Why do Graft and Evolve not combine together so well?
General forum
Posted on June 7, 2013, 9:42 p.m. by Lucy_Is_Scary
One thing I kinda wonder about~After I saw the evolve ability, I thought to myself "Gosh, that comboes great with Graft, just grafting the weak creature you play up, to make you evolve creature get stronger". But, to my dismay, I found out that these two abilities do not combine so well, due to the double-check evolve has.
The thing I find strange is: Why? I mean, it would be obviously obvious that graft and evolve SHOULD combine well - both simic abilities and the abilities could also combine REALLY well. Was it a balance decision? I do not guess so, because it is not exactly unbalanced to let them combine together. Graft can only move one counter per creature with graft after all, balancing the combination quite a bit. Additionally, this combo would not be the most easy to setup, but it would allow for very nice plays.
So, why do you think they did it so, that these two abilities do not combine together so well?
Lucy_Is_Scary says... #3
I guess so, too. However, I guess they saw each guild as "one" in a sense - so the probably looked a lot at the old simic cards and mechanics to create the new one. This, again, gives rise to simple question of "Why". The wording may be easier, however, I would still like to see graft and evolve work together better - it would allow for some really nice plays. After all, wording<actual game. Evolve is rather complicated in some scenario's anyway - a more lengthy, yet more specified wording would probably a better solution - and this could have prevented this graft/evolve effect.
June 7, 2013 10:42 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #4
Evolve is perfectly specified. You want the mechanic to be different; the wording follows the mechanic.
As for why, that's just the way they chose. Unleash and hellbent have nothing to do with one another. Same with detain and forecast. And a couple of the other guilds. It's not like Simic got shafted by itself. Some mechanics just need to progress.
June 7, 2013 11 p.m.
Same follows for Replicate and Overload. It was written in an article I read by R&D that they wanted the RTR block to be fresh and new, while also holding true to the original block and what fans loved about it. To just cut and copy things would've been cheap and unexciting as they stated themselves. I'm sure you can easily run a Graft and Evolve deck easily enough in you wanted to. They also needed to showcase how all the guilds of Ravnica have changed and "evolved" (no pun intended) since the last time we were there.
June 7, 2013 11:19 p.m.
Lucy_Is_Scary says... #6
You are correct, however, the thing I simply find strange is: Graft and Evolve COULD work together so well and it would enable some great plays and simply add to the game - also, using graft to "cheat" a creature powerful enough for evolve to trigger seems quite intuitive(That is, at least, what me and many others have thought the first time they saw evolve, thinking about a simic type deck).
Evolve is perfectly specified, I did not argue that. I also do not wish the mechanic to be really much different - the mechanic is, simplified: If a stronger creatures comes into play, your evolve creature gets stronger. Graft is all about strengthening creatures that come into play(not taking other abilities with which graft can help into account).
It simply seems strange to me, that two abilities of the same guild which seem, at first glance, to perfectly fit together do not perfectly fit together due to the wording/rules -after all, you would not have to completely and absolutely change everything. One could also change a little bit within the wording in graft - but that's just not the point, as you surely understand.
June 7, 2013 11:19 p.m.
Lucy_Is_Scary says... #7
@DukeNicky: Yeah, but that's not the point. A graft+evolve deck also works rather well. I simply find it strange the mechanics themselves don't compliment each other as they easily could. The only practical change would be, to let +1/+1 counters moved by graft onto a creature you control count for evolve.
June 7, 2013 11:21 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #8
@Lucy_Is_Scary: That would mean graft has to be worded as a replacement effect that can put +1/+1 counters on creatures as the enter the battlefield. As graft is actually worded, it waits to trigger until after the creature enters the battlefield. Neither the "intervening if clause" nor the alternative I proposed earlier can actually work around that because both involve checking the power and toughness before graft, as a triggered ability, can do anything. It's more of a problem with the first mechanic than with the latter, so it's not really something the dev team could work around.
June 8, 2013 6:35 a.m.
Lucy_Is_Scary says... #9
@Epochalyptik: I realized that, too - albeit a tad too late. There are still ways to work around the wording of evolve without essentially changing what evolve does - it may be a tad more complicated - but only in some situations which probably are rather rare. So the ability itself stays rather simple and clear, except for some special plays - which is something rather common to Magic in general. But aside from all of that, I still just find it so peculiar~ At first glance, it seems obvious how graft and evolve work together. However, due to the specific wording, they do not work together. As I said, the dev team surely looked at old simic cards while working on the new ones - and I am rather sure that they also saw how graft and evolve COULD work together, as it simply seems obvious. The question is: Why have they prevented this obvious combination? While the wording of the current evolve is more clear, especially for such in-depth-esque questions, a simplified wording like you offered would still be understood in it's gist by everyone and would allow the possibilities for graft.
June 8, 2013 7:04 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #10
The wording I offered doesn't allow graft to work with evolve, though. My alternative wording, like the "intervening if clause," checks the power and toughness of the creature at the time of triggering. If the creature doesn't immediately have a higher P/T, then neither my wording nor the actual wording would allow evolve to trigger. Either one could work, but only if graft was the keyword changed. The wording of evolve doesn't matter because neither option can currently get around the way graft works.
As for why they opted for the "intervening if clause" rather than something like the alternate I offered, it's at least in part due to wording convention. The "intervening if clause" exists to standardize wording conventions and offer a clear outline for writing similar abilities. The alternate is a bit more confusing. I'm still surprised that they haven't implemented the "intervening if clause" on cards like Sengir Vampire ; I personally find that kind of wording cumbersome.
June 8, 2013 7:18 a.m.
Lucy_Is_Scary says... #11
Ah, I see~ Well, it's been a long long time since I last played magic actively, so things get confusing. Hm, in that case, I see the reason why graft and evolve do not combine. Then again, is there a way to re-word evolve in a way, that it could combo with graft?
June 8, 2013 7:21 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #12
Looking at the way graft works, I don't think so. Evolve is an ETB ability, that much is clear. Therefore, evolve needs to somehow check the P/T as or after the creature enters. The problem with checking it after is there is no way to word the ability such that it wouldn't also check before (because the "intervening if clause" is how you would achieve an on-resolution check).
You would have to change evolve conceptually such that it is no longer an ETB ability, but I'm not even sure what you would make it.
June 8, 2013 7:30 a.m.
Lucy_Is_Scary says... #13
And again, I see. Thanks for clearing that up then~ Still, while I may not find it strange anymore, it is, nonetheless, a bit sad. If evolve+graft could work together like they, in my opinion, should, it would simply open up great, yet still not overpowered, possibilities of play.
June 8, 2013 7:39 a.m.
speaking of which here is a deck for an example for all of you:
ive managed well enough with this one!
June 9, 2013 11:27 p.m.
Lucy_Is_Scary says... #15
Well, I have a simic deck of my own(albeit, missing a number of cards, especially these nasty fetch/shock lands). Think it works a tad better than yours, simply because my creatures get a lot more powerful rather quickly and because my deck is a faster, due to manaramping and rather strong 3 and 4 mana cards. Take a look at it, if you wish: Simic-Type Deck
Epochalyptik says... #2
I highly doubt they wrote evolve's wording specifically to keep it from interacting well with graft.
Evolve was likely worded with an intervening if clause because it was the easiest way to define the mechanic. Think about how comparatively awkward the alternative would be:
Whenever a creature with greater power or toughness than this creature enters the battlefield under your control, put a +1/+1 counter on this creature.
The actual text for evolve is much cleaner. The intervening if clause convention provides a clear trigger event, a clear check condition, and a clear effect.
June 7, 2013 10:32 p.m.