Sets (LCI & REX) Lost Caverns of Ixalan and Jurassic Park spoilers

[gaytransmulldrifter]

Yeah I like Isamaru because it's one of those very elegant cards that teaches you something about the game. Why is this vanilla 2/2 for 1 legendary? A 2/2 for 1 must be a good rate! Why is this legendary a 2/2 for 1? Being legendary must be a downside!

I also like it because it is a doggy.

 

[TrainmasterGT]

You're all crazy if you're trying to convince yourself that there's something special about vanilla creatures! Muraganda Petroglyphs and Ayula, Queen Among Bears do not fix that blandness

I mean, there are a couple of vanilla creatures that are "interesting" because they have unique or pushed stat lines (Isamaru, Hound of Konda, Gigantosaurus, Catacomb Crocodile, Yargle and Multani, and so on), but they are the exceptions that prove the rule. Most vanilla creatures are chronically understatted and unexciting. Choosing vanillas was probably the hardest part of building my Unstable Cubicorns Battle Box because the options were just so uninteresting as game peices.

I think the majority of people wouldn't choose to play with Vanillas save for the purposefully compelling cards like Isamaru if given the chance.

 

[LadyMapi]

You're all crazy if you're trying to convince yourself that there's something special about vanilla creatures! Muraganda Petroglyphs and Ayula, Queen Among Bears do not fix that blandness

It's not that the vanilla creatures are special, mind you — they're not special by definition!

My thought was closer to the stereotype of Pauper where you have crazy enablers that you use to play absolutely garbage creatures. So you're slamming down moxen and setting up elaborate engines and then your win-con is the big lad.

 

[Velrun]

Yeah I like Isamaru because it's one of those very elegant cards that teaches you something about the game. Why is this vanilla 2/2 for 1 legendary? A 2/2 for 1 must be a good rate! Why is this legendary a 2/2 for 1? Being legendary must be a downside!

I also like it because it is a doggy.

It's legendary because it's a story character. Unique. There is only one on the plane. This is what legendary means in MtG.

 

[Rasmus Källqvist]

I think that attacking and blocking is fun enough that vanilla-ish creatures are actually pretty great. I think vanilla creatures with spells like doom blade and lightning bolt and vapor snag is pretty appealing.

 

[Velrun]

I just want to add, I think there is a big gap between actual vanilla creatures (Creatures with 0 card text) and simple designs.

For instance I personally consider these cards simple designs. I don't know about you all.

 

[Brad]

I find it a bit misleading to claim that most vanilla creatures are boring. Only 5/291 vanillas are rare+ since Isamaru's printing if you're willing to disregard the 9 reprints from the rare pool. Compare that to 4995/12972 for creatures as a whole. I didn't toss out the reprints for the latter because it's too difficult to eyeball. Essentially, the real statement is that rare cards are cool more often than commons and uncommons. Most people, new or not, would agree with that.

Of course players like cards with cool and unique effects! Especially when they're in a deck that they're going to play repeatedly to increase familiarity and it's probably the best card in their new deck because the card's all upside. Again, most people like that.

The risk comes when you hand a newer player a pack of 15 cards with 50 words on each, tell them to pick one, then hand them 14 more cards with that many words. Now see if they still think it's cool.

I find it very flawed to say "Players like Gollum, one of the most recognizable LOTR characters and a fairly strong card in the starter decks. Therefore, we should cram more words on cards!" I'm sure there's more data than just that, but I really think that a new player would enjoy boring-old-vanilla-Gigantosaurus just as much as they'd enjoy Gollum. Having all of column A or all of column B is inevitably going to push a significant portion of players away.

For retail, adding more rares per pack is going to be a good thing because new players have a greater number "exciting" cards in the pack while still keeping half of the pack fairly simple.

For cube, just be mindful not to make every card a novel. Make some less wordy substitutions when appropriate if you expect new players because the game is overwhelming as it is.

 

[TrainmasterGT]

I find it very flawed to say "Players like Gollum, one of the most recognizable LOTR characters and a fairly strong card in the starter decks. Therefore, we should cram more words on cards!" I'm sure there's more data than just that, but I really think that a new player would enjoy boring-old-vanilla-Gigantosaurus just as much as they'd enjoy Gollum. Having all of column A or all of column B is inevitably going to push a significant portion of players away.

