both sides of the flip, might as well start it off in fighter mode. The stats would make more sense as a 3/2 in the air, and 2/2 on the ground flavor-wise. That is terrible design-wise though. It's probably best to keep the stats as is, but instead of first strike give it:
"Whenever viking-fighter mode blocks a creature, viking-fighter mode deals 2 damage to that creature"
thor
fine
Battlecruiser
fine
raynor
fine...
tech lab
fine....
The last few were fine, though bland.
emp
fine...
No reason to just target one unit flavor-wise. Is the damage to artifacts supposed to represent something also? I get that most of your mechanical units are artifacts, but I don't really understand this part flavor-wise.
If you were to go with shield, you could do something like "Target opponent's creatures' activated abilities cannot be activated. Damage cannot be prevented this turn."
The first part represents the mana drain, and the second part represents the shield drain. Of course, your opponent can use activated abilities in response while emp is on the stack (due to super gosu micro reflexes)
Korhal
I like this a lot
Stalker
very good as well
oracle
I like this too
immortal
another good one
carrier
already been said, but doesn't work, the change is easy though
mothership
nice
zeratul
color issues
templar archives
ok
halluc
good
shakuras
great
zergling
great
mutalisk
should be B, not R
swarm host
great!!!
ultralisk
good
broodlord
good
kerrigan
good, colorpie issues with cloak, also should read "kerrigan deals x...[]"
creep
I prefer haste to first strike
neural
colorpie issue
zerus
good, although much better than the other lands if you take past sets into account
xel naga tower
good
artifact
good
I got bored towards the end, sorry if my comments aren't the most helpful. There are tons of problems with color. The biggest issue is still that you focused too much on top-down design rather than starting with a few mechanics and thinking more seriously about color distribution. Though that makes sense with your concept, you had the potential to create an actual serious set. Overall, you did well though. I really hope this post doesn't sound too negative or anything, as I liked it. You captured the flavor well. Some of the formatting and concepts needed work, but I feel like I understood most of your ideas.
Thank you for the reply. I appreciate that you considered what I was trying to do. Also, the download link should be working again.
I'll respond to a few of your key points:
Reach
I know that units attacks are not restricted in MTG as much as they are in Starcraft 2, but I feel like this is one of the most important mechanics in Starcraft 2, so I couldn't leave it out.
Shields
I really like your idea here. Unfortunately, as you said, it would require giving every Protoss creature and structure the new ability, which may not work well. I might try to implement this mechanic and see how it works out.
Structures
I feel like many who have replied didn't read what I wrote in the original post regarding this issue. As I said, I considered four different options, and I didn't want to implement a new mechanic. However, I felt that it was important that structures function in a similar fashion in MTG as they did in Starcraft 2 — buffing creatures, providing defense and also being vulnerable to attacking units.
Colors
Most of the replies have been addressing my color distribution. First of all, I think it's important to recognize that translating one game into another is not going to work perfectly. Starcraft 2 was not designed with the MTG color pie in mind. I touched on this in the original post, but I think there's only two viable approaches to translating Starcraft 2 units, abilities and structures into MTG cards:
I. Assign color to each card individually.
II. Assign color(s) to each race.
While the first choice would produce a set that is more true to MTG convention, I went with the second option in order to capture one of the fundamental concepts of Starcraft, which is that players choose only one of three distinct races. Perhaps I will attempt to translate the cards individually and see how it comes out.
On December 15 2013 22:59 pure.Wasted wrote:
Could you explain why splitting up every race between three colors at minimum is a good idea?
On December 12 2013 11:09 Duncan wrote:
I chose multiple colors for each race for two reasons: because each race has a diverse set of units and spells and to increase variety and deck creativity.
I know that decision does somewhat contradict the idea that races should be divided by color. However, I felt that allowing some color variation in each race could mitigate the issues caused by dividing the races by color.
