General Modern Horizons

[Peter LaCara]

What's with these tests? They seem pretty far below your power band.

You're probably right, but the designs are neat and I get a little drunk during spoiler season. Like, that frog is really cool. It's a mini-Gitrog! Why wouldn't I like that?

Incidentally, this set is the one that finally got me to cave on fetchlands. I'm really going to knuckle down and finish the project where I rebuild my cube from the ground up now that there isn't a giant fireworks set that blows up my assumptions about everything every 3 months. I expect there'll be one or two includes from the next core set, but nothing earth-shattering blowing up whole archetypes like the last four sets have done.

 

[Fulcrum]

They aren't fixing modern.
They are seeding frontier.

 

[TrainmasterGT]

You're probably right, but the designs are neat and I get a little drunk during spoiler season. Like, that frog is really cool. It's a mini-Gitrog! Why wouldn't I like that?

Incidentally, this set is the one that finally got me to cave on fetchlands. I'm really going to knuckle down and finish the project where I rebuild my cube from the ground up now that there isn't a giant fireworks set that blows up my assumptions about everything every 3 months. I expect there'll be one or two includes from the next core set, but nothing earth-shattering blowing up whole archetypes like the last four sets have done.

I totally love the frog as well! There are a lot of cool cards in this set, I am finding a lot of the commons pretty tempting. I'm a big fan of Rank Officer, for example. But, I think the majority of the cards in this set that only qualify as "neat" will probably not see enough play to warrant a slot. It's a little too bad, since some of these commons and uncommon are really close to being cube able. I wish they would have juiced the power of the "set for modern" a little more, don't you?

 

[GalacticTraveler12]

It's a little too bad, since some of these commons and uncommon are really close to being cube able. I wish they would have juiced the power of the "set for modern" a little more, don't you?

I've been stockpiling cards that I feel this way about for a while now. Some time ago I saw someone on here suggest a '-1 cc' cube, where every card is treated like it has less in its cost and cmc. It seems like a great way to give these cards a way to shine while having the potential for a high-power format at a fraction of the cost. It can be nice for variety's sake to have a faster format if your primary one is slow and grindy. Who needs Signets when you can run any of the weird rocks and have them be nearly as good, as well as more interesting? This also allows one to run lots of old creatures that have fallen victim to power creep. And of course, it is the perfect place for pet cards.

 

[Onderzeeboot]

I've been stockpiling cards that I feel this way about for a while now. Some time ago I saw someone on here suggest a '-1 cc' cube, where every card is treated like it has less in its cost and cmc. It seems like a great way to give these cards a way to shine while having the potential for a high-power format at a fraction of the cost. It can be nice for variety's sake to have a faster format if your primary one is slow and grindy. Who needs Signets when you can run any of the weird rocks and have them be nearly as good, as well as more interesting? This also allows one to run lots of old creatures that have fallen victim to power creep. And of course, it is the perfect place for pet cards.

That would be me, I still haven't come around to building that one Fountain of Ichor and the frog are perfect for that cube!

 

[Velrun]

I run the following cards with stickers attached to the inner-sleeves:

Parhelion II at 4WW
Final Parting at 2BB
Mastermind’s Aquisition at 1BB
Bedlem Reveler at 5RR
Captive Audience at 4BR

 

[Brad]

That would be me, I still haven't come around to building that one Fountain of Ichor and the frog are perfect for that cube!

Have you done any work on it? Could be a good community thread. Kind of hard to come up with 360+ cards you barely didn't play.

 

[Onderzeeboot]

Have you done any work on it? Could be a good community thread. Kind of hard to come up with 360+ cards you barely didn't play.

I have, but it's been a long time since last I looked at it: http://www.cubetutor.com/cubeblog/34595

Edit: It's going to be a puzzle to get the p/t ratio's right. You don't want a situation where creatures of a certain cmc are shut out of combat by the creatures of cmc one higher. That's a thing to keep an eye out for!

Anyway, Modern Horizons is full of commons and uncommons that could stand by being just that tiny bit cheaper. I'm pretty sure a bunch of cards from this set are going to end up in this cube.

 

[ravnic]

wouldn't it be easier to just have a cube, that starts at cc2 and plays all the cards that "could've been a mana cheaper"? That would also make for a better mana situation, since it is easier to hit a card on turn two than a card on turn one

 

[Velrun]

Yeah. Exactly one card draw. The 8’th og 9’th card draw depending om how you look at it.

