Pattern Recognition #37 - Figure of Destiny and Level Up
Features Opinion
berryjon
20 July 2017
2787 views
20 July 2017
2787 views
Hello everybody! My name is berryjon, and I am TappedOut.net's resident Old Fogey and part-time Smart Ass. And even I run out of ideas once in a while. So today's article comes from the glorious "Random Card" option on Gatherer. You should click it some time, see for yourself just what has been printed without context or expectation.
So when I clicked on it while pondering this article, it naturally gives me Figure of Destiny. And I looked at it, and I had a brilliant idea for today's article! Well, I think it's brilliant. Your opinions may vary, and thus, do not count. ;)
So, Figure of Destiny. I'm going to start with this card, move on to a whole Mechanic that had its roots here, then into the larger problem that affects the game, one that there is no real answer for.
As part of the multi-coloured theme of the set, the Figure of Destiny was one of the ways in which the boundaries of the colour pie were muddled and mixed together. But more importantly, it gives a glimpse into the scaling of creatures and their casting costs. I've talked about Bears before, and why they are important, but I want to take a step back and break down how Figure of Destiny works.
For the basic cost, you have a vanilla 1/1 for . Yes, I know it's not technically vanilla, but the only creature that jumps to mind as an ability-less creature for the same cost and stats is Fugitive Wizard. In Blue. Also known as the colour that doesn't care about efficient creatures.
But with the activation of the first ability, it becomes a 2/2 for . At this point, you should recognize the power, toughness and converted casting cost of a proper Bear that isn't in Green. But we're still behind the curve.
And here we get the first objection to my scaling description. Time. You don't have to fire these abilities off on the turn that the creature comes into play. You can wait. For example, I could, on turn 1, play Figure of Destiny, then on turn 2, drop a second land, attack, an turn the Figure into a 2/2 which is swinging on the second turn. And you still have another land available with which to do stuff.
It may be hard to convey in words, but that's efficient. You're attacking with a 2/2 on turn 2, and the only other creature that can do that, off the top of my head, is Isamaru, Hound of Konda. Who has, in this case, the disadvantage of being Legendary. And mono- when compared to Figure of Destiny's , and non-Legendary status. It's a very good thing, doing this with only one mana.
The next step is to pay , and it now becomes a vanilla 4/4.
So, a 4/4 for a total of five? Well, we have Serra Angel at that point, which is a vastly better creature. We also have Fomori Nomad (Time Spiral!), and a lot of other creatures that meet the same numbers. They are all better with the exception of a couple of vanilla red creatures and one artifact creature.
So ... what's the point at this point?
Well, there's not much of one, save that it's more information. For a one turn activation, you are still getting a creature that's behind the curve.
But what about turn 3?
Cast the Figure on turn 1. Attack and activate the first ability on turn 2 (and cast, say, Brute Force for good measure). Then, on turn 3, pay and now you're attacking with a 4/4. And the list of creatures that match that is a very short one.
You see now where this is going? Figure of Destiny isn't a one-turn creature. It's a multi-turn one. Even it's final ability, pushing it into an 8/8 Flyer with First Strike for an additional only looks bad when you look at it as a whole with all the previous abilities. But dropping this on turn five or six with the right acceleration? Figure of Destiny an under appreciated aggro card in any deck. Hell, I don't play with it enough. Though if I ever get my Agrus Kos, Wojek Veteran Commander deck off the ground, I know what's getting in.
Oh, it's also been pointed out to me that Warden of the First Tree is this theme given a fresh polish and printed again as a one-off.
So, what's this mechanic I was mentioning earlier? Well, the set Rise of the Eldrazi, contained an interesting mechanic that came from the idea that Zendikar was being built as a potential module / setting for Dungeons and Dragons.
And so we got the Level Up mechanic.
Level Up was an attempt to mimic how D&D characters would increase in power as they gained experience (a different mechanic entirely), and gain fancy abilities as they advance. I like Guul Draz Assassin and Lighthouse Chronologist the most of these ones. Just personal preference.
Now, unlike Figure of Destiny, Level Up (not the web comic) could only be activated as a sorcery. And given the powers some of these creatures display, I am completely fine with this balance decision. And because it also deals with counters, cards like Doubling Season are effective in supporting them.
Yeah, Doubling Season is such a great card. Synergizes with so many things.
Now, Level Up also scales much farther. Some creatures need to get eight or twelve activations to get their final version. So there is a much larger cost, especially over time. But there are only a couple of 'peeks', where something actually changes. The rest are .... filler. Time wasters to prevent you from accelerating to the same speed that Figure of Destiny could.
