General Balduvian Trading Post(s)

[Jason Waddell]

This is a thread to discuss the new ideas coming from rival forum BTP.

I know most of their stuff is pretty bullshit for the sake of being bullshit, but this one struck me as interesting. Obviously it's one of their tamer (more usable) ideas.

Additional Casting Cost Cube: This is a supplemental rule that applies to all spells. Each spell has:


"As an additional cost to cast CARDNAME, reveal a card that shares a color with CARDNAME."


This introduces lots of interesting sequencing and counterplay options, while radically shifting the value of cards like Cabal Therapy (possibly OP?).

Now I am sure you guys have some concerns, and naturally, I've anticipated these. Firstly, yes, you'll get cards stuck in your hand. The starting hand size has been changed from 7 to 9. This obviously cuts down on the number of non-games while introducing more skillful gameplay. Sequencing has never been more important. Do you pass on casting a spell for a turn so you have a guaranteed reveal for your five drop the next?

As far as cube design implications, this adjustment radically increases the value of gold and hybrid cards, due to their increased castability and increased value in casting other spells.

The change was motivated by thinking about ways to design around the new Devoid mechanic. These cards introduce a unique tension in this environment, as you can reveal a land to cast them, but they can't be used to pay the reveal cost for corresponding colored spells.

Further, this mechanic provides a natural foil to the "five color goodstuff" problem that RipLamers like to pretend doesn't exist, and forces drafters to consider splashes more thoughtfully.

I've increased my gold spell density by 25%, and I don't see myself turning back.

 

[James Stevenson]

Yeah I lurk there occasionally, NNWO has some pretty interesting ideas. The color-revealing-cost cube was apparently a great success, but I'm too lazy to try it.

There's one user there who is onto some really new shit. Let me dig some stuff up...

Fractal Drafting

My major gripe with cube philosophy (and popular philosophy in general, societal norms) is linearity. It's apparently too difficult for humans to frame ideas in dimensions more than one. People are judged together based on linear ideas of progress, ignoring the multiple dimensions of progress a human can move in. Similarly, cubes are drafted from p1p1 to pnpm, moving along some line of thought, drafting an archetype, etc. I wanted to design a cube to rebel against this idea, and after meditating on the idea for several hours I released I'd already framed my question wrongly, linearly.

So I'd like to introduce the Fractal Cube, which is a misnomer. It is in fact a metacube: Whereas a cube is a box of ~400 cards (traditionally) to make packs from and draft hwwi (how Wizards wants it), the Vector Cube is a packing box of ~400 cubes. You use an algorithm to shuffle the cubes (not together!), then make packs of 15 cubes, then players take turns picking cubes, then making packs and drafting the chosen cube cube.

At this point I'm not exactly sure how to proceed, so hopefully I can get some good feedback to fill this hole. Each player now has 45 different pools, each from a different cube. I would like players to mirror the dckbuilding process, but with pools, ie. cutting down to 23 cubes/17 basic cubes (or some such ratio). But this bit doesn't make any sense yet, help me out guys.

Ideally after this stage there is a deckbuilding phase where each player builds a deck with each of his n remaining pools. Then a tournament is played out where each player plays each other player in n matches, matching decks from similar cubes (some function will have to be devised to compare cubes - players each have decks from the same cube will obviously match those decks against eachother). After a metamatch it will quite clear which of the two players is the better player, so the winner can move on to play someone of equal skill.

Anyway that's where my idea's at right now. At some point when this works, we can move a step back and draft from a cupboard full of ~400 boxes of ~400 cubes, then regress again and draft from a warehouse full of cupboards, etc. etc. This could get really interesting.

And of course at some point we'll have to introduce the Utility Cube Draft, which contains cubes which are interesting enough to build decks from, but not good enough for the metacube itself.

 

[Jason Waddell]

Tell Doug to stay the fuck away from our forums.

 

[Jason Waddell]

Did nobody read further in the same thread?

Right, Doug, that's a little raw. Here's where I thought you were going.

Simuldrafting

Lay out the 8 packs of Pack 1 face up on the table in columns. Each player places a marker at the top of a column, indicating that it is their pack. Each player needs a pen and pad of paper.

Let's just consider an example for simplicity. Say you have Pack 2. You write down your pick from Pack 2. Then your pick from Pack 3. and so on. Continue with the packs until you have written 15 picks.

Then, reveal each player's P1P1 picks, and remove those cards. Then reveal P1P2. Here is the catch! If any of the revealed cards have already been taken, you get nothing. Nothing!

In practice we've found that it's actually best to only write down your first five picks, then pause to assess what has been taken and do the next 5. It adds a new layer of mind-games and card evaluation to the mix, as well as risk and reward. You can make a conservative list, with lower power cards you are virtually guaranteed to still have in the pack, or go for broke with bombs.

