Magic Origins SPOILERS!
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum
Posted on June 8, 2015, 1:03 a.m. by JWiley129
MaRo's article got spoiled early, so we have some SPICY Previews with "new" mechanics!
TL;DR: Menace is replacing Intimidate & Landwalk, Prowess is now evergreen primary in Blue secondary in Red and maybe tertiary in White, and Protection is now deciduous used only as necessary.
Magic Origins Card Image Gallery
Hmm Serum Visions is a legitimate possibility... but no more protection you say? Why not?
June 8, 2015 1:19 a.m.
VampireArmy says... #4
Meanace looks pretty friggen astounding. I'm also a huge fan of prowess
June 8, 2015 1:19 a.m.
vishnarg - Protection has gone the way of Hybrid, only being used as needed instead of every set. It's not gone for good, just put into the toy box of toys you use every once in a while.
June 8, 2015 1:21 a.m.
Menace is a cool mechanic, I agree, although we've seen it before on some creatures. I hope it becomes more evergreen for Red than haste though.
June 8, 2015 1:22 a.m.
I love the fact that Prowess is now evergreen. Easily one of my favorite mechanics. Excite!
June 8, 2015 1:25 a.m.
Hjaltrohir says... #9
Hopefully we'll have Serum Visions on the way, or maybe even Preordain!
June 8, 2015 1:44 a.m.
I'll just say this now.
Serum Visions will not be reprinted because Mirrodin isn't one of the 10 planes we will visit during Magic Origins.
No, it can't be worked into Theros or any other plane. Don't even try.
June 8, 2015 1:47 a.m.
JakeHarlow says... #11
Menace...so will the text of cards like Madcap Skills be edited to "Enchanted creature gets +3/+0 and has menace?" Is Menace an evergreen ability for red?
That red burn spell looks like a mostly worse Bolt of Keranos...
June 8, 2015 2:11 a.m. Edited.
JakeHarlow - Menace is replacing Intimidate and will be primary in Black and secondary in Red.
And you aren't wrong about Lightning Javelin, but it's not meant to be good.
June 8, 2015 2:13 a.m.
vishnarg Based on what was mentioned for the other mechanics, I think the reasons they want to dial back on protection is the swing impact it has on matches and the rules confusion. It can straight up invalidate an entire deck at times, oops you were playing mono-black and I happened to be maindecking Knight of Glory. See also specific formats being plagued with protection cards in the sideboard, like the swords cycle in the new Mirrodin block. Protection is also one of the least intuitive keywords. Short of memorizing an acronym, any new player is going to be left confused why their Knight of Infamy dies to a Wrath of God.
June 8, 2015 2:55 a.m.
Preordain is even less likely of a reprint than Serum Visions since it's just a better Serum Visions.
June 8, 2015 3:08 a.m.
Prowess with blue as the primary seems very weak to me. It would be better served in red.
I hope we at least get a Storm Crow with Prowess out of this.
June 8, 2015 3:09 a.m.
I'm super stoked by this announcement, prowess quickly became one of my favourite keywords.
June 8, 2015 3:11 a.m.
Eh. Protection was entertaining. I mean I don't want to be salty but this literally is dumbing down.
June 8, 2015 3:16 a.m.
ChiefBell - I won't argue the dumbing down argument, because people have been decrying it for years, but what limiting the use of protection does is allow for games to be more interactive. Intimidate, Landwalk, and protection are all mechanics that limit interaction. How many people complain about magic in the following way: "It was turn 2 and he Stormed me out."; "I cast 2 spells, and I died to Splinter Twin."; "I was running a mono-white deck and got killed by Stormbreath Dragon.". These aren't exact quotes, but you get the idea. WotC wants more interaction in the games, and that is exactly what is going to happen. While the mechanics might be getting simpler, the gameplay decisions will be getting deeper and more complex.
They are trading one type of complexity for another. Not removing it all together.
June 8, 2015 3:23 a.m.
JakeHarlow says... #21
Agree with Chief here. It's not that hard to understand protection...
Can't be blocked. Can't be targeted. Can't be enchanted. Can't be dealt damage. By whatever it has protection from.
I guess I don't see what's difficult about that. People who can't understand why their Knight of Infamy is destroyed by Wrath of God should read the rules text about protection. Magic is supposed to be a complex game, but I never considered protection to be one of the complex parts.
Why is the game being dumbed down...?
June 8, 2015 3:25 a.m.
Protection DOES have some weird interactions. Like it is weird that board clears still hit a creature with protection. If you know the rules well its not a problem but if you don't it must seem peculiar.