And here we have a unique instance, then an attempt to make a full mechanic out of it. The inherent ability of a card - specifically a creature - to improve itself over time. And not through use of something like Firebreathing on Shivan Dragon. An actual permanent increase in the effectiveness of the creature as the game advances.
So, the problem.
It is one of scale. Early creatures are cheap and have smaller effects (mostly), and later creatures cost more yet they have commiserate abilities and effects.
So what happens when you're in the middle or late game, and draw a card that would have been useful three or seven turns ago? Well, this is often what is called a "Dead Draw". A card that can do nothing, and won't be able to affect the board state even if you do play it. Or, on the converse, you draw a card that is amazing and powerful - on turn 1, where you won't be able to use it for several turns, taking up space in your hand that could be filled with an actually useful card!
Too much or too little? That's the question. That's the problem.
You could develop a game where power is flat across the board, where everything is useful from the first turn to the last.
Magic isn't that game. And there's no way to change it into that now.
So instead, Wizards puts out cards that can make creatures relevant, even if for just one turn. Instants or Sorceries that start from Giant Growth and onward. But very rarely, even by experimentation, have they tried to make this sort of thing a permanent fixture.
Why?
Well, complexity for one. Improvements like this run directly afoul of the New World Order because they can change the state of the card, and not in intuitive ways. There's also the issue of space on the card. Look at how much space Level Up takes, and realize just how little room there is for what higher power plateaus can do. You can't really have more gradation in what goes on.
Figure of Destiny has the same problem, with the additional realization that due to the way the abilities are worded, you can go down and up its scale as long as you had the mana to do so. And it's not interesting as all you're doing is making a creature bigger! Why not just use an Enchantment or an Equipment to do so instead?
I think that the Monstrosity mechanic from the Theros block was a move in the right direction. The improvement was one way, and could only be done once, which simplifies the matter.
But, on the other hand, the ability is formatted to give out a certain number of +1/+1 counters, with additional rules that state "If this creature is Monstrous...", which means you need two lines on the card instead of one to describe the effects. And this can just take up too much space again.
I think the idea is sound. But the execution needs work. Something simple and binary works, but perhaps formatted like Figure of Destiny. Nothing overly complex like Level Up.
One of my editors, Boza, argues that the new mechanics from Amonkhet and Hour of Devestation - namely Embalm and Eternalize - are successors to Monstrosity. While I can see his point, in that you spend more mana to get a new creature after it has been killed or otherwise hit the graveyard, I have to disagree. I see these mechanics as a variation on Flashback.
I've been talking about being able to make or create larger creatures as time goes on, while Embalm is more of a recurrance mechanic and Eternalize is the same, but allowing for what are essentially +1/+1 counters on a creature if it is cast from the graveyard.
That reminds me! Kicker is another escalation or scale mechanic. Or it can me. With cards like Kavu Titan, you have the option of paying the cost of the creature like it is a Bear (2/2 for ) or scaling up to for a 5/5 with Trample.
The ability or option to simply pay more at the time of casting is different from the incremental approach that I have looked at, but in the same vein. A higher cost for a more powerful effect. I like it, and Kicker is most definitely on my "I wish that was Evergreen" list of mechanics.
Of course, we'll just have to wait and see what comes next. Wizards has spent a lot of time between attempts to invoke this mechanic, so I doubt we'll know when it comes back and in what form.
Join me again next week, when I talk about an old creature type that keeps showing up, but without being that type.
Until then, I'm selling out! Or is that tapping out? Visit my Patreon page, and see if you want to help me out. Basic donors get a preview copy of the final article, while advanced donors get that as well as the opportunity to join me in a podcast version of the series where I talk and you respond.
TheRedGoat says... #2
Calling it now the "type that isn't actually its type" thing is either "lord" or "goyf". The logic of course being in the style of mechanics once tied to that type is no longer tied to that specific creature type because they were phased out.
So, spot on berryjon? Or did I just whiff three times in a row?
Also, I kinda miss level up as a mechanic. I never saw how it panned out in standard, I didn't play the game at that time, but I really like the idea of it. Yet I never saw the connection between the Figure and Level up, nor did I realize it could swap between its various "modes". I would love to see a creature that is meant to be able to work around that.
July 20, 2017 1:36 p.m.
Calliber: Shows my lack of research. I was just running on memory when I wrote that.
TheRedGoat: Miss!
July 20, 2017 2:09 p.m.
Tyrant-Thanatos says... #5
Yeah, there's actually a lot of creatures that can swing for 2 on turn 2. Just off the top of my head, Kird Ape, Loam Lion, Wild Nacatl, Goblin Guide, and Cerodon Yearling. I play in a pretty aggressive playgroup though, I doubt EDH players or Modern players run into these sorts of cards all that often.