Optional rules:
1) For every 3 cards "missed" in drafting, a player may select a card that is left on the table at the end of each pack. This helps to get more functional decks.
2) Add a 4th pack with only 10 cards in it.

 

[vennythekid]

Spoiler: So I legit searched google

Spoiler: "To find our rival fourm"

Spoiler: And after some research

Spoiler: Apparently it's a real thing

Now and then I feel obligated to spice it up a bit and throw in a balduvian trading post (the rival cube forum - they think we're super conservative) or some other stupid card.

Spoiler: "Whoooooooosh"

Only a hypothetical one. That we've already named.

 

[Jason Waddell]

If I ever sleeve up my cube again I think I'll test the "additional cost" thing. It could be incredibly stupid, but I would like a thing that decreases mana screw while still giving the players interesting options and choices.

 

[ahadabans]

If I ever sleeve up my cube again I think I'll test the "additional cost" thing. It could be incredibly stupid, but I would like a thing that decreases mana screw while still giving the players interesting options and choices.

Every opportunity I get, I will keep pimping an idea I stole and then modified which addresses exactly this. I call it Exile/Draw. It's a much less drastic change to the game (IMO) than having an additional cost tacked onto spells as suggested above (though I do think that idea is interesting too and I'd like to try it just for fun). My group is not experimental though, so I've gotten little traction on fundamental game changes (hell, I couldn't even get ULD to stick). I have tested exile/draw myself on several occasions though and it works and still feels like Magic.

Anyway, here is how Exile/Draw works (version 2.0... maybe version 3.0 actually)...

There is a new step introduced to the game that occurs right before your draw step called "Exile/Draw". At the beginning of your Exile/Draw step, you may exile a card from your hand. If you do, an opponent cuts your library and you draw a card from the middle of the deck. Your opponent then puts the top half of the cut back on top of your library (i.e. the top card of your library before exile/draw should remain the top card of your library after exile/draw).

Because you exile first (and it's not a discard) and the draw is completely random (cannot be manipulated with top of library shenanigans because it comes from the middle of your deck), this is definitely worse than looting or cycling. From testing it, I can tell you that on the surface you may be inclined to think that exile/draw is an automatic thing you always want to do, but it's not. I've made my hand worse on numerous occasions by doing it when there was not clear reason to do it. I've lost games due to decking by using it too much as well, so you definitely want to pick and choose when you do this. There are moments in a game when it is a no-brainer (I have three lands in hand, 8 in play and no business spells... gee, I wonder if I should exile/draw here). And there will be times when it's complete guesswork.

Early in the game it helps to address screw/flood in much the same way that scry would (in fact, it may be on a similar power level to scry 1 actually). If you have too much land, you can toss it for a chance at something else. Not enough land, same thing. Ditch a business spell you find least useful (or least likely to be able to cast) and hope you draw a land. In all the times I've tested this, I don't think any game become a total non-game due to mana issues. Mana screw/flood is still possible, but it is greatly reduced and it typically doesn't linger for more than one turn. And honestly, that feels right to me. I like the land/spell resource dynamic in Magic and wouldn't want to remove it (for all I complain about it), but it can be a bit too random at times and Exile/Draw addresses that well I think.

It helps combo a little bit, but in cube I really don't think that's an issue. I honestly don't think it favors any particular deck style either (aggro/midrange/control). What it does do is favor better decks and better players because it presents a lot of interesting decisions, especially early in the game. Chances for play mistakes in particular and opportunities for a tight deck to find consistency more easily than a poorly constructed one. It's a simple rule with a lot of depth too (always good when it comes to rules). Do you get rid of a sweet expensive spell in hopes of drawing land or something useful early in the game? Or do you play risky and exile a land because you don't need one right now and you'll get three cards before you need another? A lot of gray area there.

On a side note, Exile/Draw makes it more practical to run some narrow cards main deck. Disenchant is now never a dead card. If you can't play it or don't need it in a game, just exile it and get a replacement card. Not sure it eliminates side boards, but it does make running one or two utility answer cards less punitive and I think that is a net positive.

 

[Rasmus Källqvist]

Did I wake up in bizarro land?

 

[Chris Taylor]

Did I wake up in bizarro land?

Yes

 

[FlowerSunRain]

This one was my favorite:

I've been thinking about making a powermax cube because who doesn't secretly love casting ancestral recall and drawing all kinds of cards. None of the other forums have bothered to do it: the dolts on MTGS think classification is the same as optimization and the hipsters on Riptide are too scared of being violated by Kiki-combo to even consider it. It is clear that the platonic ideal of the powermax card is ancestral recall so the entire cube must be balanced around the tempo cost of drawing three cards being one mana.

