What I learned from Magic the Gathering 1/10
(This was written somewhere around 27-25 days ago, and I have decided to update it periodically, likely about 10 cards at a time.
Thanks!)
So I was really, really stressed out a few nights ago - and I got so stressed I wanted to leave the house and think about something else - So I went to my brother and was like "Hey, wanna go to Target just to look?"
(Target is a big store, just so anyone who doesn't know has context.)
So we went, I bought some things - He wanted some Cadbury eggs, and I wanted to prove to him that valentine hearts are not all the same flavor - and I also bought some seltzer and cheese sticks.
So we went, I bought some things - He wanted some Cadbury eggs, and I wanted to prove to him that valentine hearts are not all the same flavor - and I also bought some seltzer and cheese sticks.
At checkout - there's certain lanes that have stuff for sale on the side that's not candy - and usually there is one at Target that has card game stuff - which I have loved ever since I was a little kid.
They had these -
They had these -
I impulse-bought two of em', then spent the rest of the night looking through all my magic cards, which I have not messed with much since covid.
I love magic, but the community of players is mostly people I don't get along with - and now that I've come out as trans, I don't immediately fancy having to interact in a public setting with nerds from the south for hours + I hate the design ideals and art direction most magic sets have been going for years.
I have designed my own magic set before, and had my brother do the art - and printed it, then drafted it - and by doing that I can conclusively say that it is hard to design magic cards - but I really love the basic ideas, and have a lot of opinions on magic design because of that experience.
I got to thinking: I really really love certain cards, some for art, some for design, some for those factors in tandem, and others because I have specific memories attached to them.
So I thought that I'd fill the binders with cards that were my favorite - then talk about them here in the context of game design, and how I would take the design elements or have taken the design elements and applied them to RPGS.
For anyone who knows Magic - The decks I played were Bogles, Burn, 8-Rack, and SnapDelverThing.
So I thought that I'd fill the binders with cards that were my favorite - then talk about them here in the context of game design, and how I would take the design elements or have taken the design elements and applied them to RPGS.
For anyone who knows Magic - The decks I played were Bogles, Burn, 8-Rack, and SnapDelverThing.
Ok - Here we go!
From a game design perspective - this card is an example of a removal spell - something that kills stuff or destroys creatures - which is a design space that has been thoroughly explored in Magic.
Spells that restrict or outright kill things in RPGs are often limited in scope, or higher level - but in magic it is relatively cheap to kill a creature, not a player - and this is something interesting to me - as I often enjoy the style of removal that doesn't kill but limits, traps, imprisons, or otherwise inhibits a creature.
It is just more fun and interesting from me to go like "Ok, I play this and it puts your princess/giant lizard/yeti/vampire in prison"
Because then, if the other player has a way to destroy this card, the Oubliette, then their creature is released, and they get the enchantments and equipment they went in with.
It is a lot more efficient to just play a card and go "ok, I send your owl/devil/wolf/banshee to the graveyard"
But I don't find it as interesting - I like killing my own creatures - that is more interesting because then you had to have some kind of like plan or reason, but just trading one card for the opponents one card is boring - this way, with Oubliette, it is much more of a story, and a back and forth that makes sense in a fun/interesting way,
There are 5 of these, each takes 2 of the respective five colors to attach, and each grants different abilities to the creature it is equipped to.
But I don't find it as interesting - I like killing my own creatures - that is more interesting because then you had to have some kind of like plan or reason, but just trading one card for the opponents one card is boring - this way, with Oubliette, it is much more of a story, and a back and forth that makes sense in a fun/interesting way,
So, in Magic, things you can do on your own turn are sorcery speed - you cannot do them on the opponent's turn.
If you look at the equip part of this card, you can see that it says "Equip only as a sorcery"
So that means you have to pay the cost, on your turn, and have a creature - then it gets equipped.
So that means you have to pay the cost, on your turn, and have a creature - then it gets equipped.
The other speed is instant speed - which can be done on your opponent's turn which basically is the biggest part of the game for me.