There were several other cards for popular characters in those starter decks, such as Aragorn and Arwen, Gandalf, and Sauron, the Lidless Eye, all of which were better than Gollum. In fact, I think he's probably the second worst of the eight new legendary creatures in the product! The only thing that really stands out about him is the fact that he's far and away the most flavorful of the eight new designs, in no small part because of his complexity. Despite not being the best card, he's the coolest, which makes him the most resonant with newer players. I think what WOTC took away from this is that new players are not turned off by complexity so long as they find the card interesting. This is honestly the correct take from a design standpoint.

Anecdotally, the most popular cards in my Battle Box with new players so far are Venom Connosieur, Striped Riverwinder, and Sword-Coast Serpent, which are three of the most complex cards in the Box. Obviously, Striped Riverwinder with its two keywords is not as difficult to understand as the other two cards, but the difficulty of comprehending Hexproof and what it's supposed to do coupled with the puzzle of when to cycle and when to hold does still give people some trouble from time to time. But, when they get it, they tend to really like it.

This doesn't mean people can't or won't get excited about things with significantly less complexity. Gigantosaurus is not exciting to newer players simply because it's so big, but because the card is so obviously unique. This is partially because the statline and lack of abilities tell the story: It's a big dinosaur that doesn't think too much, but will annihilate you if you get too close. It's not a boring card because it is so evocative. As such, it's actively very interesting. I don't think people would get that excited about Gigantosaurs if it weren't telling such a good story. For example, I think you would be hard-pressed to get a new player to be as excited about Jedit Ojanen as they might get about Gigantosaurus or Gollum unless they are a furry.

I think the big takeaway from all of this information is that we can use complex cards to drive excitement without needing to worry so much about player comprehension. As long as the card is obviously cool, players will want to use it. Frankly, this is a suspicion I've had for a while now, but I think this has confirmed it to me.

 

[Brad]

Obviously, Striped Riverwinder with its two keywords is not as difficult to understand as the other two cards, but the difficulty of comprehending Hexproof and what it's supposed to do coupled with the puzzle of when to cycle and when to hold does still give people some trouble from time to time.

That's the other thing about "complexity." Just a couple of words can carry a lot of weight.

If you want to talk about "coolest," that's the whole reason I made my cube focused around Eldrazi. I think they're cool. Design from there.

Also anecdotally, I've heard my players say "I didn't pick that because it had too many words on it." Which, honestly, if you're new to a cube and you've noticed the cards are all similar power level, and maybe packs are piling up as you're picking slowest, that might be a pretty good idea lol.

I think all sorts of cards can drive excitement for different people. Keep a variety of things available.

 

[TrainmasterGT]

I'm going to post this here because I accidentally made the discussion about words and complexity spill over into two threads (sorry everyone, I was just trying to link back to the original conversation), but I want everyone to hear what Mark Rosewater and Mike Turian have to say about the topic. I think this is really useful information for Cube designers to understand coming from two people who know how to make good limited Magic experiences:

I think Mark says it best:
"We've spent years and years trying to figure out how to make a good starter product, and for a long time, our number one driving factor was complexity. We [felt like we] have to make the simplest thing so people can understand it. What we eventually learned is that the thing that makes people want to play Magic is not low complexity, but excitement of the experience. The first experience needs players to want to learn to play more and think "I want to play more." What we've learned is that trying to make it as simple as possible actually doesn't do the best job of getting new players because they're like 'oh, that's there,' where if you do exciting things, even things they don't understand, they if they want to learn because it's exciting to them it pulls them in. So we've really moved away from this model that 'beginning play has to be as simple as possible' to 'beginning play has to be as Dynamic and exciting as possible."

Now I'm not saying people should cut their nice simple Lightning Bolts for the extra lines of text on Chain Lightning. I completely understand the concern of overwhelming newer drafters in a Cube environment. However, from what the people who actually make this game and have the user data back it up say, it sounds like trying to maximize the excitement factor for each card is more important than trying to do this weird complexity min-max game that we have all been trying to play.

Basically, cut the things that don't spark joy, and add the things that do. If you do that, everyone will have fun.

 

[Phone]

There were several other cards for popular characters in those starter decks....

One thing I am wondering about with this whole Gollum thing (and your mention of Battle box) is that these are formats where players don't really need to parse a card while drafting it. Would a new player take a Gollum during a draft? Would I? I think I would be likely to pass it until I had seen it in play. It feels like we can still expect walls of text to be barriers to entry in any drafted format because it expects you to grok the card pretty much right away - to make a decision on it during draft.