 

[Onderzeeboot]

wouldn't it be easier to just have a cube, that starts at cc2 and plays all the cards that "could've been a mana cheaper"? That would also make for a better mana situation, since it is easier to hit a card on turn two than a card on turn one

The difference is that actually making everything cheaper means that you can sequency multiple cards in the same turn, e.g. two (originally) 2 cmc cards on turn 2. So it might be easier, but it won't be the same experience.

 

[Velrun]

Another option is to have each player begin the game with 1 og 2 lands on the battlefield

 

[Brad]

I basically don't have a cube right now because I'm in a full rebuild and might make something with this rule. I never want to make a normal type of cube, which is an issue because that's definitely the easiest design. This lets me make a normal-ish cube, but with a set of cards no one else really has access to.

 

[CaptnIrony]

Another option is to have each player begin the game with 1 og 2 lands on the battlefield

I can't tell how serious this response is meant to be, but there are quite a few differences between making everything cost 1 less and having 1 extra mana per turn.

These make a big difference:


Which I think would make for a very cool game.

 

[Velrun]

Yeah there is a difference. Just like when Ravnic suggested having a cube that started at cc2 it was also a very different suggestion from having a cube where all spells have their mana cost reduced by 1.

 

[CaptnIrony]

Right, I missed that, sorry.

 

[dbs]

The difference is that actually making everything cheaper means that you can sequency multiple cards in the same turn, e.g. two (originally) 2 cmc cards on turn 2. So it might be easier, but it won't be the same experience.

I can't tell how serious this response is meant to be, but there are quite a few differences between making everything cost 1 less and having 1 extra mana per turn.

These make a big difference:


Which I think would make for a very cool game.

This conversation is fascinating to me, because these two mechanics are more-or-less implemented in the Mox Cube. Having 10 moxen basically means you start at 2 cmc in expectation (which makes 1 drops less value and 3 drops more valuable). This has definitely changed which cards I consider "efficient" - in much the same way that 4-drops are borderline unplayable in Legacy, but in Vintage, Arlinn Kord (for example) is absolutely respectable. Even more directly relevant, cost reduction in my cube is omnipresent. With familiar- and helm-effects running around, it's very common to have your relevant spells discounted.

With the combination of the two factors above, one thing became abundantly clear to every drafter very quickly: Elvish Visionary is a bomb. I run the Zealot, the Wall, and two Visionaries. These cards are hotly contested during the draft. One issue with the moxes is you basically get fewer looks at drawing each additional land drop. The turn 1 Visionary becomes a quintessential smoother (that decks can later go on to abuse with blinking, Erratic Portal, sacrifice effects, Earthcraft, etc, etc).

But when Visionary costs 1 mana later in the game, the blinking and replaying will draw you a lot of cards at extremely efficient rates. Especially when re-casting is involved, a 1-mana Visionary several times a turn (often with Beast Whisperer in play) drives the storm count up real quick for a RG Grapeshot deck or a GW Atherflux Reservoir deck. The incessant card drawing with discounted creatures does also tend to make their library disappear at astounding rates with Psychic Corrosion.

Overall, the equations for speed, efficiency, and explosiveness change drastically. Although I should add, it's not clear how much this is due to the extra land drops and the cost reduction itself. The surrounding environment is also dedicated to letting you cast as many spells per turn as possible and maybe it's these support pieces (the Paradox Engine's, the Kor Skyfisher's, the Beast Whisperer's, etc) which cause the perspective shift.

 

[ahadabans]

I'm not sure I'm following. Elvish Visionary costing G is much different than playing it T1 (with a mox or starting the game with one land in play). As costed, I don't see Elvish Visionary being a bomb in any environment. Even best case scenario (Wirewood Symbiote and a mana elf? I guess?), I don't see it making waves in an environment with storm combo and things of that power level running around. EV is a fine duder though and I love the simplicity of it. I've grown very fond of clean text boxes.

 

[CaptnIrony]

This conversation is fascinating to me, because these two mechanics are more-or-less implemented in the Mox Cube. Having 10 moxen basically means you start at 2 cmc in expectation (which makes 1 drops less value and 3 drops more valuable). This has definitely changed which cards I consider "efficient" - in much the same way that 4-drops are borderline unplayable in Legacy, but in Vintage, Arlinn Kord (for example) is absolutely respectable. Even more directly relevant, cost reduction in my cube is omnipresent. With familiar- and helm-effects running around, it's very common to have your relevant spells discounted.