This means as long as you have the mana ready - you can do this move as a trick - you can hold the mana and make them contend with what you might do with the mana.
This means as long as you have the mana ready - you can do this move as a trick - you can hold the mana and make them contend with what you might do with the mana.
I love this collar - because you can basically toss it around to where it is most useful - another of the artifacts like this, Cranial Plating - was much more powerful, but I like this one best, it feels fair and interesting and fun and tricky - all of which I want.
I love abilities in RPGS that are like this - I like things that you can do in response, as a result of - I favor abilities that can be held and used to alter the situation on the fly instead of in initiative order.
Which I like.
I like when game decisions in all kinds of games, but especially RPGs, make you decide that a resource has multiple kinds of values - I like the fact that a lantern can be a firebomb or a light source - I like spells that transfer health to others - because decisions like those force people to go "long term? Short term? Am I the important one? Is this useful to do right now, or should I wait for a better context?"
The card is wonderful and simple - it is an expensive cost for a mediocre and boring creature - but the cost can be waved through making deckbuilding and gameplay decisions, and that is good, both for the breadth of the game, but also for the design space it can occupy in specific environments.
The card is wonderful and simple - it is an expensive cost for a mediocre and boring creature - but the cost can be waved through making deckbuilding and gameplay decisions, and that is good, both for the breadth of the game, but also for the design space it can occupy in specific environments.
I very much enjoy "boring equipment" in RPG games for the same reasons.
A boring item can be used in many ways - and all boring items are not boring when you start to apply them to the interesting situations, especially when there are multiple options.
Similar to the last card - this artifact introduces new resources.
A boring item can be used in many ways - and all boring items are not boring when you start to apply them to the interesting situations, especially when there are multiple options.
The little lightning bolt card is energy - which is used for specific effects on certain cards, and gets to go to it's own little special reservoir.
So this card is cool for three reasons:
A: It is a little engine that converts artifacts into something else, something more than just what the artifact is - now artifacts give you energy as well.
B: You can use the energy you already have, or will get over time - into an extra turn, but this gets the heart removed - so then you won't get more energy from it.
C: It is a mechanical heart used by a legendary lich as a phylactery - and the art kicks ass, the lich kicks ass, the fantasy race the lich is kicks ass - the energy concept being used in multiple ways kicks ass. (Lightning mages use it for lightning, nature mages use it to grow wildlife, death mages use it to power undeath, etc)
From an RPG perspective - this is how I like magic items to work. They alter or add onto something you already do - like fight, run, look, ETC - but add a resource, ability, or consequence - and they become a little engine that warps your decisions - and often have limitations or setbacks that make diminishing returns a very real thing.
They also need to feel fun but still be a puzzle with multiple solutions or applications.
This card is cool because it costs a lot of mana, or a little, or none at all - and the more mana you spend the bigger it is and the more ballistas it can launch - but when it launches ballistas it gets less big.
C: It is a mechanical heart used by a legendary lich as a phylactery - and the art kicks ass, the lich kicks ass, the fantasy race the lich is kicks ass - the energy concept being used in multiple ways kicks ass. (Lightning mages use it for lightning, nature mages use it to grow wildlife, death mages use it to power undeath, etc)
From an RPG perspective - this is how I like magic items to work. They alter or add onto something you already do - like fight, run, look, ETC - but add a resource, ability, or consequence - and they become a little engine that warps your decisions - and often have limitations or setbacks that make diminishing returns a very real thing.
They also need to feel fun but still be a puzzle with multiple solutions or applications.
Also you can make it bigger, but that costs a lot of mana, which means you are encouraged to put all your eggs in one basket and try to make it really big from your initial investment, but you an also play it early and grow it later.
It uses some interesting math - if you pay 8 it comes into play with 4 +1/+1 counters - but to grow it to a 4/4 from a 1/1 if it is already in play, you would need 12 mana.
It also is interesting because you can use it to shoot stuff after it blocks, but then it will deal less damage to whatever it blocks - and the shooting can be instant speed - so this sucker can shoot things in response to things happening.
