General Fight Club
- Thread starter Jason Waddell
- Start date
Shelldock Isle has been a main cube inclusion from the start, very powerful and U/x decks can activate it pretty consistently. Windbrisk Heights is the only other one of that cycle that has been playable as a Utility Land Draft inclusion, but it has some awkward sequencing in decks where you really want that untapped source after T1. It's not bad, but most of time it's left unused. I'm talking W/x decks that lean aggressive where you'd usually have 3+ creatures swinging. If things snowball and the window is available then yeah, it'll be great, but the average case scenario is just an untapped land with a card exiled that never gets casted in my cube.
I'm not sure if I'd want to use an actual pick on it in a draft unless it wheels late, but it's a completely fine inclusion in something like a ULD.
I'm not sure if I'd want to use an actual pick on it in a draft unless it wheels late, but it's a completely fine inclusion in something like a ULD.
Windbrisk Heights is great. Swinging with three creatures isn’t that difficult, and sometimes you swing when you wouldn’t normally attack to net the hideaway card. My favorite part is that you can rebuy it with:
And can be tutored out:
It’s a lot of fun and promotes proactive gameplay. Just a delightfu
I am sorry, pal, I deleted my post immediately after posting it, since after doing so, it became clear to me, that only Windbrisk Heights could be the winner in this contest.
It is basically a land costing
, since it enters tapped, and it lets you play another good card from your library for once you can attack with three creatures. Having played with battalion abilities in the past, I know that this is actually pretty easy to do for most of my cube's white decks. And it works with all those white landfall enablers, that blink or bounce permanents for extra cards!
So, I can't afford two non-aggro-playable 2-drops here. But what is more important: Working with ninjutsu or being a good blocker?
I run eleven Ninjas, one in white, five in blue, four in black and one dimir card. I also run like two cards, that care about enchantments, Starnheim Courser and Stone Haven Pilgrim. But a 0/4 is much more desireable for control. What do I do?
i will always side with the one that can attack
EDIT; don’t underestimate the potential of the enchantment typing either
EDIT; don’t underestimate the potential of the enchantment typing either
Pretty easy companion here. Companion is:
So, I can't afford two non-aggro-playable 2-drops here. But what is more important: Working with ninjutsu or being a good blocker?
I run eleven Ninjas, one in white, five in blue, four in black and one dimir card. I also run like two cards, that care about enchantments, Starnheim Courser and Stone Haven Pilgrim. But a 0/4 is much more desireable for control. What do I do?
-A playable aggro card.
-Not parasitic to any one archetype.
-Has relevant types.
-Is a dog.
That last point alone is really enough to push it over if you can only pick one TBH.
If I had to go with one I'm going with the Wall of Omens. You need clear roleplayers to make archetypes work, sometimes you need those filler cards to wheel to a specific player, and Wall is the card for any durdly W/x deck to buy time and branch into bigger plays. If I'm drafting U/W Control and I see this available around Pick 3-4, I'm pretty certain it'll wheel back around to me. I can expect it to buy enough time for me to find bigger plays to stabilize and won't be picked off easily with damage based removal.
The dog isn't bad, but I've never wanted to cube Elvish Visionary unless you're getting something extra out of it with other card interactions. Like I've never wanted to run Wall in my Karametra Enchantress deck for EDH, but dog was a snap include because it synergizes with so many other cards to do extra things.
The dog isn't bad, but I've never wanted to cube Elvish Visionary unless you're getting something extra out of it with other card interactions. Like I've never wanted to run Wall in my Karametra Enchantress deck for EDH, but dog was a snap include because it synergizes with so many other cards to do extra things.
I always feel like Wall too efficiently shuts down the early game while replacing itself. I hate attacking against that card and don't want my players to have to do it, either. I don't think it's necessarily too good or anything, I just don't like it. Or Baleful Strix for the same reasons.
@shamizy is right. You want your control players to feel controlly and aggro to feel aggressive. Diversity. It can’t all be a bland experience. Signposts are important.
And the dog is even a design mistake because nothing enchantment about it. They just gave it that card type to fit into Neon Dynasty limited/standard lifespan and it doesn’t make any sense outside that. It has no enchantment abilities. Only creature stats.
I love dogs in real life. All of them. There are no bad dogs. But on Magic cards they have no extra appeal.
And the dog is even a design mistake because nothing enchantment about it. They just gave it that card type to fit into Neon Dynasty limited/standard lifespan and it doesn’t make any sense outside that. It has no enchantment abilities. Only creature stats.
I love dogs in real life. All of them. There are no bad dogs. But on Magic cards they have no extra appeal.
Last edited:
I also feel this way about a lot of the enchantment creatures in NEO. Theros had a clear world-building reason there were enchantment creatures, and they showed their enchanted-ness through the starfield patterns in their body. This is just a... normal puppy. If it was a spirit dog or something and clearly showed signs of being ethereal, I would buy it.
I do run Birth of Meletis already. It is so great, works with artifacts and lifegain too. I didn't count it as a 2-drop when I said I can't afford two non attacking ones, and it's not like all my two drops are hyper aggressive, just having a home in some attacking decks.
That being said, I think I'll stick with the Wall. White already has a bunch of Ninjutsu enablers, both cheap fliers and etb guys. So I think having other cards than board wipes that'll lead you to controlling decks is more important for my cube.
Thanks everyone, receive your likes!
That being said, I think I'll stick with the Wall. White already has a bunch of Ninjutsu enablers, both cheap fliers and etb guys. So I think having other cards than board wipes that'll lead you to controlling decks is more important for my cube.
Thanks everyone, receive your likes!
