Why is Mark Rosewater so Pessimistic About Fortifications?
General forum
Posted on June 19, 2025, 9:04 p.m. by DemonDragonJ
In this post, Mark Rosewater expressed a lack of enthusiasm for the fortification subtype returning, which I find to be very disappointing, since I believe that fortifications have much unexplored potential.
I likely have already asked, about this subject, before, but what does everyone else say, about this matter? Do you believe that there is room to explore fortifications in greater detail? I certainly am interested to hear your thoughts, on this matter.
There are two Fortifications right now. One is Future Sight weirdness, and the other is mostly for flavor.
What unexplored potential do you see for fortifications? What abilities would you like to see?
June 20, 2025 3:38 p.m.
FormOverFunction says... #4
I think the idea of “equipment but for land” is something that has a LOT of 1. room to grow (effectively 100+% of the existing equipment effects), and 2. accessibility for new/current players (it fits alongside existing rules just fine). I’m not a big fan of the name “fortification” because it implies a building, but I think it’s good enough. It’s a logical progression the same way they went from creature enchantments to equipment. The flavor possibilities also look absolutely delicious. On the flip-side: they’ve so thoroughly protected lands now, these fortifications would be hard to deal with. That’s the main reason I would give if I had to squash the idea.
June 20, 2025 4:35 p.m.
FormOverFunction I'm not sure I follow the idea that 100% of existing equipment effects are suitable for fortifications. Most equipments modify power and toughness, which does nothing for most lands. There's also over 1,000 creature auras and less than 100 land aurs, so even if the procession from enchantment to artifact happened for lands, the pool is still a lot smaller.
There are absolutely lots of things you could do to lands. But how many of those change the core concepts of what lands do? Lands are generally there to make mana. Creatures have a lot more range in what they can and should do. Changing that would be changing some of the core philosophies and assumptions of the game. It could happen, and a fortification-heavy set could be really good if done right. But it would have to be handled carefully, since there's just not a lot of range on what lands are expected or allowed to do at this point.
What would be a good draft worthy baseline effect for fortifications? Equipments have Honed Khopesh, Leonin Scimitar, and Short Sword. What would be an equivalent common effect for lands, and how much should it cost to be fair in all colors?
Alternatively, what would a non-draft product like a Commander deck look like? How do you interact with fortifications, and what would you do with them? Continuing the parallels with equipments, there are cards that search for equipments, give bonuses for using more equipments, and so on that get made for Commander decks. Would Fort Voltron be a viable play style? If so, what makes it different from regular Voltron?
June 20, 2025 5:10 p.m.
FormOverFunction says... #6
I think the baseline effects would still be like those of current equipment… which would effectively turn all creatures into Frozen Shades or lands into Blessings… which wouldn’t probably be great. Add some man-lands and now you’ve got a wrath-proof fire breather. As we’ve seen with commander products (and discussed in other threads) they would likely make them everything-bagels, with both an effect and a payoff, that works off of having a creature of your own to target. I don’t want to fight too hard for this, and give the impression that I think we need them, but “equipment for lands” strikes me a very doable and potentially quite flavorful. I loved Farmstead and Caribou Range, so why not make more survivable reusable versions as equipment? It seems in-line with the power creep curve and the general themes you could introduce would contribute positively to the situational feel of games (like the rooms from duskmourn).
June 21, 2025 9:56 a.m.
FormOverFunction If I came across as pressuring you, I apologize. Not what I was trying to do.
I'm interested in seeing ideas for fortifications; I've tried my hand at a couple in the card creation thread and never really felt satisfied with where I ended up. There's definitely some room for fortifications, and I'd like to see some that aren't some variation of either "add more mana" or "buff target creature." Caribou Range would make a great fortification, like you said.
June 21, 2025 12:37 p.m.
FormOverFunction says... #8
Yeah, I feel the same way about a lot of the equipment. I know that many cards are made specifically for the prerelease/standard etc… so they’re not really for me. Even something like Murderer's Axe is interesting, though, because of its mechanics. Currency Converter, Fifty Feet of Rope, Suspicious Bookcase, and Treasure Chest are all flavorful and interesting (albeit maybe not auto-adds for most decks) and I feel like a new set could have a few land-equipments that matched up to this sort of weird “here’s a couple of options” line of thinking. Because of how I think about MtG I would be better off starting with a setting first. Maybe I’ll get a couple of ideas down on paper for an existing set. It’s fun to consider!!
June 21, 2025 2:22 p.m.
Because he's been at the job way too damn long and it's time for a change.
I want them to bring back up to you effects in standard sets
June 22, 2025 6:04 a.m.
Upkeep* even when I fixed it I didn't realize it changed again lol
RiotRunner789 says... #2
I only vaguely remember one fortify card (gave indestructible I think). They just weren't very impactful, memorable, or fun.
I don't see it coming back as adding much to the game though I'm not opposed to the idea.
June 20, 2025 6:20 a.m.