It uses some interesting math - if you pay 8 it comes into play with 4 +1/+1 counters - but to grow it to a 4/4 from a 1/1 if it is already in play, you would need 12 mana.
It also is interesting because you can use it to shoot stuff after it blocks, but then it will deal less damage to whatever it blocks - and the shooting can be instant speed - so this sucker can shoot things in response to things happening.
This means stuff like what I mentioned before - like a imprisoning card - well, Walking Ballista is a interesting case in that instance.
If I try to trap it, the opponent might just shoot all of it at me, or a creature I control - If they let it get imprisoned, then they have some plan to free it, or have some need to make it bigger later when they can release it.
It leads to a lot of thought about things like "what can they do with this" which is cool.
If I try to trap it, the opponent might just shoot all of it at me, or a creature I control - If they let it get imprisoned, then they have some plan to free it, or have some need to make it bigger later when they can release it.
It leads to a lot of thought about things like "what can they do with this" which is cool.
From an RPG perspective - this is like creatures that have consequences for killing or fighting them - "well, you killed the zombie, but you can taste their black and noxious blood on your palate"
It also reflects the ideas of putting lots of oomph into one thing - or starting small and waiting and spending more later when you know what to do or what you are actually needing the abilities for.
It also reflects the ideas of putting lots of oomph into one thing - or starting small and waiting and spending more later when you know what to do or what you are actually needing the abilities for.
I like the concept that waiting, or bring patient can be damning, or rewarding - it is very realistic.
I also just love creatures that are a dilemma, and not just something to hit.
Opportunity costs.
So is this card worth discarding another card?
Is the stats commiserate with the expected value of whatever you are discarding?
Is the stats commiserate with the expected value of whatever you are discarding?
This is a good question - and the kind of question I like.
It leads to stuff like - "Which cards do I need?" and "Can I find a reason to want to discard cards?" and my favorite "wait - If I don't have any cards, this card is really good!"
He is so cute - I love the Khopesh - I love his decoration, his howling bellow - and the stats, flavor, text - it just all adds up.
My first deck was a dirt cheap red aggro deck - and for me, this was that deck's defining card.
He is so cute - I love the Khopesh - I love his decoration, his howling bellow - and the stats, flavor, text - it just all adds up.
My first deck was a dirt cheap red aggro deck - and for me, this was that deck's defining card.
In roleplaying - I like effects that are aggressive - I love to put things on the line when the reward seems worth the risk.
When I play fighter - I like to press.
When I play fighter - I like to press.
So being cognizant of the risk vs reward is something I try to maintain in making things for RPGs, I often try and make sure that things like spells are not just beneficial, they have to be used cleverly, or the use of them precipitates benefits and consequences.
This card is eponymous.
It is ubiquitous.
It is terrifying and versatile and beautiful and complex.
It asks a million questions - and answers most questions posed to it.
It is a exercise in patience, timing, control, information - it's everything magic is supposed to be.
Basically the card says - remove a card that's blue from your hand, pay one life - and this card is free to cast.
It is instant (so it can be done on your opponent's turn) - and it counters a spell - so it can negate a creature, a sorcery, an instant, whatever - no matter the cost.
It is a exercise in patience, timing, control, information - it's everything magic is supposed to be.
Basically the card says - remove a card that's blue from your hand, pay one life - and this card is free to cast.
It is instant (so it can be done on your opponent's turn) - and it counters a spell - so it can negate a creature, a sorcery, an instant, whatever - no matter the cost.
This is so important because there's no way to know about it from the mana the opponent has - you have to have looked at their hand from card effects, or just know the game super well.
Knowing what to counter is hard - knowing how to bait a counter is hard - knowing if countering is important and when is just really hard.
This kind of effect is why I like spells that say stuff like "you may cast this spell outside of initiative order" in RPG spells that I make.
I like stuff that interrupts or alters things - and I like interactivity with abilities.