I think there's a fair bit of difference between the complexity of some of the Commander cards that find their way into Vintage cube and something like [[Animate Dead]]. Animate Dead for me is the poster child for complex-but-simple. You enchant a dead creature and bring it back to life. That's it. But to really understand the card during a draft would be a huge (I'm guessing) barrier for anyone not familiar with it.

I think the take away should be that simple does not equal better and that resonant design will trump most other problems (looking at you Animate Dead with your formatting gore).

 

[Onderzeeboot]

I find it a bit misleading to claim that most vanilla creatures are boring. Only 5/291 vanillas are rare+ since Isamaru's printing if you're willing to disregard the 9 reprints from the rare pool. Compare that to 4995/12972 for creatures as a whole. I didn't toss out the reprints for the latter because it's too difficult to eyeball. Essentially, the real statement is that rare cards are cool more often than commons and uncommons. Most people, new or not, would agree with that.

Of course players like cards with cool and unique effects! Especially when they're in a deck that they're going to play repeatedly to increase familiarity and it's probably the best card in their new deck because the card's all upside. Again, most people like that.

The risk comes when you hand a newer player a pack of 15 cards with 50 words on each, tell them to pick one, then hand them 14 more cards with that many words. Now see if they still think it's cool.

I find it very flawed to say "Players like Gollum, one of the most recognizable LOTR characters and a fairly strong card in the starter decks. Therefore, we should cram more words on cards!" I'm sure there's more data than just that, but I really think that a new player would enjoy boring-old-vanilla-Gigantosaurus just as much as they'd enjoy Gollum. Having all of column A or all of column B is inevitably going to push a significant portion of players away.

For retail, adding more rares per pack is going to be a good thing because new players have a greater number "exciting" cards in the pack while still keeping half of the pack fairly simple.

For cube, just be mindful not to make every card a novel. Make some less wordy substitutions when appropriate if you expect new players because the game is overwhelming as it is.

But most vanilla cards are boring! Even Indomitable Ancients and Yargle and Multani are not that exciting beyond the first "he he, that's funny" reaction. That isn't to say you can't spark excitement with vanilla's, Watchwolf turned a lot of eyes when it was first printed.

The point isn't to cram as much words on a card as possible at all times either, the point is that we shouldn't make everything as simple as possible to keep new players on board. Your Lightning Bolts and Counterspells are all fine additions to your cube (or a retail draft environment). It's the Highborn Vampires and Spined Karoks of this world that don't serve much of a purpose. They don't need to be this simple for newer players to enjoy a format, and they excite no one when opened.

 

[Velrun]

I agree that vanilla creatures are not super exciting for anyone. Maybe one or two in an entire cube. But I also think we have misunderstood the Gollum complexity talk if we think it’s the vanilla creatures that Wizards are talking about. I think it’s the more simple cards that aren’t vanilla that are going to be more complex. I expect all cards to get more text and/or have more keywords. Also when we get fewer commons and more uncommons, it’s a natural next step.

 

[ravnic]

Before previews for The Lost Caverns of Ixalan officially begin, I thought it would be fun to do another of my Duelist-style teasers where I give tiny hints of things to come. Note that I’m only giving you partial information.

First up, here are some things you can expect:

• a new card with the word “three times” in its rules text

• a new land subtype

• an aura card we’ve reprinted numerous times over twenty years appears with a new name and is one mana cheaper

• a redone version of a popular mechanic that first premiered in 2009

• a new mechanic representing crafting

• a card capable of animating both artifacts and enchantments

• a popular Tempest sorcery returns as an “enter the battlefield” effect

• a new ability word that cares about what is in your graveyard

• some counters in the set: bore, chorus, dread, finality, landmark, lore, net, point, stun, and time; one of which is a new deciduous counter

• some creature tokens: 0/1 green Dinosaur Eggs, 1/1 colorless Gnomes, 1/1 white Vampire, 1/1 blue Merfolk, 1/1 black Bat, 1/1 black Fungus, 2/2 black Skeleton Pirate, 3/1 red Dinosaur, 3/2 red and white Spirit, 3/3 green Dinosaur, 4/3 black Vampire Demon, 4/4 white Angel, 4/4 white and blue Golem (note that some of these tokens have additional abilities)

Next, here are some rules text that will be showing up on cards:

• “As an additional cost to cast this spell, tap four untapped artifacts, creatures, and/or land you control.”

• “Until end of turn, target artifact or creature becomes a Dinosaur”

• “Then destroy all other creatures if its power is exactly 20.”

• “When you <new keyword>, <new keyword> again for the same value.”