Last edited:
That's not how WOTC designs enchantment creatures anymore. For original Theros only, the Enchantment creatures were all given enchantment-like effects to fit the "gift from the gods" flavor that they were attempting to capture. However, in subsequent uses of enchantment creatures, they've chosen to make things enchantments where they make sense from a flavor perspective. For example, the Nyxborn Cycle from Theros: Beyond Death was meant to represent mundane creatures who lived in Nyx, while cards like Moon-Circuit Hacker, Sky-Blessed Samurai, and Golden-Tail Disciple from Neon Dynasty are meant to represent creatures who draw on Kami Spirit-Magic to power their spells. As Mark Rosewater has said: "Artifact creatures can simply be artifacts because of flavor. Why not enchantment creatures?"
So no, our dog friend is not a design mistake, she is representative of WOTC learning how to make better Magic sets.
But.. there is no flavor. It's just a normal dog. They even imply that it's a normal dog in the flavor text. A dog making friends with sprites is an enchantment??? Weak attempt WotC.
I fully support enchantment creatures. They are great for design purposes. But like. they had literally so many angles they could have taken to attempt to make it believable. It could have been a spirit dog. It could have been, I don't know, the animated stuffed dog of some child that wished for a playmate or something. that would fit into all the sagas showing enchantment creatures as artistic concepts brought to life. They could've made it glow a bit. Something. Anything.
That's just a shibi.
I fully support enchantment creatures. They are great for design purposes. But like. they had literally so many angles they could have taken to attempt to make it believable. It could have been a spirit dog. It could have been, I don't know, the animated stuffed dog of some child that wished for a playmate or something. that would fit into all the sagas showing enchantment creatures as artistic concepts brought to life. They could've made it glow a bit. Something. Anything.
That's just a shibi.
Last edited:
I guess this really depends on your other offerings, but I don't find that to necessarily be a bad thing when pitted against modern card designs for Aggro. Cards are just very efficient nowadays. If aggressive options continue to be more and more pushed at lower CMCs, I think it's fine to have a few defensive cards that serve as a buffer ala Wall. I wouldn't put too many into an environment to bog down board states or the combat step, but I think a handful here and there is a nice feature to have in an environment.
I've just never felt that disruption is necessarily a bad thing when it comes to gameplay unless it straight up creates a non-game. In fact I'd say that it's good to have outliers that lead to spikes in gameplay or the decision-making process. If I'm an aggressive player Wall becomes another obstacle to navigate around in the match-up and reconsider my potential damage output from turn to turn. Maybe I do just need to fire off this Portable Hole if it means I can chip in an extra 4 points of damage in the early part of the game. Firing off a Swords to Plowshares on a Wall is never a first choice but hey, is there real downside here if I'm clearing the way for attacks?
For all those reasons, this is why it is a design mistake. They can justify it however they like but they are still mistakes. A better question would be to ask: "Why can artifact creatures be artifacts simply because of flavor?"
There is no good answer. Because it's a design flaw. If one disagrees, then one only has to answer the question: What would this Magic card do if you took all of its creature parts out of it Nyxborn Courser. And again there is no good answer to this question, hence the design flaw. The card would be a blank 3 mana card with no card text or attributes or any kind.
I want you all to remember that just because Mark Rosewaters answers an intelligent question, doesn't mean he's automatically correct. He was right the first time around.
So yes, our dog friend is a design mistake because she represents WOTC having to pace themselves and not having time to design the cards properly. If anyone disagrees, there is the question above they must answer. Another way to look at it: If you (not talking to anyone specifically) are accepting these kinds of lazy skip actions from WOTC, will you accept anything you decide to not make properly? Maybe they'll attach the enchantment card type to some instants at some point with no real reason why except it makes you be able to cast enough enchantment spells in a game for a certain archetype in a limited format to be viable. And MARO will say: "We've evolved our thought of it" (This would be another design mistake even though it would be the new way Wizards design enchantments)
Last edited:
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I think it's not a design mistake or flaw, it's a flavor fail. The designs are great! More enchantment creatures are a nice way to support enchantments some more. It's been very hard to get an enchantment theme going in cubes, because typically you have to choose between the creature density to make your deck work or the enchanment density to make your deck theme work. However, judging by most reactions (and likes) here, I'ld say the flavor of these cards clearly doesn't sell the concept well.
Edit: dammit ravnic
No
An enchantment could not just have "When this enchantment enters the battlefield, draw a card." and nothing else. Because then the card would not exist.
Can you show me just one enchantment with this card text and nothing else?
Yeah all we want is for them to either do:
1. Make sure the enchantment creatures are also enchantments and not just creatures. Give them some card text and not just power/toughness.
2. Make sure they truly feel like enchantments flavor wise/lore wise. If they really stand out, sure. Fine. Then they are on par with the artifact creatures that are all constructed by creatures (inventions, robots etc.)
Just one of them. If they do neither, clear flaw and lazy design. Call it what you want. I might not be capable of choosing the right words. But it's 'wrong' at least And I could do it better than Wizards. That shouldn't be the case.
1. Make sure the enchantment creatures are also enchantments and not just creatures. Give them some card text and not just power/toughness.
2. Make sure they truly feel like enchantments flavor wise/lore wise. If they really stand out, sure. Fine. Then they are on par with the artifact creatures that are all constructed by creatures (inventions, robots etc.)
Just one of them. If they do neither, clear flaw and lazy design. Call it what you want. I might not be capable of choosing the right words. But it's 'wrong' at least
And I could do it better than Wizards. That shouldn't be the case.But it could be? There is no reason it couldn't. Works perfectly fine ruleswise. And there are many that come close to being just one time effects.