This is one of the first cards I ever owned - I absolutely love love love the art.
Pastels and red pitted armor - and a not even close to evil looking flag.
This skeleton has a polearm, specifically a standard - red armor - black bones.
Knowing what to counter is hard - knowing how to bait a counter is hard - knowing if countering is important and when is just really hard.
This kind of effect is why I like spells that say stuff like "you may cast this spell outside of initiative order" in RPG spells that I make.
I like stuff that interrupts or alters things - and I like interactivity with abilities.
Pastels and red pitted armor - and a not even close to evil looking flag.
This skeleton has a polearm, specifically a standard - red armor - black bones.
It's eyes have the symbol of Lim-Dul - it is screaming? laughing?
The card itself is fun too - and fair - three mana for a 2/1 first strike is a-ok - and the cost to regenerate it is fair - and this is an old card, so good design was not always a given.
Ice Age and Alliances had a ton of well designed cards in them - lots of things that set the stage for later on - and these abilities for the cost is not out of place for something released today.
In reference to RPGs - this card to me feels like a balanced encounter - something totally unusual and definitively of interest - but realistic and dangerous, while still being fair and understandable.
In magic, and a lot of card games - you never want to be healing yourself, you want to be killing your opponent - so a card like this is always destined to be less efficient than just dealing damage.
There are, as always, exceptions, but in general you want to be posing questions for you opponent rather than just responding to what they are doing.
I, however, dislike this.
I like when games go into a complex place, where the threats and answers have to be subtle - the planning takes some actual effort - where holing cards and preparing advanced resources is the goal.
So I like this card - I like that it encourages holding onto cards to alter them into a resource - and asking players - "Is playing that card worth losing out on extra life each turn?"
It is a cheap card to play - and the effect is small, but can add up - and it is a fantastic idea.
In relation to RPGS - this is how I always feel about the way combat can be with the right circumstance - I love movies where there is one badass who just kills all the opposition - Zatoichi, Ghost Dog, things like Tintin and Sherlock Holmes - These are the stories of one person and their friends beating opposition.
It is a cheap card to play - and the effect is small, but can add up - and it is a fantastic idea.
In relation to RPGS - this is how I always feel about the way combat can be with the right circumstance - I love movies where there is one badass who just kills all the opposition - Zatoichi, Ghost Dog, things like Tintin and Sherlock Holmes - These are the stories of one person and their friends beating opposition.
But - I also love movies and stories where you can't be so sure, and factors surprise you - and what seems like an obvious advantage turns out to be more complex than it appears - where characters die when you thought they wouldn't - and things aren't clear. Movies like Oldboy, Pi, GoT, ETC.
Combat can be dicey in a way that is not just like "I damage you and you damage me" - and the advantage that a card like ivory tower represents is the kind that is unusual - holding things so as to gain some small advantage, not just with the gaining of life, but the withholding of information, and the conversion of resources.
Red is aggressive - red asks and answers questions with damage and smashing - it's the color of jackals and goblins and dragons and devils - the color of fire and lightning and lava.
This card is just an example of a question - "Do I take 4 now, or 4 many potential times?"
It is a cheap card, it's stats are big - but the simple problem persists - the opponent chooses which in effect always means that the opponent can pick whichever they think or know is less bad for them.
Which is interesting.
It is a cheap card, it's stats are big - but the simple problem persists - the opponent chooses which in effect always means that the opponent can pick whichever they think or know is less bad for them.
Which is interesting.
Trying to utilize a card - and bluff or misrepresent - or get the opponent to misjudge which is worse - that's the real game - nothing in magic has anything to do with the cards - it's how you utilize them, what you know about them.
I like curses, I like if X then Y, I like aggressive things that pose a question - so in the context of RPGs, I think vexing devil is the kind of card that makes me want to design hostage-taking creatures, creatures that split up and pose multiple threats going in different directions - choices between bad now and bad later - etc
I like curses, I like if X then Y, I like aggressive things that pose a question - so in the context of RPGs, I think vexing devil is the kind of card that makes me want to design hostage-taking creatures, creatures that split up and pose multiple threats going in different directions - choices between bad now and bad later - etc
So - I had been playing magic for a while, maybe a couple months - and I had only played standard (read: cheap and simple).
