Tower Defense Format
The Kitchen Table forum
Posted on Nov. 5, 2014, 4:09 p.m. by Sauron_
"What would happen if Magic had a tower defense format?"
I had a great idea on how to try this out. It is very similar to Commander, except the commander is a set of lands. There is the tower, and 3 walls. The tower is a Legendary Land, and the walls are each non-basic, non-legendary lands. Each player starts with the 4 lands on the battlefield and have a 100 card library that fits the same rules as commander, only 1-of's, and no colors that aren't in any of your 4 lands.
The point of the game is to destroy the tower(s) of your opponent(s). During combat, the attacking player decides which wall to attack. Each wall has 10 life, and once all 3 have been destroyed, then he towers can be attacked, and they have 15 life.
Additional Notes: any card that destroys/removes lands won't affect the towers and walls, i.e; Strip Mine, Wasteland, Decree of Annihilation. If a player receives 10 poison counters they still lose, no matter which wall/tower was attacked. Cards that deal damage to a player are directed at walls/towers instead.
Suggestions Welcome!
Square_Nacho says... #4
Personally I think this is great. The other day I had an idea of playing Commander and just for fun throwing planechase into it as well :P
November 5, 2014 4:20 p.m.
Epochalyptik could this ever become a format on the site? Where we can input the tower and the walls?
Also, alexoak I was debating it, and I'm still not sure.
November 5, 2014 4:33 p.m.
It'd be a little more complicated, which is definitely an issue. However, you can choose planes that would compliment our retinue of defenders
November 5, 2014 4:37 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #9
We generally don't go through the effort to add new irregular (i.e. require a new, represented card designation) formats, especially ones that people propose just that day.
You can use the deck description, though.
November 5, 2014 4:37 p.m.
WhiteEyesCloudedbyH8 says... #10
sounds kinda like emperor style magic, but with lands for commanders/generals/emperors.
November 5, 2014 4:43 p.m.
Epochalyptik, if I were to write an article (which I do) about this idea and then detail a playtest, how would I achieve that?
November 5, 2014 4:46 p.m.
Servo_Token says... #12
Get rid of the poison clause. It makes it too easy for the basis behind the game to be ignored.
Otherwise, I like the idea. Running Maze's End as a tower seems fun.
November 5, 2014 4:48 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #13
Just write one up and send it to me, I guess.
I really need to find a new article editor.
November 5, 2014 4:51 p.m.
Maze's End is the first card I would ban in this format as a tower@ThatBlueMage. Similar to how EDH used to have "banned as a commander"
Way to easy to just win. All you'd have to do is build pillow fort and make maze end your tower and most of the time you win. Granted it could be disrupted but with cards like Crucible of Worlds blowing up the gates wouldn't really do much but slow it down.
November 5, 2014 4:54 p.m.
JakeHarlow says... #16
This is kind of compelling. I'd like to see some examples of games and hear how it plays.
November 5, 2014 4:56 p.m.
Servo_Token says... #17
Wait, what would happen to lands that move around?
Fetches, Maze's End, etc, anything that leaves the battlefield, would it just go back to the "Tower Zone"? Do You just insta-lose?
November 5, 2014 5 p.m.
Ok, I'll try to write an article by this wekend and have Epoch post it, this format sounds really fun as a casual game.
November 5, 2014 5:01 p.m.
I still need to work on ban/illegal list, Maze's End, and fetches eem like the first things that would go, and maybe some things like The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Gaea's Cradle, Tolarian Academy, etc.
November 5, 2014 5:03 p.m.
TelleoStar says... #20
Maze's End isn't legendary. By the rules, it cannot be a tower, only a wall. Dealing ten damage to it before it wins the game should be easy.
But I like this format... Might have to give it a try.
November 5, 2014 7:40 p.m.
I'm compelled by the idea. The walls are the only weird part. I think it needs to be more specific than non legendary, non basic. Like what about the dryad, is it a 1/1 or 0/10? It might be better to have basics for walls. This would keep Mazes End from being too over powered and fix the fetch thing.
November 5, 2014 8:09 p.m.
TelleoStar says... #22
That's not a bad thought, alexyoung, but it would take some of the fun out of the format- the basics would only be there to take damage, so there would be no incentive to attack a particular wall quickly, nor would there be any incentive to defend a particular wall more than another.
November 5, 2014 10:24 p.m.
Blizzicane says... #23
Im really surprised that walls are not being used for walls such as Steel Wall for a tower defense game. :S
November 5, 2014 10:47 p.m.
What if the walls act like color identity? Say you run Jund: a mountain, a forest, and a swamp. For example, the mountain is destroyed and is removed from the game, it could limit the player to only playing green and black spells. It would offer a new play style and way of thinking in the sense of both building decks and playing in the format.
November 6, 2014 12:01 a.m.
SadisticMystic says... #25
What would happen if someone chose to run cards like Orzhov Basilica or Lotus Vale as their walls?
December 4, 2014 5:24 a.m.
ThisIsBullshit says... #26
It says they start with them on the battlefield so I assume their "enter the battlefield" effects wouldn't trigger.
Also, vampirelazarus. Much necro such wow.
December 4, 2014 12:26 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #27
I dont know..... it didnt make it the full month since the last post.... by two days......................................................
Its on the list anyways.
Sauron_ says... #2
Sorry that I forgot to add this, each player can only tap one of the towers/walls each turn, and no lands can be cast on turn 1.
November 5, 2014 4:10 p.m.