This almost makes me want to play magic again.
Almost.
Then I remember that most people in my group buy BOXES to get the rares they need, and I give up on the thought.

(Reply) (Thread)

Also, the fact they play to *WIN*, whereas I just wanna have fun.


... FIRST TWO COMMENTS! I HAVE NO LIFE!

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Boxes? Meh. You can win 'em at the prerelease, or you can buy the singles, or you can say, "Hey, that's about four full-price DVDs."

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

But, as my second comment points out, it's not as fun as DVD's, not with the grioup that plays.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Man, Corbett's designs are just TERRIBLE.

Emmott's black and green Scout creatures are interesting, but need work. The rest are just silly. The Oaths are all over the place, and the Rift rares are miserable.

Globus' 'Revenge' commons are instant sideboard fodder, and barely (and otherwise unplayable). I like the concept behind the 'Last of' enchantment cycle, even if I don't see them as, well, playable. And the Changelings are ehh-ish.

Hopkins' Auramages are a cute idea and create too many 'What? What's where now? I have no idea what token that is.' questions. The Grasp/Imbue stuff isn't bad, though I think the effects/costs need to be worked on. The Eyes enchantments are pretty good. He certainly likes "cards that become/do other things", doesn't he.

Jablonski's Corruptors are up the same alley as the Auramages: "What's this counter?" Things that put non-+1/+1 counters on OTHER things should be used sparingly. I like the Accessories, but they're kind of already out there (the 'lesser cost in colored mana' thing), and the Half- series is a little too... Unglued? I don't know.

Jansen's Mystics are a really good common cycle of creatures. The Residue enchantments aren't a bad reuse/reinterpretation of flashback, and the Sacquipment is all pretty nice. This was a really solid entry, even if it was short on 'Wow!'s, game- or feel-wise.

Krajenta's 'Unblocked Unless' series didn't do much for me, but common instants are kind of difficult to innovate in. The Ethereals are all strangely costed/abilitied (the black one's just... I don't know what he's thinking). The EEE-nchantments are neat and new, though the 'on the stack' is a heavy tie to instants. I don't know how playable they'd turn out (probably not very), but they're relatively innovative, which is nice compared to things like those Affinity Avatars from whatsisface.

Luhrs' Aspects are in need of a wee bit of tweaking, but pretty good. The Muses are, uh, what? I think he's missing something in the mechanic there. The Amplifiers are icky, complex and deck-focusing and just generally too much everything.

Nagle's Dispersion mechanic is neither new enough nor good enough to make, at least not with these. The Invokers are alternately broken and dumb (the black one kills itself to ACTIVATE itself in a mono deck, come ON), and the Pacts aren't anything I'd want to play.

(Reply) (Thread)

Probasco's Designer Wear for the 5-Mana seems... I don't know, 'busy' for common enchantments. That being said, the red and black aren't unusable in Limited, you'd just probably rather have a different card. His Recursion sorceries aren't inspiring, but they're okay (probably because they're kind of familiar-looking). And while it's nice to see someone making small rare creatures, but the Bounds aren't all that well built. That Goblin is just silly.

Sutherland's Hex series should've had a central naming theme, but otherwise I'd say it's a pretty good set. Better as uncommons, though, for those effects. The Brooches are well considered, if not engineered. Some taste like rares, and the Goblin one's a little too much. The Jeckyll and Hyde flip cards are a really nice modification. He's got another decently solid set, and more importantly doesn't make me wonder how he got to this round.

Van Essen's Effusion is... would anyone play with that? They're not irredeemable, but they're kind of a mixed bag for color/power assignments and usefulness. The second Scout series is just as awkward as the first, though for different reasons. 'Scout' on something that costs 6 seems not that Scout-y. And has any card with implications of "Luck" ever been all that good? Man, those are a lot of mana.

Weil's Devotees I liked better when they were called "instants". The Seals are, what, advanced Opals or Hidden? Eh. I WANT to like the Pyre stuff, but something about them just turns me off. They're very epic and shout "I am a Rare!", though, which is nice to see once in a while.

Weiner's Persistence needs SOME kind of counters. The irreversibility is nice. I'm not sure what to make of the Search++ set, but he's at least working his brain. He loses cool points for saying 'in-your-face tutors', if only because it brings to mind some guy standing up and going "That's right, we're gonna get ALLLLL up in this calculus, yo!". And all I'm going to say about the Weaknesses is that I never thought Erase would ever be a kill condition.

Winkler's Presences aren't horrible, but they're another common set that feels somewhat un-, in places. More importantly, moving a mechanic from one spell type to another isn't all that innovative. I like the concept behind the Heralds, but the execution seems a lot off. The Astrals feel like sorceries being bent to fit the enchantment role, and taking Astral-specific effects combined with the Whisper activation and the "I'm hanging around to make this happen" of each spell itself just makes these bleh.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Players don't like Milling?
I always loved Arc Slogging people for 10...

(Reply) (Thread)

Nope. As they say in the article, if you look at how much Arc-Slogger trades for and compare it to its power, you'll see how much folks hate it.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

It may not be trading well now its an extended card, but it was a staple in the Mirrodin block Big Red decks.
I guess it doesn't really count as milling if you're using it to kill your opponent.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Linky no workee. Wizards' site down?