I played red aggro (read: cheap and simple).
But I wanted to play modern (read: expensive and complex).
So I saved up and bought cards and got a blue deck, SnapDelverThing - which is a very countermagic heavy, threat heavy deck.
So I bought the deck - and I researched so much about magic, about what to pay attention to, what was likely, how to play, ETC.
I knew a lot of cards, I knew a lot of rules, I knew nobody at the comic shop.
It was my very first tournament, with a new deck - and no friends.
So: I had everything to prove, and nobody knew anything about me.
So - round one, opponent sits across me - we write life totals and exchange pleasantries - we roll dice for who goes first.
He's got brown sandy hair, it is styled in a wave - he's got a nose piercing - he has five O' clock shadow - he has a pack of cigarettes in his black jacket pocket.
I think his name was Ian.
I think his name was Ian.
What I am trying to say was: he was older, wiser, more experienced at magic, obviously someone who was going to be tough.
I knew that my chances of being good right off the bat was low - so I tried to get as much info as I could - and that led to possibly one of my favorite and greatest magic moments - game one.
I knew that my chances of being good right off the bat was low - so I tried to get as much info as I could - and that led to possibly one of my favorite and greatest magic moments - game one.
So, in magic - there are standards that people kinda expect - certain things that come up a lot.
One of the key ones is - looking at what your opponent has - for example:
If my opponent passes the turn after not playing anything, but they have a bunch of lands (which produce mana, which is used to pay for cards) Well, then I should be concerned. They likely are doing something with that mana - and they are going to do it on my turn - otherwise they would have spent it.
So if an opponent has no mana that's not something you have to worry about - they can't pay for anything - this is why Force of Will (see above) is so powerful - you cannot see it being telegraphed nearly as easily.
If my opponent passes the turn after not playing anything, but they have a bunch of lands (which produce mana, which is used to pay for cards) Well, then I should be concerned. They likely are doing something with that mana - and they are going to do it on my turn - otherwise they would have spent it.
So if an opponent has no mana that's not something you have to worry about - they can't pay for anything - this is why Force of Will (see above) is so powerful - you cannot see it being telegraphed nearly as easily.
In modern, at the time, there was only two ways to counter a spell for 0 mana and no cards in play - and neither was commonly played.
Warning: Some jargon ahead!
So: Ian plays a fetchland. They crack it for one life by tapping it, then search their library (deck) for a land that corresponds to the fetchland they cracked - and it goes into play, and since it is a shockland this means they have to pay 2 life for it to come into play untapped.
I am watching this - and then Ian says, "ok I pay one black mana and cast Thoughtseize."
Thoughtseize allows them to look at my hand, and pick a card, and I discard that card (this would be really bad)
I am watching this - and then Ian says, "ok I pay one black mana and cast Thoughtseize."
Thoughtseize allows them to look at my hand, and pick a card, and I discard that card (this would be really bad)
So he cast it, and gave me a look.
This look was him going "ok, show me your hand if you know what is going on"
And I went "hold up"
His whole demeanor softened, and I think he was like "ok, great, this kid doesn't know much of anything about magic - easy first round"
He relaxed his posture and rotated the thoughtseize around, so I could read it, and began to explain what it did - but I stopped him there.
"Oh I know thoughtseize, I am trying to decide if it is going to resolve"
His terror was palpable - countering a spell for no mana just wasn't something you would expect.
So then I countered it with disrupting shoal, and then we had a fantastic three games - he won - but there wasn't a moment in those games where he underestimated me after that.
For RPGs, I literally made a spell, Shoal, as a reference to this card.
I also have made a bunch of other counterspells in RPGs, directly because of magic, and because I like the idea of counterspells.
OK - that's part 1/10
thanks!
Comments
Post a Comment