With the combination of the two factors above, one thing became abundantly clear to every drafter very quickly: Elvish Visionary is a bomb. I run the Zealot, the Wall, and two Visionaries. These cards are hotly contested during the draft. One issue with the moxes is you basically get fewer looks at drawing each additional land drop. The turn 1 Visionary becomes a quintessential smoother (that decks can later go on to abuse with blinking, Erratic Portal, sacrifice effects, Earthcraft, etc, etc).

But when Visionary costs 1 mana later in the game, the blinking and replaying will draw you a lot of cards at extremely efficient rates. Especially when re-casting is involved, a 1-mana Visionary several times a turn (often with Beast Whisperer in play) drives the storm count up real quick for a RG Grapeshot deck or a GW Atherflux Reservoir deck. The incessant card drawing with discounted creatures does also tend to make their library disappear at astounding rates with Psychic Corrosion.

Overall, the equations for speed, efficiency, and explosiveness change drastically. Although I should add, it's not clear how much this is due to the extra land drops and the cost reduction itself. The surrounding environment is also dedicated to letting you cast as many spells per turn as possible and maybe it's these support pieces (the Paradox Engine's, the Kor Skyfisher's, the Beast Whisperer's, etc) which cause the perspective shift.

Very interesting. The first part of the first paragraph felt a bit like a miss to me, but I hadn't realised the number of cost reducers in your list. I've thought of similar things when trying to design some archetypes off the beaten path. It would be cool to have a place to discuss these. I guess, like others, I should take one of my threads and use it as a "random blog of ideas".

I would not doubt that the cantriping 1/1s are all the rage, especially when you can use them as synergistic pieces, but I enjoy the fact that as you mentioned, the difference in availability and type of many production affects which cards end up playable, and that you'd end up with a different set than legacy or vintage. It is also interesting to see which ones.

 

[dbs]

I'm not sure I'm following. Elvish Visionary costing G is much different than playing it T1 (with a mox or starting the game with one land in play). As costed, I don't see Elvish Visionary being a bomb in any environment. Even best case scenario (Wirewood Symbiote and a mana elf? I guess?), I don't see it making waves in an environment with storm combo and things of that power level running around. EV is a fine duder though and I love the simplicity of it. I've grown very fond of clean text boxes.

I'm saying that in many games you will play Elvish Visionary turn 1 (I must have done that a dozen times at this point). But also in many games you will play Elvish Visionary for G (I've done this in maybe half a dozen matches). The power-level comes from the mix of efficiency, mana abuse, and raw card draw. What makes storm combo powerful? You need to be able to generate a lot of mana and card draw. A visionary that costs G together with packages like:



or



or



starts getting you cards and mana real fast so your storm combo deck can actually win. When evaluating the power level of a card, it's important to remember that pay-offs are the easy part. When every deck is a combo deck you need consistency - the basic cogs are probably more valuable than the flashy finisher you eventually close out the game with. So that pushes the veggies like EV (which again is often either a turn-1 play or costs G) up the pick order insanely quickly.

EDIT: I should add that I'm thinking of "bomb" in this case as meaning a high pick, or something that's unlikely to wheel, as opposed to "will win you the game on the spot when you cast it". No one is scooping to turn 1 EV. So that might be some non-standard language on my part, my bad.

 

[ahadabans]

Cool. I'll have to peruse your list. I'm always interested in different ways to employ storm outside the tradtitional PowerMax approach.

 

[Velrun]

That is fascinating!

And no worries CaptnIrony <3

 

[whydirt]

These alternative cube rules are fascinating! Maybe someone should start a splinter thread for the discussion so it doesn't get lost to the mists in the middle of this thread?

 

[Brad]

I did a lot of looking through recent sets today at work and I'm pretty sure I'm gonna build this idea. I'm always seeking a unique environment and I have a huge issue with trying to force interesting things like tribal or 5c or whatever the fuck stupid thing just so I'm not running something anyone else is. This lets me run a more normal archetype structure while remaining unique and giving me a design challenge.

EDIT: I've also noticed that the one drops get MUCH more fun as you are able to run 2 mana 2/1s with slight upside or an archetypal interaction. Also, colorless one drops are flexible and blue opens up real aggro.

 

[Knifethrower]

I've executed this idea myself, but the goal was to take unplayable old school jank and make it playable. For instance, .

The game starts with players have physical copies of helm of awakening in a non targetable zone.