Silmarillion: The War of the Jewels: Recent Activity
| Silmarillion: The War of the Jewels: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Skeleton | Archetypes | Flavor | 1st Playtest | 2nd Playtest | 3rd Playtest |
Recent updates to Silmarillion: The War of the Jewels: (Generated at 2025-04-30 16:51:26)
Page 1 - Older activity
Page 1 - Older activity
I think that relates more directly to having tapping Auras and Equipment which is messy, as in attachable permanents, as people tend to tap those alongside the creatures they are attached to (which is what makes Second Wind a bad idea); but nobody's complaining about artifacts there or maybe they did nobody cares (for example, think bunch of Equipment + Improvise). Regardless, because of that, I was wary about giving any Auras to the Chant colors in this set and generally strayed away from them. There was even this white Aura that itself in this set had chant which was really messy and I scrapped it quickly.
Obviously, having tappable enchantments in a set means it's the type of special concern a set has (like having to constantly fluff through graveyards with sets that have flashback) and not something to do as an evergreen thing.
As opposed to the instant vs. sorcery thing that I don't get and never did, taping enchantments are an explicitely stated rules, that not only exists, but has been broken as a test and then reinforced, because it was actually srewing with gameplay (players apparently actually like having not to care about tapping certain cards).
This is kind of out of left field here perhaps and my purpose isn't to rub it in here but c'mon guys.
Crushing Disappointment (somewhat appropriately named maybe?) has since debuted on 2021, four years later)
Mood: When you have future sight but people tell you "not to break too many rules".
In general I have noticed that there ended up being a crap ton of stuff in this set that kinda predicted the future in one way or another; wording updates for mana adding, mill terminology, shuffling shortcuts, basic lands with flavor text, proclaim as a mechanic is somewhat similar to foretell though they have different goals clearly... Personally, I prefer the ways I addressed these issues rather than how WotC did, but that I suppose is somewhat given these are choices indeed made by me.
Still waiting for my tapping enchantments though đđ
-
; -0/-1
-
to mana cost; -0/-2
-
to mana cost; -1 power
-
to proclaim cost
+
to proclaim cost
This is great! Thx.
I made this nonsense deck out of my first test draft: http://www.cubetutor.com/cubedeck/905362
My first pick was Silmarils, Jewels of FĂ«anor, which is fitting :P
Updated and done.
Direct link to draft the set here.
Cool, I'll get this uploaded sometime this week.
I'm going to declare this to now be the version 1.0. It's considered 'finished' (development is halted) until otherwise stated. Some minor fixes might still get done, but I'm not expecting major overhauls.
@Mal:
If you're still interested and have enough spare time, I updated the google drive gallery:
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5yb_ZX6AzYManY2LVFCZFJaelk
syntax fix
Well, since you are changing the text already for clarity, that seems like a good place to do so as well. What does it mean?
draw step -> upkeep
draw step -> upkeep
draw step -> upkeep
draw step -> upkeep
This particular card doesn't care about that timing at all since the effect is mandatory and it hardly matters whether you happened to draw the card before you put the counter on - no harm done in the majority of cases. Aulë's Craft is actually the card where the issue lies in this environment - this just happened to be the card where the discussion related to the whole upkeep thing got going.
There seems to be only four cards with upkeep triggers in the set so in truth it doesn't matter that much here. I could just red flag Aulë's Craft and be on my merry way.
I've considered going with "at the beginning of your precombat main phase" but it does feel even more like a hack. It's quite verbose and potential confusion with words like "precombat". The wording was last used on Bounty of the Luxa because that card adds mana and the timing wouldn't work with upkeep, which is another problem with upkeep as it is.
I agree that this likely needs its own discussion space.
The full quote is:
> For in the making of all things in that land he had the chief part, and he wrought there many beautiful and shapely works both openly and in secret. Of him comes the lore and knowledge of the Earth and of an things that it contains: whether the lore of those that make not, but seek only for the understanding of what is, or the lore of an craftsmen: the weaver, the shaper of wood, and the worker in metals; and the tiller and husbandman also, though these last and all that deal with things that grow and bear fruit must look also to the spouse of Aulë, Yavanna Kementåri.
I can find one edition where that has been modified to "all things" so maybe though most keep it as "an things". Huh...
How about flip it around?
Let the opponent put a counter on it, if the condition is not met? That way it's interactive; the opponent gets to remember to do a bad thing to you, which they will enjoy. And they might forget - which you will enjoy.
I think that's more of an issue with the way Magic is designed (and taught). Because upkeep triggers are getting increasingly rare, the natural instinct to untap then draw is reinforced because that's all you usually do. Because of that, Wizards is less inclined to design more effects that happen at upkeep.
I think this issue probably warrants its own discussion, but as a designer I think having something occur at the beginning of your precombat main phase is something you can move towards if you are truly concerned with people playing it incorrectly. But to me, that's just simplifying or modifying the game itself rather than actually solving the issue.
"an things"? "all things"? "any things"?
> If you choose to play a bunch of cards with triggers, it's your responsibility to keep track of them.
That is not a correct description of the relationship between game designer and player. Designing a game is taking ownership of it and taking on responsibility.
Abilities that involve targets need to use the stack, but choices are fine. There are plenty of turn-based actions that involve choices already.
It's still preferable to use triggered abilities just to be consistent though.
Let me put it this way: I don't think you can put a turn-based action on a card. There's a dozen or so listed in the comp rules, and I think this sort of thing has to be the rules of the game, not abilities temporarily granted by cards. For sagas, they're adding a line the rule 703 that says "put a lore counter on each saga you control as your pre-combat main phase begins." You can't do that for every card you want to make this way.
As for your comment about missed triggers, that's why upkeep triggers aren't done at common very much, to avoid tripping up newer players. If you choose to play a bunch of cards with triggers, it's your responsibility to keep track of them.
The other thing about turn-based actions is that no player controls them, so while this works because it just checks a condition of the active player, ones that require you to make a choice (like targeting or may abilities) probably just don't work at all.
This wasn't done "just because". It came from a real-life problem that I've constantly seen with upkeep triggers, especially negative ones such as echo, where people keep missing them. On the last play test, it was very noticeable with Aulë's Craft. This is an issue with upkeep itself and I'm exploring ways to circumvent it even though it's obvious that a step called "upkeep" was created to handle these kind of things; it's just that it's placement on the turn order is little bit wrong. Players tend to untap and draw by instinct at the start of their turn, so if the "upkeep" triggers happened around the time of the precombat main phase, I'm certain it would alleviate the issue since:
I guess I could use the "draw step" timing only for Aulë's Craft, but that feels rather inconsistent.
Also, I would appreciate it if you guys generally kept separate what actually doesn't work properly within the rules as they are and what's against 'good' design. I need to know the limits to test them.
The only reason the upkeep exists is to have these triggers happen during it. There are no cards that trigger at the end of phase, and no reason for those cards to exist. It's the pinnacle of bad design to do something different just to say it's different. You should never use a turn based action if you can use a trigger, and you should never trigger at the end of phase if you can trigger at the beginning.
Honestly, Dominaria is one of those sets that is looking to have a lot of rules introduced to clarify this, so I'd hold off on implementing anything until the rules are updated so we can be sure what it's messing with.
Upkeep is pretty much made for these sorts of triggers, so this should remain on upkeep. I enjoy the corner case interaction of deciding whether or not you want to flash in a Spirit with your newly untapped mana (or otherwise responding to an upkeep trigger) before you see your draw, because it creates a good sort of tension.