Can someone explain to me why a card with this kind of cost-power balance has not been printed? I've been playing Japanese TCGs going on two years now and the most powerful cards (in terms of numbers) I usually see are common vanilla cards. In an environment with 6-mana monsters like the titans and Wurmcoil Engine, how could this possibly break the system?

Um, because you don't get a card this huge at CMC 6? Admittedly, the good old Craw Wurm is looking a little underpowered now - but you don't get to go this big.

Also, magic seems to very much dislike printing bombs of any kind at common - it's already too easy to get a deck with a screwed up mana curve. So such a card would probably end up uncommon.

In fact: Quilled Slagwurm

Yeah, the issue is purely commonality. At rare you do get precisely this-but-better: Terra Stomper, Hydra Omnivore. Generally the highest power at common that each colour will get is: 6 for green, 5 for blue with an attacking restriction, 4 for black and red, 3 for white.

I don't know that either of you are truly answering his question, though the answer does involve whether such a card is appropriate for a given limited environment, which ties into the specific qualities Alex and Visitor are pointing out regarding Mana Curves, Distribution of Power among the Color Pie, and Rarity. But you also have to consider how printing large creatures with the relative frequency that you are describing desensitizes the player, resulting in questions like your own, only it'll be someone requesting a 13/13 for .

­Ulamog's Crusher was an 8/8 for 8 at common, and it even had Annihilator. But it took a very, very, specific format within the structure of Magic to allow that, as the format was based around disposable resources, ground stalls, and casting huge creatures (so-called Battleship Magic).

The point I'm making is that this card hasn't been printed, not because it would break the system, but because there should be a reason for its existence other than "well, it's not like it would break the system?"

We still have one more stop to visit, and that's 'How does it affect draft'? While a card like this can sit in the rare slot without making any waves (and could easily be printed there), printing 8/8s for 6cc can completely warp draft environments where spending 6 for a creature is considered par for the course. In comparison, one of the best draft picks in Scars of Mirrodin was Alpha Tyrranax, often picked first in packs. Granted, that probably had something to do with a lack of solid non-infect creatures in green, but a fair amount of that had to do with "Alpha Tyrranax wins games by turning sideways". If an 8/8 was printed for 6, suddenly the entire draft environment would spin around the 8/8 for 6, which really isn't healthy for showcasing new mechanics...

So why doesn't the entire common slot pick itself up by the britches and get good cards in comparison to the rare slot? That's a very good question, worthy of the thousands of debates on the subject flooding the internet. I could take a lot of tactics here, but I think I'll look at this from the point of view of a successful company that wants to be a successful company for the next 20 years. Wizards doesn't want to create your decks for you, because they know that that is not fun. However, they do want to create the environment your deck will have to deal with. If they can limit the amount of 'tournament quality cards' in any given block to about 100, then they can test around those cards and make sure the environment is as fair and as balanced as they can predict. Filling the set with nothing but sleeper cards increases the chances that one deck will dominate, cards will need to be banned, and then another deck will dominate. For the most people to have the most fun, Wizards has found that some cards need to be good and some cards need to be bad, and that good and bad strategies vary over time.

Interestingly, nobody has addressed my comment about looking at this from the design standpoint of Japanese TCGs. You'd totally see a card like this at common in most JTCGs. In fact, from my experience 50% or more of the commons in JTCGs are big vanilla cards that set the bar for where the rares lie. Lets say that 8/8 for 4cc is the base level. Adding a french vanilla ability like trample to this creature would either lower the power/toughness by 1 or raise the cost by 1 (theoretically it could be more or less, but just as an example).

What I'm trying to do here is create an environment where no card single costs more than $10, just like in the majority of JTCGs. When the rares and mythics are so much better than the commons (on average) you get crazy expensive cards upwards of $30 a pop when things get really out of control. This is so prohibitive for getting entry into competitive Magic as well as frustrating for people who live away from large population centers where there's essentially nothing but FNM for hours of driving in any direction and 3-4 guys out of ~20 who can spend 100s of dollars on their decks they're going to take to to a PTQ.