As I mentioned above, I could have assigned each card a color individually, but I wanted the races to be united in color and separate from each other. On the other hand, I felt it would have been strange to have the High Templar and Dark Templar the same color, the Zergling and Queen the same color, and the Marine and Hellion the same color.
Also, what do I do with a creature whose flavor and function violate MTG convention? According to Starcraft 2, the marine is obviously a basic soldier that can attack flying units. According to MTG, soldiers are white, but attacking flying units is not a feature of common white creatures. This makes the Starcraft 2 Marine, by its very nature, a violation of MTG convention.
I may soon post an additional set with each card assigned color based solely on its function in Starcraft 2.
Edit: I've been trying to go assign color card-by-card, but I'm having a hard time. It feels so wrong to divide up a race into five colors. I'm abandoning this strategy.
I will, however, attempt to implement a new tri-color system based the suggestion that Protoss should be blue, white and black and that Zerg should be red, black and green. I'm not sure about Terran, but I'm leaning toward white, red and black.
|
|
|
On December 16 2013 10:46 Laertes wrote:
The style and simplicity of these cards is reminiscent of the pre-10 core sets. In other words, I really like these and they give me immense nostalgia.
P.S. Can you try to make a set for dota also?
I'm not familiar with DotA, but I made brief attempts at creating sets for Diablo 2 and Heroes of Might and Magic 3.
I found the Diablo 2 set much easier to make than Starcraft 2. Probably because there are many more creatures and spells to choose from in Diablo 2. Also, the stats and mechanics are more vague than they are in Starcraft 2. As an RPG, Diablo 2 lends itself to equipment, enchantments and attack spells — all of which fit well in MTG. I had fun with the runes and auras, but I did run into problems when I attempted to incorporate the hero classes into the game.
Heroes 3 was somewhat boring, as the game's units and mechanics are fairly simply and translated so seamlessly into MTG that there was almost no point in doing it. The only interesting mechanics I encountered were retaliation the heroes' secondary skills: eagle eye, logistics, leadership, estates, necromancy, etc. However, deciding which of the 28 skills to include was overwhelming, which is another reason why I abandoned it.
I did try making my own Heroes 3 board game using the Magic Set Editor. You can view it by clicking the download link above.
|
Looks like a project you've put a lot of work into, Duncan. Pretty nifty concept, I look forward to seeing it progress as you tweak it. Thanks for the link to the .zip with the images, could be fun to print out and try a game!
|
On December 16 2013 13:57 krazykoz wrote:
Looks like a project you've put a lot of work into, Duncan. Pretty nifty concept, I look forward to seeing it progress as you tweak it. Thanks for the link to the .zip with the images, could be fun to print out and try a game!
Printing them would be really fun, but I don't know anything about creating material things. 
Here's the Zealot, Archon and Nexus with the shield ability as Urth suggested:
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
I really like this idea, but it makes the cards seem a lot more complicated due to the massive wall of text this mechanic requires. I also wonder whether or not weak Protoss creatures like the Probe and Observer should have shield — yet another issue in which Starcraft conflicts with MTG!
You'll also notice that the Nexus is now an artifact structure. I changed the way structures are labeled. Although most suggestions have been to make structures into creatures, I still believe that creating a new card type is the best route to take.
Anyway, let me know what you guys think.
|
Isn't your shield the exact same as normal hitpoints apart from it regenerating slower, so basically the exact opposite of what Protoss shields do?
Edit: So I'd change the "at the beginning of your upkeep" to "at the beginning of each combat and end step". That way shields regenerate faster (because twice per turn, compared to the once of HP).
|
On December 16 2013 15:53 Big J wrote:
Isn't your shield the exact same as normal hitpoints apart from it regenerating slower, so basically the exact opposite of what Protoss shields do? I don't think you can consider this too literally, considering that all Magic creatures regenerate in most cases.
|
I think this is a pretty basic Marine in the colour White.
