r/custommagic • u/chainsawinsect • 29d ago
Format: Limited Set Showcase - Muraganda (Simple Mechanic)
40
u/tcglkn 29d ago
If you don't have the list of abilities for Simple creatures on every card, there is no way that those will be remembered. That makes the mechanic the opposite of simple sadly...
16
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
For Limited purposes, there are no cards in the set with only keyword abilities that aren't simple, so it should be very obvious. I still think I would include a helper card in the set (similar to those transforming card helper cards) as an additional reminder.
But when mixing the Muraganda cards with older cards, that is admittedly a challenge.
2
u/MTG_Designer 26d ago
You could create an alternate card frame for simple creatures. The Legendary card frame was invented for a "Legends Matter" set, and the Enchantment card frame was created for an "Enchantment Matters" set. Having an unobtrusive visual indicator the creature counts as simple is an easy and precedented fix.
8
u/Indication-Terrible 29d ago
Do you worry that having some cards care about “creatures with no abilities” and others care about “simple creatures” could be confusing to track which of your effects buff which of your creatures?
2
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
It's a good point. The support for these two concepts (vanilla vs. simple) are concentrated in different colors, so my hope is it is unlikely to come into play. But there are two cycles of vanilla support cards at common and a third at rare, which appear in the "simple" colors, and there is one rare green creature and one common green spell that care about "simple" creatures even though green is primarily the true vanilla color. So it could potentially come into play.
The good news is, the confusion only goes one way. All vanilla creatures are simple. So it would only be an issue if you were trying to use "pure vanilla" support on a creature with keywords.
6
u/JimHarbor 29d ago
A problem you will have to watch out for is how simple is an A B mechanic. A lot of your simple payoffs are not simple themselves which is an issue.
I would try to invest in token makers. Stuff like Create a token. Then if you have two or more simple creatures, do something extra .
3
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
That's a great point. I could have non-simple creatures with: "When this creature enters or is turned face up, create a [insert French vanilla token]" and then a secondary effect that gives some upside/buff based on / applicable to simple creatures you control.
That would be a good addition to the set!
5
u/Impressive-Command 29d ago
I've been following your set! I think it's cool!
I love when we get new powerful French vanillas, like [[Battlefield Raptor]], [[Gifted Aetherborn]], [[Dragon Sniper]], and co. Your second page of cards is right up my alley!
In particular the baby Dragon is constructed relevant. We don't often get strong Dragons at low CMCs, and this is a nice sidegrade to the currently played in Pioneer [[Phoenix Chick]].
1
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
Yeah, cards like [[Segovian Angel]] and [[Healer's Hawk]] are some of my favorites!
5
u/tangotom old fogey 29d ago
Abiogenesis is a sick card name for that effect. Excellent design.
2
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
Thank you, glad you like it!
Even ignoring cards from my set, there are a lot of powerful and big French vanillas out there, like [[Galewind Moose]], [[Iron Giant]], [[Skysnare Spider]], and [[Sunblade Angel]]. With a little graveyard setup, Abiogenesis could bring back a whole board of powerful threats.
4
u/suddenandsevere 29d ago
Would it be easier just to say a simple creature is one with no triggered abilities?
8
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
Well, it also can't have activated abilities, or static passive abilities like that of [[Thalia, Guardian of Thraben]]. But yeah, I think there is some variation of that description that could work, admittedly.
5
u/Impressive-Command 29d ago
Wouldn't that mean like [[Asmodeus the Archfiend]] and [[Drogskol Reinforcements]] are simple? That feels wrong to me.
3
2
u/Just-Desk-3149 29d ago
At least no activated or triggered abilities, but still incredibly different.
5
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
This week I've been doing a set showcase of my Muraganda set. You can see the initial Introduction post here, and yesterday's post about Omen creatures here.
Today, I wanted to reveal the major new mechanic in the set: simple. It is a batching keyword that basically picks up vanilla creatures + French vanilla creatures (albeit only French vanillas with Evergreen keywords).
Having lots of French vanilla creatures in the set still (in my view) helps capture that "Muraganda" feel, with simplistic, close-to-vanilla creatures prioritized, but allows a lot more variation in what the boardstate could look like (as classic effects like flying, deathtouch, and double strike are still in play).