I want people to look at a 8/8 for 4cc in common and then look at what rare and mythic gets for 4cc and to think about whether or not the true value of higher rarities lies in their flexibility rather than sheer numbers.

This is interesting. I'm well-versed in games, but I'm focused on the American market and what works in America, because I do side-work for an American retailer.

I know, for example, that games that do very well in Japan often don't translate in America. There are a number of factors for this, but the one that always pops out at me is the fact that Katakana and Hiragana take up less space than Roman letters. That's why games like Yu-Gi-Oh! are printed on small card stock with tiny words. The Japanese don't need as much space as English readers to read what the card does.

I also know that for a game to do well in America, it needs to have a large tournament backing, and that large tournament backing is supported by a livid draft environment. I don't know what the draft environment is in the Japanese models, and wouldn't even attempt to guess. It would go some distance to explain why the Japanese model can literally build rares from pieces of commons without influencing the draft environment heavily if that draft environment just doesn't exist... which is possible. The average age of Yu-Gi-Oh!, Duel Masters and Battle Spirits players is lower in America than the average age of Magic, Lot5R or Vs. player. On average, serious drafters are older. I'm not drawing conclusions here, I'm just throwing up information I know. For all I know, the Yu-Gi-Oh! drafting crowd could be cutthroat, especially in Japan.

I do know that while I personally don't like the lego-block, make your own creature system, I will openly admit that I think the bell curve that follows power level through rarity is much too steep, common could be better and Mythic is ridiculous. I tell you what. You make a bunch of cards, and I'll make sure to critique them based upon the relative merits of the cards, and compare those cards power level to the power level of the other cards in your set. I can't guarantee I'll remember this, so feel free to slap my hand when I start blabbing about 'too good for common'. ;) I also fear that you may have to repeat your mission statement occasionally, because people will just look at one card and comment on it based on just the information they see. I'd suggest having a link ready to follow up any confusion your 'overpowered cards' are creating. Linking to this card would be a good start. Later on, when you make a bunch of cards, if people keep saying something, you may want to make a post about how card level works, and link to that.

Hey, by the way, welcome to Multiverse! I'm looking forward to seeing what tricks you've got hidden up your sleeve. :)

Well, personally I also agree that rarity should not really influence power. Wizards disagree with me.

I think you need to pick a lower baseline. Saying "Common cards are simpler" is fine, saying "Adding keywords and stuff reduces power" is fine. Saying "I want cards to be averagely powerful" is definitely fine.

Then saying "Titans, the most stupidly broken cards ever printed are my baseline"... not so much. Now, if your aim was top make every card in the set jaw droppingly awesome, that would be fun to see - but I think you need to scale this back.

But you do hit one problem - there are people out there who like huge numbers. And they want to get one-in-a-hundred rares sometimes too. So how do you give them bigger numbers on a rare? higher cost? But is already pretty close to the top of the curve. Above that you get the "I cast this and win the game" cards.

One other thing springs to mind. It is very very easy in magic to give additional keywords to things. If this was buffproof then it could quite reasonably be fairly huge. After all, the opponent needs only to block it. But give it flying, or trample, and it becomes very devastating very quickly. And magic has tended to increase the ease of doing this (equipment, for example) rather than increase the pain of it. That may be another difference between design intents.

Well, I've definitely seen the opposite reaction hit me when I brought rares back to Invasion/Odyssey standards on Multiverse. I used to design cards only to be drafted, and therefore, I wouldn't want powerful rares. 6/6 flyer for was fine, since that would dominate the game, and would be a first pick irregardless of how powerful it was in normal Magic. Unfortunately, it's very hard to convince people of this, when they aren't seeing the same game that you're seeing. I think it may be easier to convince people that 'over-powered' commons are cool, more than 'under-powered' rares are. That's personal opinion, though... I could be wrong.

Heh, a slightly weaker version of this card just got printed in Avacyn Restored at uncommon as Vorstclaw.

Oh wow. Not quite as strong as this, but wizards are making a serious stab at making green important in limited (and not for a few niche cards, but for GIANT CREATURES :)).