(Reply) (Thread)

Occasionally. The link's good, though, I just checked.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I'm with you on the frontrunner.

I liked the "Scout" cycle, even though they did point out a card with a similar mechanic that "got no love" (perhaps because I haven't found a good way to break it).

There weren't any entries today, with maybe one exception, that made me kick myself for not entering in that "Man, I could do better than this" kind of way.

Peace.

(Reply) (Thread)

I was astonished at the rare cycle of "You lose the game" cards. At first, I thought "Who would be dumb enough to play a card that makes them outright lose to a single bounce spell. Then I realized that, as auras, they not only lost to every bounce spell, but also lost to common removal spells in every color.

I thought that the common 2/2 guys for 4 that give a counter and an additional bonus to creatures on entering play could have been easily cleaned up by giving the counter and a line that said "All creatures with get ". This makes them play more like slivers (but not exactly; you can still choose which creatures get the benefit), and removes the annoying memory issues.

(Reply) (Thread)

That line should have been "All creatures with [counter] get [ability]". My pseudo-html did me in.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Yeah, but a watered-down slivers doesn't make me happy. The problem with slivers is that it benefits your opponent if they're playing, and in a common cycle you either wind up with a small cycle that doesn't have enough cards to be excited about it, or you make a lot of them (10-12) and then suddenly everyone has one.

I can see why he did it. I just don't like the effect.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

You could always change it to "All creatures you control with [counter] get [ability]", which removes any benefit to your opponent. It also makes the cards better than they were before, which adds incentive to play the cycle.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Most Overpowered: Kenneth Nagle's Lifebeam Invoker

Really? More overpowered than Aaron Weiner's tutors? 2B, remove your Niv-Mizzet from the game, I get Mindslaver in play for free. Seems fair.

(Reply) (Thread)

Wow, this week was really bad I'd say overall. I have to agree that Ryan Sutherland is clearly ahead now. The Auras didn't need the destroy all other Auras effect. If any other Auras grant the creature any abilties, its immediately superceded by the lose all other abilities and becomes [P/T creature type--ability] effects. But these are interesting cards. You can use them to make early 1/1 drops into something stronger or more useful, or play them on your opponent's creatures to make them weaker, such as making your opponent's evasive creatures or high P/T fatties into 0/5 Walls. The brooches are ok. The Runemaster Brooch has the most possibilities, since its mana conversion ability makes it easier to cast spells with hard to get colored mana requirements like the Nephilims, Queen Sliver, etc. The Jekyll and Hyde cards are great. The flavor of the Paladin/flip/Blackguard card was just awesome.

Chris Luhr's enchantments are cool. They prevent theft or your stuff, have a bonus if played on your stuff, or can be played for a negative on your opponent's stuff. The Aspect of Corruption is especially good. For 1B you get either Unholy Strength or Weakness. The Muses/Affinity artifacts are terrible though.

I liked Andrew's Scouts. Fun in some tribal decks, fun in limited, and I like cards that encourage attacking for you to get use of their abilities. The Oaths could be interesting, but the double color cost to play them is counterproductive to the goal of encouraging multi-color decks. But the costs could be tweaked. The Rift card idea was not cool though.

Mark's Revenge seems interesting. But the Revenge cost should probably be higher than the spell's original casting cost by say 1. Its just too easy to get revenge this way. The uncommons aren't a cycle. The rares are just too restrictive in their searching.

Kenneth Nagle's Dispersion isn't even a new keyword. Its called Kicker.
The invoker's are all over the place. From insanely powerful G/R/W to weak U and unplayable B (The creature dies if you Dark Ritual or tap three swamps!). The Pacts are cool, they just need the right combo pieces to balance things out. He took a step back this week.

Alexis Jansen's mystics and their storm-like mechanic is interesting. The combos that could be created with phasing, suspend RFG + return cards (Ghost Council of Orzhova, Otherworldly Journey), or Warp World... Residue is Flashback. Rares aren't really a cycle. But I loved the flavor of the artifacts except for the green one.

And then there is the rest of the pack. Either uninteresting (Cantrips) or bad. (Seal = even more restricted sleepers. Wow.)

(Reply) (Thread)

I say dispersion's radiate flavor makes it its own thing. Kicker was like, "and get one unrelated effect if you paid G3." This is like "get the same effect multiplied." I liked dispersion.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I'm just shocked Andy P. (brassy) wasn't even close to the bottom of the barrel card-wise. He was freaking out and submitted them like 15 minutes before/after the deadline. Yet his set was even in the bottom third of the submitted designs. All I know is Krajenta is gone for sure now, awful stuff.

(Reply) (Thread)

From last week and this week comments you get that Wizards are against cards that encourage you not to play 4 offs.
While no need to go as far as Bazaar of Wonders in every set I like the occasional card that makes you diversify your deck.
Bonus points for cards that makes your opponent diversify their decks (think Meddling mage).

(Reply) (Thread)

I really hope Alexis hasn't shot herself in the foot in the comments threads. Nagle and that Dragon Resurrected guy are obviously going to be taking every workplace disagreement into the trenches, and don't know when to be quiet. Weil's much better at it. Alexis is being just a little too persistent, though she had a good point about that 16th card.

(Reply) (Thread)