I love protection because it's very flavourful. It represents a special kind of card to me and one that normally begs to be in sideboards. It's one of the only mechanics that I really, really love from both a flavour AND gameplay point of view. From a flavour perspective it communicates this idea of magical protection and kind of being immune to other colours. From a gameplay perspective I most often see it as 'super hexproof' because it stops removal AND blockers.
I can understand it being downgraded but I am concerned about the future of the game if all complexity is to be stripped away. Complexity in itself isnt necessarily a bad thing and a learning curve is important for a game to have. The more learning that is involved, the more intricate the game. Intricate games tend to produce better competitive plays because they reward dedication.
Blood Baron of Vizkopa is one of my favourite cards, for reference.
June 8, 2015 3:34 a.m.
@kengiczar: A Storm Crow with Prowess... Do you really think the world is ready for that kind of power?
June 8, 2015 3:37 a.m.
Full disclosure: I am sad to see protection and intimidate leave common use.
ChiefBell and to a lesser extent JakeHarlow, you are both acting like playing Magic requires something extra than just owning the cards. You are both acting, dare I say, elitist?
JakeHarlow took four sentences to describe Protection, that itself makes it a complicated mechanic. And Magic is not supposed to be a "complex game", it's just supposed to be a game. Games can be complex, and Magic is plenty complex without Protection.
As I said in my comment above, Magic is removing the complexity from the mechanics side. The cards will become easier to read. But that complexity is shifting from having to read up on prior mechanics to complexity of gameplay. The more interactive Magic is, the better it is for the game.
June 8, 2015 3:38 a.m.
I think an intimate knowledge of the game is more important to play than the cards themselves and yeah I think that's a given. Needing to know the rules of the game you're playing is not a big ask!
I'm more sympathetic to people who can't own cards because I get that some people can't earn money. But knowledge of the rules is free so I'm not sympathetic to those who don't understand. Sure if we're talking about a new player then I'm not impatient but with older ones yeah, I am. Knowledge of rules is my number 1 priority.
June 8, 2015 3:47 a.m.
So if I enchant your Overgrown Tomb with Spreading Seas and play Blood Moon, will it remain an Island or become a Mountain?
June 8, 2015 3:49 a.m.
Have you seen how long the Comprehensive Rules are, ChiefBell? It's enormous! Intimate knowledge is a hard thing to achieve with that. Even now I have to double check to see if certain interactions work, such as with MM15. And I've only picked up the game in the last 2 years!
Also you have yet to address my point of the complexity moving away from the upfront cost of reading the card to gameplay complexity. Would you care to comment there?
June 8, 2015 3:51 a.m.
God... I'm soooo angry! Officially losing Shroud, Landwalk, and Protection is nuts! I want Swampwalk!!
I always knew Fear was unbalanced but is one of the reasons I love Black, even if it was technically a rewrite of Shadow (not official), and I NEVER liked Intimidate.
However, the loss of the 3 stated Shroud, Landwalk, and Protection?
Shroud HAS to come back! It's sooo very mechanically different than Hexproof. I can understand some of the problems with landwalk, but as long as the body it's on it's amazingly broken in of-itself, it's whatever, it's still fun in limited. AKA - Speculation on the price of popular landwalkers because confirmed no new support. Same goes for things that make all give land types, they'll be safer to play going into the future. Similarly, things like Boil, Choke, and land hate or MLD/LD probably will see even less playable prints.
And I think most people are taken a-back by the Protection announcement. We'll see I guess.
June 8, 2015 3:55 a.m.
Apologies. I'm at work.
For reference - I totally concede that protection is confusing. I just question how bad some confusion is?
June 8, 2015 3:56 a.m.
Dorotheus - Shroud has been out of the game for a while now...I don't know where that came from .
June 8, 2015 4:06 a.m.
If MTG ever got to the point where I never had to look at the rules I would just quit. See when I pay for MTG cards I don't want a piece of paper that says "Do this". I want a piece of paper I can use in a game that has unwritten interactions with other pieces of paper based on the rules, which I have to memorize in my head.
June 8, 2015 4:07 a.m.
@JWiley129, this is the first official announcement for that, that I can recall reading regarding Shroud.
It is also very, very different from Hexproof, that I shouldn't need to explain.
But it allowed a different kind of balance. A 1/1 for 1 with Shroud is bad. A 1/1 for 1 with Hexproof can win games. A 4/4 with Shroud for 3 is strong. A 4/4 with Hexproof for 3 is insane. Then applying Jedi curve, for 3 a 4/3 with Shroud, or a 3/1 with Hexproof.
@kengiczar A day where they use flavor text on Pestermite that says, "Make sure to put Splinter Twin on this guy" will be a sad day! hahahaha
June 8, 2015 4:19 a.m.
