who in here was building a Blue Cube? was it @Onderzeeboot ? and do you have a cube blog or list somewhere? i am blue-curious
General CBS
- Thread starter James Stevenson
- Start date
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
It was me, but I didn't even get it to the skeleton phase :') It's literally mana base, gold section, and blue staples.
https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/basicblues
Better than me. 90% of my projects get deleted after an hour.
I was thinking of planes that represent a color...
White Theros (enchantments)
Blue Mirrodin (artifacts)
Black Innistrad (graveyard)
Red ?????
Green Zendikar (lands)
Anyone have red ideas?
I was thinking of making some Booster Tutor type cards that have like
Theroswalk X (Open a pack of X cards from the Theros booster and put a card from that pack into your hand.)
The packs would be a pool of like 100 cards in an EDH deckbox, but they'd be locked to their colors somewhat, so the Theros pack is maybe 50% white or something.
Last edited:
There's not really an instant and sorcery block, but you're right.
I was thinking of having the arts feature planeswalkers that have been on Ravnica leaving the Ravnica-plane-cube to go get something from a plane they have been to.
I like Mirrodin more than Arcavios on a personal preference level, but Arcavios does make sense. There's also way more Mirrodin plane cards.
Deserts do be hot, though.
Strixhaven for Red?
I like most of Ravnic's picks, but I'd go Mirrodin for Blue and maybe Regatha for Red?
Would have to scour core sets for cards from Regatha though. Cards that reference Keral Keep, etc. M10, Origins, M20, M21.
Or include anything that references Jaya or Chandra since they spent so much time there.
Alternately, pick locations. Lots of iconic red places in magic. Balduvia, Shiv, Bogardan, the Pardic mountains, Skirk Ridge, Hurloon, Keld.
Same for every colour, really.
Would have to scour core sets for cards from Regatha though. Cards that reference Keral Keep, etc. M10, Origins, M20, M21.
Or include anything that references Jaya or Chandra since they spent so much time there.
Alternately, pick locations. Lots of iconic red places in magic. Balduvia, Shiv, Bogardan, the Pardic mountains, Skirk Ridge, Hurloon, Keld.
Same for every colour, really.
Worse, because artifantment deals severe psychic damage whenever it's read.
It's tricky, though. I think that it wouldn't really help things like Goblin Welder which are tied to one or another through flavor but it might help things like Academy Ruins. You could never throw an enchantment into Krark-Clan Ironworks. Generally speaking, enchantment -> artifantment seems less of a stretch than artifact-> artifantment.
It's tricky, though. I think that it wouldn't really help things like Goblin Welder which are tied to one or another through flavor but it might help things like Academy Ruins. You could never throw an enchantment into Krark-Clan Ironworks. Generally speaking, enchantment -> artifantment seems less of a stretch than artifact-> artifantment.
nah NEO proved that you don’t need things that are both artifacts and enchantments to have fun artifact decks, enchantment decks, and artifantment decks all in one draft environment.
you DO need crartifacts and crenchantments though
you DO need crartifacts and crenchantments though
The main benefit I had in mind was that you could more easily interact with your opponent's cards if there wasn't an enchantment type that most decks can't touch. I think that would make Oblivion Rings more interesting, for example. As they are now, they could usually just be a sorcery that exiles a creature.
I also think the distinction between artifact and enchantment is unnecessary. If Garfield had designed it as one type, I think the game would still work just fine.
flavorfully it makes sense. artifacts are physical objects that someone constructed that do a thing. enchantments are immaterial concepts or lingering magical effects that change the metaphysical rules of the space they inhabit.
I think it is intentional that they are different types and that not all colours can answer them. Black could answer none, red artifacts, green enchantments (and later artifacts but expensive), blue could return them and white destroy them both.
It has to do with strength and weaknesses of colours. Sadly, wotc screwed up and made blue the colour which has it all.
They are the same type of card, very much like instant and sorceries. You are right that you could reduce both and the game would be better off for it. I think it all goes back to the idea that artifacts "turned off" when tapped.
While it was a design decision, making entire colors unable to answer all permanents was as poor of a decision as limiting card draw to blue. Very common mistake, too, most card games I've played end up making the same mistake at some point.
I've often thought about adapting Magic to a Netrunner-like resource system (4 clicks per turn, spend one to draw, get one credit, install a card, make a "run" which is how you win the game) . It's interesting because there have been lots of attempts to improve on Magic, but it's difficult to do so without making large changes to the resource system so most end up being clones.
I do not agree that all colours should be able to answer all types of cards. When all colours can do everything it often becomes unnecessary to use colours at all. For me there should be weaknesses and strengths with certain play styles. Strength in one area should be compensated with weaknesses. Otherwise you end up with rock, nothing instead of rock, paper, scissors (especially blurry, non-binairy, and more than three are nice) . Although it is funny to have a mirror match once in a while. It is not funny to only play those. Neither is it funny when you know you are dead before starting.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I really liked the Warcraft TCG resource system. A very bare-bones explanation is that cards cost generic mana instead of colorless mana. Every card can be played face-down as a resource (that is, a land), but there are dedicated resource cards, called quests, that have a single use ability to give you a small benefit. E.g.
You play What's Haunting Witch Hill? face up. Once during the game, you can pay 2 generic mana plus 1 generic mana for each face-up resource the opponent controls to draw a card. You would then turn What's Haunting Witch Hill? face down to indicate its ability has been used.
So, basically all cards can be used as lands, but you still run some dedicated land cards (quests) for value. Typically, WoW TCG decks obviously run fewer quests than MtG decks run lands, but the beauty is you are never flooded, nor screwed. However, and this is a big however, obviously a resource system with generic mana wouldn't work for Magic the Gathering. The reason it did work for WoW TCG is that you have to pick a hero, and your hero's faction and class restrict what cards you can run. Maybe you could implement this in Magic by allowing players to play monocolored cards as a basic land of their color ? I imagine that gold cards become way too powerful if you also add the ability for them to be played as either a dual or a basic land of one of their colors.
Although I like the Warcraft system. Doesn’t it mean that it is much easier to play manaexpensive cards? In the first turns you put them face down as a land, later on they become spells? In mtg mana expensive cards are much stronger than cheaper cards to offset there dead in the hand part. If you additionally offset it by having it turn into a basic if wanted then there is no downside anymore right?