![[image loading]](http://www.cardkingdom.com/media/images/products/standard/49025_1.jpg)
I'd argue Terran is Green in addition to Red and White because:
Green is the colour of regeneration (Medic/Medivac, Combat Healing.)
Stim Pack could be multiple cards, some would say Blood Lust, which is Red, but it could also be Giant Growth/Berserk.
Either way it's buffing creatures, which is most common to Green.
Mule could be Dark Ritual, but Mana Ramp in general lies with Green. Red could also posses this ability in the likes of Orc Lumberjack, sacrificing your Lands for a short term mana boost, as we all know, Mules mine out your mineral line really fast!
Concussive Shell, in magic terms would be: Any creature damaged by Marauder, is tapped and does not untap during controllers next untap step. This is an ability that both Green and Blue posses, but the Marauder is very much a big fatty creature and not at all a fragile Blue one.
Where you'd really want to point at other colours is perhaps the Ghost and the Raven, but even then, Auto Turret is a token creature Green/White, since it's defensive. PDD is protective, very much White, could be a Counterspell. Seeker Missile is explosion=Red, even if it is on a timer. EMP doesn't have to be Ghost, but could be a card in itself. Also it doesn't have to be a counterspell, could be disenchant, removal of the unnatural. And for cloakies, White do have Shadow.
You could confine it to 3 colours, though it's probably not ideal to limit cool card flavours because of it.
|
|
|
Duncan, can I post some cards I created so we can compare notes? I stole from you and Urth shamelessly in some areas, but went my own way in others.
If you'd rather I didn't in your thread, let me know!
On December 15 2013 20:10 Urth wrote:
Structures
Eh, I get what you are trying to do mechanically here, but the whole thing is really poorly implemented. It doesn't serve a strong purpose mechanics-wise or flavor-wise. Additionally, it's a rules nightmare to implement a new card type that isn't a creature, but can block, and can be attacked. I can't imagine WotC getting behind something like that. Planeswalkers were an exception, you don't just make new card types for such a weak concept (no offense). I don't understand why you can block with buildings either btw.
I just made structures into Enchant Lands, ie.
Refinery (3) - Enchant land
Enchanted land is a 0/3 terran creature with defender. It’s still a land.
Whenever this land is assigned as a blocker, you may draw a card.
To get around the fact that they can't be targeted, each race should have ample destroy enchants or destroy critters. Problem solved, I think!
I ended up doing WRB for Terran. Nuke is a board wipe, Snipe is an instant destroy and the Science Vessel has a BBB spell that allows it to take -X/-X off swarms of creatures. All quite black.
|
On December 16 2013 15:53 Big J wrote:
Isn't your shield the exact same as normal hitpoints apart from it regenerating slower, so basically the exact opposite of what Protoss shields do?
Edit: So I'd change the "at the beginning of your upkeep" to "at the beginning of each combat and end step". That way shields regenerate faster (because twice per turn, compared to the once of HP).
I've updated the shield ability so that shield counters regenerate at the beginning of each combat step. I'm not sure if this the correct way to go about it, but the idea is that you must destroy a Protoss unit's shields all at once, otherwise they regenerate.
So, for example, if a player used an ability to deal 1 damage to a creature with shield 1 during the main phase, the shield counters would regenerate at the beginning of combat step.
Likewise, if a creature with first strike dealt 1 damage to a creature with shield 1 during the first strike combat damage step, the shield counters would regenerate before the normal combat damage step.
On December 16 2013 17:25 ejozl wrote:I think this is a pretty basic Marine in the colour White. + Show Spoiler +
True, but this and every other white creature with reach date back to the late 90s or early 2000s. Oh well, at least there's a precedent.
On December 16 2013 17:25 ejozl wrote:I'd argue Terran is Green in addition to Red and White because:
Green is the colour of regeneration (Medic/Medivac, Combat Healing.)
Stim Pack could be multiple cards, some would say Blood Lust, which is Red, but it could also be Giant Growth/Berserk.