And I loved Monstrosity, definitely one of my favorite mechanics. It doesn't tend to scale as high as Level Up, Figure of Destiny, or Warden of the First Tree, but I love the instant-speed activation and some of the specific cards they built with it. Splitting Slime is one of those cards I have a personal crush on, and try to work into every deck I can, and if I ever get into EDH, I'll have to build around Hythonia the Cruel.
Good read, man. :)
July 20, 2017 3:13 p.m.
ClockworkSwordfish says... #6
You've never heard of Willow Elf, Muck Rats, Mons's Goblin Raiders, Eager Cadet, Metallic Sliver, Merfolk of the Pearl Trident, Wandering Ones or Dwarven Trader?
July 20, 2017 5:32 p.m.
Tyrant-Thanatos: Objection! Wild Nacatl swings for 3 on turn 2. Remember, you play a Shock land on turn 1 for the mana! ;)
ClockworkSwordfish: Yeah, I have. I'm just asleep at the when it comes to research this week it seems.
July 20, 2017 7:19 p.m.
Tyrant-Thanatos says... #8
berryjon: Aw snap, you got me man. There's just no coming back from that kind of compelling refute.
Jokes aside, I was trying to provide examples that don't require support from other cards like Shock Lands, and basics are prevalent enough that I intentionally overlooked that aspect. Not everybody has a shock land in their hand that early. :P
And again, I play what's essentially "Kitchen Table" online with buddies, and we tend to be pretty aggro heavy, so I see stuff like that all the time. Fatal Push has been a godsend to me lately lol.
July 20, 2017 7:59 p.m.
One's meta can skew one's perception, that I will agree with completely. I try to de-meta my articles, but I can't always pull that off.
July 20, 2017 8:07 p.m.
Tyrant-Thanatos says... #10
Yep. If there's anything I've learned from interacting with other players through sites like this, it's that everybody has a slightly different perspective, and a lot of that seems to be influenced by the meta they play in. :)
July 20, 2017 8:12 p.m.
Makes you wonder what sort of Meta occurs in the FFL? ;)
I should pencil in a look at some of their boondoggles, should I be able to research it properly.
July 20, 2017 8:20 p.m.
Harashiohorn says... #12
Just wanted to quickly mention that as the article is currently written you state that that Kicker mechanic would can you, in the event it did not function as an escalation or scaling mechanic.
July 20, 2017 10:06 p.m.
berryjon, I wonder: are you gonna write about Baloths?
I also ask myself, in a sort of rethoric way... do people from WotC ever read these articles? Or our comments? THAT would be fun/interesting to know.
Best regards, B.
July 20, 2017 10:13 p.m.
aeonstoremyliver says... #14
The level up mechanic was a super neat idea on paper, at least. Playing during the ROE block, I really liked the mechanic...at first. But what really sucked was paying mana to level up your creature (which is a good mana sink, but I digress), only for it to die to Doom Blade. gasp. I know that's a tired argument, however it definitely puts the level up mechanic at a card disadvantage due to all the efficient removal spells amok.
I definitely agree that Monstosity, Embalm, and Eternalize are steps in the right direction. In fact, cards like Stormbreath Dragon are good enough to be played in Modern, unlike most of the 'Levelers.'
In any case, I enjoy reading your articles as an Old Fogey myself!
July 20, 2017 11:54 p.m.
Busse: Baloths? I don't know. They're a cut-rate Kavu tribal that's spread out from Odyssey to Oath of the Gatewatch. I'm not sure there's enough there to talk about them.
July 21, 2017 12:18 a.m.
It's still an "old" recurrent (and somewhat lackluster) creature type without being it's own type. It was just a silly long shot, considering your phrase "when I talk about an old creature type that keeps showing up, but without being that type.".
PS: I kinda miss Kavus
July 21, 2017 12:38 a.m.
Busse: Yeah, but when Flametongue Kavu exists, you have to realize the tribe was pretty tight and powerful without the same gimmicks you get with Elves or the like.
Here's hoping that Kavu are one of the Commander 2017 sets! ;)
July 21, 2017 12:47 a.m.
JANKYARD_DOG says... #18
Think Figure of Destiny could be modern competitive at all? I think it'd be interesting to see.
July 21, 2017 12:50 a.m.
JonathanSamurai says... #19
I want Samurai to come back. Bushido was an interesting combat mechanic.
July 21, 2017 11:31 a.m.
seshiro_of_the_orochi says... #20
I call for snake nowadays showing up as naga!
...