JakeHarlow says... #33
@ JWiley129: You make some valid points, to be sure. However, I am unconvinced that the changes being made will actually engender more complex gameplay. Further, the reduction of more complex mechanics, would, in my view, limit the options of players during the deck construction component of the game. For example, many protection cards have long been employed as sideboard pieces by players hoping to improve their performance against specific decks.
Before I continue, I must quibble a moment on the "four sentences" I used to describe the protection mechanic. First, it was a stylistic choice to use short phrases (not sentences; even though those were periods, there wasn't a grammatical subject in any of them) to explain each distinct thing protection does. I could easily have separated each item with commas rather than periods (as the actual official reminder text from Wizards does, if I'm not mistaken). If a player complained, "Protection is confusing because it does so many different things," I would reply, "No, it does four things. The permanent with protection can't be blocked, targeted, enchanted, or dealt damage by anything it has protection from."
I'll admit candidly that there are some situations involving protection that can confuse even experienced players. Global effects like Wrath of God still destroy creatures with protection from white. This seems counterintuitive, no mistake. Once players get over this and realize that mass destroy effects aren't stopped by protection, they are still likely to be confused when they try to use Anger of the Gods to remove, say, a Master of Waves. They'll need to be reminded that though Anger of the Gods is a global effect, it is a global effect that deals damage. Master of Waves can't be dealt damage by anything red, which is due to its protection from that color. Again, these situations can make the protection ability counterintuitive, but a simple close reading of the ability itself will quickly dispel any confusion. I think mechanics like protection lend a great deal to the game.
I'm not trying to be elitist, believe me. However, I will suggest the following. A player who cannot understand the protection ability, even after its nuances are explained (and the explanation shouldn't take long; my above examples cover almost everything), will likely have other difficulties with the game. A player who finds the concept overly complex might be better-served with a different game. Protection is hardly the only nuanced concept to be encountered in Magic: The Gathering. What about the stack and the priority system? Aren't they considerably more complex and counterintuitive than something like protection? My point is: if a player can't navigate the hurdle presented by protection, how can they be expected to grasp the finer points of the game? No amount of ability reduction and simplification will change the mechanics of the game itself, which are already complex by gaming standards.
Just try explaining the stack and the priority system to a new player. Which concept are they most likely to grasp first? The stack or protection? My money is on protection. Magic's inner workings already render the game fairly complicated. Sidelining evergreen abilities won't change that.
June 8, 2015 4:26 a.m.
JWiley129 - I don't think the complexity of the game itself changes drastically. What I mean is that the underlying core rules about how you block, attack, play cards etc does not change from set to set. The complexity of the game is driven by new cards, new mechanics, and thus new interactions. The gross, overarching rulebook stays largely static but the cards themselves change the way you apply the rules.
The nice thing about introducing complexity on cards is that you can apply 'BUT' clauses to the core rules. Your killspell would kill my creature according to the core rules BUT it has hexproof so it can't be targeted. You would normally be able to block my creature BUT is has menace / fear / other. The overarching core gameplay doesn't contain many 'buts'. The cards do. I see the cards as introducing all the wonderful 'ifs' and 'buts' and other complications that the game of magic doesn't have hardwired into its basic rules.
Therefore I don't see this move from upfront complexity to inherent, core complexity as being valid? Like I don't see it actually happening. Furthermore, if that were to be the case would wizards not be making the entire game more complicated instead of just having certain contradictions, which would be a bad thing? What I mean is that the card Blood Moon might be hard to understand on its own, but it's an isolated example that you might not have to deal with if you don't play modern. If you changed the basic complexity of the actual game then suddenly you add things that are hard to understand that EVERY player has to deal with because its right there in the very fabric of the gameplay.
I think having a few isolated BUTs is easier to deal with than changing the entire gameplay so that it contains BUTs.
June 8, 2015 4:29 a.m.
Also, as a further question; you could well describe this advocacy for complex gameplay as intellectual elitism. I WANT to be challenged - but then I need to realise that not everyone does. I shouldn't necessarily get what I want, but neither should they. When does this wish for complexity become elitist. SOME amount of complexity is inherent in every game ever, because they all have rules. How much is too much? I guess that depends on the majority of people? But then do the majority represent the best interests? Financially perhaps I guess?
June 8, 2015 4:32 a.m.
Coinman1863 says... #36
Well, we also have to think about it this way as well, we may have lost some complexity in the new sets but,
- Loosing 2 abilities is not going to drastically change the game (Probably).
- We still got all the complex/confusing/errata for life cards right? It's not like they are going to spontaneously vanish after this set is released.
We will still have complexity, but not in the ways we think.
June 8, 2015 6:21 a.m.
