How Do You Determine the Mana Cost of a Creature?
Custom Cards forum
Posted on Sept. 12, 2018, 6:31 p.m. by DemonDragonJ
I have long presumed that a creature could not have power and toughness highness than its mana cost, unless it has a drawback of some form, but other users here have been informing that that has never been a strict rule in this game, using Savannah Lions, a card that has been a part of this game since its very beginning, as an example.
Therefore, I am wondering: how is the mana cost of a creature determined? When designing a creature card, how does one calculate how much mana it should cost to summon? What does everyone else say about this subject?
Also, you have to consider how many color symbols of each color are required, how many keyworded abilities and how those exact abilities affect play.
Not to mention, you should think of how Mana cost plays into it. In a tri color commander deck with Gigantosaurus, Qasali Slingers and approximately 35 lands (12 of which tap for G), for example, the odds of you hitting 5 lands of any color in your by your 12th card is around 66%, while getting 5 green lands is actually around 2%. Meaning it's way easier to cast Qasali Slingers and use their ability, although their stats are way lower.
But let's say you're playing a mono green deck with 35 forests, Elvish Archdruid and Gigantosaurus too. The probability that you'll get Elvish Archdruid out by turn 3 is around 86% while the possibility you'll get Gigantosaurus out turn 5 is about the same. So, it's way easier getting a 3 drop on time is way higher than getting a 5 drop. Meaning that the 3 mana difference is also super affective in how long it might take to get the card out (granted, if you don't draw things that make that probability more likely).
September 12, 2018 7:27 p.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #4
Arvail, power determines rarity, not the other way around; rarity is not a mechanical factor, so I believe it should not be considered when determining the mana cost of a card. Only after the card is finished should its rarity be decided.
September 12, 2018 10:12 p.m.
Yes and no. Certain cards in design are slated for specific rarities. We also get cards that don't deserve mythic status pushed into the slot because of their effect on limited. Those certainly are mechanical decisions. When ever you hear MaRo talk about this, you have to keep in mind it's coming from a highly managed source that maintains a narrative. That's not to say he's not sharing valuable insight into the game's design, but if you're solely going to take his words at face value, you're going to be lead astray somewhat.
Power is also not strictly tied to rarity. We get junk rares (totally necessary) and wizards has been ramping up the power of set feature cards recently.
September 12, 2018 10:40 p.m.
The mana cost or the P/T are not the end goal when creating a creature. You do not sit down to create a creature and think "Ok, I want a creature that has 9 power and toughness and mana cost of GGG" the answer is not necessarily Steel Leaf Champion. It could be Leatherback Baloth.
A creature is not a mana cost and stat line, it is there to fill a role. For example, Steel Leaf Champion is part of the cycle of triple symbol creatures, so its mana cost is set. The P/T will depend on what role it should fill, in this case being an undercosted threat that works very well versus token strategies.
So, matching the P/T and manacost is not the end goal of design. It is something that happens more natural as there are expectations and guidelines such as lifetotals or available counterplay and removal that go into a creatures's p/t statting.
For example, if I told you how much should the card with this text and mana cost be:
Random Dude
Creature - Common
This spell can only be cast using mana from basic lands.
How much should it's P/T be?
How about this one:
Another dude
Creature - Rare
Haste
When ~ attacks, all creatures that are attacking get first strike and deathtouch until end of turn.
2/2
What should the mana cost be?
Give me your guesses and I will tell you the answers in the next post.
September 13, 2018 3:21 a.m.
MindAblaze says... #7
September 13, 2018 2:39 p.m.
MindAblaze says... #8
I think this discussion is hitting the major points, however I like to hear my own voice so here goes;
Cards are submitted to a file looking for things like “rare black enchantment” and “uncommon 2/2 white flier.” They are then costed accordingly based on what other abilities they have stapled to them. Then, based on the environment they exist in they tweak things further if a 4/4 is too much more powerful than a 4/3, for example.
September 13, 2018 2:45 p.m.
DragonKing90 says... #9
i'm really curious as to what kinds of creatures you and your friends were using that led you to believe that a creatures power or toughness couldn't exceed its mana cost without a drawback. especially if anyone used green. big creatures is greens biggest strength. how do you feel about Spiritmonger?
September 13, 2018 11:12 p.m.
the first one is Imperiosaur, while the second one is Ankle Shanker.
You nearly got them, intuitively or by knowing about other cards. There is no exact science on this, but you get a pretty good idea of how things should work.
Think how to not have restrictions and go with your gut feeling. Restrictions still do exist - Nullhide Ferox is a good example of that. A 4 CMC 6/6 better have severe drawbacks. On the other hand, Assassin's Trophy shows that restrictions are optional and printing the most potent removal spell in 25 years of magic is possible.
September 14, 2018 3:10 a.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #11
DragonKing90, no specific creature led me to that conclusion; it simply, is that the majority of creatures have power and toughness either equal to or slightly less than their mana costs.
And I definitely believe that Spiritmonger is either overpowered and/or undercosted; if it was a 5/5 or cost 6 mana, it would be balanced, in my mind.
September 15, 2018 12:54 a.m.
MindAblaze says... #12
Spiritmonger is just a big dumb beater that turns sideways though;
No evasion built in, a small amount of protection in Regeneration, and a color changing ability that would need to be worked with to be at all relevant. I don’t understand what’s “over-powered” about it.
When I think overpowered for the mana cost/power creep I’m looking at Serra Angel vs Baneslayer Angel, the evolution of the 2/2, reds variety of threatening one drops (Goblin Guide ever?), ridiculous enter the battlefield abilities (Titans, Grey Merchant of Asphodel and Siege Rhino?) and stuff that’s hard to get rid of.
I think the point of all this though is with the increased power level of removal spells, forced sacrifice and other things that make creatures less effective, creatures need to get stronger to balance it out. It doesn’t mean P/T higher than CMC, because that’s always been more of a guideline for a starting point than a hard and fast rule. It just means that the creature needs to be balanced for the environment it’s in. A 6/6 trample for 6 isn’t even that scary in limited any more because you probably have a bunch of options to deal with it, unless you didn’t hold one in preparation. That’s how creatures beat people, not because they’re bigger than their mana cost...
Arvail says... #2
Rarity and number of colors required to cast the spell increase how powerful a card is allowed to be. It used to be that creatures more or less never had more power+toughness than 2x their Cmc. Over the years, we've power crept a little and now we can have very powerful creatures. In Modern, for example, people regularly play with huge Tarmogoyfs and Death's Shadows. Still, just being a huge thing for little mana may not be enough to make a card good enough to see play. You've got to consider it's other abilities and the environment it's going to play in. More often than not, the post and toughness of a creature seems to not come from a set formula, but from the aggregate of cards in general. Most players have a really good feel for how big creators should get for their abilities. Go to any custom mtg design thread and you'll rarely see much disagreement over the size of creatures.
September 12, 2018 6:42 p.m.