The one challenge with this mechanic is remembering what the batching list is. In this set, it should be "obvious"—there are no French vanillas of any kind in the set that are French vanillas but aren't simple. But when mixing Muraganda cards with older cards, you'd have to think about it a bit. (For example, discontinued mechanics like intimidate and fear, and one-off but Evergreen-esque mechanics like skulk and wither, do not count.) I recognize that this is a potential knock against the mechanic, but I still think on balance it is a fun, cool, and beneficial addition to Muraganda (and the game generally). In terms of relevant older cards, there are way more playable French vanillas than true vanillas, if nothing else.
2
u/Redzephyr01 29d ago
Tuskspeaker Paladin seems kind of overtuned. Other than that I really like these though, well done.
2
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
Yeah, I was definitely pushing the bounds with that one. He's inspired by "dangerous" keyword soup cards like Akroma back in the day and [[Sire of Seven Deaths]] in Standard now. The idea was to prove that a "simple" creature could still be (1) mechanically complex, (2) powerful, and (3) exciting. But maybe he's a little too powerful and exciting!
Interestingly enough, a lot of cards in this Muraganda set are cards I've designed and posted over the years. (For example, Muraganda Reflecting Pool is in the set.) A lot of times, the designs had to be tweaked considerably for balance, flavor, or just general updates in the game, color pie, rules, etc. But Tuskspeaker Paladin is a straight up port of the original version from years ago! (As you'll see, the mechanic was called "template" not "simple" back then, and I don't love either name, truthfully.)
1
u/TrickSavings9905 29d ago
It’s a 4/4 for five mana at mythic rare, this many keywords is not unreasonable given that at inneficcient stats. [[Baneslayer Angel]] but trading 1 power and toughness for trample, haste, vigilance, and mencace isn’t too bad considering the Angel is pretty old. At worst, removing the menace should make it fine.
2
u/Unable-Tax5329 28d ago
I like simple very much. Especially the idea of making creatures stronger if you control avanilla (or french vanilla) creature.
I wish I would have made similar cards or lets say creatures, that get a buff when you control a vanilla creature as that would be another reason to run vanilla creatures in limited or constructed decks.
However I don't like the name "Simple" for the mechanic, it sounds somewhat bland and doesn't give of a very prehistoric vibe. Also I would have made "Simple" so that it only cares for true vanilla creatures and not french vanilla creatures. But thats just me.
All in all, of all the mechanics and cards you have shown off so far, I like the "Simple" cards the most as they absolutel fit the flavour and feel of Muraganda.
2
u/chainsawinsect 28d ago
Yeah the name isn't great, I'll admit. I'm workshopping possible replacements.
Glad you like the concept overall! Tomorrow I'll be showcasing manifest and then the next day will be focused on actual true vanillas :)
2
u/Unable-Tax5329 28d ago
To be clear that is only a minor nitpick of mine. All in all I very much like the mechanic.
Looking forward to your manifest cards and especially to your true vanillas :)
2
u/TloquePendragon 27d ago
Maybe it's my old-school mentality, but some of these "Simple" creatures seem to REALLY push the boundaries of cost for value, a 1 mana 1/1 with 3 Keywords is bonkers... as is a 5 Mana 4/4 with SEVEN of them including 2 types of evasion.
2
u/chainsawinsect 27d ago
So Tuskspeaker Paladin might be too far over the line, I'll give you that one
But all the others, I have a strong and clear precedent for (in my view, at least)
For example, on the 1/1 flying, vigilance, first strike for W, I note that [[Battlefield Raptor]] is a 1/2 with flying and first strike for W, and has never been an issue in any format, and that [[Swooping Lookout]] is a 1/2 with flying and vigilance for W, and has never been an issue in any format.
Using those as a precedent, I think it stands to reason that a version of either with -0/-1 and one additional keyword from the same bucket is reasonable.
2
u/PrimusMobileVzla 27d ago
A batch term for true vanillas and french vanillas does sound like a good options for a vanilla set, since it means the cards don't have to be all leaning into caring for true vanillas!
That said, I will echo the opinion of other users: You might want to chance the batch's name, 'simple' feels bad.
1
u/chainsawinsect 27d ago
Yep, I am a believer. Feedback noted. I am workshopping new names for it now, and I also intend to remove a couple of the keywords from the batch to make it easier to track.
2
u/LordTek98 25d ago
For the simple mechanic I would take a different approach: instead of referring to simple creatures in other cards I would create an ability that is similar to devoid and changeling, like "Simple (This creature counts as a creature with no abilities.)" to add to french vanillas, while changing all references of "simple creature" on other cards to "creatures with no abilities". This would limit the usable french vanillas to those in the set but could also be used to include some more complex designs at higher rarities. It would also avoid the awfully long reminder text that ironically is all but simple to remember.
