General CBS
- Thread starter James Stevenson
- Start date
yet again an alchemy card whose existence is frustrating since I'll never be able to run it
your timing is incredible
edit: also put this one in your irl cube, don't even sharpie out Seek, just pretend it's a fake mechanic or like a tarmogoyf-style preview
I love it. only real issue is that it looks like it goes infinite easily (and does) but I worry folks would assume that it's in there for that reason -- I know I would
Following up on this from the previous page, a friend just pointed me to the website literally named pkmn cards dot com, it's every bit as Scryfall as I wanted!
Dom Harvey
Contributor
On Monday I watched someone curve T1 Birds of Paradise T2 attack with it + raid Chart a Course and I don't think there's more beauty to be found in games than that
Birds of paradise proc’ing raid. Just as nature intended
Is this an ok to ask random philosophical questions about cube design? I know there are cube blogs for more specific questions. I am in the process of fully revamping my cube and want to pick people brains about broad concepts.
I was curious what people’s thoughts on intentionally supporting aggro, midrange, and control.
I always assumed that was a good thing that any good cube should aim to do but wondering if maybe that isn’t the case. Like if there was an argument for not supporting aggro and control? I feel like I saw some other designers touching on that subject in their cube blogs.
The idea being that supporting the rock paper scissors nature of aggro-midrange-control eliminated one of the key tenets of riptidianism. You can make all these cool synergies etc but those might get overshadowed because you are a control deck that just happen to run into aggro or an aggro deck that just happen to run into midrange etc.
Obviously that oversimplifies it, but in general I’ve run into that issue where you draft a super cool control deck and it just gets run over by aggro decks and synergy becomes irrelevant. And it doesn’t feel good because it’s just bad RNG (“oh I’m playing an aggro deck so I guess I just lose”). Of course ultimately very good control decks will bear very good aggro decks but I am just being extreme to make the point.
is a cube that mostly promotes all midrange decks a better environment for riptidianism? Everyone has midrange so there is no rock paper scissors rng. I know “lol everything just devolves into grindy midrange” is always something I thought was the mark of poor design but maybe I was wrong? This comes out of the other discussion or big games vs small games.
anyways interested to see what people think
I always assumed that was a good thing that any good cube should aim to do but wondering if maybe that isn’t the case. Like if there was an argument for not supporting aggro and control? I feel like I saw some other designers touching on that subject in their cube blogs.
The idea being that supporting the rock paper scissors nature of aggro-midrange-control eliminated one of the key tenets of riptidianism. You can make all these cool synergies etc but those might get overshadowed because you are a control deck that just happen to run into aggro or an aggro deck that just happen to run into midrange etc.
Obviously that oversimplifies it, but in general I’ve run into that issue where you draft a super cool control deck and it just gets run over by aggro decks and synergy becomes irrelevant. And it doesn’t feel good because it’s just bad RNG (“oh I’m playing an aggro deck so I guess I just lose”). Of course ultimately very good control decks will bear very good aggro decks but I am just being extreme to make the point.
is a cube that mostly promotes all midrange decks a better environment for riptidianism? Everyone has midrange so there is no rock paper scissors rng. I know “lol everything just devolves into grindy midrange” is always something I thought was the mark of poor design but maybe I was wrong? This comes out of the other discussion or big games vs small games.
anyways interested to see what people think
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Personally I like supporting aggro to keep the format honest. Also, I quite like drafting 16 land Boros decks 
However, I think it’s perfectly valid to eschew particular archetypes if done with intent! Especially if you have a fixed playgroup with a preferred play style. For example, if you know nobody really enjoys playing aggro decks in your group, why should you support it?
However, I think it’s perfectly valid to eschew particular archetypes if done with intent! Especially if you have a fixed playgroup with a preferred play style. For example, if you know nobody really enjoys playing aggro decks in your group, why should you support it?I think you're gonna run into that old joke - ask two economists about something and you get three different answers - because it definitely varies by person. My opinion is "build the environment you want, and modify it however your regular play group wants if that stays within your tastes". Onder's got the right idea, IMO, because the flip side of "put the themes you want in your cube" is "actively exclude the ones you don't want"!
Now, that said, here are far more words about my specific position:
I have definitely aimed against control/aggro deliberately by weakning them, specifically by removing individual power outliers. I have a higher power level cube than most here (summary: 450, no power/initiative/monarch, yes Natural Order) but cut both Murktide Regent and Ajani, Nacatl Pariah for broadly similar reasons. I'm fine with Torrential Gearhulk and Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, but I want people to have to work for it.