While arbitrary benchmarks are notoriously fickle, I decided to start by comparing the fair cost of drawing three cards at instant speed, in the form of Jace's Ingenuity to a fair threat of the same cost, namely (3)CC. The purest fair threat at that cost seemed clearly to be Kalonian Hydra. The hydra has a lot of inelegant text on it, but the important thing is that it represents a two turn clock. As such, our base attacking one drop that offers no utility should also likely be a 2 turn clock. To keep things simple at this infantile stage of development, let us make this card 10/5 for W, as efficient small creatures is white's wheelhouse. One can plainly see that powermaxers running Savannah Lion variants aren't even close to having the correct powerlevel, with there one drops being 5 times slower then the proper speed needed to combat the baseline powermax draw spell.

The red damage spell is much trickier to determine proper values for. Here, you will see why I made our lion 10/5. The powermax lightning bolt will do 5 damage, allowing it to function as removal for our formats premier early game threat and also making it sufficiently threatening in itself, only taking 4 spells to kill an opposing player with no board level interaction required. I considered a 7 damage bolt, but a hand of lotus and 3 bolts seemed to be a bit too easy a kill and may stifle the interactive games that we desire to create in our cubes here on BTP.

So here is what we have so far

W-10/5 Lion
U-Ancestral
B-?
R-5 damage
G-?
0-Lotus

 

[Aston]

So I was at FNM the other week, and a guy came up to me that I hadn't seen there before. He was quite imposing - he was over 6 feet tall, very muscular, with a shaved head. Apparently someone had pointed him in my direction because he was after a foil Lazav, Dimir Mastermind which he was after for a deck. We pulled out our binders, and I picked a few things out. As I was doing so, he told me that he wanted Lazav for his EDH deck. Apparently, this deck was themed around Doctor Who, and he wanted Lazav for the general to represent the Doctor, as he thought Lazav's ability was a good way to show the Doctor's "regenerations". I picked up a couple of bits and pieces I'd been after and handed over his new general, and he went away happy.

Anyway that's my bald Whovian trading post.

 

[Jason Waddell]

I feel so violated.

 

[Aoret]

My favorite part about this thread is the amount of ambiguity between it being purely shitposts and the couple of real ideas. I do think ahadabans may be onto something with exile/draw, but I'm still unsatisfied. "Cut from the middle" is a little too vague for all but the most casual of games. I dunno what else you'd do though :/

 

[Jason Waddell]

My favorite part about this thread is the amount of ambiguity between it being purely shitposts and the couple of real ideas. I do think ahadabans may be onto something with exile/draw, but I'm still unsatisfied. "Cut from the middle" is a little too vague for all but the most casual of games. I dunno what else you'd do though :/

Bottom?

 

[Aoret]

Bottom?

As long as we ban Bow of Nylea and whatever other cards we'd need to avoid, sure, bottom works great! It's a lot more elegant than what I was cooking up (figure out the maximum library manipulation depth in your format and dig that deep for your exile/draw. gross.)

 

[James Stevenson]

Aston wins best post award from me.

 

[ahadabans]

My favorite part about this thread is the amount of ambiguity between it being purely shitposts and the couple of real ideas. I do think ahadabans may be onto something with exile/draw, but I'm still unsatisfied. "Cut from the middle" is a little too vague for all but the most casual of games. I dunno what else you'd do though :/

I started with just from the top, but it was abusable and I didn't like that. I wanted a random card. Bottom can be abused too, so not sure I like that either. I agree middle of the deck is kind of clunky and lame, but I'm not sure what else to do there.

Maybe something weird like 5th card from the top or similar? You guys are smarter than me. Give this idea legs. I'd love to see it take off. Part of that is selfish because as dumb as this sounds, I might be able to get more traction with my group if they thought something custom was somewhat mainstream.

 

[ahadabans]

My favorite part about this thread is the amount of ambiguity between it being purely shitposts and the couple of real ideas. I do think ahadabans may be onto something with exile/draw, but I'm still unsatisfied. "Cut from the middle" is a little too vague for all but the most casual of games. I dunno what else you'd do though :/

Yeah. I felt like an idiot for my post once I saw things headed in a purely humorous direction. LOL.

 

[Jason Waddell]

Yeah. I felt like an idiot for my post once I saw things headed in a purely humorous direction. LOL.

To be honest I'd be pretty happy if usable ideas came from this thread (or were inspired by this thread).

 

[Aoret]

I started with just from the top, but it was abusable and I didn't like that. I wanted a random card. Bottom can be abused too, so not sure I like that either. I agree middle of the deck is kind of clunky and lame, but I'm not sure what else to do there.