Too obvious? Lord sounds realistic too. Otherwise: legendary tribal!
July 21, 2017 1:35 p.m.
TheRedGoat says... #21
How is it two people with type related names pop up like this? Also I already tried asking about lords above and whiffed.
On another note, should we as the community try and make a level up based card deck since berryjon skipped out again? How would that even work?
July 21, 2017 3:23 p.m.
seshiro_of_the_orochi says... #23
Champion's Drake and Training Grounds. I'd suggest UW to also include Transcendent Master.
TheRedGoat: says the guy with the tribal name ;) i get your point, funny accident. No illuminati involved afaik. I read your suggestion on lord and how it was wrong, but it still sounds fitting. My actual suggeation was "legend" nowadays showing up as "legendary whatever".
July 22, 2017 1:58 a.m.
When I started reading this article, I thought the "problem" it referred to was simply good ol' removal. As a longtime Modern player who's spent years asking questions like "does it die to Lightning Bolt?" or "how much of a tempo loss will it be when this gets Path to Exile'd?" when assessing the viability of creature cards, I can safely say the existance of killspells (and the pathetically low amount of mana they cost) has always been my biggest gripe with MtG. On one hand, they make the game substantially less fun and lead players of most formats to judge creature cards much more harshly when building their decks, even in casual formats; on the other hand, the game would be even worse without them, especially since there are tons of creatures that essentially lock people out of the game until they're killed, such as Blazing Archon or Platinum Angel. It'd be just stupid if there was no way for anyone to get rid of a resolved Blightsteel Colossus regardless of what's in their deck, but the fact a 12-mana creature can die to a 1-mana spell is also stupid.
And that's why I simply can't take cards with level up seriously and just completely ignore their existance for the most part, despite the idea behind them being fairly interesting: because the first thing that comes to my mind is how stupid I'm gonna look when my Transcendent Master gets Fatal Push'd in response to me paying the level up cost for the 6th time. I want to like level up (and monstrosity, and outlast, and many other mechanics), but the game doesn't let me. The game's built in such a way that anything but the most cost-effective creatures/keywords makes me think of frustration and waste of time. And that sucks.
July 24, 2017 6 p.m.
When you realize that everything dies to removal, you then recognize that nothing will.
Thanks for the idea for an article.
July 24, 2017 6:09 p.m.
JonathanSamurai says... #27
square711, that is why when building tribals I try to stay away from mana investment cards. Automatic triggered abilities like Champion of the Parish are better because he gets bigger without the need to sink additional mana. I like aggro decks and my philosophy is most decks can't kill everything, at least not forever. One of us has to run out of gas.
Sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't. Targeted removal, as long as it's not like 30% or more of the deck isn't as big a problem as board wipes. That is a problem lately with the power creep of board wipes like Anger of the Gods.
Racing a T4 wipe versus a T3 wipe is very different for aggro decks. So the ability to negate wipes or recover from them quickly is what keeps aggro alive. I love tribals so I'll keep building the archetype despite the weaknesses and still enjoy FNM. I also know that my chances of top 3 are much slimmer than other decks. If I ran an Affinity deck I might do a lot better but where is the flavor in that?
July 24, 2017 6:27 p.m.
I wonder just how much better Figure would be if the 2/2 mode also had skulk...
July 26, 2017 2:28 p.m.
Well, this was long before Skulk got keyworded, and that ability was found on Dwarves. Giving it any sort pf keyword, like first strike here, vigilance next then flying Ellis just paint a bigger target on it as it is.
July 26, 2017 2:51 p.m.
I know, but I'm more wondering how much better it would get if the 2/2 version had skulk.
July 26, 2017 5:06 p.m.
Minor benefit. Remember that the abilities are retained when improving and Skulk isn't as useful on larger creatures.
July 26, 2017 5:14 p.m.
Sure, but you could skulk in as a 2/2, then pump to a 4/4 AND, as the article points out, you can go backwards, so in theory you could make it a 2/2, skulk in, and then pump it again.
It's not an enormous swing in power level, but it makes the fact that it can reset more interesting in terms of play decisions. Maybe the board is stalled and skulk gets you through? Who knows.
Calliber says... #1
Always interesting reads
In regards to the first part "You're attacking with a 2/2 on turn 2, and the only other creature that can do that, off the top of my head, is Isamaru, Hound of Konda". There are 22 creatures that are 2/2 for 1-CMC. Most have some condition that needs to be met for them to hit the field or attack/block. There are 9 or 10 that can easily be attacking on turn 2 with no draw back or very minor draw back...Goblin Guide can go turn 1.
July 20, 2017 1:36 p.m.