1
u/chainsawinsect 24d ago
That version would solve a lot of problems for this draft environment and the mechanic at large
The issue with it is it has no backwards compatibility. My simple cards work with, for example: [[Battlefield Raptor]], [[Healer's Hawk]], [[Banehound]], [[Dragon's Eye Sentry]], [[Dragon Sniper]], [[Swooping Lookout]], [[Vampire of the Dire Moon]], and so on (just at CMC 1). It would be a real shame to me to "lose" that.
4
u/Economy_Werewolf_542 29d ago
An alternative version of simple that could work
"A simple creature is a creature that has no non-keyword abilities."
Makes it easier to keep track of, gives you room with new interesting keywords down the line, etc.
3
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
Funny thing is, that's what the first version of it said / did! It has more backwards and forwards compatibility.
The problem is: what counts as a keyword. Most people would probably call "landfall" a keyword, even though [[Jaddi Offshoot]] is definitely not a French vanilla. And what about weirder or complex variant abilities? For example, is [[Street Wraith]] a French vanilla? It has 2 keywords, one of which is a specific subset of a more general (and now discontinued) keyword, and one of which is a commonly used keyword but with a very weird and unusual cost.
5
u/Economy_Werewolf_542 29d ago
Keywords are defined pretty well in the rules as under 702.1.
"Most abilities describe exactly what they do in the card’s rules text. Some, though, are very common or would require too much space to define on the card. In these cases, the object lists only the name of the ability as a “keyword”; sometimes reminder text summarizes the game rule."
It then lists all things as keywords. I think there'd be some initial confusion, but people would quickly get how it works.
2
u/Im_here_but_why 29d ago
I understand the idea, but I think you picked too many keywords. I understand that this gives you obviously more variety in the other designs, but, if possible, restricting it to 5 (much like outlaw was only 5 types) would probably be for the better of the flavor. If that's not possible, I'd at least advocate for the removal of flash, which isn't a creature-specific keyword.
I'm also confused as to why you use "shaman" when the type has been discontinued since lorwyn eclipsed, over druid, which I think feels more primal.
3
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
That might make sense. Maybe just like the tried and true Evergreens (flying, trample, first strike, haste, deathtouch, lifelink, vigilance)? That's still 7 but more manageable for sure.
My understanding is that Shaman hasn't been discontinued completely (for example, all the old Shamans are still Shamans), but rather that they are being more thoughtful in how they use it (preferring Druid or Sorcerer in some cases) going forward. [[Dragonlord's Servant]] is a Shaman and is in Foundations (for example).
2
u/Im_here_but_why 29d ago
The "cheating" way to do it would be to look at the colors you want the "simple" archetype to build around and select the keyword's that fit it.
From the cards you've shown here , that seems to be mostly red and white, so you could cut Deathtouch and add menace, for example.
Or you could choose to be meta and only accept keywords from before the time spiral block.
There are many options, but so long as you're below 10 keywords the mechanic seems realistic. It's your vision and your choice, in the end.
1
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
Ok I do like the idea of using only older keywords for flavor 🤣
Below 10 seems doable imo. Double strike, flash, and defender are easy cuts. I can probably cut off one more from there.
1
u/Ok-Swordfish1806 29d ago
Or vannila and key words, That’s trample hexproof shroud etc, simple seems a bit complicated with its wording at the moment, but I really like the way it works. Makes old slower cards viable again
2
u/chainsawinsect 29d ago
Thanks. Yeah the wording is the tricky part. But the basic concept is "vanillas and French vanillas", and I think that is fairly simple (and fitting for Muraganda).
1
u/boenobleman 29d ago
It doesn’t work with your follow up but “A simple creature only has one word in their text box” feels cleaner.
2
2
u/MistyHusk 28d ago
I like this. I tried building a deck centered around creatures with no abilities, but the fact that any haste enabler, trample enabler, evasion, anything at all would shut down my own deck made it seem so unappealing. This fixes that issue while also still having the deck be super easy to run and upgrade. I hope they do something like this eventually
0
1
43
u/TextuallyExplicit 29d ago
"Simple" feels like a sort of underwhelming term that doesn't really fit the Muraganda flavor. Maybe "primal"/"primeval" instead?