Maybe something weird like 5th card from the top or similar? You guys are smarter than me. Give this idea legs. I'd love to see it take off. Part of that is selfish because as dumb as this sounds, I might be able to get more traction with my group if they thought something custom was somewhat mainstream.

I think 5th from the top is safe, I can't think of what card would be abusable. Stuff like oust sylvan library and such tends to interact with TOL higher up than the 5th card. The only interaction I can think of for 5th card (that doesn't involve a really obscure combination of TOL effects) is unexpectedly absent which, honestly, who cares.

I think the cleanest implementation is actually Jason's version, with a bit of sanitizing of the cube itself to remove BOL effects. I think the idea has legs and will give it a try once I finish dicking around with legacy mana (probably months down the road)


edit:

To be honest I'd be pretty happy if usable ideas came from this thread (or were inspired by this thread).

I think the brightest timeline for this thread is that it contains a mix of shitposts and really out there, yet legitimate, ideas (kinda like the aforementioned thread I made about lands...)

 

[ahadabans]

Regarding Exile/Draw...

There is one potential negative that did come up in my testing that in my excitement (i.e. drinking too much of my own kool-aid) I forgot to mention. That has to do with finding answers, specifically "silver bullet" type answers. Take the classic aggro/control matchup. Aggro is trying to curve out and kill the control player before they find a wrath typically. Well, the control player gets two shots per turn basically from the very first turn to find that wrath and in many cases, you are willing to exile pretty much every other card in your hand to find it. This greatly increases the odds of a turn 4 wrath. This doesn't just extend to control though (which is why I don't think it benefits one specific theater). Same matchup. Aggro is exiling cards like a fiend to get that magical boss-like curve. And after the onslaught post-wrath, control has stabilized and is at 2 life. Aggro has no board presence, but literally any burn spell in existence wins them the game. You are going to exile every card in your hand to find that burn spell.

On one hand, it's sort of a cool effect. Each deck plays like a well oiled version of itself since you can more easily find what you need. You know you have an answer and you get more opportunities to find it essentially. But there are times when it's one miraculous answer after another (in an almost tedious way). I can stop you from doing X if I pull card Y (exile/draw - BAM found it!). Then the other guy... I can counteract your move if only I could find Z (exile/draw - BAM). When you only get one card a turn (outside a draw spell), this happens less.

I had one game end up in a decking because it was literally an answer-orgy. I don't think that is the norm though. But for a time I considered capping the exile/draw effect at a specific number to prevent abusive fishing expeditions which can happen with slower decks that can stall the game forever and a day.

 

[Aoret]

Regarding Exile/Draw...

There is one potential negative... That has to do with finding answers, specifically "silver bullet" type answers.

I think this is fixable by penalizing it with life loss in the same way Wadds did with shuffles in his microsealed (I think that's what it was called?) format. Tbh I think we can port a lot of lessons from that format, because an Exile/Draw game of magic is basically the Lite version of a microsealed game of magic. I dunno what the right amount is, but I think I'd probably start at just one.

The other tack you could take on this is to increase the density of "target player" mill effects, but that solution makes a lot of assumptions about the contents of the rest of your cube and is likely significantly less portable than a life loss implementation.

 

[ahadabans]

I think this is fixable by penalizing it with life loss in the same way Wadds did with shuffles in his microsealed (I think that's what it was called?) format. Tbh I think we can port a lot of lessons from that format, because an Exile/Draw game of magic is basically the Lite version of a microsealed game of magic. I dunno what the right amount is, but I think I'd probably start at just one.

The other tack you could take on this is to increase the density of "target player" mill effects, but that solution makes a lot of assumptions about the contents of the rest of your cube and is likely significantly less portable than a life loss implementation.

Life loss is probably the correct direction to take this. It's an established mechanic that will work well.

Playing devil's advocate though, I think a life loss rider will favor aggro over control. If you are the beatdown, you generally could give a damn what your life total is. It's a resource you freely spend as the path to victory is killing your opponent before they stabilize. Once they stabilize, you lose and it won't matter if you are at 5 life or 50 life typically. Control on the other hand is desperately trying to preserve life total because each point makes it harder to get to that stabilization point. So aggro will use Exile/Draw with reckless abandon while control is going to be much less apt to take advantage unless they absolutely need to.

Maybe this is OK though. Not sure honestly.

 

[Aoret]

Worst case you end up in a position where you have to boost control or nerf aggro, which is fairly straightforward. Could be as simple as having fewer shocks and more ABU duals, more of the "unfairly good" control cards, etc.

The more I think about this idea the more excited I am to try it honestly.

 

[ahadabans]

I'm excited to get a second opinion on it, so definitely post your results.