Either way it's buffing creatures, which is most common to Green.
Mule could be Dark Ritual, but Mana Ramp in general lies with Green. Red could also posses this ability in the likes of Orc Lumberjack, sacrificing your Lands for a short term mana boost, as we all know, Mules mine out your mineral line really fast!
Concussive Shell, in magic terms would be: Any creature damaged by Marauder, is tapped and does not untap during controllers next untap step. This is an ability that both Green and Blue posses, but the Marauder is very much a big fatty creature and not at all a fragile Blue one.
Where you'd really want to point at other colours is perhaps the Ghost and the Raven, but even then, Auto Turret is a token creature Green/White, since it's defensive. PDD is protective, very much White, could be a Counterspell. Seeker Missile is explosion=Red, even if it is on a timer. EMP doesn't have to be Ghost, but could be a card in itself. Also it doesn't have to be a counterspell, could be disenchant, removal of the unnatural. And for cloakies, White do have Shadow.
You could confine it to 3 colours, though it's probably not ideal to limit cool card flavours because of it.
I think your assessment of the colors is generally accurate, but I think that no matter what color is assigned to a race, there's going to be problems.
I like your idea for the MULE. Perhaps I will change Command Center's ability to what is now Scanner Sweep and give MULE its own card.
I appreciate the suggestion, and it's a good concept, but I'm more fond of returning cards to the owner's hand and having them pay to play it again, as there are numerous mechanics that are triggered by creatures entering the battlefield. I also like to avoid exiling if possible, but that's just personal preference.
On December 16 2013 22:29 pure.Wasted wrote:
Duncan, can I post some cards I created so we can compare notes? I stole from you and Urth shamelessly in some areas, but went my own way in others.
If you'd rather I didn't in your thread, let me know!
Honestly, I'd like to avoid having this thread become an opportunity for everyone to share their cards. I think that if you have a set worth sharing, perhaps simply provide a link to the .zip file. On the other hand, I have no idea what I'm talking about, so maybe it would be better if you shared a few of your cards (with spoiler tags) and explained their ideas.
Sorry if I offended you, but I don't want this thread to become a dumping ground for poorly-made cards or work that has already been circulated on the web.
+ Show Spoiler +On December 15 2013 20:10 Urth wrote:
Structures
Eh, I get what you are trying to do mechanically here, but the whole thing is really poorly implemented. It doesn't serve a strong purpose mechanics-wise or flavor-wise. Additionally, it's a rules nightmare to implement a new card type that isn't a creature, but can block, and can be attacked. I can't imagine WotC getting behind something like that. Planeswalkers were an exception, you don't just make new card types for such a weak concept (no offense). I don't understand why you can block with buildings either btw.
On December 16 2013 22:29 pure.Wasted wrote:
I just made structures into Enchant Lands, ie.
Refinery (3) - Enchant land
Enchanted land is a 0/3 terran creature with defender. It’s still a land.
Whenever this land is assigned as a blocker, you may draw a card.
To get around the fact that they can't be targeted, each race should have ample destroy enchants or destroy critters. Problem solved, I think!
I really like this idea, but unfortunately it doesn't solve the issue of how to allow units to destroy structures, as they do in Starcraft. However, I think I'll assess my Refinery, Assimilator and Extractor to incorporate your idea of enchanting lands, if that's alright.
|
On December 17 2013 10:13 Duncan wrote:Honestly, I'd like to avoid having this thread become an opportunity for everyone to share their cards. I think that if you have a set worth sharing, perhaps simply provide a link to the .zip file. On the other hand, I have no idea what I'm talking about, so maybe it would be better if you shared a few of your cards (with spoiler tags) and explained their ideas.
Sorry if I offended you, but I don't want this thread to become a dumping ground for poorly-made cards or work that has already been circulated on the web.