• “Whenever you’re dealt combat damage, the attacking player gains control of CARDNAME and untaps it.”

• “Equip – Pay or discard a card.”

• “Whenever you cast a permanent spell using mana produced by CARDNAME, up to one other target permanent you control becomes a copy of that spell until end of turn.”

• “Skeletons you control get +1/+0 and have haste.”

• “If a triggered ability of another creature you control of the chosen type triggers, it triggers an additional time.”

• “When there are 1,000 or more time counters on CARDNAME, sacrifice it and each opponent loses 1,000 life.”

Here are some creature type lines from the set:

• Artifact Creature – Dinosaur Gnome

• Creature – Salamander Wurm

• Creature – Merfolk Warrior Scout

• Legendary Creature – Bat God

• Creature – Capybara

• Legendary Creature – Skeleton Spirit Pirate

• Artifact Creature – Nautilus

• Creature – Beast Horror Spirit

• Creature – Fungus Snail

• Creature – Dinosaur Skeleton Horror

Finally, here are some names in the set:

• Braided Quipu

• Calamitous Cave-In

• Careening Mine Cart

• Chupacabra Echo

• Diamond Pick-Axe

• Eaten by Piranhas

• Out of Air

• Pirate Hat

• Sovereign’s Machuahuitl

• Spelunking

Tune-in to see Lost Caverns of Ixalan’s debut on October 24th on twitch.tv/Magic and on our official YouTube channel. The full story drops October 20th.

Some interesting ones. Equip 3 or discard a card intrigues me.

And I assume the 1 mana cheaper aura is another humilation of my beloved Pacifism

 

[TrainmasterGT]

Diamond Pick-Axe
A new mechanic representing crafting
Careening Mine Cart
Calamitous Cave-In
Spelunking
1/1 black Bat
2/2 black Skeleton Pirate
4/4 white and blue Golem

Oh god this is going to be a Minecraft set XD

 

[Mown]

putting my bet on Cascade for exactly MV X

 

[ravnic]

Cascade is probably the 2009 mechanic returning in a new form. Maybe kewywording (and reprinting?) Treasure Keeper?

My guess for the creature with a tempest sorcery as an etb is Extinction, as most of the others we've had already and it would be a nod to ixalan's tribal themes.

 

[Velrun]

Tempest Sorcery. My guess either:
or

 

[Velrun]

• a new land subtype

Mega interesting!




• some counters in the set: bore, chorus, dread, finality, landmark, lore, net, point, stun, and time; one of which is a new deciduous counter

Wow that is many. Stun is already deciduous. So unless he think it’s still a new thing that stun is decisions then I bet it is either lore or time. Lore from Sagas which are in this set. Or time because we have seen that a lot recently and it can be used for many different things.

 

[Seeker]

He says "new deciduous counter" though - lore is already deciduous from Sagas (actually evergreen at this point right?), and time is only new to being deciduous because vanishing and suspend and so on, though that is reasonable-sounding compared to most of the others.

 

[Mown]

I would assume a deciduous counter would imply the counter has an actual mechanical property, like keyword, poison, shield, stun and rad counters, and not that it's part of a deciduous mechanic.
Not sure what any of these would be though. Dread could be "can't attack or block unless you pay 1", net is flavorful enough that it could be something, but I don't know what, and same with bore. The rest of them don't feel like good candidates for one reason or another.

 

[Velrun]

He says "new deciduous counter" though - lore is already deciduous from Sagas (actually evergreen at this point right?)

No. Sagas are deciduous.
Until Wizards decide otherwise and announce it.

If they were evergreen two things would happen:
1. You would see them in every Standard legal set unless something rare and special happens that makes them be excluded for just a single set only to naturally return to sets in the following set.
2. You would find them on an article stating that they are evergreen.

 

[LadyMapi]

The other possibility for the 2009 mechanic would be... Traps? He sure did pick a year without a lot of new mechanics, huh...

 

[TrainmasterGT]

The other possibility for the 2009 mechanic would be... Traps? He sure did pick a year without a lot of new mechanics, huh...

Traps are the only other real option I believe. They aren’t as popular as cascade, but something representing a trap would make sense in this setting…

…the Journey to the Center of the Earth Plane Dinosaur Fungus Frenemy Furry Epic Minecraft Gamer 420 (Blaze It!) Setting…

 

[Zoss]

I think either one is a real possibility, but my money is on "cascade into XYZ." It's something that WotC already kinda does with Seek and is something they've mentioned wanting to do in the past.