For control, that's "work at killing your opponent" - if you can get a Jace, the Mind Sculptor ultimate off, you deserve the W. But the combat-based-murder options are deliberately possible to kill (not Aetherling) or reasonably-sized (not Murktide Regent) or stuff like Saheeli, Sublime Artificer that has a lot of upside but still works via combat. Also consider keeping all your wraths at 5+ mana* or conditionally-effective or similar.
For aggro, that's the other side of "work at killing your opponent" - Ajani, Nacatl Pariah is cracked, like Broadside Bombardiers and White Plume Adventurer and so on. You have to put in a little more effort than that! Even though I'm gonna let you have Cecil, Dark Knight or Bristly Bill, Spine Sower or whatever, there's still a line where I just kind of go yeah, too efficient, not worth it. Rewarding synergy over raw power helps with this, but there's also different kinds of raw power. Thraben Inspector is more powerful than Savannah Lions, even against a control deck, but it kills substantially more slowly! Stuff like that.
*this effect will forever be known to me as the "kithkin shotgun", memorably depicted by paz of Pro MTG Online fame over a decade ago:
Now, that said, here are far more words about my specific position:
I have definitely aimed against control/aggro deliberately by weakning them, specifically by removing individual power outliers. I have a higher power level cube than most here (summary: 450, no power/initiative/monarch, yes Natural Order) but cut both Murktide Regent and Ajani, Nacatl Pariah for broadly similar reasons. I'm fine with Torrential Gearhulk and Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, but I want people to have to work for it.
For control, that's "work at killing your opponent" - if you can get a Jace, the Mind Sculptor ultimate off, you deserve the W. But the combat-based-murder options are deliberately possible to kill (not Aetherling) or reasonably-sized (not Murktide Regent) or stuff like Saheeli, Sublime Artificer that has a lot of upside but still works via combat. Also consider keeping all your wraths at 5+ mana* or conditionally-effective or similar.
For aggro, that's the other side of "work at killing your opponent" - Ajani, Nacatl Pariah is cracked, like Broadside Bombardiers and White Plume Adventurer and so on. You have to put in a little more effort than that! Even though I'm gonna let you have Cecil, Dark Knight or Bristly Bill, Spine Sower or whatever, there's still a line where I just kind of go yeah, too efficient, not worth it. Rewarding synergy over raw power helps with this, but there's also different kinds of raw power. Thraben Inspector is more powerful than Savannah Lions, even against a control deck, but it kills substantially more slowly! Stuff like that.
*this effect will forever be known to me as the "kithkin shotgun", memorably depicted by paz of Pro MTG Online fame over a decade ago:
The funny thing is that even eschewing aggro cards, there will always be an aggro deck in a matchup. Even if it is a control deck. If the opponent is a slower control deck, you are the aggro player.
So the question becomes: what is the clock you want to represent at different mana curves? For a slow clock, go old school creatures, i.e. weak, a quick clock use the ones printed now (please don’t). When you have chosen the speed of the clock, create combo and control such that the matchups are to your liking. For example a win rate of 60-40 or 55 to 45. A cheap shot is to use block/sets close together in timeline. This does not always work, but busted spells and busted creatures do make a quick game, but one could almost play craps instead.
There are board games where you could lose the game on the first move, and have to suffer two hours to be done, and also games where luck is the only factor. Magic has the potential to have both luck and skill to be important, but it depends on the era.
Magic sets from fallen empires to scourge hit the mark for me (not for constructed but for draft type of games). The spells are more powerful than the creatures but you will still win with the weak creatures. In constructed it falls apart due to some constructed mistakes, but every urza block card is fine in a urza block cube. I do have an urza block cube, but i am quite certain that adding a mercadian masques block (which is perceived as weaker power) will work just fine. However, adding the two newer sets instead to the urza block will give a completely different outcome.
So the question becomes: what is the clock you want to represent at different mana curves? For a slow clock, go old school creatures, i.e. weak, a quick clock use the ones printed now (please don’t). When you have chosen the speed of the clock, create combo and control such that the matchups are to your liking. For example a win rate of 60-40 or 55 to 45. A cheap shot is to use block/sets close together in timeline. This does not always work, but busted spells and busted creatures do make a quick game, but one could almost play craps instead.
There are board games where you could lose the game on the first move, and have to suffer two hours to be done, and also games where luck is the only factor. Magic has the potential to have both luck and skill to be important, but it depends on the era.
Magic sets from fallen empires to scourge hit the mark for me (not for constructed but for draft type of games). The spells are more powerful than the creatures but you will still win with the weak creatures. In constructed it falls apart due to some constructed mistakes, but every urza block card is fine in a urza block cube. I do have an urza block cube, but i am quite certain that adding a mercadian masques block (which is perceived as weaker power) will work just fine. However, adding the two newer sets instead to the urza block will give a completely different outcome.