I can respect that. Here's the zip: http://www.megafileupload.com/en/file/479468/SCMTG-set-zip.html
There are 68 cards in the set. Almost 1/2 of them are Terran, and about 3/4 of the rest are Zerg. Like you guys talked about, I split the races up into three colors: WRB for Terran, RBG for Zerg, UWG for Protoss. Terran can be monocolored as white or red, but there aren't enough black creatures yet to support monoblack Terran. Zerg has the basic tools to be monocolored as any of its three colors. Following Urth's advice, I made a conscious effort to stay within the bounds of what the colors would allow. So the white Battlecruiser doesn't destroy or deal damage, it exiles. That sort of stuff.
I took your concepts of Cloak/Burrow/Detection and Shield. I also took Evolution for Zerg, which was invented by someone I don't know for SC MTG cards I came across randomly while pic hunting. Several cards are based closely on yours (Broodlord, Immortal). Stole Horace Warfield's +1/+1 and Persist from another card I randomly came across. Stalker's ability is based on a suggestion earlier in this thread... and I think that takes care of most of my plagiarizing.
Here are some cards I was particularly happy with:
+ Show Spoiler +![[image loading]](http://s22.postimg.org/it9847929/Marine.jpg) Gave Marines, Marauders, and Firebats the same Stimpack ability. ![[image loading]](http://s22.postimg.org/s4va15llt/Mutalisk.jpg) Created the Ambush keyword. ![[image loading]](http://s13.postimg.org/a2z8iw7tj/Baneling.jpg) You can either play a Baneling from your hand on your turn, or, in a vague approximation of Baneling land-mines, you can morph one in using Evolution, give it Haste, and tap it to kill a bunch of attacking Marines who thought they were safe. ![[image loading]](http://s23.postimg.org/45f8ew62j/Lurker.jpg) Gave Roaches, Lurkers, and Widow Mines burrow. Lurkers and WM have to have paid their Burrow cost this turn to attack or block. ![[image loading]](http://s27.postimg.org/rgcyh61jn/Endless_Eggression.jpg) My version of Overrun, this is meant to work along with Burrow. Burrow usually requires tapping, making it a good way of getting a blocking creature out alive if it was going to die. With this, Burrow becomes an offensive tool because you can suddenly tap all of your Burrowing critters to make them indestructible, then untap them and attack with them. It's an approximation of Roach burrow micro. ![[image loading]](http://s22.postimg.org/3ykmq0zhd/Minefield.jpg) Spider Mines as an instant. Just realized that the wording at the bottom is ambiguous, it's meant to be "R: +1 token, once per Vulture you control." ![[image loading]](http://s22.postimg.org/bjnnlhuht/Science_Vessel.jpg) Science Vessel as a neat W/B card that works in both a mono-white and a mono-black Terran deck. The Raven is a white detector and the Orbital Command is a red detector, so each color has a mode of detection. ![[image loading]](http://s22.postimg.org/xubilgrs1/Overlord.jpg) Ovie. ![[image loading]](http://s8.postimg.org/rnsita1z9/Arcturus_Mengsk_Emperor.jpg) I think I nailed Arcturus's flavor down pretty well with this. And just for fun: ![[image loading]](http://s23.postimg.org/tkhw60sl7/Field_Orders.jpg) Aka marine splitting! ![[image loading]](http://s16.postimg.org/mv5pghk45/Excellent_Timing.jpg) Aka timing attack! I also tried to work more standard MTG abilities into the set where possible/appropriate: ie the Medivac can give bio creatures lifelink, the High Templar has scry.
I really like this idea, but unfortunately it doesn't solve the issue of how to allow units to destroy structures, as they do in Starcraft. However, I think I'll assess my Refinery, Assimilator and Extractor to incorporate your idea of enchanting lands, if that's alright.
Considering I was totally inspired by you and Urth, yeeah, you're more than welcome to take anything you like.
