Taking a little pause between my YotD theme decks to talk a little about the upcoming Return to Ravnica set. In my excitement I decided to take one of those zany personality tests to see which guild suited me best.
I wasn't surprised to see that my answers to the test led me to:
Seriously, how cool is the Simic Guild? Designing your own creatures to adapt to any environment. For me personally I'd probably just stick to designing my own ideal pet or something but the idea of the Simic guild is one that intrigues me.
Okay, maybe I answered some of the questions knowing that the test result would be Simic but that doesn't mean that the answers weren't true! ;-)
Anyway, RTR is shaping up so far to be a pretty cool set. It has been confirmed that each guild will again have its own mechanic, however, none of the old keywords are making an appearance.
Populate is looking like the Selesnya keyword and it involves creating copies of creature tokens you control.
Now, as some of you may know the Simic Guild had disbanded and its leader, Momir Vig, was killed in dissension but I'm hoping they make a reappearance, though it won't be in RTR as the five guilds they are focusing on are: Azorius, Izzet, Rakdos, Golgari, and Selesnya.
I'm actually feeling a little inspired to make a Momir Vig deck but if I do it will be after our look at the Invasion and Planar Chaos dragons. Which I will try to wrap up as soon as possible but I make no promises. ;-)
Stay tuned for Dromar!
Thank you for reading, 'till next time.
Showing posts with label random thoughts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label random thoughts. Show all posts
Monday, 6 August 2012
Wednesday, 16 May 2012
Monocolored Vs Multicolored: What It Should Be
As we all should know monocolored decks, especially in EDH, are quite limited in what they can do as each color has a strength and a weakness. I began thinking about this after building my Griselbrand deck.
A multicolor deck has access to any card that a monocolored deck would plus more. Obviously, the more colors your deck incorporates the more options you are given. You kinda get the best of both worlds when playing in multiple colors.
For an example, Black has Go for the Throat, White has Swords to Plowshares. Great removal spells in their own right but rarely would you see something as good as "Destroy target permanent" in either monoblack or monowhite. However, mix the two together and you get Vindicate.
So it is clear that Wizards is encouraging us to mix and match colors to get the effects we need but where does it leave monocolored decks? Far, far behind.
The way I see it, a monocolored deck should be the most powerful, at least in terms of its strengths, while a multicolored or even five colored deck would have more options but less powerful effects overall. Think of it in terms of a master of kung fu versus someone who is a jack of all trades martial artist. The Jack would have more versatility and thus can offer a wider range of offensive tactics but the master has honed one particular skill to a perfection as thus can perform it better than someone who has spread his knowledge over a wider area. Is one better than the other? Thats another topic altogether. All I'm saying is that it forms a kind of balance.
Now, how could this even be possible when a five colored deck has access to everything a monocolored deck would have and then some, while a monocolored deck only has access to its own cards. Its a one way street right?
The problem can only be solved by card design and a good example of making a card strictly monocolored is Atalya, Samite Master.
By forcing the player to spend only mana of a certain color, right away it empowers the monocolored deck and gives it a viable card to use over a deck that is employing all five colors.
"Jammin, what's your point?" I can hear you say and the answer is not to let monocolored decks fall by the wayside.
There is a certain flavor and charm about playing with only one color and while there is an inherent limitation to what a monocolored deck can do, all I'm saying is that decks that employ one color should have access to some more powerful cards that a multicolor deck wouldn't have access to. In order to give us a reason to play mono in the first place.
That's all for today and I hope you can understand my perspective and if by some chance you are reading this and you happen to work for Wizards then pitch my idea to them won't you? =)
Thank you for reading, 'till next time.
A multicolor deck has access to any card that a monocolored deck would plus more. Obviously, the more colors your deck incorporates the more options you are given. You kinda get the best of both worlds when playing in multiple colors.
For an example, Black has Go for the Throat, White has Swords to Plowshares. Great removal spells in their own right but rarely would you see something as good as "Destroy target permanent" in either monoblack or monowhite. However, mix the two together and you get Vindicate.
So it is clear that Wizards is encouraging us to mix and match colors to get the effects we need but where does it leave monocolored decks? Far, far behind.
The way I see it, a monocolored deck should be the most powerful, at least in terms of its strengths, while a multicolored or even five colored deck would have more options but less powerful effects overall. Think of it in terms of a master of kung fu versus someone who is a jack of all trades martial artist. The Jack would have more versatility and thus can offer a wider range of offensive tactics but the master has honed one particular skill to a perfection as thus can perform it better than someone who has spread his knowledge over a wider area. Is one better than the other? Thats another topic altogether. All I'm saying is that it forms a kind of balance.
Now, how could this even be possible when a five colored deck has access to everything a monocolored deck would have and then some, while a monocolored deck only has access to its own cards. Its a one way street right?
The problem can only be solved by card design and a good example of making a card strictly monocolored is Atalya, Samite Master.
By forcing the player to spend only mana of a certain color, right away it empowers the monocolored deck and gives it a viable card to use over a deck that is employing all five colors.
"Jammin, what's your point?" I can hear you say and the answer is not to let monocolored decks fall by the wayside.
There is a certain flavor and charm about playing with only one color and while there is an inherent limitation to what a monocolored deck can do, all I'm saying is that decks that employ one color should have access to some more powerful cards that a multicolor deck wouldn't have access to. In order to give us a reason to play mono in the first place.
That's all for today and I hope you can understand my perspective and if by some chance you are reading this and you happen to work for Wizards then pitch my idea to them won't you? =)
Thank you for reading, 'till next time.
Friday, 11 May 2012
Soulbond: Monogamy vs Bigamy
So I'm reading through the recently released Soulbond cards from Avacyn Restored and I noticed a discrepancy between some of the cards.
The explanatory/reminder text for what Soulbond does is:
"You may pair this creature with another unpaired creature when either enters the battlefield. They remain paired for as long as you control both of them."
"Both of them" leads us to believe that the pairing is exclusively between two creatures at a time yet on cards like Wolfir Silverheart it says "each of those creatures" while cards like Silverblade Paladin say "both creatures". Needless to say, this little quandary led me to the rules forums to make sure what the ruling on Soulbond was and it is indeed only between two creatures at a time. So then the only question I was left with was: Why the discrepancy?
Perhaps Wizards is trying to tell us that bigamy is wrong and you can only ever have one true soul partner.
Wolfir Silverheart huh? What a wolf indeed! ;-)
Anyways, thats my random thought for the day and I know I haven't posted for a couple days but I guarantee that more is on the way!
Thank you for reading, 'till next time.
The explanatory/reminder text for what Soulbond does is:
"You may pair this creature with another unpaired creature when either enters the battlefield. They remain paired for as long as you control both of them."
"Both of them" leads us to believe that the pairing is exclusively between two creatures at a time yet on cards like Wolfir Silverheart it says "each of those creatures" while cards like Silverblade Paladin say "both creatures". Needless to say, this little quandary led me to the rules forums to make sure what the ruling on Soulbond was and it is indeed only between two creatures at a time. So then the only question I was left with was: Why the discrepancy?
Perhaps Wizards is trying to tell us that bigamy is wrong and you can only ever have one true soul partner.
Wolfir Silverheart huh? What a wolf indeed! ;-)
Anyways, thats my random thought for the day and I know I haven't posted for a couple days but I guarantee that more is on the way!
Thank you for reading, 'till next time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)