Multiverse: Magic 20XX: Recent Activity

2013-06-16 04:28:08: jmgariepy commented on Polluted Necromancer

Part of the rare Unicorn Pactmaker cycle, as seen on Guiding Whisp. I hate all the 'up to's on this card... but I fear players would have to do it in order otherwise, and I don't want to harsh on the player who was only able to draft a single Dripping Dead...

2013-06-16 04:26:13: jmgariepy created the card Polluted Necromancer

2013-06-16 04:23:37: jmgariepy commented on Marctel, Who Hungers

Oh, Marctel, you were my silliest mistake. Originally, this card didn't say "if you cast it from your hand" which allowed the sacrificing player to keep sacrificing Marctel, keep choosing Marctel, and keep triggering Marctel until all the other creatures on the battlefield were dead, except Marctel.

That clearly wasn't the intent. And the person who first figured it out knew that couldn't be the case (thankfully, Marctel didn't end up in the hands of a munchkin).

2013-06-16 04:23:23: jmgariepy edited Marctel, Who Hungers

2013-06-16 04:20:21: jmgariepy created the card Marctel, Who Hungers

2013-06-16 04:18:15: jmgariepy commented on Guul Draz Specter

Reprint of Guul Draz Specter. I don't have much to say about this reprint, except that it fit the 'playing with Hellbent' theme, Zendikar had become a thing just as I was wrapping up the set, and I liked the card.

2013-06-16 04:16:40: jmgariepy created the card Guul Draz Specter

2013-06-16 04:13:52: jmgariepy commented on Gorgon Infamoure

Hey, another block of 20XX cards! Gorgon Infamoure is one of the Thrull Mindslave rare cycle, which rewards players for the odd draft deck-building goal of playing with two creature types that don't otherwise go together in the set.

I did have one player ask why this card doesn't give Gorgons deathtouch, and knights first strike. The answer is because they already have those abilities (often), I wanted this card to grant abilities the two tribes normally didn't have. It makes logical sense... but I don't think the person who asked that question liked that answer. This card does look a little weird in a vacuum...

2013-06-16 04:10:12: jmgariepy created the card Gorgon Infamoure

2013-06-05 10:27:23: jmgariepy commented on Shifting Sickness

Mmm. I think I liked the stress produced from this card when I first designed it. But players don't like stress as much as designers do. I mostly kept it as it is because I couldn't think of a good black ability I wasn't already using at common off the top of my head.

Also of note: The activation went way up. That's because this card is a pain to plan attacks around... something you shouldn't have to put up with regularly in common.

2013-06-05 09:50:20: Alex commented on Shifting Sickness

This one is somewhat unfortunate in that if it kills a creature, you can't move it in time to keep the Aura around. I think it'd actually be less frustrating if it were -3/-0 (or -4/-0 or something). (Although I guess that's not black any more...)

2013-06-05 05:46:05: jmgariepy edited Shifting Allegiances

2013-06-05 05:45:24: jmgariepy edited Shifting Allegiances

2013-06-05 05:45:11: jmgariepy commented on Shifting Allegiances

Might as well, eh? Defender it is.

2013-06-05 03:56:39: dude1818 commented on Shifting Allegiances

I'm surprised that this trips so many people up. I guess it's easier to change the card than the player, though. Speaking of which, why not grant defender?

2013-06-05 02:19:43: jmgariepy commented on Shifting Allegiances

Morph is interesting, but the sets complete at this point, and this cycle would be the only cards with morph. That wouldn't be very fun.

I'm just going to pull the band-aid off and make these enchant creatures proper which can be reattached. It's clearly how the players want to play them, so why am I getting in the way of their fun? Stubborness, mostly. I'd prefer to have something functionally different. Ah well... at least the game doesn't have enough re-attaching auras anyway.

2013-06-05 02:18:03: jmgariepy edited Shifting Inertia

2013-06-05 02:16:51: jmgariepy edited Shifting Vertigo

2013-06-05 02:15:50: jmgariepy edited Shifting Sickness

2013-06-05 02:14:53: jmgariepy edited Shifting Gears

2013-06-05 02:13:08: jmgariepy edited Shifting Allegiances

2013-06-05 01:15:07: amuseum commented on Shifting Allegiances

give it morph. make it an aura.

2013-06-04 03:47:37: jmgariepy commented on Shifting Allegiances

Does not help (and have tried it. I've tried a lot of permutations). People don't read the card text, and play the card wrong no matter how you word the ability. It's just human nature: They assume the card says something it does not, because they want it to say that. No amount of rewording will stop people from believing the first line of the card is 'Enchant Creature'.

2013-06-04 00:53:10: amuseum commented on Shifting Allegiances

~ becomes an Aura with "Enchant creature. Enchanted has 'yadda yadda yadda.'" Attach ~ to a creature.

2013-06-03 11:28:23: jmgariepy commented on Shifting Allegiances

Part of a cycle with Shifting Gears, Shifting Sickness, Shifting Vertigo and Shifting Inertia. The secret 5 commons missing from Magic 20XX because I don't know what to do with this slot. I still don't... but I might as well deal with this now, since I'm on a drive to finish putting this set on Multiverse so I can print and finally test 20xd6 with it.

When I first designed these cards, I thought I was being really clever. 20XX wants cards that 1). dump out of your hand for cheap because of Hellbent, and 2). wants to include a lot of activated abilities because of Wisdom (and Hellbent. Something to do after your hand is dead).

So I came up with a cycle of 'Enchant Creature Seals' that you could dump on the board fast before the proper permanent appears. Then you could waste time later attaching the enchantment back and forth to other permanents of the correct type. Sounds great!

It stank. Maybe it would have been fine as a rare cycle, but these cards continuously confused players. I added the word "Aura", then removed it (since it doesn't really do anything anyway). Both ways, players couldn't wrap their heads around the fact that this didn't come into play enchanting a creature, even though the card made no claim to be an enchant creature to start. People just blew past the text and did what their minds told them must be right.

So by playtest 3, I turned these cards into artifacts that became enchantments. This way, players would be forced to accept that the card had two states. Players responded negatively to the flavor... but most importantly, it still confused new playtesters. Now they weren't making mistakes about what happens when the artifact came into play... they were just confused. I think I fielded 5 questions on that day from people who weren't sure if the artifact was supposed to come into play enchanting something.

There is, I'm noticing now, a MTGO/Melvin problem going on with these cards, since they create multiple instances of the same ability on the card. I may have worded it differently... I'm going off of memory right now. My file is upstairs.

So, these can't stay. I guess I have one of three options

1. Make these come into play like normal enchant creatures that can be reattached, and stop being so damn precocious.
2. Come up with a new cycle of 5 cards.
3. Make something else using similar mindspace. Though I have no idea what.

The truth is that I really like these cards, warts and all, but they can't stay. They're stinking up the place.

2013-06-03 11:16:19: jmgariepy edited Shifting Allegiances

2013-06-03 11:16:03: jmgariepy commented on Shifting Inertia

See Shifting Allegiances for general comments on the cycle.

2013-06-03 11:15:51: jmgariepy commented on Shifting Gears

See Shifting Allegiances for general comments on the cycle.

2013-06-03 11:15:48: jmgariepy commented on Shifting Vertigo

See Shifting Allegiances for general comments on the cycle.

2013-06-03 11:15:28: jmgariepy commented on Shifting Sickness

See Shifting Allegiances for general comments on the cycle.