I still think there are tons of ways of achieving what you're trying to do using this method that are more neat. Give target creature -2/-2, destroy target creature, destroy target creature with defender, fight target creature with defender, destroy target enchantment, destroy target land. So units can totally destroy structures, the only thing that's missing is other units being able to save structures, but that's fixable too with more complex instructions, "...unless opponent pays 3" or "...unless opponent sacrifices a creature with converted mana cost equal or higher to target enchantment."
Feedback very welcome!!
|
On December 17 2013 11:16 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2013 10:13 Duncan wrote:Honestly, I'd like to avoid having this thread become an opportunity for everyone to share their cards. I think that if you have a set worth sharing, perhaps simply provide a link to the .zip file. On the other hand, I have no idea what I'm talking about, so maybe it would be better if you shared a few of your cards (with spoiler tags) and explained their ideas.
Sorry if I offended you, but I don't want this thread to become a dumping ground for poorly-made cards or work that has already been circulated on the web. I can respect that. Here's the zip: http://www.megafileupload.com/en/file/479468/SCMTG-set-zip.htmlThere are 68 cards in the set. Almost 1/2 of them are Terran, and about 3/4 of the rest are Zerg. Like you guys talked about, I split the races up into three colors: WRB for Terran, RBG for Zerg, UWG for Protoss. Terran can be monocolored as white or red, but there aren't enough black creatures yet to support monoblack Terran. Zerg has the basic tools to be monocolored as any of its three colors. Following Urth's advice, I made a conscious effort to stay within the bounds of what the colors would allow. So the white Battlecruiser doesn't destroy or deal damage, it exiles. That sort of stuff. I took your concepts of Cloak/Burrow/Detection and Shield. I also took Evolution for Zerg, which was invented by someone I don't know for SC MTG cards I came across randomly while pic hunting. Several cards are based closely on yours (Broodlord, Immortal). Stole Horace Warfield's +1/+1 and Persist from another card I randomly came across. Stalker's ability is based on a suggestion earlier in this thread... and I think that takes care of most of my plagiarizing. Here are some cards I was particularly happy with: + Show Spoiler +Gave Marines, Marauders, and Firebats the same Stimpack ability. Created the Ambush keyword. You can either play a Baneling from your hand on your turn, or, in a vague approximation of Baneling land-mines, you can morph one in using Evolution, give it Haste, and tap it to kill a bunch of attacking Marines who thought they were safe. Gave Roaches, Lurkers, and Widow Mines burrow. Lurkers and WM have to have paid their Burrow cost this turn to attack or block. My version of Overrun, this is meant to work along with Burrow. Burrow usually requires tapping, making it a good way of getting a blocking creature out alive if it was going to die. With this, Burrow becomes an offensive tool because you can suddenly tap all of your Burrowing critters to make them indestructible, then untap them and attack with them. It's an approximation of Roach burrow micro. Spider Mines as an instant. Just realized that the wording at the bottom is ambiguous, it's meant to be "R: +1 token, once per Vulture you control." Science Vessel as a neat W/B card that works in both a mono-white and a mono-black Terran deck. The Raven is a white detector and the Orbital Command is a red detector, so each color has a mode of detection. Ovie. I think I nailed Arcturus's flavor down pretty well with this. And just for fun: Aka marine splitting! Aka timing attack! I also tried to work more standard MTG abilities into the set where possible/appropriate: ie the Medivac can give bio creatures lifelink, the High Templar has scry. Show nested quote +I really like this idea, but unfortunately it doesn't solve the issue of how to allow units to destroy structures, as they do in Starcraft. However, I think I'll assess my Refinery, Assimilator and Extractor to incorporate your idea of enchanting lands, if that's alright.
Considering I was totally inspired by you and Urth, yeeah, you're more than welcome to take anything you like. I still think there are tons of ways of achieving what you're trying to do using this method that are more neat. Give target creature -2/-2, destroy target creature, destroy target creature with defender, fight target creature with defender, destroy target enchantment, destroy target land. So units can totally destroy structures, the only thing that's missing is other units being able to save structures, but that's fixable too with more complex instructions, "...unless opponent pays 3" or "...unless opponent sacrifices a creature with converted mana cost equal or higher to target enchantment." Feedback very welcome!!