@JWiley129, The comp rules aren't actually that long of a read. I read the whole thing in a few subway rides. There's even an app to get them on your phone. Someone who already knows how to play could skip the parts they already knew and finish it in about 3 to 5 hours, depending on how fast they read.
June 8, 2015 6:22 a.m.
I think the problem with complexity is more that most players don't even know where to find the comp rules.
June 8, 2015 6:24 a.m.
Ohthenoises says... #39
Just popping in to point out that protection also prevents equipping. Apostle's Blessing or protection from color (if the equipment is colored like Godsend) will drop the equipment too.
June 8, 2015 6:59 a.m.
Haven't read the comments yet and I will afterwards, but so far, nothing impressive has appeared imo (well ok. Liliana was good). I also kind of which that prowess was just dropped because the ability can be very powerful, but I guess when you think about it, they needed some to keep it a thing in the new standard. At first I misread lightning javelin as a 1
, which would make it awesome, but for four...way to much.
June 8, 2015 7:03 a.m.
NobodyPicksBulbasaur says... #41
Prowess makes decisions way more difficult than protection ever did. They're removing unintuitive rules, not destroying complexity. Play against Monastery Mentor a few times and tell me Prowess isn't complex.
Mechanics that appear simple can still create complex gameplay.
June 8, 2015 7:10 a.m.
I agree with NobodyPicksBulbasaur. Protection was not a confusing ability imo, and prowess is slightly more confusing and can catch new players with combat tricks.
June 8, 2015 7:12 a.m.
fluffybunnypants says... #43
I'm glad that Prowess is continuing, it's one of my favorite mechanics.
June 8, 2015 7:25 a.m.
Prowess is great and all but it makes deck building decisions for you in the way that you have to fuel it (with non creature spells). Prowess is a mechanic that is limiting. Protection isn't
June 8, 2015 7:30 a.m.
Well, this is wonderful. And I love how you can tell which cards are from which plane - like how Lightning Javelin is from Theros, because of its Akros flavor text.
Also, Menace is finally a keyworded ability. Just sayin'.
Does anyone have a higher-quality image of Hixus, Prison Warden? Because mythicspoiler is cutting off the P/T.
June 8, 2015 8:02 a.m.
Can I raise two interesting points from these spoilers specifically:
1). The artwork for Jhessian Thief is actually gorgeous. It's awesome. And the card is bad, but not awful which I like.
2). Making scry evergreen may be a fantastic thing for modern. Sure they've said they won't print cards like Serum Visions ever again. They're just too strong. But if a deck is able to accumulate a tonne of scry cards then they'll be well able to build up slow advantage. If all the counterspells, burn spells, lands, and cretaures you cast have scry then by god are you going to be able to manipulate what you draw.
CanadianShinobi - opinion on increasing scry? Good thing I assume.
June 8, 2015 8:02 a.m.
JakeHarlow says... #47
@ Ohthenoises: Equipping is targeted activated ability, so the "no target" clause of protection covers that. However, you're correct that if a creature gains protection from say, white, and is equipped with Godsend, then Godsend would fall off of it. I guess it's accurate to say that permanents of x color or type cannot be attached to a permanent with protection from said color or type.
June 8, 2015 8:05 a.m.
Ohthenoises says... #48
I just don't understand how people can think protection is complicated. Seriously? No one has heard of the acronym D.E.B.T.?
Damaged
Enchanted/Equipped
Block/Blocked by
Targeted
Not that hard.
June 8, 2015 8:14 a.m.
All this complexity discussion has me looking forward to the 2030 merge of WotC and the My Little Pony brand. It's going to be the best because there will be a Tarmo-Dash and a Rainbow-Twin.
On a real note, I am dying to get some artifact mechanics that work with proliferate. Something with counters...anything! Last time we had the Dragon Throne of Tarkir and in the Innistrad block we had the Chain Veil. Does anybody know of any cool artifacts/relics from the origin stories of our next 5 planeswalkers?
June 8, 2015 8:24 a.m.
Ohthenoises - Newer players. It has peculiar interactions with board clears and if things change colour etc. For seasoned players I think we're mostly fine but there you go. This is why I kind of feel wizards is dumbing down.
HOWEVER one thing I note is that they seem to be removing keywords that make a colour useless. Demoting "protection from X" and Intimidate means that you're less likely to lose matches just because you happen to play red and the opponent has "protection from red" creatures.
It takes some irritating chance elements out of the game? And replaces them with things like Menace which still give you choice. You won't auto lose to Menace in the same way you might auto loss to say.... Mirran Crusader but it's still very strong.
Unforgivn_II says... #2
Inb4 Serum Visions
June 8, 2015 1:05 a.m.