Not bad at all! Here's a few thoughts I have on your cards:
1. Your evolution mechanic is great. I never thought of incorporating the name of the pre-evolved creature into a keyword.
2. Creating cards like Close Quarters Carnage and Defender's Advantage is something I toyed with. I added a bunch of cards like Cheese, High Ground, etc., but I felt like this was too arbitrary, as I wanted to capture the essence of Starcraft 2. However, if the goal is to create a complete set, then it would probably be necessary to include cards like these in order to make a more well-rounded set.
3. The way you added Stimpack to Terran infantry seems simple and effective.
4. I noticed that you included some cards from Starcraft and Brood War. There are definitely some great potential cards that I couldn't make by going with Starcraft 2. Again, it's probably a better choice to create cards using concepts from all of the Starcraft games. I guess I'm realizing how much I have prioritized staying true to Starcraft over creating a viable set.
In other news, I've been making some changes to many of my cards. I don't think I'll be going back and updating the original post, but I will be updating the downloadable archive of card images.
Here's a few of the cards I've changed:
Zergling has been changed to a spell similar to Dragon Fodder.
+ Show Spoiler +
The Hatchery and Queen have been changed to incorporate a new larva mechanic. I want to include more cards that use larva, but I'm not sure if this is possible. If anyone has any suggestions, please feel free to share them.
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
I also redistributed the colors based on earlier suggestions. Zerg underwent the most color changes, with its smaller creatures being red, flying creatures being black and larger creatures being green.
I deleted Proxy Barracks, Four Gate and Six Pool, as I should have refrained from dabbling in concepts outside of those hard-wired into the game.
I revised the Bunker based on the card proposed by Zechs in his set, which can be seen here.
+ Show Spoiler +
Finally, I'm not currently satisfied with the shield mechanic. Although it may function in a way that accurately represents Starcraft, I feel as though it is too complicated. If anyone has a suggestion on how I can simplify it, your help is welcome.
|
Excellent timing should be ee han timing
|
1. would u be able to send me those some how so i can use them.
2. I think terran should be white zerg should be black and protoss should be blue.
3.if its cool with u would u email me those cards or something so i can use them with my friends id love to test them or what not. Id use them on magic workstation with them 2.
4. kickass man so far what ive read makes sense other then the color u picked for zerg and terran. I say that because i only play mono decks but if this works out and the dual lands and stuff work for me i might go dual color but other then that man keep them coming.
5. Id think itd be cool if u did warcraft 3 the frozen throne and diablo.
message me on here if its okay with u for me to use the cards as i would LOVE to and LITTERALLY KILL to use them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Bad-Zealot-Example.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Bad-Phoenix-Example.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Engineering-Bay.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Spire.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Pylon.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Sentry.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Ghost.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Dark-Templar.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Overseer.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Warpgate-Technology.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Feedback.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Stimpack.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Reaper.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Widow-Mine.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Viking-Fighter-Mode1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Thor.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Battlecruiser.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Jim-Raynor.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Tech-Lab.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/EMP.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Korhal.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Stalker.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Oracle.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Immortal.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Carrier.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Mothership.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Zeratul.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Templar-Archives.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Hallucination.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Shakuras.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Zergling.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Mutalisk.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Swarm-Host.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Ultralisk.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Brood-Lord.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Kerrigan-Queen-of-Blades.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Creep.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Neural-Parasite.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Zerus.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Xelnaga-Tower.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Xelnaga-Artifact.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/gDSQs.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4TIop.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zYsOH.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Zealot-Version-2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Archon-Version-2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Nexus-Version-2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Hatch-Zerglings-Version-2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Hatchery-Version-2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Queen-Version-2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dailyduncan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Bunker-Version-2.jpg)
